After
19 months of dithering, Christiansburg Town Council will pretend that its appointed Planning Commission has a vision for preserving local history.
If what is being said outside of the public forum is true, it is a total farce. Worse, it is
veto by inaction -- again.
A survey that is not worded in neutral terms is not valid. Sending it only to property owners of the town's
existing but embattled and ignored three historic districts continues a pattern of excluding key stakesholders -- those with historic structures outside these districts, those who own property but not the land beneath it (ground rent), tenants -- all these would be excluded, plus residents who may desire to preserve what little remains of the town's history will have no voice. It also gives non-historic property owners a leg up and a voice on a matter that they probably don't support as they wouldn't benefit from any of the
economic incentives. It excludes property owners who were not qualified in the past from tapping into available resources.
When this topic was initially
discussed -- the Planning Commission was tasked with making a
recommendation, and that's something council hasn't discussed or agreed on in public yet.
If what is being said outside of the public forum is true, it appears to be in total opposition to the town's supposed Comprehensive Plan goals. It discards available
state resources, and disdains input from
academics who have spent their adult lives researching urban and historic planning. It discounts the inter-relationships history has with
tourism development.
If the Comprehensive Plan is
routinely ignored, the Town should be challenged by the State for vacating a mandated requirement and threatened with elimination of its charter and possible merging with either the county or another area government body.
If this
recommended approach is indeed endorsed and adopted by Town Council, two actions should occur. First, any "marketing" materials paid for by the town relative to its historic charm and Victorian appeal should be challenged as false advertising. Second, residents need to decide if a fragmented community with neighborhoods disconnected from local heritage and each other are acceptable.
If this is not deemed to be the correct path for the town you want your children to grow up in or to spend your golden years in, voters need to indicate this at the ballot box. A closer examination of the motivations behind such an approach and who stands to profit is also in order.