pf_01877 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home

proposed rent for the new development. It must be asked if the development can sustain this rent differential. The developers state that they expect the majority of the renters to be seniors. Roseville currently has two other apartments specifically targeted to seniors which have subtantial vacancy rates because of the high rents. Do we need yet another? If the rents do go down, will the corollary of the developers statement hold true - lower rents will bring a lower quality renter, one more prone to be active in various illicit activities. The experience in other large apartment complexes would seeem to support this. We do not need this less desireable resident in Roseville. 4. Parks and Recreation Center: The city seems to find a significant amount of interest in this project because of the tax increment financing of a Parks and Recreation Center. Roseville has excellent parks and facilities today. Do we need another such facility, one that comes at such a high cost in many other ways? If indeed the City is interested in going forward with this project,".7it should be put before the voters of the city and decided in a general referendum rather than by a relative few with vested interests. 5. Aesthetics of the Neighborhood: Roseville is a very attractive city because it has placed a high value of proper zoning and the maintanence of high values for the aesthetics of its neighborhoods. The proposed development is in direct opposition to these long held values and will definitely detract from this specific area and from the value of Roseville in general. The impact on neighboring properties has not been adequately addressed by the development plan. It is virtually impossible to mitigate the impact of a three story apartment building by any method, let alone a few trees. We have lived in Roseville for ten years. We find this to be a truly enjoyable community, one that we do not want to see destroyed by ill -proposed plans designed for the short term gain of a developer based in,another city entirely. We were recently faced with the decision as to whether to move or enlarge our current home to meet the needs of our growing family. After much looking, we chose to stay in Roseville and put an addition on our home. We did this precisely because of the quality of life in Roseville. I want to make it clear that I am not against the development of the Concordia property in an appropriate manner. I would prefer to see this property primarily devoted to additional single family homes on adequate lots that would maintain the character of the neighborhood. I AM STRONGLY OPPOSED TO THE CURRENT DEVELOPMENT PLAN AND ASK YOU TO DENY THE BUILDERS USE OF THIS PROPERTY AS IT IS CURRENTLY DEFINED.