Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Community Concern topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Sun City residents urge commission to block housing on golf-course parcel
Summary
Multiple Sun City residents told the commission they oppose a developer’s reported plan to place as many as 1,300 homes on a golf-course-zoned parcel, citing senior safety, sewer failures, wildlife loss and CC&R protections that they say require a two-thirds homeowners vote for a zone change.
Several Sun City residents used the non-agendized public-comment period to urge the Planning Commission to protect a golf-course parcel from a potential large-scale housing proposal.
Tony Robertito, who said he lives along Cherry Hills Golf Course in the 55-plus Sun City community, told commissioners he and other residents were directly told by the developer that a housing proposal may soon be submitted and that they were ‘‘hearing numbers as high as 1,300 homes.’’ Robertito said that at that scale the project would function as ‘‘another city’’ and would immediately strain roads, emergency response, utilities and sewer systems, and raise safety concerns for seniors.
‘‘There is no justification for placing another 1,300 homes in the middle of a senior community on a land zone for recreation only,’’ Robertito said, and he asked the commission to respect homeowners’ protections and require environmental review.
Susan Chieszewski (listed by the clerk as a public speaker) said she supported the prior speaker and emphasized that Sun City’s Del Webb-era design and open space should be preserved; she questioned the idea of building 1,300 homes in an established retirement community and warned of increased traffic and intergenerational impacts.
Anne Downing described repeated local sewer failures and said residents paid substantial premiums for lots on the golf course. She said many residents oppose the project but do not come to meetings; she urged the commission to consider community impacts.
The commission did not take formal action on these non-agendized comments; the chair reminded speakers that the commission cannot respond to items not on the posted agenda under the Brown Act but may ask staff to follow up. Citizens’ assertions about a developer’s plans and specific numbers were made during public comment and were not the subject of a developer presentation at this meeting.
