The venue - The Ballroom on Landy Lane, off River Road - was a disastrous choice. Perhaps the size of the crowd was underestimated. But I arrived, prior to the start time, to find a line of cars backed up on River Road in both directions. The relatively tiny, poorly lit parking lot behind The Ballroom was jammed full. I was nearly sideswiped, as frustrated attendees attempted to turn around in the tight lot. Many cars were illegally parked in fire lanes around the venue. Quite a few people finally just left. Any venue that requires valet parking is the wrong venue for a public meeting such as this.
A second meeting time will be held this Saturday at The Ballroom, from 10 AM to noon.
A second meeting time will be held this Saturday at The Ballroom, from 10 AM to noon.
Attendees expressed frustration with the parking fiasco, and said it was difficult to hear or be heard in the cramped space. After breaking into groups, the groups were still too large, and not everyone had a fair chance to be heard.
The Westwood Complex includes the Westwood Shopping Center, Westwood Center II, Springhouse nursing home, two Citgo gas stations, Westwood Tower apartments, and the Bowlmor Lanes bowling alley.
There are essentially no concrete details about Equity One's plans, beyond the sorts of environmental promises previously heard from developer EYA two years ago. More meetings are to be scheduled in March.
For Pete's sake, PICK A LARGE ENOUGH VENUE! Preferably where some spillover parking is available.
In concept, the meeting was a good start. In execution, not so much. Beyond better logistics, future meetings have to provide a better process for attendees to have a chance to speak and give input. And Equity One needs to meet with the individual neighborhood residents at their civic association meetings, such as Kenwood, The Kenwood, Kenwood Place, Springfield and Westbard Mews, which are directly adjacent to the proposed redevelopment. But I applaud the idea of ongoing meetings, when the previous developer held zero public events.
In concept, the meeting was a good start. In execution, not so much. Beyond better logistics, future meetings have to provide a better process for attendees to have a chance to speak and give input. And Equity One needs to meet with the individual neighborhood residents at their civic association meetings, such as Kenwood, The Kenwood, Kenwood Place, Springfield and Westbard Mews, which are directly adjacent to the proposed redevelopment. But I applaud the idea of ongoing meetings, when the previous developer held zero public events.
Sounds like they needed to rent space at a nearby school auditorium. Little Flower, for example, would have had plenty of parking.
ReplyDeleteLittle Flower does not allow rented space.
ReplyDeleteHey Robert, did you RSVP as the website requested? or, were you one of the "Tareq and Michaele Salahi's" of our community?
ReplyDelete- IT WAS A WORKSHOP -
(Read the website)
'The workshops will be held at The Ballroom, located on Landy Lane. Please RSVP to info@westbardvision.com to confirm your attendance at one of the workshops.'
If you were one of the people that RSVP'd, and stayed to contribute in the group sessions, I think you would have found that it was extremely beneficial. Kudos to all the great ideas, and kind people in our community (who are positive and constructive).
Whoa, whoa, whoa: where is this criticism coming from? "Our" community? Who in "our community" is so in the tank for a Florida/New York-based developer, that they would criticize someone for writing about the obvious parking and venue problems for the meeting? This sounds like someone affiliated with the developer.
DeleteIn fact, I did RSVP for the meeting, a few minutes after the invitation arrived in my inbox. But how does an RSVP solve any of the issues I discussed above?
Of course many citizens who attended the meeting had good ideas, but why do you summarily dismiss the concerns of others -who also had good ideas -but were not able to be heard? Or who turned around and left because there was no parking? Beyond that, what do the "great ideas" have to do with the topic of my article, which was the poor choice of venue?
What is the meaning of "kind people in our community (who are positive and constructive)?" Are you suggesting there can be no dissent? We must all go along with whatever the developer suggests? That sounds like Communist China or Cuba.
Equity One could be "constructive" by selecting a more accessible venue for the future meetings, and having a format that is more inclusive. I was prepared for a positive and constructive meeting, and came with a list of concerns and ideas. Instead, I was greeted with a high-stress environment where my vehicle was almost damaged, and a venue and format that left much to be desired. That doesn't mean there can't be a constructive process going forward. How can Equity One improve the process, if they don't have honest public feedback on Wednesday night's event?