From Brad , Wild Cherry resident, Asheville High parent, and Mission trauma nurse re. DOG PARK, SCHMOG PARK‏

Brad    5:28 PM
To: jmoore@ashevillenc.gov
Cc: ashevillenccouncil@ashevillenc.gov, akopf@ashevillenc.gov

Greetings Mr. Moore:

In advance of your meeting with the "Friends" this week, I'd like to add my name to the list of those opposed to a dog park in the proposed location, and especially to an entrance on Wild Cherry Road.

As I'm sure you know, the Wild Cherry/Beaverdam intersection is the only point of ingress/egress for the entire neighborhood comprised of Wild Cherry, Garland, Gibson, the three Crabapples, and Round Oak. There is another route, but as the Thoms Estate is the last legal gated "community" within city limits, neighborhood residents are prevented from driving through the development. However, as the Thoms Estate comes online, many of the residents of those 80+ acres will use the WC/Beaverdam intersection as well.

I know there is not much point, since you are a traffic engineer, in addressing concerns regarding the complete elimination of the sound buffer from Beaverdam Road, the removal of the visual buffer from the Thoms Estate, the loss of property value for the 1842 Killian House (I was a commissioner on Historic Resources), the elimination of one of the remaining hiding spots along the creek for the valley's turkey, bear, bobcat, and coyote, the degradation of the creek from urine and feces leading to algae blooms, loss of trout population, contamination of the ACC golf course, the Audubon Sanctuary, and Beaver Lake, the insanity that the city would accept a floodplain liability "donation" and subsequently hand use of that land over to the "private sector" for design, construction, and maintenance, and the fact that very few, if any, of the residents in our neighborhood embrace the idea of a dog park.

However, as I'm cc'ing City Council and Parks and Rec on this mail, I feel those concerns need to be at least mentioned.

I do feel that it's prudent to voice my concerns over three matters that pertain to your department.

1)    The proposed entrance lies immediately adjacent to the fragile creek bed, sandwiched between the entrance to the Thoms Estate and the Wild Cherry ACS and ART bus stop. This morning, there were 6 kids waiting to catch the bus at the intersection, my son being one of them. It's the same in the afternoon.

In no way am I interested in sacrificing the safety of our neighborhood's children, whether it be from distracted, unfamiliar-with-the-territory drivers turning off of Beaverdam, or predators who might frequent a public and unsupervised park. I really don't want to see anyone from my neighborhood show up on my unit at Mission due to someone else's negligence or malice.

2)    As I'm emailing you from my phone, and the file is on my computer, I'll send you a second mail with photos and video of what the proposed park and entrance looked like not two months ago. It was under 3-5 feet of raging floodwater, standing waves and all.... No wonder ARK Development (of Jensen Beach, FL) wants to give this liability away. They don't have the resources to actually build the ark it would have taken to navigate the creek on that day. I texted this video to Marc Hunt several weeks ago, but received no reply.

3)    What about the coming Beaverdam Road traffic from Thoms Estate, Grove Park Cove, Bartrams Walk, and all the yet to be developed lots on Webb Cove. Seems as if adding more traffic to an already-saturated, fast-paced, and blind curve-filled Beaverdam is unwise at best.

And, if the developer really wants to do something with the land, why not a conservation easement or donating it to the city for a limited-clearing greenway?

I appreciate your time in reading and reflecting on this email, and please understand that there is much inertia building in opposition to this idea. The "Friends" (whose president, Bob Roepnak, is another Florida developer from Pompano Beach) have spent over a year organizing and glad-handing certain members of Council. But, I think when everything's on the table, the city will realize that, while a dog park in North Asheville might be a good idea, this location is ill-conceived, shows poor foresight and environmental apathy, places the wishes of those living lives of relative leisure over the safety of children and transit commuters, and is just a big bowl of wrong.

Sincerely, and thanks again,
Brad