Laserfiche WebLink
the purposed expansion, this issue is only going to get DRAMATICALLY worse as the <br />church area will encroach deep into the neighborhood, and the newly proposed building <br />will look down right into our property. <br /> <br />Light Pollution: <br /> <br />The neighborhood that the church plans on further encroaching into has no street lights, <br />and is isolated by the outlying streets. When the main church building and existing <br />parking lot was erected, this changed that isolation dramatically. The light emanating <br />from the current structure and parking lot is off putting and unwelcome. With the <br />purposed expansion, this issue is going to be made considerably worse, and the light <br />emanating from the new proposed structure will illuminate my property untenably. <br /> <br />This reason alone should be grounds to deny the expansion of the church parking lot <br />and new structure. <br /> <br />The Proposed Expansion Will Have An Irreversible Detrimental Effect On <br />Neighborhood: <br /> <br /> <br />The expansion the church is proposing destroys six homes in a community that has a <br />housing shortage, causes irreparable harm to the existing community, and further <br />separates the church from the neighborhood that it inhabits. The houses taken away <br />will never be reconstructed, or turned into housing again. This lose comes with no <br />benefit for the immediate neighborhood nor the greater neighborhood at large. Losing <br />these houses and people only serves the interests of one inhabitant of the <br />neighborhood, and that is the church. Without exception, the people who live in the <br />neighborhood, and are not directly affiliated with the church, do not want to replace <br />housing with a giant structure, parking lot, and prison wall. This is a legitimately <br />frightening prospect for those of us that live in the neighborhood. Even more frightening <br />is that, if this proposal is allowed to move forward, the church will no longer have any <br />responsibility to the neighborhood. As demonstrated, the church already holds the <br />neighborhood with some degree of contempt, and a complete separation will only serve <br />to make this situation worse. With their proposed annexation from the community, it is <br />reasonable to assume that the wall facing the neighborhood will be uncared for, and left <br />derelict as so much of the church’s already existing properties. Even under the best <br />case scenario, this wall would be an insurmountable problem for the neighborhood, but <br />given this property owner’s history, allowing such a thing would be a horrific mistake <br />that cannot be undone. <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> <br />