O
Beavercreek
← Community
DevelopmentCommunity discussion

Creekwood Preserve subdivision

Beavercreek

Summary not yet generated for this topic.

Community sentiment

Opposed (5)Concerned (2)

At a glance

Public comments
7
Last 30 days
0

Last discussed Jan 7, 2026.

Public comments (7)

OpposedJoshua ClanaJan 7, 2026

Spoke against the 53-home project, calling the traffic study ridiculous and citing school overcrowding, EMS/fire strain, and property-tax increases for neighbors of the $450,000-$500,000 homes.

Planning Commission - Jan 7, 2026 · 46:06 →
ConcernedDenesh ShahJan 7, 2026

Asked whether there is any upper limit on home prices or sizes the city would deem incompatible with surrounding neighborhoods.

Planning Commission - Jan 7, 2026 · 48:53 →
OpposedClayton KnipeJan 7, 2026

Said the postage-stamp lots and $450,000-$500,000 homes next to his modest neighborhood will force him and others out through rising property taxes; wants buffer lots to match adjoining lots.

Planning Commission - Jan 7, 2026 · 49:54 →
OpposedDavid DempseyJan 7, 2026

Backs directly onto the site; worried about hundreds of daily car trips and construction traffic on Graham Drive and doubts the gravity sewer will handle the added load.

Planning Commission - Jan 7, 2026 · 52:12 →
OpposedRosie DempseyJan 7, 2026

Said neighborhood children play on Graham Drive daily and that added traffic will force them indoors.

Planning Commission - Jan 7, 2026 · 54:17 →
OpposedJill BattersJan 7, 2026

Wants the city to do its own traffic study, called the merge from the base terrifying, and objected to repeated comparisons of her vinyl-sided, lower-priced neighborhood to the new homes; her taxes rose $600 last year.

Planning Commission - Jan 7, 2026 · 55:40 →
ConcernedJames WilliamsJan 7, 2026

A 40-year law enforcement officer and crash reconstructionist, he doubts 700 vehicles a day won't affect traffic and wants an unbiased city traffic study; also wants details on the buffer tree planting.

Planning Commission - Jan 7, 2026 · 58:43 →