>
H-Zone: Aren’t both the VC and the Planning Board supposed to represent all of us?
Also, given that the whole Planning Board process seemed to not fully consider many of the effects of allowing something like these amendments would permit (water, traffic, foundation damage nearby, and all the rest) — why not reverse those amendments?
The VC asked questions of the same experts the Planning Board utilized and a lot of new info and answers came to light as a result of that.
So the Planning Board part of the process seems to have been flawed.
That also argues strongly that the amendments should be reversed in light of the consequences and likely side effects that came to light during the VC hearings.
Anyone looking to build something there like the amendments the Planning Board approved would permit would clearly risk the same side effects to the community, would they not?
Whichever body is empowered to revert them doesn’t really matter as much as the need to change the Master Plan back to how it was.
But it seems logical for the same Board which approved those changes to simply rescind that approval based on new information that came out from the same experts they consulted during their process subsequent to their having approved them in the first place.