1999 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

Planning Commission Meeting regarding Dunbar rezone request (Reagan Addition lots 22, 23, 24)(R1 to R3) Rick Lee's Grandparents owned this property from early 19OO's until 1974 * Mr Frank Lowry purchased property and unsuccessfully tried to rezone to build apartments Many of the adjacent property owners ( Fulk's, Mann's, Spoon's Mansfield's, and Lee's) have lived in their homes for over 40 years. The property has been used as a neighborhood park for at least $O years * Rezoning this property to R-3 could result in: * An unreasonably large building with LOTS of asphalt / concrete parking spaces "Losing the trees and greenspace * Decrease in values of nearby properties This is exactly what we do not want: An unreasonably large building with a huge concrete or asphalt parking lot with no grass. It would not fit in at all. * We have serious concerns about the following: * Sewers They are at their maximum now Sewage backup in homes Constant overflow through manhole covers Can not handle more hookups Vlles family complaint filed with Town Council Sewer collapsed under St Clair st on March 17 Very costly upgrade for town Bishop Avenue/'Goose" creek Bishop Ave is actually a one lane alley that has amazingly heavy traffic. There is no guardrall for protection. There is dangerous deterioration and erosion along the creek bank / alley and it is very treacherous when 2 cars try to pass · The sloping of the property Leveling the land would make it look as If It Is In a pit Retaining wall would be needed on west end of property Fencing would be needed for safety purposes due to retaining wall Drainage problems and more erosion for creek · We do not believe the lots are large enough for anything bigger than a double The double directly across Carlisle street fills up the lot it ts on which is the same length as the lots trying to be rezoned. We prefer the lots remain as R-1 but could accept R-2. Mr Holloway's statements at the January meeting were to the fact that a double is not 'economically feasible' meaning it would not make enough money for them. We totally disagree with that. The amount of income generated from the property is directly proportional to the amount of money invested. Example: 1) single family home - lower Investment with I revenue source 2) double-largerlnvestmentwith2 revenue sources 3) Three family building - even larger investment with 3 revenue sources, etc... In our opinion, economic feasibility is not a valid argument. * Size of the proposed building for the R-3 rezoning There are no 2 story buildings in the neighborhood and there are no buildings larger than doubles. The 'apartments' on St. Clair st are actually sets of 1 story doubles and there is a 1 story double directly across Carlisle street. All others are either 1 story or ! I/2 story single family residences. A 2 story, large apartment building would not fit in at all and it would dwarf all the residences nearby. According to the plans presented at the January meeting, a building with 6 apartments was shown. The units were 18' x 30' in size, which is approximately the same size as this meeting room in the Town Hall. That is very small. They were described as being 'nicer' and 'an improvement'. That, In our opinion, is not true. We feel that we have proven that an R-3 is not the best use of this property because: An unreasonably large building would not fit In There are no multi-family buildings larger than doubles In the neighborhood There are no houses larger than 1 1/2 stories in the neighborhood The property Is not large enough for anything bigger than a double The sloping of the land would make it look as if It is In a pit Costly upgrades for town regarding sewer system and Bishop Avenue / 'Goose' creek , Negative effect on property values We, the long time residents of the area, oppose anything larger than a 1 story double and respectfully ask you to deny this rezoning request. We appreciate your time and thoughtful consideration of this matter.