Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutFulcher Letter AREAS OF PROTEST TO BLACKROCK CASTLE GREENS SUB- DIVISION OUTLINE I Effect On Community RECEIVED FEB 1 5 2007 CITY OF MERIDIAN CITY CLERK OFFfCE II Density And Streets A. Density B. Streets III Health & Safety IV Green Belt and Its Effects Upon Adjacent Property Owners V Compatibility Protecting Existing Residents .. AREAS OF PROTEST TO BLACKROCK CASTLE GREENS SUB-DIVISION I Effect on Community Staff report p. 9, Density /Transition "... this project will mark a significant change in the character and land use for this area." 1. It will have a tremendous effect on the value of our land. 2. It will have a negative effect on the view of land owners adjoining properties and existing bluff homes. 3. It will create a dreadful traffic problem. a. I can guess at least minimum of 1200 cars added to the already congestion of Eagle Road during rush hour. b. With the planned traffic light, traffic will back up past our driveways until it will be impossible to get to the highway. How do we handle this? What about emergencies? 4. Our wide-open spaces, which upon selling, we were promised would remain farm land for 15 years will now be covered with dense low-income housing, street lights, and heavy traffic. Staff report p. 8 "Staff believes that a Development Agreement is necessary to ensure that this property is developed in a fashion that is consistent with the comprehensive plan designation and does not NEGA TIVEL Y IMP ACT NEARBY PROPERTIES." Staff report p 9 (2nd bullet): "Wells may be used for non-domestic purposes such as landscape irrigation." Staff report Exhibit B, p. 4 states: "Wells may be used for non-domestic puposes such as landscape irrigation." 5. How is that going to effect the level of existing wells which we depend upon.? 6. This development adds nothing positive to the existing land owners. II Density and Streets Staff report states: "The gross density of the project is 3.6 dwelling units per acre." A. Density: 1. The density of R8 is contiguous with all existing land owners. The only spacious lots of R2 exist snuggled up to the Black Rock sub-division on the hill. This proves that there was no consideration to original land owners. Their whole plat is planned for a self-serving purpose. I believe that the existing land owners should have the same consideration as the yet to be developed lots on Black Rock. 2. There could be beautiful lots along the Ten Mile Creek and the planned green belt. In consideration to the adjoining land owners and the existing beautiful bluff homes there should be extensive R2 Zoning. 3. In fact it would only be proper to have these spacious lots sweeping " down the hill and extend to Eagle road. Beautiful lots to accomodate beautiful homes, making a positive effect on the entire area. The entire project should be zoned R2. 4. Most developments have spacious lots on the perimeter and grow denser toward the center of the development. Of course that would not serve the purpose of making attractive lots on Black Rock. B. Streets: 1. The main and only arterial entrance and exit is Taconic. This is a street 1/2 mile in length. This has to carry approximately 1200 cars twice a day. Because of the density of lots, and the absence of any lawns, this means children play in the streets. It is a perfect set-up for a tragic happening. 2. Potential buyers of higher-income Black Rock Sub-division lots on the hill will be forced to drive through low-income housing to get to their destination because there is no other entrance. 3. The developers have listed several stubs to adjoining property. Staffs comments on p. 6, Chapter VI, Goal II, Objective A, Action 6 "........Staff believes that the applicant has done a nice job of providing for future connectivity to the north, south and west." 4. However, on the north east line they are bordered by the Ten Mile Creek. This means that for this stub to have any value it would require a crossing. III Health & Safety 1. Since this is low-income housing, it will attract young families. Young families mean children. There is not adequate space per lot for any children's activities. Where do they play? In the street. 2. If not in the streets, they are confined to living indoors. Since there is no place to throw a ball, raise a garden, or play with a puppy they really have few other choices. They can watch filthy TV, play with a computer (which can open windows to all kinds of vile things), or play with videos. (I realize this is true of any un-supervised home.) But with the confined living this developer provides it makes this life-style much easier. 3. I am concerned about the appearance of the boxy look of these houses. Every child should be able to enter his door with pride and say ,"This is my home". I am certainly not opposed to low income families. However, I think the developer could provide a larger lot, more attractive housing and a little less profit. 4. I think this developer has done little to foster mental, physical, and emotional health for his potential buyers. 5. I am also concerned with fire and police protection. On p.5 (2nd bullet) Staff says ..."once annexed the lands will be under the jurisdiction of the Meridian City Fire Dep't. (This is shared with the Mertidian Rural Fire Dep't.) " 6. So this is If little consequence. On p.6 (bullets 1 & 2) it says "....once annexed the lands will be serviced by the Meridian Police Dep't." 7. Where do adjacent property owners who are still Ada County residents turn? This looks like a duplication of these services. IV Green Belt and Its Effects Upon Adjacent Property Owners P 8 Multi-Use Pathway states "...construct a multi~use pathway along the south side of the Ten Mile Drain where it courses through the subject property. There is an out parcel on Eagle Road which prevents the pathway from being extended all the way out to Eagle Road at this time. ......so the applicant is proposing to use micro-paths........to get pedestrians to /from the multi-use pathway. I. This totally destroys the property owned by Scott Fulcher. Once again there is no consideration for existing land owners. V Compatibility Protecting Existing Residents P. 7 "Chapter VII, Goal IV,Objective C, Action 1 - Protect existing residential properties from incompatible land use development on adjacent parcels." Staff recommends on P. 7 ".......Commission and Coucil rely on any verbal or written testimony that may be provided at the public hearing.........." 1. No consideration has been given to existing property owners. 2. Proof? All larger lots are self-serving to the exclusive housing development on Blackrock. 3. The perimeter and all other interior lots are reserved for low-income housing. 4. Beautiful lots could be utilized by the Ten Mile Creek. 5. Surrounding atmosphere should be as important for the existing land owners as for the un-inhabited lots on the bluff. 6. The lots are not even compatible within itself. The up-scale home owners must travel 1/2 mile through low-income development to reach their homes. Their eastern view will be low-income dwellings. 7. Existing bluff homes (who built for the view) will be forced to view low- income housing. 8. This development is totally backward. Most developments have a higher density in the middle and then flow out to larger lots on the perimeter. Of course, this doesn't meet their criteria to supply a nice atmosphere for their Blackrock. 9. This developer is trying to combine apples and oranges. He can't have his cake and eat it, too. He has to improve his development on the lower level lands to have a successful Blackrock. VI Summary 1. I cannot see that this development is profitable to anyone but the developer, himself. 2. It seems to me that the City of Meridian would encourage the higher density toward the center of the city and flow out to lower density on the perimeter of their Comprehensive Plan. J3~~ ~ 5~/;;- d. tJal'Lvr?d. 1Jl..?U~~ c?Z/- S--36i/ 2- "fi1;. y?r~ 66 ifJ