HomeMy WebLinkAbout02/17/2022 - Planning and Zoning Commission - SUPPLEMENTAL DOCUMENTS - Regular Meeting1
Katharine Claypool
From:Sharlene Manno
Sent:Monday, February 7, 2022 9:41 AM
To:Katharine Claypool
Subject:FW: [EXTERNAL] Pedestrian Access Concern re ODP210004, Ziegler-Corbett Overall Development
Plan
Categories:P&Z
It does not look like you received this.
From: Craig Latzke <craig@latzke.us>
Sent: Sunday, February 6, 2022 5:20 PM
To: Ryan Mounce <RMounce@fcgov.com>; Joe Olson <jolson@fcgov.com>; Sharlene Manno <smanno@fcgov.com>;
City Leaders <CityLeaders@fcgov.com>; Development Review Coordinators <DRCoord@fcgov.com>; Current_Planning
<Planning@fcgov.com>; Zoning <zoning@fcgov.com>; Engineering Mailbox <engineering@fcgov.com>
Subject: [EXTERNAL] Pedestrian Access Concern re ODP210004, Ziegler‐Corbett Overall Development Plan
Ryan Mounce (City Planner)
Shar Manno (P&Z Customer and Administrative Manager)
Joe Olson (Traffic Engineer)
City Council Members and City Manager
Planning & Zoning Commission (not sure of email addresses, so trying planning, zoning, and drcoord addresses)
In reviewing the agenda for the February 17, 2022 meeting regarding the Ziegler-Corbett Overall Development
Plan (hereafter shortened to "ODP"), I noticed an important consideration slipped the attention of the Planning
& Zoning Commission and others involved in the review of this ODP and the "request for Alternative
Compliance to Section 3.6.3 regarding street pattern and connectivity standards."
I live in Woodland Park Estates (hereafter "WPE"), the subdivision to the East and North of the ODP. The
children and families in WPE do not have a reasonable means of crossing Ziegler on foot to access our
neighborhood elementary school (Linton) or the closest park to us (English Ranch Park). So, in 2018 I inquired
about the possible addition of a signalled crosswalk at Paddington Rd and Ziegler. We were told this need was
known and was most-likely to be met by a future signalled intersection at Paddington Rd and Ziegler Rd,
depending on the development of the parcial that is the subject of this ODP. Related email from Joe Olson
(City Traffic Engineer) is included below, after my email.
Many other neighbors have expressed to me their fear of crossing Ziegler on foot, long distance to the next
closest crosswalk, and their desire for a signalled pedestrian crosswalk at this location.
Here is an illustration of the walking path from WPE to the Linton Elementary school with (green) and without
(green plus red) a crosswalk at Paddington Rd. The route is nearly doubled (from 3700ft to 6700ft) without the
crosswalk. That is a LONG detour for pedestrians, especially elementary-school-aged pedestrians.
ITEM 2, CORRESPONDENCE 1
Packet pg. 1
2
The Feb 17 meeting agenda states that staff recommends approving the Alternative Compliance Plan, which changes the
connection to Paddington Rd to the north of this ODP to pedestrian‐only and instead adds a new street and new
intersection of that street to Ziegler.
In recommending this approval, staff notes the following in their first finding:
1. "The lack of a local street connection and vehicular access does not result in any reduction to access or
circulation for bicycles, pedestrians, or transit."
This finding appears to be incorrect. Without the alternative compliance plan, additional vehicular traffic on Paddington
from this development would drive the addition of a signalled intersection at Paddington/Ziegler, an intersection which
would also accommodate pedestrian/bicycle access from WPE across Ziegler. The plan instead creates a new street
with a new "channelized T" intersection which does not accommodate pedestrian/bicycle access from WPE across
Ziegler. Thus the alternative compliance plan REDUCES the access or circulation for bicycles and/or
pedestrians compared to if the alternative compliance plan is not approved.
This alternative compliance plan likely also negatively impacts vehicular access in and out of the Woodland Park Estates
subdivision, compared with having a signalled intersection at Paddington/Ziegler.
With traffic on Ziegler already substantial and certain to continue increasing ‐ adding the additional street and
channelized‐T intersection, instead of making use of Paddington Rd, may be a shortsighted move by the developer and
the City with regards to vehicular, bicycle, and pedestrian traffic.
I request that the persons receiving this email rescind or reject the recommendation to approve this alternative
compliance plan, or work with the developer to revise this plan to accommodate cross‐Ziegler pedestrian traffic from
Woodland Park Estates at Paddington, or otherwise ensure that a signalled pedestrian crosswalk (or signalled
intersection) will be installed at the Paddington/Ziegler intersection.
Thanks for your time,
Regards,
Craig Latzke
3908 Mesa Verde St
Fort Collins, CO
ITEM 2, CORRESPONDENCE 1
Packet pg. 2
3
970‐227‐7444
PS.
In anticipation of a suggestion that WPE residents use the next closest existing crosswalk at Council Tree and
Ziegler, I want to note that not having a crosswalk here significantly increases the walking distance to the
school/park. Looking at precedent, most of the signalled crosswalks on Ziegler/Drake and Horsetooth were
installed in locations where the next closest existing crosswalk was closer than Council Tree is to this proposed
crosswalk:
o 3010 feet: Distance of round‐trip detour (to Council Tree) if Ziegler does not gain a crosswalk at
Paddington Rd.
o 1010 feet: Distance of round‐trip detour (to Timberline) if Drake did not have a crosswalk at Illinois Dr.
o 1730 feet: Distance of round‐trip detour (to Timberline) if Horsetooth did not have a crosswalk at Arctic
Fox Dr.
o 2250 feet: Distance of round‐trip detour (to Timberline) if Drake did not have a crosswalk at the Power
Trail.
o 2300 feet: Distance of round‐trip detour (to College Ave) if Drake did not have a crosswalk at Tulane Dr.
o 2510 feet: Distance of round‐trip detour (to Lemay, or Stuart) if Drake did not have a crosswalk at
Woodward entrance.
o 3340 feet: Distance of round‐trip detour (to Lemay) if Drake did not have a crosswalk near Brookwood
Dr.
Referenced email from Joe Olson (City Traffic Engineer) on Sept 5, 2018 (emphasis mine):
Thanks for the clarification on the crossing location. We're aware of the desire for a signalized crossing on Ziegler at
Paddington. Unfortunately, it's complicated because of the potential development of the property to the south of
English Ranch. Depending on how that property develops it may end up that we signalize Ziegler/Paddington
(potentially with some developer participation in the cost) or, there may be a need instead for a signal further to
the south to serve that property. The bottom line is that there is still uncertainty about the right location for a
signal. That being the case, we feel like we need to wait to see what happens with the development before
making a decision about signalization of Ziegler/Paddington.
In the meantime, we suggest that people use the signal at Council Tree to cross Ziegler. I realize that's not a
perfect solution but it probably makes the most sense in the interim until things resolve at Paddington.
Let me know if you need more information. If you'd prefer to talk on the phone my number is 970‐224‐6062.
Sincerely,
Joe
Joe Olson, P.E.
Traffic Engineer
City of Fort Collins
ITEM 2, CORRESPONDENCE 1
Packet pg. 3
From:Kathy Kulesa
To:Development Review Comments
Subject:[EXTERNAL] ODP210004, Ziegler-Corbett Overall Development Plan
Date:Monday, February 7, 2022 12:23:47 PM
Hi,
I am writing in regards to the planned development for just north of the Target Shopping Complex, located off
Ziegler.
I live in the Woodland Park Estates neighborhood and am very concerned about the additional traffic this poses for
Ziegler and our ability to exit our neighborhood safely or cross the street to access the neighborhood school and
park.
When I first moved to the neighborhood, there were flashing yellow lights and pedestrian crossing signs with a
crosswalk at Grand Teton/Paddington. Unfortunately, that did nothing to protect our children when they tried to
cross into English Ranch to attend Linton School. At one point, a neighbor wearing a bright yellow safety vest,
myself, my dog and our three children tried to cross at the crosswalk to get to school and were almost hit by a car
that ignored all the other cars that had stopped for us. As Ziegler was developed, the cross walk and signs were
removed without any notice to us from the city. We requested meetings to determine how we would be able to
safely cross and were told once there was additional development behind Target, Ziegler would get a stop light at
Grand Teton/Paddington for us to use. Until that time, we were told to go down to the light at Council Tree, cross at
the light and then work our way back. However, know one considered the fact that the delivery entrance to Target
located just north of Council Tree would get so much traffic and block our path. There is no crosswalk at the
entrance, no sidewalk to work around the traffic both coming and going through that entrance and drivers are not
looking to the South as they are trying to get out to take a left. This makes for an even more dangerous crossing.
After listening in on the recent Zoom proposal, it was apparent that English Ranch did not want anything in regard
to a stop light at Paddington/Ziegler and the developers were looking at adding yet another T entrance just past the
delivery entrance. This is unacceptable for our neighborhood. Trying to drive a car left out of Grand Teton for most
of the day is impossible and walking or biking across to access our only neighborhood park is not worth the risk.
I ask that you please consider those of us trapped in this neighborhood and give us safe passage to cross as was
promised. Even if is a cross walk light, that would be better than no light at all.
In addition, I would like the city to consider development of the Straus Cabin/Horsetooth access to help divert some
of the traffic off Ziegler and also development of Prospect to alleviate additional traffic that all seems to be funneled
through Ziegler as an access to downtown.
Sincerely,
Kathy Kulesa
ITEM 2, CORRESPONDENCE 2
Packet pg. 4
From:Robert Schutzius
To:Development Review Comments
Subject:[EXTERNAL] ODP210004, Ziegler-Corbett Overall Development Plan
Date:Tuesday, February 8, 2022 9:47:45 AM
I am writing regarding the proposed development at the intersection of Ziegler Road
and Paddington Road, just north of the Front Range Village Shopping Center.
I have no issues with the proposed development, but with the increased traffic that it
will bring, I would encourage the City to put in a stop light at the intersection of Ziegler
and Grand Canyon Street (on the East) / Paddington Road (on the West). We need
some means of traffic control in order for pedestrians to cross Ziegler safely and so
that motorists can make a left turn onto southbound Ziegler Road from the Woodland
Park Estates, which can be quite challenging even with the traffic that we currently
have. I would imaging that English Ranch residence have a difficult time making a
left turn onto northbound Ziegler from Paddington Road or Eastgate Lane.
I appreciate your respectfully considering my request.
Robert Schutzius (Shoot-zee-us)
720-269-9719 cell
schutzius@yahoo.com
ITEM 2, CORRESPONDENCE 3
Packet pg. 5
From:Mark Jones
To:Ryan Mounce; Development Review Comments
Subject:[EXTERNAL] Re: Ziegler-Corbett Overall Development Plan, ODP210004
Date:Tuesday, February 8, 2022 12:04:28 PM
Hello Ryan Mounce & Nicole Hahn, and others:
As a resident of the English Ranch neighborhood, I wanted to thank-you for the community
meeting this past Wednesday evening on 2/2/22 regarding the development to the south of the
English Ranch neighborhood here in Fort Collins, officially the Ziegler-Corbett Overall
Development Plan, ODP210004.
As I understood from listening to the whole meeting, the artery of Edmonds Road running
south of Paddington Road will remain CLOSED to vehicles, and as proposed there will ONLY
be a pedestrian and bike throughway. I assume it would be similar to how Kingsley Court
currently is now south of Paddington Road with only pedestrian & bike access. This sounds in
accordance with previous zoning plans & amendments. I support this type of bike/pedestrian
access, just not vehicular access.
With that said, I want to be on the record as saying, I do NOT support any future throughway
for vehicular traffic on Edmonds Road south through to the proposed development, and I do
NOT support any future vehicular throughway on Kingsley Court through to the south
connecting Corbett Drive.
If either of these were opened to traffic, it's not only the new development with roughly 700
residents as was mentioned on the call, but the business & shopping traffic from Front Range
Village which would impact English Ranch creating massive unnecessary congestion for the
English Ranch neighborhood, in addition to causing safety issues which the capacity of
English Ranch was not designed for.
As of now, the English Ranch neighborhood already has a steady flow of traffic on Sunstone,
some of whom travel quickly despite the speed bumps, and at times there is increased traffic
on Paddington to Kingsley.
I appreciate having this forum for input and for the record.
Sincerely,
Mark Jones
2614 Southfield Ct.
Fort Collins, CO. 80525
ITEM 2, CORRESPONDENCE 4
Packet pg. 6
From:pam starlingsnest.com
To:Development Review Comments
Subject:[EXTERNAL] ODP210004 Ziegler-Corbett Overall Development Plan
Date:Tuesday, February 8, 2022 8:13:05 PM
Re: Controlled Pedestrian Crosswalk at Grand Teton-Paddington Rd. Still Needed
I am a resident of Woodland Park Estates and alarmed at the proposed density of future
development along Ziegler Rd. without consideration for the safety of pedestrians and cyclists
from our neighborhood. I am 67 years old and often cycle along Ziegler to reach the Poudre
River Trail. However, I often find it unsafe to cross Ziegler to return to my neighborhood, as
It is a very busy road with high-speed traffic, including a lot of truck traffic. Likewise, it is
very dangerous to cross Ziegler to access our closest park and neighborhood elementary
school in English Ranch. The need for a controlled pedestrian crosswalk at Grand Teton-
Paddington Rd. is only becoming more critical with increased development along this busy
corridor. I am at a loss to understand why this critical infrastructure has not been included in
this plan.
Please reconsider including this improvement in the above named plan.
Thank you,
Pamela Starling
3902 Grand Canyon St.
Woodland Park Estates
Get Outlook for Android
ITEM 2, CORRESPONDENCE 5
Packet pg. 7
From:Craig Latzke
To:Ryan Mounce; Engineering Mailbox; Development Review Comments
Cc:Cortney Geary; Julie Pignataro
Subject:[EXTERNAL] Re: Re: Pedestrian Access Concern re ODP210004, Ziegler-Corbett Overall Development Plan
Date:Tuesday, February 15, 2022 11:11:01 PM
Attachments:image001.png
Thanks, Ryan.
I re-included the dpreviewcomments email as a recipient in my response, so my additional
comments here will become part of the materials for the P&Z Committee review before the
February 17th meeting.
In the "Ziegler ODP-FINAL-COMMENTS-RND 02-RESPONSES.pdf" you attached I see
comments (like the one you reference) about pedestrian improvements along Paddington and
Ziegler, but no mention of a pedestrian crossing across Ziegler at/near Paddington. So, I don't
believe the pedestrian-crossing concern for the Woodland Park Estates neighborhood has been
noted/incorporated to the degree your previous comments seem to indicate.
At 22min into the YouTube video I hear a neighbor of mine (Alison) comment on the lack of
pedestrian crossing. In response Nicole mentions both the Active Modes Plan and that this
feedback will be passed along to the team (I assume the planning-and-zoning committee).
However, I do not see that consideration of a pedestrian crossing has been passed along to the
committee in any written format as it relates to this ODP. I also do not see Alison's concern
about turning left (in a vehicle) out of Woodland Park Estates (Mesa Verde St and/or Grand
Teton Pl) onto southbound Ziegler, in context of the additional traffic levels on Ziegler, as
having been noted/considered/incorporated in any way into the ODP materials. So, again, I do
not believe these concerns have been fully understood, considered, documented, or
incorporated into the review process or development of the alternative compliance plan.
As Grand Teton Pl is essentially an extension of Paddington, I had hoped this ODP connecting
(vehicularly) to Paddington to the north would result in a full/signalled intersection at
Paddington/Grand Teton and Ziegler to addressing all of the following:
- Left, northbound turns out of the new development (addressed by alternative compliance
plan)
- Left, northbound turns out of English Ranch (NOT addressed by alternative compliance
plan)
- Left, southbound turns out of Woodland Park Estates (NOT addressed by alternative
compliance plan)
- Pedestrian crossing (NOT addressed by alternative compliance plan)
At 56min in the Youtube video of the Zoom recording, Nicole(?) explicitly states that a signal
is not being considered at Paddington/Ziegler because, "without that [vehicular Paddington]
connection, there just will not be enough traffic there to warrant a signal at Paddington."
Again at 1:03 it is reiterated that the Paddington intersection will not have any changes made
to it "without having that connection to this development" and will remain in its existing
condition ongoing.
The alternative compliance plan, by eliminating improvements to that intersection, provides
demonstrably less functionality and benefit. It addresses concerns of English Ranch residents
about the connection to Paddington bringing vehicular traffic into their neighborhood, but at
ITEM 2, CORRESPONDENCE 6
Packet pg. 8
the expense of both vehicular and pedestrian safety on Ziegler. So the alternative compliance
plan is not clearly an equally good plan, much less a superior plan, compared to improvements
to that intersection that would occur without the alternative compliance plan. Incorporating
into the alternative compliance plan a pedestrian crossing across Ziegler at Paddington would
decrease the tradeoffs by at least addressing the pedestrian concern. And maybe there is some
other solution that could address even more of the concerns (like vehicular safety turning left
out of Woodland Park Estates onto southbound Ziegler). But the alternative compliance plan,
as it currently exists without any of these other considerations addressed, seems not yet worthy
of acceptance.
Regards,
Craig
On Mon, Feb 7, 2022 at 1:56 PM Ryan Mounce <RMounce@fcgov.com> wrote:
Hi Craig,
In regards to documentation, I would recommend a couple sources:
See attached comment letter for an interim round of review of this proposal by staff
last year. Specifically comment #7 in the Engineering section requesting notes be
added for further examination of pedestrian improvements when individual phases
(called Project Development Plans) are reviewed.
You can view a recording of last week’s neighborhood meeting update for this
proposal at: https://youtu.be/a3N3ZpMljJIv. Most of the meeting discussion is related
to transportation issues and this is where Traffic Operations staff mentioned they’ve
heard feedback from neighbors and they’re interested in a pedestrian crossing along
this stretch of Ziegler, and to include this information as part of the Active Modes
Plan.
A final note of clarification is that this particular proposal wouldn’t be responsible for fully
funding a pedestrian crossing. This would be something the City would initiate partly due to
existing conditions and the ODP proposal would be required to contribute a proportional
share based on traffic studies that would be required to submit for subsequent phases of
development if the ODP is approved.
Regards,
ITEM 2, CORRESPONDENCE 6
Packet pg. 9
Ryan Mounce
Planning Services
City of Fort Collins
970.224.6186 | rmounce@fcgov.com
From: Craig Latzke <craig@latzke.us>
Sent: Monday, February 7, 2022 1:30 PM
To: Ryan Mounce <RMounce@fcgov.com>; Cortney Geary <cgeary@fcgov.com>
Subject: [EXTERNAL] Re: Pedestrian Access Concern re ODP210004, Ziegler-Corbett
Overall Development Plan
Ryan,
Thanks for the thoughtful and relevant reply, inclusion in the meeting information packet,
and the information you provided. You noted that "this particular crossing has been
identified as a priority in the update to the City’s Active Modes Plan which is currently
underway." Is there any documentation you can share indicating that this crossing is a
priority (to Traffic Operations or other departments) or part of that Active Moves Plan in
draft or other form? I ask because I've never seen such in writing, which would be
promising.
I've copied Courtney Geary to ensure this concern/request is on her radar, as it overlaps with
the Active Modes Plan, Safe Routes to School, and Walking initiatives that she oversees.
Courtney, as a side note to you: My wife is an avid recreational road biker and has enjoyed
and appreciated the City's friendliness/accommodations to this for the last 20+ years. Fort
Collins and the surrounding areas are notably better than most other places we visit in this
regard. A few years ago we moved across town to reduce commuting, I now commute to
work nearly exclusively by walking, and often walk to shop/eat in the Front Range Village
area...so neat to be able to do that. But when we cross Zigler at Paddington to get to the
park...yikes. Thanks for your work on extending these benefits to more people across more
of the city.
Have a great afternoon and a great week!
Regards,
ITEM 2, CORRESPONDENCE 6
Packet pg. 10
Craig
On Mon, Feb 7, 2022 at 11:48 AM Ryan Mounce <RMounce@fcgov.com> wrote:
Hello Craig,
I wanted to confirm receipt of your comments for the Ziegler-Corbett ODP project and let
you know I’ve passed your message along to be included in the Planning and Zoning
Commission’s packet of information for this proposal.
You may have seen an automatic reply from Joe Olson’s email address, as he is no longer
working at the City, however, I have also passed along your message to Traffic
Operations and Engineering staff who are reviewing this proposal.
Traffic Operations is still working to get a pedestrian crossing for Ziegler near Paddington
Road. As was shared at a recent neighborhood meeting, this particular crossing has been
identified as a priority in the update to the City’s Active Modes Plan which is currently
underway. Staff is also working with the applicants Ziegler-Corbett ODP proposal on
contributing their share for a future crossing. The timing is still uncertain as the ODP
proposal is a master plan without any rights to develop or construct any buildings. A
financial contribution would come later when individual phases of the ODP are reviewed
if the overall ODP is first approved.
Regards,
Ryan Mounce
Planning Services
City of Fort Collins
970.224.6186 | rmounce@fcgov.com
From: Craig Latzke <craig@latzke.us>
Sent: Sunday, February 6, 2022 5:20 PM
To: Ryan Mounce <RMounce@fcgov.com>; Joe Olson <jolson@fcgov.com>; Sharlene
Manno <smanno@fcgov.com>; City Leaders <CityLeaders@fcgov.com>; Development
Review Coordinators <DRCoord@fcgov.com>; Current_Planning
ITEM 2, CORRESPONDENCE 6
Packet pg. 11
<Planning@fcgov.com>; Zoning <zoning@fcgov.com>; Engineering Mailbox
<engineering@fcgov.com>
Subject: [EXTERNAL] Pedestrian Access Concern re ODP210004, Ziegler-Corbett
Overall Development Plan
Ryan Mounce (City Planner)
Shar Manno (P&Z Customer and Administrative Manager)
Joe Olson (Traffic Engineer)
City Council Members and City Manager
Planning & Zoning Commission (not sure of email addresses, so trying planning, zoning,
and drcoord addresses)
In reviewing the agenda for the February 17, 2022 meeting regarding the Ziegler-
Corbett Overall Development Plan (hereafter shortened to "ODP"), I noticed an
important consideration slipped the attention of the Planning & Zoning
Commission and others involved in the review of this ODP and the "request for
Alternative Compliance to Section 3.6.3 regarding street pattern and connectivity
standards."
I live in Woodland Park Estates (hereafter "WPE"), the subdivision to the East and
North of the ODP. The children and families in WPE do not have a reasonable
means of crossing Ziegler on foot to access our neighborhood elementary school
(Linton) or the closest park to us (English Ranch Park). So, in 2018 I inquired
about the possible addition of a signalled crosswalk at Paddington Rd and
Ziegler. We were told this need was known and was most-likely to be met by a
future signalled intersection at Paddington Rd and Ziegler Rd, depending on the
development of the parcial that is the subject of this ODP. Related email from Joe
Olson (City Traffic Engineer) is included below, after my email.
Many other neighbors have expressed to me their fear of crossing Ziegler on foot,
long distance to the next closest crosswalk, and their desire for a signalled
pedestrian crosswalk at this location.
Here is an illustration of the walking path from WPE to the Linton Elementary
school with (green) and without (green plus red) a crosswalk at Paddington Rd.
The route is nearly doubled (from 3700ft to 6700ft) without the crosswalk. That is
a LONG detour for pedestrians, especially elementary-school-aged pedestrians.
ITEM 2, CORRESPONDENCE 6
Packet pg. 12
The Feb 17 meeting agenda states that staff recommends approving the Alternative
Compliance Plan, which changes the connection to Paddington Rd to the north of this
ODP to pedestrian-only and instead adds a new street and new intersection of that street to
Ziegler.
In recommending this approval, staff notes the following in their first finding:
1. "The lack of a local street connection and vehicular access does not result in any reduction to
access or circulation for bicycles, pedestrians, or transit."
This finding appears to be incorrect. Without the alternative compliance plan, additional
vehicular traffic on Paddington from this development would drive the addition of a
signalled intersection at Paddington/Ziegler, an intersection which would also
accommodate pedestrian/bicycle access from WPE across Ziegler. The plan instead
creates a new street with a new "channelized T" intersection which does not
accommodate pedestrian/bicycle access from WPE across Ziegler. Thus the alternative
compliance plan REDUCES the access or circulation for bicycles and/or
pedestrians compared to if the alternative compliance plan is not approved.
This alternative compliance plan likely also negatively impacts vehicular access in and
out of the Woodland Park Estates subdivision, compared with having a signalled
intersection at Paddington/Ziegler.
With traffic on Ziegler already substantial and certain to continue increasing - adding the
additional street and channelized-T intersection, instead of making use of Paddington Rd,
ITEM 2, CORRESPONDENCE 6
Packet pg. 13
may be a shortsighted move by the developer and the City with regards to vehicular,
bicycle, and pedestrian traffic.
I request that the persons receiving this email rescind or reject the recommendation
to approve this alternative compliance plan, or work with the developer to revise this
plan to accommodate cross-Ziegler pedestrian traffic from Woodland Park Estates
at Paddington, or otherwise ensure that a signalled pedestrian crosswalk (or
signalled intersection) will be installed at the Paddington/Ziegler intersection.
Thanks for your time,
Regards,
Craig Latzke
3908 Mesa Verde St
Fort Collins, CO
970-227-7444
PS.
In anticipation of a suggestion that WPE residents use the next closest existing
crosswalk at Council Tree and Ziegler, I want to note that not having a crosswalk
here significantly increases the walking distance to the school/park. Looking at
precedent, most of the signalled crosswalks on Ziegler/Drake and Horsetooth were
installed in locations where the next closest existing crosswalk was closer than
Council Tree is to this proposed crosswalk:
3010 feet: Distance of round-trip detour (to Council Tree) if Ziegler does not
gain a crosswalk at Paddington Rd.
1010 feet: Distance of round-trip detour (to Timberline) if Drake did not have
a crosswalk at Illinois Dr.
1730 feet: Distance of round-trip detour (to Timberline) if Horsetooth did not
have a crosswalk at Arctic Fox Dr.
2250 feet: Distance of round-trip detour (to Timberline) if Drake did not have
a crosswalk at the Power Trail.
2300 feet: Distance of round-trip detour (to College Ave) if Drake did not
have a crosswalk at Tulane Dr.
2510 feet: Distance of round-trip detour (to Lemay, or Stuart) if Drake did
not have a crosswalk at Woodward entrance.
ITEM 2, CORRESPONDENCE 6
Packet pg. 14
3340 feet: Distance of round-trip detour (to Lemay) if Drake did not have a
crosswalk near Brookwood Dr.
Referenced email from Joe Olson (City Traffic Engineer) on Sept 5, 2018
(emphasis mine):
Thanks for the clarification on the crossing location. We're aware of the desire for a signalized
crossing on Ziegler at Paddington. Unfortunately, it's complicated because of the
potential development of the property to the south of English Ranch. Depending on
how that property develops it may end up that we signalize Ziegler/Paddington
(potentially with some developer participation in the cost) or, there may be a need
instead for a signal further to the south to serve that property. The bottom line is
that there is still uncertainty about the right location for a signal. That being the
case, we feel like we need to wait to see what happens with the development before
making a decision about signalization of Ziegler/Paddington.
In the meantime, we suggest that people use the signal at Council Tree to
cross Ziegler. I realize that's not a perfect solution but it probably makes the most
sense in the interim until things resolve at Paddington.
Let me know if you need more information. If you'd prefer to talk on the phone my
number is 970-224-6062.
Sincerely,
Joe
Joe Olson, P.E.
Traffic Engineer
City of Fort Collins
ITEM 2, CORRESPONDENCE 6
Packet pg. 15
1
Katharine Claypool
From:Sharlene Manno
Sent:Thursday, February 17, 2022 8:02 AM
To:Katharine Claypool
Subject:FW: [EXTERNAL] Ziegler-Corbett Overall Development Plan Comments for 2-17 Meeting
Categories:P&Z
Another one.
From: Michael DuHadway <m.duhadway@comcast.net>
Sent: Wednesday, February 16, 2022 4:26 PM
To: Sharlene Manno <smanno@fcgov.com>
Cc: Michael DuHadway <m.duhadway@comcast.net>
Subject: [EXTERNAL] Ziegler‐Corbett Overall Development Plan Comments for 2‐17 Meeting
Shar,
Below is my comments for the Commission, for meeting scheduled 2-17.
I live on the east end of Paddington Road (2902 Paddington). Developer is proposing 3-4 story
structures, right across from my house. I don't want to look out my front windows and see these
massive structures everyday. Worried about noise and light pollution from the structures very close
by. I am also worried the my house/property value will be reduced because of this. I believe that
those structures should be limited to 2 stories.
They are talking about putting a bike/walk path from the development to Paddington Road. With the
very high density the developer is scoping for this project. I don't see how the can provide enough
parking for the people living in that development. I am worried the Paddington Road will become
overflow parking for people living or visiting in the development.
I believe that the Commission should not make changes to the primary and secondary use plan for
this development. People in the area like a mix, this gives us increased opportunities for new
businesses and restaurants. This can all be done with just walking to them from English Ranch.
Sincerely,
Michael DuHadway
2902 Paddington Road
English Ranch
ITEM 2, CORRESPONDENCE 7
Packet pg. 16
From:William R Murray
To:Development Review Comments
Subject:[EXTERNAL] Zeigler-Corbett Overall Development Plan
Date:Wednesday, February 16, 2022 7:30:59 PM
Dear Planning Commission:
We live in English Ranch and wanted to make two suggestions for the Zeigler-Corbett Overall Development Plan
for input to the meeting of 2/2/2022 or after.
1. We are frequently disturbed by loud motorcycles driving down Zeigler road at high speed multiple times per day.
We would like to recommend that reductions in traffic noise and increases in safety also be considered as reasons
for a traffic light at Zeigler and Paddington. Other speed mitigation approaches, such as speed bumps, lower speed
limits, or better enforcement would also be helpful.
2. We understand that the newly modified plan is intended to restrict access to English Ranch to bikes and
pedestrians. If access is controlled through bollards to keep out cars, that would not keep out motorcycles. Please
ensure that motorcycles also cannot access English Ranch, as the motorcycle noise from Zeigler is bad enough as is.
Thank you for consideration,
Bill and Mary Murray
3008 Stonehaven Drive
English Ranch
ITEM 2, CORRESPONDENCE 8
Packet pg. 17
From:Greg Rosing
To:Development Review Comments
Subject:[EXTERNAL] re: Ziegler-Corbett development proposal
Date:Thursday, February 17, 2022 10:49:24 AM
To whom it may concern:
We have watched with interest as the Overall Development Plan (ODP) for a phased, 30-acre, mixed-
use development located north of Front Range Village between Ziegler Road and Corbett Drive has
progressed through the neighborhood meetings. We were pleased to see that the developer’s latest
plans include only pedestrian/bicycle access on Edmonds Road between Paddington Road and the
development. We are certain that if vehicle traffic is allowed through this access point, it will result
in significantly higher vehicle traffic levels through the English Ranch and adjoining neighborhoods
and will make the streets in these neighborhoods less safe for pedestrians and bicyclists. We already
witness many drivers trying to find a shortcut through the neighborhoods from Timberline,
Horsetooth and Ziegler Roads to the Front Range Village Shopping Center or from the shopping
center trying to find a shortcut the opposite direction via Corbett Drive. As the speed bumps and
“Your Speed” (radar) signs along Sunstone Drive, Kingsley Drive and Paddington Road are only
somewhat effective in slowing the existing traffic already using these streets, we are concerned for
the safety of the pedestrians and bicyclist (many of which are children) in our neighborhood should
additional vehicle traffic be allowed through Edmonds Road to the new development and
subsequently, Front Range Village – such access will undoubtedly add significantly more traffic
through the existing neighborhoods.
We understand that development of the currently vacant land is inevitable and are not opposed to
that happening as long as the traffic controls are implemented in a way that preserves the safety of
the existing adjacent neighborhoods. Therefore, we ask that as you consider the development plan,
you do so without allowing vehicle traffic to/from the development on Edmonds Road.
Thank you for your consideration.
Melodee Barcelona & Greg Rosing
2608 Southfield Court
Fort Collins, CO 80525
ITEM 2, CORRESPONDENCE 9
Packet pg. 18
1
Katharine Claypool
From:Sharlene Manno
Sent:Thursday, February 17, 2022 7:46 AM
To:Katharine Claypool
Subject:FW: [EXTERNAL] Pedestrian Access Concern re ODP210004, Ziegler-Corbett Overall Development
Plan
Categories:P&Z
Another one.
From: Craig Latzke <craig@latzke.us>
Sent: Wednesday, February 16, 2022 3:17 PM
To: Josh Devine <jdevine1980@gmail.com>
Cc: Ryan Mounce <RMounce@fcgov.com>; Joe Olson <jolson@fcgov.com>; Sharlene Manno <smanno@fcgov.com>;
City Leaders <CityLeaders@fcgov.com>; Development Review Coordinators <DRCoord@fcgov.com>; Current_Planning
<Planning@fcgov.com>; Zoning <zoning@fcgov.com>; Engineering Mailbox <engineering@fcgov.com>; Kimberly Bacon
<2387cf67988961f9ff3daaa0a2d622e184373a49e9a50b8fb20df838ad15a2df@mastino.mailer.appfolio.us>
Subject: Re: [EXTERNAL] Pedestrian Access Concern re ODP210004, Ziegler‐Corbett Overall Development Plan
"doesn't really increase the chance of getting a signal at Ziegler and Paddington based on the initial neighborhood
meeting when the original plan was in place to make the English Ranch connection"
That does not match with what I was told by a city traffic engineer 3‐4 years ago nor with what I heard on the recording
of the last meeting, where it was specifically stated at least twice by a City representative that without the vehicular
traffic connecting from the ODP to Paddington, Paddington/Ziegler was now unlikely to get a traffic signal because there
would not be traffic volume (from English Ranch plus the ODP) to warrant that signal.
If the addition of a pedestrian crossing can be guaranteed and maybe something else done to help with left‐turns out of
Woodland Park, without connecting the ODP to Paddington ‐ then our neighborhoods can both win instead of having
competing concerns.
Until the alternative compliance plan removed the vehicular connection, our neighborhood's hopes for the safe crossing
of Ziegler hinged on this long‐awaited added signal at Paddington. The alternative compliance plan seems to remove this
hope. I would like to see an option that benefits both neighborhoods, instead of this alternative compliance plan (as it is
today) which sacrifices the interests of our neighborhood (Woodland Park) for the interests of your neighborhood
(English Ranch).
Regards,
Craig
On Wed, Feb 16, 2022 at 1:55 PM Josh Devine <jdevine1980@gmail.com> wrote:
Hello Craig and others of the city,
I live in English Ranch and read Craig's email to the city on the Ziegler and Paddington intersection. A couple things
conflict with the overall concern about safety in my opinion. Whether or not the new development connects traffic to
Paddington does not affect if there will also be a connection to Ziegler the way I saw the before/after plans. It appears
that the Ziegler connection will happen either way. It's going to come out of one intersection or two (if they add the
traffic connection to Paddington) so I would think the overall impact to Ziegler traffic is going to be about the same. I
ITEM 2, CORRESPONDENCE 10
Packet pg. 19
2
guess Craig is thinking if they do both intersections out of the new development there will be a better chance at getting
a signal at Paddington and Ziegler (with no guarantees though) which I can understand but that leads to my next
concern/point.
If there is a traffic connection to English Ranch then there is going to be a LOT more traffic along Paddington and
Kingsley, both streets that I assume you'll still want to walk on and across if you are concerned about getting through
English Ranch and Linton with children. Sure it won't be nearly as much traffic as on Zeigler but it will be much more in
the neighborhood. As others have noted on the neighborhood review, almost every time we walk/bike through the
walkway from Kingsley to Corbett there are cars thinking they can get through. This is after years of that road never
going through. Once it is open, there will be a flood of cars cutting through Paddington/Kingsley to get to Horsetooth.
They aren't going to put signals in the neighborhood and traffic coming out of Front Range and the new development is
not going to have a "home" tie to English Ranch so they will probably be more likely to drive without as much care as
with people who live in the neighborhood.
So connecting the new development to Paddington for traffic could result in the worst case scenario for both the WPE
and English Ranch neighborhoods in my opinion:
‐ increased traffic on Ziegler at Paddington either way so it's going to be tough for WPE residents to cross either way
‐ increased traffic in English Ranch on residential streets decreasing safety throughout the journey from WPE through
English Ranch, not just to English Ranch
‐ doesn't really increase the chance of getting a signal at Ziegler and Paddington based on the initial neighborhood
meeting when the original plan was in place to make the English Ranch connection. I believe it was indicated that the
traffic study still didn't warrant a signal even if the new development connected to Paddington. I could be wrong on
this point and misunderstood the information from the traffic study however.
Thank you,
Josh Devine
‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐ Forwarded message ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐
From: Kimberly Bacon
<2387cf67988961f9ff3daaa0a2d622e184373a49e9a50b8fb20df838ad15a2df@mastino.mailer.appfolio.us>
Date: Wed, Feb 16, 2022 at 12:13 PM
Subject: Important Meeting Information
To: <jdevine1980@gmail.com>
Dear English Ranch South Residents,
The good news from the Feb 2 Development Proposal Review meeting was that
the plan for the Ziegler‐Corbett property had been amended to exclude any
vehicular connection to English Ranch via Edmonds Rd. Thank you for your
participation.
However, this plan must be approved by the Planning and Zoning Commission at their meeting tomorrow, Feb 17th at
6pm. Agenda is attached. There has already been a suggestion submitted by a resident of Woodland Park to our east to
rescind that change (see second attachment),
We need to make sure our voices are heard again to ensure the vehicular
connection continues to be excluded. The public can participate and
comment in person or via Zoom.
Meeting information here:
https://link.edgepilot.com/s/11799280/qemVRveyqUiSrUG1fORDBw?u=https://www.fcgov.com/developmentreview/p
roposals
Zoom link:
ITEM 2, CORRESPONDENCE 10
Packet pg. 20
3
https://link.edgepilot.com/s/e9fb5360/Kj3jaSkznUKTfA‐0v251cA?u=https://fcgov.zoom.us/j/95695544771
Thanks,
Your English Ranch South HOA Board
Kimberly Bacon
Sr. Community Manager
6205 S Main St, Suite D‐275
Aurora, CO 80016
(303) 928‐7670
ITEM 2, CORRESPONDENCE 10
Packet pg. 21
RPT Realty
20750 Civic Center Dr. Suite 310
Southfield, MI 48076
1
February 17, 2022
To: Fort Colling Planning Services & The Fort Collins Planning and Zoning Board
Re: Mixed Use Development Zeigler & Corbett ODP Review
To Whom it May Concern,
This letter is to express the support from the Owner of Front Range Village (“FRV”),
RPT Realty, Inc. (“RPT”) for a residential development project on the remaining lots at
Zeigler Ave and Corbett Dr. (Proposal # ODP210004)
RPT supports strategic, sustainable, necessary residential development within the Fort
Collins community. Understanding the current zoning category this remaining lot is
restricted to, RPT encourages the Planning and Zoning board to grant the required
modifications to the zoning to allow for a residential development to be built on this land.
Further, RPT supports the included details of the current ODP of including a childcare
facility within the development. Equitable access to affordable, stable, and quality
childcare is lacking in this community, and adding options like this development
proposal is planning, are exactly the right steps to move forward and make significant
impacts on the current unbalanced childcare options in this community.
RPT has been presented with plans for changing the traffic patterns on Zeigler Road
that would change access to a service/delivery entrance of FRV to add a Channelized
“T” Intersection. After review of the plans, RPT encourages that the following conditions
are considered in the addition of this type of intersection:
•The Channelized “T” Intersection is built to be wide enough to accommodate a
left turn for delivery trucks, that range in size but are used commercially for large
freight deliveries and include semi-trucks, “18-Wheelers”, and truck and trailers.
The turning capacities of these large trucks is a paramount concern of adding
this type of intersection. It is critical that this road, initially designed to be a
service access road continue to be utilized for it’s originally intended
purpose and changes to Zeigler Road need to take this into serious
consideration.
•Adequate signage along Zeigler Road be added to alert oncoming drivers of the
intersection change or existence– for both north and southbound traffic.
Lastly, FRV was the first and largest development on the north end of Corbett Dr. Over
the years, the owner of FRV has taken on some maintenance responsibilities of the
street beyond the normal scope of obligation for a private owner over a public street,
ITEM 2, CORRESPONDENCE 11
Packet pg. 22
RPT Realty
20750 Civic Center Dr. Suite 310
Southfield, MI 48076
2
including light snow removal, landscaping maintenance, sidewalk maintenance, etc.
FRV staff receives complaints about the inadequate snow removal efforts of Corbett Dr.
during almost every snow event, resulting in RPT’s hired vendors performing services
outside of their contracted scopes to provide safe conditions along Corbett Dr. Lastly,
the landscaping along sidewalks, within medians, etc. has fallen onto the owner of FRV
since the Center’s development. To be clear: without RPT’s involvement, these things
would not be addressed, and other private owners currently and previously have
benefitted from RPT taking initiative to address these items in a timely manner. With this
additional development, RPT is urging the city to take more action in maintaining this
street and alleviating RPT of the expense and informal obligation of maintaining the
publicly owned and operated street.
We thank you for taking the time to consider the concerns outlined here, specifically
pertaining to the proposed Channelized “T” Intersection, and future maintenance of
Corbett Dr. as it continues to be come more and more utilized by the public. We are
excited and supportive of the development including residential units and a child care
facility.
Thank you,
Huston Hoffman
General Manager
Front Range Village
RPT Realty, LP
ITEM 2, CORRESPONDENCE 11
Packet pg. 23
1
Katharine Claypool
From:Sharlene Manno
Sent:Thursday, February 17, 2022 7:45 AM
To:Katharine Claypool
Subject:FW: Note to PZ RE: Country Club Reserve site
Categories:P&Z
Hi Katie,
Here is one to include.
Shar
From: Yani Jones <yjones@fcgov.com>
Sent: Wednesday, February 16, 2022 5:29 PM
To: Sharlene Manno <smanno@fcgov.com>
Subject: RE: Note to PZ RE: Country Club Reserve site
Hi Shar!
This comment from Ms. Holzworth is intended to be a general public comment for P&Z (since it’s about a project they’ve
already made a decision on), if that’s not clear from her message.
Take care,
Yani
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
YANI JONES
Pronouns: She/Her (What’s this?)
Program Coordinator
City of Fort Collins Neighborhood Services
(970) 658-0263
FCGov.com/NeighborhoodServices
From: Amy Holzworth <holzworths@msn.com>
Sent: Wednesday, February 16, 2022 5:25 PM
To: Sharlene Manno <smanno@fcgov.com>; City Leaders <CityLeaders@fcgov.com>
Cc: Yani Jones <yjones@fcgov.com>
Subject: [EXTERNAL] Note to PZ RE: Country Club Reserve site
Hi Shar and City Council contact ‐
I was given your name by very helpful and smart Yani Jones and received a very intelligent and thoughtful response from
City Environmental Planner, W. Scott Benton. What wonderfully competent staff. Please let their supervisors know of
their excellent service.
Thank you for your service to the Fort Collins as well.
GENERAL PUBLIC COMMENT
Packet pg. 24
2
Being a public service person myself, I am proud to serve our community and have lived in Fort Collins since 1979 other
than out of state for college and some time in Colorado Springs.
The site preparation for the Country Club Reserve is so violently aggressive and no different than any other development
prep I’m sure. Although I’m not altruistic about it, I certainly have concerns about how decisions are made to continue
to let developers get nearly whatever they want and I’m not convinced affordable housing is actually, truly being
developed. I would not be surprised if the earth mover workers can’t afford to live there.
Many of us in our neighborhood must have missed the 2018 notice of public comment on this site development
proposal and the approval process in 2021 seemed pretty quiet but speedy. Glad to have seen in the minutes that a few
neighbors to the East of the site made comments. We voiced some things in a 2016 meeting however.
This is just a drop in the bucket with my one small voice but my experience watching earth scrapers remove habitat
and displace animals in a what would have been better served as an Open Space on this end of town is mindboggling
and distressing. In less than a week I saw 4 buck deer stunned by trucks and then move out. They literally stared at them
from 100 feet or so and it was obvious they were confused. I wonder about the life, or death, of innumerable frogs while
they hibernate, the fox I heard screaming at night and whose den was likely destroyed and not to mention the snakes,
mice, rabbits, pair of eagles and insects that made up a lively habitat. Animals are our neighbors as well and should have
a voice. One lone hawk watches the activity from their favorite tree.
My concerns, and many folks would probably agree, is the loss of habitat, inches tight between structures, light and
noise pollution, access from Douglas Road and Turnberry and so many other issues. How do we not prioritize Open
Space as efficiently and aggressively as development?
Please, if anything, require developers to provide at least two native plants to each new homeowner. Or maybe realtors,
I don’t know. Maybe I can work with Yani to utilize one of the neighborhood grants and give from our neighborhood to
the new one? And whatever you can do to mitigate too tight structure design could reduce the catastrophic possibilities
of situations like the Marshall Fire catastrophe. Many of us would be respect and support you.
One small voice, no need to reply but thank you for listening‐
Amy Holzworth
Cell 970‐222‐9771
Email: holzworths@msn.com
Sent from Mail for Windows
GENERAL PUBLIC COMMENT
Packet pg. 25