THE BOTTOM LINE
THE BUILDING SITE IS PROBLEMATIC WITH ACCESS, TRAFFIC CONCENTRATION, TRAFFIC SAFETY & DRAINAGE
THIS IS NOT THE AVERAGE DEVELOPMENT SITE, AND SHOULD NOT BE TREATED AS ONE
THE COSTS ARE HIGH FOR MANY.
PLYMOUTH NEEDS A GOLF COURSE
DEVELOPMENT DESTROYS AN ASSET THAT CAN NEVER BE REPLACED
LOSING THIS LAND DETRACTS FROM THE COMMUNITY. THE ADDITIONAL HOUSING ADDS NOTHING.
THIS DEVELOPMENT PROVIDES LITTLE BENEFIT TO THE CITY & ITS RESIDENTS
THIS IS NOT A TYPICAL DEVELOPMENT SITE
Most sites new development sites are on the edge of something. Farmland. A well traveled road. The edge of the city, expanding outward with growth.
Hollydale sits in the middle of neighborhoods that have been there for over 20 years.
Developing Hollydale would not transform prairie or farmland, it would destroy a park.
THE SITE REALLY DOESN'T WORK
A housing development of this size requires two vehicle access points.
Holly Lane from Old Rockford Road is the only way to access the property today. It's a small neighborhood street that has never seen the 2000+ car trips Hollydale and Timbers Edge would create. All these cars would flow out to Old Rockford, with impatient drivers cutting through the residential streets of Wyndemere and Golf View.
The second access would be created new by plowing through Courts of Nanterre, a 20+ year old development owned predominantly by retirees. Not only would the residents suffer a loss of property value and a significant change the character of their neighborhood, but the intersection of the new Comstock Lane at Schmidt Lake Road is a safety hazard due to the sightline up the bridge looking west.
So what's the plan to improve safety? Install a median to prohibit left turns from Comstock, and change Schmidt Lake Road from four to three lanes, reducing traffic flow and adding to the queue at the high school. As a bonus, we - the taxpayer - will probably get to pay for the work. If depends upon what's negotiated with the developer.
Why would we reduce traffic flow on an arterial, ruin the property values of an established neighborhood, double the density of a closed in area, route 2,000 cars per day down what is now a quiet neighborhood road, encourage unsafe cut through traffic on to residential streets, increase traffic on a primary route to the high school that is already so busy kids aren't allowed to bike to the elementary schools on it, and risk more drainage problems and environmental damage, just to build 229 more houses that we don't need? There must be a big benefit to the City, right? Wrong.
THE BENEFIT IS VERY LOW
The only benefit to the City and its residents is an increase in the City's tax base. But even an additional $300 million in value is an increase in market value