From:                              Rachel Gay Rosser []

Sent:                               Tuesday, March 18, 2014 2:33 PM

To:                                   Elizabeth Hill

Cc:                                   Peter Ray; Andrewgniss; Truman O'Brien; John (Jack) R. Venrick

Subject:                          Response to DPER letter April 2013


Hello Elizabeth,


Regarding the KCC Steve refers, here are some questions.


It has been stated that the parcels involved in this parks project on school titled land have not been re-zoned.  So what are parcels #292-303-9081 and #202-303-9020 currently zoned and what date were they zoned as such?


21A.12.220 is Steve noted is found in KC Codes under "Resource and Commercial/Industrial Zones"


Why are KCC Densities and Dimensions being applied to a RA Zone that are found in KCC under Commercial/Industrial Zones?


21A.08.040, "Recreational/Cultural Land Uses" which clearly states adherence & compliance to 50 feet setbacks EXCEPT IN "Residential Developments" and "Sub-Divisions" neither which are applicable to this project. Why is this VPD project allowed to be exempted from compliance?


Additionally 21A.08.040 A & B.1.a., states "No stadiums on sites less than 10 acres".  Is this applicable to VPD Fields project? 


21A.08.040 B.1.b., Steve notes, "Lighting for structures and fields SHALL be directed away from rural area and residential zones."   The parcels associated to VPD project (#292-303-9081 & #202-303-9020 on ALL sides surrounded by rural area.  


How will the impact to abutting properties of lights be met? 


Has the privacy between adjacent uses, i.e. green barriers & setbacks to provide privacy to pre-existing uses been adhered as directed


By not adhering to the 50 foot setbacks for backstops, dugouts, bleachers etc., endangerments to life and limb from fly balls and trespassing onto private abutting property has been created and approved.  How does the KC DPER plan to manage these safety issues?


A "steep slope" has been allowed to be created under the C&G Type 1 permit during summer 2011.  Since the autumn rains of 2011 we have water running under and through our barn because of these permitted actions.  That is 3 1/2 years now this will only create further damage.   


No County representative has come over to our property to investigate inside our private barn that we are aware of other than you.  It was fortunate that your visit was after a rainy period so that you could witness the enormous puddles, runoff directly onto our property and water inside our barn.  This was witnessed, photographed and recorded in movie format during our walk around and has been documented on other rainy occasions.


This is another issue that MUST be resolved as an "Approved" project has created severe negative impacts to abutting property.  How was the Decision Criteria determined for this VPD project?


This is still a mess.  The axis and matrix being the property lines, boundaries, easements and perimeters filed and in existence under law and regulation prior to permit application for this project.


We received an e-mail from Elaine @ VPD about fencing installations.  Why is the DPER allowing continuation of this project without surveys that meet law and regulation and illegal removal of pre-existing survey markers & monuments?  


DDES/DPER was notified 2 March 2011 of the VPD destroying property lines & monuments that had been in place for centuries and decades.  No action appears to have been taken by KC to enforce compliance to replace these monuments and markers as previously existed.   We oppose adjustments to the filed and recorded documents dating from as far back as 1864 & 1912 that have been recognized as property lines.  We do NOT approve of VPD putting fences onto our property.


We look forward to the continuation of working together towards adherence and compliance to law and regulation regarding this VPD project.


Thank you

Margaret and Gay Rosser

Friends and Neighbors of