It's time once again for the City Council to hold their bi-weekly regular meeting. Tonight's agenda (.pdf) is farshtopped with consent items, which aren't likely to be pulled off the consent agenda for discussion.
Also on tonight's agenda are two items of interest for closed session -- one is for discussion of pending litigation, and the other is discussion of an employee matter. We're guessing the employee matter will be City Manager Jim Hock's review, since that review was deferred from the last regular City Council meeting held on 9-21-09.
At that meeting, City Manager Jim Hock boasted of an award Park Ridge received -- "The Voice of People Award for Excellence Award" presented to Park Ridge for recognition of the City’s code enforcement. Mr. Hock states, "The City of Park Ridge was in the top 3 of the top 10%" of more than 500 jurisdictions surveyed for the award.
You can watch the video of that portion of the meeting below, beginning at the 02:45 mark --
video #00002.MTS PRCC 9-21-09
At the 04:32 mark is where the "timing is everything" moment of sad irony begins. Immediately following the City Manager's boast of how well the City of Park Ridge reflects the voice of the people, two residents address the Council on a building code enforcement matter which appears to have been an utter failure on the part of the City's Community Preservation and Development Department under the Directorship of Ms. Carrie Davis.
We had expected that some PRU reader would have come along and commented on the above at some point.
The issues involved with the residents' complaints about lack of code enforcement were followed-up in last week's edition of the Journal & Topics newspaper -- 'Residents Claim New Home Causes Flooding'
In the article, the Director of Community Preservation and Development Ms. Carrie Davis says, "When it comes to flooding regulations and standards, each property owner is responsible for his or her own water drainage." The PRU Crew was left virtually speechless after reading the article and Ms. Davis' quotes in it. We're left wondering why the City of Park Ridge has a sewer system at all!
By the way, who selected Ms. Davis to be the new Director of Community Preservation and Development? That's right, people -- City Manager Jim Hock.
Whether the Council chooses to review Mr. Hock's performance in closed or open session, we sure hope they demand some explanations from him as to why his Director of Community Preservation and Development has once again made an ass of herself, and what he intends to do about moooooving forward in addressing what appears to be Ms. Davis' inability to read and understand the Park Ridge building and zoning code.
On a side note -- The PRU Crew spends a considerable amount of our limited time reviewing and indexing the videos from various meetings. We also try to keep an eye on the number of views each video receives, and we do that by checking the Melidosian Motionbox folder.
We're both irritated and disappointed that it appears the only videos which receive a respectable number of viewings are the ones we post here on our blog.
Come on people -- just because we pull out and highlight something doesn't mean you shouldn't make the effort to go beyond the information and opinion contained here.
The Melidosian Motionbox folder link is the first link in our list, provided for you on your right.
Click. Go. Watch.
And we'd like to suggest you give the Planning and Zoning Committee videos your time and attention too.
October 5, 2009
Timing Is Everything!
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
13 comments:
Feel bad for those 2 men on Vine though they're certainly not the only ones.
This get's more insane all the time.
Thanks, PRU, for this timely and spot-on assessment.
Having observed Carrie Davis' performance as Randy Derifield's understudy, she sure never seemed like director "timber." And her comments about the water problem with that new Vine street home reveal that she doesn't seem to have grown into the job.
Not only do they foolishly raise the sewer issue, but they also suggest that the elevation of one's property is also a private matter, even if it is a foot or two (or three or four?) higher than the neighbors.
Whether that's a problem with the language of the City Code or an enforcement problem isn't clear from the article, but something's sure not right if this kind of thing can happen and the city can just ignore it.
Hoover --
The issues of elevation and drainage are covered in the building code.
We don't expect PRU readers to have a ready handle on the building code, but we believe it isn't too much to ask that the Director of Community Development does.
Mike,
Why do you feel bad for the 2 men on Vine?
Aren't they now just seeing where the water had previously run into?
Welcome to the club. I'd love to be higher than all of my neighbors so they could deal with the run-off from my yard, but as it is we are all about the same height, so we "share" the water equally. Share it in our yards, our basements, etc.
For anyone who likes detail...from the city's municipal code, Article 15, chapter 8 LAND GRADES...
15-8-1 REQUIRED PLANS
A. It shall be unlawful to alter the grade or drainage on any parcel of land including the
installation of any landscape wall or berm located within five (5) feet of any property line,
25 feet or more in length, or higher than 30 inches without a permit issued by the Building
Official. An applicant for a grade or drainage alteration permit shall submit to the Building
Official drawings and plans showing the proposed grade alteration and/or drainage
alterations.
...in case anyone thinks the "confusion" surrounding this issue has to do with some "lack of clarity" as it pertains to obtaining the permit mentioned in the above...
15-8-2 DRAINAGE
The Building Official shall not approve an alteration in the land grade if, in his opinion or the
opinion of the City Engineer, the proposed alteration will cause water to be unreasonably diverted to any abutting or nearby property or alter the existing or natural drainage of the area.
(Ord 2005-46, 8/15/05, S24)
At best, it appears the "opinion" of a member of the city staff on this issue was, perhaps, in error when the city went ahead and issued a permit approving the plans submitted...if the two "complaining" residents' complaints are to be believed.
I find it amusing that after the city issued the permit approving the plans...they then felt the need or duty to hire an "independent" consultant to basically tell them, "you're a-okay...nothing improper or illegal here..."
By the way...which "independent" engineering consultant was it who the city hired?
FUBAR government. Nothing new.
I believe the "engineer" was Mr. Bono. Does that suprise anyone?
Wasn't Bono the same engineer that advised the owner of the offending property? Or was that The Edge?
When the video starts and that guy is talking about the library, who is that in the amen corner?
Anon@5:35 --
That would be the voice of our own City Cluck, Betty Henneman.
I have photos to document the before & after of the 12-18" grade increase in the new construction next to my house. When I complained to the city, an employee came out and told me that because there was a drain & a swale I'd probably get far less water in my yard. HA! I now get twice as much water. Bozos!
The consultants to who we pay a princely sum for information that seldom appears to address our needs are all private-sector, for-profit companies.
That's at least half the problem with gub-mint, folks. The private sector sees the gub-mint customer coming and they think the sky's the limit -- forgetting that, in this country at least, the gub-mint they're bleeding is their neighbors and fellow citizens. Think about it -- if you dare.
what was Buzzzz talking about at the City council mtg last night? Ethics violation? who? the aldermen looked nervous, other city employees lookd confused. He threw it out there but wouldnt talk about it.
Like the TV cliffhangers of the 80s.Cmon. somebody knows!
Post a Comment