Montclair Sta. Back c. 1913 FADED.jpg

MONTCLAIR TERMINAL

FUTURE REGIONAL STATION WITH A STORIED PAST


or

OVERCROWDED NIGHTMARE SCENARIO OF APART-MENT COMPLEX/RETAIL DEVELOPMENT
___________________________________________________________________
_______________________________________

_________________

 

PROCESS

In an ostensible effort to speed up the process the Montclair Planning Board has instituted some rather-too-flexible-in-hands-of-the-chair legalistic procedures for conducting meetings on the proposal, where testimony by the developer and their experts is open to questions, but not criticism. Public comment is largely forbidden, and when the final hearing of public comments by the "objectors" comes (it's Orwellian)  they will need to hire experts - or be one - in order to have their comments heard.

Here are paraphrased some of the "choicer" exchanges from the November 26 Planning Board meeting, revolving around the applicant's inexplicable attempt to expand the protected station house building by half its 45-foot depth, building a new back wall 22.5 feet to the rear of the existing one, and putting a fast food restaurant between the two - plans which were scrapped with another submission of drawings presented at the next meeting a week later - thanks apparently to one observant Montclair citizen. The video is available here.

__________________

Langen Engineering now comes early in the proceedings introducing a more "subtle" change than the one they just aired - "possibly requiring a little more explanation"...


They get right to the point:

LANGEN: "In the footprint of theee.. restaurant space: the footprint itself has not changed whatsoever. So it's the same 7667 square feet. [But the area of the building is only 5250.] In trying to clarify and do some of our homework on making sure that we had consistency amongst all the numbers - both in the parking reports and in our site plans - what we found was that that space where what we now think of as the Pig and Prince is actually only a portion of that footprint. So there's a demising wall where there's this... large footprint of approximately seventy-six hundred square feet. The pig and Prince comprises approximately 5000 square feet of that. So there's been an additional portion umm, which has... ummm, which will be occupied - which has to be accommodated in the parking demand calculations. What we've done is identified an 1800 square foot portion of that footprint to be dedicated to, uh, what we're calling a fast food restaurant."

In other words, they are adding an additional 1800' fast food restaurant with 72 seats to the approximately five thousand feet of the existing Pig and Prince, in a building that only has 5250 square feet of space. (approximate - my estimate)

 

Concurrently Langen's representative is pointing out with a special pointing device particulars of the "restaurant footprint" - which means: building footprint - including a mysterious "demised wall" - this on a profusely marked-up and illegible projected drawing having no outline or indication of the instant station building on it! ...with this all couched, as it turns out, in their professed need to have more accurate measurements for purposes of parking compliance - the newly discovered eighteen hundred feet of space suddenly materialized in a building of about five thousand being nothing special.

It all comes down to a station building/restaurant footprint dichotomy - which terms in Langen's use are synonymous - as with the architect from a different firm, who uses the same illegible drawing as well, to describe the same changes later in the same meeting.

An 1800-square-foot portion of the building has now been "identified", and is referred to as having been "found". It is to be used for a fast food restaurant, says the representative, while appearing to be pointing with the special pointer to a representation of something called a "demising wall" (a wall that separates properties, such as rental units) which doesn't exist in the drawing.

P. B.M. SCHWARTZ: "Did you just DISCOVER this space?, or..."

 

LANGEN: Well it's not "discovered" space, but we... In cleaning up our numbers we found that what we thought to be Pig and Prince's lease of the entire building only turned out to be a portion of that. And we realized there's a demising wall within that space that we had not..Uhh...uhh... [noticed?] accurately depicted previously.

The demising wall referred to is evidently the existing wall at the back of the protected (assumedly) station house building.

__________________

Apropos of issues related to and occurring mostly in the next meeting is this question from Historic Preservation Commissioner Greenbaum during the first half:

GREENBAUM: "With, um respect to your, uh, updated, uh, plan - and we all agree that there is essentially a modified application at this time, is that correct? There's variances between the previous applications/plans that have been presented. So, is it safe to say that - will we agree that - this is a modified application?"


LANGEN: "It's not a modified application. The application has continued with provisions to address comments both from the board and the [unintelligible]."

GREENBAUM: "ok"
 

____________________

In further relevant-to-station-house-rear-expansion testimony that evening, Stevie the Architect comes on after the break and begins by noting a "change to the restaurant" in the revised drawing:

P.B.M. SCHWARTZ: "So THEIR back wall, where there are tables right now - you're saying there's a space behind there and they're currently using that for storage? is that..."

STEVIE: "Well I think they use it, informally, uh, I mean storage, I'm not exactly sure what's in that..."

 

P.B.M. SCHWARTZ: "And it.. is there window access? ...there right now, I mean is it seen from the street?

 

STEVIE: "It can be accessed, uh...there's a door... I would say... on sorta the, the western corner of that uhh, building here... [pointing to the same map used before in the earlier testimony, on which the building is not depicted] right off the walkway uh, uh, to Lackawanna Plaza.

P.B.M. SCHWARTZ: "Uh-huh..."

____________________

Stationhouse Expanded 22.5' to the Rear

NOT THE PLAN DRAWING USED IN THE ABOVE DESCRIBED TESTIMONY
While this plan showing the existing station house building is noticeably plastered with block letters reading "EXISTING TO REMAIN" and "NO CHANGE" - on close examination it reveales the intention to to relocate the back wall of the building - listed on National, State and Local Historical Registers. The existing, original, back wall is located above the word: "RESTAURANT".

Stationhouse Expanded 22.5' to the Rear

EAST ELEVATION SHOWING EXTENSION OF THE BUILDING TO THE  RIGHT

The existing back wall of the building is under or near the back line of the attic at its right side. The extension substantially changes the massing of the building. Quoins located on the original rear corner analogous to those shown on the front corner here would necessarily be partially concealed or demolished. The extension as drawn shows uneven spacing of the top vertical decorative elements new-versus-old on close inspection. The existing canopy noted in the drawing appears extended to the right where it is supported by a post having spacing not in conformance with that of the others. The said existing canopy has been supported at its right through its abutment with the likewise existing canopy of Track 1, since 1913.

____________________

________________________________________

____________________

DISPOSITIVE EXCHANGE OF 11-26 THAT RESULTED IN GETTING PLANS FOR THE TERMINAL BUILDING SUBMITTED 11-15, SCRAPPED

Former Historic Preservation Commissioner Frank Rubacky appears, to question the Applicant in the form of Stevie the Architect:

RUBACKY: ...The site plan in your drawings has confused me. [...]
 

Your outline of the terminal building, which is being utilized by the Pig and Prince, is a little bit deceptive in the sense that [in the drawing] the portion that they're using for storage is part of this terminal building, it's not part of the train shed.

STEVIE: That's correct.

RUBACKY: So why is...

 

STEVIE: [didactically] "Platform Canopy."


It's NOT a platform canopy. [to Applicant's Council] ("That's why I'm glad you said platform canopy.") [back to Stevie] "It's not a platform canopy."

 

STEVIE: "Uh..."

 

RUBACKY: "There.. There's a lot of mistakes in, in... [moves toward the drawing] this area. THIS - is not a platform canopy. Never was, still isn't. Your historic preservation expert testified: this is the terminal element; this is the shed for the station...

 

COUNSEL FOR THE APPLICANT: "When you say... When you say - just so I... so I'm clear actually - whaddayou mean when you say "shed?"

 

RUBACKY: Theee, uh...

 

P.B.M.: "Can you get the mic too? We can't hear you very well."

RUBACKY: The original use was [pointing to the canopy that projects east from the terminal building] this shed was not for passengers per se, or people on the train platforms. It was used as a recei... loading dock, for bulk freight. And it came around the corner here [motioning from the east to the north side of the existing terminal building] to protect the entrances on this side of the terminal, where passengers would exit, and go to the train platforms. But THIS [indicating immediately north of the existing terminal building] is not the platform, and it's been repeatedly mislabeled, and misidentified. Your expert identified it, but it never translated to the site plan. Soo... I... I'm a little bit concerned about this area because, your expert testified that this is the most historic part of the entire site.

 

And yet you're modifying it.

 

Do you understand that you're modifying the most historic part of the site?

 

STEVIE: I don't believe that we're modifying that.

 

P. B. STAFF: "Um...I need a... can ... uh..."

 

RUBACKY: [handing over the microphone] I'm sorry.

 

P. B. STAFF: "...need a microphone for Mr. Stevie."

 

STEVIE: I don't believe the intention is that we're going to modify that. [looking for a different sheet] (Um, I'm just going to...)"

 

RUBACKY: [referring to sheet numbers] "Could you go to A9 or A10?"

STEVIE: "That's where I'm going. I believe A8 is what I'm lookin' for."
So, uh the area that we're talking about right now is right in here. And so: on... on the model drawin...

P. B.M. UNKNOWN: "Sorry, what's your... what sheet is that?

 

STEVIE: "This is Sheet A8, of Exhibit A43.

 

And so, right now, um, the area that Mr. Rubacky is speaking of is this location in here. [not possible to follow the pointer] Um, and this is all part of the... [gesturing at Rubacky concerning some special meaning of the following term:] "train station building."

RUBACKY: "Actually, it's not. but..."

STEVIE: "...but umm... Perhaps I'm not... I'm not using the correct terminology...

RUBACKY: "No, you're... you're just... don't understand the site. [laughs] The building... This terminal building doesn't end at the middle...[unintelligible]"

 

STEVIE: "That's what I was trying to explain."

RUBACKY: "You were pointing out that this..."

STEVIE: "I was trying to show that this corner [not possible to follow pointer] - and I just don't have a steady hand and I apologize - but this corner, is the end of the building itself and then the... "shed" that you're speaking of, is located here."

 

RUBACKY: "The building ends... ... ... [looks blankly at Stevie then walks back to the podium] O.K. - Here's my point - and it's frustrating. All your drawings are wrong. It's as simple as that. ...and if we had somebody who did an assessment of the property they would know that it's wrong. It's obvious."

Could you go to A9 please? Could... ahh, sorry, uh YES. Could you zoom in on the middle section, terminal building? [addressing the board] And this is important. I uh, I think you need to understand this. Because it's...

CHIEF SOVIET PLANNING BOARD SHOW TRIAL KANGAROO JOHN WYNNE: [with great forbearance] "You mean you're saying you BELIEVE they're wrong." [follows with a dispassionate chuckle]

RUBACKY: "I know they're wrong.  ...as only a [unintelligible] could know."

[pointing to the east elevation] O.K. This is the terminal building. [pointing to the line of the existing back wall and attic at its back] It has one continu... [break in video?] [referring to same, existing back wall:] This is the exterior wall. The shed serving this facade [east] turns the corner, and services the north facade. [now pointing to the section of the east wall proposed as being extended 22.5' north in the drawing] Here, you show an extension of the terminal. ...that I call a modification to an historic landmark.


I don't understand this, you haven't spoken to this. Looks like brick, looks like stone. [pointing to the existing part] Looks like ...a duplication of this. But this is NOT part of the building. This is NOT ...the building per se. Yes, it's part of the shed area, but this whole section here? ...is made up."


STEVIE: "I understand that."

RUBACKY: "You understand that? So - you did that. Why?"

STEVIE: "Because this is currently indoor shopping center right now. So this is drywall and...

 

RUBACKY: And you're... [unintelligible]

 

COUNSEL FOR THE APPLICANT: "And, and to, to that point I, I'm gonna object to the... just... we're not acknowledging the statement that you're making tha... that that's a, uh, historic landmark or part of the historic building. [This, without an opportunity for Rubacky to respond to his objection which was falsely taken.] I'll let Mr. Stevie answer."

P.B.M. SCHWARTZ: I think the question was, Mr. Stevie: why did you do... why did you make the modification.

 

STEVIE: So again, we're using this as a transition area between the existing building and the proposed building. It's

currently constructed of materials that are not suitable for the exterior of the building, so we're going to clad them in materials that ARE suitable for the exterior of the building. Um, and again, in keeping with the character of, the historic property, as well as the new property.

CHIEF SOVIET PLANNING BOARD SHOW TRIAL KANGAROO JOHN WYNNE: "But you're... That space is already... That space is already enclosed - as it's currently constructed, right?...

 

STEVIE: "That's correct..."

 

CHIEF SOVIET PLANNING BOARD SHOW TRIAL KANGAROO JOHN WYNNE: "...so you're not changing anything. You're just changing the facing - basically, what's along the sidewalk. That's the only thing that you've changed!

 

STEVIE: "That's correct."

 

RUBACKY: "What's there from a PLANNING point of view, I understand."

 

CHIEF SOVIET PLANNING BOARD SHOW TRIAL KANGAROO JOHN WYNNE: "Well tha... We're tryin', We're tryin' to understand from a FACTUAL point of view exactly... 

RUBACKY: "[unintelligible] ...to EXPLAIN the factual point... [unintelligible]

CHIEF SOVIET PLANNING BOARD SHOW TRIAL KANGAROO JOHN WYNNE: [over Rubacky] ... Exactly... Well ah, well we're... we're all CONFUSED.

COUNSEL FOR THE APPLICANT: [with the purpose of helping to block whatever Rubacky is saying] "Mr. Stevie: That's part of the interior wall now?

 

STEVIE: "That's correct."

RUBACKI: "[unintelligible] ...that that's NOT part of the terminal... [unintelligible]"

P.B.M. UNKNOWN: [to Rubacky] "You need the mic. You need the mic."

 

P.B.M. SCHWARTZ: "OK lets... lets break it down into little pieces. Is the existing brick of that section to the right... there now?"

 

STEVIE: "No"

 

P.B.M. SCHWARTZ: "So that... You are modifying the existing exterior structure and proposing to replicate it similarly to what is there to the left of that. Is that a fair statement?"

STEVIE: "That's a fair... It's a transitional... It's a transitional detail between the... the... the train shed building and the new, ah... architectural facade of the retail."

 

P.B.M. SCHWARTZ: "Do you have a picture of what is there now?"

 

STEVIE: "I may have a picture, I would have to search for it."

 

CHIEF SOVIET PLANNING BOARD SHOW TRIAL KANGAROO JOHN WYNNE: "But that's current... that area is currently inside the mall...

 

STEVIE: "It's currently inside the mall... [unintelligible]"

 

CHIEF SOVIET PLANNING BOARD SHOW TRIAL KANGAROO JOHN WYNNE: ...and it's a storefront. It's that first storefront, correct?"

 

STEVIE: "That's correct. It's storefront and it's interior finishes."

 

CHIEF SOVIET PLANNING BOARD SHOW TRIAL KANGAROO JOHN WYNNE: "So I... And I think the[sic] was... was originally... the last thing that was there was an eyeglass place?

P.B.M. SCHWARTZ: [to Stevie] "So what's on the outside right now? Brick?"

 

STEVIE: "No, on the outside...

 

CHIEF SOVIET PLANNING BOARD SHOW TRIAL KANGAROO JOHN WYNNE: [to Schwartz, interrupting] "No. it was a storefront. it was glass.

STEVIE: "It's a storefront. It's glass and it's sheet rock...

 

CHIEF SOVIET PLANNING BOARD SHOW TRIAL KANGAROO JOHN WYNNE: [broadly gesturing with great import] "Right. And they're REMOVING the wall structure in FRONT of all that!"

P.B.M. SCHWARTZ: "Oh God. ok."

 

STEVIE: "Right! See, the inside...

 

CHIEF SOVIET PLANNING BOARD SHOW TRIAL KANGAROO JOHN WYNNE: ...because right now that's INSIDE the mall. The mall... the mall starts... Those two doors... 

STEVIE:"are outside"

 

CHIEF SOVIET PLANNING BOARD SHOW TRIAL KANGAROO JOHN WYNNE: are outside... and then... there's a wall, and the inside starts from there.

 

P.B.M. SCHWARTZ: "Got it."

 

CHIEF SOVIET PLANNING BOARD SHOW TRIAL KANGAROO JOHN WYNNE: The only... so the only difference to the current structure now, is that the mall is being removed from...

 

STEVIE: [unintelligible] ...removed from... [unintelligible]

CHIEF SOVIET PLANNING BOARD SHOW TRIAL KANGAROO JOHN WYNNE: "...from the station - all the way along theeee... uh, west side. [east, actually] Uhh, so all those storefronts that were formerly INSIDE the mall will now be exposed...

 

STEVIE: "Outside. That's correct."

 

CHIEF SOVIET PLANNING BOARD SHOW TRIAL KANGAROO JOHN WYNNE: ...to the parking lot, and that FIRST storefront, which was originally a glass storefront, is the... The FACADE of it is being made to MIRROR the facade of the adjacent station - so that it transitions to... [emphatically] because that's not gonna be a storefront. The storefronts will go from this... from... from... from theee... next storefront in... ...so yeah."

(Disorder has erupted, with the chair and counsel for the applicant running interference to shut Rubacky down.)


P.B.M. SCHWARTZ: "So we're extending... we're extending the brick of what was the terminal - that is now Pig and Prince...

STEVIE: "That's correct."

 

P.B.M. SCHWARTZ: ... going, uh ...going... [several including STEVIE say "north" - others say "east"] going east... we're extending the brick. That's what you're proposing. You're exten... You're MODIFYING the... (what Frank [Rubacky] is saying, if that is part of the original historic building - that's been designated.) You are proposing to um... demo or modify that piece on the exterior - and brick that - replicating the brick to the left...

STEVIE: "Correct."

P.B.M. SCHWARTZ: ...the brick treatment to the left. and then you are MODIFYING the interior elements of that - creating effectively storefronts - now going north."

STEVIE: "That's correct."

P.B.M. UNKNOWN "The only... [unintelligible]"

CHIEF SOVIET PLANNING BOARD SHOW TRIAL KANGAROO JOHN WYNNE: [with wisdom and moral rightiousness [[though feigned]] in revealing the deciding factor [[to his mind]] "And that piece that's adjacent to the train station is ALREADY ENCLOSED. And already has a door that faces onto Lackawanna Plaza on the... on the other side, right?...

STEVIE: "Yes."

 

CHIEF SOVIET PLANNING BOARD SHOW TRIAL KANGAROO JOHN WYNNE: ...that you can see from the other... from the small parking lot, in the... theee - what would be, I guess... the windows are blacked out... and the door is blacked out... but you... you can see it on Google Maps."

 

P.B.M. SCHWARTZ: "So you're changing the SYMMETRY of that building, because it looks like there are... two main sections over to the left, and you're extending the one to the right. You are MODIFYING the exterior of that..."

CHIEF SOVIET PLANNING BOARD SHOW TRIAL KANGAROO JOHN WYNNE: [interrupting] "Juss-the... just the... It's just the the exterior facade. Because the INTERNAL space is already there. [?]

P.B.M. SCHWARTZ: [several attempts to regain the floor are unsuccessful] "[unintelligible]"

CHIEF SOVIET PLANNING BOARD SHOW TRIAL KANGAROO JOHN WYNNE: "...was already modified."

P.B.M. LOUGHMAN: [unintelligible]

CHIEF SOVIET PLANNING BOARD SHOW TRIAL KANGAROO JOHN WYNNE: "And you're losing the whole MALLYou're losing the whole mall enclosure..."

P.B.M. LOUGHMAN:  [unintelligible] "...hall, of the original waiting room..."

.

CHIEF SOVIET PLANNING BOARD SHOW TRIAL KANGAROO JOHN WYNNE: [interrupting Loughman to correct her] No! No. That... that was... That MALL was not part of the original waiting room. That was added in, in the renovation.

COUNSEL FOR THE APPLICANT: "Mr. Chairman just to clarify and uh, uh... I think most of that was correct. [?] I just wanna clarify for the EXTERIOR that... what's there NOW, versus what we're replacing it to now: What is there now is NOT original to the train station, from... [Given the foregoing questioning and clarification by SCHWARTZ this is a consciously attempted fraud upon the board.]

P.B.M. SCHWARTZ: "No, it's a storefront..." [and he agrees]

CHIEF SOVIET PLANNING BOARD SHOW TRIAL KANGAROO JOHN WYNNE: [to applicant's counsel] "RIGHT! That was... that was done with the... that was done with the modification back in the Eighties.

COUNSEL FOR THE APPLICANT: "Right. Correct. Just wanted to clarify that."

 

P.B.M. SCHWARTZ: "Mr. Rubacky, back to you, sir."

 

CHIEF SOVIET PLANNING BOARD SHOW TRIAL KANGAROO JOHN WYNNE: [to Rubacky - FORWARDING WITHIN THE PROCESS THE NOW ESTABLISHED FRAUD] "Do you still have an ISSUE?? Or do you DISAGREE WITH THAT?? ...Or... what's wrong with that?" [AND USING IT TO DISCREDIT RUBACKY]

RUBACKY: "[unintelligible] Well, o.k. lemme start. Lemme just ask a question..." [the applicant supposed to be addressed only with questions in this session]

CHIEF SOVIET PLANNING BOARD SHOW TRIAL KANGAROO JOHN WYNNE: "NO! NO! Why don't you... NO! NO! Why don't you answer MY question: What's wrong with that... What's wrong with theee... the way that it's been outlined... so far?

RUBACKY: "You called this a transitional element. From a historic preservation - federal standards...

 

CHIEF SOVIET PLANNING BOARD SHOW TRIAL KANGAROO JOHN WYNNE: "I... ASIDE from a...

 

RUBACKY: You ASKED me... DO YOU WANT AN ANSWER OR...

 

CHIEF SOVIET PLANNING BOARD SHOW TRIAL KANGAROO JOHN WYNNE: You're not answering my question!

 

RUBACKY I'm TRYING to...

 

CHIEF SOVIET PLANNING BOARD SHOW TRIAL KANGAROO JOHN WYNNE: "No, well you're not answering my question, 'cause I ASKED you - in terms of what was just described - AND NOWHERE ALONG THAT DESCRIPTION - did anybody say - did I or anybody else say - that that was part of the HISTORICAL... what was historically designated - or bring up ANY MENTION of historical designation. The ONLY thing that we said, was basically, that there was a new FACADE - put on what is now... what is currently an existing structure. [a complete misrepresentation of the discussion during the past twelve minutes]

RUBACKY: [unintelligible]

CHIEF SOVIET PLANNING BOARD SHOW TRIAL KANGAROO JOHN WYNNE: "Now is that right or wrong?"

RUBACKY: No, it's NOT RIGHT. It's WRONG.

CHIEF SOVIET PLANNING BOARD SHOW TRIAL KANGAROO JOHN WYNNE: What's wrong with that?

 

RUBACKY: "[unintelligible] ...how you gonna turn the corner here?

CHIEF SOVIET PLANNING BOARD SHOW TRIAL KANGAROO JOHN WYNNE: "What's wrong with that?"

 

RUBACKY: "It's gonna impact the corner design of this building. It's going to change the LOOK of this building. You're gonna use new bricks...

 

CHIEF SOVIET PLANNING BOARD SHOW TRIAL KANGAROO JOHN WYNNE: "IT'S ALREADY BEEN CHANGED! BECAUSE THERE'S A MALL ENTRANCE RIGHT THERE! It's already been changed!!

RUBACKY: "Yes, but they're demo... they're DEMOLISHING  that [unintelligible] detriment, and now you're gonna replace it with another detriment.

CHIEF SOVIET PLANNING BOARD SHOW TRIAL KANGAROO JOHN WYNNE: "So, that's your... THAT'S what your point is. Your saying that what they're replacing it with - because it's already been... it's already been impacted - and what you're saying is that instead of restoring it back to the original, they're replacing it with something else that impacts it."

RUBACKY: I'm not saying restore it back the the original, not at all! You're not listening to me. I wish you would listen to me.


CHIEF SOVIET PLANNING BOARD SHOW TRIAL KANGAROO JOHN WYNNE: "I AM LISTENING TO YOU. WHAT I'M TRYING TO UNDER...

RUBACKY: "No, No!... [unintelligible]"

CHIEF SOVIET PLANNING BOARD SHOW TRIAL KANGAROO JOHN WYNNE: I'M TRYING TO UNDERSTAND WHAT YOU'RE SAYING AND YOU'RE BEING OBTUSE AS USUAL!

RUBACKY: "[unintelligible] Let me TRY to finish! ...O.K.?

It's not a question about restoring something, [pointing to the modified east facade. emphatically:] it's a question of LEAVING THIS ALONE.  THAT'S the QUESTION. You LEAVE - the BUILDING - ALONE. And you don't have enough detail, with what is being presented tonight to form the opinion you're forming. You are PREJUDGING this based on your own recollection of the building. You're NOT...

CHIEF SOVIET PLANNING BOARD SHOW TRIAL KANGAROO JOHN WYNNE: And you're NOT!?

RUBACKY: Well I have a little bit of HPC experience and I do know the building.

 

CHIEF SOVIET PLANNING BOARD SHOW TRIAL KANGAROO JOHN WYNNE: Well, ya know what? You're not the only person, in this ROOM, that has experience with that building. So it doesn't qualify you, as any more an expert than me, or anybody else sitting on this board!


RUBACKY: No, I'm not saying I'm any more of an expert, I said I understand the building!

 

CHIEF SOVIET PLANNING BOARD SHOW TRIAL KANGAROO JOHN WYNNE: I understand the building too! And I think I understand the building just as much as you do.

 

RUBACKY: Alright, we're just gonna disagree. All I'm saying is: the HPC should have addressed this; THEY DIDN'T; you have a chance to address it; YOU'RE NOT. ...I've made my point.

CHIEF SOVIET PLANNING BOARD SHOW TRIAL KANGAROO JOHN WYNNE: Good! No, no - Good! He's made his point - I think we all understand what he said. [the usual optuseness notwithstanding] Do you have any further questions...

RUBACKY: Yes, I do.

_______________________________________________________________________________________________________________

________________________________________

_______________________________________________________________________________________________________________

Commissioner Rubacky went on to point out several other departures from accepted historical preservation norms and law - with which the architect is intimately familiar - included in another (west) elevation of the protected Terminal Building, as proposed.

The November 26 proposal to the board was carried out as a multi-pronged conspiracy involving cooperation of the engineer, architect and counsel of the developer. The tactic of introducing and arguing incessantly a non-starter proposal (non-starter because it blatantly ignores the said norms and law) may be seen as a ploy designed to wear the opposition down, the which survives now only in the form of Rubacky - and Schwartz (who is not a regular member of the board) in his capacity of efforts made to clarify the proposal openly before the public as a neutral entity. If not for Schwartz it would  have been possible to completely ignore Rubacky's criticism, and this would have been reflected in the record.

That the chair John Wynn is engaged in an effort to do that as evidenced by his extremely vocal bias and dishonesty displayed at the meeting is completely obvious.

_______________________________________________________________________________________________________________

________________________________________

_______________________________________________________________________________________________________________

If you want your comment to appear on Facebook, click the box next to "Also post on Facebook" at lower left. (It doesn't show up till you click or enter text in the text box.)