@VolNExile

#977
#977
VolNExile said:
Our city does not appear to understand the concept of “sunk cost.” If something has been funded in the budget, it must be done, no matter how impractical, loathed, useless, contrary to established policy, and downright stupid it might be. Note: this mindset is definitely not confined to our city administration.
Click to expand...

Bring in the Berkeley tree sitters.
 
  • Like
Reactions: volfanbill, Souce and VolNExile
#978
#978
VolNExile said:
Our city does not appear to understand the concept of “sunk cost.” If something has been funded in the budget, it must be done, no matter how impractical, loathed, useless, contrary to established policy, and downright stupid it might be. Note: this mindset is definitely not confined to our city administration.
Click to expand...

I would be pissed.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Souce and VolNExile
#979
#979
NorCalVol67 said:
I would be pissed.
Click to expand...
We are! And the resident who was the moderator thingy for the initial meetings (before everything went black during Covid) got all upset during the Monday meeting and said that we had all agreed to this. No, we absolutely did not. She kept chatting with city staff through this period and is now their biggest evangelist.

Classic Stockholm Syndrome.
 
  • Like
Reactions: vollygirl and Souce
#980
#980
VolNExile said:
We are! And the resident who was the moderator thingy for the initial meetings (before everything went black during Covid) got all upset during the Monday meeting and said that we had all agreed to this. No, we absolutely did not. She kept chatting with city staff through this period and is now their biggest evangelist.

Classic Stockholm Syndrome.
Click to expand...

I'll help with the protests.

giphy.gif
 
  • Like
Reactions: VolNExile
#981
#981
VolNExile said:
City told us this Monday that they plan to cut down every tree, healthy or not, from ..., and put 6’ wide sidewalks on both sides of the road. And that since that would be so expensive (!!!), they can’t afford to extend the sidewalk beyond that down to the park, forcing everyone to walk in the street.

I asked what the cost would be to remove the trees on only one side and replace them with sidewalk, and remove the sidewalk on the other side and let the trees recover, and was told, “We can’t.”

So we’re off to the Urban Forestry Commission meeting in November.

Basically, someone sold a bond X years ago to repair/replace sidewalks on our street, and if they don’t do it soon, they lose the money. (Where?)
Click to expand...
@Tin Man

— I thought I had hit Reply, but apparently not. I added the quote later, but I don’t think that edits trigger notifications. Anyway, here’s the latest status.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: Tin Man
#991
#991
volfanbill said:
Do you live in Asheville proper Exie?
Click to expand...
Many would consider it improper, but yes, I’m a city girl now on our 0.15 acre lot/ 100 year old bungalow in a West AVL neighborhood originally filled with mill workers. Someone would have to forcibly lobotomize me to get me back to the ‘burbs.
 
  • Like
Reactions: volfanbill
#992
#992
VolNExile said:
Many would consider it improper, but yes, I’m a city girl now on our 0.15 acre lot/ 100 year old bungalow in a West AVL neighborhood originally filled with mill workers. Someone would have to forcibly lobotomize me to get me back to the ‘burbs.
Click to expand...
Just seems like a contradiction for Asheville to want to get rid of trees, money situation or not.

Unless the gerrymandering is in effect here?
 
#994
#994
volfanbill said:
Just seems like a contradiction for Asheville to want to get rid of trees, money situation or not.

Unless the gerrymandering is in effect here?
Click to expand...
No, it’s a messy combo of the dedicated bond issue, genuinely diseased ancient maples (but certainly not all of them), current old sidewalks destroyed by tree roots, and ADA requirements for sidewalk widths (5’) plus city ordinance for 6’ wide sidewalks if the sidewalk goes to the curb.

Add to this that the power transmission line on one side of the street is defended mightily by Duke Power and their contractors, who have butchered the trees on that side of the road, hastening their decline.

What I’ve argued for from the beginning is that compliant sidewalks (the current ones are truly treacherous) are not needed on BOTH sides of the street. Put them on the transmission line side of the street, pull them up on the other side while leaving the trees, use the money saved to extend the sidewalk (singular) toward the park, and spare 50% of our mature tree canopy, which will take decades to restore.

—This is all context that Rusty had from his visit with his lovely better half earlier in the month.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 82_VOL_83, Tin Man, volfanbill and 1 other person
New Posts
You must log in or register to reply here.

Advertisement



Back
Top