Jump to content

Recent Topics Recent Topics

Photo
- - - - -

PRD-High density zoning


  • You cannot start a new topic
  • Please log in to reply
957 replies to this topic

#1 COPAD

COPAD

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 33 posts

Posted 15 March 2005 - 09:04 PM

Tuesday, March 22, 2 PM Paulding Chamber of Commerce lower level for the Paulding Planning Comission meeting to protest the two proposed PRD developments along Hwy 61, Mustang Drive, N. Davis Mill Rd. area. As many as five houses per acre are proposed! The total two developments will add 582 houses. Imagine your child's classroom size, the amount of traffic on Hwy 61, to 278 or down C-120 Hiram-Sudie Rd, and the impact on the general environment and nature.
Please contact the following individuals by phone or email and voice your opinion that PRD's do not serve in the best interest of the surrounding community.
Jerry Shearin, Chair jsherin@paulding.gov
Larry Ragsdale lragsdale@paulding.gov
Hal Echols hechols@paulding.gov
Wayne Kirby wkirby@paulding.gov
Don Powell dpowell@paulding.gov

YOUR SUPPORT IS GREATLY APPRECIATED>
Citizens of Paulding Against Density

#2 thatboyaintright

thatboyaintright

    Called to preach on p.com

  • ^BOPPER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 34,156 posts

Posted 15 March 2005 - 09:28 PM

QUOTE (COPAD @ Mar 15 2005, 10:04 PM)
Tuesday, March 22, 2 PM Paulding Chamber of Commerce lower level for the Paulding Planning Comission meeting to protest the two proposed PRD developments along Hwy 61, Mustang Drive, N. Davis Mill Rd. area. As many as five houses per acre are proposed!  The total two developments will add 582 houses. Imagine your child's classroom size, the amount of traffic on Hwy 61, to 278 or down C-120 Hiram-Sudie Rd, and the impact on the general environment and nature.
Please contact the following individuals by phone or email and voice your opinion that PRD's do not serve in the best interest of the surrounding community.
Jerry Shearin, Chair  jsherin@paulding.gov
Larry Ragsdale  lragsdale@paulding.gov
Hal Echols  hechols@paulding.gov
Wayne Kirby  wkirby@paulding.gov
Don Powell  dpowell@paulding.gov

YOUR SUPPORT IS GREATLY APPRECIATED>
Citizens of Paulding Against Density

A first-time poster! Welcome to p.com!

Don't take this the wrong way, but lemme ask you this --- you obviously want the development to voted away. Denied. Go away. OK. Fine. Fair enough.

So, if the development is voted down, are you prepared for a 100% increase in your taxes to fight the lawsuit that will certainly be presented? Afterall, the State of GA statute is very, very clear --- yea, even explicit --- if the proposed development meets all regulations of the county, the environmental rules, etc., then the county may not deny the request.

That is what the law says. Plain as day.

So I think that, perhaps, you also should be contacting your state representative/senator to demand that GA regulations be changed so the counties have that authority.

Again, don't take this the wrong way, but what you are asking is for hte commissioners to voluntarily subject the taxpayers money to a certain lawsuit that the county is guaranteed 100% to lose.

Anyway, welcome to p.com! Hope you stick around & join in on the discussions. Dont' forget to "Get Red," e.g., becoming a subscribing member. Since we use the site & it's resources, we need to support it!
"Great men wake up to slay dragons. Most are content to chase lizards. Therein lies the difference. Live Brave."

Posted ImagePosted Image
Posted ImagePosted ImagePosted Image

#3 mrsdavidj6

mrsdavidj6

    Icon

  • +Member plus pink
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,626 posts

Posted 15 March 2005 - 09:51 PM

Just jumping in here as a native who left for Cherokee for a while.....The Cherokee County commissioners learned back in the 90's to use their authority - and yes they have it - to require developers to give more to the school system. Our commissioners seem to want to just bow out of the school issue and just be thankful for whatever a developer gives......Well, that's great for the Good Ole Boy Paulding developers who have made good, but, the Cousins, Ken Horton, etc., are used to giving land and lots of money to school systems in other areas of Georgia.......I'm just blown away at how far behind our beloved county and our elected officials are......They're not going to run big name developers away from this goldmine by demanding better planning and more money for our schools....

#4 FreeBird

FreeBird

    Super Icon

  • +Member plus
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 16,075 posts

Posted 15 March 2005 - 09:52 PM

I thought that max classroom size was set by the state. Are you spreading false information to get something to go your way?

I've got to ask - where do you live? Is it in a planned community?
"Socialism is a philosophy of failure, the creed of ignorance, and the gospel of envy, its inherent virtue is the equal sharing of misery.''

-Sir Winston Churchill

#5 mrsdavidj6

mrsdavidj6

    Icon

  • +Member plus pink
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,626 posts

Posted 15 March 2005 - 10:36 PM

COPAD.....I was venting my frustration a little re: lack of money for our school system, but re-reading your post, I have a question.....Is there sewer where you are? Is there a treatment facility planned with this PRD you mentioned??? Since sewer is a requirement of a PRD and the general area you mentioned is not sewer, my interest was piqued. Schools can become a sticky issue; however, the more money generated from the developer, the better. I feel as if our county could do a better job with the money for schools thru impact fees, etc.

#6 CATMAX

CATMAX

    Paulding Com member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 90 posts

Posted 16 March 2005 - 11:37 AM

copad - you need to get your facts straight there is only one prd on mustang dr up for zoning this month. only 220 +/- homes. do not ask me why i know ,i just know first hand. (i feed my family in this business)

tbar - thanks for the support!

#7 COPAD

COPAD

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 33 posts

Posted 16 March 2005 - 12:08 PM

Yes, for the month of March this is the property with 221 homes planned and in April the next development will be up for approval by the same individuals with 361 homes planned. PRD's will be on sewer lines and where they are connecting to has not been shown on the plans.
I want you to feed your family, but can't you feed them on a higher commission check based on better housing, which will also increase the tax base for revenues to the county.



QUOTE (CATMAX @ Mar 16 2005, 12:37 PM)
copad - you need to get your facts straight there is only one prd on mustang dr up for zoning this month.  only 220 +/- homes.  do not ask me why i know ,i just know first hand.  (i feed my family in this business)

tbar - thanks for the support!


#8 COPAD

COPAD

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 33 posts

Posted 16 March 2005 - 12:13 PM

I researched the local high school to find it was built for 1500 students, now has enrollment of 2,000 with Sept. projections (WITHOUT THE NEW DEVELOPMENTS IMPACT) of 2, 150+. With trailers filled to capacity and facilities overcrowded at this one school how will they accomadate approximately 2.5 children per household average times the 582 houses proposed? What about traffic with approximately 2 cars (3 if teens are driving) per household?
What did the developer promise to the educational system-anything?


QUOTE (FreeBird @ Mar 15 2005, 10:52 PM)
I thought that max classroom size was set by the state.  Are you spreading false information to get something to go your way?

I've got to ask - where do you live?  Is it in a planned community?


#9 CATMAX

CATMAX

    Paulding Com member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 90 posts

Posted 16 March 2005 - 03:02 PM

QUOTE (COPAD @ Mar 16 2005, 12:08 PM)
Yes, for the month of March this is the property with 221 homes planned and in April the next development will be up for approval by the same individuals with 361 homes planned. PRD's will be on sewer lines and where they are connecting to has not been shown on the plans.
I want you to feed your family, but can't you feed them on a higher commission check based on better housing, which will also increase the tax base for revenues to the county.


I DO NOT WORK ON COMMISSION! I WORK DESIGNING THE THINGS. BELIEVE ME THE REALTOR MAKES MORE MONEY THAN I DO FOR A LOT LESS WORK!

#10 Subby

Subby

    a.k.a. Subby Enterprises

  • +Member plus Orange
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 13,961 posts

Posted 16 March 2005 - 03:18 PM

QUOTE (CATMAX @ Mar 16 2005, 04:02 PM)
I DO NOT WORK ON COMMISSION!  I WORK DESIGNING THE THINGS.  BELIEVE ME THE REALTOR MAKES MORE MONEY THAN I DO FOR A LOT LESS WORK!


I know that's right!! excl.gif

#11 Bubba Trump

Bubba Trump

    Paulding Com member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 297 posts

Posted 16 March 2005 - 06:52 PM

Since I am an adjioning owner to the property to be zoned on Tuesday I would weigh in on this matter. I personally am in favor of the projects, I think it will bring the focus of growth to south Paulding. With growth comes buisness. Also PRD zoning requires sewer by law. In past PRD zonings, developers must pay to lay the sewer lines, and apprears to be the same in this case. it would be GREAT to have an oppertunity to tap onto sewer. Currently I have to pump my septic 300 feet out into my back yard. I have seen the site plans for both properties, they are avaialable for review at planning and zoning and niether property have a density higher than 2. 4 units per acre, with some of the lots being half acre or larger.

#12 COPAD

COPAD

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 33 posts

Posted 16 March 2005 - 06:55 PM

CatMax, I'm glad you work! I appreciate the fact that you design. What I'd like to know is why not go for the High end buyer?
It concerns current homeowners that the property proposed is NOT LIKE the surrounding community in any direction and per Sec. G, Zoning Review Standards reads as follows: Any proposed rezoning will be evaluated using the following zoning review standards:
1) Existing land use and zoning classification of nearby property.
2) Whether the zoning proposal will permit a use that is suitable in view of the use and development of adjacent and nearby property.
3) Whether the zoning proposal will adversely affect the existing use or usability of adjacent or nearby property.
4) Whether the zoning proposal will result in a use which will or could cause an excessive or burdensome use of existing streets, transportation facilities, utilities or schools.
5)Whether the proposed use is supported by new or changing condiditons not anticipated by the Comprehensive Plan or reflected in the existing zoning on the property or surrounding properties; and
6) Whether the zoning proposal is in conformity with the policies and intent of the Comprehensive Plan.

Keep designing and keep the above in mind when it comes to other homeowners already established in the neighborhood.




QUOTE (CATMAX @ Mar 16 2005, 04:02 PM)
I DO NOT WORK ON COMMISSION!  I WORK DESIGNING THE THINGS.  BELIEVE ME THE REALTOR MAKES MORE MONEY THAN I DO FOR A LOT LESS WORK!


#13 COPAD

COPAD

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 33 posts

Posted 16 March 2005 - 07:12 PM

Bubba,
Thanks for bringing up the subject about "connection" and the density factor.
First, did you ask if, as a current homeowner, (but not part of the proposed development) where the line in relation to your property would be laid and what the cost to you would be for connection? Let us know.
Second, The 2.42 per acre is an AVERAGE based on several factors and does not mean 2.42 houses per acre. This number also takes into account 10.87 acres set aside as greenspace (since there are flood zones due to natural water flows that was easy enough to provide for) and that greenspace is Added into the total projection of acres/houses-EVEN though there will be no houses on it! Same goes for the "amenities" space of pool, clubhouse, tennis courts and an undisclosed (on the application ) "sports field". Those of us that have the facts and figures do know that the following applies: Setbacks are 25 feet from the front, FIVE FEET TO THE SIDE and 10 feet on conrner lots, rear 15 feet. Basically, had you reviewed the plot drawings and counted there are FIVE HOUSES per acre in some areas.
Not all things are as they seem on the surface!
Let us know the possibilty of connection and cost.Thanks in advance.



quote=Bubba Trump,Mar 16 2005, 07:52 PM]
Since I am an adjioning owner to the property to be zoned on Tuesday I would weigh in on this matter. I personally am in favor of the projects, I think it will bring the focus of growth to south Paulding. With growth comes buisness. Also PRD zoning requires sewer by law. In past PRD zonings, developers must pay to lay the sewer lines, and apprears to be the same in this case. it would be GREAT to have an oppertunity to tap onto sewer. Currently I have to pump my septic 300 feet out into my back yard. I have seen the site plans for both properties, they are avaialable for review at planning and zoning and niether property have a density higher than 2. 4 units per acre, with some of the lots being half acre or larger.

[/quote]

#14 Bubba Trump

Bubba Trump

    Paulding Com member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 297 posts

Posted 16 March 2005 - 07:52 PM

My property runs along a creek that is being concidered for part of the sewer line. A cost to connect has not has not been disscussed, but plan exchanging an easment for connection.

I m puzzled with your assumption of proposed home prices? When I spoke with the developer they have not locked in a builder and project homes to range from the 180s to mid 300s. That would certainly help my property value.

#15 cherokeewoman

cherokeewoman

    Icon

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,589 posts

Posted 17 March 2005 - 03:32 AM

COPAD, I feel your pain, but at the meeting you will loose. Our neighborhood has been there, done the reseach like you, fought and lost. The PRd's will come. They are this time the county tax basis. They provide water and sewage for existing areas involved with the development,so they are infrastracture growth for the county. A very few also offer something for schools, usually the ones that have to be approved by the state. The planning and zoning and the comissioners will look at the county zoning laws and approve. If it complies, they have no reason not to approve. It is bad news for existing citizens of Paulding, but this is a fact of life. In a year or two to come most of our land will be taken over by prd's, the land will be completly clear cut and these (I call them cluster homes - no matter the price) will be built. There will be erosion, the county is not good at penalizing developers for erosion problems. They say they will shut them down, but they don't. Developers reign over laws in the county from what I have seen. We invited the commisioner out to take a look at thing, but no response from him. Our clean air will be in a crisis situation. In a few or more years to come we will be penalized by all of this by the ozone factor in this county, so I am sure existing and new land owners will pay additional taxes for the lack of trees.
It seems like there is nothing we can do to stop this unless we can afford to hire a team of lawyers to try and change the zoning laws.
We as long time and new citizens of Paulding will just have to learn to live with higher property taxes, developers doing as they want, schools so overcroweded that double sessions have to be in the works somewhere, lack of fire and police protection. It seems to be a coming way of life.
Our county in some areas has gone to hell in a hand basket and there is no way we can do anything about it except pay higher taxes.
Everyone and Mr Chairman says industry is our salvation, but with the looks of it/lack of it/ most land owners will be forced to sell to some one in the future because taxes will skyrocket to pay for the police, schools, fire protection, that the prd's increase in persons will cause. Some may not be able to afford to live in the county they grew up in.
I am very worried about our schools. We can not in the next few years house and give quality eduacation for all the new prd's. There are not enough new schools in the picture. Look at the number of prd's being build around the county(prd's usually have around 300 homes per development(at least 1 child per home.) They do not offer anything to the school system except more children. There are no plans for the school system for all these children. Even when new schools are approved, they take years to build.
Do we have a plan to ship children out to other counties? This is one of my biggest concerns of all the newly approved prd's. We do not have the schools to provide. All schools here are now overpopulated with children. When do we meet an emergency situation? I think we are close now. Can we send all the extra children to the planning and commisioners office for their education?
We can't provide for the citizens now, but we keep growing.
Past commissioner changed everything to r2 is the excuse. From what I understand it can't be changed like it was before without lawyers mulitude of citizens, etc. How did they make the sudden classifaction before lawyers etc?
We will continue to grow, but with this growth we have a large number of new school students coming in that should be the planning/ zoning and comminshers responsibility, the school board has no say to the new developments.
To the officials, Where do we educate the children?
No one else seems to be concerned with this, they think all the growth is great.
I wonder will they complain when the schools are so overloaded we have to turn students away.

#16 halo 2

halo 2

    Icon

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,610 posts

Posted 17 March 2005 - 06:47 AM

again i hate it when someone just comes in and post a gripe or fuss about something they want changed or voted down. Then their gone. This is beginning to be a typical way of bringing in the forces. If you are going to post something, please stay in here and give oppinions on more than just your topic. I have seen this a hundred times. Welcome to pcom but dont just serve your agenda.
He who laughs last is the SLOWEST...

#17 ericschief

ericschief

    Paulding Com member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 454 posts

Posted 17 March 2005 - 10:03 AM

I am in this neighborhood and am thoroughly confused about exactly what is going into this development. I hate to see the land disappear - we enjoy the wildlife that frequents the open pasture land, but progress is the way of the politicians in our county these days - and who can blame them? They reap big bucks from development - surveyor, hauling business, etc - just look around us?

The biggest issue at my end of the neighborhood is the access to and from - there is only one access right into Mustang Drive - and that goes into Hwy 61 - where it is already nearly impossible to get out now. Unless there is a better street plan than that I have seen - I don't see how this can be good for anyone! The accident rate on Hwy 61 between Save Rite (Hiram Sudie Rd) and Hay-Renfoe across from Grand's has got to be one of the highest in the county - and we have had several deaths as a result of traffic accidents - how are we to handle additional traffic of 100 new homes - let alone up to and maybe more than 500. Having lived off Davis Mill Road, too - that is just as bad - traffic is the nightmare in this county - I have driven all over and I hate this traffic here!
No access roads - no cut throughs - too many cars on 2 lane roads and too few red lights (except around the Hiram "mini junction" at WalMart - oops mentioned the big guys didn't I?).

So - designers and planners - what are the road plans - this development is sandwiched between 2 state roads - so is the answer that you have no control over the road development or are the developers gonna give us traffic relief out of their pockets? What's the answer to the traffic jam?????

#18 HiramGirl

HiramGirl

    Icon

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,215 posts

Posted 17 March 2005 - 10:30 AM

Ericschief:

According to the TIP list from the Georgia DOT, 61 will be widen to four lanes with construction beginning in 2006 or 2008. But, as for traffic improvements, I have no clue. That would totally be up to the Georgia DOT.

QUOTE (ericschief @ Mar 17 2005, 10:03 AM)
I am in this neighborhood and am thoroughly confused about exactly what is going into this development.  I hate to see the land disappear - we enjoy the wildlife that frequents the open pasture land, but progress is the way of the politicians in our county these days - and who can blame them? They reap big bucks from development - surveyor, hauling business, etc - just look around us?

The biggest issue at my end of the neighborhood is the access to and from - there is only one access right into Mustang Drive - and that goes into Hwy 61 - where it is already nearly impossible to get out now.  Unless there is a better street plan than that I have seen - I don't see how this can be good for anyone!  The accident rate on Hwy 61 between Save Rite (Hiram Sudie Rd) and Hay-Renfoe across from Grand's has got to be one of the highest in the county - and we have had several deaths as a result of traffic accidents - how are we to handle additional traffic of 100 new homes - let alone up to and maybe more than 500.  Having lived off Davis Mill Road, too - that is just as bad - traffic is the nightmare in this county - I have driven all over and I hate this traffic here!
No access roads - no cut throughs - too many cars on 2 lane roads and too few red lights (except around the Hiram "mini junction" at WalMart - oops mentioned the big guys didn't I?).

So - designers and planners - what are the road plans - this development is sandwiched between 2 state roads - so is the answer that you have no control over the road development or are the developers gonna give us traffic relief out of their pockets?  What's the answer to the traffic jam?????


#19 markdavd

markdavd

    Sawdust Creator

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 15,871 posts

Posted 17 March 2005 - 10:39 AM

Y'all want to stop the growth - here's somethings you can do:


Get the people who own the land to STOP SELLING IT. If they want to sell anyway, buy it yourself.

Nobody is forcing anybody to sell their land.

If you want to stop the approval of the zoning - hire an attorney to advise the county on how they can stop it without spending tens of thousands of taxpayers dollars in court only to lose anyway.

If you want more schools faster, go to the state and get the laws changed so they can build schools according to anticipated needs instead of current needs.

The biggest thing is quit complaining. Then research and find things the county can legally do about it. If there isn't anything that they can do, work to get the laws changed.
I read recently that "most of today's reporters and journalists are no better than used car salesmen. When they're working, you just know they're lying to you." My first thought is that's an insult to used car salesmen!

#20 PauldingMom

PauldingMom

    Super Icon

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 6,696 posts

Posted 17 March 2005 - 10:40 AM

I have agree with Bubba, this side of Paulding is in need of new developement. This area has a great potential and has been over looked for a long time.
Carpe Diem.
Remember all those women on the 'Titanic' who waved off the dessert cart

Erma Bombeck
Sometimes nothing is a cool hand.

#21 markdavd

markdavd

    Sawdust Creator

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 15,871 posts

Posted 17 March 2005 - 10:48 AM

I saw the question on how they changed the zoning to R2, and why can't they change it back.

As I understand it, there were no zoning restrictions until the late 1960's. At that time, they changed the zoning to R2. I'm sure nobody wants to go back to the time when there were no restrictions.

The way I understand it is if they were to change it to R1 or whatever, anybody who owned land affected could line up at the courthouse to file suit against the county claiming they had 'plans' on using the R2 to their advantage right before it was changed. The county would have to defend against each of the lawsuits. In the meantime, a judge could order a stay against the change, in essence moving it back to R2 until things are resolved.

5 years down the road, with probably hundreds of thousands in legal costs to the county, may the change may or may not be allowed by a judge.
I read recently that "most of today's reporters and journalists are no better than used car salesmen. When they're working, you just know they're lying to you." My first thought is that's an insult to used car salesmen!

#22 The Sound Guy

The Sound Guy

    Super Icon

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 8,140 posts

Posted 17 March 2005 - 11:01 AM

As I understand it, road issues outside of a development are the responsiblity of the county/state to handle unless the county negotiates with the developer to get some assistance.

However, also as I understand it, lack of road space is NOT an acceptable reason for the county to reject a building application as long as it meets the existing zoning requirements.

The problem is that the county is zoned R-2 where there is not enough infrastruture to support R-2. This was done years ago as a bid to slow down the influx of single wide mobile homes into the county which was good, but has backfired in a way no one forsaw.

So the best we can do is try to get the developer to give some money or roadwork to the country when they try to get a PRD zoned.

SG

The only problem with quotes on the internet is that you can't authenticate them -- Abraham Lincoln

 

DISCLAIMER: The information and opinions expressed in this post are not necessarily the opinions of the author and may be denied or disregarded at a later date. Reading of this paragraph constitutes as agreement on part of reader not to hold author responsible for any damaging effects resulting from reading and agreeing with anything said in this post; furthermore reader waives all future claims resulting from changes in law which may render this disclaimer null and void. This disclaimer is valid in all states with the exception of those states which have laws forbidding the existence of this disclaimer, and in states where such laws exist the reader agrees to read this disclaimer in a state where this disclaimer is binding.


#23 Johnny Jacobs

Johnny Jacobs

    A Good Old Boy

  • ^BOPPER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 9,598 posts

Posted 17 March 2005 - 11:06 AM

QUOTE (ericschief @ Mar 17 2005, 10:03 AM)
...
The biggest issue at my end of the neighborhood is the access to and from - there is only one access right into Mustang Drive - and that goes into Hwy 61 - where it is already nearly impossible to get out now.  Unless there is a better street plan than that I have seen - I don't see how this can be good for anyone!  The accident rate on Hwy 61 between Save Rite (Hiram Sudie Rd) and Hay-Renfoe across from Grand's has got to be one of the highest in the county - and we have had several deaths as a result of traffic accidents - how are we to handle additional traffic of 100 new homes - let alone up to and maybe more than 500.  Having lived off Davis Mill Road, too - that is just as bad - traffic is the nightmare in this county - I have driven all over and I hate this traffic here!
No access roads - no cut throughs - too many cars on 2 lane roads and too few red lights (except around the Hiram "mini junction" at WalMart - oops mentioned the big guys didn't I?).
...


Ericscheif,

You might want to buy a Paulding County Road Map.
There is a Northern exit into Winndale Road, from which you can get on to Hiram Sudie Road. You do not Have to use 61 at all.

JohnnyJ

#24 Texan in Georgia

Texan in Georgia

    Paulding Com member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 381 posts

Posted 17 March 2005 - 11:25 AM

I, personally, wish the county would slow up on all the new subdivisions that are going in but if we are going to keep having them built I would really prefer them not to be the current eyesores such as the Darby's Run subdivision going in on West Hiram and the "Box" community that is just south of 278 in Hiram. I would rather see more mobile homes than these "zero lot line" subdivisions.

Just my opinion.

#25 HiramGirl

HiramGirl

    Icon

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,215 posts

Posted 17 March 2005 - 11:55 AM

Oh, I have a tremedous distaste for Darby's Run. Have you noticed that huge pit in the backyard?! Who would want to live there with such a hazard in the back?! I can imagine trash, Christmas trees, and who knows what being thrown down there!

QUOTE (Texan in Georgia @ Mar 17 2005, 11:25 AM)
I, personally, wish the county would slow up on all the new subdivisions that are going in but if we are going to keep having them built I would really prefer them not to be the current eyesores such as the Darby's Run subdivision going in on West Hiram and the "Box" community that is just south of 278 in Hiram.  I would rather see more mobile homes than these "zero lot line" subdivisions.

Just my opinion.


#26 COPAD

COPAD

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 33 posts

Posted 17 March 2005 - 01:40 PM

Johnny, I live where you are asking someone to consider driving out from these proposed TWO subdivisions. The larger of the two will directly access Hwy 61 very near the entrance-exit for the High School. Have you been on Hwy 61 just before class start times? End of class? It takes an officer to conduct the traffic flow.
The exit out the "back side" of N. Davis Mill onto Winndale is pocked with holes constantly needing filling and is VERY narrow and winding-going to Winndale or the opposite direction to Hiram Sudie Rd. THIS IS NOT A MAIN THROUGH STREET, but a cow path-farm road that got paved!


quote=JohnnyJ,Mar 17 2005, 12:06 PM]
Ericscheif,

You might want to buy a Paulding County Road Map.
There is a Northern exit into Winndale Road, from which you can get on to Hiram Sudie Road. You do not Have to use 61 at all.

JohnnyJ

[/quote]

#27 COPAD

COPAD

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 33 posts

Posted 17 March 2005 - 01:48 PM

I work for a living and it is not feasible for me to be on 24/7 to meet your needs. I post responses only as I have available time and can answer reasonable comments. But, I felt you deserved one, despite the lack of subject content other than to complain about something and offer no constructive comment.
This is the agenda of a rather large community and not just mine, sorry to disappoint you.

QUOTE (halo 2 @ Mar 17 2005, 07:47 AM)
again i hate it when someone just comes in and post a gripe or fuss about something they want changed or voted down. Then their gone. This is beginning to be a typical way of bringing in the forces. If you are going to post something, please stay in here and give oppinions on more than just your topic. I have seen this a hundred times. Welcome to pcom but dont just serve your agenda.


#28 COPAD

COPAD

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 33 posts

Posted 17 March 2005 - 02:03 PM

Paulding MOM did you say? Do you currently have children in any classroom that will be directly affected by this? The High School alone was built for 1500 students, but today's enrollment is 2000 with Fall expected to reach 2150+.
Could you tell us where the children for these 582 proposed houses will sit? Trailers are the order of the day? I think I need to buy stock in School Trailers for classroom space, if that's the case-then I could be wealthy too!
Development must be LIKE the surrounding community per the zoning review standards and neither of these proposed sites meet that qualification. We don't mind development of LIKE TYPE structures, please understand that this is our central issue.


QUOTE (PauldingMom @ Mar 17 2005, 11:40 AM)
I have agree with Bubba, this side of Paulding is in need of new developement. This area has a great potential and has been over looked for a long time.


#29 Johnny Jacobs

Johnny Jacobs

    A Good Old Boy

  • ^BOPPER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 9,598 posts

Posted 17 March 2005 - 04:00 PM

QUOTE (COPAD @ Mar 17 2005, 01:40 PM)
Johnny, I live where you are asking someone to consider driving out from these proposed TWO subdivisions. The larger of the two will directly access Hwy 61 very near the entrance-exit for the High School. Have you been on Hwy 61 just before class start times? End of class? It takes an officer to conduct the traffic flow.
The exit out the "back side" of N. Davis Mill onto Winndale is pocked with holes constantly needing filling and is VERY narrow and winding-going to Winndale or the opposite direction to Hiram Sudie Rd. THIS IS NOT A MAIN THROUGH STREET, but a cow path-farm road that got paved!



Then I suggest a talk with the Road Department or the Chairman to make it a main through road.
This is a bypass that your area needs to get around the high school.
To fix an existing road should be easier to do than to get a new road built.
A great many of our roads in Paulding started as a cow path or as a farm road.
And yes, I have been on 61 at schooltime with my children who attended through 2005.

JohnnyJ

#30 Subby

Subby

    a.k.a. Subby Enterprises

  • +Member plus Orange
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 13,961 posts

Posted 17 March 2005 - 04:06 PM

I try to remain silent in these sort of posts (for good reason I will not disclose).

But, I will tell you that PRD's put more homes in less space. Most people's gripes are about how much SPACE is taken up for new homes. PRD's reduce this problem dramatically. PRD's often bring with them updated and improved infrastructure, compliments of the developer (that means no cost to you).

Just a little food for thought.

#31 thatboyaintright

thatboyaintright

    Called to preach on p.com

  • ^BOPPER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 34,156 posts

Posted 17 March 2005 - 08:54 PM

QUOTE (COPAD @ Mar 16 2005, 01:13 PM)
I researched the local high school to find it was built for 1500 students, now has enrollment of 2,000 with Sept. projections (WITHOUT THE NEW DEVELOPMENTS IMPACT) of 2, 150+. With trailers filled to capacity and facilities overcrowded at this one school how will they accomadate approximately 2.5 children per household average times the 582 houses proposed? What about traffic with approximately 2 cars (3 if teens are driving) per household?
What did the developer promise to the educational system-anything?

Yes, the developer has already made an overture for the school issue, & that is old --- very old --- news. In fact, it was reported here on p.com on the Fastrtead Page for January 25, 2005 (click here for the story). It was also in Neighbor & the Dallas New Era. And it was given as a point of information at the board meeting. And, I do believe it was mentioned this week in the meeting at Hickory Heights Baptist.

Moreover, it was talked about on here for quite some time.

Here is the quote from theFastread Page . . .
QUOTE
Addressing another key issue - the schools - Hughes also cited the stipulation that the development would contribute $150,000 for the purchase of land for a public school in the area. The contribution is either cash or its equivalent and could go toward the purchase of a 30-acre parcel currently offered the schools by Cousin's Properties a few thousand feet south of the development.


Oh, & there will be another $4.5 million the developer will give to the county for engineering and other on and off-site road improvements related to the project.

Someone didn't give out the information like they were supposed to. While I know the Paulding Neighbor does occassionally miss some houses when giving out the paper, it looks like they fell down on the job grievously for this information. Jerry Shearin should also be chided for not making sure this information got out to everyone. The commissioners office needs to be inundated with emails about not talking this up more. If the developer is giving money for a new school & another $4.5 million for off project improvements, that information needs to be out there more. Shame, shame, shame for not telling the story --- the whole story
"Great men wake up to slay dragons. Most are content to chase lizards. Therein lies the difference. Live Brave."

Posted ImagePosted Image
Posted ImagePosted ImagePosted Image

#32 mrshoward

mrshoward

    Super Icon

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 22,301 posts

Posted 18 March 2005 - 07:52 AM

As for the high density part...
It is pure negligence and greed to build these homes so close together...
Paulding county should not allow this...
One small house fire and a stiff wind and the whole neighborhood burns
to the ground...
Mark my words, When we lose a whole subdivsion to a fire it will not surprise me... unsure.gif unsure.gif unsure.gif
A man must be excessively stupid, as well as uncharitable,
who believes that there is no virtue but on his own side, and that there
are not men as honest as himself who may differ from him in political principles.


- Joseph Addison

#33 COPAD

COPAD

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 33 posts

Posted 18 March 2005 - 10:10 AM

Please keep this apples to apples. The comments and article are about yet ANOTHER location, very separate, but evidently as opposed, as the PRD's called Wellington Place and Bleakley Lakes. It is not sufficient for the developer to "make offerings" of money for land purchase for school systems. It still takes a building, employees and teachers, just to name a few incidentals, to call it a school and that will be at taxpayers expense. When shortsightedness of the few end up costing the many, why is it that the few express themselves so profoundly with "attitude".




QUOTE (thatboyaintright @ Mar 17 2005, 09:54 PM)
Yes, the developer has already made an overture for the school issue, & that is old --- very old --- news. In fact, it was reported here on p.com on the Fastrtead Page for January 25, 2005 (click here for the story). It was also in Neighbor & the Dallas New Era. And it was given as a point of information at the board meeting. And, I do believe it was mentioned this week in the meeting at Hickory Heights Baptist.

Moreover, it was talked about on here for quite some time.

Here is the quote from theFastread Page . . .
Oh, & there will be another $4.5 million the developer will give to the county for engineering and other on and off-site road improvements related to the project.

Someone didn't give out the information like they were supposed to. While I know the Paulding Neighbor does occassionally miss some houses when giving out the paper, it looks like they fell down on the job grievously for this information. Jerry Shearin should also be chided for not making sure this information got out to everyone. The commissioners office needs to be inundated with emails about not talking this up more. If the developer is giving money for a new school & another $4.5 million for off project improvements, that information needs to be out there more. Shame, shame, shame for not telling the story --- the whole story


#34 COPAD

COPAD

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 33 posts

Posted 18 March 2005 - 10:19 AM

WOW, a farsighted person is on paulding.com, welcome friend! Consider water runnoff and add flood zone potentials. RE: don't they destroy all the great trees that it took YEARS to grow to the heights attained, but man puts down in a matter of minutes for his own greed. Just this AM I watched goldfinches, a male and female red-headed woodpecker, morning doves, cardinals and other wildlife feeding at the feeder and wondered where will they disappear to when their homes are destroyed. It is time for nest building (Spring) not destruction...but what does a developer care? Even wildlife creates SPACE in their choice of nest building-ever seen two nests on the same limb?



QUOTE (mrshoward @ Mar 18 2005, 08:52 AM)
As for the high density part...
It is pure negligence and greed to build these homes so close together...
Paulding county should not allow this...
One small house fire and a stiff wind and the whole neighborhood burns
to the ground...
Mark my words, When we lose a whole subdivsion to a fire it will not surprise me... unsure.gif  unsure.gif  unsure.gif


#35 The Sound Guy

The Sound Guy

    Super Icon

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 8,140 posts

Posted 18 March 2005 - 10:55 AM

QUOTE (COPAD @ Mar 18 2005, 10:10 AM)
It is not sufficient for the developer to "make offerings" of money for land purchase for school systems.


Who says it's not sufficient? You? Well, sorry, but that's not the law.

As I told you in my reply to you in the other thread and as has been repeated 10 balzillion times on here:

THE LAND IS ZONED R2. HE CAN BUILD A SUBDIVISION AT R2 AND NOT GIVE THE COUNTY JACK S*&T.

That's 1/3 acre lots with road space and nothing else. The county cannot stop it or we go to court and LOSE. What part of that do you not understand? Yea, you may not like it, me either, but it's the STATE law. It's been proven over and over and over. See the counties you've mentioned before.

So right now it's a give and give proposition. They give the county some additional money for schools that they normally would not, they provide the links to the sewer plants (PRD requires sewer) then the county allows modifications to the zoning in the PRD. That allows them to put in amenties and higher end housing. If the county demands too much, they say to heck with it and we get little bittie houses on septic tanks with no tax base at R2 and STILL have to provide a school and roads and police and fire and ... well, you get the idea.

Besides, it's a double bonus, if we get the high end homes, not only do we have the developers seed money, but we'll get much more property tax dollars from the houses themselves, so we will be able to provide the remaining funds to build the schools. So the PRD is double plus good compaired to the alternative.

Yea, the whole R2 across the whole county sucks. It was a quick and dirty solution to the problem of single wide trailer parks everywhere. But that's the cards we have been dealt, so we have to play them. You can whine about those things you cannot change or work with the things that are changeable.

SG

The R2 Map from the chairman's meeting:



The Tan is all R2.

Edited to fix the map.

Edited by The Sound Guy, 18 March 2005 - 10:58 AM.

The only problem with quotes on the internet is that you can't authenticate them -- Abraham Lincoln

 

DISCLAIMER: The information and opinions expressed in this post are not necessarily the opinions of the author and may be denied or disregarded at a later date. Reading of this paragraph constitutes as agreement on part of reader not to hold author responsible for any damaging effects resulting from reading and agreeing with anything said in this post; furthermore reader waives all future claims resulting from changes in law which may render this disclaimer null and void. This disclaimer is valid in all states with the exception of those states which have laws forbidding the existence of this disclaimer, and in states where such laws exist the reader agrees to read this disclaimer in a state where this disclaimer is binding.


#36 thatboyaintright

thatboyaintright

    Called to preach on p.com

  • ^BOPPER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 34,156 posts

Posted 18 March 2005 - 10:59 AM

QUOTE (COPAD @ Mar 18 2005, 11:10 AM)
Please keep this apples to apples. The comments and article are about yet ANOTHER location, very separate, but evidently as opposed, as the PRD's called Wellington Place and Bleakley Lakes. It is not sufficient for the developer to "make offerings" of money for land purchase for school systems. It still takes a building, employees and teachers, just to name a few incidentals, to call it a school and that will be at taxpayers expense. When shortsightedness of the few end up costing the many, why is it that the few express themselves so profoundly with "attitude".

I thought your opposition was to the Sheffield development. Regardless, the point is the same.

Perhaps you need to do some research on the State of GA law as to how schools are built. The BOE cannot build a new school just because a development is coming in or may come in. The students have to already be there & all the available options of redistricting to spread out the overflow must be exhausted. Once that is done, the BOE may submit a proposal for a new school to the state. Then the state has to approve it. Then the process can begin.

If your opposition to a project is due to school conditions, then you need to rethink it. It wouldn't matter what project it is or when it is, the schools are going to be overcrowded no matter what. Anytime there is growth, there will be the same process.

Question: how long have you lived in Paulding?

Moreover, it has nothing to do with "greed." Wait. Define "greed" for me, please. Please explain who is the "greedy" one in this whole process. The folks who sold the land? Yep --- they made money. Shame on them because no one else who owned the land would do that. The developer? Yep --- they are making a living & hire a lot of folks too. Shame on them for spending money on constrution in Paulding! No, wait --- I know. The "Greedy" ones have to be the workers who build those projects/homes. Yes, sir. Let 'em be on welfare as that'll show 'em! Or how about the people who are buying here in Paulding? Maybe they are the "greedy" ones because they are buying a house here cheaper than in Cobb. Dang them! How dare they look for a better deal! Shame on them!

So exactly who is "greedy" here?

Maybe the "greedy" ones are the folks who want to dictate what someone else must do with their land, because "someone" wants to enjoy the virgin scenar/wildlife but not spend the money on buying the land for themselves?

Isn't that called a "moocher"?

Let's go another route, shall we? How dare anyone tell a private citizen what he may or may not do with his property. As long as the owner abides by the rules, keep your opinions about what he/she chooses to do with it to yourself. It doesn't belong to you; it belongs to another. They are not telling you how you can or cannot do on your side of the property line, you know.

Are you saying you don't want the devlopments to bring the jobs in to Paulding? So you're against jobs in the local economy? You really want people to have to drive all the way to ATL every morning? Isn't that continuing our dependance on foreign oil? Is that what you want? You actually WANT the US to pay hard earned tax dollars to a Muslim state for oil? Why in the world would you be opposed to development that would bring both jobs & money to a deserving property owner, who paid all the taxes on that land for all those years? And now you want to tell the former owners that they cannot sell their own land?

Why, that's unpatriotic! UnAmerican. Sounds Communistic.

Tell ya what, comrade. Who is the "greedy" one?

Oh, I am on a roll today! (BTW, the above was intended to raise dander & get the ire of folks rolling. Flame away at me!)
"Great men wake up to slay dragons. Most are content to chase lizards. Therein lies the difference. Live Brave."

Posted ImagePosted Image
Posted ImagePosted ImagePosted Image

#37 The Sound Guy

The Sound Guy

    Super Icon

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 8,140 posts

Posted 18 March 2005 - 11:05 AM

QUOTE (thatboyaintright @ Mar 18 2005, 10:59 AM)
Maybe the "greedy" ones are the folks who want to dictate what someone else must do with their land, because "someone" wants to enjoy the virgin scenar/wildlife but not spend the money on buying the land for themselves?

Isn't that called a "moocher"?



No flames here TBAR.

I will say there are some land owners that try. When the 10-20 acres across from Windrift was sold I was told that a stipulation was added to the deed that the land may never be subdivided. Not sure if that prevents commercial building there, but at least it will not be another subdivision.

SG

The only problem with quotes on the internet is that you can't authenticate them -- Abraham Lincoln

 

DISCLAIMER: The information and opinions expressed in this post are not necessarily the opinions of the author and may be denied or disregarded at a later date. Reading of this paragraph constitutes as agreement on part of reader not to hold author responsible for any damaging effects resulting from reading and agreeing with anything said in this post; furthermore reader waives all future claims resulting from changes in law which may render this disclaimer null and void. This disclaimer is valid in all states with the exception of those states which have laws forbidding the existence of this disclaimer, and in states where such laws exist the reader agrees to read this disclaimer in a state where this disclaimer is binding.


#38 HiramGirl

HiramGirl

    Icon

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,215 posts

Posted 18 March 2005 - 11:51 AM

TBAR, I have a honest question for you: What is the limit for housing development in Paulding?

All the housing development has brought jobs, good jobs, to Paulding? I don't see it. I still have to drive to Atlanta everyday for work because I doubt I would ever be able to make a living working for someone in Paulding. The wages just aren't there and I doubt they will be anytime soon.


QUOTE (thatboyaintright @ Mar 18 2005, 10:59 AM)
I thought your opposition was to the Sheffield development. Regardless, the point is the same.

Perhaps you need to do some research on the State of GA law as to how schools are built. The BOE cannot build a new school just because a development is coming in or may come in. The students have to already be there & all the available options of redistricting to spread out the overflow must be exhausted. Once that is done, the BOE may submit a proposal for a new school to the state. Then the state has to approve it. Then the process can begin.

If your opposition to a project is due to school conditions, then you need to rethink it. It wouldn't matter what project it is or when it is, the schools are going to be overcrowded no matter what. Anytime there is growth, there will be the same process.

Question: how long have you lived in Paulding?

Moreover, it has nothing to do with "greed." Wait. Define "greed" for me, please. Please explain who is the "greedy" one in this whole process. The folks who sold the land? Yep --- they made money. Shame on them because no one else who owned the land would do that. The developer? Yep --- they are making a living & hire a lot of folks too. Shame on them for spending money on constrution in Paulding! No, wait --- I know. The "Greedy" ones have to be the workers who build those projects/homes. Yes, sir. Let 'em be on welfare as that'll show 'em! Or how about the people who are buying here in Paulding? Maybe they are the "greedy" ones because they are buying a house here cheaper than in Cobb. Dang them! How dare they look for a better deal! Shame on them!

So exactly who is "greedy" here?

Maybe the "greedy" ones are the folks who want to dictate what someone else must do with their land, because "someone" wants to enjoy the virgin scenar/wildlife but not spend the money on buying the land for themselves?

Isn't that called a "moocher"?

Let's go another route, shall we? How dare anyone tell a private citizen what he may or may not do with his property. As long as the owner abides by the rules, keep your opinions about what he/she chooses to do with it to yourself. It doesn't belong to you; it belongs to another. They are not telling you how you can or cannot do on your side of the property line, you know.

Are you saying you don't want the devlopments to bring the jobs in to Paulding? So you're against jobs in the local economy? You really want people to have to drive all the way to ATL every morning? Isn't that continuing our dependance on foreign oil? Is that what you want? You actually WANT the US to pay hard earned tax dollars to a Muslim state for oil? Why in the world would you be opposed to development that would bring both jobs & money to a deserving property owner, who paid all the taxes on that land for all those years? And now you want to tell the former owners that they cannot sell their own land?

Why, that's unpatriotic! UnAmerican. Sounds Communistic.

Tell ya what, comrade. Who is the "greedy" one?

Oh, I am on a roll today! (BTW, the above was intended to raise dander & get the ire of folks rolling. Flame away at me!)


#39 Subby

Subby

    a.k.a. Subby Enterprises

  • +Member plus Orange
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 13,961 posts

Posted 18 March 2005 - 12:05 PM

QUOTE (mrshoward @ Mar 18 2005, 08:52 AM)
As for the high density part...
It is pure negligence and greed to build these homes so close together...
Paulding county should not allow this...
One small house fire and a stiff wind and the whole neighborhood burns
to the ground...
Mark my words, When we lose a whole subdivsion to a fire it will not surprise me... unsure.gif  unsure.gif  unsure.gif


That is quite innaccurate. Tightly packed homes like this started out in California years ago, and the fire scenerio is not what you think it is. When was the last time you seen a whole subdivision burn down from one house fire? On the other hand, with apartments all over the place, this becomes a moot point. Yankees from up north have been living in tight quarters for decades. This is like paradise for northern transients.

I believe TBAR pretty much laid the facts down rather well about PRD's. With R-2, the county gets nothing in return. With PRD's, the county benefits greatly. Just because some of us don't "like the way they look", it is the future trend, and will continue to be for a long time to come.

#40 The Sound Guy

The Sound Guy

    Super Icon

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 8,140 posts

Posted 18 March 2005 - 12:20 PM

QUOTE (HiramGirl @ Mar 18 2005, 11:51 AM)
TBAR, I have a honest question for you: What is the limit for housing development in Paulding? 

All the housing development has brought jobs, good jobs, to Paulding?  I don't see it. I still have to drive to Atlanta everyday for work because I doubt I would ever be able to make a living working for someone in Paulding.  The wages just aren't there and I doubt they will be anytime soon.



Well, I'm not TBAR, nor do I play him on TV but.....

That's the problem, there is NO limit on housing in Paulding. The county is zoned to be a complete bedroom community feeding Atlanta.

If the leadership at the time of the Trailer Crisis had taken a *little* more time and generated a land use map and then fit the *Brand New* zoning to that map, we'd have commercial areas, residential areas, all fairly well laid out.

But no, instead they thought, "Hmmm R2. That will stop the trailers and NOBODY will ever want to build houses in Paulding. Shoot, we don't even have a 4-lane." Famous last words. smile.gif

SG

The only problem with quotes on the internet is that you can't authenticate them -- Abraham Lincoln

 

DISCLAIMER: The information and opinions expressed in this post are not necessarily the opinions of the author and may be denied or disregarded at a later date. Reading of this paragraph constitutes as agreement on part of reader not to hold author responsible for any damaging effects resulting from reading and agreeing with anything said in this post; furthermore reader waives all future claims resulting from changes in law which may render this disclaimer null and void. This disclaimer is valid in all states with the exception of those states which have laws forbidding the existence of this disclaimer, and in states where such laws exist the reader agrees to read this disclaimer in a state where this disclaimer is binding.





0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users

Recent Topics Recent Topics