Ugly sprawl no progress for Grand Valley

To the editor:

The proposal for the City of Grand Junction to annex and overbuild on rural property starting with the 17 acres of agricultural land that the proposed Maverick Estates developers hope to build 68 houses on would be a really bad move for the neighbors living in the area and for the Grand Valley as a whole. The annexations and density sprawl would continue all the way to the bookcliffs, rendering this valley to resembling the worst of Los Angeles-type sprawl.

With all the added traffic of just the ill-proposed Maverick development at
H and 24 1/2 roads, the already over trafficked, narrow and poorly designed roads in the area, we would be a traffic fiasco. The area’s roads already can’t handle the present traffic. Children certainly can’t ride bikes or walk to nearby schools as traffic is heavy and there are virtually no shoulders on the roads.

The Grand Valley would have the reputation of having a very tacky and poor quality of life with absolutely no rural area left. My wife and I wouldn’t have moved here to open our downtown bagel shop 24 years ago if not for Mesa County’s rural areas.

The city should honor its 2010 comprehensive plan, which prohibits this sort of dense sprawl and destruction of long-established neighborhoods. The county is against the Maverick Estates proposal, as are virtually all who live in and would like to live (and build reasonably) in this lovely rural area. Quality of life is more important than some developer making millions and having Grand Junction be on the map because of high population numbers. Ugly, dense sprawl is not progress.

Mark and Missy Smith, Grand Junction