Saturday, November 2, 2013

Revisions to Chapel Ridge: Still the same hideous Chapel Ridge

On Oct. 30, Brian Mertz submitted a new plat plan [PDF], with minor revisions to his recent PR (planned residential) zoning request for the Nov. 12 meeting.   It's still the same monstrous high-density plan, with just a few changes.  In fact, this version is barely different from the R7 version, which the Planning and Zoning board unanimously rejected on Sept. 10.

Some facts about the updated Chapel Ridge:

- Unlike the first Chapel Ridge (seeking R7 zoning), this version is seeking PR (planned residential) zoning.

- Chapel Ridge 2.0 is only 5.2% less dense than first version.

- Chapel Ridge 2.0 crams 359 houses onto 143 acres.

- Chapel Ridge 2.0 will result in the likely flooding of surrounding areas.

- Chapel Ridge 2.0 will cause an extreme increase (over doubling) of traffic on K Highway.

- Chapel Ridge 2.0 will cause the destruction of wildlife habitat, etc.

- Chapel Ridge 2.0 will cause the lowering of the quality of life and property values for the surrounding area.

- Although the "gross density" is 2.51 homes per acre (as this includes streets, flood retention structures, etc.), Chapel Ridge's real density can reach as high as nearly 6 homes per acre.  Some lots are only 7,150 ft. in size.

- PR (planned residential) zoning could be even more extreme than R7, as this is the zoning often used for multi-family housing.  Although Brian Mertz is seeking single family PR, his plan could later be amended to a higher density, or even to  include multi-family housing.

- The hundreds of students this proposal will bring to Union Chapel almost certainly will result in a drastic redistricting of Union Chapel.

- The plan does not comply with the Platte County Land Use Plan.  It is not compatible in character, density or scale to the surrounding neighborhoods.   It will disrupt the stability of our area and destroy the rural charm that we sought in moving here.

- If this plan is approved, it clears the way for more of the same which will result in greatly compounded impacts in the community, and an unsustainable drain on public resources.

- If area is to be rezoned, it should be rezoned to R80 to compliment surrounding area.  Lots should be 1 - 3 acres with no lots smaller than 1 acre permitted.

In short, say No to PR (planned residential) zoning.  It's wrong for our area. Contact the Planning and Zoning board and the county commissioners today.





1 comment: