HomeMy WebLinkAboutMULBERRY LEMAY CROSSINGS, LOT ONE, FILING ONE - FINAL PUD - 36-96D - MEDIA - (30)Wal-Mart , ,' ,
project must
be approved
■ P&Z Board should Seems like we've
accept the city staff been here before.
recommendation and We say, let's not go
there again.
allow Crossings project Thursday night,
to proceed the Planning and
Zoning Board is
scheduled to vote on the final review of the
proposed Wal-Mart Supercenter at Mulberry
and Lemay. ,
City staff has endorsed the project, saying
that all city requirements have been fulfilled.
The Coloradoan editorial board reiterates its
long -held stance that if developer Mark Gold-
berg has fulfilled the regulations stated by
the city, then the project should be approved.
Press the rewind button back nearly a year
ago. The P&Z Board rejected the city staff
recommendation for preliminary approval of
the project. City Council refused to overturn
the P&Z Board's vote. Angry proponents took
a referendum issue to voters that calls for the
preliminary plan of the project to be ap-
proved. Voters pass the referendum in April
and the final plan returns to the P&Z for con-
sideration.
This is where we are today.
Deja whew!
There is a new wrinkle in this review,
though. Opponents to the project are trying,,'
again to halt the project. They have written'°T
the city threatening legal action. The group
believes the public referendum vote was iile=
gal because it compelled voters to overturn a
quasi -elected board.
Right or wrong on this legal issue, this
project should have been approved and
should be approved as long as the developer
meets the land -use requirements set forth by
the city. If not, then reject it on that basis.
We do agree, however, that in general, land -
use questions should not be decided by a pub-
lic vote. Like many public referendums these
days, land -use issues are too complicated to
be determined by a public vote. How many
voters really understand whether the devel-
oper has fulfilled city requirements? What an
appropriate variance is? Do we all know
what a PUD is? That is why we have a paid,
professional city staff, which, in this case, has
recommended approval of the project.
The P&Z Board, of course, should be anoth-
er step in this same process; the board should
exist to ensure that city requirements are
met. Unfortunately, because the board con-
sists of appointees rather than elected offi-
cials, it often becomes politicized rather than
objective. Factors such as whether Wal-Mart
is an upstanding employer here or elsewhere,
or if the company is environmentally friend-
ly are not the issues in this matter.
In fact, this project has become a political
line in the sand between no -growth and pro -
growth extremists. Somewhere in the middle
are the people who voted on the issue. The
best tack P&Z Board members can take
Thursday is to depoliticize this project by"
heeding the city staff recommendation.
Opponents, too, could better use their ener-
gy by focusing on changing the city's develop-
ment guidelines rather than fighting individ-
ual projects after they are proposed.