CC - Agendas - City Council - REGULAR - 11/4/2008

Home

Agenda Item: GP08-004 Major General Plan Amendment October 1, 2008 Ryan Smith, Planning and Zoning City of Prescott Ryan Smith, As we discussed, please include these comments in the the PUBLIC HEARINGS October 2, 2008, October 9, 2008, and the City Council Public Hearing Study Session November 4, 2008. Areas of concern for Richard and Donna Sinclair, are specifically: 1) WATER 2) DENSITY 3) BALANCE -- Growth vs. Sane and Sensible Environmental Concerns 4) OPEN SPACE and NEED FOR TRAILS CREATION AND PRESERVATION Comments: Water: Changing the General Plan now to avoid hassle in the future may seem wise to some. However, such a broad swipe to allow this much density is not realistic. Even IF the water ranch pipeline from Big Chino in Paulden goes through--which now looks like a HUGE WASTE OF TAXPAYER MONEY--there is still only so much precious water in Northern Arizona. We cannot pump desalinized ocean water over the mountains from the sea to our area because the energy cost to pump water from the sea over the mountains defeats the effort. With too much growth,the aquifers will be depleted and people with water now will have dry wells! How can that be equitable or even legal!? Density: Proposed Density levels may be described as "highest and best use" to land owners and planners desiring growth and revenue. Down the road--even a few years, not 100 years--we may well be stuck with the arid, near worthless properties left behind. Developers and city officials may be long moved to another state, but current property owners (we little guys)may be left with the destruction. Balance: With this amount of land and so little water--the majority of the area should be 2-5 acre minimum and provide significant open space and trails set aside now. The result would still provide excellent return for current property owners/developers and City of Prescott--without permanently damaging the land by over-building with too little water and pushing a metropolis where the resources are not there to sustain a metropolis. Rule of thumb: As, historically, in Arizona, even when not in a drought, 40-60 acres were required for each head of cattle, it is obvious,too many acres with HIGH DENSITY dwellings is a recipe for disaster! If there are City of Prescott or Yavapai County planning and zoning officials who still feel there have not been gross development errors made in the past.... Well,they would be wrong--there have been some irreversible errors made. And much damage to the area. Who benefits then? Few. 11