A builder is trying to have the property that the Friendly Road Inn was on as well as the parcel directly beside it to the west rezoned for ten 3 story buildings with 228 apartments. A small single family neighborhood just west of both properties is most affected. This small neighborhood consists of 25 single family homes.
This property is probably the last infill property left on Friendly Avenue between the new Painter Blvd just one block away and Guilford College. As one of the home owners in this neighborhood, we are not against development. In fact we would welcome a responsible builder developing a neighborhood that is compatitable to ours. We are against the density. Ten 3 story building up against single family homes is too much.
Just in toward Guilford College is the Coble Farm community. There are 250 some homes on this 52 acre tract of land. Mega Builders wants 228 appartments on 13 acres of land.
Our community formed a group and were joined by Carriage Crossing, Carriage Village and Coble Farm. There are 400+ homes all saying this is too dense.
Our group won the first round with the zoning board on December 10, 2007. The builder appealed it to city council on January 10, 2008. With Robbie Perkins absent because of an injury and Mike Barber having to recuse himself it did not pass with a majority and there will be a second reading on February 5, 2008.
The residents of Coble Farm were able to get really great restrictions for Meadow Creek that runs to the west of their property. Mega Builders has not made the first concession concerning this creek that has its headwaters just south of Friendly Avenue. In addition there is a small spring fed fresh water pond on the Shaw property and the builder is wanting to reduce it by 2/3 and call it a rentention pond. This pond flows into Meadow Creek. Meadow Creek flows into Horsepen Creek. Horsepen Creek flows into Greensboro,s water supply.
Meadow Creek is protected on the north side of Friendly Avenue. Meadow Creek on the south side of Friendly Avenue is currently fair game for what ever the builder wants to do to it.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
11 comments:
My concern is the timing and verification if the absent city council member offered to buy the Burgen(sp) property. Wouldnt that be considered a conflict?
There are many conlicts in this issue, not the least of which is a Council Member accusing Winstead Sr. of saying he is withdrawing in order to get a lower price and adding, "I do it all the time." And, making a detention pond out of a beautiful little spring fed pond does irrepairable harm to the city water supply!
Shep
The entire neighborhood community are all opposed to the excessive density of this development plan because it Just Doesn't Fit. This was our main issue. I thought this point was made very clear and I also thought the fact that all the properties around this property developed between 3 to 9 homes per acre should have said "17 homes per acre JUST DOESN'T FIT" here.
I don't think that the fact that Mega Builders can't make a good enough profit developing a 9 - 12 homes per acre and a maximum of 2 stories because they are paying too much for the properties should be a re-zoning concern. Nor is it right for zoning to support property owners who inflate the prices so much over market to comprise the existing neighborhoods and/or the value of neighboring homes. One level single-family homes to 2 level homes is at least the proper blend. This would also make the density at 12 which is good for the 2025 comprehensive plan. This property will be developed sometime in the future......just maybe Mega Builder's plan is JUST NOT THE RIGHT ONE.
We shouldn't be allowing this to happen. I thought rezoning was the
developer fits the land and the neighborhoods needs not the land and neighborhoods fit the developer's needs.
Sandy
PS if you would like to view this item brought before the City Council on January 15th here is the link: http://greensboro.granicus.com/MediaPlayer.php?view_id=2&clip_id=407&publish_id=&event_id=
It is #17 on the agenda. If you cannot jump to #17 you can set the time at 2:34:50 and this proposed rezoning will run till 3:31:00.
That link again is:
http://greensboro.granicus.com/
MediaPlayer.php?view_id=2&clip_id=
407&publish_id=&event_id=
What a beautiful city park this property would make-particularly since it has a beautiful pond already on the property. Also, it happens to be adjacent to the future Greenway. That would truly be the highest and best use for this land. Since this notion is unlikely, the next best approach is to beseech the council to take a (what makes sense to the community) approach. This would entail no higher a density than RM-12. For once I hope they hear the voices of each of us. I felt that the Mayor heard our plea during the hearing-maybe she can help us!
Attorney Derek Allen, the rezoning champion, was recently elected the winner of the Young Guns title at his firm. He sure took some pot shots at the Zoniong Commission and City Council meetings
This rezoning proposal is consistent with a number of Connections 2025 goals and policies. It promotes compact development, mixed-income neighborhoods, and the diversification of new housing stock to meet the needs for suitable, affordable housing. This request is also compatible with the High Residential land use classification on the Generalized Future Land Use Map of the Comprehensive Plan. However another Plan policy is the protection of established neighborhoods from potential negative impacts of development (noise, light, etc.).
Staff has noted that this request is more intense than previously approved rezonings in the general vicinity. Most of the zoning districts to the north and east of the proposed development are generally CD-RM-12 and CD-RM-8 districts. Staff is most concerned with the relationship of the proposed development to the adjacent single family neighborhood directly to the west. The applicant has informed staff of the intent to add the following additional conditions:
• All exterior lighting in the parking areas shall be directed towards the interior of the property.
• The planting yard along the western line of the subject property shall be a minimum of thirty (30) feet wide.
• The planting rate within the planting yard along the western line of the subject property shall be double the required "C" yard planting rate. The planting yard shall include evergreen understory trees and be placed at the top of the slope, to the extent feasible, to provide a visual screen to the adjacent properties to the west.
• All buildings shall be limited to three (3) above ground stories.
Due to the intention to add the above mentioned conditions staff feels that the potential incompatibility with the single family neighborhood to the west has been somewhat minimized. Alternatively, reducing the density would also be a way to further minimize the potential incompatibility.
The above statements were taken from the Planning Departments staff report reqarding this issue. My question is if this project is incompatible with the existing single family neighborhood why would your department approve it?
Cindy Hayworth a the January 15, 2008 planning meet atated "...if it is incompatible, it is incompatible".
I don't even live near this area but read all the blogs. I heard the story on News2 last night. This is crazy--who wants their home to have 10 3 story building built near it? Like most people, my wife and I saved for many years in order to even get a downpayment for our home which we will be paying the mortgage many years to come. This would make me sick! We all know that the City Council, County Comissioners, and indeed the CITY of Greensboro and GUILFORD County are run by real estate people, developers, and builders and this is just another example of them all putting a knife in the backs of homeowners, i.e. taxpayers. No doubt money and political favors have been exchanged between these folks. The City and County need to remember who pays the bills--the taxpayers, especially the homeowners! The gall of our local government never ceases to amaze me.
look up rezoning protest petition
look up rezoning protest petition, we as citizens need to hold the greensboro city council accountable and need to push for the protest petition that is a North Carolina General Statute and is mandatory by all cities no if ands or buts check it out. High Point has protest petitions in its planning department i beg you guys to check it out.
Bob says in a letter dated January 29, 2008 to the Mayor and members of the City Council..
I was one of the speakers opposing the West Friendly Avenue rezoning(Shaw property) at the January council meeting. Thank you for your time and attention during my recent appearance.
As I know you do, I have a very serious concern about Greensboro’s water supply. One point not made by any of the speakers, developers, or the Zoning Commission was the amount of water such a project would consume annually. Using an algorithm provided by Ken Jackson in the City of Greensboro Water Resources Department, the average annual consumption of the typical two-bedroom residence with washer/dishwasher, toilets, etc. is 47,842 gallons per year. When you multiply this amount by 228 units in the proposed complex that is 10,930,780 gallons per year average to be consumed by the residents of this West Friendly project (using two residents per unit). None of the above calculations provide for the large amount of water that would be used for landscape maintenance.
As stewards of our community and its resources I would hope that you and your fellow council members would consider the impact this rezoning would have on our scant water resources and vote your conscience.
One way to show that you and your fellow council members can be proactive and lead the way toward better water resource management projects would be a strong show of conviction and declare a moratorium on all high-density zoning projects until our water resource problem is solved.
I am convinced better days are ahead for Greensboro with your dedication to the citizens of this city .
Sincerely,
Robert J. Harris
I received a call this afternoon from the News & Record. They want to run a letter I submitted befrore the last Council Meeting. I made a couple of up-dates and expect to see it within a few days.
My point is this...keep those cards and letters flying ( and blogs comments too). Rezoning, and water supply issues continue to be major topics of discussion. And also, the snakelike intertwining of Council members, attorneys, builders/contractors, real estate agents and developers. IT AIN'T OVER YET!
Post a Comment