|
Post by markp on Nov 18, 2013 16:36:32 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. Uhh... only if you bought an estate sale where the people passed away or they themselves moved out of the area. If you a buy a home from someone and they move in next door... it is still two where there was only one.
|
|
|
Post by ravens20 on Nov 18, 2013 18:56:22 GMT -4
Uhh... not if you moved into an existing house. Uhh... only if you bought an estate sale where the people passed away or they themselves moved out of the area. If you a buy a home from someone and they move in next door... it is still two where there was only one. Then I would not be the one contributing to the growth, that would be the person that decided to have a house built and sell their existing home to me. It's none of my business where they are moving anyways.
|
|
|
Post by alleycat on Nov 18, 2013 22:57:27 GMT -4
Uhh... not if you moved into an existing house. Uhh... only if you bought an estate sale where the people passed away or they themselves moved out of the area. If you a buy a home from someone and they move in next door... it is still two where there was only one. Well, exactly what I did. Moved I to existing house. Five people moved out of area, two moved in. So, yes, moved here to avoid growth. What did u do?
|
|
|
Post by alleycat on Nov 18, 2013 23:16:57 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. Not sure what you are getting at here. I don't think I have commented on the ski sewer issue. I paid a bundle for mine, was forced to as a matter of fact. If you guys need it, you need it. I expect you to pay for it. You can expect to have lots of new neighbors once it's in. The busing is true. It could be a development with fewer houses. However, I'm not sure, but I think developing that land at all was considered environmentally problematic. I wonder why if everyone is so hopped up about keeping $$ in qac, that they're welcoming with open arms some developer from elsewhere. Walmart and Kmart were ort of in a bidding war, concurrently with efforts to keep Walmart out. The Walmart issues concerned not only the probable loss of small local businesses, but also the original p,an to put a superwalmart at the foot of the bridge. Much of the discussion was not wanting that to be the new welcome to qac. In addition, there were many many environmental issue. Walmart did not opt to relocate, and eventually dropped out. Kmart moved in, as a much smaller store in a much less objectionable area.
|
|
|
Post by bluecrabber on Nov 19, 2013 8:38:09 GMT -4
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. Man, the neighbor's wife must really be hot!! You are stuttering with double posts!
|
|
|
Post by markp on Nov 19, 2013 12:24:53 GMT -4
I was born at Easton Memorial to parents that are from families that have been here for generations. Thanks for asking. The home that I currently own was an estate sale of another person who's family has resided here for generations. Keep thinking the way you do, it's only getting more crowded when your neighbor moves in from another region, but it was fine when you did yourself. Hypocrisy, you're in deep enough to the point you cannot see it.
|
|
|
Post by ravens20 on Nov 19, 2013 13:13:34 GMT -4
I was born at Easton Memorial to parents that are from families that have been here for generations. Thanks for asking. The home that I currently own was an estate sale of another person who's family has resided here for generations. Keep thinking the way you do, it's only getting more crowded when your neighbor moves in from another region, but it was fine when you did yourself. Hypocrisy, you're in deep enough to the point you cannot see it. So your parents contributed to the growth by having children that stayed in the area. I hope you didn't have any kids otherwise you contributed as well. Unless of course you forced them to move to the Western shore.
|
|
|
Post by lainey on Nov 19, 2013 15:35:33 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? No burner, I am not of that crowd. I also don't blindly follow the so called experts. Everybody has an angle and some spin. Here is my issue with SKI getting sewer: Its not just sewer and this is not a new development. There are communities with failing septics, communities with a ton of vacant lots that are currently not buildable. The lots are not buildable because they wont hold water. Adding sewer is not going to make the lot hold more water, only pull sewer away. If we put in sewer, those lots should now all be buildable. I don't know what code currently exists that differentiates one unbuildable lot from another unbuildable lot. To the best of my knowledge, the only thing holding the developers off right now is the perc test. No perc, no build. I have no problems with current residents having sewer, truly I don't. The rub comes when all those other existing lots want building permits. They should be granted permits as the only reason to not allow building was solved with sewer. Now I have 2800 more homes down there. Im using your numbers from early, you said 3500 lots. Route 8 as currently built will need to be widened to four lanes from the current two. We can also now plan on needing another school or maybe two. Now you are impacting my wallet. Now you are spending my state tax dollars (State route 8) and my county tax dollars (school construction) Ive got folks like JackBquick complaining that the hookups without the new neighbors is too expensive, and then there is me, saying I don't want to fund the roads and schools that have to come with your sewer. There is no developer to widen the road, the developer has been long gone. When my street was built, I and my other 45 neighbors, we paid the developer to build it. We paid for our hookups and there was no new school for the impact our 46 homes had on the county, although we did pay school impact fees anyway. We are infill to existing infrastructure. SKI requires additional infrastructure to support the existing vacant lots if sewer is run. That is my issue.
|
|
|
Post by burnerbill on Nov 19, 2013 22:11:45 GMT -4
Lainey, at all the SKI hearings and in the materials about the project, the number of lots available on which to build homes in the 8 impacted communities is 1,615. I believe that is fairly close to the actual number. There are no other developments planned at all below Bay City.
The ordnance is designed to get all lots to abide by the current county code of each lot being at least 20,000 s.f. on which to build (NC20). I do not know where you got 2800 more homes or even 3500 lots, I have never mentioned either number. Another "red herring" by the No Sewer folks? All funds for running the sewer come from the users, which you know. Rt 8 is a state road and according to studies, the current school system in place can accept the additional student load. Now, when you adjust for this new ordnance, when and if passed, we will obviously see a drastic reduction in the potential new home going up in SKI and fewer possible students. Read the flyer I attached.
One more thing... the scare mongers are making it look like all these new homes will pop up over night. Even now, with Bay City and Cloverfields having had sewer and water for over 25 years, I think, correct me if wrong, these two areas still have lots on which to build. So, why do people think the buildout in SKI will be more and faster? County estimates it will take almost 20 years before sewer service is connected to all 8 communities.
|
|
|
Post by lainey on Nov 20, 2013 13:30:57 GMT -4
Burner, I went back to the other thread on the proposed new ordnance to get the 3500, but I see my mistake, it is 3500 total platted lots down there. No red herrings, no scare tactics, just an honest mistake. Ok, so either way, 1615 new homes down there in the existing communities will still need to widen Route 8(state tax dollars that are not there and QAC will never see) and the potential for atleast one more school (state and county dollars from all, not just SKI). I don't know what studies you are looking at that say we can accept more students in our schools. Our ninth grade no longer fits at Kent Island High School. A look at all the portables around the schools says differently. I lived here when sewer came into the communities of Harbor View, Cloverfields and Bay City. There may be a few odd lots left in those communities but I know they exploded darn near overnight. We were told back then they would cap the number of building permits issued to control growth. It didn't happen. I was here, I witnessed the explosion. What has changed to make this time different? Harbor View got it first. 200 low income homes got plopped right down within a year or two of the sewer. Whole new streets went into Harbor View. Now they are saying they are going to make everyone have 20000 sq feet to be a buildable lot? What happens to the folks who have 15,000 square foot lots? Are they just SOL? They could have owned those lots with building hopes for the last 30 years. Smells like it is ripe for lawsuits to me. And then we need to think about the farms for sale along route 8 and the housing that will go in once sewer is added. How can you stop development if there is existing infrastructure? Right now, I would venture to guess that those farms have not been sold because developers know that land wont perc. Right now, no perc, no build. Maybe that is why there are no currently planned developments....
|
|
|
Post by lainey on Nov 20, 2013 13:33:37 GMT -4
Wow, delayed reaction to create post.....sorry for repeating myself 3 times....
|
|
|
Post by jackbquick on Nov 20, 2013 14:18:18 GMT -4
Wow, delayed reaction to create post.....sorry for repeating myself 3 times.... Lainey, if the build-out was limited to 650, reduced from 1, 600, would you still be against resolving this problem or are you dead set on zero new homes?
|
|
|
Post by lainey on Nov 20, 2013 14:55:15 GMT -4
If the buildout was limited, I would be much more supportive. The problem with that is just like this new ordnance, how in the world can that happen? All I see is "lawyer bait" in this new ordnance. Somebody is going to lose out on their property rights and only the developers who can afford to buy multiple lots will win. I have never been against SKI sewer. I am against widening Route 8 and building a new school that unfortunately will have to accompany that sewer line. Limiting the buildout after sewer did not happen in the past and no one has done anything to change that for this time.
|
|
|
Post by emsguru on Nov 20, 2013 14:57:03 GMT -4
Wow, delayed reaction to create post.....sorry for repeating myself 3 times.... Lainey, if the build-out was limited to 650, reduced from 1, 600, would you still be against resolving this problem or are you dead set on zero new homes? I have to agree with Lainey just because I would be pretty angry If I had a few lots down there that never perc'd and when sewer does come I'm told I cannot build. Who decides who can and cannot build? I don't see a way its decided that's fair and doesn't result in a major lawsuit.
|
|
|
Post by lainey on Nov 20, 2013 15:04:15 GMT -4
From what I remember at that time, it has been awhile, when cloverfields got its sewer, the county had some grand plan to only allow say 400 homes to be built in year one. The builders and developers rushed in to get all the permits. Harry One-lotowner with retirement dreams of the shore was told to get on the waiting list for a permit. The lawyers got called in and next thing you know, no one is controlling growth and limiting permits. And just that fast, Cloverfields went from a community of about 50 homes to over 900.
Jackbquick, what is your lot size? are you over 20,000 square feet?
|
|
|
Post by jackbquick on Nov 20, 2013 16:51:08 GMT -4
From what I remember at that time, it has been awhile, when cloverfields got its sewer, the county had some grand plan to only allow say 400 homes to be built in year one. The builders and developers rushed in to get all the permits. Harry One-lotowner with retirement dreams of the shore was told to get on the waiting list for a permit. The lawyers got called in and next thing you know, no one is controlling growth and limiting permits. And just that fast, Cloverfields went from a community of about 50 homes to over 900. Jackbquick, what is your lot size? are you over 20,000 square feet? Lainey, My home would not meet the new 20, 000 sf ordinance but I do not think they will force me to tear down my house. I was hoping for some infill so those new owners could share the cost and keep my bill reasonable.
|
|
|
Post by burnerbill on Nov 20, 2013 17:32:15 GMT -4
Lainey and emsguru... I do see your point about what the new ordnance does, but, it is bringing up to present standards the lot sizes which could be approved to build a home plus set back requirements etc.. Some lots under 20K sf may be able to build if set back requirements are met. Are you implying that if a person bought their lot in 1980 that the home they could put on the lot can be based on the codes of 1980 and not current codes? If that is the case, I should be able to go to the county and say I can expand my home since it was built BEFORE the current set back requirements. Should I sue?
Secondarily, the wording of the SKI plan and the expansion of the sewage plant to provide services to SKI are such that NO OTHER developments, other than those currently in place, can be served by the plant in SKI. If any farms are sold to developers, it will not be to build and be served by the sewer. Besides, due to the water table and other health issues in SKI, my understanding is no new homes can be built which require on site septic. Correct me if I am wrong.
Thirdly, one hopes the lessons learned from the buildout fiasco described in Bay City and all will prevent the "over night" popping up of all types of homes. I would like to think the homes that will go in will be on larger lots, created by the new ordnance, and of higher value and quality, not of the "low income" variety.
A last point... this mess is totally the fault of the county in allowing lots of insufficient size to be created and sold with the buyer being "promised" they could build on their lot when sewer comes.
|
|