Okay, I was going to post this last week, but heard that it might get accepted by the Williamson AM. I certainly have many thoughts about some of these ideas, but I will save them for the time being because I wouldn't want to bias the poll included. So here you go...the letter to the editor by Ron DeFrancisco (your Ward 1 candidate).
‘They Paved Paradise & Put Up A Parking Lot’
By: Ron DeFrancisco
The song ‘Big Yellow Taxi’ by the Counting Crows best describes what is happening in Spring Hill today, with lyrics like, “They paved paradise and put up a parking lot, with a pink hotel, a boutique, and a swingin' hot spot. Don't it always seem to go, that you don't know what you got 'til it's gone, they paved paradise and put up a parking lot.”
Granted, I doubt we will see a pink hotel on R.C. Alexander’s 907 acres of lovely countryside on Buckner Lane, but what exactly is the rush to build anything there? Large lots of open land like this are becoming rare in Spring Hill and what was once a paradise is quickly being turned into a parking lot – see Main Street or I-65 during rush hour.
Realtor Mamie McArthur says that building an upscale mixed use development on this property “will be Spring Hill’s finest hour.” In reality, this will be just another nail in the coffin of a rural and scenic Spring Hill. Our city is already grappling with traffic issues and infrastructure problems trying to support the developments already completed and in progress, and we are now proposing single family homes, townhouses, condos and commercial business on this property. This will only add to the traffic concerns on Duplex Road, Main Street and I-65.
But wait, according to Spring Hill Building Official Ferrell White, “It doesn’t hurt to ask them” to put an interstate exchange onto I-65. That will be great, we will have one more interchange to bottleneck traffic during rush hour and we can all meet up for morning coffee when we park at I-65 and the 840 since that area has yet to be widened.
Adding to this logic, White states “That’s a pretty good site for this (Traditional Neighborhood Development) zoning.” “It allows a little higher density in exchange for open land and amenities.” Right now, the property is all beautiful open land and has no need for amenities, so why build anything? The Traditional Neighborhood Development zoning that is currently under consideration by the Planning Commission allows for 18-24 units per acre and will introduce the once foreign concept of zero lot lines to Spring Hill. We have already populated Spring Hill beyond its capacity to support this population, have approved developments which will double our population again, and plans like this show that there is no intention of stopping, but rather allowing developers to cram more people into smaller areas in the name of progress and profit.
I think it is time for the Planning Commission and the Board of Mayor and Alderman to take a stand and realize that they are allowing paradise to be paved, and if this is not done soon, we will not know what we’ve got ‘til it’s gone. We have plenty of developments already in progress and land that is already zoned for residential or commercial development; we should be using that land first. Re-zoning approvals need to stop being handed out like candy on Halloween night and we need to preserve our open land and rural background while gradually building into the future at a pace that our city and region can fully support.
Now, what do you think? I am going to try to incorporate more polls into the postings to see how those we think about certain issues. Thank you for being our test subject Mr. DeFrancisco!
The daily poll has ended. Click here to view the results.
Thank you for participating!
Monday, January 29, 2007
Ron DeFrancisco's Letter to the Editor
Posted by Gorilla in the Corner at 8:03 AM
Labels: Board of Mayor and Aldermen, Election 2007, Planning Commission, Traffic
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Post Ratings
IMPORTANT DISCLAIMER: The information on this website is a series of personal opinions and is not meant to reflect an official position by the City of Spring Hill.
40 comments:
The song ‘Big Yellow Taxi’ by the Counting Crows...
Don't you mean Joni Mitchell?
Again, shows your youth...
Ron,
Don't worry about criticism from people who judge you "anonymously". Also, seeing "due diligence" and "credibility" in the same sentence as folks in the music business is laughable. You are absolutely correct about the growth in Spring Hill. It's a runaway train, and there's no one strong enough in City Hall to stop it. Are the citizens of Spring Hill that short-sighted to allow this to happen? (Take a drive around town and count how many previously built commercial spaces are still available.)The sad part is that the current administration probably won't be around when the citizens have to foot the bill.
Good Luck !
My apologies to Joni Mitchell, but I quoted from the version I was familiar with. I did my "due diligence" at the site listed below to ensure that I quoted the lyrics properly.
http://www.azlyrics.com/lyrics/countingcrows/bigyellowtaxi.html
Ron said:
"Now that I am here......."
Let's put this in perspective. Ron (NIMBY - not in my back yard) has, by his own admission, been living in Spring Hill since February 2006. Now that he is here he would like to prevent others from enjoying what many of us have been wanting to occur for many years i.e.: a place to shop, a place to dine, a community to enjoy without leaving our community.
Ron enjoys quick access to I-65 via Saturn Parkway. Yet he wants to deny 80% of Spring Hill's population quick access to I-65. In other words, Ron, whom doesn't have to travel up Columbia Ave. each morning, would rather the 80% continue to fight the traffic north.
Ron, let me ask you, where was your due diligence in February 2006? You moved into a community that was at that time and still is the fastest growing in Tennessee. All of a sudden the community that "YOU CHOSE" is not the best community for Ron to live in. Something just doesn't make sense. Is this the due diligence you promise as a board member? I suspect that you are just saying what needs to be said to get elected.
I personally want better access to I-65, more choices in dining and entertainment, more recreation, more shopping, and someone with a plan to accomplish the above.
It's very apparent that your service as a "Codes Enforcer" of garbage cans, run down vehicles, signs, etc. is not what Spring Hill needs at this time.
Best of luck!
Well, I've been here for 7 years and I happen to agree that it is past time to get a solid handle on growth and make sure future growth is smart growth, and managed growth.
I can't see how anyone can be against proceeding with purpose - not just as it comes at us.
Personally, I love the song Big Yellow Taxi. I loved it when I first heard Joni Mitchell sing it, loved it when I heard Bob Dylan sing it, and loved it when I heard Amy Grant sing it. I'm a pretty fair minded guy, but what troubles me most is the fact the Ron seems to lack what many in this ENTITLEMENT GENERATION have missed, a sense of where they have come from.
Quick to take on the world, quick to say they know better, and quick to defend themselves when someone tries to guide them straight.
I give the guy credit for stepping up and running for public office. I give the guy more credit for continuing to defend himself on this forum when useless barbs are aimed at him.
Missing from Ron's discussion about why he wants to gain my confidence through my vote is any reference to the smart and managed growth tools that are finally in place and a lack of flexibility in his message when it is shown to be wrong. Then again, I shouldn't really expect him to fully know how things used to be run at city hall.
Some may say I am being too harsh, but I really do mean this out of respect for Ron and the others who think enough of their city to try and make a difference.
I was skeptical of Jonathan Duda at first, many of us were. But Ron could learn a thing or two from this young man. As the gorilla said in a prior comment, tribulation brings about perseverance and perseverance proven character.
Thank you for giving me an opportunity to speak my mind and forgive me from not signing my post. I am not yet comfortable with doing that.
Ron said:
.......so why build anything?
Pull yourself away from your X-box games of "Doom & Gloom."
Greetings again. Let me try to address all of the points made here.
1. At no point in any of this have I said that I do not want our city to have shops, restaurants, and amenities so that our residents can remain in Spring Hill. It is something I am in favor of, which you will see if you visit my website. What I have said is that I am against putting a strip mall on every corner as many other cities have done during rapid development. I believe our commercial development needs to be properly planned so that we do not build "too much of a good thing". If we build more commercial space than we have businesses to fill it and customers to support it, then what we will be left with is empty shopping centers and the remains of failed businesses. As I have said before, we need to focus on filling vacant spaces in commercial buildings that are already built before building more.
2. Why move to the fastest growing city in Tennessee? That is purely a statistic. If you take a city of 7,500 and add 2,500 people, your rate of growth is 25%. If you take a city of 75,000 and add 2,500 people, your rate of growth is only 3%. It is very easy for a small town to become the fastest growing city. For me, Spring Hill was still a small town with a small town feel.
3. I do not wish to keep others from enjoying what I have. What I do wish is to keep the residents that are here from having to suffer from the effects of over development. I have no problem with approving new development, once the infrastructure is in place to support it without having a negative impact on the residents of our city.
4. I do enjoy quick access to I-65. I also enjoy an abrupt stop at the 840 most mornings. Many days, I do not even use Saturn Parkway, but rather take Buckner past 907 beautiful acres of land, then take Thompsons Station Road to 431 and 431 to the 840. I do not object to another I-65 entrance/exit, but other improvements such as the widening of I-65 from the 840 to Highway 96 need to be completed to support this. What I do object to is building more homes near the proposed entrance to I-65 and adding more traffic to an already packed I-65.
5. NIMBY - Not in my back yard... No, NIABY - Not in anyone's back yard. My plan is to allow residents in this city to enjoy their homes without the quality of life issues that adjacent commercial development brings. Ask the residents near Campbell Station how they liked the noise from the businesses that was reaching their homes and why they complained to the BOMA about it, resulting in discussions of noise ordinances and permits. If the two uses were properly separated, this would never have been an issue. I will tell you, that I like many of my neighbors am not thrilled about a new Kroger, Walgreens, and maybe even a carwash in our backyard, but then again I do not think many of us want that view from our backyard, which is why I will fight to keep commercial and residential properties separate. I personally do not mind driving a couple of extra minutes to go to the existing Kroger, Publix or recently built Walgreens.
6. In response to not knowing where I came from... I know where I came from, and I have seen the mistakes that were made by those that came before me there, along with the results of those mistakes. I firmly believe that those that do not know their history are doomed to repeat it, which is why I am stepping up now to try and prevent some of the same things from occurring here. As I have said before, I do not have all of the answers, and I am bound to make mistakes, but I truly believe that I have something to offer the City of Spring Hill if I am elected, and that is looking at the big picture and using my experience to keep our city a beautiful place to live, work and play, free of the negative impacts of over/rapid development. I have nothing to gain if elected (I am not a builder, developer, real estate agent or mortgage broker) and no other motive for running than to keep Spring Hill a city which we can all enjoy, raise families in, retire in and be proud of.
7. Like you, I have a great deal of respect for Alderman Duda becuase he truly cares about this city and just as important, he is not afraid to explain his decisions and ideas and make his voice heard on the board. I believe we need more members on the BOMA that are willing to do the same, and come April, I hope to be one of those voices.
8. In regards to remaining Anonymous, you do not need to apologize, as your remarks were polite and genuine, rather than as you put it "useless barbs". I always like to hear useful ideas and constructive criticism backed up by facts, and if provided with good facts and ideas, my opinions can be changed by those. So please feel free to tell me what you think is right and wrong with Spring Hill and what you would or would not change.
"I will tell you, that I like many of my neighbors am not thrilled about a new Kroger, Walgreens, and maybe even a carwash in our backyard..."
When you bought your house in February 2006, what did you think was going to go in to those 25 acres of commercial zoned property next to interstate access? What gives you the right to now tell those property owners what they can and cannot do? Incredible!!!
"my opinions can be changed... "
You just lost my vote dude. I liked the way you said you meant and meant what you said and people could either take it or leave it. It showed true leadership and backbone. Now, you're just some other guy willing to be swayed to gain popularity. Unless you want to lose a bunch of other votes, you better start sticking to your guns.
Boy you guys are tough with the "you just lost my vote" line. If I were you (and obviously I am not) there is plenty of time to evaluate all of the candidates. I would hope that one issue does not sway you back and forth from candidate to candidate all quarter.
I agree
Anonymous,
In reference to my comment about my opinions being able to be changed, in order for that to occur, I would have to be presented with convincing facts proving that my position was flawed. I cannot be right all of the time, and have to be able to admit when I am wrong when the facts show it to be so, which is where that statement came from. I have no intention of backing down when I know I am right and have the facts to prove it.
Anonymous,
When I bought my house, there were/are homes on the majority of the property that is destined to be commerical in the area of Lovell Lane and Port Royal Road. Since then, those homes have been sold to commercial development, and one has even been moved to another location. If it was just the Kroger and Walgreens at Saturn Parkway and Port Royal, then that would be a different story, as there would at least be some distance between the commercial and residential development, but we are talking about adding more strip mall space to both developments, as well as discussions going before the Planning Commission for more storage units and a carwash. So tell me, would you want this in your backyard?
The below question has been ask in another thread and Ron continues to ignore the question. So I'll ask, in hopes of, getting an answer in a different thread. Here goes......
Rooooon, you still didn't answer my question. Quit deflecting by asking more questions. Answer the below question.
How did Ron's due diligence in February 2006 support his decision to move to one of the fastest growing communities in the country? Now that Ron is here, only 11 months into his residency, ...........
I have attempted to answer your question again in the other thread. I hope you will now answer mine....
Ron,
I "hear" you saying that you are not anti-growth, and that you are merely wanting to temporarily suspend growth until the infrastructure has caught up to the current developments. Yet, the tone that you took in this letter to the editor sounded very anti-growth. When you first began posting on this page, I was interested in hearing your vision for Spring Hill... but the more you post, the more you sound like someone trying to escape.
I am all for planned growth. I have lived in the Middle Tennessee area for 13 years now and have been a Williamson Couty resident for 11 of those 13 years. I must say that I have been very impressed with the approach the developers of the Cool Springs area have taken over the years. Development in that area of Franklin has been very planned and intentional... and now they are a "go-to" area in Tennessee. Cool Springs is very pleasant on the eye, property values continue to increase. Retail, corporate, and residential coexist peacefully. Communities that take a no growth stance don't grow. Instead of no growth, I support a smart growth platform.
I believe that Spring Hill has started down the "smart growth" path. They now have, and are developing a vision for the city and are working to engineer that vision. I, as a homeowner am excited to see the development in Spring Hill... especially if it is smart development. I as a resident of Haynes Crossing, welcome the retail developments that are beginning to occur on the Saturn Parkway corridor. And if they open a Starbucks in one of those stripmalls going up behind your house, I will jump for joy. I personally can't understand why development has not occured on the Saturn Parkway Corridor sooner.
As far as I-65 intersections... I welcome them. The more the merrier. More access points to the interstate means less congestion on interior roads. From my understanding, the widening of I-65 is already in the works and will probably be completed before any additional access points are added. When I was looking to buy in Spring Hill, I could see that Duplex road would probably be the most likely place to add an access point... and that was one of the reasons that led me to Haynes crossing: easy access to the interstate via Saturn Parkway, and in the near future, via Duplex Rd. I also had enough vision to see that one day, there would be commercial development along Saturn Parkway and Port Royal. I didn't have to look at zoning maps to see that would one day happen. I welcome the growth and will not support anyone who wants to make Spring Hill an "escapist" community. I will support someone who is willing to see Spring Hill as a very family-friendly, progressive community.
Is Ron Defrancisco that common of a name that, according to tax records, there are three in Spring Hill? We have two in Haynes Crossing (Maury County) and one in Pickett's Ridge (Williamson County)?
This might not have anything to do with the election, but I found this to be odd. And this is coming from a Smith....
A father and a son in Haynes Crossing, and that's really none of your business.
That is what happens when someone runs for public office---people will do a little research.
To clarify, I live in Haynes Crossing, my grandfather lives two doors down from me, and my father lives in Pickett's Ridge. Nothing to hide about that.
jeh,
To clarify my position for you, I am all for new development in this city, as long as it is properly planned and can be supported by the infrastructure and the population and not cuase quality of life issues for the current residents. I would not have a problem with a Starbucks or other small business going in next to a residential area, including in my back yard. These type of small businesses are quiet and do not create quality of life issues. I do however have issues with large stores such as Kroger or a car wash being placed next to a residential area, due to the fact that Kroger is open 24 hours, large businesses like this have large delivery trucks making deliveries at all times of the day creating noise concerns, lighting from the parking lot can intrude into the residential area, and the carwash that is being proposed is not consistent with the area and would create noise concerns for the residential area. So yes, I am trying to escape... I am trying to escape from the negative impacts that development brings and propose to move the city forward with development that our city can handle without these negative impacts, and developing in such a way that it does not create a hardship on the residents and business owners that are already here.
JEH,
That commercial property isn't in his back yard. It's in mine. He's buffered by about two rows of homes. As I type, there's a bulldozer and a mountain of dirt ten feet from my back fence and I get to hear dumptrucks all day long. Yet Ron is the one who complains...
Keep in mind that there are other candidates in this race. They aren't talking right now and that is for a reason. But one of those candidates introduced the idea for a second interstate exit two years ago along with the hospital and an industrial park to generate revenue which would offset GM's leverage on the community. There are some pro-growth candidates out there and you'll hear from us soon enough. Until then, just remember it's extrememly early. We still have two and a half months.
Take care
MD
P.S. Kroger right down the street (and my house will be closer to it as well) is awesome. I'll be able to ride my bike there to pick up whatever I need rather than drive all the way across town through traffic. As will the thousands of other people, including Ron, in this subdivision.
More on all this at a later time perhaps.
Michael Dinwiddie (MD),
Actually, I will be doing all of my shopping at Publix as my way of saying thanks to Kroger.
We know you live close to me too (check previous posts... the people are doing their research), and we all know you are a candidate, so don't be afraid to sign your full name to your comments entirely, stand fully behind your comments and let the campaign begin. If you enjoy the sound of the bulldozers and look forward to storage units and a possible carwash in your backyard and are happy about all of the re-zoning near us, then more power to you. That is where we differ, and ultimately the voters will decide which position they favor... quiet residential areas free from commercial intrusion or a strip mall behind every home.
By the way, those two rows of homes do not quite equal a buffer, if there were a thick tree line or a wall, then maybe I would say there was a buffer.
MD,
I assume that MD stands for Michael Dinwiddie. I have been patiently waiting to hear from you, hopeful that you carry a vision for Spring Hill that I could get behind and vote for.
Mr. DeFrancisco says that he is not against growth, yet when he openly comes against an additional interstate access and the possiblity of a progressive and self-supporting development along Buckner Lane (which brings with it the possibility of yet another interstate access), I wonder.
BTW, what is the status of the Kroger? I am eagerly awaiting its arrival.
Thank you, MD
JEH,
You mistake my intentions. I am not against more access to I-65. I am against building more large developments in the area of these proposed access points with the current position of the city that this will solve the traffic problem that these new developments will create, causing more bottlenecks of even more people entering and exiting an already over burdened interstate. If we built these access points and did not immediately jump to build 1,000+ new homes around them, then I would not be opposed to it. We need to wait for the state to widen I-65 from the 840 to Hwy 96 before we rush to add to the number of people that would be using those access points.
Email me JEH. mdinwiddie@charter.net
Ron, I think you're doing enough talking for the both of us, for now. Thanks.
MD
Ron,
I really appreciate your candor. You definitely leave all of your cards on the table. I am sincerely trying to understand where you are coming from, but having difficulty apparantly.
I moved to Spring Hill just before you did, but (as I said before) have lived in this area for quite a while. I can remember when Cool Springs was nothing but a shopping mall surrounded by farm land. The only buildings on Cool Springs Blvd were Gateway tire, and a few shops/offices next door.
If memory serves me right, the widening of I-65 from Moore's Lane to Hwy 96 happend about the same time Hwy 840 made a connection with I-65. At that time, I thought it to be very short-sighted of the State to stop the widening of I-65 at Hwy 96. It seemed pretty obvious to me that I-65 would need to be widened all the way to 840 to fully utilize the impact that 840 could have. But there was a reason the state stopped at Hwy 96... and I'm sure it had something to do with there not being an immediate need to go further than Hwy 96. Well, now there is an immediate need and the widening has moved up the priority list. If Spring Hill had waited until I-65 was widened all the way to 840 before it began to allow growth, Spring Hill would not have grown and there would be no talk of widening I-65.
We need to continue to grow... not recklessly... but growth needs to continue. Growth is necessary to life. As we grow, we need to continually make the state and counties aware of our growth and show them how they can partner with us in our growth to help everyone. If we wait for the State or counties to play catch up, no one progresses.
Strong leadership is needed to guide and engineer growth appropriately and in the most sensible areas of our city. I also believe that there are ways that we as a city can step ahead of the state's and counties' involvement and apply a little self help. The hospital is an excellant example of that. What is stopping us from building city roads that will help Alleviate congestion (in fact I think we are beginning to see that happen). If we take a passive approach then we are going to miss a great opportunity to continue growing this wonderful city.
JEH,
You make very good points, which I agree with. The need to widen I-65 is here, and as we have discussed in these forums, that relief may be here within the next 2-5 years as long as budget shortages do not interfere as the media has been reporting is possible. When the original work was done, as you explain it, there was no vision or thought of the explosion of development that was going to occur in Spring Hill. State projects focus on need at the time of construction based on traffic studies and account for anticipated growth. If we had developed more responsibly, and worked proactively with the state and surrounding governments, this issue would not be as critical as it is now. If we do not start developing responsibly over the next 2-5 years, we are only going to compound the problem, and if we do not develop responsibly beyond that, the improvements that the state makes in the hopefully not too distant future will be outgrown shortly after their completion, and we will be in a vicious cycle of being reactive rather than proactive. To me, responsible development does not include approving developments of 1,000+ homes and introducing new zoning that will allow 18-24 residences to be placed on a one acre lot when we are having difficulty supporting our current population, and doing so before we have confirmation and ground breaking of relief to our infrastructure problems. This is simply not fair to the residents that are here and the ones that are moving here. Again, I am not saying that we should stop all development. What I am saying is that we are moving too fast and need to slow down, and build responsibly within the confines of our infrastructres ability to support the new development. We need to plan for infrastructure improvements and as those improvements occur, continue to develop within those boundaries of our ability to support more development. I do not want to "close the door behind me" as some have tried to paint me, but I do want to ensure that those that are here do not have to suffer in order for the developers to build as quickly as possible, make as much money as they can, then move on to the next "Fastest Growing City in America", never looking back and leaving us to solve and pay for all of the problems that we failed to address before instead of after we allowed the development to occur.
As I have said to a few others here, I appreciate the professional manner in which you present your points, and I hope that I have allowed you to better understand my position. I am a very candid individual who is not afraid to put all of my cards on the table and take the criticism from those with different views (even though I would prefer some of it to be more constructive from some of the Anonymous folks), and I like to hear those views, as it often opens my eyes to things that I may not have been aware of. If you would like to discuss any other issues with me, please feel free to e-mail me at ron@voteronspringhill.com, and if you like, we can even set up a meeting to discuss our views in person.
Since the moment that I first read your letter, I have been trying to put a finger on what it reminded me of.
I finally figured it out.
There's a term that describes the type of development philosophy that you advocated in the letter: Sprawl
From the link above:
Sprawl is characterized by several land use patterns which usually occur in unison:
1. Single-use zoning - This refers to a situation where commercial, residential, and industrial areas are separated from one another.
2. Low-density land use - Sprawl consumes much more land than traditional urban developments because new developments are of low density.
3. Car dependent communities - Areas of urban sprawl are also characterized as being highly dependent on automobiles for transportation.
Sprawl is the chief culprit in the clogging of local streets and regional connectors. Low density expansion uses up more of the surrounding land than high density expansion and living in a larger, more spread out space makes providing public services more expensive.
Don't get me wrong, I agree with your philosophy that certain infrastructure needs to be in place first - any reasonable person would... But, to stop (or slow) the growth until major road projects are completed is just setting the city up for disaster. A moratorium that reduces inventory will artificially inflate the cost of real-estate, which increases the cost of development.
JEH said it best, folks at city hall are finally starting to figure out that roads can and must be designed and built now for the future.
Silverback,
I can see your point, but the problem I feel is that I do not see an attempt to build things close together and leave a lot of open land with it. The more land that you leave open under the current method of operation is only land that developers are going to come in and ask to have rezoned so that they can continue to build and make money. Then, rather than having a 50 acre tract of land, with 150 homes (figuring 1/3 acre lots), you put that same 150 onto a little over 8 acres (18 units per acre as the Traditional Neighborhood Development suggests) and leave 42 open acres. If those 42 acres stay as open space, then you have something. But, if a developer comes back and gets approval to build on those 42 acres, we could see the possibility of 900 homes on those 50 acres vs 150 homes. Do you want the guaranteed 150 or the possible 900, and which one creates the bigger burden of support?
150 1/3 acre lots on 50 acres is the definition of sprawl.
So what is the definition of 900 houses on 50 acres?
a ferry tale.
minimum lot size is 8k sf. maximum houses on 50 acres would be closer to 200. but keep talling people it would be 900, it shows hom smart you are.
Actually Ron, using your example, the new TND would work like something like this:
50 acres, less:
12.5 Acres Usable Open Space Requirement (25% required)
17.5 Acres Roads, sewer, Wastewater Mgmt, etc.
===
20 Acres Usable Land
* 8 Maximum density for single family is 8 Units per acre for Usable Land.
===
160 Homes
But the new TND is not meant to replace standard PUDs, it's meant for much larger, single tracts of land.
Silverback,
The discussions that the Planning Commission had on this TND zoning idea were that it would allow the possibility of 18-24 units per acre, which is why the discussion of requiring fire sprinklers in this zoning category was introduced, so I will adjust my projected number of units to be between 360-480 possible.
It is amazing to me how many "monday morning quarterbacks" we have commenting (yet signing anonymously), yet if they have all of this knowledge and forsight why are they not running themselves? And why not sign your name, what is someone going to do, say something you don't agree with about you? *GASP*
Although I don't neccessarily agree with all of Ron's points, I believe the premise is understandable. In some respects the city is (starting) to do a much better job of defining growth, mainly on the commercial side (although I think a commercial shopping center/strip mall at the corner of Port Royal/Duplex is a bad idea, regardless of them cutting the hill and putting in a light, city funds could be used for that if need be). However, I still think that they have let the residential developers run with the ball for long enough.. Harvey Park is the one nice exception to this, although I don't see the green space being allocated by the other deveolpers per new subidivision, the discussed walking paths between subdivisions, etc.
Last but not least, give Ron (or any other canidate who comes onto the site and is willing to discuss topics) some slack. I figure at least if they are making an effort to communicate the least any of us can do is be respectful in our questions and/or comments.
ok, i'm off of my soapbox now.
Sprawl - did it ever occur to you that many of the people that moved here & love living in SH came here for the urban "sprawl" - because we like our space and the open areas? Perhaps you should move to NYC. I think that would suit you better than where people depend on automobiles.
Thank you for the comments.
derekb,
I do not ask that everyone agree with me on every point, all that I ask is the the criticism be constructive. We all have opinions, let's share them, learn from eachother, and stand behind them.
anon. @ 21:13
Main Entry: urban sprawl
Function: noun
: the spreading of urban developments (as houses and shopping centers) on undeveloped land near a city
I agree with much Mr. Defrancisco says. The growth needs to be controlled much more then it is today for the sake of the current residence and Spring Hill as a whole. Traffic is going to continue to get worse until the widening projects begin and then it's going to get ridiculous while construction is in progress.
Destroying one of the last good size piece of property in North Spring Hill by building a mixed use development is reckless and irresponsible on the part of our leaders. This area should be turned into a park. I know there is not much money to made by making this land a city or county park so I guess this will never happen so lets overpopulate it and destroy another part of the city with another Interstate exit... yeah that's a good idea.
The city leaders should follow the example of Thompsons Staton and seriously consider a moratorium on development. The current number of approved residential building sites is far more than enough to allow for a strong housing market with choices from a 1 bedroom town home to a huge 3000 + square foot mansion. At this rate most of Spring Hill, at least the Williamson part, will be either houses or acres of dirt piles for the next 5 years while developers continue to profit millions of dollars.
As for the roads, Spring Hill needs to get off their backsides and start pushing the state and county harder for road improvements now, not in two to three years. I know there have been talks and more talks but lets see some action and less talking. What happened to the tens of thousands of dollars we the tax payers laid out for the Duplex road traffic study? Has that not proven this road needs to be improved now? Or are they going to wait until a few people are killed by a construction vehicle before doing anything?
Post a Comment