HomeMy WebLinkAbout02-08-21 Public Comment - B. Roshia - Buffalo RunFrom: Bill Roshia
To: Agenda
Subject: Buffalo Run development comment in opposition
Date: Monday, February 8, 2021 1:15:14 PM
To Whom It May Concern:
My household is submitting this letter in opposition to the proposed R5 zoning being requested by the developers of
the so-called ‘Buffalo Run’ subdivision located on Fowler, south of Stucky.
It seems that the requirements of this meeting are a 4/1 vote to override the Zoning Commission’s recommendation
to deny. Thusly, I will simply refer to the City’s own Unified Development Code and redline the conflicts between
the Code and the intent of this project.
—
From: Sec. 38.300.100. - Residential zoning districts—Intent and purpose.
F. Residential mixed-use high density district (R-5). The intent of the R-5 residential mixed-use high density district
is to provide for high-density residential development through a variety of compatible housing types and
residentially supportive commercial uses in a geographically compact, walkable area to serve the varying needs of
the community's residents. In fact, there is no residentially supportive commercial that has been proposed to be
included in this project, NOR are there any existing residentially supportive commercial outposts adjacent to this
proposed project.These purposes are accomplished by:
1.Providing for a mixture of housing types, including single and multi-household dwellings to serve the varying
needs of the community's residents. There is no proposal that includes single and multi-household dwellings. This
has been engineered to attempt to gain the highest density possible, regardless of community impact, as evidenced
by the developer’s behavior over the course of the project so far.
2.Allowing offices and small scale retail and restaurants as secondary uses provided special standards are met. There
is no proposed office, retail, hospitality, or otherwise neighborhood oriented commercial space.
Use of this zone is appropriate for areas adjacent to mixed-use districts and/or served by transit to accommodate a
higher density of residents in close proximity to jobs and services. Again, Buffalo Run does not meet this criterial
either. There is no existing transit, and there are no close proximity jobs or services.
—
It is clear that Buffalo Run does not add to our community anything except higher density housing, on the back of a
well-built and functioning community made up of Meadow Creek and the surrounding HOAs and non-organized
neighboring community. The placement of this R5 is simply WRONG. The way the developers are going about
this is WRONG. The attempt to shoe-horn R5 with limitations into an area adjacent to as-built R1 and actual rural
county neighbors is WRONG.
Furthermore, the City ought to take note that this developer’s engagement with the adjacent community has been
minimal, and only after making personal attacks toward one of our principal organizers and Meadow Creek HOA
board members as a result of the neighborhood standing in solidarity against this project.
Specifically, this development is wrong for our neighborhood, as you see by the Zoning Commission
recommendation, and the level of community opposition through this process. Generally, this development is wrong
for the city because it not only fails to meet the basic purposes of said zoning, but it also brings to light the
absolutely disingenuous methods being used by this developer to make things look as if they comport.
IN FACT, many of the prepared slides and deliverables that have been disclosed to the neighborhood present
information in highly disingenuous ways. For instance, using distances that are crow-flies, from the very edge of
the property to make things seem closer. Pretending that a disused technology campus, with a single climbing gym
is a neighborhood oriented and residential supporting commercial hub would be laughable if we weren’t literally
considering whether or not to allow the construction of a food desert. Pretending that there is a walkable and direct
path out of the neighborhood would be laughable if we weren’t considering whether or not to allow the construction
of a high density residential zone that has no protected space non automobile traffic going north, south, OR west.
The city should begin requiring walking distance measurements in supporting documents, and come up with a color
coded system that CLEARLY DELINIATES existing vs. possible future build out. Allowing any developer to gloss
over the time that passes from current until the eventual, completion of possible adjacent development, that they
have nothing to do with and no control over, ignores the fact that this development, when it will be delivered as
finished product, may exist in an underserved distant place for years and years to come. Just because Fowler and
Stucky might be built to City standards in the future, does not mean that the children who move in to this
development as new are not going to be at the exact risk that the city’s road construction standards seek to mitigate.
Just because there may be walkable commercial that meets the needs of this R5 neighborhood in 10 years, does
NOT mean that it comports with the requirements for today, and allowing projects like this to use the rosy-horizon
approach deprives the initial residents of the basics that the City has deemed necessary for the successful use of R5
zoning.
Bill & Michelle Roshia
3473 S29th Ave