Loading...
Item 5 Dear City Council: Just like everyone, our home and it's privacy, enjoyment, and valuation is very important to us. When we built our home 19 years ago we knew that White Chapel would some day be widened. To that end, we have planted and nourished trees and shrubs along that side of our property in order to enhance and protect our property. Recently, we have been notified that the city plans to take some of our property, some of our trees, and some of the privacy those provide. The overall plan is not as aesthetically pleasing as what we currently have for the neighborhood boundaries. As a result, the value of our property will be greatly reduced. These are our concerns. Trees: After attending the first meeting in December with the city staff, we have stated over and over that we don't want to lose our trees and have been told "we will see what we can do ". In the end we were told the answer was no changes would be made to the new wall's design and we would definitely lose all trees and shrubs outside the current wall (all on our property) and one 17 year old live oak inside our wall that would cost $18,000 to replace. This is a critical tree to our privacy and noise and light abatement problems. Surely, the wall location can be changed slightly so that this tree is not lost. Which gets me back to the city's letter stating that "every effort will be made to save all trees and shrubs ". Verbally, we have already been told that the city plans to take our critical live oak and all trees and crepe myrtles outside of the wall. 50, what exactly does every effort to save all trees and shrubs mean? Will the city follow all requirements to protect the trees as spelled out in the city's tree ordinance? The letter states we would have no sprinkler system for 1/3 of our yard during the process. How is not being able to water those trees efficiently making every effort to save them? (Not to mention my grass and ground covers) I spoke to an arborist who said among other things, the trees should be feed beginning now and preliminary root cuts made if every effort is to be made to save these important trees. Where is the list of plants that will be planted in place of the trees and /or shrubs that are removed and to abate the noise and sight line from the increased roadway? Where is the assurance that our grass, ground cover, and fences will be restored up to the new wall? Private businesses are required to spell out exactly what their landscaping plan is for their construction. Where is the city's plan? The Process: Why must our current wall be torn down before the new wall is constructed? An 8' chain link fence is not the same as a brick wall. During that time, we will not have as much privacy or flexibility to sell our house should the need or desire arise. Where is the compensation for that? And again, are we supposed to drag hoses around during the process to water our trees and lawn? We installed a sprinkler system so that we would never have to do that. Wall design: We have been told that the new wall is designed to have a stone retaining wall with a 6' brick wall on top of it (although this isn't spelled out in the letter). The pillars have the stone extending higher than the rest. The homeowners will see 2 - 5' of this retaining wall so it maters to us what it looks like. The stone and brick don't compliment each other. They are two vastly different colors. The stone extending up the pillars only emphasizes that. The engineers told us, the city would own it, they could make it what ever color they wanted. Does it really mater more to that engineer than to the homeowners who will look at it every day? Outside of the wall: The design has an 8' sidewalk on the west, the road, 6' sidewalk on the east, and then a brick wall - wall to wall concrete. The city would never allow private businesses to build anything with this much concrete and no plantings. They should do no less. Why not narrow the sidewalk and have plantings between it and the wall? The city has done this on every other street. The new sidewalk on the east side of Carroll south of 1709 is narrower so that landscaping could be preserved. The example we were told was going to be followed on N. Kimball has plantings between the sidewalk and the wall. White Chapel should also. Finally, the letter stated "The city's negotiations have been successful to date ". I don't know how anyone could say that. There are 13 homes along White Chapel in Chapel Downs and apparently only 3 of us have been notified of this road widening plan. Aren't the others entitled to be in on the process? The 3 of us that knew about what was being planned, have stated our concerns and they haven't been addressed. Then to receive the only offer we have ever been given (other than the appraisal last summer that we were told to ignore) and it is labeled Final Offer or condemnation process will begin with no details and no itemization. Wow, what a way to treat the homeowners! Please, help make this project come to a mutually agreeable conclusion for both the city and the homeowners. We just want the city to minimize the disruption to our home and its value and to be fairly compensated for what they are taking from us. Thank you, j/c) 411 ntcLe, 101 Ascot :'» - 0 oke 0,4 04L_ ,4447-tot f F 95 a iL u an,L0(06aCagnA