Yeah, I'm still not a fan of Farrell's comments.
Quote:
"We are mindful that a standalone restaurant with drive-through existed on this site previously and would still exist had the previous use not burned down. However, that did happen. As such, we must review..."
"There is significant potential for a mixed-use high development.. Such a project could even include a new Dairy Queen, but of course without a drive-through."
"The proposed design is a generic Dairy Queen that is well below the quality expected and needed for this location."
|
There's not much in Farrell's comments that seem to express concerns with the changes. Instead I feel like she's taking a devastating fire as an excuse to push through with her vision of the area.
She might not be on the planning department but she does get to comment as the councilor for the ward. Of course her voice holds more than some random and instead of using her voice to support a small business and private property owner in her ward she used it as an opportunity to continue her crusade against cars.
She's going against the community association who expressed support of the development. So she went against the business owner, land owner, community association, and I would say individual voices like myself.
Still think Farrell's in the wrong here. Willing to cut some slack to the actual planning department if the changes result in impacts that would not have existed if it was built "brick-by-brick" but without Farrell using those in her comments I doubt they are substantial.