At one point in last night's council meeting, Councilwoman Haynes said, regarding the planning committee's previous unanimous rejection against the zoning, "well, they are volunteers, and not really planning experts." Kind of an ironic statement, coming from you Ms. Haynes! Kind of a groin-kick to those who give their time to that committee. At least you admitted to not being one yourself.
Still, some of those non-planning experts are probably more qualified than you to make that assessment, based on what I witnessed at both of those meetings, and their educational/professional background.
The strongest argument (which was not which side believes in Jesus the most) was the one of safety. Low income, elderly residents do not own cars or drive, public transportation is not really available or convenient, and with exception of access to the Food Lion, NOBODY is walking or crossing S. College or S. 17th Steet on foot. You would be taking your life into your own hands. Those folks would have been stranded on an island in that location.
I am not a Pine Valley resident, but I took an active interest in this issue process. I agree it is a piece of property property in transition...but we also shouldn't be bailing out the wealthy land-owning family with more tax dollars based on the mediocrity of their property location. There are a number of behind-the-curtain items that I don't believe were disclosed. (It's that whole transparency thing, again.)
There are other pieces of property. Why doesn't the WHA just buy an already-built apartment complex located close to the amenities they need? I know of several that would fit the bill, and save the cost of new construction. Based on the occupancy rates, the owners would probably be eager to do business. There may be a shortage of affordable PUBLIC housing, but building new is not the only option.
More information about formatting options