Ashton Ridge-CS 960919 CASE No. R
We are opposed to the amendment which would allow access from the alley on lots
1-5 in the s~ject development, due to the ste~ grade of the driveways which
would result. The developer has raised the elevation of the ground behind the
alley (with fill dirt), to the point where we believe the slope of the drivewa~
will result in a safety hazard for parked cars, homeowners, and children
playing.
All five families which occupy the five adjacent homes to lots 1-5 in Ashton
Ridge have small children. The safety hazard of children riding bicycles,
skateboards, and playing outdoors on or near the sloped driveways is a risk we
are not willing to accept. The risk of a vehicle sliding or rolling down the
driveway in inclement weather conditions or due to mechanical failure, onto our
adjacent property, is also a risk we would like to avoid.
While our neighborhood association supported the change in zoning from SF-12 to
allow the Ashton Ridge development, we were unaware of the extent of fill dirt
which would be added to elevate the ground well above its natural grade. Ne do
not believe the developer/builder,s desire for "improved marketability" of rear
entry homes on lots 4 & 5 warrants jeopardizing the safety of the adjacent
property owners.
While the builder/developer has represented to us that the elevation will be
reduced from its present hiqh level to acco~odate rear entry qaraqes, with
front yards lowered one and one-half feet below the curb level, and qaraqe
floors lowered by a similar measure below the house slab, we feel the resultinq
slope will still represent an unnecessary safety hazard. We implore the
members of the Planning and Zoninq Colittee, our fellow Coppell citizens, to
maintain the existing conditions, as oriqinally approved, requirinq street
access for lots 1-5.
In attempting to obtain an amendment to the conditions, the builder/developer
approached each Park Place homeowner on the adjacent five lots, and requested
our signatures to avoid going through the formal hearing process. The verbal
representations made by the builder/developer were that "a mistake" had been
made in drawing up the original condition the plann
_~.accept the builder's representations about the reduce~-;~;~-;f-~h~'~r~;~;,.'v
· ·
245 Suzsnne Way