PLEASE ATTEND THE PUBLIC MEETING 2/7 7PM AT ST GABE'S AND THE PUBLIC HEARING AT CITY COUNCIL 2/20. The VOTE is not expected until 3/20. This was in response to Dia Steiger's Next Door post: Is this revised plan an improvement over the initial proposal? Yes it is, but it still disregards the current R-3 zoning that defines this neighborhood. The sidewalk improvements only apply to that 600 foot stretch of Sharon Lane, and they are required to replace the them as part of the project. The rest of Sharon Lane will see no improvements to the sidewalks. The very construction of the sidewalks and driveways, along with grading of a significantly sloping site, will kill a significant portion of the trees. There are no repercussions for the developer for clear cutting a site-which is why you see that happening all over Charlotte. They are only required to put 15% of them back, and tall oaks will be replaced with 6" caliper saplings. That is the standard. Look at the other Simonini projects-SouthPark City Homes, Churchill Road-there was not one tree left standing. Those site plans also showed lots of green space and trees, but remember those are concepts used to sell. There is no guarantee that is what it will look like, and no authority will prevent clear cutting a site. In fact, we have been told that it is exactly what they will do if we oppose this project. Those of us that have been opposed from its inception have always had 2 main concerns: 1) the Rezoning of this R-3 parcel in an area that is entirely single family residential to UR-2, which is a much denser designation that sets a precedent for the remainder of Sharon Lane and adjacent streets that have large lots. The City Planning department points to UR-2 zoning, intended for areas adjacent to the urban core of Charlotte,for use in residential neighborhoods as justification to approve infill projects like this one. Just because it was used before does not justify its use over and over, especially without a holistic look at the other factors specific to a site-a school zone, the existing character of the street and the current traffic. I guarantee if approved, this will be the poster child for the large lot at the other end of Sharon Lane and more on Sharon Road. Once UR-2 zoning is allowed it is here to stay, and our single family residential lots will be peppered with condominium communities that have their own governing homeowners associations. 2)No one is opposed to the owners' right to develop their property, but we simply want them to adhere to the the same deed restrictions and guidelines that govern our properties and retain the character established on Sharon Lane. We have been told that building 18 homes on this parcel that currently holds 5 homes in not profitable, but all around us in Olde Foxcroft and Foxcroft homes are being torn down and replaced with new ones. If the numbers don't work, are all those families making huge financial mistakes? Those are exchanging one home for another, this would be exchanging 5 for 18. Why is that not enough? The fact that so much effort has been put into this development makes it perfectly clear just how profitable it will be. The character of the neighborhood is altered and precedents for future development are set, all for the profit a handful of individuals. There is more at stake here than allowing something to get built that looks pretty on paper.