Powered by iPetitions - Start your online petition now

Signatures 354 total

Page: 1, 2, 3, 4, ... 8 »

  1. 1
    Name: Kim Beal on Jun 17, 2010
    Comments: "I oppose this rezoning petition"
    Flag
  2. 2
    Name: Marlene Marti on Jun 17, 2010
    Comments: We strongly oppose this project for rezoning.
    Flag
  3. 3
    Name: Katie Zender on Jun 17, 2010
    Comments: I strongly oppose the rezoning petition for the Strawn Apts property that is currently being requested by CHA. It sets a very poor precedent for respecting ULI recommendations, small area plans and TOD guidelines, disregarding the time thought and work that has gone into plants trying to enhance and protect neighborhoods. The petition ignores guidelines and asks for exceptions/variances on building heights at the outset. It's embarrassing to attend all the meetings and see how little CHA has listened or accommodated...all the while saying they are "working" with us.
    Flag
  4. 4
    Name: Kristen Henderson on Jun 17, 2010
    Comments: The bottom line---TOD is dense enough, and any plan that exceeds it even slightly should be rejected out of hand on principle alone by City Council. If I understand correctly, the CHA/City paid ULI $68,000 for a "world class" study that was embraced by the neighborhood. It then immediately hired an architect to put together a "plan" that initially not only more than doubled the recommended density on the site, but also significantly exceeded the TOD zoning height restrictions. This process would be disappointing enough on its face, but that it has happened on property adjoining an historic neighborhood makes it that much harder to fathom.
    Flag
  5. 5
    Name: Suzanne Sigmon on Jun 17, 2010
    Comments:
    Flag
  6. 6
    Name: Suzanne Sigmon on Jun 17, 2010
    Comments:
    Flag
  7. 7
    Name: Sally Knauth on Jun 17, 2010
    Comments: stick with the ULI recommendations...do not squeeze in so many tacky boxes.
    Flag
  8. 8
    Name: Vickie Rolfe on Jun 17, 2010
    Comments:
    Flag
  9. 9
    Name: Nancy Gonzales Eastman on Jun 17, 2010
    Comments: I am disgusted that the ULI recommendations are being ignored once again. I implore you to not allow this project to proceed as is. Please follow the ULI recommendations and historic district guidelines when planning this project.
    Flag
  10. 10
    Name: April Barnhardt Whitlock on Jun 17, 2010
    Comments: I oppose this rezoning petition.
    Flag
  11. 11
    Name: Ed Ritter on Jun 17, 2010
    Comments:
    Flag
  12. 12
    Name: Rebecca W. Abernethy on Jun 17, 2010
    Comments:
    Flag
  13. 13
    Name: Lisa Stewart on Jun 17, 2010
    Comments: I am a Dilworth resident and I oppose the rezoning petition # 2010-022.
    Flag
  14. 14
    Name: Josh Rimany on Jun 17, 2010
    Comments: As a community leader and past DCDA president, I not only oppose petition 2010-22, but I am dissapointed and appauled that the planning dept and city council would even concider approving a proposal like this one. This rezoning not only goes against the city's plans for TOD developement, it goes against the ULI study and guidlines for the site, which the city just paid for. Rezoning these 17 acres without a specific site plan is not only dangerous for this crucial parcel of land, it also sets a very bad precedent for future development.
    Flag
  15. 15
    Name: Kim Beal on Jun 17, 2010
    Comments:
    Flag
  16. 16
    Name: Ernie Dehnert on Jun 17, 2010
    Comments: Strawn has been and can continue to be a good neighbor. However the proposed development is totally out of character for the neighborhood and the density is over the top. The current residents and the entire area will suffer if this is allowed to continue in its present form.
    Flag
  17. 17
    Name: Miller Abernethy on Jun 17, 2010
    Comments:
    Flag
  18. 18
    Name: Charles Bludsworth on Jun 17, 2010
    Comments: Stop this irresponsible project.
    Flag
  19. 19
    Name: Ralph Mcmillan on Jun 17, 2010
    Comments: i oppose this petition
    Flag
  20. 20
    Name: Quincy Acklen on Jun 17, 2010
    Comments: I oppose this plan. It is not even close to being within TOD guidelines, and IF the plan suddenly changes we the public need to look at it before deciding. Lowes had pages of provisions and rules for their plan, but this massive site has but one page?!! CHA hasn't even address the low income elderly in their own plan - for me that alone call into question their motives - I can at best trust only what they commit to in writing, and not a single thing they say.
    Flag
  21. 21
    Name: Barbara Milford on Jun 17, 2010
    Comments: Let's give this some more thought. It can be a win-win effort.
    Flag
  22. 22
    Name: Paula Stewart on Jun 17, 2010
    Comments: PLEASE! DONT MAKE THIS DECISION IN HASTE and thus invalidate the many prior years of vision, tediously hard work and planning by our businesses and residents whose belief that careful execution of development in Dilworth ensures future success for Charlotte's "first suburb" and for Charlotte overall. Members of City Council surely know that this area of the city is important--a truly vital puzzle piece of Charlotte's appeal as a destination and vibrant, attractive place to live. You have only to stand on the street viewing this particular parcel of Dilworth's business district & know it represents the heart of this great neighborhood. We all want development here but we only have one chance to do it right. While we do realize that tax revenue & new business from quick development would help our city's bottom line in the shorter term, experience tells us that rushed & thoughtless passage of this rezoning, will surely create "open season" on one of the true jewel areas in Charlotte's crown.
    Flag
  23. 23
    Name: Nancy Johnson on Jun 17, 2010
    Comments:
    Flag
  24. 24
    Name: John L. Fenlon on Jun 17, 2010
    Comments: Would encourage inordinate development, exceeds the TOD maximums, does not provide specific development standards, and is incompatible to a nearby historic district.
    Flag
  25. 25
    Name: John Cochrane on Jun 17, 2010
    Comments: I oppose this rezoning petition. I will slowly be encircled institutional sprawl; hospital and Housing Authority. Density, yes; Intensity, NO. John F. Cochrane
    Flag
  26. 26
    Name: Sallie Moody on Jun 17, 2010
    Comments: Please consider this petition.
    Flag
  27. 27
    Name: Anne Gildea on Jun 17, 2010
    Comments: I oppose the rezoning petition. Why are ULI's recommendations being disregarded? Why are the surrounding neighborhoods not being considered?
    Flag
  28. 28
    Name: Hal Tribble on Jun 17, 2010
    Comments: I think a conditional re-zoning request based on a proposed design plan that can be debated by all concern is more appropriate here.
    Flag
  29. 29
    Name: Margaret Clifford on Jun 17, 2010
    Comments:
    Flag
  30. 30
    Name: Ken Bauer on Jun 17, 2010
    Comments:
    Flag
  31. 31
    Name: Thomas Whitlock on Jun 17, 2010
    Comments:
    Flag
  32. 32
    Name: Thomas Whitlock on Jun 17, 2010
    Comments:
    Flag
  33. 33
    Name: MaryAnn Mee on Jun 17, 2010
    Comments: I oppose the CHA's plan to rezone the 17- acre Strawn site and sell off parcels to developers.
    Flag
  34. 34
    Name: Anonymous on Jun 17, 2010
    Comments: I oppose this project in its current form.
    Flag
  35. 35
    Name: Theresa Payton on Jun 17, 2010
    Comments: I do not agree with the rezoning petition as it is designed. Please leave the property as it is today. Why does the city feel the need to displace those lovely residents? You are disrupting families, neighborhoods, and the overflow character. Why? To make a buck? Because you don't like the way it looks? Improve the property and take care of the people there.
    Flag
  36. 36
    Name: Jeanne Woosley President, Sedgefield Neighborhood Assoc. on Jun 17, 2010
    Comments: I oppose this rezoning petition. City Council should uphold the TOD guidelines in place versus bending them to meet the will of developers who will not be residents of the area they impact.
    Flag
  37. 37
    Name: Erin Holland on Jun 17, 2010
    Comments: Let's preserve the essence of Dilworth....too much density will congest already crowded roadways. This area already has solid density guidelines and the current zoning should be sufficient. This current proposal does NOT add value to the local community.
    Flag
  38. 38
    Name: Bill Bradford on Jun 17, 2010
    Comments: I oppose the zoning and project in it's current form. There is way too much at stake here not to do it right!
    Flag
  39. 39
    Name: Janelle Travis on Jun 17, 2010
    Comments: This rezoning request has NO plan, just overwhelms the property, displaces low income residents, with no guarantee of return, no green space other than a water drainage area. CHA has not heard the Dilworth Community , every meeting they say they do..... obviously not true. This rezoning would take a pleasant area to live in and destroy it. Actually, I think CHA needs to get its self together and work with the communities to improve what they have. And improve their mode of operation.
    Flag
  40. 40
    Name: Lenore Jones Deutsch on Jun 17, 2010
    Comments:
    Flag
  41. 41
    Name: Lisa Donovan on Jun 17, 2010
    Comments: I oppose this rezoning.
    Flag
  42. 42
    Name: Larry Gildea on Jun 17, 2010
    Comments:
    Flag
  43. 43
    Name: Jacqueline Jones on Jun 17, 2010
    Comments: I oppose the CHA-Strawn Rezoning Petition in its current form.
    Flag
  44. 44
    Name: Peter Kakacek on Jun 17, 2010
    Comments:
    Flag
  45. 45
    Name: Leah Campbell on Jun 17, 2010
    Comments: I am a Dilworth resident and I oppose the rezoning petition # 2010-022
    Flag
  46. 46
    Name: Leah Campbell on Jun 17, 2010
    Comments:
    Flag
  47. 47
    Name: Craig And Paula Reutlinger on Jun 17, 2010
    Comments: How in the world can the members of the City Council vote anything but NO on this re-zoning petition when it clearly ignores provisions and recommendations of people that have been hired to make recommendations which best fit the community it is designated for and about. Dilworth already receives enough traffic from people crossing from the north to south and visa versa. this would only make it worse --not to mention what it would do in terms of traffic on East Boulevard, now down to one lane. We also do not want individuals coming in with "Big Pink Building" ideas. And while we have the Historic District in place, owners after a year can do whatever they want to with the property. We have already seen that happen. PLEASE CITY COUNCIL DO WHAT IS RIGHT FOR DILWORTH, THE FIRST HISTORIC NEIGHBORHOOD IN CHARLOTTE. PROTECT IT FROM DEVELOPMENT WHICH DOES NOT COINCIDE WITH WHAT THE DCDA HAS WORKED SO HARD TO DO OVER THE YEARS -- TO PROTECT THE HERITAGE OF EDWARD DILWORTH LATTA AND THE INVESTMENT OF TIME AND ENERGY TO MAKE THIS A BEAUTIFUL AND SAFE PLACE TO LIVE.
    Flag
  48. 48
    Name: Anonymous on Jun 17, 2010
    Comments:
    Flag
  49. 49
    Name: J Robert Morehead on Jun 17, 2010
    Comments:
    Flag
  50. 50
    Name: Debora Arnold on Jun 17, 2010
    Comments: Please observe the Urban Land Institute's recommendations and be good stewards of one of our city's remaining treasures -- the Dilworth historic district.
    Flag

Page: 1, 2, 3, 4, ... 8 »

Sponsored links