Laserfiche WebLink
~ 1. . ° ^ •� ^ = �^ . <br /> . <br />. ^ <br /> September 21 , 1987 � <br /> ` <br /> Springfield Town Board and Planning Committee <br />{ 'Our property is adjacent to the Wyngaard property whose rezoning <br /> and platting was discussed at a public hearing of the Springfield <br /> Town Board on Tuesday~ September 15. While we are not opposed to <br /> the rezoning or platting of the adjacent 40 acres, we are <br /> opposed , as are all other property owners on Pine Cone Circle <br /> except Mr. Wyngaard , to the extension of Pine Cone Circle into <br /> the proposed plat. <br /> We left Tuesday night 's meeting with the concern that even though <br /> the board was meeting to "hold a public hearing" , the members of <br /> the board and the Planning Committee had already made up their <br /> minds in favor of 1 . the rezoning of the Wyngaard property, and <br /> 2. the extension of Pine Cone Circle into the proposed plat. <br /> The extension of Pine Cone Circle is not in the best interests of <br /> all of the current property owners and taxpayers of Pine Cone <br /> Circle, with the exception of Mr. Wyngaard. Pine Cone Circle is <br /> a quiet cul de sac. The current residents, including the <br /> Wyngaard family, value the quality of life we enjoy by not being <br /> a part of a major subdivision. Mrs. Wyngaard has told us that <br /> they purchased as much property as they could to preserve their <br /> privacy. . <br /> The Wyngaards now are offering their property for sale. This is <br /> their right. Our rights should not be sacrificed for the ' <br /> Wyngaard 's profit. <br /> . <br /> By developing the 40 acres into 22 residential plots, the Town of <br /> Springfield will profit from the increased tax base. Our rights <br /> should not be sacrificed for the Town 's profit. <br /> It may be easy to access the 40-acre proposed plat through Pine <br /> Cone Circle. But because the current property owners are <br /> unanimously opposed to the extension of Pine Cone Circle (with <br /> l <br /> the exception of Mr. Wyngaard) , we appea l to our elected board <br /> to fully investigate and consider alternative access. <br /> Southern access through the Enchanted Valley subdivision would be <br /> consistent with curr.ent high density land use This access would <br /> be through an "outlot" which has been designated as permanently <br /> non-buildable and has only one adjacent neighbor. Traffic would <br /> be directed onto Airport Road which has traffic control at <br /> Highway 12. Traffic from Pine Cone Circle would use Schneider <br /> Road which does not have signal lights at Highway 12, and is <br /> already a congested corner. The potential additional tax dollars <br /> gained from the new 40 acre plat should be compared with the <br /> costs of upgrading Schneider and perhaps Enchanted Valley roads. <br /> 1 <br />