This property is currently zoned and master planned for the appropriate density. The connectivity in the plan has both valid and problematic issues for the environment as well as for traffic. The infrastructure required to increase the density will have negative economic impacts to Scio. There appears to be no valid reasons to increase the density from the current zoning and I do not support the current plan.
H
Heather Kahler
12 years ago
Please do NOT build Scioview. It will ruin it for the complex on Little Lake Lane.
A
Aaron Wilson-Ahlstrom
12 years ago
This proposal, to develop this 165 acres of farmland, ignores the wisdom of the township's own master plan.
M
Margret Rothwell
12 years ago
That area is beautiful and a great place to walk your pets, go on a jog or run, and just an all around great peaceful place. Also a great place for kids to explore and have fun outdoors.
B
Beth Madison
12 years ago
NO SCIOVIEW! It's one big bad idea.
K
Kendra Pyle
12 years ago
Featured
This area is much better left undeveloped to serve as a buffer to Saginaw Forest and to protect the watershed. The area has already been taxed enough with the Pall/Gelman contaminated groundwater.
S
Suzanne Eastman, Ann Arbor, MI, USA
12 years ago
I strongly support this for all the reasons listed. Please do not subdivide this property and turn Little Lake Road into a thouroughfare, and destroy the solitude of Saginaw Forest.
M
Mark Billman
12 years ago
Profit-driven short-sightedness is not in anyone's interest!
J
Julie K. Krick
12 years ago
I dread to think of what our neighborhood would become if this proposal was passed and the housing development was allowed to go ahead as planned. Our co-housing communities went so far as to order porch lights and outdoor lighting designed to preserve the tranquility of our night sky. That serenity would be destroyed forever with such an intrusion on our common space. While the final decision is out of my hands, I can only urge you to please reject this plan and keep our natural areas and quality of life in tact.
R
Robert Perrault
12 years ago
I was appalled when I first heard of the idea of building a 174 unit housing development on this particular piece of land. Now that I have given the matter more thought, I am even more appalled.. I assume that the housing development has commercial value, but I think it would be extremely short-sighted to trade such extensive and irreparable damage to this farmland and wetland setting, not to mention the degradation of the lifestyle of residents living in the area. I hope wiser heads will prevail and spirit of the Master Plan will be honored.
A
Anonymous
12 years ago
Please reject this plan
R
Rose D'Agostino
12 years ago
Please respect the peaceful, rural character of this neighborhood and the wetlands environment. A development of this magnitude would significantly diminish the quality of life for the existing resident and wreak havoc upon the environment.. This plan runs counter to the existing Scio Township Master Plan and thus must be denied.
K
Ken Ogilvie
12 years ago
Bad idea!
L
Linda Lawson
12 years ago
Please consider the character of Scio Twp. It will ruin why people like us moved here in the first place.
L
Larry Works
12 years ago
Until the Pall/Gelman plume has an acceptable resolution, there should be a moratorium upon residential development within a 2 mile radius of the plume. http://goo.gl/PUhs84 Further, residential development in this area, would have an adverse effect on the waterfowl using the Mississippi flyway. Although the wetland will NOT be built upon, waterfowl avoid highly congested areas of human population.
J
Jan Curtiss Taylor
12 years ago
please protest some nature conservancy there.
A
Anonymous
12 years ago
This would destroy the character of the area.
J
Jenny Cook
12 years ago
I think this parcel could be much better used. Reducing the number of houses planned, but adding some planned parkland, would increase the quality of life for the Scioview residents and their neighbors.
S
Sunil/Merial Das
12 years ago
We share similar concerns and therefore would be against the proposal.
S
syndallas baughman
12 years ago
The project is too big and destroys the character of this area. People who live in dense housing need open spaces and natural areas to escape to. Why is it that in Scio township this densely populated area has not parks or open spaces, while we pay taxes that go for land preservation in low density population areas that serve fewer people? WIth the proximity to Saginaw forest this land is an ideal open space that would serve more Scio Township residents than any of the other parcels of preserved land in the township.
This property is currently zoned and master planned for the appropriate density. The connectivity in the plan has both valid and problematic issues for the environment as well as for traffic. The infrastructure required to increase the density will have negative economic impacts to Scio. There appears to be no valid reasons to increase the density from the current zoning and I do not support the current plan.
Please do NOT build Scioview. It will ruin it for the complex on Little Lake Lane.
This proposal, to develop this 165 acres of farmland, ignores the wisdom of the township's own master plan.
That area is beautiful and a great place to walk your pets, go on a jog or run, and just an all around great peaceful place. Also a great place for kids to explore and have fun outdoors.
NO SCIOVIEW! It's one big bad idea.
This area is much better left undeveloped to serve as a buffer to Saginaw Forest and to protect the watershed. The area has already been taxed enough with the Pall/Gelman contaminated groundwater.
I strongly support this for all the reasons listed. Please do not subdivide this property and turn Little Lake Road into a thouroughfare, and destroy the solitude of Saginaw Forest.
Profit-driven short-sightedness is not in anyone's interest!
I dread to think of what our neighborhood would become if this proposal was passed and the housing development was allowed to go ahead as planned. Our co-housing communities went so far as to order porch lights and outdoor lighting designed to preserve the tranquility of our night sky. That serenity would be destroyed forever with such an intrusion on our common space. While the final decision is out of my hands, I can only urge you to please reject this plan and keep our natural areas and quality of life in tact.
I was appalled when I first heard of the idea of building a 174 unit housing development on this particular piece of land. Now that I have given the matter more thought, I am even more appalled.. I assume that the housing development has commercial value, but I think it would be extremely short-sighted to trade such extensive and irreparable damage to this farmland and wetland setting, not to mention the degradation of the lifestyle of residents living in the area. I hope wiser heads will prevail and spirit of the Master Plan will be honored.
Please reject this plan
Please respect the peaceful, rural character of this neighborhood and the wetlands environment. A development of this magnitude would significantly diminish the quality of life for the existing resident and wreak havoc upon the environment.. This plan runs counter to the existing Scio Township Master Plan and thus must be denied.
Bad idea!
Please consider the character of Scio Twp. It will ruin why people like us moved here in the first place.
Until the Pall/Gelman plume has an acceptable resolution, there should be a moratorium upon residential development within a 2 mile radius of the plume. http://goo.gl/PUhs84 Further, residential development in this area, would have an adverse effect on the waterfowl using the Mississippi flyway. Although the wetland will NOT be built upon, waterfowl avoid highly congested areas of human population.
please protest some nature conservancy there.
This would destroy the character of the area.
I think this parcel could be much better used. Reducing the number of houses planned, but adding some planned parkland, would increase the quality of life for the Scioview residents and their neighbors.
We share similar concerns and therefore would be against the proposal.
The project is too big and destroys the character of this area. People who live in dense housing need open spaces and natural areas to escape to. Why is it that in Scio township this densely populated area has not parks or open spaces, while we pay taxes that go for land preservation in low density population areas that serve fewer people? WIth the proximity to Saginaw forest this land is an ideal open space that would serve more Scio Township residents than any of the other parcels of preserved land in the township.