Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutA006 - Memo from Ken and Ratree Platt, 3620 Woodland Street y 20 July 2014 Memo to: The Ames City Council From: Ken and Ratree Platt, 3620 Woodland Street, Ames Subject: The Breckenridge Project 1. We are not able to attend the 22 July meeting of the Ames City Council. If we were able to do so we would encourage the council to reject the Breckenridge rezoning request for high density zoning other than that supported by the vast majority of the College Creek residential community. 2. We are concerned that a — 540 bedroom development with —540 associated parking spaces for the North Parcel as requested by Breckenridge will not only significantly alter the quality of ife and depress property values in the College Creek neighborhood, but also significantly alter the quality of life in the northern neighborhoods directly across Lincoln Way. The proposed high density development of the North Parcel will be the equivalent of a small crowded high rise city. Furthermore North Franklin Avenue will become a major thoroughfare for traffic from the Breckenridge project. There will also be significantly increased student foot traffic in the adjacent neighborhoods on party weekends which in realty are every weekend. 3. Supporters of the Breckenridge project contend that the offer by Breckenridge to set aside the Middle Parcel for single owner occupied housing in exchange for high density zoning in the North and South Parcels is a good compromise. We contend that it is not for the following reasons; a) It is unlikely that a traditional family would purchase a home located between two high density student populations equipped with clubhouses with sponsored weekend parties. Would you?? b) A realtor who spoke at the 8 July meeting said she was having difficulty finding houses for parents to buy for their children while they attend ISU. Single family owner occupied houses in the Middle Parcel would be ideal for this purpose. Why wouldn't a developer be tempted to build houses to accommodate this need? We believe that this is exactly what will happen, and instead of a student population of— 850 spread over the 3 parcels with their automobiles, it will likely be greater than 1000 + automobiles, and more if Breckenridge knowingly rents to students who share bedrooms, or students themselves share bedrooms without Breckenridge's knowledge. 4. The South Parcel should not be zoned for density other than single family owner occupied. This is what the University had intended when they sold the land to the Ames School District. As indicated by Mr. Madden in past Council meetings, this land is not suitable for high density student housing. So why would we, the community of Ames, want to make it a dense student housing site, and in the process threaten/destroy green space that makes Ames such an appealing place to live? 5. Some statements/opinions made during the 8 July City Council meeting that we want to address are as follows; a) The opinion was expressed during public input more than once that the City Council's deliberation on the Breckenridge Project was being driven by the threat of litigation. We believe it is a correct assumption. It is a bad precedent that is being set, and everything possible should be done to make it perfectly clear that the City does not respond to the threat of litigation. We should not be afraid of litigation. b) A statement made by a council member implied that Breckenridge's property rights were being restricted. Of course they are, as would be ours if we wanted to use our property for a purpose not permitted by the city's land use policy and zoning. Breckenridge should be treated like any other property owner in Ames. There was no guarantee that Breckenridge would get the zoning they wanted when they purchased the property from the Ames School Board. It was a risk that they chose to take. They are free to resell the land and move on if they cannot make their business plan profitable. c) A comment was made during public input that the business community of West Ames has not benefitted from the City's growth like other parts of the City. Along the same lines a realtor commented that the sooner the Breckenridge property was developed, the better. The issue is not about improving the business climate for a few individuals, it is about retaining the quality of life and the property values of long established family- oriented neighborhoods. 6. We encourage the City Council to do what is right for the residents of the community. Please do not make your decision based on the threat of litigation. If additional time is necessary before making any decision, take it and use the opportunity to include representatives of the neighborhood association both directly and indirectly affected, and the University. We would also suggest that the Ames School Board provides a representative to any such meetings so that they can be more aware of the negative affect that their decisions could have on the community. There is already a significant increase in student housing being provided e.g. South 16th street, and ample space to provide more student housing west of South Dakota Avenue. Thus there is no need to rush a decision that will have a momentous affect on the family residents of Ames. Respectfully submitted, Ken and Ratree Platt