|
Post by burnerbill on Nov 16, 2013 14:18:02 GMT -4
KIDL is ramping it up! Just got their flyer courtesy of the USPS today. It begins with nice words about environment, agriculture, quality of life, avoid over crowding schools and traffic studies (at whose expense?) IMHO, when I read it over, it appears to be more efforts to stall, if not reduce or eliminate, growth on the island.
When I see words like: "preserve the Kent Island environment, its agriculture and quality of life", I wonder, how is agriculture in the mix? Are the developers running roughshod over farmland and taking them over against the farmer's wishes? Seems to me those property owners are selling their property in order for them to be developed. Is the KIDL saying this should not happen and tell farmers what to do with their land? Maybe the KIDL should become philanthropic and buy up all these properties and preserve them at no cost to the tax payer.
I moved here in 2002 and I do wonder where this group was when all the developments they indicate are in the development process? Four Seasons is over 14 years in development. How did they get passed to go forward? Additionally, the new county ordnance to limit lot sizes to current county codes does poke a big hole in the statement about 1,600+ vacant lots in SKI. The ordnance will reduce that to 650 or less.
Is there middle ground instead of simply saying "NO"? Big Box Battle? Seems more of a keep WalMart out of here than anything else. I do agree about Four Seasons and the unsightly 3 - 5 story condos being planned there. As I noted in an earlier thread... a development with large lots and million dollar homes would be much better than a bunch of homes on quarter acre or less and these condos.
There is middle ground and some growth, properly planned, can work.
|
|
|
Post by jackbquick on Nov 16, 2013 15:34:21 GMT -4
KIDL is ramping it up! Just got their flyer courtesy of the USPS today. It begins with nice words about environment, agriculture, quality of life, avoid over crowding schools and traffic studies (at whose expense?) IMHO, when I read it over, it appears to be more efforts to stall, if not reduce or eliminate, growth on the island. When I see words like: "preserve the Kent Island environment, its agriculture and quality of life", I wonder, how is agriculture in the mix? Are the developers running roughshod over farmland and taking them over against the farmer's wishes? Seems to me those property owners are selling their property in order for them to be developed. Is the KIDL saying this should not happen and tell farmers what to do with their land? Maybe the KIDL should become philanthropic and buy up all these properties and preserve them at no cost to the tax payer. I moved here in 2002 and I do wonder where this group was when all the developments they indicate are in the development process? Four Seasons is over 14 years in development. How did they get passed to go forward? Additionally, the new county ordnance to limit lot sizes to current county codes does poke a big hole in the statement about 1,600+ vacant lots in SKI. The ordnance will reduce that to 650 or less. Is there middle ground instead of simply saying "NO"? Big Box Battle? Seems more of a keep WalMart out of here than anything else. I do agree about Four Seasons and the unsightly 3 - 5 story condos being planned there. As I noted in an earlier thread... a development with large lots and million dollar homes would be much better than a bunch of homes on quarter acre or less and these condos. There is middle ground and some growth, properly planned, can work. Agreed. I also got the flyer. Kind of tired of hearing from this group of core 20 people who show up at every commissioner meeting to oppose any idea of growth. Smart or not smart, they say managed growth but I have never heard them support anything. If they do not want to live around growth, they should move to an area that is not the only urban population center in all of QAC. They wouldn't have this problem in the rural farmland area where any growth is now prohibited. The new tier maps means more growth going forward on KI. You can thank QACA and the CBF for that. They say they do not want growth on KI, but really, they mostly do not want rural sprawl. Growth in the only urban of QAC is not rural sprawl. Sorry but true.
|
|
|
Post by jackbquick on Nov 16, 2013 15:39:18 GMT -4
KIDL is ramping it up! Just got their flyer courtesy of the USPS today. It begins with nice words about environment, agriculture, quality of life, avoid over crowding schools and traffic studies (at whose expense?) IMHO, when I read it over, it appears to be more efforts to stall, if not reduce or eliminate, growth on the island. When I see words like: "preserve the Kent Island environment, its agriculture and quality of life", I wonder, how is agriculture in the mix? Are the developers running roughshod over farmland and taking them over against the farmer's wishes? Seems to me those property owners are selling their property in order for them to be developed. Is the KIDL saying this should not happen and tell farmers what to do with their land? Maybe the KIDL should become philanthropic and buy up all these properties and preserve them at no cost to the tax payer. I moved here in 2002 and I do wonder where this group was when all the developments they indicate are in the development process? Four Seasons is over 14 years in development. How did they get passed to go forward? Additionally, the new county ordnance to limit lot sizes to current county codes does poke a big hole in the statement about 1,600+ vacant lots in SKI. The ordnance will reduce that to 650 or less. Is there middle ground instead of simply saying "NO"? Big Box Battle? Seems more of a keep WalMart out of here than anything else. I do agree about Four Seasons and the unsightly 3 - 5 story condos being planned there. As I noted in an earlier thread... a development with large lots and million dollar homes would be much better than a bunch of homes on quarter acre or less and these condos. There is middle ground and some growth, properly planned, can work. Agreed. I also got the flyer. Kind of tired of hearing from this group of core 20 people who show up at every commissioner meeting to oppose any idea of growth. Smart or not smart, they say managed growth but I have never heard them support anything. If they do not want to live around growth, they should move to an area that is not the only urban population center in all of QAC. They wouldn't have this problem in the rural farmland area where any growth is now prohibited. The new tier maps means more growth going forward on KI. You can thank QACA and the CBF for that. QACA and CBF say they do not want growth on KI, but really, they mostly do not want rural sprawl. Growth in the only urban of QAC is not rural sprawl. Sorry but true.
|
|
|
Post by bchevy on Nov 16, 2013 19:14:51 GMT -4
Gotta love the "core 20 people" lines. I want to meet these folks cause they must be really powerful.
|
|
|
Post by jackbquick on Nov 16, 2013 19:24:10 GMT -4
Gotta love the "core 20 people" lines. I want to meet these folks cause they must be really powerful. Just look up the 4seasons public meeting and several county commissioner meetings recently on this topic. Fast forward to the end for press and public comments. Same faces every time. The proof is on the videos.
|
|
|
Post by bchevy on Nov 16, 2013 19:43:48 GMT -4
No need to look anything up. It takes more than 20 people to get anything done. When you post lines like that it takes away what little credibility might be in the rest of your post. IMO.
|
|
|
Post by alleycat on Nov 16, 2013 19:45:26 GMT -4
KIDL is ramping it up! Just got their flyer courtesy of the USPS today. It begins with nice words about environment, agriculture, quality of life, avoid over crowding schools and traffic studies (at whose expense?) IMHO, when I read it over, it appears to be more efforts to stall, if not reduce or eliminate, growth on the island. When I see words like: "preserve the Kent Island environment, its agriculture and quality of life", I wonder, how is agriculture in the mix? Are the developers running roughshod over farmland and taking them over against the farmer's wishes? Seems to me those property owners are selling their property in order for them to be developed. Is the KIDL saying this should not happen and tell farmers what to do with their land? Maybe the KIDL should become philanthropic and buy up all these properties and preserve them at no cost to the tax payer. I moved here in 2002 and I do wonder where this group was when all the developments they indicate are in the development process? Four Seasons is over 14 years in development. How did they get passed to go forward? Additionally, the new county ordnance to limit lot sizes to current county codes does poke a big hole in the statement about 1,600+ vacant lots in SKI. The ordnance will reduce that to 650 or less. Is there middle ground instead of simply saying "NO"? Big Box Battle? Seems more of a keep WalMart out of here than anything else. I do agree about Four Seasons and the unsightly 3 - 5 story condos being planned there. As I noted in an earlier thread... a development with large lots and million dollar homes would be much better than a bunch of homes on quarter acre or less and these condos. There is middle ground and some growth, properly planned, can work. Agreed. I also got the flyer. Kind of tired of hearing from this group of core 20 people who show up at every commissioner meeting to oppose any idea of growth. Smart or not smart, they say managed growth but I have never heard them support anything. If they do not want to live around growth, they should move to an area that is not the only urban population center in all of QAC. They wouldn't have this problem in the rural farmland area where any growth is now prohibited. The new tier maps means more growth going forward on KI. You can thank QACA and the CBF for that. They say they do not want growth on KI, but really, they mostly do not want rural sprawl. Growth in the only urban of QAC is not rural sprawl. Sorry but true. You realize that people who came here some years ago came here because they did not want to live near growth. This is not the only urban population center, but I guess people like you have made it so. Don't blame the people who came here or were here not wanting urbanization on the island from STILL not wanting it.
|
|
|
Post by jackbquick on Nov 16, 2013 20:06:55 GMT -4
Agreed. I also got the flyer. Kind of tired of hearing from this group of core 20 people who show up at every commissioner meeting to oppose any idea of growth. Smart or not smart, they say managed growth but I have never heard them support anything. If they do not want to live around growth, they should move to an area that is not the only urban population center in all of QAC. They wouldn't have this problem in the rural farmland area where any growth is now prohibited. The new tier maps means more growth going forward on KI. You can thank QACA and the CBF for that. They say they do not want growth on KI, but really, they mostly do not want rural sprawl. Growth in the only urban of QAC is not rural sprawl. Sorry but true. You realize that people who came here some years ago came here because they did not want to live near growth. This is not the only urban population center, but I guess people like you have made it so. Don't blame the people who came here or were here not wanting urbanization on the island from STILL not wanting it. Ok don't blame people like me who do not mind sharing the island witha few more people who will hopefully bring support fore more services and choices when they come
|
|
|
Post by jackbquick on Nov 16, 2013 20:11:24 GMT -4
No need to look anything up. It takes more than 20 people to get anything done. When you post lines like that it takes away what little credibility might be in the rest of your post. IMO. Not really if you constantly complain enough. At least that is what I have witnessed the last few years.
|
|
|
Post by alleycat on Nov 16, 2013 20:26:48 GMT -4
You realize that people who came here some years ago came here because they did not want to live near growth. This is not the only urban population center, but I guess people like you have made it so. Don't blame the people who came here or were here not wanting urbanization on the island from STILL not wanting it. Ok don't blame people like me who do not mind sharing the island witha few more people who will hopefully bring support fore more services and choices when they come Depends on your definition of sharing the island. Don't mind sharing. DO mind potential Enron,ental damage, poor planning for access, on and on. No need to repeat all that.
|
|
|
Post by jackbquick on Nov 17, 2013 10:56:26 GMT -4
Ok don't blame people like me who do not mind sharing the island witha few more people who will hopefully bring support fore more services and choices when they come Depends on your definition of sharing the island. Don't mind sharing. DO mind potential Enron,ental damage, poor planning for access, on and on. No need to repeat all that. According to the Secretary of Enviorment, the new developement will not pollute more than the existing farm already does. Unfortunately, developement pollutes less than farms and that is just a fact. Sad but true!
|
|
|
Post by burnerbill on Nov 17, 2013 11:50:06 GMT -4
bchevy... it may not be a "core of 20 people", but, what I have found is most opponents to stuff happening on KI either do not live on the island or in the affected areas. For example, according to the Bay Times, most of the folks who spoke against the project were off islanders or did not live in that area. Basically, we have a group of people who think they know what is best for everyone else regardless of what everyone else thinks.
|
|
|
Post by bchevy on Nov 17, 2013 16:39:16 GMT -4
bchevy... it may not be a "core of 20 people", but, what I have found is most opponents to stuff happening on KI either do not live on the island or in the affected areas. For example, according to the Bay Times, most of the folks who spoke against the project were off islanders or did not live in that area. Basically, we have a group of people who think they know what is best for everyone else regardless of what everyone else thinks. Post your sources or you just sound like you're babbling. How you you know where these people are from? How have you "found" your info.? At the last KIHS meeting on the big issues here, the vast majority of locals speaking were against it, and the majority (almost all) of the FEW speakers for it, were from out of town, most of those were brought in by the contractor KHOV. What we have are people speaking out for what THEY want. That's the great part of our country we can speak our mind. What you claim is very close to what you preach, you preach YOUR opinions and want everyone else to hop on your train. Sorry Bub, doesn't work that way.
|
|
|
Post by bchevy on Nov 17, 2013 16:44:24 GMT -4
Depends on your definition of sharing the island. Don't mind sharing. DO mind potential Enron,ental damage, poor planning for access, on and on. No need to repeat all that. According to the Secretary of Enviorment, the new developement will not pollute more than the existing farm already does. Unfortunately, developement pollutes less than farms and that is just a fact. Sad but true! Yes, believe the government, they have all of our best interests in mind, Right? I don't believe it for a minute. I'm pretty sure all the blacktop in the developed areas don't soak in any rain, and run off a lot more crap into our bay from the over fertilized yards. MY OPINION Check out the muddy runoff STILL coming through Bay City from the Schools across the street every time it rains..... we didn't see that when the farm was there.
|
|
|
Post by jackbquick on Nov 17, 2013 16:58:06 GMT -4
According to the Secretary of Enviorment, the new developement will not pollute more than the existing farm already does. Unfortunately, developement pollutes less than farms and that is just a fact. Sad but true! Yes, believe the government, they have all of our best interests in mind, Right? I don't believe it for a minute. I'm pretty sure all the blacktop in the developed areas don't soak in any rain, and run off a lot more crap into our bay from the over fertilized yards. MY OPINION Check out the muddy runoff STILL coming through Bay City from the Schools across the street every time it rains..... we didn't see that when the farm was there. On the 4seasons, the gov't seems to be against it so I was surprised that the Secretary said that. Now the gov't saying that all the fertalizers and such seep into the soils over time and eventually the soils become saturated and can't filter properly anymore. It is like you can't win either way. I guess the strongest supporters of the environment do not want either. Funny that the local health department was saying the same thing about the saturated soils on SKI and yet it continues to get ignored.
|
|
|
Post by burnerbill on Nov 17, 2013 21:02:18 GMT -4
bchevy.. yes, MY OPINIONS.. never said you HAVE to hop on board. Putting words in my mouth again??!! Opinions can be freely expressed and you can disagree with them, simple as that. Instead you attack chiding the poster as being uninformed etc.. That is your tact. Anyway....
As for folks who are against something that are not residents in the impacted area, is what I mean. It was in the Bay Times article reporting on the public meeting held for the Four Seasons development. They were quoting folks who did not live in that area. I live in SKI, for me to speak against Four Seasons wouldn't make sense other than my having some other agenda to be against it. No different than someone who lives up island who doesn't want the sewer to run to SKI.
|
|
|
Post by alleycat on Nov 17, 2013 21:45:04 GMT -4
I and maybe others don't give a rat's a$$ about sewer running down to u. I don't know how long you've been here, but Hovnanian used to BUS people in here from his other developments in other states to tell everybody he how they lived in happy hollow and we should, too. You have ur facts wrong. See if the bay times has an archives section you can spend some time with, on this issue, on the Walmart issue, etc.
|
|
|
Post by burnerbill on Nov 17, 2013 23:16:47 GMT -4
alleycat, good, so when opinions here are expressed in any manner about this issue, you shall remain mum. I, as well as every other resident in SKI who will get it will be paying for it. Not you with higher taxes the opponents claim. Don't know anything about the Hovnanian busing issue, no comment. Four Seasons, my opinion - does not need to be a 1000+ home development and from the drawings I've seen, it will be a blot on the horizon from Rt 50. It can be a nice cluster of high end homes on large lots instead. WalMart, I have seen here comments that WalMart was shot down then K-Mart is built. Before my time.
|
|
|
Post by markp on Nov 18, 2013 13:34:54 GMT -4
I love it when people use "I moved to the area to get away from growth". If you're not from the area to begin with... you're part of the growth.
|
|
|
Post by burnerbill on Nov 18, 2013 13:46:17 GMT -4
markp... referring to alleycat's comments? I do not think anyone here said they moved here to get away from growth.
With that said, there is going to be some growth around here. For example, what would occur when the sewer is run down to SKI, will occur within existing communities without the need to create new developments. It is the new developments that is getting everyone's ire up. Overall, it is a matter of how it can be achieved and to the satisfaction of most. Can't say all as there will always be someone who wants to close the bridges on each side of the island to anyone who wants to move here.
|
|
|
Post by ravens20 on Nov 18, 2013 13:56:23 GMT -4
I love it when people use "I moved to the area to get away from growth". If you're not from the area to begin with... you're part of the growth. Uhh... not if you moved into an existing house.
|
|
|
Post by lainey on Nov 18, 2013 15:40:33 GMT -4
Depends on your definition of sharing the island. Don't mind sharing. DO mind potential Enron,ental damage, poor planning for access, on and on. No need to repeat all that. According to the Secretary of Enviorment, the new developement will not pollute more than the existing farm already does. Unfortunately, developement pollutes less than farms and that is just a fact. Sad but true! Now Jack, come on you know that is not true. I bet the land your house sits on right now is more polluted with you there than it was as a farm. If you mind environmental damage so much, you should move. Failing septics are very bad for the environment. Lets use your lot as the first one to get combined with someone else's. Maybe this new ordnance isn't so bad afterall......
|
|
|
Post by burnerbill on Nov 18, 2013 15:57:04 GMT -4
Lainey... so, are you in that crowd when an "expert" testifies to something you do not believe, that expert is outright wrong? Differing opinions are one thing, expert opinion, who may have studies and the like to back them up, is another.
Also, you are probably correct about on-site septic... it is more polluting than farms may be since the high ground water is invading septic fields and carrying that effluent into the bay. This is why running the sewer line is critical. So, if the CBF is behind that, which I believe they are, fight Four Seasons and support the SKI project to "Save the Bay". Right?
|
|
|
Post by jackbquick on Nov 18, 2013 16:21:48 GMT -4
According to the Secretary of Enviorment, the new developement will not pollute more than the existing farm already does. Unfortunately, developement pollutes less than farms and that is just a fact. Sad but true! Now Jack, come on you know that is not true. I bet the land your house sits on right now is more polluted with you there than it was as a farm. If you mind environmental damage so much, you should move. Failing septics are very bad for the environment. Lets use your lot as the first one to get combined with someone else's. Maybe this new ordnance isn't so bad afterall...... I don't think they are asking neighbors who own homes to combine them but I might consider since my neighbors wife is really hot.
|
|
|
Post by jackbquick on Nov 18, 2013 16:22:04 GMT -4
According to the Secretary of Enviorment, the new developement will not pollute more than the existing farm already does. Unfortunately, developement pollutes less than farms and that is just a fact. Sad but true! Now Jack, come on you know that is not true. I bet the land your house sits on right now is more polluted with you there than it was as a farm. If you mind environmental damage so much, you should move. Failing septics are very bad for the environment. Lets use your lot as the first one to get combined with someone else's. Maybe this new ordnance isn't so bad afterall...... I don't think they are asking neighbors who own homes to combine them but I might consider since my neighbors wife is really hot.
|
|