A reply to "The Vintage: Be part of the solution, not the problem"
Submitted by Carson Now Reader on Tue, 09/27/2016 - 9:49am
This is a reply to http://carsonnow.org/reader-content/09/26/2016/vintage-be-part-solution-.... I am not on Facebook, so I have to do it like this.
Let me see if I understand this. Style trumps substance? It is OK for the project to fill the last piece of open space left on this side of town with a hyperdensity development, just because the architecture is "tasteful? Taste is a matter of personal opinion (and I happen not to like what's proposed). It is OK to negate the property rights of the neighbors -- by violating the current master plan and zoning -- just because the proponents are "polite" and the opponents are a "lynch mob"? Isn't THAT characterization itself slanderous? It is OK to violate my rights, my peace of mind, the tranquility I expect ed in my retirement years, just because the violator is "respectful"? If the people who are proposing this project were respectful of the people who already live here, they would not be proposing such a disrespectful project.
Property rights are NOT absolute. We have zoning laws to protect the interests of all property owners. An owner is NOT entitled to do anything he wants with his property, but only what is compatible with the neighborhood. Well, a hyperdensity development that makes a joke of current master plans and zoning -- effectively, the contract under which we present owners bought our homes in this area -- consisting of apartments and zero lot line condo rentals, commercial spaces, parking lots, and a smattering of homes on substandard size lots is NOT compatible with a neighborhood of single family site-built homes on regulation size lots. A hyperdensity development that dumps much additional traffic -- due to the new residents, visitors and employees in the commercial and care facilities -- onto streets where kids walk to and from school is not only INcompatible with the existing neighborhood, but a significant new danger to the safety of those children.
The list of problems with this proposed development is as long as the 648 page application itself. We already by water from neighboring counties because we don't have enough. The fields are a buffer zone for floods; we had two "hundred year" floods in the past couple of decades. The fields are just a few hundred feet off an earthquake fault line. As to the specifics of the plans, everything is still up in the air; the developer still makes public presentation where he promises "we can do anything you want." You DO have to ask, even after slogging through the 648 page application, exactly WHAT are they proposing to build? To illustrate that point, the "open space" in this project consists of a grand total of 1.2 acres at the Mountain Street trail head, on which they propose to build (1) a soccer field, (2) a bocci ball field, (3) a vineyard, (4) vegetable gardens to feed the residents, (5) ... "whatever you want."
Yes, be part of the solution. Come to the meeting on Thursday and tell the Planning Commission NOT to approve this project.
- application
- architecture
- children
- developer
- Development
- Family
- gardens
- homes
- kids
- Kids!
- live
- meeting
- Mind
- mountain
- new
- open space
- Opinion
- opinion
- peace
- planning
- public
- Rentals
- retirement
- Safety
- school
- Space
- The Vintage At Kings Canyon
- urban development
- walk
- water
- zoning
- Earthquake
- master plan
- soccer
- Traffic
