Vote NO to RE-ZONING 15 Acres on Historic LaRoche Ave from Single-Family to Multi-Family
0 have signed. Let’s get to 1,000!
[UPDATE: Please refer to the Community Factsheet about this issue for the latest key information on this petition. We have updated the core petition below to reflect new basic information, and stand by the fundamental statements that first inspired this petition. If the Commissioners vote to approve the item, we are asking for "conditions to zoning" that would address the concerns of all relevant parties.]
Late last year, housing developers purchased the Woo property – set among six single family homes that face LaRoche, just north of Riverview and south of Herb River Bend. They are now requesting a re-zoning from R-1 (single family) to R-3-5 (multi-family at 5 units per acre) for 6705, 6609 & 0 LaRoche Avenue; 6714 Howard Foss Drive. That would amount to 57 units on the ~15 acres that they have amassed. On June 26, 2018, the Metropolitan Planning Commission arrived at a failed tie. As a result, the matter will be passed along to the County Commission without a recommendation. We strongly urge the County Commissioners to deny the application at the August 3, 2018 Commission meeting.
Agenda item and attachments for the June 26th meeting can be found here: https://www.thempc.org/eagenda/x/mpc/2018/june-26-2018-regular-mpc-meeting/174_1988.pdf
General development plan can be found here: https://www.thempc.org/eagenda/x/mpc/2018/june-26-2018-regular-mpc-meeting/laroche-gdp.pdf
We, as nearby community members and residents who deeply care about the natural beauty and slow-paced character of this area, collectively oppose the re-zoning. We request that the current R-1 zoning be maintained for the following reasons:
- Re-zoning to multi-family will add an intensity of development that is incompatible to the existing community character and unique sense of place along the Herb River and the historic LaRoche Avenue Corridor. The existing single family zoning (R-1) is essential to maintaining the natural beauty and unique character of the area.
- Safety on LaRoche is already a serious concern, particularly on this portion of the road near blind curves where there are frequent accidents. While traffic volumes of the proposed multi-family development would produce similar volumes as single family, it remains a question to whether the proposed new road connection would and should trigger other improvements to LaRoche to make it safer for the community. [NOTE: We have changed this from the original statement of saying that multi-family would generate "much more traffic." But we stand by our statements that the safety concerns are paramount and cannot be explained away with average trips day statistics.]
- The change to multi-family will significantly alter the neighborhood fabric from the well-established single family residential that has existed for many years. Increasing density across 15 acres will be in stark contrast to the surrounding development pattern. Only one multi-family development exists along this part of LaRoche at Fiddler's Crossing. It is a very small development of 14 units -- nothing close to 57 units. (If zoning is approved, the applicant will seek a future variance to decrease lot sizes from 60-feet to 50-feet wide, further densifying the neighborhood fabric.)
- This is a long-established and mostly built-out community where change is very slow and density is not projected. There is no justification to expect further density in this area per the Comprehensive Plan and Future Land Use Map, therefore the rezoning would be contrary to MPC's planning documents. The MPC's Future Land Use Map (dated 2015) depicts these parcels as Single Family Residential Suburban -- for detached single family homes. If approved, this could set a precedent for additional upzoning in Southeast Chatham.
- There is no need for “transitional zoning” in this area along LaRoche Avenue, which was a justification given for this change in zoning. Riverview is a very low intensity use and does not need a transition.
- There would be loss of exceptional live oaks and other mature canopy trees. The site contains very large trees and is heavily-wooded, but the applicant’s Development Plan appears to place buildings, graded roads and graded ponds in proximity to or on top of existing mature trees and their critical root zones. Tree preservation is not seriously considered in this project and cannot be achieved with an R-3 zoning.
We want to be clear: we are not against all development. We simply request that the Planning Commission uphold the existing zoning as appropriate to long-standing development patterns and the community's rich character and sense of place.
Complete your signature
0 have signed. Let’s get to 1,000!