Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutA003 - Memo from Oakwood Neighborhood dated January 9, 1996 r V To: Ames City Council Members From: Bonnie Homstad, Oakwood Neighborhood Representati a Re: Thoughts on Dickson Jensen' s Proposed Develop 'en ' N `9 ,1i` �996 � 1) We were surprised that Mr. Jensen gave us a co ki plat and pictures of the houses he intends to build the told P&Z they were not yet available for their perusal. �A Surprised even more that they approved it "sight unseen". P&Z' s reasoning was that even though R 1-6 zoning was requested, Mr. Jensen did not necessarily have to make every lot minimum size. (The plat shows every lot is indeed minimum size) The house plans ore story house on a :)0 foot wide loL could be no wider than .38 feet to meet the 6 foot side yard setback requirement. Similarly, a 2. story house on a 50 foot wide lot could be only 34 feet wide to meet the 8 foot sideyard setback requirement. ( The house plans he showed us were all wider than that--most 40 feet wide and larger. ) So, what does he really intend to build there ? To their credit, some of the P&Z members voted "No" pending further study being done and more information submitted by the developer. Our neighborhood is for well planned development, and we do not expect to have things our way 100 %. 2) Who is to determine the "Human needs and Liveability" of such residential projects? Planning and Zoning and our City Housing staff should be examining such projects in detail to afford optimal housing in Ames. They should include City Parks staff as well as neighborhood people who are most familiar with the area. I have been working with Nancy Carroll for the past 1 ;i years on trying to find a potential park site for the area. When Mr. Jensen heard our concerns at the P&Z meeting, he commented that they were not his problem; he was right. Yet, I would have liked to hear they were of concern to him. The developer' s concern is his bottom line--his profit. Thus, the rest of us must work on "liveability, aesthetics, safety, etc.__ EVERY housing project, regardless of its price range, can achieve that. Affordability is not the only issue. 3) In recent years, the City gave up a strip of land winding through White Oak Drive stating no desire to maintain it. It was given to private property holders. Such a strip could have become our community "greenway". Lack of planning or vision has precluded that option. Let' s not do that again. 4) Safety is a big issue on Oakwood Road. This R 1-6 zoning and plan indicates families with young children. Our "saving grace" in Oakwood has been our large yards. With no park, our children have space to play in their own yard. Jensen' s project allows no such space either in the yard or in the development. Indeed, he has narrowed the only street into the development "for our safety" with the reasoning that it will slow traffic. (My thought is that emergency vehicles could not easily get through, as well as a fleeting thought that the narrowed street allows him to squeeze in the maximum number of houses in the given space) 5) Intensification can be accomplished only with safety in mind. A ghetto is affordable but not liveable. My education courses indicate that human beings need certain "square foot per person space requirements" for psychological and emotional growth and well being. Even preschools have legal minimum space requirements per persc.-n. In addition, there must be an "open or outdoor area" to "let off steam". Our nearest park is 1. 9 miles north (Stuart Smith Park) --not convenient for mothers to walk young children, nor for anyone else. With the given plan, you' ll have a situation of young children with no yard or park facing an open 45 mph highway (Oakwood Road) . My education courses also indicate that "80% of our discipline problems can be eliminated by providing gross motor activity areas (running, jumping, etc. ) If these needs are not met, they manifest themselves in other ways in our town (crime, frustration, mental health problems) . Our area currently does not provide these outlets; Jensen' s plan as stated currently will only add to the problems with no relief in sight. In summary, the new LUPP Plan says we are the Number 1 Priority Growth Area in Ames; Mr. Raby says we are the future of Ames residential growth. Piecemeal planning is not good enough. A little teamwork,planning and vision will create an "Everybody Win" situation. THANK YOU "k POSSIBLE ACTIONS TO BE TAKEN IN THE LUPP AREAS "BEFORE WE DIG": --A brainstorming session to examine the area through the perspective of various professions and disciplines, i.e. Banker, Developer, Tax Expert, Realtor, Parks Statt, Neighborhood expects. Just as the LUPP Plan is comprehensive and general, now we need an individual area needs assessment. --ways to make optimum housing development possible: 1) Incentives such as tax abatement to make it affordable 2) Fees or special assessments to be paid over x years to developers for amenities in given area. 3) Monthly Association Dues 4) Have residents maintain greenways and common areas, creating community spirit 5) Require a certain percentage of each development as green area Q Raise the 4'53,00o maximum limit on qualifying for housing assistance in Story County through such programs as MCC, etc. REPERCUSSIONS: --The very first development dnna in the n •.q rnnp tu;II he aerriRg precedents--thus, it is worthy of careful planning. a --our actions will create dtimal housing in Ames in EVERY price range --Help developers afford such optimal housing --Make the developer look good, i.e. civic minded, environmentally aware, etc. --Create good PR for Ames City Council--you would be seen as visionary and creative (Our Oakwood area already has the `village" or "Service Center" concept. with Verle and Steve Burgason's "Country Store" and gas station within walking distance; go with that and take full credit for good planning and implementation of the new LUPP in action. --Give the Chamber of Commerce one more selling point for Ames: optimal housing in all price rangez. Ames could be seen as a model city in recreating itself affordably and aesthetically.