|
|
Post by tribune on Feb 10, 2005 7:02:47 GMT -8
|
|
|
|
Post by Chris on Feb 10, 2005 7:08:34 GMT -8
This is great! I wonder if this also means that we may get another on-ramp and off-ramp soon on Todd? That would be great to relieve the Irwindale/Foothill intersection. That would be a big step forward to working towards the general plan.  |
|
|
|
Post by Jen on Feb 10, 2005 7:37:54 GMT -8
Year after year, Azusa has been named the most improved city. However, what has slowed down the development of this city is budgetary constraints, past image of the city, land ownders holding on to properties that they are not developing, a slow planning commission, and residents who fight any change from happening in this city. It is not the city council that slowed things down. The budgetary constraints are a huge one. The city can only work with what they are financially able to handle. This has been a very poor city, and many businesses have taken advantage of this. After the Monrovia Poject property is developed, this will change. The city needs the property tax money so that they have something to work with. The Mountain Cove tax money is just starting to come in for the city. And as the cities image improves, as well as the schools, the property values will increase as well. Which means as properties are sold, more property tax dollars for the city.
|
|
possible but not likely
Guest
|
Post by possible but not likely on Feb 10, 2005 8:35:21 GMT -8
This is great! I wonder if this also means that we may get another on-ramp and off-ramp soon on Todd? That would be great to relieve the Irwindale/Foothill intersection. That would be a big step forward to working towards the general plan. The general plan would call for Vernon Ave. on/off ramps to be closed and *replaced* by Todd Ave. So I'm not sure how much relief you would see. But the plan is still being met with resistance and would cost a FORTUNE to have happen. So I wouldn't hold my breath on this part of the GP. So far, it's just an idea on paper. |
|
|
|
Post by reality check on Feb 10, 2005 8:51:20 GMT -8
Year after year, Azusa has been named the most improved city. However, what has slowed down the development of this city is budgetary constraints, past image of the city, land ownders holding on to properties that they are not developing, a slow planning commission, and residents who fight any change from happening in this city. It is not the city council that slowed things down. I'm not sure what's provoking your comment, but sorry, I have to disagree. You're exaggerating AND diverting the truth from where it belongs. First, the 'most improved city' thing. 'Year after year?' It was one time, in an editorial, that the Tribune called Azusa 'most improved city.' It's not an annual competition. Azusa still has a LOOOOONG way to go, and the council for as long as they've been there have had relatively marginal results - compared to the tenure and in other cities. Joe Rocha, the LAST person who should be taking the blame, actually took responsibility on behalf of the council at a meeting a few months ago - for neglecting the downtown, the Foothill Center, and several overlooked neighborhoods. Of course, a certain mayoral candidate sitting a few seats away from him scoffed at his comment and wouldn't accept any culpability. As for residents fighting change, it only happened notably twice that I can think of. The recent Monrovia Nursery thing, which as much as I supported it, I also feel could have been avoided if certain councilmembers didn't have such a 'you're with me or you're against me' outlook on dealing with people. The other time was the previous MN proposal, Rosedale, which HAD to be stopped because it was such a low-quality (Kaufman and Broad), dense (as in lot-sizes smaller than our own houses) development - which by the way, was supported by Diane Chagnon and Dick Stanford to the point as if they gave birth to it. (Actually, they were just receiving big campaign money from it.) To absolve these councilmembers from any responsibility for this mind-numbingly SLOOOW progress? That is pure fantasy. |
|
|
|
Post by VOTER on Feb 10, 2005 18:16:40 GMT -8
I can see what you mean about the slow progress. Even with the gun club issue they didn't completely resolve the matter. They left a window open so that they ( the gun club) can ask for up to a 10 year extension and maybe even submit a plan that the planning commision & city council might accept or be taken to a referendum. This issue has been asore spot in our sides for a long time and it will continue to be till they are finally out of there but now we all need to be very vigilant about what happens there for years to come. Why didn't they just stick to their guns and get it over with once and for all. The city will probably still get sued even if they ( the gun club) doesn't stand a chance to win. I'm frustuated already and I haven't been hre that long!  |
|
|
|
Post by Bump in the road on Apr 10, 2005 19:40:21 GMT -8
Look what Irwindale has done in the last ten years compared to Azusa. The development on Irwindale ave. as one example. They bought the Kincade pit from us to use in the future. This is a forward moving city . They will use this site for a good location to promote maybe a big chain outlet. If the old Raider crater gets fill up, I would expect a large car dealership to go there. This will bring in lots of needed revenue for the city. We need to have the forsite that they have'not the excuses for why things don't get done. Until this happens we will be a "bump in the road between Irwindale and Glendora". Let's get moving Azusa.  |
|
