Laserfiche WebLink
<br />Comments on The "Trunk Highway fi10 Corridor Study. - continued <br /> <br />. <br /> <br />be taking some of that value first by down-zoning -- <br />acquiring rights in my property without paying .fair <br />compensation as provided in the Constitution of the <br />United States. <br /> <br />c. When I wish to develop, and the county is not ready <br />to condemn, the coutts will permit me to develop any <br />land designated park. At that time I will need an <br />appropriate zoning and not park as a zoning. <br /> <br />5. As stated in #4, the suggested use designations of my farm on <br />figure fi8 are inappropriate for the following reasons: <br /> <br />a. The land designated R/C-Retail/Commercial is only on <br />the north side of the service road, instead of on <br />the north and south sides as in Alpaca estates. It <br />does not make sense to plan low-density residential <br />to front along the south side of the commercial- <br />industrial service road, as shown in figure #8. <br />Single-family lots fronting on such a road will not <br />be desirable. <br /> <br />. <br /> <br />Retail commercial is of questionable feasibility in <br />this location because the transit plan has the T.H. <br />#10 access points so far from my farm. <br /> <br />The land designated R/C-Retail/Commercial should be <br />either light industrial like on Alpaca Estates, <br />offices, high-tech buildings, or apartments. <br /> <br />Before the south-side service road is constructed, <br />this use should be settled, so that the lots between <br />the service road and T.H. #10 are deep enough, <br />otherwise the service road should be located adja- <br />cent to T.H. #10. <br /> <br />b. The land designated park (which should be SF-Single <br />Family) is too deep from north to south along <br />Traprock Street. The north boundary of this land <br />should extend from 142nd Avenue Northwest (on the <br />west) to Traprock Street (on the east) following <br />along the north or south lines of Plat i89233, <br />Parcel #2500. <br /> <br />c. That area between the R/C-Retail/Commercial and said <br />boundary line, described in "b" above, should be <br />Residential PUD (allowing a density of ten-to-twelve <br />units per acre) or even apartments. If Schwartzman <br />can get MF-Multip1e Family along the river, this <br />should be no problem. <br /> <br />. <br />