Northridge at Piper Estates

Letter to developers Summer 2006

Jan 23, 2007

To: Northridge at Piper Estates
Timothy Zarda, Builders, Realtors and Management

Re: Homeowners Meeting 18 June 2006


Dear Sir or Madam,

On June 18, 2006, several homeowners from Northridge at Piper Estates gathered to discuss events and situations affecting our neighborhood. The primary concerns have a direct effect on property values, quality of life, and legal compliance with standards established in the ?“Declaration of Easements, Covenants, Conditions and Restrictions of Northridge at Piper Estates.?” After the main concerns were agreed upon and listed, I, Andrea Greenwald, went through the Declaration and tried to find documentation supporting our issues.

I believe I speak for most of us when I state that there is an overwhelming desire to work with our neighborhood Developers, Builders and Realtors to make our neighborhood the best in the region. We want to offer prospective buyers a home of which they can be proud, and a community worth joining.

Below you will find each topic we discussed, followed by applicable Articles and Sections from the Declaration, (to the best of my knowledge) and other comments.

We are having our next neighborhood meeting in early August and cordially invite you to join us for a congenial questions and answers session.

?• Homes with too many cars (over 3) parked in driveways and on streets for weeks/months at a time. Article 8.1a: Regarding use of lots for single family dwelling and restricting dwelling to ?“?…quiet, in offensive activities, such as tutoring or giving art or music lessons, or for a home office, so long as such activities do not violate the other restrictions set forth in this Declaration, and do not materially increase the number of cars parked on the street, or interfere with adjoining owners?’ use of their Lots.?” AND Article 8.5a: Regarding ?“Boats and Motor Vehicles.?” ?“?…No automobile shall be stored (except within an enclosed garage), or parked, except for temporary guest parking and except for parking within an enclosed garage or on a driveway on the Lot (i.e., street parking is prohibited, except for temporary guest parking)?….?”
?• Common areas ?“looking bad,?” not watered, etc. Article 1.7, regarding common areas. It was pointed out that some highly visible common area is not looking as good as it could. For example, the approach from 110th (Hutton Rd), where the storm drain is threatened with overflow of surrounding grass/mud, and the common area that lies between Phase1, lot 1 and lot 38, adjacent to the ?“fountain pond.?”
?• Empty lots not being taken care of, grass/weeds, trash build up. This concerns builder responsibilities and construction crews?’ negligence. Article 8.8 concerns trash being kept in appropriate receptacles and removed in a timely manner. This includes construction trash being controlled while there is ongoing construction (not loosely piled up, or scattered over the lot indefinitely.) Article 6.1 deals with property and lot maintenance before and after active construction. Lot 38 (phase 1) comes to mind. ?“All vacant Lots and undeveloped portions of the Addition shall be kept mowed and free of trash and construction debris by the Owner thereof. From and after the completion of construction of a residence on a Lot, the Owner and occupant of each Lot shall cultivate an attractive ground cover or grass on all areas visible from the street,?…No Owner shall permit weeds or grass to grow to a height of greater than six (6) inches upon its Lot...?”
?• Speed Limit signs posted on Northridge Drive. This topic concerned motorized vehicles (resident and construction) exceeding the universally understood 30 MPH residential speed limit. I (AG) have tried, in vain, to get an answer from the Wyandotte County traffic engineer, Dave Northup, regarding getting a 20MPH speed limit sign for this curving stretch of road. Hopefully, the Developer will have better luck. The residents need drivers entering our neighborhood to respect the families who live here (small children, pets, joggers, walkers, etc.) by not driving through at speeds approaching (and exceeding!) 40 MPH.
?• A cement walking trail with access to the Piper School Complex. The current access to the school complex is through the main entrances to the neighborhood and involves traveling on high volume roads (110th) with no sidewalks. Perhaps the school district would approve access between the football field and the common area adjacent to Phase 2, Lot 1, or between Phase 3, Lots 115 and 116, or both.
?• Construction/builder trash/nails/brush piles all over the neighborhood. Several residents have had tire damage resulting from driving past construction that litters the street. Also, the large brush piles attract nuisances and look bad. (should be in appropriate containers)
?• Sewer drains need ?“something?” to keep kids/small pets from falling in. I realize that the drains are a city issue, but the city tells me that the Developer must request assistance, because not all roads/drains are turned over to the city.
?• Silt fences. Residents who live in Phase 2 and near Phase 3 expressed concerns that the silt fences are installed but not maintained, resulting in sagging and ineffective silt fences that allow damage to established yards.
?• Pool issues. Since the June 18 meeting, the pool has opened. Most fears we had seem to have not materialized. There have been a few incidents with cleanliness/safety issues. The general consensus seems to be that a uniform letter, to EVERY resident with access to the pool, clearly stating rules for behavior/dress/guests, etc. There is also a suggestion on the table for two non-lifeguard attendants to check ID?’s.
?• Concrete trucks using empty lots for clean out. Residents have witnessed the construction crews disregarding posted guidelines for clean out. We feel that the builders must expect complete compliance from contractors, or provide immediate clean up.
?• Lake access. Residents have concerns about unknown persons (non-resident) fishing in the two major ponds. While we cannot know every resident, we need clarification, and possibly a posted sign, of who has ?“lake access.?” Someday, some of us would like a common, small, dock into the larger lake in the common area across from Lots 6&7. We feel it would be attractive and functional.
?• ?“Small?” houses in Phase 1. Those of us in Phase 1 expressed concern that the house on Lot 11 is not in keeping with the rest of the neighborhood. It is a two-car garage, three-bedroom home that has the potential to appraise far below the rest of our properties. The fact that our immediate neighbors will have homes of a certain size and appearance was specifically addressed by the Realtors when we purchased homes in this neighborhood. Quite a few of us are concerned that, perhaps, standards are slipping in Phase 1, and this would have a direct impact on our property values.

In conclusion, I would like to stress our desire to work with the Developers, Realtors, Builders and Management Company. We realize that the ?“Turnover date?”(Article 2.11) is not for several more years, but would like to maintain a ?“homeowners group?” that is recognized, and utilized, by Developers, etc. Should you have a Board maintaining control of Northridge, we would respectfully request a Resident representative on that Board.

I hope you will join us in August so that we may treat you to the hospitality that we have created amongst ourselves. We will finalize a date somewhere around August 10-13 (before school starts at Piper). Please let me know which (or another) date is more amenable.

Sincerely yours,



Andrea Greenwald Point of Contact: G. Matz
10700 Merion Drive 4526 North 108th Street
Kansas City, KS 66109 (913)721-3425
agreenwald@kc.rr.com G_Matz@hotmail.com
913-721-3853