Westwood-Roxhill-Arbor Heights CC: Signs & safety; livability/growth

Should the issue of improving safety on 35th SW also take into consideration the proliferation of signs at some businesses? An attendee at Tuesday night’s Westwood-Roxhill-Arbor Heights Community Council meeting brought that up, according to meeting notes from co-chair Joe Szilagyi. And from pre-scheduled agenda items, what he describes as “a rolling discussion about the Mayor’s Housing Affordability and Livability Agenda and future growth impacts on the Westwood/Highland Park Urban Village” yielded a dozen discussion points.

See those points, and the rest of the meeting notes, here. Next WWRHAH meeting: 6:15 pm January 6th, Southwest Branch Library.

9 Replies to "Westwood-Roxhill-Arbor Heights CC: Signs & safety; livability/growth"

  • sophista-tiki December 3, 2014 (1:37 am)

    So what does it mean for a single family house/lot smack dab in the middle of an ” urban village” problem? are we all going to get wiped out by development? “Urban Village” sounds like a pre targeted density zone where developers eagerly drool over the potential land grabs of older structures on big lots they see as ” hogging prime real estate”.

  • Nora December 3, 2014 (7:22 am)


    Only if you sell. Eminent domain doesn’t apply here. Also, this is an urban residential village, as opposed to an urban village (Morgan Junction) or an urban hub (Alaska Junction). There won’t be nearly as much growth or increased density as there has been near the Alaska Junction. A lot of that was discussed at the meeting last night.

    I think the plan is to get someone from DPD out at the next meeting so we can talk about zoning and have a more in depth discussion of this next month.

  • theworldaccordingto December 3, 2014 (8:11 am)

    those plans mean almost nothing. city reserves a prerogative to spin its “intent” as it pleases when it pleases. DPD does not communicate well with neighborhoods. Watch. out. It will soon be all about the lawyers people can afford to hire. See NERD stories. If community councils cannot afford land use attorneys, they will get steamrolled. Gauranteed.

  • Nearby neigbhor December 3, 2014 (9:18 am)

    @theworldaccordingto some neighborhoods would welcome the constant presence of another 1,000 people in certain blocks, along with the attendant new businesses, services, and transportation facilities that would follow them here.

  • Chris December 3, 2014 (9:59 am)

    To anyone who has an opinion on increased density and growth in the Westwood area, I would urge you to attend upcoming meetings of the Westwood/Roxhill/Arbor Heights Neighborhood Council, as they will likely be discussing what WE in the neighborhood would like to see happen. If there is something that you would like to see happen, or NOT see, or just want to find out more about how this process works, stop by the next meeting and voice your questions or concerns.

  • rules of order December 3, 2014 (12:30 pm)

    Does that council use Robert’s rules of order? I will try to attend if they invoke democratic and fair procedures into any of these “discussiins” cuz I smell predetermined agendas. Yes, I think white center and south park are being excluded too. Where is longrange planning with them? Annexation of wc will happen by law and create in city biz district. Remember that or get it wrong and get it done dumb.

  • Joe Szilagyi December 3, 2014 (1:14 pm)

    @rules, in WWRHAH we use Roberts lightly when needed and vote and poll often, both in meetings and online to set decisions for things we advocate. This planned invite for DPD is just to discuss the wheres, whys, and hows, *IF* this were to happen, since it’s probably inevitable anyway. There’s no agenda beyond finding out what’s plausible or not at first for information purposes.

Sorry, comment time is over.