Oppose Increase in DUs Allowed Per Acre

I appose this change in zoning as it increases the dwelling density in an already crowded area. The character of the neighborhood should be maintained.

Strongly oppose the proposed zoning change.

The traffic on Zolezzi is already too heavy and the new right turn lane did not help to slow things down. The impact of just this 5 acre parcel at 5 duplexes per acre, assuming ONLY two people per unit both commuting, generates an increase in traffic by 100 cars per day minimum. This added to the congestion of parents picking up their children from the school, which is already a traffic safety issue. There are also people in the existing 1+ acre lots that have livestock. Do they have to worry that people moving into these newly overdeveloped projects are going to complain about the animals? Multi-family 5DU/acre is not appropriate on open/undeveloped properties in this area. Especially if they are interspersed within existing neighborhoods.

No!

I STRONGLY oppose the proposed change in zoning regulations for the 5.1 acre site APN 162-010-31. An increase of DU's per acre diminishes the characteristics of the neighborhood and does not conform to reasonable zoning practices specifically developed and approved as the Master Plan for the Thomas Creek Suburban Character Management Area.

Please protect the beautiful creek and land.

They should not be aloud to change the code to 5 per acre. We already have to much traffic on Zolezzi Lane and Arrow Creek. They just keep adding more traffic and do nothing about the traffic and the 2 lane roads. Lets keep this at 3 per acre.

Possible another school is needed but more apartments is too much. The traffic will be obnoxious and affect all the neighborhoods.

This is a totally unnecessary amendment to the Character Plan, I strongly oppose.

strongly oppose

Strongly oppose this change

I have lived here on Jeppson Lane for 23 years. I am directly across from the yellow lines marked as SITE on the map. I believe it is owned by the Catholic church. Fifteen years ago developers tore down the horse corrals, out buildings and houses on this property. Then the big machines came in and started digging... Well, guess what folks.. they dug up Native American Indian artifacts. The historical society closed down the project and it has sat there all these years. Does no one remember??

“Furthermore we ask the developer to take responsibility and provide for the maintenance of the Whites Creek area as a natural resource.”

I work in the evenings, so I cannot attend this meeting. I am opposed to the overdevelopment of this property for all the reason listed in the petition. In addition, I would like language in any sone change proposal that sunsets the project and the zone change if the specified project is not completed within five years. Too many developers have used drawings and presentations to seduce boards into approving projects that sound good and would have minimal impact, and then turn around and sell their land with its zone change to another developer who proposes something with far great impact. Planning boards must do due diligence on developers seeking zone changes to determine if if they are trustworthy. Thank you

I oppose the proposed zoning change to increase dwelling units per acre.

Thank you for providing this informs

The number of housing units in that area is increasing dramatically and traffic is already being impacted before the area is even built out. Please stop the madness! I came here from California to get away from the traffic!

Enough already!

Zoning has a purpose, greed should not change it

We don't want South Reno to turn into the over crowded nightmare that is the Bay Area/Silicon Valley. We love our clean, wildlife symbiotic, friendly, polite, respectful and respectable South Reno style of living and we don't want it to change. If we wanted "urban living", we would have purchased a house in am urban area.