Outlook [EXTERNAL MAIL] Fwd: CCZP0069-25 Zoning From Judith Lordi Date Mon 9/22/2025 11:01 AM To Leia LaPlace Mrs. Leia LaPlace Territorial Planner Dept. of Planning and Natural Resources Dear Mrs. LaPlace-Matthews, That was an excellently moderated hearing, very civil and informative. Thank you for setting the overall tone so high.  As you know,  Monica Ruhle, BH #33, and Julie George, BH #30, were in attendance with me (#28 & #29, Trustee) on my computer. We had some discussion afterwards, and I said that I would try to write up a letter with our further questions and points we felt had not been fully addressed. Firstly, we wish to advise Ms. Barnes that we know there are more uses permitted in B-2 zoning than in B-3, so please do not speak as though Mr. Misbeh is making any concessions to our concerns. Also, we do not agree that FIRST you get the re-zoning and THEN you do the suitability/ecological surveys. Secondly, Ms. Barnes never answered the question as to why they needed a zoning change to B-2 instead of R-2 or R-3?  Financial considerations should not qualify to either the Legislature or the Planning Board. Public Works spent a lot of time and money putting in a settlement basin in the Contentment/Wenty Nielsen intersection on two separate occasions.  That gut runs from Dr. David Doward's backyard through the north edge of 6a and the south edge of #29 and #30 along Rd Plt #7 to the intersection, under the intersection, and down the south side of the road all the way to Friedensthal Moravian church backyard. Plot 6a sits like a once-folded paper with the crease at the southeast corner of Doward's lot and the land slopes east to that gut and west to the private road for Beeston Hill. Suddenly, someone is going to seal the ground over that crinkle making a "catchment area"  approximately 800' long and 200' wide with a nice drop of 10 to 12 feet.  Say we get a couple of heavy rains, as we did last week, a little over an 6 inches of rain, 160,000 sf of catchment gives us 80,000 cu ft of water or, at 7.48 gal/cu ft, that's over 542,000 gallons of water. To visualize, that is an acre of water a little more than a foot and a half deep. Half of that water is heading for Maison de Poincy to the west and half is heading for the settlement basin to the east, not to mention the church basement and the Health Club and that's just 10 hours of rain storms.  You know, we usually get three-day rains in May and September. Water weareth away stone.  (Judith has been a farmer most of her life and has a great respect for water.) But neither Mr. Misbeh nor Ms. Barnes have made mention of water runoff provisions. He made allowances for it 3 years ago, but not now.  (And why doesn't a townhouse/condo developer have to put in cisterns when a homeowner does? ) All Ms. Barnes says is "Just give us the re-zone and then we will study it."  The coast and geodetic survey from 1932 shows what is there.  Ms. Barnes said they only plan to use less than 4 acres for the "townhouses". I believe the projected paved area is larger than my figures. Ms Barnes told us that Mr. Misbeh is concerned that there be "affordable housing" for our returning young people.  With respect, the Legislature in its sovereignty is keen to provide affordable housing for people who are coming here to work. The cart seems to be once again preceding the horse. We three ladies sincerely wish to ask Who will provide the jobs to lure our young people home?  St. Croix is replete with people saying "Build it and they will come."  Our doctors don't have enough patients, our restaurants don't have enough patrons, car showrooms don't have enough buyers, and with a tariff-crazed federal government, this speck in the ocean is going to see even leaner times. I certainly hope that good things will come from efforts with the old Hess/Hovensa area, but ... Ms. Barnes kindly explained that even though 30% of the townhouses will be for sale for our returning youngsters, half of the 70% available for rent will be short term rentals, so apparently, our returning younger generation will not be staying very long? It sounds as though Mr. Misbeh should get a hotel or guesthouse license?  Which brings us to the traffic problem. Why does his projection show his only access and egress is off a 35' private road, when his lot has three other access roads right off the main road?  His property has no access from the privately owned (and maintained) Beeston Hill Road, and he knows it. Those of us who live here have enough problems with traffic, without him adding 24 more families to the load. Please note he has put his access at a blind spot for persons coming down the hill. Wouldn't his most logical access be a small bridge over the northeast gut by the Contentment/Aloy "Wenty" Nielsen/Orange Grove intersection?   My friends and I  also didn't follow the bit about "public financing", which the B-2 zoning would make unnecessary? Did Ms. Barnes mean to imply that the government was going to subsidize some of this project?  To the three of us, "affordable" sounds like just another term for low- cost/low income housing. With all due respect, 24 families, whether subsidized or not, on 4 acres in these three residential zones (Beeston Hill, Mount Royal, and Catherine's Rest) will seriously overload the area, (the traffic, the sewerage, the water supply) especially when the rest of the B-2 acreage in Mr. Misbeh's plans are filled.    Sincerely and respectfully, Judith Armstrong Lordi  BH #28 Monica Hedrick Ruhle  BH #33 Julie Mary George BH #30 Caution: This e-mail has originated outside of GVI network. Do not click on links or open any attachment (s) that might look suspicious unless you have knowledge of who the sender is.