My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
7.4 SR 05-20-2024
ElkRiver
>
City Government
>
City Council
>
Council Agenda Packets
>
2021 - 2030
>
2024
>
05-20-2024
>
7.4 SR 05-20-2024
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
11/15/2024 1:13:34 PM
Creation date
11/15/2024 1:13:34 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
City Government
type
SR
date
5/20/2024
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
105
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
View images
View plain text
5/22/2023 <br />Lennar Zone Change <br />Please consider the following and let me know why this shouldn't be addressed before <br />approval; <br />I'm Jim Sweazey. My wife, Sharon and I own the property on the south west side of Cleveland <br />that intersects the proposed second phase of this development. <br />We feel that this preliminary plan cannot be approved without consideration of the impact of <br />the next phase. <br />These planned unit developments have a mixture of housing types but phase 1 only has the <br />larger home sites. <br />Our concern is if these smaller high density buildings are not in this phase then where will they <br />be located? It would be irresponsible to approve this application without considering the <br />development as a whole. <br />Personally our issue is locating them on all three side of our property. If this would greatly <br />impact our property values and quality of life. Zoning ordinances are meant to keep this from <br />happening. <br />This loss of value can easily be demonstrated by builders own action including this <br />development. They will not build high density housing near single family homes without a <br />separation with ponds, trees, or sometimes larger lots. I have searched the existing <br />developments in the area and only found one near the elementary school. This makes good <br />sense. It maintains the value of single family home lots that often require a premium charge. If <br />developers won't do this around their own property they should not be allowed to do it to <br />others. They would be taking my property value and profiting by it for themselves. <br />We don't fault them for proposing this, corporations are in business tb make a profit but it is <br />the duty of the city to protect citizen's rights. <br />Much of the planned multilevel townhouses would be close to and tower over my current <br />home. From my experience these often becomes rental property. <br />Page 153 of 430 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.