Roy Baldwin Says "It's not Garish"; Gee Thanks Roy Boy!
Does anyone else see a problem with a review board having the word 'garish' as their all encompassing guideline to approve or disapprove? Why does Vienna have a divorce attorney like Boy Baldwin on a review board making such idiotic statements? Is it too much to ask that there be OBJECTIVE guidelines so people don't feel like they are at the mercy of political cronies?
Roy can you define exactly what inappropriate is? Or is this all based on how you feel at that "minute and half" moment as you describe it?
We are sure Maud rates that performance by Baldwin at the Vienna Commercial Architectural Review Board a perfect "10"!
Comments
I don't have a problem with his professional background.
I don't know him, but if he got through law school, he should know how to read and interpret guidelines, which is what the board should be doing.
It comes back to the impetus for all of this much-needed scrutiny;
"What color will the fence be?"..."It shouldn't matter because that's not a requirement"
What I DO have a problem with is his (or anyone's) inability to objectively pass judgment due to an obvious lack of standards or gauges.
His comment "...doesn't violate ordinance, it's not garish..." while maybe accurate, speaks volumes and ought to be the issue.
Does the referenced ordinance specify levels of garishness?
Is "garish" actually in some mysterious, randomly enforced ordinance?
How can they enforce "garish" without imposing personal taste into the decisions?
Again, if Baldwin has a "weak toolbox" (the ordinances) with which to work, the focus ought to be fixing the tools.
Posted by: tbrduc | January 29, 2007 08:52 AM
He definitely has a weak 'toolbox'. But he knew that before he agreed to sit there. He likes the weak toolbox as does Maud because it gives them power. They don't like something, they just say, "Sorry its garish." At this stage of the game if anyone is willing to sit on these boards and continue the charade, knowing full well the assorted problems, then they deserve political attacks.
And yes, the Commercial Architectural Review Board has NO guidelines and NO standards. The code, and we don't make this up, has one governing word written into law. The Town Board of Architectural Review:
It's the same nonsense as practiced in the historic district. That piece of code can mean anything to anyone. It's a joke. And it's been a joke for 30 years.
And good point about levels of garish. We would like to see TC deal with that!
Posted by: Historic Vienna | January 29, 2007 10:17 AM
It's also worth noting that Roy Baldwin is the ONLY citizen in Vienna to show up last year at Town Council candidate debates with copies of the lawsuit pending against the Town regarding the historic district. He made the case openly to everyone that the lawsuit was a money maker of some sort. This guy is a bottom dweller, not to mention as phony as they come.
Posted by: Historic District Lawsuit | January 29, 2007 05:08 PM
Hmm.
I wasn't at that meeting, so I must accept your comments.
If true and he DID go into that position with his eyes wide open, then shame on him and it seems like he's been bitten/smitten by the power bug also.
If he's not going to address the REAL issue; the "empty toolbox" then his motivations are suspect, as well.
My opinion, of course.
Thanks for the opportunity to post comments.
Posted by: tbrduc | January 30, 2007 08:08 PM
I notice that Roy Boy's house colors follow the mantra dictated by Brown Town. We need a picture on here.
Posted by: vienna mommy | February 4, 2007 09:49 AM