11. REZ01192022-6257 (CC Ord) Community Development Department requesting Council action regarding a zone change application (File #REZ01192022-6257, Sugarcreek) submitted by Plumb Holdings LLC, proposing that 66.5 acres at 8968 S. 1300 E. be rezoned to the R-1-10 Zone.
Dear Council Member,
We are Brad and Jane Erwin and we live at 8727 Pebble Hills Drive.
We are writing to you concerning the new Sugarcreek Development.
We are not opposed to the rezoning for a new housing development, but we are very much opposed to the road on the proposed plan from the developer that dumps the new development into our existing subdivision.
We believe the increased traffic into our neighborhood will create a very dangerous situation at what is already a blind corner. We believe that cutting a road into a very unstable, sandy slope will undermine all of the existing houses on the south side of Pebble Hills Circle. We believe the necessary retaining walls will be unsightly and prone to graffiti. On a personal level, a road there would create roads on three sides of our house.
The current area beside our house has been an eyesore for many years. Our family has tried to maintain it; we have cut down and killed weeds and cleaned out trash that has ben dumped there for over 35 years as the previous owner chose not to maintain it. It is currently fenced off and signed “No Trespassing”, but we still try to keep the weeds down. We are the guilty party who planted Virginia creeper on the fence to provide a bit of greenery.
We have always enjoyed the wildlife; there are many squirrels, quail, numerous varieties of birds, white-tailed hawks, and harmless garden snakes that make this area their home. We would miss them very much; the gophers not so much.
We would love to see this area used as a green space or an area for trails that both neighborhoods could enjoy. We believe this would help keep Sandy a friendly, family city everyone would be happy to call home.
Thank you for your time.
Brad and Jane Erwin
My name is Pankaj Patel, and I live at 1094 E. Pebble Hills Circle.
I am writing this letter to express some concerns I have regarding the Sugarcreek development. I have serious concerns with the road adjoining Sugarcreek with Pebble Hills Road next to the LDS ward. Although I am not opposed to the development of residential housing, I believe it would be a mistake to build the road between the two subdivisions. I have two major concerns regarding the proposal submitted to Sandy City.
Firstly, the road is unnecessary and would create more traffic in a subdivision that is already short on outlets to the larger main roads. This would be especially problematic in the winter months. Our neighborhood is one the last to be cleared by the street plows, making it difficult to get in or out of our area in even moderate amounts of snow. I have more than once helped free a car that was stuck and needed to be shoveled out. Increasing traffic would only increase the odds of an accident where a driver could hit a stuck car.
Second, the road would create a blind spot for incoming traffic. The narrowness of the road combined with the high retaining wall that would need to be built would create a dangerous situation with limited visibility. People by nature pay less attention while driving on smaller residential roads because the speed limit is lower. Introducing visibility hazards in such an area, with playing children, compounds the risk of an accident occurring.
I would much rather that area, which is being proposed for the new road, be instead developed into a walking trail. I am in support of any one of the three proposals submitted by my neighbors, all of which I believe would create a lesser traffic impact and keep the area a safe neighborhood to live in.
My name is Gary Michaels and I live at 8720 Pebble Hills Dr. I am concerned about the proposed road connection from Pebble Hills Dr and Sugar Creek.
Due to recent developments, the area has experienced increased population, thus increasing the congestion, noise and traffic. The proposed connection would certainly add a heavier burden to what was once a quiet neighborhood.
The proposed connection would require a waiver since the property width in insufficient. Waivers should ONLY be granted when NO other alternative is available. Since the project has not been started, there is sufficient time to seriously consider other alternatives (which have already been suggested).
I would also reiterate that the proposed connection would be a blind intersection, with increased potential danger for cars and pedestrians. I support the idea of creating a walking path in combination with open spaces. Sandy is quickly "filling in" and open spaces are a premium. Where they do exist, property values increase and community asthetics improve. The walking path can be designed to allow foot traffic and be opened for emergency use. It would also make the waiver unnecessary.
I look forward to the possibilities Sugar Creek presents and adding open buffer spaces along with a foot path in place of a potentially dangerous intersection would be a welcome change to an ever increasing suburban to urban shift.
My name is John De Jong. I live at 1103 E. Pebble Hills Circle. I am writing you this letter as a concerned resident about the Sugarcreek development.
It concerns the road adjoining Sugarcreek with Pebble Hills road next to the LDS ward. Although I am for building residential housing, I think it is a mistake to build the road between the two subdivisions.
I have two concerns about the proposal submitted to Sandy City.
The road would create a blind spot for cars coming though. It would be too narrow for street code and create accidents waiting to happen. With the high retaining wall that would need to be built and children in the area, it would be easy to overlook them. My son was hit by an automobile at the age of three in a similar situation of an adjoining road. That is why I moved to this neighborhood because there is less traffic.
The road is not needed here and would create more traffic in a subdivision that does not have a lot of outlets to the main roads. This would be troublesome, even more so in the winter months. We are one of the last neighborhoods to see the street plows and it makes it very difficult to get in and out of our streets. Even small hills create a problem.
That small area that you are proposing a connecting road would be better suited for a walking trail. This would create some green space which would be helpful for such a large development and not take away too much of your land. I am in favor of any one of the three proposals submitted by my neighbors, which would create less traffic impact and keep the area a safe living neighborhood.
Thank you for reading this and considering my request.
Dear Council Member,
We are Brad and Jane Erwin and we live at 8727 Pebble Hills Drive.
We are writing to you concerning the new Sugarcreek Development.
We are not opposed to the rezoning for a new housing development, but we are very much opposed to the road on the proposed plan from the developer that dumps the new development into our existing subdivision.
We believe the increased traffic into our neighborhood will create a very dangerous situation at what is already a blind corner. We believe that cutting a road into a very unstable, sandy slope will undermine all of the existing houses on the south side of Pebble Hills Circle. We believe the necessary retaining walls will be unsightly and prone to graffiti. On a personal level, a road there would create roads on three sides of our house.
The current area beside our house has been an eyesore for many years. Our family has tried to maintain it; we have cut down and killed weeds and cleaned out trash that has ben dumped there for over 35 years as the previous owner chose not to maintain it. It is currently fenced off and signed “No Trespassing”, but we still try to keep the weeds down. We are the guilty party who planted Virginia creeper on the fence to provide a bit of greenery.
We have always enjoyed the wildlife; there are many squirrels, quail, numerous varieties of birds, white-tailed hawks, and harmless garden snakes that make this area their home. We would miss them very much; the gophers not so much.
We would love to see this area used as a green space or an area for trails that both neighborhoods could enjoy. We believe this would help keep Sandy a friendly, family city everyone would be happy to call home.
Thank you for your time.
Brad and Jane Erwin
My name is Pankaj Patel, and I live at 1094 E. Pebble Hills Circle.
I am writing this letter to express some concerns I have regarding the Sugarcreek development. I have serious concerns with the road adjoining Sugarcreek with Pebble Hills Road next to the LDS ward. Although I am not opposed to the development of residential housing, I believe it would be a mistake to build the road between the two subdivisions. I have two major concerns regarding the proposal submitted to Sandy City.
Firstly, the road is unnecessary and would create more traffic in a subdivision that is already short on outlets to the larger main roads. This would be especially problematic in the winter months. Our neighborhood is one the last to be cleared by the street plows, making it difficult to get in or out of our area in even moderate amounts of snow. I have more than once helped free a car that was stuck and needed to be shoveled out. Increasing traffic would only increase the odds of an accident where a driver could hit a stuck car.
Second, the road would create a blind spot for incoming traffic. The narrowness of the road combined with the high retaining wall that would need to be built would create a dangerous situation with limited visibility. People by nature pay less attention while driving on smaller residential roads because the speed limit is lower. Introducing visibility hazards in such an area, with playing children, compounds the risk of an accident occurring.
I would much rather that area, which is being proposed for the new road, be instead developed into a walking trail. I am in support of any one of the three proposals submitted by my neighbors, all of which I believe would create a lesser traffic impact and keep the area a safe neighborhood to live in.
Thank you for your time
Pankaj Patel
My name is Gary Michaels and I live at 8720 Pebble Hills Dr. I am concerned about the proposed road connection from Pebble Hills Dr and Sugar Creek.
Due to recent developments, the area has experienced increased population, thus increasing the congestion, noise and traffic. The proposed connection would certainly add a heavier burden to what was once a quiet neighborhood.
The proposed connection would require a waiver since the property width in insufficient. Waivers should ONLY be granted when NO other alternative is available. Since the project has not been started, there is sufficient time to seriously consider other alternatives (which have already been suggested).
I would also reiterate that the proposed connection would be a blind intersection, with increased potential danger for cars and pedestrians. I support the idea of creating a walking path in combination with open spaces. Sandy is quickly "filling in" and open spaces are a premium. Where they do exist, property values increase and community asthetics improve. The walking path can be designed to allow foot traffic and be opened for emergency use. It would also make the waiver unnecessary.
I look forward to the possibilities Sugar Creek presents and adding open buffer spaces along with a foot path in place of a potentially dangerous intersection would be a welcome change to an ever increasing suburban to urban shift.
My name is John De Jong. I live at 1103 E. Pebble Hills Circle. I am writing you this letter as a concerned resident about the Sugarcreek development.
It concerns the road adjoining Sugarcreek with Pebble Hills road next to the LDS ward. Although I am for building residential housing, I think it is a mistake to build the road between the two subdivisions.
I have two concerns about the proposal submitted to Sandy City.
The road would create a blind spot for cars coming though. It would be too narrow for street code and create accidents waiting to happen. With the high retaining wall that would need to be built and children in the area, it would be easy to overlook them. My son was hit by an automobile at the age of three in a similar situation of an adjoining road. That is why I moved to this neighborhood because there is less traffic.
The road is not needed here and would create more traffic in a subdivision that does not have a lot of outlets to the main roads. This would be troublesome, even more so in the winter months. We are one of the last neighborhoods to see the street plows and it makes it very difficult to get in and out of our streets. Even small hills create a problem.
That small area that you are proposing a connecting road would be better suited for a walking trail. This would create some green space which would be helpful for such a large development and not take away too much of your land. I am in favor of any one of the three proposals submitted by my neighbors, which would create less traffic impact and keep the area a safe living neighborhood.
Thank you for reading this and considering my request.
John De Jong