My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
03-24-08 Council Meeting Agenda & Packet
sbend
>
Public
>
Common Council
>
Common Council Agenda Packets
>
2008
>
03-24-08 Council Meeting Agenda & Packet
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
4/24/2008 2:10:43 PM
Creation date
3/20/2008 2:53:25 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
City Council - City Clerk
City Council - Document Type
Agendas
City Counci - Date
3/24/2008
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
116
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).
Show annotations
View images
View plain text
i <br />TO: Area Plan Commission <br />FROM: Kathleen and William Sikes - on behalf of the neighborhood encompassed by <br />Lynnwood, Shellbark, Mays and the west side of Lilac `~ <br />,I <br />We are requesting that the Commission give a "NOT RECOMMENDED" rating for <br />the zoning request for the land at the corner of Lynnwood and Cleveland. <br />This is about destroying a quiet, lawful neighborhood of very modest homes <br />maintained by small incomes. This about light pollution, noise pollution and the <br />intrusive odors of car exhaust fumes and cooking grease. None of these environmental <br />pollutants can be effectively contained by screens, fences, filters or sticks that hope to be <br />trees. ~ ~ <br />This is about fear. No one wants to be perceived as refusing to allow a developer to <br />earn a living. Everyone is afraid to be seen as opposing growth. Our economic structure <br />seems to depend on the constant destruction of green spaces and neighborhoods so that <br />yet another shiny building can be built. There are lots of shiny new buildings alo~ig <br />Portage and they will look like trash in a few years as our Destructo economic ma~hines <br />drives further north and west and creates newer and shinier areas. <br />;~ <br />This is about arrogance. In a previous encounter, we made it very plain that h~ corner <br />is an absolutely lousy place for a commercial zoning. This space will be filled vv~ <br />problems for the county, the city and most certainly for the residents of the neighf~orhood. <br />Yet, here we are again going over the same ground and proving the same points. <br />!~ <br />Why should our taxes pay for meetings, sewers, stop lights and road reconfigurations? <br />This is also about crocodile tears. Surely during the presentation there will b~ <br />comments made by the petitioner as to what a great new feature this area will be and how <br />he will make every effort to be friends with the neighborhood. He already owns , ~ trashed <br />house on the property in question and he has not attended to it or the complaints ~ <br />nearby neighbors. To us this shows his real level of concern. <br />The answer to a zoning change was NO three years ago. A lousy idea rarely gets <br />better with age and this one certainly hasn't. It's still a lousy idea. <br /> <br />MAR 1' 2 2008 <br />~ ~~~~ ,~~~ ~~'~ ~1 ~0 ~REa ~!u~~v co "~1~~! ra <br />C?G ~~~~ <br />~~ <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.