Status: Closed — this petition is no longer accepting signatures.
WE, THE UNDERSIGNED, OBJECT TO THE SITING AND CONSTRUCTION OF THE SUNCREST SUBSTATION WITHIN THE TRSSD
Final supporters
1. THE PUBLIC WORKS BUILDING AND SALT, DIESEL AND TRUCK STORAGE FACILITY WILL ADD UNACCEPTABLE MASS AND INCREASE DRIVING FORCE IN A LANDSLIDE AREA WHICH THE CITY’S OWN TECHNICAL CONSULTANT HAS CHARACTERIZED AS “PROBLEMATIC.”
2. THE CITY COUNCIL’S INVESTING MORE THAN $1.7 MILLION IN TRSSD FUNDS IN A BUILDING WHERE, UNDER THE BEST OF CIRCUMSTANCE, THE RETURN ON INVESTMENT WOULD TAKE A MINIMUM OF 20.7 YEARS IS NOT PRUDENT AND CONSTITUTES A CLEAR BREACH OF THE CITY COUNCIL’S PUBLIC DUTY TO SERVICE DISTRICT RESIDENTS.
3. BUILDING A “NON-HUMAN OCCUPANCY” PUBLIC WORKS BUILDING (THAT MUST HAVE AN OCCUPANCY RATE OF LESS THAN 2,000 PERSON-HOURS PER YEAR WHICH REQUIRES IT TO BE UNOCCUPIED THE REMAINING 6,765 HOURS IN THE YEAR) IS INCOMPATIBLE WITH THE SURROUNDING HIGH END RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT, CONSTITUTES AN UNWISE LAND USE INCONSISTENT WITH THE CITY’S OWN ORDINANCE, AND CREATES AN ATTRACTIVE UNOCCUPIED NUISANCE FOR CHILDREN AND THIEVES.
4. THE RESIDENTS OF THE SERVICE DISTRICT ARE ENTIRELY SATISIFIED WITH THE CITY’S CURRENT DELIVERY OF SERVICES AND NO PUBLIC SAFETY OR OTHER NEEDS ANALYSIS EXISTS TO JUSTIFY THE EXPENDITURE OF MILLIONS OF DOLLARS ON THIS PROJECT. ON THE CONTRARY, LOADING TRAVERSE RIDGE ROAD AND RESIDENTIAL STREETS WITH NEVER BEFORE SEEN HIGH VOLUME DIESEL TANKER TRUCKS AND SALT DELIVERY TRUCKS TO SUPPORT THE PUBLIC WORKS BUILDING INCREASES REAL RISKS TO PUBLIC SAFETY AND HUMAN HEALTH.
5. WHILE MEMBERS OF THE CITY COUNCIL MAY HAVE THE ABILITY TO ALLOCATE TRSSD FUNDS TO THE CONSTRUCTION OF A PUBLIC WORKS BUILDING IN THE SERVICE DISTRICT, SUCH AN ALLOCATION IS ILL-ADVISED IN THE FACE OF SERVICE DISTRICT OPPOSITION, AND MAY CONSTITUTE AN ABUSE OF THE DISCRETION AND AUTHORITY ENTRUSTED TO YOU BY THE SERVICE DISTRICT.
FOR THE REASONS SET FORTH ABOVE, AMONG OTHERS, THE UNDERSIGNED RESPECTFULLY REQUESTS THAT THE MAYOR AND THE CITY COUNCIL FORMALLY CEASE FURTHER ACTIVITIES ASSOCIATED WITH THE SITING AND CONSTRUCTION OF THE PUBLIC WORKS BUILDING IN THE SERVICE DISTRICT.
More like this
Oppose Location of Substation, Towers, & Powerlines
Kirkland Ordinances and Plans apply to Potala Project
Updates
April 15, 2014
I spent the entire morning staring at the city site maps again and it just feels more reckless the more I look at the ground instability reports. People keep reaching out to say they feel ignored by the council but I promise I am still here working on the next set of questions to send over to them even if the inbox is becoming a bit of a nightmare to manage.
April 15, 2014
I was just checking the list and the sheer reach of this thing makes my head spin because I honestly thought it would just be a few neighbors grumbling in a group chat. It really hits differently seeing people speak up about these landslide risks and the complete lack of logic behind building that facility right in our backyard.
Reached 100 supporters
April 15, 2014
6 Comments
If the city council ignores the land safety reports just to build this eyesore they are gonna be in a lot of trouble when the ground shifts.
This makes zero sense. Why build a storage shed on literal unstable ground? Draper is throwing money away on a liability.
I moved to this area for the residential feel and this is just gonna bring heavy trucks and dust. Do not put this facility in our backyard.
Living right by this proposed site and the traffic and noise are a nightmare. Plus the landslide risk is no joke. Find somewhere else!
TOTAL WASTE OF TAXPAYER MONEY. We dont need this here.
Share this petition
Share this petition to help it reach more people.
Your share link
Status: Closed — this petition is no longer accepting signatures.
WE, THE UNDERSIGNED, OBJECT TO THE SITING AND CONSTRUCTION OF THE SUNCREST SUBSTATION WITHIN THE TRSSD
Final supporters
1. THE PUBLIC WORKS BUILDING AND SALT, DIESEL AND TRUCK STORAGE FACILITY WILL ADD UNACCEPTABLE MASS AND INCREASE DRIVING FORCE IN A LANDSLIDE AREA WHICH THE CITY’S OWN TECHNICAL CONSULTANT HAS CHARACTERIZED AS “PROBLEMATIC.”
2. THE CITY COUNCIL’S INVESTING MORE THAN $1.7 MILLION IN TRSSD FUNDS IN A BUILDING WHERE, UNDER THE BEST OF CIRCUMSTANCE, THE RETURN ON INVESTMENT WOULD TAKE A MINIMUM OF 20.7 YEARS IS NOT PRUDENT AND CONSTITUTES A CLEAR BREACH OF THE CITY COUNCIL’S PUBLIC DUTY TO SERVICE DISTRICT RESIDENTS.
3. BUILDING A “NON-HUMAN OCCUPANCY” PUBLIC WORKS BUILDING (THAT MUST HAVE AN OCCUPANCY RATE OF LESS THAN 2,000 PERSON-HOURS PER YEAR WHICH REQUIRES IT TO BE UNOCCUPIED THE REMAINING 6,765 HOURS IN THE YEAR) IS INCOMPATIBLE WITH THE SURROUNDING HIGH END RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT, CONSTITUTES AN UNWISE LAND USE INCONSISTENT WITH THE CITY’S OWN ORDINANCE, AND CREATES AN ATTRACTIVE UNOCCUPIED NUISANCE FOR CHILDREN AND THIEVES.
4. THE RESIDENTS OF THE SERVICE DISTRICT ARE ENTIRELY SATISIFIED WITH THE CITY’S CURRENT DELIVERY OF SERVICES AND NO PUBLIC SAFETY OR OTHER NEEDS ANALYSIS EXISTS TO JUSTIFY THE EXPENDITURE OF MILLIONS OF DOLLARS ON THIS PROJECT. ON THE CONTRARY, LOADING TRAVERSE RIDGE ROAD AND RESIDENTIAL STREETS WITH NEVER BEFORE SEEN HIGH VOLUME DIESEL TANKER TRUCKS AND SALT DELIVERY TRUCKS TO SUPPORT THE PUBLIC WORKS BUILDING INCREASES REAL RISKS TO PUBLIC SAFETY AND HUMAN HEALTH.
5. WHILE MEMBERS OF THE CITY COUNCIL MAY HAVE THE ABILITY TO ALLOCATE TRSSD FUNDS TO THE CONSTRUCTION OF A PUBLIC WORKS BUILDING IN THE SERVICE DISTRICT, SUCH AN ALLOCATION IS ILL-ADVISED IN THE FACE OF SERVICE DISTRICT OPPOSITION, AND MAY CONSTITUTE AN ABUSE OF THE DISCRETION AND AUTHORITY ENTRUSTED TO YOU BY THE SERVICE DISTRICT.
FOR THE REASONS SET FORTH ABOVE, AMONG OTHERS, THE UNDERSIGNED RESPECTFULLY REQUESTS THAT THE MAYOR AND THE CITY COUNCIL FORMALLY CEASE FURTHER ACTIVITIES ASSOCIATED WITH THE SITING AND CONSTRUCTION OF THE PUBLIC WORKS BUILDING IN THE SERVICE DISTRICT.
Updates
April 15, 2014
I spent the entire morning staring at the city site maps again and it just feels more reckless the more I look at the ground instability reports. People keep reaching out to say they feel ignored by the council but I promise I am still here working on the next set of questions to send over to them even if the inbox is becoming a bit of a nightmare to manage.
April 15, 2014
I was just checking the list and the sheer reach of this thing makes my head spin because I honestly thought it would just be a few neighbors grumbling in a group chat. It really hits differently seeing people speak up about these landslide risks and the complete lack of logic behind building that facility right in our backyard.
Reached 100 supporters
April 15, 2014
6 Comments
Why are we paying for a building that cant even be used half the time? This is just bad planning.
If the city council ignores the land safety reports just to build this eyesore they are gonna be in a lot of trouble when the ground shifts.
This makes zero sense. Why build a storage shed on literal unstable ground? Draper is throwing money away on a liability.
I moved to this area for the residential feel and this is just gonna bring heavy trucks and dust. Do not put this facility in our backyard.
Living right by this proposed site and the traffic and noise are a nightmare. Plus the landslide risk is no joke. Find somewhere else!
TOTAL WASTE OF TAXPAYER MONEY. We dont need this here.
Share this petition
Share this petition to help it reach more people.
Your share link
Petitions like this
Other petitions you might want to support
Scan to share
Anyone who scans this can sign the petition.
Why are we paying for a building that cant even be used half the time? This is just bad planning.