Agenda - 02-04-2025; 5-a - Applications for Zoning Atlas Amendment, Comprehensive Plan Amendments, & UDO Text Amendments to Realize “Fiddlehead Corner”, a Master Plan Development – Conditional District

Browse Search

269 Approved 8.7.24 1003 people are unaware that dozens of Morrow Mill landowners including us have voluntarily 1004 put restrictive covenants on their properties requiring 10-acre minimum lot sizes so that 1005 their land can be protected from development for future generations. These restrictions 1006 go far beyond what the County requires in the unprotected watershed. It may be hard for 1007 a developer to understand, but those of us who live here do not have a transactional 1008 relationship with this land. We know that once agriculture and forested land is lost, you 1009 don't get it back. Playing by the County's rules has meant that our property values have 1010 not increased the way property values close to town have. Though we may not get rich 1011 selling our land to a developer one day, this stability serves a greater good. It means that 1012 folks can still find smaller lots and homes that are affordable and young farmers have a 1013 chance of holding on to their inherited land because tax values are not sky high. It is only 1014 because the rest of us have played by the rules that this developer can now see our land 1015 as cheap and ready to be exploited for their suburban development. This project is 1016 unnecessary and unneighborly. I say unnecessary because without changing a single 1017 ordinance, they can build enough homes for all of the current members to live side by 1018 side, sharing resources and supporting one another like the rest of us do. I ask the 1019 planning board to respect the wisdom of the UDO and the vision outlined in the Land Use 1020 Plan 2050 and reject this proposal because it is wholly inconsistent with both, thank you. 1021 1022 Carol Mellon: Yes, first I'd like to say, I've had to make a lot of changes to my notes because, we were 1023 first told that there would be an assisted living center on the campus of the proposed 1024 development and it has since been changed to family care home. This seems like kind of 1025 an effort to shoe-horn this proposal into or toward approval, but let me continue. Our area 1026 does not have the infrastructure to support a large community of people needing frequent 1027 medical care. We are served by a volunteer fire and rescue squad that is not equipped to 1028 transport residents to relatively distant hospitals on a frequent basis and along a hilly, two- 1029 lane highway with infrequent passing zones. Those needing skilled care would have to go 1030 elsewhere in any case since the planners of this community will not have any provision for 1031 that. Even if everything goes as planned from a financial point of view, a high-density 1032 staff intensive development will not only increase environmental pollution nearby, but will 1033 definitely increase the amount of traffic, air pollution, and noise. As one of our previous 1034 residences was adjacent to an assisted living center, we know that the required staff will 1035 be working around the clock as well, coming and going at hours that are now reserved for 1036 peace and quiet in our area. Again, I ask that you reject this proposal, thank you. 1037 1038 Anna Hatcher: So, for me personally, because of the concerns about the traffic which is going to grow, 1 1039 don't know, probably three times more than we have originally, I think that one of the 1040 requirements for this neighborhood is they will go ahead and build a public bus station 1041 because people in age sometimes have challenges with driving good and paying 1042 attention, especially when it's getting dark. I think it has to be a requirement a public bus 1043 station, something like that. Next concern is the construction hours. I don't want to live in 1044 hell for the next 10 years, right? I came to this country from the huge city Kyiv in Ukraine 1045 5 years ago. I know what construction is, and at least it has to be mandatory that after 1046 5:00 p.m. no noisy construction work. It has to be documented. If you don't want us, with 1047 Chelsea to pull out my truck and block the entrance and exit and makes strikes and 1048 revolution which I know how to do revolutions trust me. And you don't want to have it in 1049 the county, right? So, no construction after 5:00 p.m., no noisy construction activities on 1050 weekends. It has to be documented and be a requirement to these people.Also, we 1051 would like to have and see a backup from this group, like a backup plan. Because they 1052 are in respected age, right? If they aren't able to perform in 3 years, what's next steps.