While I was not surprised that the proposed re-zoning of land containing a “battered tennis court” in lower Pinebrook has reappeared after last year’s overwhelming protest to same, it is abundantly clear that the developer did not heed the concerns expressed at the time (“Contested Pinebrook affordable housing development returns to Summit County Council,” July 5).
Density was, and is, the main issue with this project, and that issue is twofold: occupants and vehicles. How many people will occupy the proposed 22 units? Even if only one person occupies each bedroom, that’s 41 people. And one person/bedroom is unrealistic. So the actual number of tenants will potentially be much higher.
The vehicle conundrum is the same. One per bedroom would be 41. Can 41 vehicles even FIT on a tennis court? Street parking is not available, and is, in fact, in violation of Summit County regulations during the winter months. Again, this is assuming there’s only one “driver” per bedroom, which is unlikely. Is it anticipated that only one adult will be living in a one-bedroom unit, of which there will be eight? That scenario alone invalidates the suggested numbers.
This proposed development has become highly politicized because it includes affordable housing units. There were two participants on last year’s call with the Summit County Planning Commision who criticized Pinebrook residents for being insensitive to the needs of low-income residents. Tellingly, neither caller lived in Pinebrook!
They were promoting a social agenda without considering the ramifications.
We are all well aware of the housing shortage in Summit County; however, that fact is totally irrelevant to peoples’ objections to this project. If these units were all offered at market value — or as high as the market could bear — the protests would be the same. Density is THE issue.
We need to keep current zoning intact, and stop trying to put a square peg in a round hole.
Ally Hogan
Pinebrook