Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
Home
My WebLink
About
COUNCIL - AGENDA ITEM - 03/31/2020 - PUBLIC HEARING AND SECOND READING OF ORDINANCE NO.
Agenda Item 17 Item # 17 Page 1 AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY March 31, 2020 City Council THE CITY MANAGER IS RECOMMENDING THAT CITY COUNCIL POSTPONE THE HEARING AND SECOND READING OF ORDINANCE NO. 138, 2019 UNTIL APRIL 21, 2020. STAFF Cameron Gloss, Planning Manager Tom Leeson, Director, Comm Dev & Neighborhood Svrs Brad Yatabe, Legal SUBJECT Public Hearing and Second Reading of Ordinance No. 138, 2019, Amending the Zoning Map of the City of Fort Collins by Changing the Zoning Classification for that Certain Property Known as the Hughes Stadium Site Rezoning and Approving Corresponding Changes to the Residential Neighborhood Sign District Map. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY This Ordinance, adopted on First Reading on November 5, 2019, by a vote of 4-3 (Nays: Cunniff, Gutowsky, Pignataro), rezones 164.55 acres located on the west side of Overland Trail and north of CR32, with one condition, and to place the property into the Residential Sign District. City Council initiated the rezoning on July 16, 2019 and directed City staff to prepare a rezoning application and make a recommendation regarding the appropriate zoning. The site is currently zoned Transition (T) and staff recommends placement into the Residential Foothills (RF) and Low-Density Mixed-Use Neighborhood (LMN) zone districts. A recommended condition of the rezone requires that future development in the portion zoned Residential Foothills district meet the requirements of a Cluster Plan pursuant to Land Use Code Section 4.3(E)(2). The request places the property into the Residential Sign District. The Planning and Zoning Board on a 4-2 vote recommended that City Council not adopt the staff proposed zoning and instead zone the property entirely Residential Foothills. Second Reading hearing procedure: 1. Announcement of item 2. Consideration of any procedural issues 3. Additional City staff presentation, if any, regarding the rezoning application 4. Additional property owner presentation, if any, regarding the rezoning application 5. Public testimony 6. City staff and property owner rebuttal testimony 7. Councilmember questions of staff, the property owner, and members of the public that provided comments 8. Council decision Due to the COVID-19 health emergency, the City is providing an option for the public, including the property owner of the property being considered for rezoning, to provide input to City Council remotely as opposed to in person. Please refer to the summary agenda information for more details on this remote option. Any member of the public, including the property owner of the property being considered for rezoning, who wishes to provide materials to City Council for consideration in relation to this item must provide such information to the City Clerk no later than noon on March 31 as required pursuant to Section 3.g.(2) of the Amended Rules of Procedure Governing the Conduct of City Council Meetings and Council Work Sessions. STAFF RECOMMENDATION Agenda Item 17 Item # 17 Page 2 Staff recommends adoption of the Ordinance on Second Reading. BACKGROUND / DISCUSSION Second Reading of this Ordinance was delayed due to a citizen ethics complaint alleging that Mayor Troxell and Mayor Pro Tem Stephens have a financial interest and a personal interest in the Hughes Stadium annexation property rezoning decision, and an allegation that Mayor Troxell had a conflict of interest in light of National Association of Realtors Fund campaign activities in 2017. On December 16, 2019, the Alternate Ethics Review Board conducted an initial review and concluded that the complaints did not merit further investigation or action. Since November 5, 2019, staff has received relatively few additional public comments and questions. Citizen inquires have focused on three main areas: 1. Clarification on the residential and non-residential uses, and density and range of housing types, permitted under the proposed RF and LMN zone districts 2. A request for the City to purchase the site for affordable housing 3. Clarification that the City of Fort Collins will continue to be the water service provider to the property. ATTACHMENTS 1. First Reading Agenda Item Summary, November 5, 2019 (w/o attachments) (PDF) 2. Public Comments received November 6, 2019 through March 10, 2020 (PDF) 3. Public Comments received March 11 through March 25, 2020 (PDF) 4. Ordinance No. 138, 2019 (PDF) Agenda Item 12 Item # 12 Page 1 AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY November 5, 2019 City Council STAFF Cameron Gloss, Planning Manager Tom Leeson, Director, Comm Dev & Neighborhood Svrs Brad Yatabe, Legal SUBJECT First Reading of Ordinance No. 138, 2019, Amending the Zoning Map of the City of Fort Collins by Changing the Zoning Classification for that Certain Property Known as the Hughes Stadium Site Rezoning and Approving Corresponding Changes to the Residential Neighborhood Sign District Map. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY The purpose of this item is to rezone 164.55 acres located on the west side of Overland Trail and north of CR32 (parcel # 9720100913) with one condition and to place the property into the Residential Sign District. City Council initiated the rezoning on July 16, 2019 and directed City staff to prepare a rezoning application and make a recommendation regarding the appropriate zoning. The site is currently zoned Transition (T) and staff recommends placement into the Residential Foothills (RF) and Low-Density Mixed-Use Neighborhood (LMN) zone districts. A recommended condition of the rezone requires that future development in the portion zoned Residential Foothills district meet the requirements of a Cluster Plan pursuant to Land Use Code Section 4.3(E)(2). The request places the property into the Residential Sign District. The Planning and Zoning Board on a 4-2 vote recommended that City Council not adopt the staff proposed zoning and instead zone the property entirely Residential Foothills. STAFF RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends adoption of the Ordinance on First Reading. BACKGROUND / DISCUSSION I. Site History The subject property was annexed into the City of Fort Collins with City Council approval of the Hughes Stadium Site Annexation Ordinance 123, 2018, on October 16, 2018. The property was placed into the Transition (T) zone district. The Hughes property was previously a federally owned parcel that was gifted to the Colorado Board of Agriculture in September 1957 almost 10 years after the Horsetooth Reservoir construction started. The Reservoir was completed in 1949, with the first water storage in Horsetooth Reservoir in January 1951.The BLM first transferred the property to the Department of Health, Education and Welfare and ownership was then transferred to the Board of Agriculture. Other than a gravel pit fronting on Overland Trail that provided extracted materials for the Horsetooth Reservoir construction, and dry land farming on the northernmost twenty acres, the site remained vacant and in an unaltered state until the 1960s. Hughes Stadium, and a large parking lot covering much of the site, was constructed in 1967 and opened in 1968. In addition to football games, the stadium hosted music concerts, rodeos, Ag Days, and other public events. A ATTACHMENT 1 Agenda Item 12 Item # 12 Page 2 regional stormwater detention pond of approximately 27 acres was constructed in 1997 on the east/southeast portion of the site within the rodeo grounds that covered the previously mined area. The detention pond was constructed as a result of the historic flood event and designed to accommodate stormwater flows originating from the site as well as parcels to the north and northwest. In 2011, an 18-hole disc golf course was developed by the City in conjunction with CSU within the detention pond area. CSU closed Hughes Stadium before the 2017-2018 school year, after completion of the on-campus Canvas Stadium. Site demolition and construction materials recycling and disposal was completed April - November 2018. The former stadium foundation remains about 10 feet below the ground surface. Surrounding Zoning and Land Use North South East West Zoning Medium Density Mixed-Use Neighborhood (MMN); County FA-1 - Farming POL (Public Open Lands); County FA-1 - Farming Medium Density Mixed- Use Neighborhood (MMN); County FA-1 - Farming POL (Public Open Lands); County FA-1 - Farming Land Use Single and multi- family residential (Westgate); single- family residential; pasture Pineridge Natural Area; single family house. Single and multi-family residential (Trail West, Willow Lane, Stadium Heights); Drive-in Movie Theater Maxwell Natural Area; vacant (owned by US Bureau of Reclamation) History of Long-Range Plans Pertaining to the Site Designation of the Hughes Stadium site as an area slated for urban growth has changed substantially over the last 50 plus years: 1967-The first “modern” comprehensive plan, “The Plan for Progress” was adopted. The Plan recommended that an expressway be constructed west of Overland Trail connecting the “LaPorte area southerly to the west border of Loveland”. The “CSU Stadium” was noted on the Plan and Light Industrial land uses were recommended north of the Stadium along the west side of Overland Trail. 1974-The City’s first Open Space Plan, and also the first element of a new Comprehensive Plan, was adopted. This Plan provided the initial strategy for acquiring and preserving land for open space (eventually becoming the Natural Areas program). The Open Space Plan recommended acquisition of land areas within the foothills designated for geologic hazard, all of which are located at elevations higher than the Hughes site. (Attachment 1) 1979-Urban Service Area Study; City Council adopted the Land Use Policies Plan and included this land use element in the Intergovernmental Agreement for the Fort Collins Urban Growth Area (UGA) adopted the following year. Properties west of Overland Trail, except for the Miller Property abutting the Hughes Stadium site to the north, were excluded from the UGA at that time. Agenda Item 12 Item # 12 Page 3 8. Design should address compatibility with existing and planned uses on adjacent public and private lands. 1986-Urban Growth Area (UGA) amendment west of Overland Trail, adding 1,360 acres along the Foothills and creation of a new Residential Foothills (RF) zone district allowing either a standard subdivision of 1 dwelling unit per 2.29 acres or a “Cluster Development Plan with a gross density of 1 dwelling unit per acre. No structure could extend above the 5,250-foot elevation under the RF district. 1992-Natural Areas Policy Plan adopted that built upon the Open Space Plan and Foothills Area Study and was an ‘element’ of the Comprehensive Plan. Maps contained within the Plan do not include the Hughes Stadium site as part of the foothills resource area. 1997-First version of a new Comprehensive Plan, known as “City Plan,” adopted. The original City Plan provided a fundamental shift in the community’s land use planning strategy, one that required the mixing of residential densities and uses within newly developing areas. New land use designations shown on a Structure Plan map were the Low-Density Mixed-Use Neighborhood and the Medium Density Mixed-Use Neighborhood. The Hughes Stadium site was located outside of the Growth Management Area (renamed from the previous Urban Growth Area). o The RF zone district was carried forward into City Plan recognizing the previous analysis and policy direction of the Foothills Area Study. o The Master Street Plan amended to remove the roadway extension of Overland Trail between Drake and Harmony Roads. 2011-City Plan updated along with a parallel effort to update the Transportation Master Plan. Hughes Stadium site identified as an “area for future GMA expansion”. II. Applicable Development Standards Division 2.9 - Amendment of Zoning Map Applicable Code Standard Summary of Code Requirement and Analysis Staff Findings 2.9.2 - Applicability Only the Council may, after recommendation of the Planning and Zoning Board, adopt an ordinance amending the Zoning Map in accordance with the provisions of Division 2.9. Complies 2.9.3 - Initiation An amendment to the Zoning Map may be proposed by the Council, the Planning and Zoning Board, the Director or the owners of the property to be rezoned. On July 16, 2019, City Council initiated the rezoning of the former Hughes Stadium site. Complies 2.9.4 - Text and Map Amendment Review Procedures In order to approve a proposed rezoning of 640 acres of land or less (quasi- judicial) the decision maker must find that it satisfies the following criteria: The proposed amendment is: (a) consistent with the City Comprehensive Plan (City Plan); and/or (b) warranted by changed conditions within the neighborhood surrounding and including the subject property. The Planning and Zoning Board and City Council may consider the following additional factors: (a) whether and the extent to which the proposed amendment is compatible with existing and proposed uses surrounding the subject land, and is the appropriate zone district for the land; (b) whether and the extent to which the proposed amendment would result in significantly adverse impacts on the natural environment, including, but not limited to, water, air, noise, stormwater management, wildlife, vegetation, wetlands and natural functioning of the environment; (c) whether and the extent to which the proposed amendment would result in a logical and orderly development pattern. Complies Agenda Item 12 Item # 12 Page 4 III. Rezoning Procedural Overview 1. Neighborhood Meeting (August 8, 2019) If a quasi-judicial map amendment is the subject of a known controversy, a neighborhood meeting may be conducted prior to submittal of a formal development application. Staff convened a neighborhood meeting in accordance with the Land Use Code on August 8, 2019. 2. Application Submittal A formal rezoning application was submitted by City staff on August 23, 2019. Staff performed one round of review through applicable City Departments and referral agencies. 3. Review of Applications All City staff involved in the development review process reviewed the application. 4. Notice (Posted, Written and Published) Posted Notice (REZ190001): March 22, 2019, Sign # 431 Written notice: September 5, 2019, 8,400 letters sent to both owners and renters. Published Notice: Sept 8, 2019 5. Planning and Zoning Board Public Hearing The Planning and Zoning Board conducted a public hearing on September 19, 2019, and made a formal recommendation to City Council. In making its recommendation on a quasi-judicial rezoning, the Planning and Zoning Board must make the following mandatory findings that the proposed amendment is: (a) consistent with the City’s Comprehensive Plan; and/or (b) warranted by changed conditions within the neighborhood surrounding and including the subject property. Further, the Board may consider the following factors: (a) whether and the extent to which the proposed amendment is compatible with existing and proposed uses surrounding the subject land and is the appropriate zone district for the land; (b) whether and the extent to which the proposed amendment would result in significantly adverse impacts on the natural environment, including, but not limited to, water, air, noise, stormwater management, wildlife, vegetation, wetlands and the natural functioning of the environment; (c) whether and the extent to which the proposed amendment would result in a logical and orderly development pattern 6. City Council Public Hearing The City Council will conduct a public hearing and decide on the proposed rezoning based on the quasi- judicial rezoning review criteria. IV. City Plan (Comprehensive Plan) Background City Plan provides the primary adopted plan and policy document applied to rezoning applications. This section summarizes the relevant policies applicable to the rezoning and the ‘place types’ depicted on the recently revised Structure Plan Map. As necessary, this staff report includes analyses related to City Plan. In April 2019, City Council adopted a revised City Plan that repealed and replaced the 2011 version. A. City Plan Outcome Areas The 2019 City Plan is organized based on seven outcome areas that form the basis of the City’s Budgeting for Outcomes (BFO) process. These outcome areas are: 1. Neighborhood Livability and Social Health 2. Culture and Recreation 3. Economic Health 4. Environmental Health 5. Safe Community 6. Transportation 7. High Performing Community Agenda Item 12 Item # 12 Page 5 Three core values guide the vision for City Plan: livability, community, and sustainability. Each outcome area has a series of statements indicating how the principles and policies of each outcome area align with the core values. Action plans accompany each outcome area to ensure implementation of City Plan. The applicable vision statements are: 1. Neighborhood Livability and Social Health Encouraging a welcoming, equitable community that celebrates diversity Requiring adequate public facilities and infrastructure to serve existing development and new growth Maintaining our unique character and sense of place Encouraging the development of quality and affordable housing options for residents of all income levels Managing where and how the city grows in the future Reducing the impacts of our built environment on the natural environment Providing residents with opportunities to live healthy, safe, and active lifestyles Preserving historic resources and character-defining features that make Fort Collins unique Promoting the use of sustainable-building and site-design techniques Creating a distinctive and attractive community that is appealing to workers, visitors, and residents 2. Culture and Recreation Increasing access to arts, culture and recreation opportunities for all residents and visitors Encouraging a welcoming, equitable community that celebrates diversity 3. Economic Health Reducing identified barriers of workforce attraction and retention, including access and affordability of housing and childcare Environmental Health Providing access to natural areas and environmentally sensitive community separators to create opportunities to experience nature Protecting, enhancing and restoring ecosystems in both urban and natural contexts Providing affordable and equitable access to nature and the environment Protecting and improving the quality of our air, water and night skies 4. Safe Community Using ecosystem services and other natural functions of the environment to enhance our safety and help protect us from natural hazards Mitigating risks posed by natural hazards to businesses and property Encouraging healthy living through active transportation and physical activity Guiding development away from high-risk areas 5. Transportation Adapting to changes in technology, demographics and mobility-as-a-service with new transportation modes and partnerships Identifying the types of transit services that can grow and leverage changing transportation technologies, while still providing access to a broad section of the community to critical transit services Integrating land use and transportation planning and investments Providing a safe, convenient and connected transportation network for all modes Building an equitable bicycle and pedestrian network to serve residents of all ages and abilities Designing the City’s transportation facilities and network to be reliable, affordable, efficient, connected and comfortable 6. High Performing Community Agenda Item 12 Item # 12 Page 6 Ensuring that all members of the community are involved in decision making Maintaining efficient and effective local government processes that reduce barriers to innovation and economic development Using a triple bottom line that incorporates equity and considers the social, economic and environmental impacts of decisions. B. Trends and Forces Report A report was prepared during the first phase of the City Plan Update that highlighted major trends and key issues facing the community. This Trends and Forces Report highlighted those choices and trade-offs that needed to be explored in light of both trends and existing conditions. Of these trends, one of the major areas of focus for the City Plan update was the challenges that Fort Collins faces in the provision of housing. Since 2000, Fort Collins and Larimer County have produced more jobs than housing units, and the jobs- housing imbalance has recently accelerated. At the same time, rents and home prices in Fort Collins have been increasing faster than wages. The demographic composition of Fort Collins is changing dramatically. The population is aging (particularly those over the age of 65) and will represent a larger percentage of the City’s population in the future. However, younger adults are also moving to Fort Collins in increasing numbers, attracted by employment opportunities and quality of life. This trend is expected to continue. As a result, the composition of demand for housing in Fort Collins will undoubtedly shift. Some of these shifts are being driven by younger residents who prefer different housing options and from older residents who no longer have the desire and/or ability to maintain their single-family home. The difficulty providing additional housing to meet our needs is increasingly constrained by a limited supply of vacant land. Based on current trends, our supply of vacant land will be exhausted by 2040. Unlike the Hughes property, most of the vacant land in the GMA is not served by City sewer and water utilities. This dynamic could impact the availability, timing, and pricing of future development. This need for additional housing and a greater range of housing choice has become a growing community concern over the last decade given changes to the jobs-housing balance and demographics. Public engagement during the City Plan Update, which included the participation of nearly 4,000 members, consistently showed housing availability and affordability as the top-cited community challenge. This has also been borne out in results of recent Community Surveys where citizens have rated our housing affordability lower than national and Front Range benchmarks. C. Structure Plan Map The Structure Plan Map in City Plan provides a framework for the ultimate buildout of Fort Collins. It focuses on the physical form and development pattern of the community, illustrating areas where new greenfield development, infill, and redevelopment is likely to occur, as well as the types of land uses and intensities to encourage. The Structure Plan: Guides future growth and reinvestment and serves as official Land Use Plan for the City; Informs planning for infrastructure and services; Fosters coordinated land use and transportation decisions within the city and region; and Helps implement principles and policies. The Growth Management Boundary (GMA) was expanded during the 2019 Update to include the Hughes Stadium site because of City Plan conclusions provided in 2011 and for the need of additional housing described in the Trends and Forces Report. The revised GMA boundary is reflected on the Structure Plan Map. Agenda Item 12 Item # 12 Page 7 One of the most significant changes to the 2019 City Plan from the 2011 version is the use of “place types” on the Structure Plan Map to describe future development character rather than land use districts. “Place type” descriptions provide a set of visual and narrative criteria to describe the look, feel, and general character of a part of the community. Thirteen (13) place types, describing three types of neighborhoods, eight districts, and two open lands categories are depicted on the Structure Plan. Two place types are designated on the Hughes Stadium site: Suburban Neighborhood on the west half and Mixed-Use Neighborhood on the east half which are generally described below. 1. Suburban Neighborhood Place Type Density Between 2 and 5 principal dwelling units per acre Principal Land Use Single-family detached homes Supporting Land Use Parks and recreational facilities, schools, places of worship, accessory dwelling units in some locations (where permitted by underlying zoning) Key Characteristics/Considerations Comprised of predominantly single-family detached homes Neighborhood Centers may serve as focal points within Single-family Neighborhoods (see Neighborhood Mixed-Use District) Amenities and infrastructure encourage walking and biking, but transit service is typically more limited Typical Types of Transit: Limited local bus service with frequencies of approximately every 60 minutes; some locations may also be served by flex services 2. Mixed Neighborhood Place Type Density Between 5 and 20 principal dwelling units per acre (typically equates to an average of 7 to 12 dwelling units per acre) Principal Land Use Single-family detached homes, duplexes, triplexes and townhomes Supporting Land Use Accessory dwelling units, small-scale multi-family buildings, small-scale retail, restaurants/cafes, community and public facilities, parks and recreational facilities, schools, places of worship Key Characteristics/Considerations (New Neighborhoods) Provide opportunities for a variety of attached and detached housing options and amenities in a compact neighborhood setting; some neighborhoods also include (or have direct access to) small-scale retail and other supporting services Neighborhood Centers should serve as focal points within Mixed-Neighborhoods (see Neighborhood Mixed- Use District) Typically located within walking/biking distance of services and amenities, as well as high frequency transit Mixed-Neighborhoods built in a greenfield context should include a mix of housing options (lot size, type, price range, etc.). Where townhomes or multi-family buildings are proposed in an existing neighborhood context, a transition in building height, massing, and form should be provided along the shared property line or street frontage. As existing neighborhoods change and evolve over time, rezoning of some areas may be appropriate when paired with a subarea or neighborhood planning initiative. Typical Types of Transit In areas on the lower end of the density range, service will be similar to Single-Family Neighborhoods; as densities approach 20 dwelling units per acre, fixed-route service at frequencies of between 30-60 minutes D. Use of the Structure Plan in a Rezoning Evaluation City Plan sets specific direction on how the Structure Plan is to be used when evaluating a rezoning: Agenda Item 12 Item # 12 Page 8 “How to Use the Structure Plan The Structure Plan establishes a broad vision for future land uses in Fort Collins. In most cases, land use categories generally follow existing parcel lines, roadways, and other geographic boundaries. If the place type boundary shown on the Structure Plan map does not follow an existing parcel line, the actual delineation of place types will be established at the time of a proposed rezoning and development submittal. Underlying zoning was reviewed and considered as updates to the Structure Plan were made to ensure that consistency between planned land uses and zoning could be maintained to the maximum extent feasible. However, in some instances, place type categories do differ from underlying zoning, as was necessary to meet the broader objectives of the Plan. To fully achieve the Plan’s objectives, rezoning may be required when some properties develop or redevelop in the future. Future zone changes should generally adhere to the place type boundaries depicted in the Structure Plan, but flexibility in interpretation of the boundary may be granted provided the proposed change is consistent with the principles, goals, and policies contained in this Plan. Density ranges outlined for each place type category are based on gross acreage and are intended to address overall densities for a particular area rather than for individual parcels. The Structure Plan is not intended to be used as a standalone tool; rather, it should be considered in conjunction with the Transportation Plan, and the accompanying principles, goals, and policies contained in this Plan”. E. City Plan Principles and Policies The rezoning application must also be evaluated based upon the principles and policies found in City Plan. The most applicable principle and policies highlighted below reflect expressed community values related to open land preservation, support for natural ecosystems, the efficient use of urban land and the need to supply housing to meet both immediate and future needs. Principle ENV 1: Conserve, create and enhance ecosystems and natural spaces within Fort Collins, the GMA and the region. POLICY ENV 1.1 - PUBLICLY CONTROLLED OPEN LANDS Maintain a system of publicly controlled natural areas to maintain the integrity of wildlife habitat and conservation sites, protect corridors between natural areas, conserve outstanding examples of Fort Collins’ diverse natural heritage, and provide a broad range of opportunities for educational, interpretive and recreational programs to meet community needs POLICY ENV 1.2 - LAND CONSERVATION AND STEWARDSHIP Continue to acquire, manage, maintain and enhance public open lands and natural areas in accordance with the City’s Natural Areas Master Plan to ensure the protection of plants and animals in need of conservation and their associated ecosystems; support biodiversity; control the invasion and spread of non-native plants; improve aesthetics; and provide opportunities for appropriate public use. Agenda Item 12 Item # 12 Page 9 POLICY ENV 1.3 - NATURE IN THE CITY Conserve, protect and enhance natural resources and high-value biological resources throughout the GMA by: Directing development away from natural features to the maximum extent feasible; Identifying opportunities to integrate or reintroduce natural systems as part of the built environment to improve habitat in urbanized areas and expand residents’ access to nature; Utilizing green infrastructure to manage stormwater and increase greenspace in public rights-of-way and as part of public and private development; and Supporting the use of a broad range of native landscaping that enhances plant and animal diversity. POLICY ENV 1.6 - WILDLIFE CORRIDORS Conserve and enhance wildlife movement corridors through a network of public open lands and natural habitat buffers along natural features such as streams and drainageways. Policy LIV 1.6 - ADEQUATE PUBLIC FACILITIES Utilize the provision of public facilities and services to direct development to desired location, in accordance with the following criteria: Direct development to locations where it can be adequately served by critical public facilities and services such as water, sewer, police, transportation, schools, fire, stormwater management and parks, in accordance with adopted levels of service for public facilities and services. Principle LIV 5: Create more opportunities for housing choices. Policy LIV 5.1 - HOUSING OPTIONS To enhance community health and livability, encourage a variety of housing types and densities, including mixed- used developments that are well served by public transportation and close to employment centers, shopping, services and amenities. Policy LIV 5.2 - SUPPLY OF ATTAINABLE HOUSING Encourage public and private sectors to maintain and develop a diverse range of housing options, including housing that is attainable (30% or less of monthly income) to residents earning the median income. Options could include ADUs, duplexes, townhomes, mobile homes, manufactured housing and other “missing middle” housing types. Policy LIV 5.3 - LAND FOR RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT Use density requirements to maximize the use of land for residential development to positively influence housing supply and expand housing choice. V. ZONING SCENARIOS Based on the two “place types” described in City Plan, as well as the site context and evaluation of public comments received through the community engagement process, five prospective zoning districts were considered: Residential Foothills (RF), Urban Estate (UE), Low-Density Mixed-Use Neighborhood (LMN), Medium-Density Mixed-Use Neighborhood (MMN) and Public Open Lands (POL). Five options were developed that combined these first four districts as ‘scenarios’ that were included in the public evaluation. The Public Open Lands district was not brought forward as this district is limited to publicly owned property. The five scenarios are reflected in Attachment 7. Agenda Item 12 Item # 12 Page 10 1. RF zoning on western half and LMN zoning on eastern half, with a requirement that the RF-zoned area meet the standards for a “cluster plan”. 2. RF zoning on western half and MMN zoning on eastern half, with a requirement that the RF-zoned area meet the standards for a “cluster plan”. 3. UE zoning on western half and MMN zoning on eastern half, with a requirement that the UE-zoned area meet the standards for a “cluster plan”. 4. UE zoning on western half and LMN zoning on eastern half, with a requirement that the UE-zoned area meet the standards for a “cluster plan”. 5. UE zoning on western half and a mix of MMN and LMN zoning on eastern half, with a requirement that the UE-zoned area meet the standards for a “cluster plan”. Article 4 of the Land Use Code provides use and development standards pertaining to various zone district and the review process applicable to each use type. Allowed uses are as follows: Article 4 of the Land Use Code provides use and development standards pertaining to various zone district and the review process applicable to each use type. Allowed uses are as follows: BDR = Basic Development Review Type 1 = Administrative Review Type 2 = Planning & Zoning Board Review Land Use Residential Foothills (RF) Urban Estate (UE) Low-Density Mixed-Use Neighborhood (LMN) Medium- Density Mixed-Use Neighborh ood (MMN) Public Open Lands (POL) Accessory buildings BDR BDR BDR BDR BDR Accessory uses BDR BDR BDR BDR BDR Farm animals Type 1 Type 1 Prohibited Prohibited Prohibited Urban agriculture BDR BDR BDR BDR BDR Agricultural activities Prohibited Prohibited Prohibited Prohibited Type 2 Off-site construction staging BDR BDR BDR BDR BDR Wireless Telecommunication Equipment BDR BDR BDR BDR BDR Neighborhood Parks BDR BDR BDR BDR BDR Cemeteries Prohibited Prohibited Prohibited Prohibited Type 1 Short term primary rentals Prohibited BDR BDR BDR Prohibited Shelters for victims of domestic violence BDR BDR BDR BDR Prohibited Parks, recreation and other Open Lands Type 1 Type 1 Type 1 Type 1 Type 1 Single-family detached dwellings Type 1 Type 1 Type 1 Type 1 Prohibited Residential Cluster Developments Type 1 Type 2 Prohibited Prohibited Prohibited Single-family attached dwellings Prohibited Type 1 Type 1 Type 1 Prohibited Two-family dwellings Prohibited Type 1 Type 1 Type 1 Prohibited Group homes for up to 8 occupants Prohibited Type 1 Type 1 Type 1 Prohibited Group homes with More than 8 occupants Agenda Item 12 Item # 12 Page 11 Land Use Residential Foothills (RF) Urban Estate (UE) Low-Density Mixed-Use Neighborhood (LMN) Medium- Density Mixed-Use Neighborh ood (MMN) Public Open Lands (POL) Places of worship or assembly Type 1 Type 2 Type 1 Type 1 Prohibited Community facilities Prohibited Prohibited Type 1 Type 1 Type 2 Neighborhood support/recreational facilities Prohibited Prohibited Type 1 Type 1 Prohibited Seasonal overflow shelters Prohibited Prohibited Type 1 Type 1 Prohibited Minor public facilities Type 1 Type 1 Type 1 Type 1 Prohibited Wildlife rescue and Education centers Type 2 Type 2 Type 2 Prohibited Type 2 Convenience retail w/o fuel sales Prohibited Prohibited Prohibited Type 2 Prohibited Restaurant, limited Mixed-use Prohibited Prohibited Prohibited Type 1 Prohibited Golf courses Type 2 Type 2 Type 2 Prohibited Type 2 Childcare centers Prohibited Type 2 Type 1 Type 1 Prohibited Bed and Breakfast 6 or fewer beds Type 2 Type 2 Type 1 Type 1 Prohibited Plant nurseries & greenhouses Type 2 Type 2 Prohibited Prohibited Prohibited Farmer’s Market if in a park or central feature Prohibited Prohibited Prohibited Type 1 Prohibited Large/farm animal Boarding Prohibited Type 2 Prohibited Prohibited Prohibited Adult day/respite Care Prohibited Type 2 Type 1 Prohibited Prohibited Small-scale reception centers Prohibited Type 2 Prohibited Prohibited Prohibited Resource extraction Prohibited Type 2 Prohibited Prohibited Prohibited Composting facilities Prohibited Type 2 Prohibited Prohibited Type 1 Accessory buildings/ uses <2,500 sq. ft. Prohibited Type 2 Type 2 BDR Prohibited Accessory buildings/ uses >2,500 sq. ft. Prohibited Type 2 Prohibited BDR Prohibited Neighborhood Center With at least 2 Commercial/service uses Prohibited Prohibited Type 1 Prohibited Prohibited Personal/business service shops Prohibited Prohibited Prohibited Type 2 Prohibited Offices, financial Services, clinics Prohibited Prohibited Prohibited Type 2 Prohibited Small and medium- Scale solar energy systems Type 2 Type 2 Type 2 Type 2 Prohibited Resource recovery Prohibited Prohibited Prohibited Prohibited Type 2 All uses that are not expressly allowed as permitted uses above are prohibited Staff recommends Option 1 that provides the combination of the RF (conditioned upon the requirement for a cluster development plan) and LMN zone districts. Clustering on the RF portion of the site will provide more Agenda Item 12 Item # 12 Page 12 The RF District provides two options for development: single-family houses on individual lots at least 2.29 acres in size, or single-family houses clustered at a gross density of one unit per acre. Three development plans have been approved and constructed within the Residential Foothills Zone: Burns Ranch at Quail Ridge, The Ponds at Overland, and Bella Vira. All portions of these developments lying within the RF zone district have been ‘cluster developments’. Of these projects, the Ponds at Overland (1995) was the most controversial during the development review process. The project was approved as a cluster plan of 284 single family lots on 284.23 acres, with clustering at 3 to 5 units per acre on developed portions of the property. An appeal of the Planning and Zoning Board approval of the project to City Council from a citizen’s group “Friends of the Foothills” showed objections based on perceived negative impacts of density, site grading, aesthetics to the foothills, traffic congestion, storm drainage, wildlife habitat, trail access, and to impacts to noise, air, and community stress levels. Low-Density Mixed-Use Neighborhood (LMN) District The Low-Density Mixed-Use Neighborhood (LMN) district was created in 1997. The LMN district became the predominant zoning district applied to vacant undeveloped parcels since that time. The purpose of the LMN District expressed in the Land Use Code: The Low-Density Mixed-Use Neighborhood District is intended to be a setting for a predominance of low-density housing combined with complementary and supporting land uses that serve a neighborhood and are developed and operated in harmony with the residential characteristics of a neighborhood. The main purpose of the District is to meet a wide range of needs of everyday living in neighborhoods that include a variety of housing choices, that invite walking to gathering places, services and conveniences, and that are fully integrated into the larger community by the pattern of streets, blocks, and other linkages. A neighborhood center provides a focal point, and attractive walking and biking paths invite residents to enjoy the center as well as the small neighborhood parks. Any new development in this District shall be arranged to form part of an individual neighborhood. For the purposes of this Division, a neighborhood shall be considered to consist of approximately eighty (80) to one hundred sixty (160) acres, with its edges typically consisting of major streets, drainageways, irrigation ditches, railroad tracks and other major physical features. VI. REZONING EVALUATION As stated, rezoning requests are principally evaluated based on compliance with City Plan and/or changed conditions within the neighborhood surrounding and including the subject property, although other factors may be considered. A. Mandatory Requirements 1. Consistency with City Plan (Zoning Map Amendment Requirement) The proposed RF and LMN zoning district boundaries coincide with the Suburban Neighborhood and Mixed Neighborhood ‘place type’ designations found on the City Plan Structure Plan Map and strike an appropriate balance between adopted City Plan Environmental and Livability principles and policies. 2. Warranted by changed conditions within the neighborhood surrounding Not applicable. B. Additional Factors that May Be Considered 1. Compatibility with existing and proposed Uses (Additional Considerations per LUC) The proposed zoning district boundary demarking the east/west zoning split aligns with the longitudinal boundary of Residential Foothills (RF) zoning to the north that governs development on The Ponds at Overland and Bella Vira neighborhoods. This zoning configuration, along with the condition that any future development Agenda Item 12 Item # 12 Page 13 be a “cluster plan”, provides a clear transition from the City of Fort Collins natural areas along the foothills and higher residential densities permitted along Overland Trail. Abutting neighborhoods to the north and east are of a similar residential density and housing type mix as permitted in the LMN-zoned portion of the site. 2. Adverse Impacts to the Natural Environment (Additional Considerations per LUC) The property has been substantially altered from its natural condition; therefore, the rezoning will not result in negative impacts to natural vegetation or surface water patterns. Site modifications began in the 1940’s when a portion of the property fronting Overland Trail was mined for gravel used in the Horsetooth Reservoir construction. The site was later cleared of natural vegetation, stream channels were removed, and the site regraded to accommodate construction of Hughes Stadium and a heavily compacted parking area covering more than 100 acres. Except for trees and shrubs planted approximately 10 years ago by CSU to enhance property aesthetics, vegetation consists largely of invasive weedy species like cheatgrass, Canada thistle, mullein, kochia, bindweed, and puncture vine. No cost analysis has been conducted with respect to restoring the site to its original, natural condition, although, anecdotally, the costs appear to be significant. The Natural Areas Department (Department) considers numerous criteria when prioritizing a site for acquisition as a natural area. The Department may only acquire land from a willing seller if using dedicated program funds. The following criteria are considered: current and potential wildlife habitat values; access to nature for the community; value as buffer or addition to an existing natural area; existing condition of property and the cost to restore; other conservation values such as scenic, community separator, agriculture, cultural resources; alignment with City Plan goals and the Natural Areas Master Plan; and, education opportunities. The City did not attempt to purchase the site as there is not a willing seller and the criteria for acquisition have not been met. From the perspective of Natural Areas staff, there would be significant opportunity costs associated with a purchase. For example, funds directed to the Hughes site would not be available for conservation in northeast Fort Collins which has no natural area sites. The Hughes site, on the other hand, has nearby natural areas of over 1,000 acres with nearly 10 miles of trail as well as a large community park. There will be little to no impacts to wildlife as no wetlands exist on the site and it provides limited resident wildlife habitat. Clustering of development within RF-zoned areas provide an opportunity to connect with wildlife movement corridors. Prior to any future development on the site, an Ecological Characterization Study must be prepared by a professional qualified in the areas of ecology, wildlife biology or other related discipline. The study must identify areas with wildlife, plant life and/or natural characteristics in need of protection. The existing stormwater detention area known as the “rodeo pond” fronting Overland Trail has been sized to accommodate local and regional stormwater runoff regardless of the zoning districts designated on the property. No evidence suggests that permitted density/activity under the proposed zoning will result in adverse impacts to air quality when considering the regional impacts on Fort Collins’ air quality. The biggest air quality problem near the Front Range foothills is ozone during the warmer months. Ozone patterns are the result of urban emissions (vehicles, industry and oil & gas operations being the largest contributors) photochemically aging as they travel west during the daytime upslope winds. This ozone impact would not be the result of new construction on the Hughes site, just of transport of emissions from the Front Range urban corridor. Particulate matter (PM2.5/PM10) levels along the Foothills are some of the lowest in the community and generally lessen further from the I-25 corridor. 3. Logical and Orderly Development Pattern The proposed amendment would result in a logical and orderly development pattern by: Providing a density and intensity gradient and land use transition between the developed character along Overland Trail to the natural character of the Maxwell Natural Area abutting to the west. Agenda Item 12 Item # 12 Page 14 Placing the lowest housing density and opportunities to retain more land in an open state on the west portion of the site. Placing comparable residential density along the east and northeast portions of the site towards existing residential neighborhoods of similar density and housing mix. Orienting the LMN zone district toward Overland Trail which will provide a “neighborhood center” serving the site and nearby residences. Allowing housing opportunities on the site where a full range of urban services- arterial streets, water, sanitary sewer, storm drainage, electric power, schools and trails- are either presently available or can be provided. Specifically, to transportation, the City’s Master Street Plan will serve as a guide as it anticipated adequate arterial capacity for growth in the area. If and when a development plan is submitted, a detailed traffic review will be required and all Transportation Level of Service (LOS) standards must be met. Transportation-related impacts may require improvements to the transportation system both adjacent and off-site for vehicular, bicycle, pedestrian and transit modes. VII. Condition of Approval Land Use Code Section 2.9.4(I) allows conditions of approval to be imposed upon a rezoning. Staff recommends that Council impose the condition of approval that any development within the portion of the property zoned as Residential Foothills (R-F) be developed in clusters pursuant to Land Use Code Section 4.3(E)(2). Staff is recommending this condition of approval to provide a clear transition from the City of Fort Collins natural areas along the foothills and place higher residential densities permitted along Overland Trail. Clustering on the RF portion of the site will provide more habitat for wildlife corridors along the foothills, require less new utility and street infrastructure, and better maintain a more ‘open’ character. CITY FINANCIAL IMPACTS No significant impacts as the request is limited to rezoning. BOARD / COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION The Planning and Zoning Board conducted a public hearing of the rezoning request on September 19, 2019, and recommended, on a 4-2 vote, that City Council not adopt the proposed zone districts. Alternatively, the Board recommended that the property be rezoned to Residential Foothills (RF) with the requirement that future development meet the requirements of a Cluster Plan pursuant to Land Use Code Section 4.3 (E)(2). Planning and Zoning Board Hearing minutes are provided as Attachment 26. PUBLIC OUTREACH I. Neighborhood Meeting Staff convened one neighborhood meeting in accordance with Land Use Code Section 2.9.4(B) on August 8, 2019. A neighborhood meeting to discuss potential redevelopment of the Hughes site was also held on April 4, 2019, and Colorado State University held two Listening Session (September 20, 2017, and October 18, 2017). See Attachments 10-22 for the two neighborhood meeting summaries, individual public comments and the Listening Session Feedback summaries. II. Public Comments A consistent theme throughout the public process has been the preference expressed by community members that the site be retained in an undeveloped state and that views to the foothills be protected. Comments range from the acquisition by a public agency as a protected Natural Area or Open Space to expanded use as a recreational site. Agenda Item 12 Item # 12 Page 15 During the rezoning neighborhood meeting, attendees expressed an overall preference for as much open space as possible on the site to protect resources within the Maxwell Natural Area to the west, create a buffer for wildlife in the area, protect views of the foothills for surrounding neighborhoods and keep the traffic impact low. A slight preference for “clustering” on the western edge of the site was indicated. Responses at the Hughes Stadium Open House on the question about which three characteristics are most important for the site: III. Scenarios Feedback Of the 5 Scenarios presented at the neighborhood meeting (Attachment 7), support for Scenario 1 was most prominent among attendees. Many comments related to Scenario 1 involved a desire for as much open space as possible within the zone district configuration presented in Scenario 1. Many comments included a desire for a “6th scenario,” zoned as “Public Open Lands” or “POL” only. Several comments requested that at least half of the site be designated as Public Open Lands. Comments also included a desire for even lower development density than Scenario 1 allows. Some of these concerns were expressed in conjunction with a concern regarding traffic congestion and stress on existing road infrastructure in the area, including pedestrian and bicycle infrastructure. Several comments expressed a desire for affordable housing on the site. Some benefits mentioned regarding Scenario 1 were made in contrast to the other Scenarios; across several Scenarios, comments regarding a desire for the lower-density option (Scenario 1) were expressed. These comments were made in conjunction with a desire to preserve views of the foothills with lower density housing, a desire to keep development at 2 stories and a desire for low impact on existing wildlife in the area. A small number of comments expressed interest in high-density housing options, citing the need for different housing types and sizes correlated to affordability. In order to understand the preferred site zoning after presenting the scenarios, staff presented a half sheet empty site outline to allow attendees to draw in their preferred site zoning. Many drawings indicated a desire for “Public Open Lands” or POL across the entire site. Several other drawings indicated a preference for some development on the site with a protective naturalistic or open space buffer along the western edge of the site. Agenda Item 12 Item # 12 Page 16 ATTACHMENTS 1. 1974 Open Space Plan Map and Recommendations (PDF) 2. Foothills Issues Report (PDF) 3. Hughes Proposed Zone Districts (PDF) 4. Structure Plan Map (PDF) 5. City Plan Place Type Summaries-Suburban and Mixed Neighborhoods (PDF) 6. Article 4 Use and Development Standards for RF and LMN zone districts (PDF) 7. Maps of 5 Zoning Districts Scenarios Considered (PDF) 8. Memo-Air Quality Impacts of Foothills Development (PDF) 9. Rezoning Neighborhood Meeting Presentation (PDF) 10. Public Comments Summary, September 3, 2019 (PDF) 11. Staff presentation to Boards and Commissions (PDF) 12. Hughes Scenarios Sticky Note Feedback (PDF) 13. Scenario 1-5 Sticky Note Feedback (PDF) 14. Hughes Zoning Drawings from Neighborhood Meeting (PDF) 15. Site Characteristics Most Important to Participants at Neighborhood Meeting (PDF) 16. Summary of Scenario Comments (PDF) 17. Other Comments from Neighborhood Meeting (PDF) 18. Citizen Comments Received (PDF) 19. Planning Action to Transform Hughes Sustainably (PATHS) comments (PDF) 20. OurCity Webpage comments (PDF) 21. First Neighborhood Meeting Comments (PDF) 22. Neighborhood Listening Session Attendee Feedback, September 20, 2017 (PDF) 23. Planning and Zoning Board Minutes, September 19, 2019 (PDF) 24. Letter Regarding Emergency Access at Proposed Hughes Stadium Development (PDF) 25. Powerpoint presentation (PDF) PUBLIC COMMENTS RECEIVED FROM NOVEMBER 6, 2019 THROUTGH MARCH 10, 2020. Council received these comments as part of its March 17 agenda. Comments received from March 10 through March 25 are provided as Attachment 3. Any comments received between March 25 until 4 pm, March 31 will be provided in the read‐ before packet given to Council on March 31. ATTACHMENT 2 From: Tauny Gilmore To: Barb Clem; Delynn Coldiron Subject: FW: Input on Hughes Stadium Property Rezoning Date: Wednesday, November 6, 2019 9:02:40 AM Printed for Darin. From: Joyce DeVaney <JDeVaney6@Comcast.net> Sent: Tuesday, November 05, 2019 4:37 PM To: City Leaders <CityLeaders@fcgov.com> Cc: Cameron Gloss <cgloss@fcgov.com>; Sylvia Tatman-Burruss <statman-burruss@fcgov.com> Subject: Input on Hughes Stadium Property Rezoning I live within a few blocks of the proposed development, and I strongly feel that the vote tonight on the Hughes Stadium rezoning should be RF zoning, as the Planning and Zoning Board has recommended. I oppose the LMN zoning on the east half of the property. It is imperative to keep the number of potential residences at a minimum because of our neighborhood concerns regarding traffic, dust, wildlife barriers, adequate access to trails/foothills, and ultimate congestion. There has not been adequate study of the potential for traffic problems, school resources for the kids, and how this neighborhood could absorb even the number of families proposed with both LMN and RF zoning. The 600-700 homes proposed by Lennar was totally unacceptable, and I very much appreciate the time and attention that City staff have devoted to public hearings and neighborhood input. We love our "crown jewel" on the west side of Fort Collins, and we insist on keeping it family-friendly and safe from traffic congestion. Thank you for your consideration of these comments. Joyce DeVaney 2842 McKeag Drive Virus-free. www.avast.com PUBLIC COMMENTS RECEIVED NOVEMBER 6, 2019 THROUGH MARCH 10, 2020 From: Sylvia Tatman-Burruss To: Delynn Coldiron Subject: Fwd: Hughes Stadium Date: Tuesday, November 5, 2019 6:59:04 PM For Hughes Sent from my iPhone Begin forwarded message: From: Aaron Monier <aaronmonier@live.com> Date: November 5, 2019 at 6:55:02 PM MST To: "statman-burruss@fcgov.com" <statman-burruss@fcgov.com> Subject: Hughes Stadium Dear Sylvia, Unfortunately my wife and I are unable to attend the meeting tonight. We still would like to express are opinion on the housing matter. We are home owners in the Browns farm neighborhood and have lived in Ft. Collins for over 15 years. We very much support leaving as much open space as possible in the Hughes stadium area. Beautiful Public open spaces are one the unique features that bring residents and tourists alike to Fort Collins, and this area has been enjoyed by residents for years. As a town we’ve already made a commitment to environmentally sustainable practices and in our consideration of this property we have an opportunity to practice what we preach. Thank you for considering our thoughts on this matter, Aaron Monier And Kelly Keeler PUBLIC COMMENTS RECEIVED NOVEMBER 6, 2019 THROUGH MARCH 10, 2020 From: Adam Eggleston To: City Leaders; Wade Troxell; Darin Atteberry; Cameron Gloss Subject: Response from 11/05/2019 City Council Meeting Date: Wednesday, November 6, 2019 4:10:39 PM Good Afternoon City Council Members, Mayor Troxell, and City Staff, This is Adam Eggleston and I always try to be positive in my emails and communication, and never too harshly criticized, but the discussion and decisions made last night gave me a real sense of concern. I am very concerned about the decision to circumvent the normal process of Land Development and the overstepping of the city council. It is clear that the current makeup of this council believes they know more than educated and professional staff that has been helping the city for years, what was most apparent is absolute lack of institutional knowledge of Fort Collins land-use code and nearly no working knowledge of anything to do with real estate transactions, ownership, and use. The council should at a minimum had been knowledgeable about the differences between RF/LMN/MMN zoning and what is allowable types of structures and densities associated with each zoning. If the council would allow the staff to work through the normal process then the answers to your questions would have been more accurately answered and we could have had a better or educated discussion. I never purposely want to call out any particular council members, but in this case councilmember Caniff, that his anecdote examples are strictly based and blatantly predetermined biases. I would like to see council member Caniff use more intelligent and citable data to help make decisions that will impact the city for decades to come and not anecdotal feelings. This Council it's facing many long-term projects that would determine the growth of Fort Collins over the next three decades. It is imperative that everyone become more knowledgeable on land use code or be willing to utilize the educated and expert staff to suggest the best strategy recommendations for use for the land and which available to develop. This Council will also have to make a decision, to allow expanding growth to match the needs of our community both now and into the future, in one of two ways allow for horizontal growth like this proposed project or be willing to make the necessary changes to allow for vertical growth. Either way, neither this council or future councils will be able to stop the growth that Fort Collins. I apologize to be so critical, as I always tried to be positive and informative in my emails and correspondence. But in situations like these, I feel I have to be a little bit more direct. Next week I will continue to be the friendly neighborhood City advocate. I look forward to continuing to work with you all to help our city grow into the future. PUBLIC COMMENTS RECEIVED NOVEMBER 6, 2019 THROUGH MARCH 10, 2020 Thanks, Adam Eggleston -- 2017/2018 Fort Collins Board of REALTORS Board of Directors 2016/2017 Northern Colorado Young Professional Co-Chair 2017 Volunteer of the Year 2017 Young Professional of the Year 2019 Chair Government Affairs Committee Ex-Officio Member Chamber of Commerce LLAC Vice Chair-Fort Collins Parking Advisory Board PUBLIC COMMENTS RECEIVED NOVEMBER 6, 2019 THROUGH MARCH 10, 2020 From: Darin Atteberry To: Delynn Coldiron Subject: FW: Hughes Stadium Date: Wednesday, November 6, 2019 3:32:56 PM . . . . . . . . . . Darin Atteberry, ICMA-CM / AICP City Manager Fort Collins, Colorado -----Original Message----- From: Barbara Heffington <bheffington@me.com> Sent: Wednesday, November 6, 2019 3:17 PM To: Susan Gutowsky <sgutowsky@fcgov.com> Cc: City Leaders <CityLeaders@fcgov.com> Subject: Hughes Stadium Thank you for taking the time to drive out to the Hughes site and take in the splendor of this beautiful piece of land. I appreciate you doing so. It made me wonder if any of the other council members took the time to do this. I live off of Drake road and in the past I have ridden my horse from my house to Pineridge natural area. I can not even imagine 600 plus homes on that property. I will be affected by the increased traffic those homes will bring. It would be a miracle if CSU gave the land to the city to make a beautiful park or maybe a music venue. I will keep dreaming. The site really is a Crown Jewel of Fort Collins!!!! I am so sad. Thank you again for listening to our Fort Collins community. I have been a resident here since 1972. Barbara Heffington Sent from my iPad PUBLIC COMMENTS RECEIVED NOVEMBER 6, 2019 THROUGH MARCH 10, 2020 New signatures From: Barb Clem To: Delynn Coldiron Subject: FW: 500 more people signed “Fort Collins City Council: Find a more sustainable alternative to the Hughes Redevelopment Plan” Date: Wednesday, November 6, 2019 12:07:34 PM Attachments: image025.png Barb Clem Executive Assistant to the City Manager Fort Collins, CO 970-221-6509 From: mail@changemail.org <mail@changemail.org> Sent: Wednesday, November 6, 2019 11:29 AM To: Darin Atteberry <DATTEBERRY@fcgov.com> Subject: 500 more people signed “Fort Collins City Council: Find a more sustainable alternative to the Hughes Redevelopment Plan” Darrin Atteberry – This petition addressed to you on Change.org has new activity. See progress and respond to the campaign's supporters. Fort Collins City Council: Find a more sustainable alternative to the Hughes Redevelopment Plan Petition by P.A.T.H.S. FoCo · 500 supporters 500 more people signed View petition activity RECENT SUPPORTERS Kirsten Carlson Denver, CO · Aug 06, 2019 PUBLIC COMMENTS RECEIVED NOVEMBER 6, 2019 THROUGH MARCH 10, 2020 No more apartments or housing! We want more natural open areas! Rebecca Cohencious Ashburn, VA · Aug 06, 2019 My experience as a Lennar homeowner is that they are a haphazard builder with little regard for the quality of the end product. nathan fritzen Fort Collins, CO · Aug 05, 2019 When people think of Colorado, they picture forests, mountains, deer, and prairie dogs. No one thinks of suburban sprawl, apartments, and WalMart (unless they live here, in which case it’s impossible to miss). Boulder has managed to increase its financial worth by wrapping the city with natural areas. This artificially raised property values by placing a limit on how much land is available for development, decreasing supply. At the same time, by keeping the “natural” Colorado habitat, Boulder remains one of the few “destination” cities in the Midwest, desirable for businesses, tourists, and families. I think Colorado needs to dedicate as much land as possible to natural areas. Eco-tourism is a viable form of income. Rocky Mountain National Park saw over 4.5 million visitors in 2018, and Estes Park remains Colorado’s sweetheart tourist town, offering little actual industry. That’s equivalent to 80% of Colorado’s population visiting RMNP annually, bringing out of state money to Estes Park. The money will be there, and the value will only increase as the supply of wildlife and land becomes even more novel than it already is. Costa Rica recognized this potential, marketed itself as a tourist destination, and is now ranked 12th (of 32 Latin American and Caribbean countries) in per capita GDP. Tourism earns more money for the country than the combined total exporting of coffee, bananas, and pineapples, their top cash crop. My recommendation is to turn the stadium land into a wilderness area. Plant some trees, natural grasses; and wildflowers. And then enjoy it. Fort Collins used to have a unique, “Colorado” feel to it, but it runs the risk of turning into just another suburb now. Katherine Abbott Rye, NH · Jul 30, 2019 As a frequent visitor to Fort Collins, I am concerned with the overpopulation of the city and the negative consequences Kris Aliabadi , · Jul 30, 2019 There is a better use for this space than 600 addition housing units. It is going to flood the west side of town with traffic and take away from our PUBLIC COMMENTS RECEIVED NOVEMBER 6, 2019 THROUGH MARCH 10, 2020 natural spaces. View all 500 supporters CHANGE.ORG FOR DECISION MAKERS On Change.org, decision makers like you connect directly with people around the world to resolve issues. Respond to let the people petitioning you know you're listening, say whether you agree with their call to action, or ask them for more information. Learn more. This notification was sent to datteberry@fcgov.com, the address listed as the decision maker contact by the petition starter. If this is incorrect, please post a response to let the petition starter know. Change.org · 548 Market St #29993, San Francisco, CA 94104-5401, USA PUBLIC COMMENTS RECEIVED NOVEMBER 6, 2019 THROUGH MARCH 10, 2020 From: Renee Walkup To: Emily Gorgol Cc: City Clerk Office; Ross Cunniff Subject: Your Constituents Date: Thursday, November 14, 2019 6:55:49 AM Hello, Emily. When we spoke at the City’s Board Recognition dinner a few weeks ago, you mentioned that the work on City Council has been challenging. That’s certainly understandable, since being on City Council requires a great deal of time and is a huge commitment to our community. At a recent City Council meeting, you publicly stated that your constituents are seeking affordable and attainable housing options. Their desire for better equality and inclusion prompted your vote for the City’s recommendation for RF and LMH housing at the old Hughes site. I’d like to share some FACTS with you regarding the ramifications of your vote, if this development is built. I ask that you read the FACTS below and consider them before the next City Council meeting and 2nd reading of the Hughes Site. 1. The LMH and RF recommendation will mean that Lennar can build UP to 996 houses in that space. (The City’s estimate was the minimum number.) 2. Lennar is anything BUT an attainable housing builder. In researching 18 of their recent housing developments in Colorado, prices range from a low of 406k to a high of 758k. I question how these prices, in today’s dollars, are attainable to those you feel are most in need of housing. 3. Our air quality on the west side of town is the worst in the state of Colorado. Recent research conducted at CSU has linked poor air quality to aggressive behavior and increased crime (Oct. 2019). 4. The number of houses going into the space will require elementary school overcrowding. In speaking with those on the board and with local teachers, adding to class sizes hurt students in second language households the most. They get less attention and because teachers have to move more rapidly during their instruction; oftentimes, students who need more deliberately-paced instruction and left behind. According to PSD, there will be an estimated 400 ELEMENTARY school students coming into the school district. The City said that there is plenty of space in the schools but that ONLY pertains to the Middle and High Schools in the area. Although this isn’t your district, the reality is, many students will have to change schools due to redistricting. Therefore, your students, whether in your district or near La Familia, will be affected. Consider the fact that you have second language students who are already stressed to get their work done at home, who will have to change schools. Consider that they’ll have to take different buses, may be separated from their friends, will have to adjust to new school environments, routines will be disrupted, etc. These are facts of overcrowded schools and it’s the children will suffer the consequences. Many of them those you care most PUBLIC COMMENTS RECEIVED NOVEMBER 6, 2019 THROUGH MARCH 10, 2020 deeply about helping. And as a Public Health expert, you know the consequences and costs, social and economic, of students who do not finish high school. Most of whom were lost somewhere along the way at school. Is that the Fort Collins you want in the future? Emily, it’s not too late to change your vote. You have the opportunity to make the right decision by standing up for what you believe and adhering to the values and principles on which you ran. Our community, and most importantly, those whom you serve in your community, who are entrusting you, are looking for you to take the high road and vote on their behalf. Ask yourself if you are representing them or if you are voting out of other pressures. Because at the end of the day, you’ll have to look yourself in the mirror. Sincerely, Renee P. Walkup 3514 Pratolina Ct. Fort Collins, CO 80521 PUBLIC COMMENTS RECEIVED NOVEMBER 6, 2019 THROUGH MARCH 10, 2020 September 19, 2019 City of Fort Collins Planning & Zoning Board 300 Laporte Ave. Fort Collins, CO 80521 RE: Hughes Stadium Annexation Property Rezoning, REZ 190001 Dear Chair Hansen and Fellow Planning & Zoning Board Members, I wanted to call to your attention three key points: 1. City Staff has done a great job attempting to balance multiple community goals, and often competing opinions voiced by citizens and commenters from outside our community. Cameron Gloss in particular has taken great effort to ensure that any development on this property is held to a high standard and creates a legacy neighborhood. 2. The Structure Plan, and many of the Zoning Scenarios evaluated do not seem to recognize the existing physical condition of the site. There is a large, regional detention pond that needs to remain in some manner. The footprint of the former stadium is unsuited for development, and there is an agreement to continue a disc golf course. As such, there is likely ±50 acres of de facto open space when considering stormwater detention, the stadium footprint, and disc golf course. 3. Key City Goals could better be achieved with more flexibility in zoning. Among such goals and initiatives are Nature in the City, Climate Action Plan, City Plan, and the #1 concern from Fort Collins’ Community Survey: affordable quality housing. The existing site conditions creating roughly 50 acres of open space do not follow the zoning line currently presented. Bisecting the site in such a manner imposes an artificial barrier to creative land planning that could best achieve the goals mentioned in Item 3. Diversity of housing options, price points, place types, etc. would be better served by placing LMN zoning across the entire property. As mentioned above, City Planning Staff will undoubtedly ensure development is done correctly. 50 acres of open space is already a given. A single zoning type of LMN will best serve the current and future needs of Fort Collins residents. Sincerely, Nick Haws 2721 Walkaloosa Way Fort Collins, CO 80525 PUBLIC COMMENTS RECEIVED NOVEMBER 6, 2019 THROUGH MARCH 10, 2020 From: Delynn Coldiron To: Delynn Coldiron Subject: RE: Hughes Site Date: Thursday, November 14, 2019 3:22:07 PM From: Vail <vailtrails@gmail.com> Sent: Thursday, November 7, 2019 7:42 AM To: Wade Troxell <WTroxell@fcgov.com>; Kristin Stephens <kstephens@fcgov.com>; Ken Summers <ksummers@fcgov.com>; Emily Gorgol <egorgol@fcgov.com> Subject: Hughes Site I have lived in the Lexington Green Neighborhood for about 20 years and would like to stay in Fort Collins. I have been pleased and trusting about the leadership in our city that has created such a pleasant place to live. I quite often hike in the foothills and ride my bicycle along Overland Trail enjoying nature and the rural sites. I have always expected our leaders to continue serving in the way that reflects my values. I realize that the Hughes Stadium redevelopment is a private transaction, however, this is a property that has always felt like it belonged to the residents of our city. It has been used by thousands on a regular basis, but more importantly has been a landmark and treasured open space that serves as a gateway to our magnificent foothills. I believe that many are not aware of the plan to put homes on this well loved land. Many who are aware are heartbroken thinking about the loss, but also what it will mean to our way of life. The west side has been a sanctuary away from traffic, noise, and chaos. If this development moves ahead, the quality of our life here will be transformed in a way that can never be reversed. The place we go to rejuvenate and celebrate our freedoms will be changed forever. With the homes will come more cars running down Overland Trail and Drake Rd and Prospect Rd every day. We already have so much more noise from traffic that it is distressing. West Fort Collins does not need to irreversibly change in a way that destroys it’s appeal. Colorado State University has broken our trust. The people who act out of greed instead of valuing community should not be deciding the future of Fort Collins. I am very disappointed that you do not value the open space at Hughes Stadium site enough to do all that is in your power to preserve it for the citizens. Especially Ms Stephens and Ms Gorgol, representing districts that are directly impacted. Shame on CSU and shame on you all for not recognizing an opportunity to be heroic in your actions. This is a special parcel that should be preserved as open space. Jan Vail PUBLIC COMMENTS RECEIVED NOVEMBER 6, 2019 THROUGH MARCH 10, 2020 From: Delynn Coldiron To: Delynn Coldiron Subject: RE: A community, and planet, with boundaries Date: Thursday, November 14, 2019 3:19:24 PM From: DAVID ROY <david.roy@comcast.net> Sent: Friday, November 8, 2019 7:30 AM To: Emily Gorgol <egorgol@fcgov.com> Subject: A community, and planet, with boundaries Good morning, Council Member Gorgol; I am profoundly disappointed in your vote to support Lennar, a company worth nearly $20 billion dollars, and from out of state, over the voices and concerns of your neighbors and fellow citizens. (Interactive chart of historical net worth (market cap) for Lennar (LEN) over the last 10 years. How much a company is worth is typically represented by its market capitalization, or the current stock price multiplied by the number of shares outstanding. Lennar net worth as of November 06, 2019 is $18.54B.) Your vote looks like you are choosing to march with the Fort Collins Board of Realtors and the Fort Collins Chamber of Commerce, instead of examining the facts, and understanding the environmental value of the old Hughes Stadium footprint. (The Fort Collins Area Chamber of Commerce and Realtors backed zoning that allowed increased density and the opportunity for more affordable and attainable housing in the city.) This vote puts you on the side of Tony Frank, a man who disregarded nearly the entire Fort Collins community so that Colorado State University could field a football team on campus, and who, despite having been the leader of Colorado State University, had the temerity to allow CSU to put out this weasley comment; ("We remain committed to evaluating reinvestment of a portion of the proceeds into attainable and potentially affordable housing for CSU employees, although such decisions obviously cannot be made until the zoning process is complete and the finances available to the CSU System from this project are then known." ) The track record of Lennar includes this gem of how they built community, by demolishing affordable housing units, in San Diego: Developer Lennar Homes of California will move forward with the plan to demolish the 332-unit Penasquitos Village development to construct Pacific Village, which will consist of 99 single-family homes, 105 triplex units, 120 condominiums and 276 apartments. Lennar, a company that built more than 26,500 homes and had revenue of $10.9 billion in 2016, has this vision: We build homes in some of the most desirable cities in the nation and for all stages of your life: first home, move-up home, or a multigenerational home to accommodate your changing family needs. Our communities cater to all lifestyles and include urban, suburban, active adult and golf course living. Emily; your vote defines a classic, co-opted, liberal world view. I'm sure that you believe that the least fortunate in Fort Collins deserve the dignity of housing, and that those who work in Fort Collins have every right to try and find housing in Fort Collins. As do I. Working with the Realtors and the Chamber because you want to reduce poverty in Fort Collins strengthens their Trumpian talking points, puts a good voice (yours) in their back-pockets, and does less than 0% to change the dynamics of poverty in Fort Collins. That is not the work of a progressive. PUBLIC COMMENTS RECEIVED NOVEMBER 6, 2019 THROUGH MARCH 10, 2020 The worst thing to me about your vote is that it continues the trend across all levels in government about policies being created as though this is a planet without boundaries. Emily, we live on one planet, with finite resources, a planet that is fraying at the edges, soon to be consumed by the effects of climate change, and the specter of mass extinctions. Your neighbors, many of whom believe at least as strongly as you do in equality, in decency, some of whom have worked for decades to make Fort Collins a great place, and who also believe in the ability of government to do good work, know that the breaking point is upon us. Protecting and preserving this land for the 7th generation is the highest and best use for it. I'm pretty certain that Lennar, through Darin and others, will come wringing together their $20 billion dollar hands, and have the nerve to ask for more from the citizens of Fort Collins (e.g. a Metro District, etc.). When that time comes, please tell them 'no'. Thank you, Emily. Best Regards, David Roy 2016 Evergreen Court Fort Collins CO 80521 (970) 493-9201 PUBLIC COMMENTS RECEIVED NOVEMBER 6, 2019 THROUGH MARCH 10, 2020 From: Delynn Coldiron To: Delynn Coldiron Subject: RE: Housing meeting? Date: Thursday, November 14, 2019 3:18:22 PM From: Lisa Baughn <lisa.baughn@gmail.com> Sent: Sunday, November 10, 2019 11:18 AM To: Emily Gorgol <egorgol@fcgov.com> Subject: Housing meeting? Hello Emily, I hope you've had a really great weekend this weekend. My name is Lisa Baughn, I'm an adjunct instructor of Geography, 5-year resident of district 5 and member of PATHS. I was able to meet you at your listening session a couple of weekends ago and hear your thoughts on affordable housing and economic issues here in Ft. Collins. It's great to be in touch with you again. I really appreciate your interest and attention to the issues of affordability here in Ft. Collins and thank you for the conversation at the session. In the last 4-5 years the market value of my 1br. apartment in district 5 (Heatheridge Lakes) has increased about 29% (possibly more). If I were to try and move in to it today, I could not afford it on the spotty, part- time, low wage work that seems to be available now. I experienced instability at all 3 of my adjuncting jobs this Fall semester, and just have not been able to break out of such low wage, part time contract work. Lots of folks continue to face PUBLIC COMMENTS RECEIVED NOVEMBER 6, 2019 THROUGH MARCH 10, 2020 similar insecurities as you know, both related to increases in housing prices and stagnant or falling incomes and the growth of the precarious "gig" economy. I talk to many residents who are really struggling to hang on in Ft. Collins. I know you know their struggles as well. A fellow member of PATHS and I have been reflecting on and researching the points you made at the listening session and at the City Council hearing during the Hughes zoning process last week, and we were wondering if you'd be available this week to talk about housing issues in more detail, either Tuesday, Thursday or Friday. If so, we would really appreciate it! :) Specifically, we'd like to share some really interesting and important data with you, and get your thoughts on it: "Here's What We Actually Know About Market-Rate Housing Development and Displacement" https://shelterforce.org/2018/11/05/heres-what-we-actually- know-about-market-rate-housing-development-and- displacement/ There are lots of studies linked to in the article, and we'd really like to open some of them up for discussion/exploration with you, if possible. If so, please let me know of some times that might work for PUBLIC COMMENTS RECEIVED NOVEMBER 6, 2019 THROUGH MARCH 10, 2020 you on Tuesday, Thursday or Friday. If those days don't work, let us know and we'll try for something else. :) Thank you so much, Emily. I'm looking forward to talking about these important issues with you again. Sincerely, Lisa Baughn lisa.baughn@gmail.com PUBLIC COMMENTS RECEIVED NOVEMBER 6, 2019 THROUGH MARCH 10, 2020 From: Delynn Coldiron To: Delynn Coldiron Subject: RE: Hughes Date: Thursday, November 14, 2019 3:16:15 PM From: Chris Warman <actualchrisw@gmail.com> Sent: Friday, November 8, 2019 12:58 PM To: Emily Gorgol <egorgol@fcgov.com> Subject: Hughes Councilmember Gorgol, I am beyond disappointed in your vote to approve the Hughes development, and as a constituent of the 6th district in Fort Collins, I believe you acted unfaithfully in casting your vote for the development. We elect our officials to speak for us, and you ran on a platform of "Thriving Natural Environment" which is the reason I voted for you in the first place. In doing so, and in following suit with the first council vote to reject the initial development, I reasonably believed you would continue to agree with the voices of your constituents and reject the subsequent proposal. Instead, you used the guise of "affordable housing" to vote for the project. Whereas the proposal contains no written promise of affordability, nor does it accurately address the current cost of living in Fort Collins, I believe you acted in bad faith. Additionally, whereas you are a sitting member of the Affordable Housing Board, you should know that adding these homes will not fix the housing problems. Not only will these homes most likely be priced at or above the current median home cost of $425,000, it will also not account for rising rent costs. Currently, 2 bedroom apartments are commonly priced upwards of $1400 which means someone would spend 85% of their minimum wage job solely on housing. New apartments do not lower the cost of old apartments and new homes do not lower the cost of existing homes. Another problem is the lack of existing infrastructure to support this new proposed community. Overland Trail is a two-lane road that already does not have enough traffic lights or safe side walks while seeing an incredible increase in traffic each year. Adding these homes will not help, and there is no way any environmental study would suggest anything less than a negative impact. Even more than the traffic issues will be the lack of affordable food within walking distance for this community. Even if people can afford to live there, they will only find themselves in a food desert with limited public transportation options which makes this project not only bad for the environment but also discriminatory. On top of all this, there is the issue of Lennar entering this market on your watch after you stated in your campaign your desire to build local communities. Now, the money spent on developing the Hughes Stadium area will instantly leave the community. As the saying goes, a good compromise leaves everyone mad. My only hope is that this compromise upsets Lennar enough to decide not to build, and then this valuable natural resource can potentially be preserved as the people who PUBLIC COMMENTS RECEIVED NOVEMBER 6, 2019 THROUGH MARCH 10, 2020 already live in the area believe it should be. For these reasons and more, I fully intend to follow up on this issue by pursuing any civil and legal means available to prevent this housing development. I hope that you listen to your constituents and rejoin their efforts to preserve the natural beauty of Fort Collins. All the best. -Chris Warman PUBLIC COMMENTS RECEIVED NOVEMBER 6, 2019 THROUGH MARCH 10, 2020 From: Delynn Coldiron To: Delynn Coldiron Subject: RE: Hughes Stadium Site Rezoning | need more housing options Date: Thursday, November 14, 2019 3:37:35 PM From: Nick Haws <nick@northernengineering.com> Sent: Tuesday, November 5, 2019 3:14 PM To: Emily Gorgol <egorgol@fcgov.com> Subject: Hughes Stadium Site Rezoning | need more housing options Emily, Attached is a letter I provided to the Planning & Zoning Board on September 19th . I don’t think it made it into the full agenda packet tonight, but perhaps I overlooked it in the volume of attachments. My comments today are much the same. We need thoughtful, well-planned housing on this site. Not a cluster of 80 homes at price tags over $1M. That does not align with City Plan nor does it address the needs of the greater community for attainable housing. Please vote for LMN Zoning, as recommended by Staff. Thanks, Nick Haws 2721 Walkaloosa Way Fort Collins, CO 80525 PUBLIC COMMENTS RECEIVED NOVEMBER 6, 2019 THROUGH MARCH 10, 2020 From: Delynn Coldiron To: Delynn Coldiron Subject: RE: Hughes Stadium Development Date: Thursday, November 14, 2019 3:38:27 PM From: James Bishop <jamesmadisonbishop@gmail.com> Sent: Sunday, November 10, 2019 7:13 PM To: Emily Gorgol <egorgol@fcgov.com> Subject: Hughes Stadium Development Ms. Gorgol, Hi, I'm a member of your district and I understand you recently voted to approved high-density housing at the Hughes Stadium site without any guarantees of affordable housing ensured. As someone who works in water in this area and has been involved in discussions regarding the nexus of affordable housing and "tap fees" with developers, it's my understanding that affordable housing according to average industry models means units beginning in the low 300,000 thousands. That's low 300,000s even with greatly reduced footprints for single family units relative to suburban lots through the 90s. The Mosaic development off of Timberline is a perfect example of this trend. Frankly, I'm disappointed that a supposedly progressive representative like yourself is not ensuring affordable housing for people such as our teachers is not baked into any developments that you approve. Either City Council gets serious about baking in affordable units into their development approvals, or this town will continue to punish its working classes and we will become a town only for the wealthy. This may sound a little hyperbolic but if home prices continue to appreciate as they have been it's very much accurate. I'd be happy to discuss this issue further but my vote will follow genuinely progressive policies and a city council member who takes seriously the role of government in constraining capitalism. All best, James Bishop PUBLIC COMMENTS RECEIVED NOVEMBER 6, 2019 THROUGH MARCH 10, 2020 From: Delynn Coldiron To: Delynn Coldiron Subject: RE: decision Date: Thursday, November 14, 2019 3:39:01 PM From: gbtrancer1@aol.com <gbtrancer1@aol.com> Sent: Wednesday, November 13, 2019 3:14 PM To: wtroell@fcgov.com <wtroell@fcgov.com>; Emily Gorgol <egorgol@fcgov.com>; Ken Summers <ksummers@fcgov.com>; Kristin Stephens <kstephens@fcgov.com>; Ross Cunniff <rcunniff@fcgov.com>; Susan Gutowsky <sgutowsky@fcgov.com>; jpignatoro@fcgvo.com <jpignatoro@fcgvo.com> Subject: re: decision Dear Council Members, May I first say I would like to extend my appreciation to those members: Ross, Susan and Julie who voted in favour of what the community wants and for the betterment of our quality of life by voting against Hughes development. I believe this shows sensitivity to constituents for whom these members have been elected and awareness of the implications of placing this development on the west side in an already crowded and lacking in transportation routes. This area is the access to horsetooth reservoir and provides a buffer for animal populations. The lesson Boulder discovered by developing their west end is more animal intrusions and fires and they found a downtown stadium to be a nuisance. Fort Collins is touted as a wonderful place to live and since I have moved here in 1990 I have seen this wonderful town deteriorate due to over development and lack of placing limitations on growth. This has created a situation where the air quality contrary to csu representative is not a 'regional problem" it is one we all have part in and like Boulder the more air pollution on the west side the more it sinks into town. I remember when we did not have brown clouds that were visible from arthurs rock. All other considerations have also deteriorated with the crowding. I could barely speak my whole two minutes at the podium as I surveyed the council and could see where some members were headed, this was conveyed in their body language and I must say it seemed dismissive of those who got up to speak. This development has been opposed by I would say the majority of the community for a number of reasons and would ask that the remaining members regain reason and vote this development down. The poorly planned stadium and overruns should not be a suitable reason to continue this project, which is not addressing the lack of affordable housing in this community. This project is certainly not in character with our town and how we would like to be viewed as a healthy and attractive town. We need more open space. Thanks George Bishop PUBLIC COMMENTS RECEIVED NOVEMBER 6, 2019 THROUGH MARCH 10, 2020 PURCHASE AND SALE 8GREEMENT [Hughes Stadium Redevelopment) THIS PURCHASE AND SALE AGREEMENT (this "Agreement"), the Effective Date of which is January 31 , 2019, is entered into by the STATE BOARD OF AGRICULTURE OF COLORADO, now known as the BOARD OF GOVERNORS OF THE COLORADO STATE UNIVERSITY SYSTEM, acting by and through COLORADO STATE UNIVERSITY ("Seller") and LENNAR COLORADO, LLC, a Colorado limited liability company ("Buyer"). Buyer and Seller will sometimes be referred to herein individually as a "Party" or together as "Parties"). RECITALS A. Seller is the owner of that certain real property located at 201 1 South Overland Trail, Fort Collins, Colorado, which was formerly the location of Hughes Stadium (the "Property"). B. Seller wishes to sell to Buyer the Property and Buyer wishes to purchase from Seller the Property, upon the terms and conditions hereinafter set forth, NOW THEREFORE, in consideration of the foregoing recitals, which form a substantive part of this Agreement, and Of the premises and the mutual covenants and agreement of the Parties set forth in this Agreement, the receipt and sufficiency of which are hereby acknowledged. Buyer and Seller do hereby agree as follows: 1. Definitions. Capitalized terms that are not defined when first used in this Agreement have the meanings set forth below. (a) Additional Purchase Price: As defined in Section 15(a). (b) Additional Title Matter: As defined in Section 6(g). (c) Affiliate: As defined in Section 18(d). (d) Authorities: All federal, state and local governmental and quasigovernmental agencies, bodies, entities, boards and authorities that have jurisdiction over the Property, the furnishing of utilities or other services to the Property, or the subdivision, improvement, development, occupancy, sale or use of the Property. (e) None. (D Buyer's Entitlement Costs: As defined in Section 3(d). (g) Buyer's Entitlement Work Product: As defined in Section 4(d). City of Fort Collins. PUBLIC COMMENTS RECEIVED NOVEMBER 6, 2019 THROUGH MARCH 10, 2020 1857N5.2 (i) Closing: The act of settlement of the purchase and sale of the Lots at which Seller conveys title to Buyer by delivery of a deed and Buyer delivers the Purchase Price to Seller. The Parties contemplate that there will be one Closing. O) Closing Date: As defined in Section 5(a). (k) As defined in Section 6(a). Confidentipl Information: As defined in Section 17(a). (m) CORA: As defined in Section 17(c). (n) Deposit: Two Hundred and Fifty Thousand Dollars ($250,000.00), as more particularly specified in Section 3(a). (o) Disclosing Partv: As defined in Section 7(a). (p) Pistrict•. As defined in Section 4(g). (q) Documents; As defined in Section 4(c). (r) Effective Date: The date on which both Parties have delivered to the other a fully executed original of this Agreement. The Effective Date shall be filled in above upon establishment of the Effective Date. (s) Escrow Agent or Title Company: Fidelity National Title Company, 3500 John F. Kennedy Pkwy., Ste. 100, Fort Collins, co 80525. Existing Survey: As defined in Section 6(e). (u) Period: The period beginning on the Effective Date and expiring on 5:00 p.m. MDT, on the ninetieth (90th) day after the Effective Date. (v) Financial Records: As defined in Section 15(d). (w) Final Plat: As defined in Section 4(e). (x) Home: The home types that Buyer intends to build on the Lots. (y) Indemnified Partv: As defined in Section 4(c). (z) Initial Concept Plan: Buyer's initial concept plan for development of the Hughes Subdivision as set forth in the Response to Hughes Stadium Master Developer RFP dated June 8, 2018. (aa) Initial Title Materi*.• As defined in Section 6(a). (bb) Legal Requirements: The rules, regulations, laws, ordinances, standards, approved plans and other requirements of the Authorities. (cc) loetter or Credit: As defined in Section 3(a). 2 PUBLIC COMMENTS RECEIVED NOVEMBER 6, 2019 THROUGH MARCH 10, 2020 (dd) LgE: A proposed number Of six hundred twenty-five (625) lots, which may be increased or decreased pursuant to the Final Plat as described herein, to be developed as townhomes, paired homes and detached single family residences. (ee) Material Event Termination Notice: As defined in Section 7. Mqximqm Seller Liability: As defined in Section 14(b) (gg) As defined in Section 15(b). Outside Closine pate: 5:00 p.m. MDT, October 30, 2020, at which time this Agreement shall automatically terminate if Closing has not been consummated before such time. Upon such termination, the Parties shall have such rights and responsibilities as are otherwise set forth in this Agreement. (ii) Permitted Exceptions: As defined in Section 6(h). Preliminary Entitlement Confirmation: As defined in Section (kk) Preliminary Entitlement Confirmation Deadline: As defined in Section 4(d). (11) Preliminary Entitlement Reimbursement: As defined in Section 4(d). (mm) Proiect Approvals: As defined in Section 4(e). (nn) EssLAppægLE.Æ.iQd: As defined in Section 40. (00) Project Documents: As defined in Section 4(e). (pp) Property: The parcel of real property currently containing approximately one hundred sixty-one (161) acres located at 201 1 South Overland Trail, City of Fort Collins, Larimer County, Colorado, as more particularly described and depicted on Exhibit attached hereto, including Seller's interest, if any, in all mineral, oil, gas, gravel, geothermal, and ground water rights appurtenant t 857W63.2 thereto; together with all contracts and contract rights, studies, materials and plans, including architectural, landscaping, grading, and other plans, specifications and reports applicable to the Lots; all easements, rights of way, permits. approvals, privileges and entitlements appurtenant thereto and all right, title and interest in and to all streets and water courses adjacent to, abutting or serving the real property. (qq) The proposed development of the Property into a desired number Of six hundred twenty-five (625) Lots, to be developed into single family detached, paired, and townhome Homes, with plans for low 3 PUBLIC COMMENTS RECEIVED NOVEMBER 6, 2019 THROUGH MARCH 10, 2020 maintenance Homes and "Next Gen" Homes, together with planned significant trail systems, parks and open space tracts, with a central civic park to memorialize the former Hughes Stadium, and associated retail uses, to be known as the "Hughes Subdivision". (rr) Purchase Pcie•. The amount to be paid to Seller as provided in Section 3(b). (SS) Representative* As defined in Section 17(a). (tt) ReciDieng: As defined in Section 17(a). (uu) Retail Closing: The closing between Buyer or its successor and a third-party homebuyer of a Lot with a completed Home thereon. (vv) Sales Price(s): The purchase price for a Home(s) paid by a third party homebuyer at a Retail Closing, based upon the closing settlement statement (formerly known as a "HUD-I (ww) Suitabilitv Notice: As defined in Section 4(b). (xx) Title Review Period: As defined in Section 6(c). (yy) Updated Survey; As defined in Section 6(e). (zz) Warrant! Expiration Date: As defined in Section 14(b). 2.Purchase and Sple. Subject to the terms and conditions of this Agreement, Seller agrees to sell to Buyer, and Buyer agrees to purchase from Seller, the Property in fee simple. 3.Depositi Purchase Price. (a)Delivery of Deposit. Within five (5) business days after the Effective Date, Buyer shall deliver to Escrow Agent the Deposit by wire transfer, or at Buyer's election, shall deliver to Escrow Agent the Deposit in the form of a letter of credit issued by 18570965.2 or the benefit of Seller in the form attached hereto as X It (t e tter re It t uyer fails to deliver the Suitability Notice as provided in Section 4(b), prior to the end of the Feasibility Period, then this Agreement shall automatically terminate as of the end of the Feasibility Period and Escrow Agent shall immediately return the Deposit to Buyer at such time. After delivery of the Suitability Notice. the Deposit shall be nonrefundable to Buyer except as expressly provided in Sections 6(g)(ii), 7, 8, 9, I I(b) and I I(d) of this Agreement. The Deposit shall be held by Escrow Agent in escrow, with any cash portion held in a separate, federally-insured interest bearing account(s), and the interest shall be considered pan of the Deposit. The Deposit shall not be credited against the Purchase Price, unless during the term Of this Agreement the Letter Of Credit is substituted or replaced with a cash deposit, and then only in the amount held by the Escrow Agent and applied at Closing. If this Agreement is terminated by Buyer pursuant to Sections 4(b), 4(d), 4(e), 6(g)(ii), 7, 8, 9, I(b) and I I(d), the Deposit then held by Escrow Agent shall be returned to Buyer by Escrow Agent, and, except as otherwise provided herein, thereafter, all further rights and obligations of the Parties under this Agreement shall terminate. 1 4 PUBLIC COMMENTS RECEIVED NOVEMBER 6, 2019 THROUGH MARCH 10, 2020 (b)Eurcbase Price. The Purchase Price for the Property payable at Closing shall be Ten Million Dollars ($10,000,000.00) ("Purchase Price"). and shall be adjusted prior to Closing as follows: (i)based upon the number of Lots contained in the Final Plat, if fewer than sixty hundred twenty-five (625) Lots are approved in the Final Plat, then the Purchase Price would be reduced on a pro rata basis in the amount of Sixteen Thousand Dollars (S 16,000.00) per Lot less than sixty hundred twenty-five (625) Lots, up to a maximum reduction equivalent to Four Hundred Thousand Dollars ($400,000.00); (ii) if more than sixty hundred twenty-five (625) Lots are approved in the Final Plat then the Purchase Price would be increased by the amount of Sixteen Thousand Dollars ($16,000.00) per Lot more than sixty hundred twenty-five (625) Lots; and (iii) if the City allows a reduction of the amount of drainage areas in the Project from those currently shown on Buyer's Initial Concept Plan, then the Purchase Price would be increased by Eight Thousand Dollars ($8,000.00) for each such additional Lot more than sixty hundred twenty-five (625) Lots caused as a result of the reduction of the drainage areas in the Project; and (ii)Buyer's Entitlement Costs up to a maximum of Four Hundred Thousand Dollars ($400,000.00) shall be applied as a credit against the Purchase Price, provided that Buyer shall deliver to Seller paid invoices with reasonable backup documentation. (c)Additional Price. In addition to the Purchase Price, from and after Closing, Buyer shall pay Seller the Additional Purchase Price specified in Section 15 below. (d)Entitlement and matting Costs. The Parties acknowledge and agree that the Purchase Price is based upon the Final Plat pursuant to the Project Documents receiving final, unappealable approval by the applicable Authorities, together with recordation thereof, on or before Closing for a minimum of six hundred twenty five (625) Lots, subject to adjustment pursuant to Section 3(b) (or if appeal is taken, such appeal has been resolved to the commercially reasonable satisfaction of Buyer). Buyer shall be responsible for all costs of 1857*5.2 preparation and submittal of the Final Plat and Project Documents, and to pay any fees imposed by the Authorities as a condition to final approval of Final Plat and Project Documents and the costs charged by the County Clerk and Recorder for recordation of the Final Plat, and any park and school dedication fees imposed by the Authorities at or before recordation Of the Final Plat to the extent not satisfied by open space and school dedications in the Final Plat, and any traffic impact fees or other fees or charges imposed by the Authorities at recordation of the Final Plat, expressly including any raw water requirements and City-required water resource or water capital fees. Buyer agrees to be solely responsible for such costs of rezoning, platting and engineering costs Of preparation and submittal Of the Final Plat and Project Documents incurred by Buyer (collectively, "Buyer's Entitlement Costs"). During the Feasibility Period, Buyer will present Buyer's Initial Concept Plan to the City for preliminary review and feedback. 4. Preliminary Magers. (a)Feasibilitv Study. Buyer shall have the right during the Feasibility Period, to investigate title and to make such investigations, studies and tests with respect to the Property as Buyer deems necessary or appropriate to determine the feasibility of purchasing the Property. Buyer acknowledges and Seller hereby agrees that Buyer will, during the Feasibility Period and prior to Closing, have the opportunity to make "Investigations, Tests and Surveys", as hereinafter 5 PUBLIC COMMENTS RECEIVED NOVEMBER 6, 2019 THROUGH MARCH 10, 2020 defined, on the Property, to satisfy itself that the Property is satisfactory for Buyer's intended use. "Investigations, Tests and Surveys" means, without limitation, the following: (i) inspecting, surveying, making engineering, environmental and architectural studies, testing the soil and otherwise determining the condition of the Property; (ii) reviewing all Documents received from Seller under Section 4(c), all subdivision. zoning, and building code ordinances, rules and regulations of the City and applicable Authorities and the State of Colorado; (iii) determining that utilities, including, but without limitation, water, gas, electricity, telephone and cable television services, can be made available to adequately serve the improvements which are intended to be constructed on the Property; (iv) determining that there is or shall be adequate access to serve the Homes and retail spaces that Buyer intends to construct on the Property; (v) determining the nature, magnitude, and times due Of atl taxes, fees, charges, system development fees, tap fees, and Other costs which are or may be imposed upon the Property or Buyer by any utility company or government or quasi-government agency; (vi) determining the adequacy of water and sewer taps for the Property and service of same; (vii) determining the number, size and location of the Lots and retail spaces by submittal of a land plan to the City; and (viii) determining all other matters regarding the Property and the development thereof which Buyer deems appropriate. However, Buyer shall not engage in any physically invasive testing or inspections without Seller's prior written consent not to be unreasonably withheld or delayed. Seller wilt permit Buyer's consultants to contact the applicable Authorities in order to investigate the Property. Buyer will be fully responsible for payment of Buyer's consultant fees, costs and charges with respect to any such investigation. Buyer's obligation to purchase the Property is specifically contingent and conditional upon Buyer being satisfied in its sole and subjective discretion that the Property can be developed for the Project and that there are no impediments to the development of the Property for the Project, which would make it unprofitable, impracticable or infeasible to purchase and develop the Property for Buyer's intended use. 1857W65.2 6 PUBLIC COMMENTS RECEIVED NOVEMBER 6, 2019 THROUGH MARCH 10, 2020 (b)Feasibility Period. Buyer shall have until expiration of the Feasibility Period to satisfy itself, in its sole and subjective discretion, with respect to the conditions set forth in this Section 4. It shall be conclusively presumed that Buyer is dissatisfied with the conditions set forth in this Section 4, and the Agreement shall automatically terminate and Buyer's Deposit shall be returned by Escrow Agent unless Buyer gives written notice to Seller Of its waiver of the conditions set forth in this Section 4 (the 'Suitability Notice") prior to expiration of the Feasibility Period. In addition, at any time prior to expiration of the Feasibility Period, Buyer may, in its sole discretion, for any reason or for no reason. terminate this Agreement by written notice to Seller. Upon any such termination of this Agreement, Buyer's Deposit shall be immediately returned to Buyer, and thereafter no Party hereto shall have any further obligation or liability to the other with respect to the transactions contemplated by this Agreement except for Buyer's obligations pursuant to Sections 4(c) and 12 hereof, which shall survive termination of this Agreement. Except as otherwise provided herein, no examination of the Property will be deemed to constitute a waiver or relinquishment on Buyer's part of its rights to rely on the express covenants, representations, warranties and agreements of Seller in this Agreement. (c)Righ$ of Entry. During the Feasibility Period and thereafter until this Agreement is terminated, Seller shall permit Buyer, its employees, agents, contractors and subcontractors (after giving Seller reasonable prior notice identifying the purpose of Buyer's entry) to enter upon the Property and while thereon make surveys, take measurements, perform soil test borings or other tests of surface and subsurface conditions, make engineering, environmental and other studies and inspect the Property. However, Buyer shall not engage in any physically invasive testing or inspections without Seller's prior written consent. Seller has made available to Buyer all material reports, surveys, tests, studies, assessments and other information regarding the Property that are in Seller's possession or control to facilitate Buyer's due diligence review of the Property (the "Documents"). Buyer shall (i) keep the Property free of any liens or third party claims resulting therefrom; (ii) defend, indemnify and hold harmless Seller and each of Seller's employees and agents, and Seller's affiliates' employees and agents (each an "Indemnified Party") from and against any and all claims, causes of action, costs (including reasonable attorneys' fees), losses, liability, or awards of any kind or nature incurred by Seller and/or an Indemnified Party caused by Buyer's entry into the Property, excluding negligent acts of Seller and pre-existing conditions in the Property not otherwise exacerbated by Buyer's entry, (iii) restore as nearly as practicable such portion of the Property damaged by Buyer's entry to substantially its condition immediately before such exercise, and (iv) maintain general liability insurance from the date hereof naming Seller as an additional insured, covering Buyer's activities on the Property in the minimum amount of $2,000,000 combined single limit for death, bodily injury and property damage, with companies and in a form reasonably satisfactory to Seller. The terms of subjections 4(c)(i) to 4(c)(iii) for the benefit of Seller shall survive the Closing or earlier termination of this Agreement. (d)Preliminary Entitlement Confirmation. During the Feasibility Period, Buyer shall use commercially reasonable, diligent and good faith efforts to satisfy itself, in Buyer's reasonable detennination, that the City will approve the final Project Approvals (as defined below) for a minimum of six hundred (600) Lots (the "Preliminary Entitlement Confirmation"). Preliminary Entitlement Confirmation shall include preliminary approval at a public hearing, and support by City Council or the Planning and Zoning Board at a preapplication hearing. Buyer shall use commercially reasonable, good faith efforts to notify Seller in advance of any meetings or telephone conferences with City representatives that in any way pertain to its pursuit of the Preliminary Entitlement Confirrnation, and shall afford Seller the opportunity to have a representative present. If, despite commercially reasonable, diligent and good faith efforts, Buyer is unable to obtain a Preliminary Entitlement Confirmation or before ninety (90) days after expiration of the Feasibility Period (the "Preliminary Entitlement Confirmation Deadline"), and 7 18570965.2 PUBLIC COMMENTS RECEIVED NOVEMBER 6, 2019 THROUGH MARCH 10, 2020 elects to terminate this Agreement by written notice to Seller on or before the Preliminary Entitlement Confirmation Deadline, as a result thereof, Buyer's Deposit shall be immediately returned to Buyer and Seller shall reimburse Buyer for Buyer's actual out-of-pocket costs and expenses incurred in connection with its efforts to obtain the Preliminary Entitlement Confirmation (and not for other Feasibility Period matters) in an amount not to exceed Four Hundred Thousand Dollars ($400,000.00), as evidenced by paid invoices with reasonable backup documentation (the "Preliminary Entitlement Reimbursement"). Within ten (10) business days after payment by Seller of the Preliminary Entitlement Reimbursement to Buyer, Buyer shall deliver or cause to be delivered, copies Of all of Buyer's Entitlement Work Product (as hereinafter defined). For purposes of this Section 4(d), "Buyer's Entitlement Work Product" means all site planning, development, platting and public improvement plans prepared by Buyer related to the Project, including any application materials related to the Preliminary Entitlement Confirmation or the Project Approvals, but not including Buyer's proprietary, privileged, or confidential information or Home plans. Buyer shall (a) take such actions and pay any legitimate outstanding sums as may be necessary to preclude any claim against Seller or the Property for any sums owing for the preparation of Buyer's Work Product, and (b) use reasonable efforts to obtain within ten (10) business days after Seller gives Buyer its written request, such consents as may be reasonably necessary to enable Seiler to utilize Buyer's Work Product; provided, that Buyer shall not be responsible for any party or consultant's refusal to provide any such consent. Buyer's Work Product shall otherwise be assigned "as is," without any representation or warranty by Buyer with respect to the accuracy or completeness of its contents. To the extent Buyer's Work Product can be assigned, Buyer's Work Product shall be deemed assigned to Seller upon the termination of this Agreement under this Section without the execution of any additional documents. The foregoing terms for the benefit of Seller shall survive the termination of this Agreement. (e)Project Approvqls. From and after the Effective Date, Buyer, at its sole cost and expense, shall use commercially reasonable, diligent and good faith efforts to obtain all necessary approvals from the City and all other applicable Authorities on or before that date which is twelve (12) months after the Effective Date (the "Project Approval Period") for the following: (i) a PUD, with applicable zoning overlay: (ii) a Subdivision Improvement Agreement for the Project; (iii) a Final Development Plan for the Property; (iv) a final plat or plats for the Property in connection with Buyer's development of the Project to be recorded in the Clerk and Recorder's Office of the County of Larimer; and (v) engineering and construction drawings and plans related thereto (collectively, the "Final Plat") (all of which will be referred to collectively as the "Project Documents"). The approval by applicable Authorities of the Project Documents, shall be referTed to herein as the ' 'Project Approvals." If required by the City, the Project Documents will be submitted to the Authorities under Seller's name as owner of the Property. The Parties acknowledge that Ray Baker will represent Seller on behalf of the Project and shall support, cooperate and assist Buyer in obtaining the Project Approvals, at no out-of-pocket cost to Seller; provided, however, that Buyer will be the "front" spokesperson for the Project with the City and will liaison with the City on behalf Of the Project. Buyer agrees to use commercially reasonable efforts to keep Seller reasonably informed of the status of its efforts to obtain the Project Approvals. The Parties acknowledge and agree that the Closing shall be conditioned on Buyer's ability to obtain the Project Approvals on or before the expiration of the Project Approval Period. In the event Buyer is unable to obtain approval of the Project Documents, despite using diligent efforts, prior to the expiration of the Project Approval Period for reasons beyond Buyer's reasonable control, Buyer may elect to either (i) terminate this Agreement upon written notice to Seller prior to the expiration of the Project Approval Period and thereafter the Parties shall have no further rights or obligations hereunder. except for those which expressly survive termination, or (ii) waive its contingency in writing prior to the expiration Of the Project Approval Period to obtain the Project Approvals and proceed to Closing, and this Agreement remains in full force and effect, or (iii) request in writing within twenty (20) days before the expiration of the Project Approval Period a one-time extension of the Project Approval Period and the Closing Date for a period of time not to exceed ninety (90) days. Notwithstanding the foregoing, Buyer will not be obligated to fund or continue with the entitlement and platting process if, in Buyer's sole but reasonable 8 PUBLIC COMMENTS RECEIVED NOVEMBER 6, 2019 THROUGH MARCH 10, 2020 discretion, Buyer determines during the Project Approvals Period that the City will not approve the Final Plat in conformance with Buyer's Initial Concept Plan. (f)Seller Review. A draft of the Project Documents shall be submitted by Buyer to Ray Baker, at rbaker9217@gmail.com, on behalf of Seller, for Seller's approval, not to be unreasonably withheld before submitting the same to the City. A courtesy copy of the Project Documents shall be sent concurrently to general.counsel@coloradostate.edu. Seller shall have ten (10) business days after each such submittal to provide written notice Of any objections to same, and if Seller does not provide a written objection within such 10 business day period, then it shall be deemed that Seller has approved such submittal. After such approval or deemed approval by Seller, Buyer shall not revise the form of the Project Documents in a material way without obtaining Seller's prior approval not to be unreasonably withheld or delayed. Upon approval by Seller, Buyer shall submit the draft Project Documents to the City. Notwithstanding anything to the contrary contained in this Agreement, Buyer shall be solely responsible for the timely payment of all fees assessed by the City relating to the Project Documents and any other development of the Project as required pursuant to the Project Documents, including, without limitation, all application and permit fees, site planning, engineering costs, and recording costs and any and all school fees assessed at Final Plat, land dedication fees, district fees, cash-in-lieu payments, City financial assurances and any other fee related thereto; it being expressly agreed to by the Parties that Seller shall not be responsible for the payment of any such fees or for any penalties resulting from Buyer's failure to timely pay any such fees. (g)District. Seller hereby acknowledges and agrees that Buyer may elect, and hereby retains the right, at its sole and absolute discretion any time after Buyer has delivered its Suitability Notice to create a new metropolitan district controlled initially by Buyer or its Affiliates, to which the Project will not be subject until after Closing for the PUQOse of funding public improvements and/or provide covenant enforcement and maintenance services for the Project as approved by the City (the "District"). Upon the inclusion of the Property within the boundaries of such District after Closing, the Project shall be subject to any and all levies and facilities fees assessed against the Project from such District. Any agreements or documents 9 18570965.2 PUBLIC COMMENTS RECEIVED NOVEMBER 6, 2019 THROUGH MARCH 10, 2020 carrying out the intent of this Section may be recorded against the Project at Closing, but not prior to Closing. Subject to the terms Of this Section, Seller will not Object or otherwise challenge inclusion of the Property now or in the future into the District. However, Seller will not actively participate in Buyer's efforts to obtain approval of the District by the City. The Parties further acknowledge and agree that the Closing shall not be conditioned on Buyer's ability to obtain approval of the District by the City. (h)Siens: Sales Trailer: Storage of Equipment. After the end of the Feasibility Period. for so long as Buyer has not terrninated this Agreement, Buyer shall have the right to place signs and a sales trailer on the Property and to conduct marketing activities thereon solely in relation to development Of the Project, all in accordance with the applicable Legal Requirements, and approved by Seller, such approval not to be unreasonably withheld or delayed. Seller shall also provide, at no cost to Buyer, adequate space on the Property for storage of construction equipment and materials that Buyer and its contractors and their subcontractors may from time to time require solely in relation to development of the Project. Such space shall be located in an area mutually acceptable to Buyer and Seller. In connection with Buyer's exercise of its rights hereunder, Buyer shall comply with all requirements as set forth in Section 4(c)(i) to (iv). (i)Attainable Housing. During the Feasibility Period, Buyer and Seller shall use commercially reasonable, good faith effons to reach agreement regarding an allocation of a portion of thc Property for the development of attainable housing. S. (a)Closing shall take place within ten ( 10) business days after the final, unappealable approval by the applicable Authorities of the Project Documents (or if appeal is taken, such appeal has been resolved to the commercially reasonable satisfaction of the Buyer) and recordation of the Final Plat, but in no event later than the Outside Closing Date (the "Closing Date"). Closing shall occur through an escrow with Escrow Agent, whereby Seller. Buyer and their attomeys need not be physically present at the Closing and may deliver documents by overnight air courier or other means. The Parties acknowledge that Buyer requires five (5) business days to wire the Purchase Price after approval of the Closing settlement statement. (b)Subject to the adjustments provided for herein, any credit of the cash portion of the Deposit at Closing as provided in Section 3(a) and a credit at Closing of Buyer's Entitlement Costs in accordance with Section 3(b)(ii), Buyer shall pay at Closing the Purchase Price by cashier's or title company check or wired funds. (c)Upon delivery of the Purchase Price, the Parties shall execute, acknowledge, and deliver the Closing documents set forth on Exhibit D. (d)Each Party shall execute, acknowledge, enseal and deliver, after the Effective Date, including at or after Closing, such further reasonable and customary assurances, instruments and documents as the Escrow Agent may reasonably request in order to fulfill the intent of this Agreement and the transactions contemplated hereby. (e)All real estate taxes, and all other public or governmental charges and public or private assessments against the Property which are or may be payable on an annual basis (including metropolitan district, sanitary commission, benefit charges, liens or encumbrances for sewer, water, drainage or other public improvements whether completed or commenced on or prior to the Effective Date or subsequent thereto), shall be adjusted and prorated between the Parties as of the day prior to Closing and paid by Seller at Closing (as a credit to Buyer) and shall from and 10 18570965.2 PUBLIC COMMENTS RECEIVED NOVEMBER 6, 2019 THROUGH MARCH 10, 2020 after Closing be assumed and paid by Buyer, whether or not assessments have been levied as of the date of Closing. Any tax proration based on an estimate shall be final. The obligation to adjust shall survive Closing. (f)The cost of documentary stamps, transfer taxes and recording fees shall be paid by Buyer. Notwithstanding the foregoing, Seller shall pay at Closing, without any contribution from Buyer, (i) any agricultural land, recapture, or roll-back tax due in connection with the conveyance or deed under any Authority's law, regulation or ordinance (or any similar tax or assessment), and (ii) the cost of preparing release documents, if any, and the recording thereof for any lien releases required to be obtained by Seller in order to convey title to the Property in accordance with Section 6. 7. Title and Survey. (a)Commitment. Within ten (10) days following the Effective Date, Escrow Agent shall, at Seller's cost, deliver to Buyer, with a copy to Buyer's counsel, a title insurance commitment, with best available copies of all exceptions evidencing title to the Property (collectively, the "Commitment") by the Title Company. The original Commitment and any Existing Survey (as defined below), are refeffed to as the "Initial Title Materials". The list of Permitted Exceptions shall be attached hereto as Exhibit E prior to expiration of thc Feasibility Period as provided in Section 6(h). (b)Form of Commitment. The Commitment shall be in the amount of the Purchase Price and shall be updated as provided in Section 6(d), and shall be for an ALTA Form 2006 extended coverage owner's title policy with all standard pre-printed exceptions deleted, provided that Buyer shall be responsible for any updates to the Existing Survey required by the Title Company to delete the so-called "standard title exceptions." (c)Title Review. Buyer shall have until the date that is thirty (30) days after receipt by Buyer of the Initial Title Materials to review the Commitment and any Survey (the 'Title Review Period"). If Buyer determines that there are title exceptions or matters shown on the Survey other than those deemed to be acceptable to Buyer, Buyer shall notify Seller, in writing, of such title defects during the Title Review Period (the "Buyer's Title Objection Notice") and Seller shall have the right, within ten (10) days after receiving such notice, to elect: (i) to cure the title defect at Seller's cost and expense, or (ii) not to cure such defect (the "Seller's Title Response Notice"). Seller's failure to notify Buyer in writing within the stated time frame shall be deemed Seller's election not to cure. If Seller elects to cure, Seller shall use its commercially reasonable efforts to do so prior to Closing, and provide Buyer with an update to the Commitment demonstrating that the title defects have been cured. If Seller fails to timely cure or elects not to cure, then Buyer shall be entitled to elect to terminate this Agreement or waive such defect by delivery of written notice to Seller on or before the date that is ten (10) days after the date on which Seller's Title Response Notice was due, and if Buyer elects to terminate, Buyer shall be entitled to the return of the Deposit. If Buyer fails to timely deliver its written waiver pursuant to the preceding sentence, this Agreement shall be deemed terminated and Buyer shall be entitled to the prompt return Of its Deposit. Buyer shall not be required to object to mechanics liens, mortgages, or deeds of trust caused by Seller, and the Parties agree that such items will be released at Seller's expense as of Closing. (d)(Jpdpqed Commitment. The Commitment shall be updated, together with legible copies of any additional matters identified therein, and shall be delivered to Buyer no less than ten (10) days before the Closing Date, unless there are no additional matters listed as Schedule B-2 exceptions in which case the update may be delivered at the Closing. Unless caused by Buyer or its employees, agents, contractors or subcontractors, if any updated Commitment discloses any new requirement, defect, encumbrances or other adverse matter that is not a Permitted Exception, 11 18570965.2 PUBLIC COMMENTS RECEIVED NOVEMBER 6, 2019 THROUGH MARCH 10, 2020 then Buyer shall notify Seller in writing of the new title defects on or before Closing. The procedures set forth in Section 6(c) shall be applicable to any such new title defect, and if necessary, the Closing Date shall be extended accordingly. (e)Survey. Within five (5) days following the Effective Date, Seller shall deliver the most recent ALTANSPS survey of the Property ("Existing Survey") to Buyer. Buyer shall have the right, but not the obligation, at Buyer's sole cost and expense, to obtain an update to the Existing Survey ("Updated Survey" and together with the Existing Survey, the 'Survey"), which such update, if obtained, shall be certified to Buyer, Seller and the Title Company, and otherwise in form sufficient to insure deletion of the standard preprinted exceptions on the title policy. (f)Survev Review. In the event the Survey reflects easements, encroachments, rights-of-way, roads, lack of access, deficiencies, overlaps, gaps or gores between any parcels included within the Property or between the Property and any adjoining streets or roads, or other defects not contained in the Permitted Exceptions to title or other matters which preclude the use of the Property for the purposes set forth in this Agreement, then Buyer shall notify Seller, in writing, of such survey defects during the Title Review Period (the "Survey Objections"). Survey Objections shall be considered as defects in title and Seller shall have the same rights and duties relating to the remedy of such survey defects as are provided in Section 6(c) pertaining to the remedy of title defects. The procedures relating to the raising and curing of Survey Objections shall be the same procedures as are provided in Section 6(c) pertaining to title defects. (g)Additional Title Matters. For the purposes of this Agreement, an "Additional Title Matter" is any encumbrance on. or defect in, title to the Property that is not a Permitted Exception and that was not disclosed in the Initial Title Materials (including, without limitation, matters shown on any Survey), which was not caused by Buyer or its employees, agents, contractors or subcontractors; and the "Interim Period" refers to the period of time that is between: (A) the expiration of the Feasibility Period, and (B) Closing Date. If at any time during the Interim Period, Buyer obtains knowledge (through an update to the Commitment or the Survey, the closing Commitment or otherwise) of any Additional Title Matter which is objectionable to Buyer, Buyer shall give Seller written notice (an 'Objection Notice") of its objection to the Additional Title Matter no later than five (5) business days after the date on which Buyer receives written notice of such Additional Title Matter. Any such Additional Title Matter for which Buyer does not deliver a timely Objection Notice, shall be deemed to have been accepted by Buyer and shall be a Permitted Exception. Seller shall use commercially reasonable efforts to, within five (5) business days after receipt of an Objection Notice for an Additional Title Matter caused by Seller, its employees, agents or contractors (the "Title Cure Period"), to take reasonable actions to remove or cure or, with Buyer's consent, to obtain title insurance over the Additional Title Matter subject to such Objection Notice. In the event that Closing is scheduled to occur during the Title Cure Period, the date of Closing shall, at Seller's option, be extended to a date that is not more than thirty (30) days after the delivery of the Objection Notice to enable Seller to take any such cure actions. If Seller is unable to remove or cure using commercially reasonable efforts or, with Buyer's consent, to obtain title insurance over all such Additional Title Matters prior to the end of the Title Cure Period, Buyer may, by written notice (the "Election Notice") given to Seller within fivc (5) business days after the end of the Title Cure Period, elect only one of the following options: (i)accept the Property with such defects, and waive any uncured Additional Title Matters for which Buyer has delivered an Objection Notice; or (ii)to terminate this Agreement, and upon such termination the Deposit shall be returned by Escrow Agent to Buyer, and the Parties will have no further rights, obligations and liabilities hereunder, except those rights, obligations and liabilities that expressly survive termination; provided however, if such Additional Title Matter is caused by an act of Seller after the date hereof and is not otherwise contemplated by this 12 18570965.2 PUBLIC COMMENTS RECEIVED NOVEMBER 6, 2019 THROUGH MARCH 10, 2020 Agreement, or is a matter which Seller agreed in writing, or was obligated, to cure, then Seller shall be in default hereunder and Buyer shall have Buyer's rights and remedies under Section I I (b) hereof. If Seller does not receive an Election Notice within such 5-busincss day period, Buyer shall be deemed to have elected option (i) above, in this Section 6(g). (h)Permitted Exceptions. If this Agreement is not terminated pursuant to Section 4(b), the term "Permitted Exceptions" shall mean (i) taxes and assessments for the year of Closing and subsequent years, a lien not due and payable, (ii) any matter that is disclosed in the Initial Title Materials or any Additional Title Matter which is disclosed in any updates or supplements to the Initial Title Materials and to which Buyer does not object in accordance with Sections 6(c) or (g) or to which Buyer so objects but subsequently waives (or is deemed to have waived) its objection, or consents to title insurance over such matter, (iii) the Final Plat and the Project Documents, (iv) any easements to any special or metropolitan districts, utility providers, and governmental and quasi-governmental entities required in connection with the Final Plat or the Project Documents, (v) any title exceptions or encumbrances which are created by, through or under Buyer, or which are otherwise created, approved or waived by Buyer, (vi) that certain Option and Site Lease Agreement dated May I, 2002, by and between The Colorado State Board of Agriculture acting by and through Colorado State University, a state institution of higher education, and Qwest Wireless, L.L.C., a Delaware limited liability company, and (vii) that certain Lease Agreement dated July 29, 201 1, by and between Colorado State University and the City. Notwithstanding the foregoing terms of this Section 6(h), the following items shall be excluded from the definition of "Permitted Exceptions": (l) any delinquent taxes or assessments, (2) mechanics liens, mortgages, or deeds of trust caused by 13 18570965.2 PUBLIC COMMENTS RECEIVED NOVEMBER 6, 2019 THROUGH MARCH 10, 2020 Seller, (3) the standard printed exception relating to mechanics liens caused by Seller, (4) any Other standard printed exceptions which the Title Company has agreed to delete or will delete pursuant to an issued endorsement, which Seller expressly agrees to pay. 8. If, after the Effective Date and prior to Closing, a portion of the Property is taken (or threatened to be taken) under the power or threat of eminent domain that (i) has the effect of reducing the aggregate value Of the Property by more than ten percent (10%) Of the Purchase Price, or (ii) impedes proposed or current access to the Property, then, in any such event, Buyer may elect to terminate this Agreement by giving written notice to Seller of its election to terminate this Agreement (a "Material Event Termination Notice") within ten (10) days after notice of such condemnation or similar proceeding, in which case the Deposit shall be returned to Buyer, and both Seller and Buyer shall be released from further responsibility hereunder. If Buyer does not give (or has no right to give) a Material Event Termination Notice within such 10-day period, then Seller shall assign to Buyer all of Seller's right to receive condemnation proceeds after Closing payable as a result of such proceeding, and Buyer shall be entitled to an abatement Of the Purchase Price in an amount equal to any condemnation proceeds received by Seller prior to Closing. Notwithstanding any provision to the contrary, in no event shall any dedication of setbacks for rights-of-way and other public areas as required by the City and disclosed in the Documents be considered a taking under the power or threat of eminent domain as intended by this Section. 9. Seller's Conditions Precedent to Closing. Seller's obligation to complete Closing shall be conditioned upon the satisfaction (or Seller's written waiver thereof) of the condition precedent set forth in this Section 8. Seller shall be entitled to waive. in writing, the condition precedent set forth herein. In the event that the condition precedent to Closing has not occurred on or before the Outside Closing Date, Seller may, at Seller's option exercised by written notice to Buyer, (i) extend the Closing for an amount of time. equal to the time it takes the responsible Party, utilizing good faith, best efforts, to satisfy the condition precedent for Closing, but no later than as specified in Section I(ii), or (ii) terminate this Agreement, in which event the Deposit shall be returned by Escrow Agent to Buyer, and, unless the failure of the subject condition precedent to Closing is due to the default of Buyer, which will be subject to the provisions Of Section I I(a), neither Party shall thereafter have any liability to the other hereunder, other than those liabilities and obligations which by the express terms of this Agreement are intended to survive such termination. The condition prccedent is as follows: (a)Reproentations. Each of Buyer's representations and warranties as set forth in Section Error! Reference source not found. shall be materially true as of the date of Closing and Buyer shall so certify in writing at Closing. 10. Buyer's Conditions Precedent to Closing. Buyer's obligation to complete Closing shall be conditioned upon the satisfaction (or Buyer's written waiver thereof) of each of the conditions precedent set forth in this Section 9. Buyer shall be entitled to waive, in writing, each or any of the conditions precedent set forth herein. In the event that all conditions precedent to Closing have not occurred on or before the Outside Closing Date, the Parties agree that Buyer may, at Buyer's option exercised by written notice to Seller, terminate this Agreement, in which event the Deposit shall be retumed by Escrow Agent to Buyer, and, unless the failure of the subject condition precedent to Closing is due to the default of Seller, PUBLIC COMMENTS RECEIVED NOVEMBER 6, 2019 THROUGH MARCH 10, 2020 1857tms-2 which will be subject to the provisions of Section I I(b), neither Party shall thereafter have any liability to the other hereunder, other than those liabilities and obligations which by the express terms of this Agreement are intended to survive such termination. The conditions precedent are as follows: (a)Title Company shall deliver to Buyer or shall be unconditionally committed to issue to Buyer after Closing an extended coverage title policy (ALTA Form 2006) insuring title to the Property, without preprinted exceptions to title as set forth in Section 6(a), subject only to the Permitted Exceptions, and subject to Buyer providing any update Of the Existing Survey as required by the Title Company. (b)MqrptorJum. There shall exist no general moratorium imposed or announced by any Authority or utility supplier that would rcsult in any Authority denying permits necessary for the development, construction, use or occupancy of the Property as a residential development or any utility supplier delaying or denying sanitary sewer, water, natural gas, electricity or telephone connections with respect to the Property. (c)Representations. Each Of Seller's representations and warranties as set forth in Section 14(a) shall be materially true as of the date of Closing and Seller shall so certify in writing at Closing. (d)Final Plat and Project Documents. The City and any other applicable Authorities shall have granted final, unappealable approval of the Final Plat and Project Documents (or if appeal is taken, such appeal has been resolved to the commercially reasonable satisfaction of Buyer), and the executed Final Plat has been recorded in the Clerk and Recorder's Office of Larimer County. Buyer shall use diligent and good faith efforts to record the Final Plat promptly upon approval and execution of the same. 11. Possession. At Closing, Seller shall deliver exclusive possession and occupancy of the Property to Buyer free and clear of any claims of any third parties to possession thereof, except as set forth in the Permitted Exceptions. 12. Default. (a)Buyer Default. If Buyer is the defaulting Party, because of the difficulty in calculating damages, the Parties agree that Seller's sole and exclusive remedy at law or in equity shall be limited to the right to terminate this Agreement, to draw completely down the Letter of Credit held by Escrow Agent, and to retain the Deposit as provided in Section 3(a) as liquidated damages, and the Deposit shall be forfeited. Other than the specific remedy expressly set forth in this Section I I(a) and except for the indemnities contained in Section 4(c), Seller hereby waives any and all right and remedy, at law or in equity, to which Seller may otherwise have been entitled by reason of Buyer's default, including any right in equity to seek specific performance of this Agreement by Buyer and any right at law to seek damages from Buyer. (b)Seller Default. If Seller fails to consummate Closing in breach of this Agreement, the Parties agree that Buyer shall have the right to elect, as its sole and exclusive remedy at law or in equity, to (i) waive such default or breach and proceed with the purchase of the Property pursuant to the remaining terms and conditions of this Agreement without any reduction of or credit against the Purchase Price; (ii) terminate this Agreement and receive a prompt return of the Deposit and reimbursement from Seller of Buyer's out-of-pocket expenses incurred in connection with this Agreement, including, without limitation, Buyer's Entitlement Costs, not to exceed $250,000.00; or (iii) pursue specific perfomance under this Agreement provided that such action must be commenced within ninety (90) days following Buyer's discovery of Seller's material 15 18570965.2 PUBLIC COMMENTS RECEIVED NOVEMBER 6, 2019 THROUGH MARCH 10, 2020 default under this Agreement. In the event of any default by Seller, or in the event Buyer shall be entitled to terminate this Agreement. or this Agreement shall otherwise terminate in accordance with the provisions hereof, the Deposit shall be immediately returned to Buyer as provided in Section 3(a), but such payment shall not limit Buyer's rights and remedies set forth above. Other than the specific remedies expressly set forth in I I(b) and I I(d), Buyer hereby waives any and all right and remedy, at law or in equity, to which Buyer may otherwise have been entitled by reason Of Seller's default, including any right at law to seek damages from Seller, except as specified herein. IN NO EVENT SHALL SELLER BE LIABLE TO BUYER FOR ANY PUNITIVE, SPECULATIVE OR CONSEQUENTIAL DAMAGES. EXCEIY I' AS PROVIDED IN SECTION 18(t), IN NO EVENT SHALL BUYER BE ENTITLED TO RECORD THIS AGREEMENT OR ANY OTHER DOCUMENT OR (EXCEPT IN THE EVENT OF A DISPUTE ARISING OUT OF THIS AGREEMENT AS NEEDED TO ENFORCE ITS RIGHTS UNDER THIS AGREEMENT) AS A LIS PENDENS AGAINST THE PROPERTY. (c)Cure Period. Notwithstanding the provisions of Sections I (a) and (b) above, no default by either Party hereto shall result in a termination or limitation Of any rights of such Party hereunder unless and until the other Party shall have notified the defaulting Party in writing of said default, and the defaulting Party shall have failed to cure said default within ten (10) days after the receipt of said written notice. (d)No Adeauate Remedv. As provided in Section I I (b), it is agreed that in the event Buyer is not in default under this Agreement and Seller is the defaulting party hereunder, and Buyer desires to seek specific performance of this Agreement, but that due to Seller's intentional, affirmative conveyance of all or a portion of the Property to a third party, such specific performance is no longer a remedy available to Buyer, then this Agreement shall terminate, the Deposit shall immediately be returned to Buyer as provided in Section 3(a), and Buyer shall receive a payment from Seller of $250,000.00 as liquidated damages, which the Parties acknowledge is a reasonable estimate of Buyer's damages for lost profits and lost business opportunity or consequential damages that would be extremely difficult or impractical to determine. If this Agreement terminates as a result of the foregoing, it is agreed that the provisions of this Section shall survive any such termination. 13. Any notice to be given pursuant to this Agreement shall be given in accordance with Exhibit G. 14. Mutupl Representations. To induce each other to enter into this Agreement, each Party hereby represents and warrants to the other that (i) it has been duly authorized and empowered to enter into this Agreement and to perform fully its obligations 16 PUBLIC COMMENTS RECEIVED NOVEMBER 6, 2019 THROUGH MARCH 10, 2020 hereunder, (ii) such obligations constitute the valid and binding obligations of such Party, enforceable in accordance with their terms, (iii) that, except as expressly provided in this Agreement, no further consents of any other person, entity, public body or court are required in connection with this Agreement and the performance of all obligations hereunder, and (iv) it has not used the services of any real estate agent, broker or finder with respect to the transactions contemplated hereby. 15. Warrenties and Representations. (a)Seller's Warranties and To induce Buyer to enter into this Agreement, Seller represents and warrants to Buyer: (i)Condemnation. Rezoning or Reclassification. There is not pending, or to Seller's Actual Knowledge, threatened, any (A) condemnation proceeding or Other litigation relating to or otherwise affecting any or all Of the Property, or (B) except as contemplated by this Agreement, reclassification of any or all of the Property for local zoning purposes. (ii) (A) There is not pending, or to Seller's Actual Knowledge, threatened, from any federal, state, county or local Authority any notice, suit or judgment relating to any violation at the Property, and (B) Seller has not received written notice from any governmental authority that there is any condition existing with respect to the Property that violates any statute. ordinance, law or code regarding zoning, building, fire, air pollution, or health law, or requiring any Smprovement, alteration, addition, correction or other work on or about the Property, whether related to the Property or to the activities of any owner or occupant thereof. (iii)Environmental Conditions. To Seller's Actual Knowledge, and except as disclosed in any environmental assessment or other environmental report or documentation included as part of the Documents, within the last twenty-four (24) months, Seller has received no written notice alleging the presence of any "Hazardous Wastes". "Hazardous Material" and/or "Hazardous Substances" as those terms are defined under any federal, state or local law in, at, about or under the Property (collectively, "Hazardous Materials") in violation of any applicable federal, state or local environmental laws ("Environmental Laws"). For purposes of this Agreement, the term "Environmental Laws" shall include, without limitation, the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation and Liability Act ('CERCLA"), 42 U.S.C. 9601 et seq. and the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act ("RCRA"), 42 U.S.C. 6901 et seq., as amended from time to time; and any similar federal, state and local laws and ordinances and the regulations and rules implementing such statutes, laws and ordinances. (iv)Litigation. There is no foreclosure action or litigation, arbitration or proceeding pending, or to Seller's Actual Knowledge, threatened before any court or administrative agency or any other condition that relates to or affects the Property, Seller's interest therein, Seller's performance hereunder, or Buyer's intended use of the Property, or which will result in a lien, charge, encumbrance or judgment against any part of or any interest in the Property. i857W65.2 17 PUBLIC COMMENTS RECEIVED NOVEMBER 6, 2019 THROUGH MARCH 10, 2020 (v)Organization. Seller is validly existing under the laws of the State Of Colorado and has full power and authority to sell the Property. (vi)Title. Except as provided in the Permitted Exceptions, to Seller's Actual Knowledge, the title to the Property is subject to no tenancy or other right Of use or occupancy which will remain in effect at or after Closing. (vii) Except as disclosed in the Documents delivered to Buyer hereunder, including, without limitation, the Option and Site Lease Agreement and the City Lease, to Seller's Actual Knowledge, Seller has not entered into any unrecorded restrictions relating to the development of the Property as contemplated hereunder that would have a material, adverse impact on Buyer's intended use of the Property. (viii)No preach. The execution and delivery of this Agreement by Seller, the execution and delivery of every other document and instrument delivered pursuant hereto by or on behalf of Seller, and the consummation of the transactions contemplated hereby do not and will not (A) constitute or result in the breach of or default under any oral or written agreement to which Seller is a party or which affects the Property; (B) constitute or result in a violation of any order, decree, or injunction with respect to which Seller and/or the Property is bound; (C) cause or entitle any Party to have a right to accelerate or declare a default under any oral or written agreement to which Seller is a party or which affects the Property; and/or (D) violate any provision of any municipal, state or federal law, statutory or otherwise, to which Seller or the Property is or may be subject. (ix)NO Assessments. There are no special, general, or other assessments pending or, to Seller's Actual Knowledge, threatened against the Property. All installments of any pending assessments due and payable on or before the Closing Date will be paid by Seller on or before Closing. (x)NQ Contracts. Seller has not entered into any other contracts, agreements or understandings, verbal or written, for the sale or transfer of any portion of the Property which are in existence as of the Effective Date. Between the date of this Agreement and Closing, no part of the Property will be alienated, encumbered or transferred by Seller. (xi)No Commitments. Except as disclosed in the Documents delivered to Buyer hereunder, Seller has not made commitments to any Authority, school board, church or other religious body, or to any other organization, group or individual relating to the Property which would impose any obligations upon Buyer to make any contributions of money or land or to install or maintain any improvements or which would interfere with Buyer's ability to use, develop or improve the Property as herein contemplated. (xii)Documents. The copies of the Documents furnished to Buyer pursuant to this Agreement are true and complete copies of the documents they purport to be. To the extent any of the Documents were not prepared by Seller, Seller is making no warranty as to the accuracy or quality of work included therein. 185709650 18 PUBLIC COMMENTS RECEIVED NOVEMBER 6, 2019 THROUGH MARCH 10, 2020 For the purposes of this Section 14(a), the phrase "Seller's Actual Knowledge" and words of similar import shall mean the present, actual knowledge, without additional inquiry • or investigation being taken, of Lynn Johnson (the "Representative"). The foregoing reference to the Representative is solely for the purpose of establishing the contractual standard for Seller's knowledge. The Representative is not undertaking, and does not have, any personal obligation or liability to Buyer in connection with this Agreement. (b)Survival. The representations and warranties of Seller set forth herein shall be true as of the Effective Date and the date of Closing and shall survive Closing for a period of one (I) year (the "Warranty Expiration Date"). Seller shall notify Buyer in writing immediately if any representation becomes untrue or misleading in light of information obtained by Seller after the Effective Date. Notwithstanding anything in this Agreement to the contrary, after Closing and subject to the Warranty Expiration Date above and the terms of Section 18(e) below, except for claims based upon fraud, the maximum aggregate liability of Seller, and the maximum aggregate amount which may be awarded to the collected by Buyer under this Agreement or any documents executed pursuant hereto or in the connection herewith, will under no circumstances whatsoever exceed two percent (2%) Of the Purchase Price ("Maximum Seller Liability"). This indemnification is in addition to any remedies set forth in Section I I. To induce Seller to enter into this Agreement, to Buyer's knowledge represents and warrants to Seller: (i)Organization. Buyer is a limited liability company, duly organized. validly existing and in good standing under the laws of the State of Colorado, and shall as Of Closing, have full power and authority to purchase the Property. (ii)No Breach. The execution and delivery of this Agreement by Buyer. the execution and delivery of every other document and instrument delivered pursuant hereto by or on behalf of Buyer, and the consummation of the transactions contemplated hereby do not and will not (A) constitute or result in the breach of or default under any oral or written agreement to which Buyer is a party; (B) constitute or result in a violation of any order, decree, or injunction with respect to which Buyer is bound', (C) cause or entitle any party to have a right to accelerate or declare a default under any oral or written agreement to which Buyer is a party; and/or (D) violate any provision of any municipal, state or federal law, statutory or otherwise, to which Seller is or may be subject. (iii)Litigation. There is no pending or threatened litigation, which would affect Buyer's ability to perform under this Agreement. (c)As-is Provision. THE PARTIES HEREBY ACKNOWLEDGE AND AGREE AS FOLLOWS: (A) BUYER rs A SOPHISTICATED BUYER THAT IS FAMILIAR WITH THIS TYPE OF PROPERTY; (B) EXCEPT AS MAY BE SPECIFICALLY SET FORTH IN THIS AGREEMENT, THE DEED, AND/OR ANY OTHER DOCUMENT OR INSTRUMENT DELIVERED BY, OR ON BEHALF OF, SELLER AT CLOSING (THE "EXPRESS REPRESENTATIONS"), NEITHER SELLER NOR ANY OF ITS AGENTS, REPRESENTATIVES, BROKERS, OFFICERS, DIRECTORS, SHAREHOLDERS, MEMBERS, OR EMPLOYEES HAS MADE OR WILL MAKE ANY REPRESENTATIONS OR WARRANTIES OF ANY KIND WHATSOEVER, WHETHER ORAL OR WRITTEN, EXPRESS OR IMPLIED, wrrH RESPECT TO THE PROPERTY, AND INCLUDING, WITHOUT LIMITATION, ANY REPRESENTATION OR WARRANTY REGARDING FITNESS FOR ANY PARTICULAR PURPOSE, COMPLIANCE WITH ANY LAW, RULE, REGULATION, ORDER, OR REQUIREMENT, MERCHANTABILITY, MARKETABILITY, PROFITABILITY, OR SUITABILITY OF THE PROPERTY, AND SELLER DISCLAIMS ALL Buyer's Warranties and 19 18570965.2 PUBLIC COMMENTS RECEIVED NOVEMBER 6, 2019 THROUGH MARCH 10, 2020 SUCH REPRESENTATIONS AND WARRANTIES; AND (C) THE PROPERTY IS BEING SOLD TO BUYER IN ITS PRESENT "AS-IS" CONDITION SUBJECT TO THE EXPRESS REPRESENTATIONS. SUBJECT TO THE EXPRESS REPRESENTATIONS AND THE TERMS HEREOF, BUYER WILL BE AFFORDED THE OPPORTUNITY TO MAKE ANY AND ALL INSPECTIONS OF THE PROPERTY AND SUCH RELATED MATTERS AS BUYER MAY REASONABLY DESIRE. (d)Except for the representations made by Seller as expressly provided Section 14 above and in the deed delivered at Closing, effective on the Closing Date, Buyer and Buyer's successors and assigns, hereby release Seller from, and waive any and all claims against Seller resulting from the physical, environmental, economic or legal condition of the Property, whether arising or accruing before, on or after the date hereof and whether attributable to events or circumstances which have heretofore or may hereafter occur, including, without limitation, the following (i) any and all liabilities with respect to the structural, physical, or environmental condition of the Property; (ii) any and all liabilities relating to the release of or the presence, discovery or removal of any Hazardous Materials, or for, connected with or arising out of any and all claims or causes of action based upon any Environmental Laws, or any related claims or causes of action or any other federal, state or municipal based statutory or regulatory causes of action for environmental contamination at, in, about or under the Property; and (iii) any implied or statutory warranties or guaranties of fitness, merchantability or any other statutory or implied warranty or guaranty of any kind or nature regarding or relating to any portion of the Property. IS. Additional Purchase Price. As provided in Section 3(b), from and after Closing, Buyer agrees to pay to Seller in the manner specified below the amount of the Additional Purchase Price, as follows: (iii) (v) 20 PUBLIC COMMENTS RECEIVED NOVEMBER 6, 2019 THROUGH MARCH 10, 2020 Notwithstanding anything in the foregoing to the contrary, the Total Costs shall not include any of the foregoing expenses to the extent funded by or otherwise reimbursed by the District or any Other public financing districts including or related to the Property. (c) Payment ot Additional Purchase Price. (i) The Additional Purchase Price for each Int due Seller shall be paid at the Retail Closing with respect to each Home conveyed in the Project by Buyer to a homebuyer. Along with such payment, Buyer shall deliver to Seller an accounting in the form of Exhibit H attached hereto and incorporated herein setting forth the Additional Purchase Price due Seller with respect to each Home conveyed in the Project by Buyer during the prior year. (ii)Final Sale and Reconciliation. Within ninety (90) days after the close of escrow for the sale of the last Home in the Project (the "Final Sale"), Buyer shall complete and submit to Seller an accounting consistent with the details of the calculation Of Additional Purchase Price in this Agreement together with a check made payable to Seller in the amount of the balance of any Additional Purchase Price remaining payable for the Project. If the final accounting or any Audit (as defined below) shows any deficiency in amounts due to Seller, or any overpayment by Buyer, such deficiency shall be immediately paid by Buyer or overpayment reimbursed by Seller, as the case may be. Notwithstanding anything to the contrary herein, the Parties acknowledge and agree that the Additional Purchase price is a material consideration in Seller's agreement to sell the Property to Buyer, and Buyer agrees that it shall proceed with development of the Project and the sale of Homes with good faith and commercially reasonable efforts. (d)Financial Records and Statements of Buyer. Buyer shall keep and maintain, or cause to be kept and maintained, accurate financial books and records for the Project in accordance with Buyer's normal accounting principles (collectively, the "Financial Records"), vi ix 21 18570965.2 PUBLIC COMMENTS RECEIVED NOVEMBER 6, 2019 THROUGH MARCH 10, 2020 provided that such Financial Records must evidence the information reasonably necessary to calculate Net Profits in accordance with Section 15(b). The Financial Records shall include all supporting documentation relative to sales and cost of sales, and shall be maintained by Buyer for three (3) years after the Final Sale. Within ten (10) business days after the written request of Seller, Buyer shall provide to Seller copies of the current Financial Records. Notwithstanding the foregoing (i) Buyer shall not be required to provide Financial Records more than once per year, and (ii) upon Buyer's request, Seller shall sign and deliver a reasonable confidentiality agreement with respect to the Financial Records. (e)Audit. At the option of Seller and, except as set f01th below, at Seller's cost, exercised by written notice to Buyer, during the six (6) month period following the Final Sale, Buyer's books and records for the Project shall be audited by an independent certified public accountant licensed in the State of Colorado mutually agreeable to Seller and Buyer for the purpose of verifying the calculation of Net Profits and the Additional Purchase Price, if any, due Seller for the Project (the "Audit"). The Audit shall be binding upon the Parties. Buyer shall make available to the auditor at Buyer's business office, within ten (10) business days after notice of Audit, all Of the books and records of Buyer for the Project which such auditor deems necessary or desirable for the purpose of performing the Audit. Any deficiency in amounts due to Seller, or any overpayment by Buyer, as deterrnined by the Audit, shall be immediately paid by Buyer or reimbursed by Seller, as the case may be. If the Additional Purchase Price due to Seller, as determined by the Audit, is at least one hundred ten percent (110%) of the amount theretofore paid by Buyer, Buyer shall also pay to Seller the reasonable cost of the Audit 1857%5.2 (f)Early Transfer. Any sale, conveyance, exchange or transfer of all or any portion Of the Property by Buyer prior to a Retail Closing shall be deemed to be an "Early Transfer"; provided, however, an Early Transfer shall not be deemed to have occurred by reason of the fact that such portion of the Property (the "Early Transfer Property") is encumbered by a first mortgage on the Property that was funded by a lender not affiliated with Buyer to provide acquisition. development and construction financing for the Property. Buyer shall not make an Early Transfer of a portion of the Property to any patty except in accordance with the terrns hereof. At least 30 days prior to the contemplated date of an Early Transfer, Buyer shall give written notice to Seller ("Buyer's Early Transfer Notice") of the proposed Early Transfer and deliver to Seller any information reasonably requested by Seller with respect to the terms of the proposed Early Transfer and the proposed transferee. Prior to the closing Of any Early Transfer. Buyer shall record in the real property records for the Early Transfer Property in Larimer County, Colorado a covenant in form reasonably acceptable to Seller providing for the payment of the Additional Purchase Price to Seller in accordance with this Section 15 upon the occurrence of a Retail Closing with respect to all or any portion of the Early Transfer Property. 16. Ancillarv Covepants. (a)Special Taxing Pistrict Disclosuce. NOTICE: In accordance with the provisions of C.R.S. 98-35.7-101(1), Seller provides the following disclosure to Buyer: SPECIAL TAXING DISTRICTS MAY BE SUBJECT TO GENERAL OBLIGATION INDEBTEDNESS THAT IS PAID BY REVENUES PRODUCED FROM ANNUAL TAX LEVIES ON THE TAXABLE PROPERTY WITHIN SUCH DISTRICTS. PROPERTY OWNERS IN SUCH DISTRICTS MAY BE PLACED AT RISK FOR INCREASED MILL LEVIES AND TAX TO SUPPORT THE SERVICING OF SUCH DEBT WHERE CIRCUMSTANCES ARISE RESULTING IN THE INABILITY OF SUCH A DISTRICT TO DISCHARGE SUCH INDEBTEDNESS WITHOUT SUCH AN INCREASE IN MILL 22 PUBLIC COMMENTS RECEIVED NOVEMBER 6, 2019 THROUGH MARCH 10, 2020 LEVIES. BUYERS SHOULD INVESTIGATE THE SPECIAL TAXING DISTRICTS IN WHICH THE PROPERTY LOCATED BY CONTACTING THE couNTY TREASURER, BY REVIEWING THE CERTIFICATE OF TAXES DUE FOR THE PROPERTY, AND BY OBTAINING FURTHER INFORMATION FROM THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS, THE COUNTY CLERK AND RECORDER, OR THE COUNTY ASSESSOR. (b)Water Disclosure. In accordance with the provisions Of C.R.S. 98-35.7-104, Seller provides the following disclosure to Buyer: THE SOURCE OF POTABLE WATER FOR THIS REAL ESTATE IS A WATER PROVIDER, WHICH CAN BE CONTACTED AS FOLLOWS: SOME WATER PROVIDERS RELY, TO VARYING DEGREES, ON NON RENEWABLE GROUND WATER. YOU MAY WISH TO CONTACT YOUR PROVIDER TO DETERMINE THE LONG-TERM SUFFICIENCY OF PROVIDER'S WATER SUPPLIES. (c)Disclosure o? Oil and Gas Ac�vity. The following disclosure is included in accordance with C.R.S. 38-35.7-108: THE SURFACE ESTATE OF THE PROPERTY MAY BE OWNED SEPARATELY FROM THE UNDERLYING MINERAL ESTATE, AND TRANSFER OF THE SURFACE ESTATE MAY NOT INCLUDE TRANSFER OF THE MINERAL ESTATE. THIRD PARTIES MAY OWN OR LEASE INTERESTS IN OIL, GAS, OR OTHER MINERALS UNDER THE SURFACE, AND THEY MAY ENTER AND USE THE SURFACE ESTATE TO ACCESS THE MINERAL ESTATE. THE USE OF THE SURFACE ESTATE TO ACCESS THE MINERAIS MAY BE GOVERNED BY A SURFACE USE AGREEMENT, A MEMORANDUM OR OTHER NOTICE OF WHICH MAY BE RECORDED WITH THE COUNTY CLERK AND RECORDER. THE OIL AND GAS ACTIVITY THAT MAY OCCUR ON OR ADJACENT TO THIS PROPERTY MAY INCLUDE, BUT IS NOT LIMITED TO, SURVEYING, DRILLING, WELL COMPLETION OPERATIONS, STORAGE, OIL AND GAS, OR PRODUCTION FACILITIES, PRODUCING WELLS, REWORKING OF CURRENT WELLS, AND GAS GATHERING AND PROCESSING FACILITIES. THE BUYER IS ENCOURAGED TO SEEK ADDITIONAL INFORMATION REGARDING OIL AND GAS ACTIVITY ON OR ADJACENT TO THIS PROPERTY, INCLUDING DRILLING PERMIT APPLICATIONS. THIS INFORMATION MAY BE AVAILABLE FROM THE COLORADO OIL AND GAS CONSERVATION COMMISSION. NAME: City of Fort Collins ADDRESS: WEBSITE; https://www.fcgov.com TELEPHONE: 970-212-2900 Utilities Customer Service Laporte Ave. Fort Collins, CO 80524 23 18570965.2 PUBLIC COMMENTS RECEIVED NOVEMBER 6, 2019 THROUGH MARCH 10, 2020 (d) Interstate Land Sales Full Disclosure Act and Colorado Subdivision Developers Act Exemp�ons. It is acknowledged and agreed by the Par�es that the sale of the Property will be exempt from the provisions of the Federal Interstate Land Sales Full Disclosure Act under the exemp�on applicable to sale or lease of property to any person who acquires such property for the purpose of engaging in the business of construc�ng residen�al, commercial or industrial buildings or for the purpose of resale of such property to persons engaged in such business. Buyer hereby represents and warrants to Seller that it is acquiring the Property for such purposes. It is further acknowledged by the Par�es that the sale of the Property will be exempt under the provisions of the Colorado Subdivision Developers Act under the exemp�on applicable to transfers between developers. Buyer represents and warrants to Seller that Buyer is acquiring the Property for the purpose of par�cipa�ng as the owner of the Property in the development, promo�on and/or sale of the Property and ponions thereof. 17. Confiden�plitx. (a)Confiden�al Informa�on. Each Party shall, and shall cause its employees, agents and representa�ves ("Representa�ves") to, keep confiden�al and refrain 1857W6S.2 from using, except in connection with this Agreement. all "Confidential Information" of the other Party. For purposes of this Agreement, "Confidential Information" means, with respect to a Party ("Disclosing Party") any and all such information of a confidential or proprietary nature furnished (whether in written or oral form, electronically stored or otherwise) to the other Party (the "Recipient") or the Recipient's Representatives, whether before, on or after the date hereof, including without limitation, any analyses, notes, data, compilations, summaries, forecasts, studies or other documents and materials prepared in connection with their review of, or interest in, entering into this Agreement, or their performance of any Of the services or obligations contemplated hereunder, that is identified as confidential at the time of disclosure, or the Recipient knows it is intended to remain confidential, due to its nature or the circumstance under which it is disclosed. The term "Confidential Information" will not however, include information of a Disclosing Party that (i) was or becomes publicly available other than as a result of a disclosure directly or indirectly by or on behalf of the Recipient or its Representative; (ii) was or becomes available to the Recipient on a non-confidential basis; (iii) was rightfully in the possession of the Recipient prior to disclosure by the Disclosing Party; or (iv) was developed independently without access to the Confidential Information. (b)Non-Disclosurg. Each recipient will only disclose the Confidential Information Of the Other Party to those Representatives of such recipient who have a need to know such information in connection with the execution and performance of the Parties' respective rights and obligations under this Agreement. Anyone to whom any Confidential Information is disclosed shall be (a) advised of the existence of this Section 17 of this Agreement and of such recipient's obligations hereunder, and shall agree to be bound by the terms hereof to the same extent as if they were parties hereto, or (b) bound under a written agreement (including a pre-existing written agreement) or other legal, contractual or fiduciary obligation to protect the Confidential Information from unauthorized use and disclosure. In any event, each Patty shall, at its sole expense, take all commercially reasonable measures to restrain its Representatives from prohibited or unauthorized disclosure, distribution or use of the Confidential Information. (c)Legally Reauired Disclosure. The Seller's obligations under this Section 17 are to the extent permitted by the Colorado Open Records Act ("CORA"). In the event a Recipient or any of its Representatives is required by law, regulation or court order to disclose any of the corresponding Disclosing Party's Confidential Information, such Recipient shall 24 PUBLIC COMMENTS RECEIVED NOVEMBER 6, 2019 THROUGH MARCH 10, 2020 promptly notify the Disclosing Party in writing prior to any party making any such disclosure so that thc Disclosing Party, at its sole expense, might seek a protective order or other appropriate remedy from the proper authority. Each Recipient agrees to cooperate with the corresponding Disclosing Party in seeking any such order or other remedy. Each Recipient further agrees that if the corresponding Disclosing Party is not successful in precluding the requesting legal body or authority from requiring the disclosure of any Confidential Information. such Recipient or its Representatives will furnish only that portion of the Confidential Information that it is legally required to be disclosed and will exercise its reasonable best efforts to obtain reliable assurances that confidential treatment will be accorded the Confidential Information in such proceeding. (d)Colorado Open Records Act. It is acknowledged that the Seller is subject to the requirements of CORA and Buyer shall assist and cooperate with the Seller (on request and at each Party's own expense) to enable the Seller to comply with the information disclosure requirements imposed by CORA. Where a Party receives a request for Confidential Information it shall notify the other Party in writing within three (3) business days Of receipt of such request for information. (i)The Parties agree and acknowledge that Seller shall be responsible for determining in its absolute and sole discretion whether the Confidential Information held by it is exempt from disclosure under CORA or is to be disclosed in response to a request for information. (ii)If Seller determines it is obligated to disclose information in response to such request for information, it shall notify Buyer of that decision as soon as reasonably possible, and in any event, at least two (2) business days before disclosure and give due consideration to any objections, without prejudice to the Seller's rights, (iii)Notwithstanding other notification provisions in this Agreement, the notifications required by this Section may be made by any method reasonably calculated to ensure receipt, including electronic mail. (e)press Release. Notwithstanding anything in the foregoing to the contrary, Seller and Buyer shall reasonably cooperate to draft and issue a mutually agreeable press release announcing the proposed sale of the Property following the execution of this Agreement. Seller agrees to coordinate with and afford Buyer the opportunity to participate in the press release. 18. Gengml (a)Entire Agreement. This Agreement constitutes the final and entire Agreement between the Parties and they shall not be bound by any terms, covenants, conditions, representations or warranties not expressly contained herein. This Agreement may not be amended except by written instrument executed by both Parties. (b)Par*ial Invalidity. If any one or more of the provisions contained in this Agreement shall for any reason be held invalid, illegal or unenforceable in any respect, such invalidity, illegality, or unenforceability shall not affect any other provision hereof, and this Agreement shall be construed as if such invalid, illegal or unenforceable provision had never been contained herein. (c)Time of the Essence. Time is of the essence of this Agreement and the performance of the terms and conditions hereof. (d)Successors and Assigns. This Agreement shall be binding upon and shall inure to the benefit of the Parties and their respective legal representatives, successors and assigns. Buyer shall not have the right to assign the Agreement without Seller's prior written consent, which consent may be given or withheld in Seller's reasonable discretion; provided that 25 18570965.2 PUBLIC COMMENTS RECEIVED NOVEMBER 6, 2019 THROUGH MARCH 10, 2020 Buyer shall in no event be released from any of its obligations or liabilities hereunder as a result of any such approved assignment. Notwithstanding the foregoing to the contrary, Buyer is permitted to assign this Agreement, in whole or in part, without Seller's consent to an Affiliate of Buyer, provided that, (i) assignee assumes Buyer's obligations under 18S71Y652 this Agreement pursuant to a written agreement in form and substance reasonably acceptable to Seller; (ii) Seller receives a copy of such assignment and assumption agreement on or before three (3) business days prior to Closing and reaffirms all of the representations and warranties Of Buyer herein and (iii) Buyer shall remain liable for, and shall not be released from the performance of, Buyer's obligations under this Agreement after such assignment. Whenever reference is made in this Agreement to Seller or Buyer, such reference shall include the successors and assigns Of such party under this Agreement. For purposes Of this Section, "Affiliate" shall mean an entity that directly or indirectly through one or more intermediaries' controls, or is controlled by, or is under the common control with, the Buyer. (e)Governmental Immunity, No term or condition Of this Agreement shall be construed or interpreted as a waiver, express or implied, of any Of the immunities, rights, benefits, protections, or other provisions, of the Colorado Governmental Immunity Act, C.R.S. 24-10-101, et seq., or the Federal Tort Claims Act, 28 U.S.C. 1346(b) and 2671 , et seq., as applicable now or hereafter amended. (D Choice or Law. Colorado law, and rules and regulations issued pursuant thereto, shall be applied in the interpretation, execution, and enforcement of this Agreement. Any provision included or incorporated herein by reference which conflicts with said laws, rules, and regulations shall be null and void. Any provision incorporated herein by reference which purports to negate this Section 18(f) in whole or in part shall not be valid or enforceable or available in any action at law. whether by way of complaint, defense, or otherwise. Any provision rendered null and void by the operation of this provision shall not invalidate the remainder of this Agreement, to the extent capable of execution. (g)Binding Arbitration Prohibited. The State of Colorado does not agree to binding arbitration by any extra-judicial body or person. Any provision to the contrary in this Agreement or incorporated herein by reference shall be null and void. (h)Emolovee Financial Interest. C.R.S. 24-18-201 and 24-50507. The signatories aver that to their knowledge, no employee of the State has any personal or beneficial interest whatsoever in the service or property described in this Agreement. (i)No Violation of Law. The signatories aver that they are familiar with C.R.S. 18-8-301, et seq. (Bribery and Corrupt Influences) and C.R.S. 18-8- 01, et seq. (Abuse of Public Office) and that no violation of such provisions is present in this Agreement. G) Use of "Colorado State University", "CSU" or "Hughes Stadium". Buyer may only state that the Property is located at the former Hughes Stadium site for the purpose of providing information as to the general location of the Property in advertisements concerning the Property or to refer to the Property as the "Hughes Subdivision". Except as hereinabove permitted, Buyer agrees that it shall not use or allow the use of the name "Colorado State University", 'CSV' or "Hughes Stadium" in any manner to name, designate, advertise, sell or develop the Property or in any manner or connection with the operations or businesses located or to be located on the Property. The restriction in this Section 18(j) shall survive Closing. 26 PUBLIC COMMENTS RECEIVED NOVEMBER 6, 2019 THROUGH MARCH 10, 2020 (k)Counterparts. This Agreement may be executed in counterparts, each of which shall be deemed an original and all of which together shall constitute one and the same instrument. (l) The headings of the Sections, subsections, paragraphs and subparagraphs hereof are provided for convenience of reference only, and shall not considered in construing their contents. (m)Each writing or plat or plan referred to herein as being attached hereto as an exhibit or otherwise designated herein as an exhibit is incorporated herein by reference and made a part hereof. The following exhibits are attached hereto: (n)Time Periods. Any and all references in this Agreement to time periods which are specified by reference to a certain number of days refer to calendar days, unless "business days" is otherwise expressly provided. Therefore, if (a) the last date by which Closing is permitted to occur hereunder, or (b) any date by which a Party is required to provide the other Party with notice hereunder, occurs on a Saturday or a Sunday or a banking holiday in the jurisdiction where the Property is located, then and in any of such events, such applicable dates shall be deemed to occur, for all purposes of this Agreement, on that calendarday which is the next, succeeding day, which is not a Saturday, Sunday or banking holiday. (o)No Partnership. Nothing in this Agreement shall be deemed in any way to create between the Parties any relationship of partnership, joint venture or association, and the Parties disclaim the existence thereof. (p)Escrow Provisions. The Escrow Agent's actions and the Parties' obligations in regard to any escrow shall be governed by Escrow Agent's standard escrow provisions attached as Exhibit B to the extent that they are not inconsistent with this Agreement. (q)Waivers. No Party shall be deemed to have waived the exercise of any right which it holds hereunder unless such waiver is made expressly and in writing (and no delay or omission by any Party hereto in exercising any such right shall be deemed a waiver of its Exhibit A Legal Description of Property Exhibit B Escrow Agent's Standard Escrow Provisions Exhibit C Form Deed Exhibit D Closing Documents Exhibit E Permitted Exceptions Exhibit F Additional Obligations of Seller Exhibit G Notice Addresses Exhibit H Additional Purchase Price Schedule 27 18570965.2 PUBLIC COMMENTS RECEIVED NOVEMBER 6, 2019 THROUGH MARCH 10, 2020 future exercise). No such waiver made as to any instance involving the exercise of any such right shall be deemed a waiver as to any other such instance, or any other such right. (r)WAIVER OF JURY TRIAL. TO THE MAXIMUM EXTENT PERMITTED BY LAW, SELLER AND BUYER EACH HEREBY WAIVES RIGHT TO TRIAL BY JURY m ANY ACTION OR PROCEEDING ARISING OUT OF THIS 1857W65.2 28 PUBLIC COMMENTS RECEIVED NOVEMBER 6, 2019 THROUGH MARCH 10, 2020 AGREEMENT AND THE RESPECTIVE RIGHTS AND OBLIGATIONS OF THE PARTIES HERETO. (s)Facsimile and PDF Copies. Facsimile copies or PDF copies sent by email of the Agreement and any amendments hereto and any signatures thereon shall be considered for all purposes as originals. (t)Memorandum Q! Agreement. Upon delivery of the Suitability Notice by Buyer, Seller shall be obligated to record a Memorandum Of Purchase and Sale Agreement (the "Memorandum") in the real property records of Larimer County, Colorado, evidencing: (i) Buyer's interest in the Property, and (ii) Buyer's and/or its successor's obligation to pay the Additional Purchase Price to Seller pursuant to Section 15 above, in a form to bc negotiated and reasonably and mutually acceptable to the Parties prior to expiration of the Feasibility Period; provided that, prior tovecording the Memorandum, Buyer will deliver a duly executed Release of the Memorandum to the Title Company to be held in escrow, and recorded by the Title Company in the event Of termination of this Agreement or default by Buyer under this Agreement. After Closing. Seller shall be obligated to release the Memorandum Of record by delivery of a quit claim deed or other evidence of termination satisfactory to the title company for any Lot subject to a Retail Closing immediately upon payment by Buyer to Seller of the Additional Purchase Price applicable to such Lot pursuant to Section 5 above. [Signatures on following page.] 29 PUBLIC COMMENTS RECEIVED NOVEMBER 6, 2019 THROUGH MARCH 10, 2020 IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the Par�es hereto have executed under seal this Purchase and Sale Agreement as of the Effec�ve Date. SELLER: THE BOARD OF GOVERNORS OF THE COLORADO STATE UNIVERSITY SYSTEM, ac�ng by and through COLORADO STATE UNIVERSITY Division of University Opera�ons 318 Administra�on Building Colorado State University Fort Collins, CO 80523-600 LEGAL REVIEW: Office of the General Counsel Colorado State University System 01 Administra�on Building Fort Collins, CO 80523-0006 185709652 BUYER: Date 30 PUBLIC COMMENTS RECEIVED NOVEMBER 6, 2019 THROUGH MARCH 10, 2020 LENNAR COLORADO, LLC, a Colorado limited liabil•ty pmpany Name: Title: Vice President 18570965.2 Daniel J. ess 31 PUBLIC COMMENTS RECEIVED NOVEMBER 6, 2019 THROUGH MARCH 10, 2020 The undersigned joins in the execu�on of the foregoing Agreement for the sole purpose of agreeing to hold and apply the Deposit subject to and in accordance with the terms of the foregoing Agreement. ESCROW AGENT: FIDELITY NATIONAL TITLE COMPANY By: Nam e: Title: Date: 1857W6S.2 32 PUBLIC COMMENTS RECEIVED NOVEMBER 6, 2019 THROUGH MARCH 10, 2020 AGREEMENT OF SALE by and between THE BOARD OF GOVERNORS OF THE COLORADO STATE UNIVERSITY SYSTEM, acting by and through COLORADO STATE UNIVERSITY, as Seller and LENNAR COLORADO, LLC, as Buyer EXHIBIT Legal Description of the Property Beginning at the East quarter comer (E 1/4) of Section 20, Township 7 North, Range 69 West of the Sixth Principal Meridian; thence South 000 14' West, 1390.9 feet; thence South 87059' West, 1473.5 feet; thence South 78025' West, 1214.3 feet; thence North 00 028' East, 245 1.0 feet; thence North 57044' East 66.1 feet, thence on a regular curve to the left with a radius of 336.48 feet, 149.4 feet; thence North 320 17' East, 0.2 feet, thence on a regular curve to the left with a radius of 240.99 feet, 133.2 feet; thence North 00027' East, I I I .2 feet; thence on a regular curve to the right with a radius Of 236.48 feet, 99.5 feet; thence North 86023' East, 2437.4 feet; thence South 000 14' West, 1391.7 feet to the Point of Beginning, subject to existing public road rightof-way running through the Southeast corner. EXCEPT that portion conveyed to the City of Fort Collins in Deed recorded November 19, i 998 at Reception No. 98101735, described as follows: Considering the East line of the Southeast Quarter of said Section 20 as bearing SOOO 14' 18" W from a aluminum cap in monument box at the East Quarter corner of said Section 20 to a aluminum cap in a monument box at the Southeast corner of said Section 20 and with all bearings contained herein relative thereto; Commencing at the East Quarter corner of said Section 20; thence along said East line, S 000 14' 1 8" E, I, 153.43 feet to the Point of Beginning; thence continuing along said East line, S 000 14' 18" W, 237.64 feet to a point on the South line of the North half of said Southeast Quarter; thence along said South line, S 88000'04" W, 1,473.03 feet; thence N 78053'33" E, 1,501.23 feet to the Point of Beginning, County of Larimer, State of Colorado. A-I 1857W65.2 33 PUBLIC COMMENTS RECEIVED NOVEMBER 6, 2019 THROUGH MARCH 10, 2020 AGREEMENT QF SALE by and between THE BOARD OF GOVERNORS OF THE COLORADO STATE UNIVERSITY SYSTEM, acting by and through COLORADO STATE UNIVERSITY, as Seller and LENNAR COLORADO, LLC, as Buyer EXHIBIT F„scrqw Provisions Buyer and Seller, jointly and severally, hereby agree to indemnify the Escrow Agent and hold it harmless from any and all claims, liabilities, losses, actions, suits or proceedings at law or in equity, or any other expense, fees or charges of any character or nature, which it may incur or with which it may be threatened by reason Of its acting as Escrow Agent under this Agreement, including, without limitation, attorneys' fees and the cost of defending any actions, suit or proceeding or resisting any claim. 2. In the event of a dispute between the Parties as to the disposition of the Deposit or any other escrow monies held by the Escrow Agent or actions taken by or contemplated by the Escrow Agent, Buyer and Seller agree to settlement of such dispute by the methods more specifically contained in the Agreement of Sale. Immediately upon receipt of written notification to the Escrow Agent of an escrow funds dispute which cannot be resolved bctween the Parties, including any contract default having occurred due to failure to close, Escrow Agent agrees to notify the Parties that unless the Parties mutually select an arbitrator within five (5) business days of notification, Escrow Agent will submit the matter to AAA to settle the dispute as quickly as possible. The decision and awarding of any funds by the Arbitrator shall be final and binding upon the Parties hereto. Within three (3) business days after the Arbitrator has resolved the dispute and rendered written directions, the Escrow Agent shall turn over any escrow monies together with any interest earned thereon to the appropriate party due all or part Of the funds set forth in the written directions. Alternatively, in the event of any controversy involving the Deposit or any other escrow funds, the Escrow Holder may, upon agreement by Buyer and Seller, charge one-half of its fees and costs to Seller and one-half of its fees and costs to Buyer, and then place all or portions of the Deposit or any other escrow funds in the registry of any court of competent jurisdiction, and upon payment of such funds in to the court registry, Escrow Holder shall be released from all further liability in connection with the funds delivered. 3. The Escrow Agent shall not be bound by any other agreement whether or not it has knowledge of the existence thereof or of its terms and conditions, and is required only to hold the Deposit as herein set forth and to make payment or other disposition thereof as hereinbefore stated. 4. Escrow Agent shall not be liable for any mistakes of fact, or errors of judgment, or for any acts or omission of any kind unless caused by the willful misconduct or gross negligence of Escrow Agent. 5. Escrow Agent may resign upon ten (10) days written notice to the Parties to their addresses set forth herein. If a successor escrow agent is not appointed within a fourteen (14) day period following such resignation, the Escrow Agent may petition a court of competent jurisdiction to name a successor. The costs of such action shall be paid by Seller and Buyer on an equal basis, and shall be subject to the provisions of Section I hereof. 34 PUBLIC COMMENTS RECEIVED NOVEMBER 6, 2019 THROUGH MARCH 10, 2020 AGREEMENT OF SALE by and between THE BOARD OF GOVERNORS OF THE COLORADO STATE UNIVERSITY SYSTEM, acting by and through COLORADO STATE UNIVERSITY, as Seller and LENNAR COLORADO, LLC, as Buyer EXHIBIT C Eorm Deed UPON RECORDING RETURN TO: Rebecca W. Dow, Esq. Holland & Hart LLP P.O. Box 8749 Denver, CO 80201 SPECIAL WARRANTY DEED THIS DEED. dated . 20_. between THE BOARD OF GOVERNORS OF THE COLORADO STATE UNIVERSITY SYSTEM, acting by and through COLORADO STATE UNIVERSITY ("Grantor"), whose address is c/o Colorado State University Research Foundation, 2537 Research Blvd, suite 200, Ft. Collins, CO 80525; and LENNAR COLORADO, LLC. a Colorado limited liability company ("Grantee"), whose address is 9193 S. Jamaica Street, 4th Fl., Englewood. CO 80112. WITNESS, that Grantor, for and in consideration of the sum OfDollars ), the receipt and sufficiency of which is hereby acknowledged, does hereby GRANT, SELL and CONVEY unto Grantee all of the real property described on Exhibit A, attached hereto and incorporated herein by this reference, located in the County of Larimer, State Of Colorado, together with improvements and appurtenances, belonging or in any way appertaining and the reversion and reversions, remainder and remainders, rents, issues, and profits thereof; and all the estate, right, title, interest. claim, and demand whatsoever of the Grantor, either in law or equity, Of, in, and to the above real property (the "Property"). Grantor does hereby covenant and agree that it shall WARRANT AND FOREVER DEFEND the title to the Property for the benefit of Grantee against all persons claiming by, through or under Grantor, subject to the matters described on Ebbjbi1_Å attached hereto, and incorporated herein by this reference. 1857096•i2 IN WITNESS WHEREOF, Grantor has executed this deed to be effective on the date set forth above. GRANTOR: 35 PUBLIC COMMENTS RECEIVED NOVEMBER 6, 2019 THROUGH MARCH 10, 2020 THE BOARD OF GOVERNORS OF THE COLORADO STATE UNIVERSITY SYSTEM, acting by and through COLORADO STATE UNIVERSITY Name: Its: c-2 STATE OF COLORADO ) SS. COUNTY OF The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this day of 36 PUBLIC COMMENTS RECEIVED NOVEMBER 6, 2019 THROUGH MARCH 10, 2020 20—, by as the Board of Governors of the C o l o r a d o State University System, acting by and through Colorado State Uni versity. WITNESS my hand and official seal. Notary Public My Commission Expires: 1 SEALI c-3 1857%5.2 Exhibit A to Special Warranty Deed Legal Description of Property [To be inserted prior to Closing] 37 PUBLIC COMMENTS RECEIVED NOVEMBER 6, 2019 THROUGH MARCH 10, 2020 Exhibit B to Special Warranty Deed Permi�ed Excep�ons TAXES FOR THE YEAR 20 AND SUBSEQUENT YEARS. [TO be inserted prior to Closing] c-5 18570965.2 38 PUBLIC COMMENTS RECEIVED NOVEMBER 6, 2019 THROUGH MARCH 10, 2020 AGREEMENT OF SALE by and between THE BOARD OF GOVERNORS OF THE COLORADO STATE UNIVERSITY SYSTEM, acting by and through COLORADO STATE UNIVERSITY, as Seller and LENNAR COLORADO, LLC, as Buyer EXHIBIT p Closing Poguments to be Delivered to Boyer (a) If required by Title Company, a certified copy of the resolution Of Seller's Board of Directors authorizing and approving this Agreement and the transactions contemplated herein and the execution of the Agreement and the Closing documents; (b) A special warranty deed in form attached as Exhibi; C, which conveys fee simple title to the Property; (c) An assignment, without warranty, of Seller's rights, title and interest, if any, in all permits, plans, licenses, approvals, certificates, entitlements, development agreements and related items included within the Documents and, in each case, to the extent assignable; (c) A Foreign Investment in Real Property Tax Act ("FIRVTA") certification in conformance with the requirements of FIRYfA; (e) All consents which may be required from any third person or entity in connection with the sale of the Property; (f) The Seller's Affidavit in the form required by the Title Company and reasonably acceptable to the Seller; and (g) Such other documents or instruments as may be required by other provisions of this Agreement or reasonably required by Buyer to effectuate Closing. All of the documents and instruments to be delivered by Seller pursuant to this Exhibit shall be in form and substance reasonably satisfactory to counsel for Buyer. Closing Documents to be Delivered to Seller (a) The Purchase Price; PUBLIC COMMENTS RECEIVED NOVEMBER 6, 2019 THROUGH MARCH 10, 2020 (b) If required by Title Company, satisfactory evidence that the person or persons executing the Closing documents on behalf of Buyer have full right, power and authority to do so; 18S7W65.2 (c) the Real Property Transfer Declara�on required by applicable Colorado law; (d) All consents which may be required from any third person or en�ty in connec�on with the purchase of the Property; The Buyer's Affidavit in the form required by the Title Company and as reasonably acceptable to Buyer; (f) Such other documents or instruments as may be required by other provisions of this Agreement or reasonably required by Seller to effectuate Closing. All of the documents and instruments to be delivered by Buyer pursuant to this Exhibit shall be in form and substance reasonably sa�sfactory to counsel for Seller. PUBLIC COMMENTS RECEIVED NOVEMBER 6, 2019 THROUGH MARCH 10, 2020 AGREEMENT OF SALE by and between THE BOARD OF GOVERNORS OF THE COLORADO STATE UNIVERSITY SYSTEM, acting by and through COLORADO STATE UNIVERSITY, as Seller and LENNAR COLORADO, LLC, as Buyer 18570965.2 EXHIBIT E Permitted [to be inserted during Feasibility Period] TAXES FOR THE YEAR 20_ AND SUBSEQUENT YEARS. Buyer's Ini�als 1857(B65.2 Date Agreed: Seller's Initials AGREEMENT OF SALE by and between THE BOARD OF GOVERNORS OF THE COLORADO STATE UNIVERSITY SYSTEM, acting by and through COLORADO STATE UNIVERSITY, as Seller PUBLIC COMMENTS RECEIVED NOVEMBER 6, 2019 THROUGH MARCH 10, 2020 and LENNAR COLORADO, LLC, as Buyer Additional Obligations of Seller (Insert, if any during the Feasibility Period.] PUBLIC COMMENTS RECEIVED NOVEMBER 6, 2019 THROUGH MARCH 10, 2020 AGREEMENT OF SALE by and between THE BOARD OF GOVERNORS OF THE COLORADO STATE UNIVERSITY SYSTEM, acting by and through COLORADO STATE UNIVERSITY, as Seller and LENNAR COLORADO, LLC, as Buyer EXHIBIT G Notige$ Any notice to be given to any Party hereto in connection with this Agreement shall be in writing and shall be deemed received (a) on the date delivered if hand delivered by receipted hand delivery or by electronic transmission, and (b) two (2) days after postmark if sent postage prepaid by certified or registered mail, return receipt requested. Notices to the Parties shall be sent to their addresses set forth below. Either Party, by written notice to the other, may change its address to which notices are to be sent. The Parties shall copy Escrow Agent on all notices sent hereunder, but failure to notify Escrow Agent shall not be deemed a failure of notice to a Party to whom notice has been given. Any default notice under this Agreement sent by electronic transmission must be followed by the delivery of a hard copy. yuyer's Address: Lennar Colorado, LLC 9193 S. Jamaica Street, 4th Fl. Englewood, CO 801 12 Attn: Daniel J. Nickless, Land President Telephone: 303-486-5063 Email: daniel.nickless@lennar.com With copy to: Rebecca W. Dow, Esq. Holland & Hart LLP 555 17th Street, suite 3200 Denver, Colorado 80202 Telephone: 303-295-8413 Email: rdow@hollandhart.com Escrow Agent's Address: Fidelity National Title Company 3500 John F. Kennedy Pkwy., Ste. 100 Fort Collins, CO 80525 Attention-. Julie Norris Telephone: (970) 212-7750 Email: jnorris@fnLgom Seller's Address: Colorado State University c/o Colorado State Uni versity Research Foundation 2537 Research Blvd., Suite 200 Fort Collins, CO 80526 G-1 18570965.2 PUBLIC COMMENTS RECEIVED NOVEMBER 6, 2019 THROUGH MARCH 10, 2020 With a CODV (o: Telephone: Email: Marc C. Diamant, Esq. Brownstein Hyatt Farber Schreck, LLP 410 17th st., 22nd Floor Denver, CO 80202-4437 Telephone: 303-223-1 132 Email: mdiamant@bhfs.com 1857W65.2 PUBLIC COMMENTS RECEIVED NOVEMBER 6, 2019 THROUGH MARCH 10, 2020 AGREEMENT OF SALE by and between THE BOARD OF GOVERNORS OF THE COLORADO STATE UNIVERSITY SYSTEM, acting by and through COLORADO STATE UNIVERSITY, as Seller and LENNAR COLORADO, LLC, as Buyer EXHIBIT H Additional Purchase Price Payment Schedule [See attached.] PUBLIC COMMENTS RECEIVED NOVEMBER 6, 2019 THROUGH MARCH 10, 2020 CALCULATION OF ADDITIONAL PURCHASE PRICE by and between THE BOARD OF GOVERNORS OF THE COLORADO STATE UNIVERSITY SYSTEM, acting by and through COLORADO STATE UNIVERSITY, as Seller and LENNAR COLORADO, LLC, as Buyer Lot No. Address: 1857W65.2 PUBLIC COMMENTS RECEIVED NOVEMBER 6, 2019 THROUGH MARCH 10, 2020 AGREEMENT OF SALE EXHIBIT 1 Form or Leger or Credit (See attached.] 1-1 IRREVOCABLE STANDBY LETTER OF CREDrr NO. FGAC.XXXXX BENEFICIARY: APPLICANT: LC AMOUNn USDSXXXX.XX (AMOUNT IN WORDS US DOLLARS) EXPIRATION DATE: (DAIEJ AT OUR COUNTFRS RE: GENTLEMEN: WE HEREBY ESTABLISH OUR IRREVOCABLE STANDBY LETTER OF CREDIT NO. FGAC.xxxxx IN YOUR FAVOR AT THE REQUEST AND FOR THE ACCOUNT OF [APPLICANT) IN AN AGGREGATE AMOUNT NOT TO PUBLIC COMMENTS RECEIVED NOVEMBER 6, 2019 THROUGH MARCH 10, 2020 EXCEED THE THIS LETTER OF CREDIT IS AVAILABLE BY YOUR DRAFr(S) DRAWN AT Sl DULY AND MANUALLY SIGNED AND MARKED: "DRAWN UNDER LETTER OFCREDtT NO. FOAC.XXXXX DATED MOMMI XXu zOXX•• WHEN A OF CREDIT AND ALL ORIGINAL AMENDMENTS, IF ANY. AND THE FOLLOWING DOCUMENT(S); BF.NFFiCIARY•s CERTIFICATE DULY AND MANUALLY SIGNED AND DATED BY AN AUTHORIZED OFFICER SIGNING AS SUCH ON ITS LETTERHEAD READING EXACTLY AS FOLLOWS- THE AMOUNT REPRESENTED BY THE DRAFT ACCOMPANYING THIS STATEMENT IS THE AMOUNT REQUIRED TO BE PAID TO THE BENEFICIARY ON ACCOUNT OF THE DEFAULT OF (APPLICANTI UNDER THE IAGREEMENT NAME) DATED ON OR AROUND ( DATE). (THE "AGREEMENT') BY AND BETWEEN IBENFFICIARYI. AS AND (APPLICANT). AS 1-1; THAT (APPLICANT) HAS BEEN GIVEN WRITTEN NOTICE BY [BENEFICIARY) DESCRIBING THE EVENT OR CONDITION OF SUCH DEFAULT IN REASONABLE DETAIL BY CERTIFIED MAIL. RETURN RECEIPT REQUESTED; THE DEFAULT HAS NOT BEEN CURED WITHIN THE CURE PERIOD PROVIDED THEREIN, IF ANY. AND THAT [BENEFICIARY] IS NOT IN DEFAULT UNDER THE TERMS AND CONDITIONS OF THE AGREEMENT AND AS SUCH IS ENTm.ED TO BE PAID THE PROCEEDS OF THIS LETTER OF CREDIT UNDER THE TERMS OF THE AGREEMENT THIS LETTER OF CREDrr SETS FORTH IN FULL THE TERMS OF OUR UNDERTAKING AND SUCH UNDERTAKING SHALL NOT IN ANY WAY BE MODIFIED, AMENDED. AMPLIFIED OR LIMITED BY REFERENCE TO ANY DOCUMENT. INSTRUMENT OR AGREEMENT REÆRRED TO HEREIN OR IN WHICH THIS LETTER OF CREDIT IS RFFERRED TO OR WHICH THIS LETTER OF CREDIT RELATES, AND ANY SUCH REFERENCE SHALL NOT BE DEEMED TO INCORR)RATE HEREIN ANY SUCH DOCUMENT. INSTRUMENT OR AGREEMENT. WE HEREBY ENGAGE WITH BENEFICIARY THAT ALL SIGHT DRAFTS DRAWN UNDER AND IN CONFORMITY WITH THE TERMS AND CONDITIONS OF THIS LETTER OF CREDIT WILL BE DULY HONORED IF DRAWN AN IRED HEREIN IF PRESENTED B E TERFD OR CFRT(FIF.D MAIL. RETURN RFCEIPT REQUESTED OR BY FEDERAL EXPRESS OR ANY OTHER NATIONALLY RECOGNIZED COURIER COMPANY. THIS LETTER OF CREDff is SUBJECT TO AND GOVERNED BY THE LAWS OF THE STATE OF FIORIDA WITHOUT REGARD TO PRINCIPLES OF CONFLICT OF LAW), AND EXCEPT AS OTHERWISE EXPRESSLY STATED HEREIN. IS SUBJECT TO THE INTERNATIONAL STANDBY PRACTCES 1998. INIERNATIONAL CHAMBER OF COMMERCE • PUBLICATION NO. 590 ("ISP98") AND IN THE EVEtcr OF ANY CONFLICT, THE LAWS OF THE STATE OF FLORIDA WILL CONTROL. VERY TRULY YOURS. AUTHORIZED S}GNER. TITLE 11353800_12 1 - 2 t 1857W65.2 PUBLIC COMMENTS RECEIVED NOVEMBER 6, 2019 THROUGH MARCH 10, 2020 November 17, 2019 Communication to City Council Members: Ross Cunniff, Emily Gorgol, Susan Gutowsky, Julie Pignataro, Kristin Stephens, Ken Summers, and Wade Troxell Thank you Councilmembers Cunniff, Gutowsky and Pignataro for listening to the Fort Collins community on November 5, 2019, and for voting against the proposed zoning submitted by the City Planning Department. Unfortunately, your job is not over yet. The zoning of the former Hughes Stadium Site (Hughes Property) must be given another vote at the second reading on November 19, 2019. We respectfully request the vote be proposed by one of you! The process for reaching decisions regarding critical zoning issues that impact the livability of the residents of the City of Fort Collins is unfairly weighted toward the City Planners and their recommendation. Yes, the community provides public statements; however, the community does not get to question the City directly, and cannot challenge statements made or information omitted. There was a clear need to clarify, question and rebut several misinformed points made at the Council meeting on November 5th during the discussion and deliberation process. At the November 5 meeting, when Cameron Gloss was asked about density on the Hughes Property, he stated that he thought “about 550 units” would be the most that could be built there. What he didn’t say AND avoided with every answer is that once the zoning is approved, as long as the plan submitted by the builder meets minimum code, the City has no control over how many units will be built. Why didn’t someone ask Mr. Gloss to take out his calculator and determine, under the proposed zoning, the maximum number of units that could be built. The community had their calculators out and easily figured out that well over 800 dwellings and up to 996 could be built on the LMN zoned area alone. He minimized the very likely possibility of maximum development of the area to “sell” this recommendation to City Council when he stated that a “maximum of 550” units would be constructed. This is especially disconcerting when you review that the purchase contract of the Hughes property from Lennar stipulates the construction of a minimum of 600 units. Furthermore, and even more disconcerting, is the fact that CSU will gain tremendous payouts for any construction of more than 625 units, and incur monetary penalties for lesser density below 600 units. So, Mr. Gloss knowingly misled both Council and the community. Mr. Gloss has been a part of this all along in an ethically dubious role since the RFP process was undertaken, despite a recent memorandum stating that he “only consulted “ on the zoning rules of the City. While several members, especially Mayor Troxell and Mr. Gloss, stipulated that the meeting on November 5th was to determine zoning and NOT development, it is unmistakable that the zoning has everything to do with future development, as evidenced by the now-public purchase contract between Lennar and CSU. In fact, it is also well known that the proposal brought forth by the City Staff allows for the Lennar plan to continue as is for ½ of the parcel of Hughes. The reason for the “plumb bob” dividing line along the already developed areas to the west of Overland Trail and “City Plan” that was developed AFTER the purchase contract between CSU and Lennar, (ever so conveniently) is to facilitate the maximum density, and thus financial gain, to support PUBLIC COMMENTS RECEIVED NOVEMBER 6, 2019 THROUGH MARCH 10, 2020 CSU’s financial deficit from the new stadium. LMN, by definition, supports development parcels of 80- 160 acres. Hence, anything less than 80 acres, despite the “lay of the land” of 10% mixed use housing to the west of Overland Trail, could not possibly apply given the LMN criteria. At numerous meetings, where the Hughes Property was discussed, City employees stated they did not know the details of the purchase agreement between CSU and Lennar. Not only is it known that City Planners were involved in the process, but the purchase agreement has been made public via a CORA request. However, giving the benefit of the doubt, let us enlighten you on the highlights of the attached, redacted purchase agreement: 1. CSU’s financial gain comes in the form of an initial purchase price of $10M for the property alone. Furthermore, CSU receives $16K, for every dwelling over 625, and an additional redacted amount of money (aka, “added purchase price”) each time a dwelling is sold. This was not divulged to the community and not available until the CORA request was made and published. This serious omission about the financial details, although a private deal, constitutes a violation of good faith with the residents of Fort Collins, and a deliberate lack of transparency. 2. The purchase contract also includes a credit to Lennar from CSU of $16K for each unit less than the minimum of 625 units up to $400,000. CSU isn’t going to reduce their $10 million sale for less density. 3. CSU stated in their RFQ that one objective for development applicants was to provide for “affordable workforce housing” among other objectives involving City and community integration. However, the current Lennar proposal does not provide for either affordable or attainable housing. If CSU is so concerned about providing workforce housing, why did they NOT REQUIRE affordable housing as part of the purchase agreement? Obviously, the offer of $10 million PLUS incentives was enough to override that goal. Incidentally, housing owned by CSU on Elizabeth rents for $1000+ / month for a 1-bedroom/ 1-bathroom apartment. This clearly shows the glaring lack of commitment of CSU to provide affordable housing. There is a weak and unconvincing argument being promulgated that suggests that more density = more affordability. The average home price with the current Lennar proposal is $433K. When you consider that the price per acre of Hughes property falls between $60K to $83K (depending on total versus “developable” acres of approximately 121 acres), then tack on the City building “fees” for infrastructure of up to $85/SF unit, it is impossible that any unit would fall under $300K. Not only is this NOT affordable, but it is NOT attainable by most work force employees in any industry. When Mr. Gloss was asked by a Council member at the November 5th Council meeting what maximum density the LMN zoning would allow, he stated he didn’t have a calculator to figure it out. As the City “development consultant,” he knew the contents of the Lennar and CSU purchase contract. How does he then share to the community and Council that the development would be a “maximum of 550 units”? We don’t need a calculator, 550 IS LESS THAN 625! The Hughes site, as described by many, is a valuable and historical part of Fort Collins. Even as you are reading this letter, this special location is undergoing vital biological and physical processes that will return it to its natural and original condition despite all that has been reaped from it. Despite the special and beloved nature of the Hughes site, the City keeps forcing only sprawling and dense housing PUBLIC COMMENTS RECEIVED NOVEMBER 6, 2019 THROUGH MARCH 10, 2020 options upon us. So many great ideas have been presented as options, but no one is listening to those suggestions or even considering alternatives. The most reasonable and acceptable compromise was put forward by our P&Z Board, a volunteer board of our peers who was despicably thrown under the bus by Council’s decision to accept the City Staff’s proposal. The P&Z board thoughtfully deliberated and decided upon the recommendation of a Residential Foothills District with Clustered development on the entire property. This designation would provide the best overall compromise for open space and wildlife advocates, particularly if any residential units to be constructed were limited to 1 unit per 1 acre (an acreage limitation allowed under “Clustered” zoning), and if the residential development was contiguously clustered to the eastern-most aspect of the property near Overland Trail. The rest of the property to the west could be conserved as open lands/green space with public trails and rights-of-way for hikers and cyclists. Furthermore, and most importantly, it should be noted that an RF District designation also provides for desirable uses, other than residential development, that are extremely beneficial to the overall community in Fort Collins. Just a few of those institutional, civic and public uses include urban agriculture, neighborhood parks and recreation and open lands, a wildlife education and rehabilitation center, and a small solar energy park. Many of these non-residential uses in the RF District could serve as invaluable educational and recreational opportunities for ALL residents of, and visitors to, Fort Collins. Certainly and agreeably, Council members would like to see a resolution to the Hughes development issue. Community members would also like to move on. Countless hours have been invested by all and much frustration has been incurred. The Fort Collins community, in EVERY meeting ever held on this issue, have spoken LOUD and CLEAR that high density housing is NOT what should be developed on this prime and beloved property. We can do SO much better than what the City Staff is recommending - dense and sprawling housing in an LMN/RF district at the base of our foothills. There is an agenda here, and we all know it. And, it is wrong. Please STOP the VOTE! Additionally, we respectfully request that one of you initiate the second vote and support the Planning and Zoning Board’s recommendation of clustered RF on the entire Hughes parcel. Sincerely, PATHS of Fort Collins Planning Actions To Transform Hughes Sustainably PUBLIC COMMENTS RECEIVED NOVEMBER 6, 2019 THROUGH MARCH 10, 2020 November 17, 2019 Communication to City Council Members: Ross Cunniff, Emily Gorgol, Susan Gutowsky, Julie Pignataro, Kristin Stephens, Ken Summers, and Wade Troxell I am writing in preparation for the upcoming City Council meeting scheduled November 19, 2019 and specifically on agenda item regarding the second reading of the Hughes Re-Zoning. One cannot even begin to discuss comments in enough detail to make a point in 2 minutes and I am hopeful that you will all read my letter. I am respectfully asking for a second vote that would rescind the initial vote from November 5, 2019 and accept the recommendation of RF / clustered zoning as put forth by the Planning and Zoning Board for the Hughes site. As I have mentioned in commentary in previous meetings, I am very concerned about the proposed zoning to a high-density proportion for the Hughes site. I am also very concerned about the lack of transparency that has been the underlying theme of this whole charade. First, CSU held community hearings to discuss the sale of the land and obtain community input. While OPEN SPACE was the underlying response of the community as a whole, comments were cast aside and the community heard no feedback. Meanwhile, CSU posted an RFQ soliciting buyers for the property. According to City Staff, CSU refused to discuss selling this area to the City of Fort Collins. Lennar was the offering developer. Little was known about the purchase agreement other than a sales price of $10 million. (A pretty hefty price considering City Staff feel it has little value). It was not until a CORA request of the contract was publicized and community members learned of the additional “hidden” financial incentives for CSU that would “seal the deal” for a high-density housing project. Interesting that the RFQ mentioned a plethora of objectives that were not included in Lennar’s purchase contract. CSU requested the Hughes parcel to be placed into T-Transition and become annexed by the City. At this time, and by this request, this property and development planning became the rights of the community to comment and have input on development and zoning. AFTER the contract negotiations were underway for the purchase of the Hughes site, along comes the City Plan to identify growth areas and “Place Types” and report that these were voted on by citizens in our community; many still do not understand what the term “Place Types” means much less what they represent in the City Plan. More meetings and testimonies, all a charade from the perspective of many. Community members commented, gave insights and ideas, asked questions, and tried to be supportive of ANYTHING OTHER THAN HIGH DENSITY development. Then, the City Planning Dept, at a meeting in August, presented 5 development choices and asked citizens to choose between PUBLIC COMMENTS RECEIVED NOVEMBER 6, 2019 THROUGH MARCH 10, 2020 them. ALL HOUSING DEVELOPMENTS WITH HIGH DENSITY OPTIONS. There were no choices to incorporate open space, community centers, lower density options. It was a choice between 5 evils. Not to mention, misrepresentation of the potential density of each of the 5 proposed developments to further sway choice; to collect data points to document the “community preference” for the Hughes site. More recently, and even at the November 5th meeting, there has been “cover up” and “back tracking” by the City Planning Department. When Mr. Gloss presented his updated version of the zoning proposal of LMN/ RF, he somehow included new data that he gathered from previous public criticism of his plan. In fact, for the November 5th presentation, he referred to a new air quality study, apparently from 2014 instead of the previous data reported from 1985. With this revised presentation to Council, there were several issues that needed clarification or rebuttal due to omission or inaccurate statements. One example was when Mr. Gloss stated that the maximum number of houses that would be built with the proposed plan was 550. Later, he sent out a corrected statement with “theoretical” scenarios that confirm over 1000 units as presented by the community in testimony. This was a conscious understatement in order to get Council buy-in and ratification. It is not fair that the Fort Collins community members can’t comment when these situations occur. Mr. Gloss also mentioned that there were 6 egresses out of the proposed Lennar development (many community members voiced safety concerns) however, in my review of the plan, I only see 2 egresses; one on Overland and one on Dixon. There is an area designated to the north as “future development access” which intersects private property and cannot be included as an exit / egress. In this same meeting on November 5th , there was even more citizen testimony against the City Staff proposal of LMN/ RF in a 50/50 split. Three supporters (less than 10% of testimony presented) testified in support of this plan and all had financial incentives associated with the high density. Mr. Gloss’s determination of the “lay of the land” and to justify the 50/50 split of the parcel is arbitrary and comes with purposeful intent to meet criteria of LMN for 80 to 160 acres. If the division of the property was anything less than 50% (or 80 acres), LMN zoning could not apply by definition.; another “convenience” for this plan of Hughes. Even when one looks at the map of the proposed Lennar plan, there is no comparison to the surrounding areas west of Overland Trail. This was also pointed out at the November 5th meeting by citizens. There is no separation between the zoning and the Lennar plan on the Hughes site. They are intertwined. The City Planning Dept. has an agenda to make the project with Lennar a GO. We have learned of hidden financial incentives; there may be more we are not aware of yet. There have been acknowledgements of “off line” communications between CSU, Lennar, and the City Planning with emails being sent out and more. There has been possible conflict of interest by some of the Council members and whether a “legal” conflict or not, there is definitely the appearance of at least “social” conflict by members that have employment affiliations with CSU. There has been misrepresentation and omission of pertinent data. There has been promises that cannot be guaranteed in many facets as well. This is WRONG. PUBLIC COMMENTS RECEIVED NOVEMBER 6, 2019 THROUGH MARCH 10, 2020 The citizens of Fort Collins have entrusted all of you to make choices and decisions that will be in our best interests as community members of our Choice City. It is unfortunate that so many citizens have VOICED comments only to fall on deaf ears. In fact, many citizens have given up hope of any democratic process in the final zoning determination; they feel the decision has already been made at the get go. I appreciate that Council members Cunniff, Gutoswky and Pignataro are LISTENING to their constituents and understand what a rash decision today can do to the future of tomorrow. The P & Z Board’s recommendation of RF clustered should be respected and recognized as a thoughtful and appropriate compromise between all interested parties. RF zoning will allow for some creative and community service options to be integrated without high density and all of the associated negative impacts to the area. HEAR OUR VOICES; STOP THE VOTE AND PUT A SECOND VOTE ON THE TABLE! VOTE FOR THE PEOPLE OF FORT COLLINS AND FOR THE BEAUTY WE HAVE IN OUR FOOTHILLS. I respectfully request that you over-turn your decision to zone the Hughes site as a 50/50 split of LMN and RF clustered and instead support RF clustered for the entire parcel. Thanks for your time and consideration. I will see you on the 19th . Sincerely, Tamra Meurer Fort Collins Citizen (since 1983) 80525 PUBLIC COMMENTS RECEIVED NOVEMBER 6, 2019 THROUGH MARCH 10, 2020 From: Delynn Coldiron To: Delynn Coldiron Subject: RE: Hughes stadium property Date: Monday, November 18, 2019 3:43:26 PM ________________________________________ From: Carroll & Jan Morony <jancar68@comcast.net> Sent: Monday, November 18, 2019 7:28 AM To: Ross Cunniff Subject: Hughes stadium property Hello Ross, We live in the Hughes stadium area and hope you will change your vote and vote in the affirmative for the Hughes stadium property zoning. We do not think that the area should be open space/ natural area because we already have natural areas and parks to service our area and other areas of the city are in need of money spent to give them parks and natural areas. Does the city have the funds to develop and maintain this area as a natural area when other areas of the city should be a priority for parks development? We see a lot of "NIMBY" and "the council doesn't listen to us because the vote didn't go our way". The city needs more homes. This ordinance is much better than what was proposed by the developer. We all need to take a broader view of what's best for the city and not just for "my neighborhood". Carroll and Jan Morony PUBLIC COMMENTS RECEIVED NOVEMBER 6, 2019 THROUGH MARCH 10, 2020 From: Delynn Coldiron To: Delynn Coldiron Subject: RE: Vote "no" on Hughes rezoning/development Date: Monday, November 18, 2019 3:51:42 PM From: Gary Wockner <gary@garywockner.com> Sent: Monday, November 18, 2019 3:36 PM To: City Leaders <CityLeaders@fcgov.com> Subject: Vote "no" on Hughes rezoning/development Hi Fort Collins City Council, I'm writing to ask you to vote "no" on the rezoning of the Hughes Stadium area, as well as any proposal to build a development there. The property is prime Open Space and should be used for that purpose, not packed in with housing that would further degrade the surrounding Open Space, increase GHG emissions, create more air pollution, create more noise pollution, and create more traffic. Cramming dense housing in areas of town where neighbors don't want it, or where it degrades nature, is a terrible decision. Further, this proposal does zero to create more affordable housing in Fort Collins. The biosphere around us is our life-support system – protecting the non-human world is the single biggest step we can take to ensure our own survival. Stop pounding more housing and unwanted development into Fort Collins. Thank you, Gary Wockner 516 N. Grant Ave. Fort Collins, CO 80522 -- Gary Wockner, PhD Environmental Activist, Scientist, Writer Author: "River Warrior: Fighting to Protect the World's Rivers" (2016) Web: http://GaryWockner.com Email: Gary@GaryWockner.com Phone/WhatsApp: 970-218-8310 PUBLIC COMMENTS RECEIVED NOVEMBER 6, 2019 THROUGH MARCH 10, 2020 From: Delynn Coldiron To: Delynn Coldiron Subject: RE: Hughes Stadium Property Rezoning Date: Monday, November 18, 2019 3:59:25 PM From: gary baumann <rockngb@gmail.com> Sent: Tuesday, November 05, 2019 8:14 AM To: Cameron Gloss <cgloss@fcgov.com>; Sylvia Tatman-Burruss <statman-burruss@fcgov.com> Subject: Hughes Stadium Property Rezoning Cameron, Sylvia, I am unable to attend tonight's meeting due to work schedule. I would like to ask a couple questions and voice my concerns which I would be hopeful you can pass along. Question 1: Just how many people would this development add to the area? Question 2: How much will auto traffic be increased in the area? Question 3: Does the city plan to improve roads including adding additional traffic lanes for automobiles on Drake, Overland Trail, Mulberry St. and Possibly Elizabeth to help with congestion? Question 4: Who is the developer and or owners of this property? I cannot see anything that gives us this information. My concerns: I have lived in this neighborhood for over 4 decades. I have seen two lane roads reduced to one lane each way for traffic to make room for bike lanes. Adding more traffic to this area without going back to the four lanes where possible will cause congestion and a recipe for increased risk of auto/bike accidents. Additionally, I feel that the bike lanes created on Mulberry and recently on Vine are outrageously insane. I have never seen such planning in any other city I have visited, and I have visited my share. This attempt and approach to give bicyclist wide lanes going both ways does nothing for us who rely on auto transportation. I am concerned that the city will attempt to add more bike lanes and separation which is not good for traffic.I will add that since the bike lanes on Mulberry and Vine it has doubled my time to get from Overland Trail to Shields due to increased traffic. The lanes do not line up, they are now narrow, stripping is pitiful and due to weather and people hitting some of the separation devices, they look ghetto, filthy and hideous. PUBLIC COMMENTS RECEIVED NOVEMBER 6, 2019 THROUGH MARCH 10, 2020 I am also concerned about crime. Crime follows population and the area is already known for higher crime close to this proposed site. I feel that clustered apartments, four plexes and such will add to the crime rates in the area. What I feel would be more suitable for the space is guaranteed 50% open park/nature and single family homes on large lots double or triple the size of most neighborhoods. Those homes would perhaps be larger single family homes and would allow the site to be developed in a manor better suited for the site and close neighborhoods. Please do give me answers to my questions and please let my voice be heard on this matter. Thank you, Gary Baumann PUBLIC COMMENTS RECEIVED NOVEMBER 6, 2019 THROUGH MARCH 10, 2020 From: Delynn Coldiron To: Delynn Coldiron Subject: RE: Sunday Evening thoughts.... Date: Monday, November 18, 2019 3:57:50 PM From: hermi@frii.com <hermi@frii.com> Sent: Sunday, November 10, 2019 8:07 PM To: Emily Gorgol <egorgol@fcgov.com> Subject: Sunday Evening thoughts.... Hello Emily, Sunday evenings are a good time to mop up and respond to the week's news and events. Once again, your vote regarding the Stadium development deserves a thank you. More impressive to me are your common sense comments regarding your decision and your vote. You represent me on the Council and I am grateful for your thoughtful consideration of the issues. Thanks, again. My best, Hermi LaPoint Fort Collins PUBLIC COMMENTS RECEIVED NOVEMBER 6, 2019 THROUGH MARCH 10, 2020 From: Delynn Coldiron To: Delynn Coldiron Subject: RE: Davis, CA or Oakland?? Date: Monday, November 18, 2019 3:54:42 PM Begin forwarded message: From: Melodie <melodiesue@comcast.net> Date: November 16, 2019 at 7:16:29 PM MST To: Wade Troxell <WTroxell@fcgov.com> Subject: Davis, CA or Oakland?? Dear Mr. Troxell, RE: Hughes Zoning and Development I have lived in Quail Hollow for 15 years and along the Front Range for almost 40 years. I remember when the Rams would play at Hughes Stadium Drake (Street) would be turned into a 3-lane and police officers would manually control the traffic lights at Drake and Taft Hill. Anyone living along Drake could barely get in or out of the subdivision, turning into the shopping plaza where Safeway is located was almost impossible. Access into the Hughes parcel is limited: there IS NO ACCESS from the West, the North, or the South. Not only would the increase of traffic drastically change the quality of life for all those who live between Overland Trail and Taft Hill but it would be catastrophic in case of a fire or flood; both of which have happened in the area of town bordered between Drake and Prospect. I remember the Spring Creek flood of 1997 that took lives of many trapped in the trailer park (this parcel sits directly below Horsetooth Dam). I also remember watching the flames of the High Park Fire and the smaller fires later that year on the West side of Horsetooth Reservoir. Fires and floods DO happen here! Paradise, CA ignored repeated warnings to city planners about exit routes and the geography that contributed to over 85 deaths: "the greatest risk to the ridge communities is from an east wind driven fire that originates above the communities and blows downhill through developed areas." In combination with a reduced number of travel lanes to escape. https://www.latimes.com/local/california/la-me-camp-fire-deathtrap- 20181230-story.html The Hughes site is land-locked and everyone living there will have to get in their PUBLIC COMMENTS RECEIVED NOVEMBER 6, 2019 THROUGH MARCH 10, 2020 cars to get gas or groceries which, even if the roads were widened, will spew additional carbon exhaust and that would just sit in that geographical pocket as a result of an inversion created by the topography. Just last week as I was returning from Cheyenne, I looked to the West as I crested 1-25 South of Wellington and I saw a brownish-blue cloud hanging over West Fort Collins!! Many residents of Fort Collins and visitors enjoy the trails for hiking and biking along that area that will most definitely be adversely impacted by a high-density housing project like the one proposed by Lennar, adding an additional 1400 cars (2 per 700 units). Lennar doesn't know or care about our community. Hughes parcel was gifted to CSU and due to its location at the base of Horsetooth is truly a gem. This is NOT just another cornfield. My question is, do you care about our community? I remember visiting Davis, CA when my son was in graduate school (UC Davis, another land grant university) and was so impressed because they have been a good steward with their land use and planning. The town is still a lovely place to visit; not unlike Fort Collins. Please don’t sell our community to the highest bidder! Choose wisely for our community and for the generations to come. As elected public servants your job is represent and honor the will of the people, NOT kowtowing to the whims of CSU! Also, understand that the will of the people will be reflected at the ballot box during the next election cycle. Regards, Melodie Sue Nicholas PUBLIC COMMENTS RECEIVED NOVEMBER 6, 2019 THROUGH MARCH 10, 2020 PUBLIC COMMENTS RECEIVED NOVEMBER 6, 2019 THROUGH MARCH 10, 2020 From: Martha Zook To: City Leaders Subject: Rezoning of old Hughes Site vote Date: Monday, November 18, 2019 6:24:25 PM Attachments: City Council Letter Nov 19 .pdf To: City Council Members FROM: Todd & Martha Zook DATE: November 18, 2019 RE: Rezoning of the Old Hughes Site Ross Cunniff, Emily Gorgol, Susan Gutowsky, Julie Pignataro, Kristin Stephens, Ken Summers, and Wade Troxell First of all, thank you to Councilmembers Ross Cunniff, Susan Gutowsky and Julie Pignataro for listening to the citizens of Fort Collins in voting against the proposed zoning submitted by the City Planning Department on November 5, 2019. To the Mayor and other council members, I am asking that you reconsider and rescind your vote made on November 5, 2019. Ms. Emily Gorgol: when you were interviewed by the Coloradoan and was asked: Why are you running for City Council? You said and I quote “I have spent many years working to better our community, and I feel strongly that I can continue to help make Fort Collins more open, accessible, and affordable for all by bringing a voice of inclusive representation to City Hall.” Where is that voice now? You promised the people who got you in that seat more open space, accessibility and affordability. You are sacrificing the Citizens of Fort Collins with a Lie of affordable housing. You are maximizing the profit at the cost of the citizens for FAKE Promises. No fast-growing City has attainable housing and you cannot build your way out of affordable housing. You are doing all this damage for the Fake promise of attainable units that will never happen. Kristin, you as well told the Coloradoan that you were rerunning to continue the work you started on …affordable and attainable housing, and maintaining our quality of life. Again, I need to ask was this a lie, a fake promise to the Citizens of Fort Collins to get you a seat at City Council? What happened with all the talk about CSU creating “work-force housing”, affordable, and attainable? With the salary most CSU employees make, what you approved on November 5th , that will never happen. In all the meetings, open forum, etc., the citizens of Fort Collins made it very loud and clear they did not want to see clustered/high density housing. They want to keep that area as Open Space. You can do right for the citizens of Fort Collins by changing your vote and say NO to Lennar! Sincerely, Martha and Todd Zook mzook.colorado@gmail.com Attached please find my signed letter. PUBLIC COMMENTS RECEIVED NOVEMBER 6, 2019 THROUGH MARCH 10, 2020 From: Delynn Coldiron To: Delynn Coldiron Subject: RE: Higher Stadium Site Redevelopment Date: Tuesday, November 19, 2019 9:42:30 AM From: Pam Turner <pamturner2008@gmail.com> Sent: Monday, November 18, 2019 5:18:14 PM To: Emily Gorgol <egorgol@fcgov.com> Cc: Kristin Stephens <kstephens@fcgov.com>; Susan Gutowsky <sgutowsky@fcgov.com>; Ross Cunniff <rcunniff@fcgov.com>; Julie Pignataro <jpignataro@fcgov.com>; Wade Troxell <WTroxell@fcgov.com>; Ken Summers <ksummers@fcgov.com> Subject: Higher Stadium Site Redevelopment Dear Ms. Gorgol, Thanks for serving on FC City Council! This message is to bring to your attention something that I observed at the last Council meeting. Although I am not super active at this moment, I am a long time League of Women Voters member and have served in various capacities in the League, including the Observer Corps. Since my husband has been on the P and Z Board for 5 years now, I have been able to learn and observe a lot more about how the Fort Collins city planning staff, developers, the P and Z Board, and City Council interact. I have lived in Fort Collins since 1979, have two degrees from CSU, and have participated in many non-profit and city sponsored projects over many years. I have been particularly interested in the Hughes Stadium site redevelopment as many citizens are, because the foothills area is fragile and irreplaceable. In many ways that area, near the “A” best represents the unique identity of Fort Collins. At the same time, I truly see the need for real affordable housing in this city. Many of our friends have grown children who cannot afford to move here and have bought houses in Wellington, Weld County, and Loveland. Your commitment to this issue is easy to observe and greatly appreciated. Although Susan Gutowsky is my Council Representative, I am specifically speaking about your interaction with the city staff at the last Council meeting. Regarding the Hughes site, I don’t believe the Council was well served by the city staff when you asked questions about the possibility of zoning the entire area RF. This zoning does not require low density, but leaves room for dense clusters of affordable housing AND open space. Any density could be approved through the additional permitted use or modification standard process, not just the lowest density. The city staff did not explain that at the meeting. For example, a developer could propose dense affordable housing on one end of the entire property and keep most of the units they proposed, if those were certified affordable. I urge you and the City Council to drive affordable housing proposals by direct PUBLIC COMMENTS RECEIVED NOVEMBER 6, 2019 THROUGH MARCH 10, 2020 communication with the city planning staff. They communicate with developers and could encourage proposals that fit the desires and needs of our entire city, not just realtors and developers. They should be better at explaining options to you and to our citizens about what is really possible. Open space and affordable housing is possible, if we want it. And I believe many of us do. We want to see more young families in our town, not just white high income retirees. With appreciation, Pam Turner 970-420-4891 1104 Williams Street Fort Collins, CO 80524 -- Pamela A. Turner 970-420-4891 PUBLIC COMMENTS RECEIVED NOVEMBER 6, 2019 THROUGH MARCH 10, 2020 From: Delynn Coldiron To: Delynn Coldiron Subject: RE: Hughes Stadium development Date: Tuesday, November 19, 2019 9:41:57 AM From: quailspg@frii.com <quailspg@frii.com> Sent: Tuesday, November 19, 2019 1:50:10 AM To: Julie Pignataro <jpignataro@fcgov.com> Subject: Hughes Stadium development Dear Councilwoman Julie Pignataro: Please count me among those who treasure the remaining open spaces on the fringes of Fort Collins. Placing a high-density development against the foothills would be destructive to the environment and place a burden on older, established neighborhoods along Overland Trail and West Drake. My husband and I have lived in and close to Fort Collins since we were students, fifty years ago. Recent growth has reduced our quality of life considerably (traffic, noise, light pollution, shockingly high tax increases). We look to elected officials to address the problems inherent in policies that encourage a demand for resources -- notably water and space -- that continues to grow exponentially. Thank you for your efforts so far. Gratefully: Donna Braginetz 3817 N. County Rd. 25E Bellvue, CO 80512 PUBLIC COMMENTS RECEIVED NOVEMBER 6, 2019 THROUGH MARCH 10, 2020 From: Delynn Coldiron To: Delynn Coldiron Subject: RE: Development vs. climate change and the future Date: Tuesday, November 19, 2019 9:34:49 AM From: DAVID ROY <david.roy@comcast.net> Sent: Tuesday, November 19, 2019 7:42 AM To: Ross Cunniff <rcunniff@fcgov.com> Subject: Development vs. climate change and the future Good morning, Council Member Cunniff; a belated 'thank you' for your recent vote on the old Hughes Stadium site. An article to boost you, and bolster your efforts: https://www.nytimes.com/2019/11/19/climate/climate-real-estate-developers.html? action=click&module=News&pgtype=Homepage To lose an opportunity to protect and preserve one of the last pieces of land that the old Hughes site represents, a unique ecosystem, simply because an out of state developer with deep pockets wants in on our 'can't miss' housing dilemma, would be one of the most shortsighted decisions a City Council elected by the citizens of Fort Collins could make. Make it a great day. Best regards, David Roy 2016 Evergreen Court Fort Collins CO 80521 (970) 493-9201 PUBLIC COMMENTS RECEIVED NOVEMBER 6, 2019 THROUGH MARCH 10, 2020 From: Delynn Coldiron To: Delynn Coldiron Subject: RE: Another voice against Hughes Development Date: Tuesday, November 19, 2019 9:47:46 AM From: Freymuth,Valerie <valerie.freymuth@colostate.edu> Sent: Tuesday, November 19, 2019 9:25 AM To: Ross Cunniff <rcunniff@fcgov.com> Subject: Another voice against Hughes Development Mr. Cuniff, Thank you for your vote against rezoning the Hughes site at the City Council meeting of November 5. I am a resident of west Fort Collins (Elizabeth and Overland.) I am disappointed that I cannot attend the meeting tonight to add my voice to the many citizens there, again expressing their desire to maintain this area of natural beauty and space in our ever more crowded city. My experience in the past has been that once the developer get approval they cram the maximum number of houses allowed on the property, no matter the effect it will have on surrounding areas. The citizens of Fort Collins do not trust CSU and I believe there is also some question as to the reputation of Lennar as well. I am afraid that whatever is the maximum allowed under zoning laws, that number will be built on that space- ruining a treasure that can never be recovered. Please motion for a turnover of the previous vote and please encourage other members of the council to think further than tax revenue. Valerie Freymuth 3314 W Elizabeth St 970-215-6519 PUBLIC COMMENTS RECEIVED NOVEMBER 6, 2019 THROUGH MARCH 10, 2020 From: Delynn Coldiron To: Delynn Coldiron Subject: RE: Hughes Date: Tuesday, November 19, 2019 9:11:02 AM ________________________________________ From: Renee Walkup <walkup@salespeak.com> Sent: Tuesday, November 19, 2019 8:03 AM To: Wade Troxell; Kristin Stephens Cc: Darin Atteberry; Ross Cunniff; Ken Summers; Emily Gorgol; Julie Pignataro; Susan Gutowsky Subject: Hughes Good Morning. Thank you for all the work you do on behalf of the community. I can’t imagine the difficult and challenging issues that you are dealing with on a daily basis. As a matter of record, I feel the need to tell you that I have not been involved in any of the recent ethics accusation letters or emails. As you’ve heard me say numerous times, I love this City. My association with PATHS has decreased as the passions among some involved have accelerated. I want you to be aware of that fact, although I will be at Council meeting tonight expressing my continued concerns regarding a large development proposal at Hughes. Thank you, Renee Walkup PUBLIC COMMENTS RECEIVED NOVEMBER 6, 2019 THROUGH MARCH 10, 2020 From: Linda Crozier Hall To: City Leaders Subject: Hughes Property Rezoning Date: Tuesday, November 19, 2019 1:13:01 PM Attachments: Wolf.Conservation Area-Fort.Collins.2019.pdf Dear Honorable Mayor and Fort Collins City Council Please do not approve the zoning designation for the Hughes Stadium Property tonight. It is my understanding that Colorado State University does not have to follow your zoning recommendation anyway. This property is in the federally designated wolf conservation area. I have attached a map showing that the area is bordered on the north by the state line, on the east by Interstate 25, on the south by Interstate 70 and on the west by a line from Craig, Colorado south to Interstate 70. We need to keep this open space between the foothills and the City Fort Collins and Colorado State University. The wolves are already here in Colorado and Wolves are the West. It is my understanding that either the City of Fort Collins or Larimer County has the money to buy this property for open space. This should actually not be necessary. Colorado State University should rise to the occasion and keep this property as open space. CSU claims to be a leader in environmental protection. They also say they want to be good neighbors to the residents of Fort Collins. We gave in to their new on-campus football stadium and the traffic and parking problems it has caused all for a football program that cannot compete at the level of a team from a college of this size. This ten million dollar sale to Lennar will not fix this embarrassing situation. It will take much more money than that. Many people are in love with the West and would love to have a chance to view the wolves in a natural area that is not 50 degrees below zero in the winter like Yellowstone National Park. Please support the wolves and give them a chance to show us what the West is all about. PLEASE VOTE NO TONIGHT. IT IS THE LEAST WE CAN DO. Sincerely Linda Hall PUBLIC COMMENTS RECEIVED NOVEMBER 6, 2019 THROUGH MARCH 10, 2020 PUBLIC COMMENTS RECEIVED NOVEMBER 6, 2019 THROUGH MARCH 10, 2020 PUBLIC COMMENTS RECEIVED NOVEMBER 6, 2019 THROUGH MARCH 10, 2020 H u g h e s G e n e r a l P u b l i c L i s t e n i n g S e s s i o n P a g e 1 | 9 Hughes General Public Listening Session – Feedback by Attendees October 18, 2017, 6-8 p.m. Drake Centre; Fort Collins, CO CSU and CAA ICON offered five “listening” stations as described below where attendees could ask questions and provide their feedback. Each station was manned by CSU and/or CAA ICON representatives. The below are 200 comments, questions and concerns which were logged by station notetakers or written by attendees on comment boards. Redevelopment Process Station 1. Build High Density Affordable Housing 2. Will the Public Open Land remain the same? 3. Parking Garage/Shared parking for access 4. Medium to Higher Density Affordable Housing/Housing of some sort 5. What are the possibilities so far regarding redevelopment? 6. Are you putting affordable housing/apartments on the site? a. Answer: Nothing has been decided as of yet. 7. Where do investors come into the process? 8. Work with Habitat for Humanity for a portion of the property to create affordable housing 9. Has developer been selected? a. Answer: No 10. Where are these and other comments/feedback going? a. Answer: We are collecting feedback and will eventually share it on the website. 11. Keep it for open space 12. Keep some of it for open space and views 13. Concert Venue 14. Will you be soliciting different concept plans from developers? 15. What is the timeline? 16. Who owns the property? a. Answer: The Board of Governors 17. Mountain Bike Park (like Valmont in Boulder) 18. How is the Hughes property zoned? 19. How many acres is the property? a. Answer: Approx. 160 Acres 20. Is the development going to be owned by CSU or privately owned? a. Answer: Privately Owned 21. Capitalize on the asset of the property 22. Something where you can remember Hughes 23. Something more than just housing 24. Maximize the asset for CSU 25. Can we keep the Frisbee Golf Course? 26. Emphasize open space 27. Connect Spring Creek Trail to Maxwell to Poudre 28. Private individuals purchase and donate to the city as Open Space 29. Ethics of sustainability integral to the ongoing project PUBLIC COMMENTS RECEIVED NOVEMBER 6, 2019 THROUGH MARCH 10, 2020 H u g h e s G e n e r a l P u b l i c L i s t e n i n g S e s s i o n P a g e 2 | 9 30. Bike park (see Valmont Park in Boulder) 31. If Fort Collins grows, we need to preserve open and rec space to support it 32. “Outdoor lifestyle” = reason for FC desirable place to live INCLUDING attracting top CSU faculty 33. A mountain bike park would provide recreational opportunities for FC residents AND visitors. Progressive, forward thinking! a. Agree! Progressive and forward thinking is key. Affordable housing is not for this space – prime real estate 34. Open space/park/trails 35. I would like to see the history of the stadium maintained. I like the idea of an outdoor adventure park for CSU students and the Ft. Collins community alike. There could be a sports complex, boat and equipment rental, and various summer camps to drive in revenue for the university as well as climbing walls, sledding hills, and other activities that bring mountain experiences closer to home 36. How does this impact the legacy of CSU and the City of Fort Collins? People come to school or move here for our “lifestyle” and access to open space. There is plenty of area in F.C. to develop, but not many unique areas like this to preserve as open space a. AMEN! Existing Site Station 1. Could expand parking area for Maxwell (might not be part of the property) 2. Would be nice to create a safe and fun sledding area for kids 3. Turn into huge construction laboratory to design housing of next century. CSU has several relevant depts (construction management, engineering, interior design, landscape architecture). City has housing needs (students, seniors, etc.). This land could be used to develop new designs, train students for the new century’s needs, give students the opportunity to design for new century, train a new generation of skilled craftsmen, and provide needed housing 4. Keep Frisbee golf course – does get used and its presence is appreciated 5. Concerned about any development abutting the mountains – issue for fire spread 6. Concerned about traffic esp. at the Drake and Overland intersection 7. Concerned about another large track of houses with nothing else to offer – wouldn’t even mind a mixed use commercial/residential development 8. Love to see mixed use development of commercial and residential – not high density 9. Suggest zero energy homes and buildings 10. Why the rush to sell and get rid of the property? 11. Is there a fiduciary duty to our citizens for open space? 12. How large is the land 13. 160 acres 14. Concerned about traffic if the area gets developed 15. Keep the Frisbee golf course 16. Concerned about traffic esp. at Drake and Taft – currently not a lot feeding in from Overland Trail. Worried especially with other development already being built 17. Keep detention pond 18. County road heavily used by runners and bikers for hiking, running, and getting to Horsetooth and trails in Maxwell area 19. Not adequate parking along Overland PUBLIC COMMENTS RECEIVED NOVEMBER 6, 2019 THROUGH MARCH 10, 2020 H u g h e s G e n e r a l P u b l i c L i s t e n i n g S e s s i o n P a g e 3 | 9 20. Overland needs to be expanded anyway 21. Intersection at Drake and Overland is archaic – could be redesigned 22. Concerns about development of land and height of structures effecting leisure and enjoyment of the outdoors 23. With continued increasing land value in Fort Collins – possibly very valuable land in the future? 24. Why isn’t CSU looking to expand the equine center 25. Why turn the land over now when it could be used to expand vet program (one of the best in the country) 26. How much does it cost to hold lease of land – building housing now seems short sited 27. What/how will development impact trail use for hikers and bikers – safety issue 28. CSU is an agricultural school – losing sight of that by developing that open space 29. If they’re going to take away this open space are they going to offset it with other open space? 30. Recommend that CSU and the city collaborate to keep costs down on affordable housing by selling some parcels of land at under-appraised value and the city reducing costs for utilities and permits 31. Recommend a variety of different housing types to meet the needs for affordable housing i.e. clusters of duplex houses, very small one-story houses, and stacked apartments for rent 32. Build a second unit with Fort Collins housing authority replicating the big complex on S. College Ave (“Housing First” – housing for homeless families and managed by housing authority) including all the amenities such as case managers, advising, etc. 33. More trees and greenery 34. Preserve the view 35. Preserve the site and turn it into an alternative sports venue – world class track racing venue (cycling). Use the budge you have to convert it instead of demolishing it. 36. Convert Hughes Stadium into a giant terraced horticultural/botanical research greenhouse with a bowl shaped, rain capturing fabric translucent lid. The bowl shaped interior would have varied cooler and warmer growing zones depending on their elevation from the floor. Snow will melt on contact, and rain would be collected at the bottom and drain thru to a green machine. People will come to see this for sure – the world’s first stadium converted to a botanical garden!!! This idea comes from my brother, a celebrated architect. He has done worldwide projects. He happens to be Fort Collins based. He developed Block #1 and helped with 5 star city building. Currently working on confluence project in Old Town. 37. I would like something innovative and unique to Fort Collins. No simply another densely packed area of large houses. Combine with ample open space possible mixed use, other creative ideas. We don’t simply need more boredom and traffic on the west side. 38. Agree! 39. Me too! 40. I would very much like to preserve the trails going up behind Hughes to the open spaces. If this property is sold and developed, in a year this access will disappear – this area is heavily used by bikers, runners, and walkers. Doing mixed use would be ideal – recreation, horticulture, creative community gathering, etc. use would be ideal 41. Our own Red Rocks type area would be perfect and what we deserve!!! 42. Sorry…no!! We don’t need a Red Rocks…we have a $220 million stadium!! We need AFFORDABLE HOUSING. PUBLIC COMMENTS RECEIVED NOVEMBER 6, 2019 THROUGH MARCH 10, 2020 H u g h e s G e n e r a l P u b l i c L i s t e n i n g S e s s i o n P a g e 4 | 9 43. Let’s not lose sight of the fact this property is directly beneath one of the Horsetooth reservoir dams – potential safety consideration for only residential development 44. Also high density of wild life in this area that would be impacted by further development, not to mention fire hazard 45. Convert to pumped-storage hydropower (renewable energy): requires Hughes for storage – remaining lands use for 2nd Olympic training park or supplemental terraced ‘grow’ facility (legal cannabis) – pay of bonds in 4 months – Adam P. Million 46. Mixed use – open space/recreation; housing, including “housing first” units for homeless families/individuals; below market (housing authority type) apts/condos (not prices “beginning in the low 300s) for working people that support all of us who live here 47. Please be mindful to keep connections to open space and Horsetooth intact with appropriate zoning and density to keep gradient to open space healthy. 48. We can and should build affordable housing in other areas of the city. Open space near Horsetooth is limited and decreasing. This is an opportunity to offer the citizens of this community increased recreational/outdoor/natural use of beautiful land. Keep it recreational 49. Re: above comment: I don’t think we can build affordable housing in other areas of the city. There is just not available sites elsewhere 50. I would like to see something new and different, aside from housing and land conservation! The space I unique but also next to the electrical center, mountains, and my house. I run up the trails and want something worthwhile!!! CSU housing does not make sense. DO IT! 51. Please consider making it into a park which would include grass sports fields, trails, a bike park, open space. We need more open space to absorb carbon emissions and give recreational opportunities and preserve wild life habitat 52. We don’t need brightly lit (reference to grass sports fields above). Night time darkness is GOOD! Land Use Context Station: 1. Affordable housing either for CSU-related or general public 2. Need affordable housing; can CSU include non-profits in RFQ process, so development fees can be reduced? 3. Tiny house community (500-1000SF small homes and micros homes) a. Comment stating “are not affordable”! 4. LEED ND (Neighborhood Development) Certified 5. Height restriction on buildings 6. Please no commercial 7. Expand Maxwell parking 8. We could think (not exclusively) of public park or a “children’s” park a. This won’t stop other plans, necessarily. b. Most important: A creative park/space for children. Would connect us to the future and next generation! 9. Wouldn’t mind a mix of open space/mixed use development to break monotony of west side. Wouldn’t mind some commercial integrated with housing 10. A mass of dense rooftops would be detrimental to the premier foothills property 11. Preserving open space, recreational areas and wildlife habitat is critical as areas near Hughes are being developed PUBLIC COMMENTS RECEIVED NOVEMBER 6, 2019 THROUGH MARCH 10, 2020 H u g h e s G e n e r a l P u b l i c L i s t e n i n g S e s s i o n P a g e 5 | 9 a. I agree (3x) 12. If housing is developed, hope there is some affordable housing for CSU employees 13. How would development of property affect adjacent natural areas, including access points (human vs. wildlife access) and G.A.P. (continuity/contiguous/pathway) issues? 14. Expand Maxwell parking and trail system 15. If there is development for housing – mixed use, different sizes and densities. 16. Continued access to Maxwell is very important for neighbors 17. Tiny affordable homes a. I agree. 18. Expand Maxwell wilderness area – we need dark space! a. Yes! 19. Desire open space to keep overland biker safety 20. Park multiuse would be viable option 21. Horse park in Northern Colorado to serve Wyoming/Fort Collins/Greely for Eng/Western competitions and education 22. Municipal garden/farm for example: Jessup Farm, bike/family friendly 23. Is there any way to connect CDC/Infectious Disease Campus Section to Stadium Property to develop large employment center for drug/disease research? 24. Good opportunity to provide land use that would absorb carbon emissions rather than cost $ to build infrastructure, pavement. Consider renewable energy for part of the space 25. Does the school district have a role in determining whether they have capacity for the number of students that would need to be served in a new development? (In addition to those that will come from the new development at the corner of Drake and Overland? a. Great concern! 26. NO retail near foothills, traffic and lights after dark – NOT wanted!! a. Agree!!! 27. Need integrated bicycle and pedestrian facilities: paths/walkways connecting to existing trails to the west. Integrated recreational amenities like cycle cross course, crit. course, pump track, … 28. Keep the space open, I’m concerned if we turn the land into affordable housing this doesn’t solve our housing problem. It’s only a Band-Aid to our current problem. Plus, we’re already having issues over water rights in FoCo. Community Needs & Values Station: 1. Keep the views of the foothills 2. Integrated retail and residential would be okay if done tastefully. Do not want subsidized low income housing – too much crime in area already. Sorry. 3. Should be like Red Rocks kind of area 4. Would like it to stay natural, but single family housing would be more appropriate than affordable housing 5. Concern with far more traffic 6. It’s not easy to get around without a vehicle near this property 7. Are there other areas that make more sense for affordable housing that is more convenient? 8. Likes that it’s so open and nothing is really on the west side PUBLIC COMMENTS RECEIVED NOVEMBER 6, 2019 THROUGH MARCH 10, 2020 H u g h e s G e n e r a l P u b l i c L i s t e n i n g S e s s i o n P a g e 6 | 9 9. University should retain control/ownership of the property no matter what is done with it (all of it can be done.) Concern that the space will be needed long-term for the university as it expands. 10. Keep Fort Collins unique, not just build home – I agree 11. Open space is #1 in terms of values – ideal opportunity for CSU to walk-the-walk of environmentalism 12. Would like to see some of the property set aside for affordable housing (not market price) – even housing given to staff, students, employees (lowest owners.) Could alleviate this city concern. 13. Housing for the homeless – a portion of the property 14. “Housing First” 15. No “free” or “given” housing – not sustainable and will encourage more movement to Fort Collins 16. Beautiful land/property – already tree there – keep that value added 17. Impact on schools – where will kids go to school in this area if more development is added? a. I agree b. (Redistricting?) I agree 18. Mixed development and recreational sports + health activities – integrate bike, paths and connectivity to the paths that go west. From a developer perspective – mixing can be really good. 19. Nonprofits and developers partner in RFQ/RFP process to ensued reduced city fees for development 20. Opposed to retail and commercial 21. No more bright lights at night! 22. Expand Maxwell parking area, county road is access for bikes and pedestrians 23. Cap the height of development (no 6-8 story buildings) 24. Keep detention pond for flood control 25. Open to low cost housing (Low density – done properly) 26. Higher density that backs up to the other higher density makes a buffer with what’s already there 27. Open space is good, such as with Frisbee golf 28. It’s okay to have some retail – community focused retail, so people don’t always have to drive – can walk/bike to it. 29. Consider traffic on Drake due to future developments, please! 30. Is there a “Land Swap” or other opportunity between CSU and City of Fort Collins? 31. Is the land suitable for construction? a. Geotech reports? b. Soil reports? 32. Support annexation mitigate potential fire threat 33. Will community be a part of selection committee/process? 34. Will there be transparency with where money goes with sale of property? 35. Adequate parking requirements 36. What is “GMA” – Growth Management Area? PUBLIC COMMENTS RECEIVED NOVEMBER 6, 2019 THROUGH MARCH 10, 2020 H u g h e s G e n e r a l P u b l i c L i s t e n i n g S e s s i o n P a g e 7 | 9 37. Encourage “smaller” housing (1200 sq. ft.) – a smaller footprint – more efficient, “innovative” housing (zero energy use, solar, eco) a. Or 600-750 sq. ft. for a single person or person with a child 38. Provide public access paths to the open spaces if there is development 39. Open spaces, views and recreation are the most important community values. a. I agree. 40. Plenty of other spaces for affordable housing out by I-25 – don’t get rid of existing open spaces 41. Some of the land (maybe 10-15 acres) could be used as “experiment” or “research” housing a. A large organization (BRE TRUST) in London recently asked I.B.E. if we would consider a research housing development, funded by industry, in Fort Collins! 42. If we miss this opportunity, the loss will be immeasurable – opportunity for discreet segments, some for purchase, others open space/parks for children, different uses, some for affordable rent housing. 43. Balance need for food related retail in this part of town with congestion that heavy retail brings so near to open space. 44. Small grocery store (with 3 types of laundry detergent instead of 27) 45. Need to provide bike trail link between Spring Canyon Park and extend north to the Poudre. a. I agree. 46. Wouldn’t mind retail if integrated into neighborhood. No 7-Elevens or Fast Food. a. I agree. 47. More Trees. a. I agree. 48. Homes that are affordable for “regular” people too – not just limited to low income and homeless for qualification 49. Maintain: a. Biker Safety b. Egress and wildlife to trails 50. Farm use and park use 51. Water concern with 600-800 homes a. Doesn’t solve our housing issues! 52. Access through 168 acres to trails; multiuse and horse, pedestrian, bike friendly 53. Agriculture Learning Center Traffic, Multimodal Access Station: 1. More housing = more traffic = more people moving here = more business = A mix of outdoor recreational activity areas interspersed would be nice to get people off their computers and outside. Fort Collins just came in 1st in outdoor encouragement opportunities for citizens. 2. Disagree with the above. People will move here… always have, probably always will… the choice becomes how the area will develop (not if!) and how will people be encouraged to enjoy the wonderful environment here. 3. Connect to public transit in more meaningful way – none of the most obvious uses will reduce traffic congestion without transit solutions. East to west to Max line. 4. Agree with third point. Move away from cars/parking and toward public transportation. PUBLIC COMMENTS RECEIVED NOVEMBER 6, 2019 THROUGH MARCH 10, 2020 H u g h e s G e n e r a l P u b l i c L i s t e n i n g S e s s i o n P a g e 8 | 9 5. Second needing connection to public transit! Hopefully some affordable housing will be developed & families will need bus line transportation. 6. To move more people from property to downtown, complete overland as 4 lane as in City plan and connect to larger east/west roads from Vine to Drake. Look for new bypass route for north circle of city. 7. Can City purchase property? 8. Can group of alumni purchase property? o As a non-profit, etc. 9. Like others concerned about the traffic with more cars on the road with runners and bikers it’s already becoming more and more unsafe to run along the roads. 10. What is a good solution for the traffic at the corner of Drake and Overland trail 11. Traffic, traffic, traffic, how to handle? 12. Need better transit on west side of town that connects to city center 13. Improve intersection of Drake & Overland. 14. Agree with improving intersection of Drake & Overland – Roundabout? 15. Roundabouts at Prospect and Cedarwood/Hampshire for traffic calming 16. Overland Trail needs an overhaul to accommodate more development (honestly it needs it already). Would love to see an east – west Max line from CSU to O.T. and then down to Hughes property, plus expanded/safer bike ways. 17. Concerns about too much traffic on O.T. (@ capacity now) 18. This concern goes away with any future development as roads and intersections are relatively easy to redesign and incorporate into development plans. 19. Trail concerns 20. Bicycle facilities 21. Recreational facilities as part of Development – Pump track, cycle cross course 22. Support bicycle, pedestrian, transit on Overland Trail 23. If housing, where will children go to school? – Elementary schools full 24. Concern about traffic load at intersection of Drake & Overland – another housing development currently underway 25. Dixon Canyon Road sees high volume of bikes and runners and heavy use for parking by those accessing Horsetooth, Maxwell & Pine Ridge 26. Concern about traffic on Drake – other development underway already 27. Concern about traffic on Prospect 28. Would be ideal to have bike path going north from Spring Canyon to Poudre 29. If higher-density housing, make sure there’s enough parking so it doesn’t spill over into neighborhood 30. How will this affect Taft Hill Rd.? Additional: The following concept for a cycling and fitness theme park was shared by an attendee: What if a visionary developer wanted to create something unique located in a world class city? Imagine the * Cell Phone Co. Kids Bike Safety Town * GPS Co. paved Crit/Skate/Ski Course * Broadband Co. MTB Courses * Sporting Goods Co. Cross Course * Energy Bar Co. BMX Course * Bike Components Co. Trials Course PUBLIC COMMENTS RECEIVED NOVEMBER 6, 2019 THROUGH MARCH 10, 2020 H u g h e s G e n e r a l P u b l i c L i s t e n i n g S e s s i o n P a g e 9 | 9 * Energy Drink Co. Fitness Center * Innovative Toy Co. Playground * Bike Tool Co. free (self -help) shop * Health Svc. Co. Sports Medicine Ctr. * Grocery Co. Healthy Food Court * Bike/Sports Equipment Co. Mall * Brewing Co. Velodrome/Concert * Amphitheatre with Classrooms or Gym under the stands *JUST fill in the blanks with your favorite brands (with $$$) "AT THE" * Fort Collins (or Colorado, or NoCo, or Foothills, or Rocky Mountain, or Northern Colorado) (*circle one) CYCLING AND FITNESS PARK Sustainability and Innovation at every level is essential! Think THEME PARK based public (CSU, Front Range Community College, PSD, City of FC, Larimer County, State of CO) private (food, beverage, merchandise, and naming sponsors) partnership with facilities AND programming for affordable housing, education, fitness and recreation. Add a Mixed Use Private RE Development to include: Affordable Loft Condos and Apartments, plus commercial business and professional offices above a healthy retail grocer, bike, sportswear University, Community College, K-12, and Private Industry Classroom, Lab, and Field Courses that relate to the disciplines and passions supported by the Center An auto fuel and recharge station. Cooperative Relationships with Downtown, Midtown, and Uptown private convention and lodging businesses public transportation connections, including bike share. This becomes: THE LIFECYCLE CENTER PUBLIC COMMENTS RECEIVED NOVEMBER 6, 2019 THROUGH MARCH 10, 2020 H u g h e s N e i g h b o r h o o d L i s t e n i n g S e s s i o n P a g e 1 | 14 Hughes Neighborhood Listening Session – Feedback by Attendees September 20, 2017, 6-8 p.m. Drake Centre; Fort Collins, CO CSU and CAA ICON offered five “listening” stations as described below where attendees could ask questions and provide their feedback. Each station was manned by CSU and/or CAA ICON representatives. The below are nearly 400 comments, questions and concerns which were logged by station notetakers or written by attendees on comment boards. Redevelopment Process Station 1. Requested that all boards on display at meeting be posted online for reference. 2. Does CSU/City of FC have any idea of timeline for Annexation? 3. Do not annex property. Low cost housing is more affordable if the property is left within the county. 4. Imperative that the property go through the Annexation and P&Z Process. 5. Recommends emphasis on recreational development 6. Recommends that the public be provided the selection criteria for the future developer. 7. Work with Great Outdoors Colorado, City of Fort Collins, Loveland, and Larimer County to preserve as open space and Multiuse recreational. 8. No Housing 9. No Apartment Buildings 10. Preserve Existing Landscape 11. No Development – Leave in County 12. No Low-income housing 13. Hughes is last piece of open space in Fort Collins. Leave as Open Space 14. Develop into Music Venue 15. Leave Open 16. Emphasis on recreation 17. Is there a projected timeline for the overall Development? 18. If Developed – Prefer Mix Use 19. Festival Site/ Park and Ride 20. Be clear about potential interests. Transparency. 21. Prefer Small Housing Development 22. Site to be utilized as Park and Ride 23. CSU/City to provide feasibility study to develop the property based on the case study of “The Eden Project”. 24. Leave as Open Space/Recreational 25. Can you be denied Annexation? 26. What are the city’s boundaries? At what point can they no longer annex property? 27. Are their examples of other projects within the city that have recently been annexed? 28. You’ve already lied to us to get us here to “listen” to us. You’ve already make up your mind to develop. This isn’t about listening to us. It’s you (CSU) telling us what you’ve already decided. It’s going to hurt Fort Collins, wildlife, and people to develop that land and opens PUBLIC COMMENTS RECEIVED NOVEMBER 6, 2019 THROUGH MARCH 10, 2020 H u g h e s N e i g h b o r h o o d L i s t e n i n g S e s s i o n P a g e 2 | 14 up our foothills for more housing. You pay for it. Raise your own money. No one wins again, but CSU. 29. This is a very rare property – Keep it for recreation and nature. We don’t need more housing up against the foothills. 30. Please keep this open space or recreation based. Please do what’s right for community and not CSU’s pocketbook. 31. Develop into a Senior Living Community 32. Ed Zdnek – Working with Miller Family (Land owners with 40 acre lot to the north). a. Would like to be included in the planning process. b. Millers are developing the property to the north. c. Potentially developing a Continuing Care Residential Community with Open Space. 33. Please keep it open for Recreation, Peace, Dog, and their human enjoyment. Being so close to nature in today’s crazy world is good for everyone. Thank you. 34. CSU to gift land to city. Keep Open 35. Combined FC/Loveland community GOCO money to preserve open space, maybe multi-use outdoor recreation, hike/mtn bike trails, picnic area, etc. 36. Can city of Fort Collins purchase the property? 37. Multi-Use – Open space (especially retention areas, west, trails, etc.) & residential, affordable housing for CSU Employees. Especially staff and others. 38. There is plenty of low-income housing on the west side already. No more of that, please. 39. Keep it natural – Open space for community and dogs. 40. No housing, shopping malls, or development of any kind. 41. BRB – Getting louder over past year. Existing Site Station 1. Artery status of Overland Trail? 2. Annexation process? 3. Will there be high density housing built to offset demo process? 4. If new development is built – will it feed into CSU’s goal of being green/carbon neutral? 5. Hopeful whatever is built is innovative and an example for the future 6. Land banking – future of affordable housing 7. Communal work with City of Fort Collins, Loveland, Larimer County Parks, and Great Outdoor Colorado (GOCO) for multi-recreational and outdoor use exclusively 8. Run an analysis – recommend a traffic and noise study 9. Worried about too much traffic and noise – sound reverberates off foothills – nervous about noise 10. Native animals could be impacted – concern for overall environmental impacts 11. Across Maxwell area where the land deviation exists – could be turned into another reservoir 12. Hopes for partnership with Larimer County, City of Fort Collins, and CSU to buy the land and extend open spaces 13. Take down Hughes 14. If land is developed – develop on NE side with same density as along Sumac 15. Build townhomes and/or single family homes from SE to SW side along foothills (similar to Ponds development) PUBLIC COMMENTS RECEIVED NOVEMBER 6, 2019 THROUGH MARCH 10, 2020 H u g h e s N e i g h b o r h o o d L i s t e n i n g S e s s i o n P a g e 3 | 14 16. Concern for impacts on Pineridge, Maxwell, and Dixon Reservoir 17. If area’s developed – wants single family and low density to preserve recreational flavor and whole west side 18. Development should embrace recreation – should be some form of recreational area that embraces outdoor/active culture 19. Develop something that everyone can enjoy 20. Mom/Pop shops would be fine but keep recreational culture represented 21. Development should be low density – anti inner city high density 22. If not developing – use space for high schools or something community supported 23. Leave for festivals for city, county, and CSU 24. Park n ride to new stadium 25. Should reflect CSU’s message for sustainability and green living 26. Don’t build high density developments along foothills – housing can happen anywhere – keep as green and nature based as possible 27. Development could be mixed use i.e. low-density housing, recreational, and retail and restaurants 28. Implement traffic study – Overland is narrow with few through streets and there’s also another high density development across the way 29. Pro low income housing – keep in mind when looking for ways to develop 30. Would be interesting to turn Hughes into something – studio apartments? 31. If Hughes is torn down hope that the materials are recycled 32. Keep existing trees – spent time and effort being cultivated 33. Respect and preserve culture of the west side – neighborhood focused/recreational 34. Preserve as much open space as possible 35. What would the Maxwell’s want? It was their land 36. Preserving safety of the area – lots of trails and open space that people currently feel comfortable using all times of day and night 37. Traffic, noise, and density are concerns – wants to keep view of mountains preserved – want single family/2 story housing 38. Keep recreational feel 39. Please listen to residents and not developers 40. Focus on housing for local CSU employees before opening up to the community 41. Contact Niantic (Pokémon Go creator) and remove Pokémon Go Gym “Sonny Lubick Field at Hughes Stadium.” – could be a safety hazard when/if demo and development begins 42. Fence backing up to Sumac that CSU maintains – what’s going to happen when/if demolition and/or development begins 43. Maintain green characteristics – selling point of buying a house in this part of town 44. Safety concerns about low income housing around trails and outdoor spaces o Dan’s answer – talk about priority given to CSU employees 45. Will there be a lock on low income housing? – concern about people buying low and selling high 46. Turn area into schools for growing population 47. If developed as low-income housing for CSU employees – how will that be managed? Concerned about it turning into student housing which brings noise, trash, parties, etc. PUBLIC COMMENTS RECEIVED NOVEMBER 6, 2019 THROUGH MARCH 10, 2020 H u g h e s N e i g h b o r h o o d L i s t e n i n g S e s s i o n P a g e 4 | 14 48. You lied to us telling us it wasn’t being redeveloped to get us to come here. You said you were going to hear us about whether it should be redeveloped. We’re not being heard. You’re going to pay for it regardless. I hope you will consider the impact for the animals, people, and environment. 49. Concern about the drainage area, trees there, and impact on neighborhood if that’s changed. 50. Concern for the value of existing homes if low income housing is built 51. Traffic and traffic noise that comes with building additional homes are a concern 52. Please preserve the history of the area/space 53. Encouraged by though of housing mixed with recreational space 54. Safety concerns regarding traffic if area is developed 55. Maintain integrity of the foothills 56. Create a multi-use recreational area 57. Do not care if Hughes stays or gets torn down 58. NO housing or commercial retail developments 59. Would rather see a golf course developed (if financial gain is the motivator) than housing. Golf course – open space, tourist attraction, brings in money, etc. 60. Area is the last existing open space recreational area left in town 61. Not excited about low income housing 62. Would like to see open space funds (GOCO) used for preservation of space 63. Concerned about Sea Surf being involved in the development of the project o Dan’s answer – they won’t be 64. If area gets developed I will move away 65. Once you start to fill the area with something that could potentially ruin it there are long standing and far reaching negative effects 66. Like the open space idea – don’t want housing or retail. If it gets developed wants it turned into a park (like what they’re doing on Zeigler over by Fossil Creek HS). That way you’re using the land but preserving the integrity of the environment 67. Small concert venue would be nice – would encourage community interaction 68. Capitalize on and preserve open space – dovetailed with master trail plans of city and county 69. Keep culture of the west side of town 70. Already have plenty of high density housing on the west side 71. There’s lots of wildlife in the area – please keep area as wild as possible 72. Would like the city to take it and use it for an ice rink and outdoor concerts 73. Sacrificed centrally located housing in favor of a stadium used infrequently in central Fort Collins – don’t compound the error by establishing housing in the foothills 74. Hopes for a senior-living focus in new development 75. Are they thinking/targeting faculty housing opposed to student housing? o Dan’s answer – Yes 76. Curious about what types of home will be built if area is developed – singe family, condos, etc. 77. Wants to preserve trails 78. Curious about the time frame o Dan’s answer – will take several months before anything occurs 79. Transit is weak in that area – improve public transit (buses) which could help with traffic and parking concerns PUBLIC COMMENTS RECEIVED NOVEMBER 6, 2019 THROUGH MARCH 10, 2020 H u g h e s N e i g h b o r h o o d L i s t e n i n g S e s s i o n P a g e 5 | 14 80. Tell CSU to keep/preserve a pocket of land – don’t sell everything 81. Keep continuity with the land to the North – Miller property 82. Move government facilities in downtown Fort Collins to Hughes area – develop high taxed housing properties downtown 83. Turn area into sports fields/facilities for kids 84. Keep some open space truly open/natural for kids to explore in 85. Keep it open for recreation, nature, and peace and quiet next to city 86. It’s special to be able to take your dog into the area 87. Don’t cram it full of houses and retail like Walgreens and Starbucks Land Use Context Station: (+1) = agreement by another person who wants to second the comment 1. No major housing construction; no condos 2. Does the property have to be annexed into the city? Why? A developer would have more latitude and flexibility if it wasn’t annexed. 3. No concert venue due to concern for noise. 4. Because the land was given to CSU for practically nothing, ethically they should raise the money to tear down stadium, make natural area at CSU’s expense, and give the land back to the people. 5. Once a little housing is there, it will continue to spread. We’ve seen that in other areas nearby. 6. 800 homes would be huge amount of traffic. 7. What is the GMA (Growth Management Area) process? 8. There is plenty of low income housing on the west side of town. Don’t need more. 9. Don’t want to see wildlife diminished by this project. 10. Wants full transparency in the RFQ/RFP process with all the submittals posted online for the public (not just the shortlist submittals, but all of them). 11. Wants low density housing, not high density—or wants open space—no retail, but recreation is okay. 12. In old town, city and county buildings don’t collect tax (low tax base). Put this issue in front of the community by putting the low income housing (high tax base) in old town, then move the city and county buildings to the Hughes area where there is lower traffic impact. 13. Consider how the adjacent Miller property coexists with the Hughes site cooperatively. The Miller property has not had any contact from CSU/Facilities or from Icon on planning. 14. Concern about low income housing—what it will do for safety of recreation for kids, women, and family, as well as for the property value of the neighborhood. 15. Keep open space/recreational 16. Would a new school go in, if more housing went in? Could a low density neighborhood handle that? Who would pay for the school? 17. Do developers have to set aside a certain amount of park/recreation/open space if housing goes in? 18. Is there any idea of how much space that area would support? 19. Velodrome for cyclists could bring in income. 20. High density housing is a concern because city is already doing it; do it by I-25, not in a place with natural boundaries. PUBLIC COMMENTS RECEIVED NOVEMBER 6, 2019 THROUGH MARCH 10, 2020 H u g h e s N e i g h b o r h o o d L i s t e n i n g S e s s i o n P a g e 6 | 14 21. Leave the property for festivals for the City, County, and CSU. 22. The property could become a Park & Ride to transport people to the new on-campus stadium. 23. (This commenter has been in Fort Collins since 1967) A special quality of Fort Collins has been the ability to protect open spaces in this community, so it can be watershed and natural landscape. It is important to have a buffer between the developed city and the rest of the foothills. 24. If developed, restrict the property to low-density mixed use. 25. Would like no development—or make the property a concert venue to compete with Red Rocks. 26. Mostly worried about traffic 27. Against more housing and traffic, especially given the development on Drake and Overland. 28. Ecological effects—concern over the traffic along the reservoir road (“Every day will be like game day”) 29. Make it a high end golf course, restaurant okay too, to provide income. It would preserve the view of the foothills while being natural but manicured. 30. (Sarcasm intended) It should be a gated community reserved for the most elite of the 1% comprised of McMansions and servant quarters. Or, a commune for hippies. 31. Think about using natural materials with respect to absorbing sound. 32. Concern for flood planning 33. (+1) Would like it to be a natural area—it’s a very special space. Keep growth on the east side. There are wonderful animals that live on this property. 34. 18 years ago when she moved here, it was originally communicated to this person that this area would remain a green belt all the way to Loveland. She is very concerned about high density growth in this belt. 35. Existing roads aren’t adequate. 36. This is an area that the community uses. 37. Preference for lack of buildings; maintaining the view is important. 38. Suggestion to add another reservoir on this property that connects to the bottom of Horsetooth. 39. Don’t want to see homes built; this will maintain view and space and promote tourism. 40. Will there be an environmental assessment (from human to wildlife to noise, etc.)? 41. Leave the space natural—no development (no parking lots, parks, houses); trails are okay 42. No need to keep developing. 43. Treasures the open space; the property is unique—the interface with the prairie, foothills. 44. What is the zoning for the space? Question about the area represented as LMN (represented in the map). 45. Don’t add traffic—concern about more vehicles and pollution and the environment. Concern about the animals that live on that parcel. 46. Concern that what comments that are received from residents will be put aside for what makes the most money. 47. Keep it natural—open space for community and dogs. 48. No housing, shopping malls, or development of any kind. 49. What is low income or affordable housing? Who does it include? Would like this defined. 50. No more shopping malls or big name stores, no hotels or resorts. Preference for an art center and crafts-based area, could have a healing center and alternative businesses, old town unique feel is okay; no box stores. Other ideas: Bike paths, open space, community farm, a place where PUBLIC COMMENTS RECEIVED NOVEMBER 6, 2019 THROUGH MARCH 10, 2020 H u g h e s N e i g h b o r h o o d L i s t e n i n g S e s s i o n P a g e 7 | 14 art is integrated with open space, eco-friendly landscaping for kids and animals, eliminating the use of toxic stuff like pesticides. More like the Gardens on Spring Creek. 51. No students. 52. “Agriburbia”—a combination of agriculture and houses together, right under the “A” 53. Mode of sustainable living with good building materials and the use of vegetable gardens. 54. Low density development with a feeling of space. 55. Have a development for profit, do not have low income housing tax credits used, but instead have it with a proper mix of affordable housing. 56. Incorporate housing in a balanced/aesthetic/open way. There’s already high density condos/housing near here. 57. Keep it a dog/human focused area—like having a dog pool. 58. CSU said this property was too valuable not to develop. However, the property is too valuable to develop. 59. Need for innovative transit-oriented workforce housing, mixed use with recreational space merging into open space around it. 60. Currently serves as space for running and dogs. 61. Limit traffic 62. NO HOUSING, NO COMMERCIAL 63. Venue where it maintains integrity of the foothills, animals, open space/multi-use (hiking, golf course), which would bring in tourist recreation based money. 64. Ask CSU to raise employee wages to not be forced to provide low income housing. 65. Support low-density development, however make reasonable and appealing if high density low income housing, then target families—but then issue of traffic, so provide resources within the neighborhood and promote alternative transit. 66. Is there a potential buyer already for this property? 67. Will CSU lease the land? –Steady revenue 68. What is the economic value? 69. What about this space for senior housing? A community of different levels of care; a building that includes daycare for seniors and children. 70. Would like to hear a wish list from the City of Fort Collins before any developers come on board or any more meetings occur. 71. Integrity of the open space recreation is important; protect it. That’s the reason why I moved to my neighborhood. 72. “You lied to us. The letter said you were going to listen about whether we are redeveloping or not. If you take down the stadium, raise your own money for it. Please consider the animals, the people, and the environment.” 73. (+1) Sell to Stryker/music venue (Fort Collins Red Rocks) 74. Low density—acreages/horse properties 75. (+1) Detention pond – impacts of development, will it handle 76. No “Destination” Development 77. No retail 78. 10 pm Quiet time 79. (+1) Like Observatory Village or Rigden Farm, Bucking Horse would be great. 80. Community feel, mixed, nothing big. 81. Planned community PUBLIC COMMENTS RECEIVED NOVEMBER 6, 2019 THROUGH MARCH 10, 2020 H u g h e s N e i g h b o r h o o d L i s t e n i n g S e s s i o n P a g e 8 | 14 82. If CSU owns land & private developers build- is it taxable on land & improvements? 83. Not money driven 84. Not multi-million dollar homes 85. What is affordable? 86. Lower density 87. Mixed use 88. Neighborhood retail—no big box. 89. Repurpose Hughes to other uses 90. If more housing, what are the impacts on local schools? 91. Engage PSD early in the discussion 92. No new traffic lights 93. Low density/no traffic 94. Preserve open space 95. Mixed better—No development 96. Low height—two story maximum 97. Overland/Drake impacts 98. Keep feel of area 99. This is a big PR show—won’t change desire to development 100. Stay as is—given to CSU should remain with public purpose—CSU doesn’t need –tear down—return to people as a natural area—ethical thing to do. 101. (+1) Leave natural / no development 102. (+1) No parking lots 103. (+1) Trails open space are ideal 104. (+1) Critical to conserve wildlife habitat and corridors 105. (+1) Travesty to develop 106. (+1) Poudre District Library & other community uses such as Gardens and other recreation if developed 107. Secondary reservoir—whole site with associated open space. 108. Lied to us to get us here. Letter said “talk about” whether to develop. 109. If develop—raise money yourself. 110. Please consider animals, people, and environment. 111. Take stadium down at CSU expenses and leave land alone. 112. Reflect “proposed” trail, City-Bike FC. 113. Connections for bike connections between city natural areas. 114. Strengthen trail connections 115. Connect natural areas—County and City. 116. CSU should keep this property: no more land, sale is short-sighted 117. Maintain easement for City connections 118. Will money override values 119. Trail connection to neighborhoods east of Overland Trail. Community Needs & Values Station: 1. Move & Expand the Holiday Twin Drive In to this new space! 2. Open space & capitalizing on what is already there a. Connect trails PUBLIC COMMENTS RECEIVED NOVEMBER 6, 2019 THROUGH MARCH 10, 2020 H u g h e s N e i g h b o r h o o d L i s t e n i n g S e s s i o n P a g e 9 | 14 b. Keep disc golf course c. Add Velodrome 3. Open space, close to nature a. Keep the peaceful atmosphere b. Keep the views of the ridge c. Keep the openness/visibility 4. Velodrome for bicyclists 5. Space for festivals – CSU & City 6. Parking area to transport fans to new stadium 7. Use space so community can benefit ex. like Spring Creek Gardens – but doesn’t necessarily need to be a garden 8. No more traffic lights – don’t make something that would make this happen 9. Keep it in county zoning 10. Utilize space so community can benefit i.e. Spring Creek Gardens 11. Minimize traffic & control traffic 12. Permanent home for farmer’s market - This ties to CSU’s mission & education 13. Place for dog(s) to roam without city restriction 14. Open space & mixed housing (affordable +, not low income) 15. Low light – respect the culture of the west side of town 16. Keep integrity of open space, not be an eye sore, protects property values 17. Encourage conservation & land trust groups to purchase land & gift it to the city for open space 18. 100% opposed to construction (housing, retail, commercial) 19. Open space trails 20. New library location & open space & community gardens & conserve wildlife corridor & habitat 21. Open space – lots & lots 22. Protect passage/migration areas of wildlife 23. Straight bus-line from overland to campus a. Would ease parking issues on campus b. Important for staff & faculty c. Important for affordability & access to campus 24. If developed, can they use local developer? 25. Green energy space/sustainable space/eco-friendly a. Solar power b. Create an example of what can be done with sustainability & green energy 26. No retail/no commercial 27. Velodrome 28. Outdoor gym/fitness area 29. Keep Frisbee golf! 30. Keep water retention 31. Protect wildlife & incorporate into design & encourage more wildlife 32. Why does it need to be annexed? Why does CSU want to get rid of it? Can CSU repurpose it to their benefit? Can CSU repurpose for CSU? a. Use for educational purpose -> research on plants, land, animals, environment 33. Low-density/low-profile & sustainable living 34. No Walmart! No retail/no commercial PUBLIC COMMENTS RECEIVED NOVEMBER 6, 2019 THROUGH MARCH 10, 2020 H u g h e s N e i g h b o r h o o d L i s t e n i n g S e s s i o n P a g e 10 | 14 35. Community gardens – weave in w/ educational purpose of CSU 36. Farmer’s market 37. Keep integrity of CSU as Ag School a. Repurpose space to support mission b. Education 38. Protect mountain bike trails 39. Low profile & minimize traffic 40. If land gets developed for affordable housing and/or CSU staff/faculty, how will it be regulated? a. Concern for property turning into rentals by CSU staff/faculty kids/college students b. Concern of rental property vs. ownership 41. If land is developed. Make low profile & blend in w/ surroundings & environment 42. Maintain integrity of foothills 43. No eye sores! 44. Wildlife refuge & be mindful of wildlife & their habitat 45. Create parking low profile, no high rises 46. If developed make multi-use 47. No hotels, resorts, commercial/big-name stores 48. Large park! a. New recreational opportunities 49. Non-chain, local food 50. Food truck rally night(s) 51. No bars or brewery or distilleries 52. Quiet space 53. Multi-use space a. Has retention ponds – keep b. Keep open space c. Some affordable housing – keep towards Overland i. CSU staff 54. Multi-use space a. Keep the views (nature & mountains) b. Keep the trails c. Connectivity/ability to connect to nearby spaces/parks/open space d. Make a “City Park 2” e. Recreation 55. Take stadium down & leave alone a. Wildlife viewing b. Lied to us about redevelopment c. Protect the wildlife d. CSU must raise money for taking down stadium/whatever happens e. No housing or construction because we lose it all 56. Tear down stadium & give land back to the people 57. Make all natural area 58. No housing, no commercial development 59. Affordable Housing – only part of the space, maintaining natural area a. Limit business & local, not commercial/non-local PUBLIC COMMENTS RECEIVED NOVEMBER 6, 2019 THROUGH MARCH 10, 2020 H u g h e s N e i g h b o r h o o d L i s t e n i n g S e s s i o n P a g e 11 | 14 60. Maintain integrity of foothills 61. Faculty/staff housing & open space/natural area a. Mixed type of housing 62. Open Space 63. Open space w/ recreation opportunities 64. Maintain outdoor community space – Fort Collins/Loveland/County to work together to create 65. Open space a. Protect interface between the mountains & prairie b. Close to wildlife habitat c. Non-manicured – keep it natural d. Unstructured e. We want to come to see nature 66. Open space a. Conserved space, protect interface between mountains & prairie b. Trails for walking c. Wildlife conservation space d. Central wildlife corridor 67. Lower crime at Elizabeth/Overland & mitigate this issue 68. Open space a. Walking trails b. Natural habitat 69. Open space 70. Recreation space 71. If there must be structures, build affordable housing (2-story max height, low profile) a. NO retrial space 72. Open space/recreation a. Yoga studio 73. Open space/recreation a. No condo & no residential b. No commercial 74. Open space & recreation a. Keep the natural views b. No man-made structures 75. Open space/recreation a. Maintain viewshed b. Don’t lose access to trails c. Don’t lose user ability of open space/personal recreation d. Keep values of Fort Collins biking/transit/sustainability & inclusivity 76. More open space 77. Additional reservoir 78. West Elizabeth needs additional traffic light at Overland Trail (or a roundabout) 79. More open space/recreation – large space 80. Lower traffic 81. Additional traffic lights on Overland 82. Affordable housing PUBLIC COMMENTS RECEIVED NOVEMBER 6, 2019 THROUGH MARCH 10, 2020 H u g h e s N e i g h b o r h o o d L i s t e n i n g S e s s i o n P a g e 12 | 14 a. Lower cost of construction b. If CSU sells Hughes land to developer, could some of the money go back to developer in a covenant to help cover development cost so it makes it more affordable to lower income brackets? 83. Leave space open (natural preserve) a. Not much open space along foothills now 84. Low profile if developed 85. Park-like a. Mountain bike park b. Ball fields c. Picnic areas 86. Recreation/open space/bike path/walking paths/sledding hill/dog park a. No additional construction (housing, buildings) b. No additional congestion/traffic 87. Open space a. Link to other open spaces nearby b. Create pedestrian/open space corridor c. Unstructured recreation – nature-based 88. Protect access to trails from neighborhoods 89. Low density housing 90. Need for openness 91. Increase park area & accessibility to parks 92. No gas stations / no big box retrial Traffic, Multimodal Access Station: # IN FAVOR: STATEMENT/ISSUE/SUGGESTION: 3 Multiple buses on multiple routes that’s paid by the developer 3 Roundabouts are great! 3 Plan ahead – make sure whatever goes in has traffic capacity to accommodate BEFORE it becomes a problem. Proactive, please. 5 Moved to the west side of town to avoid the traffic and congestion happening in other areas that are already more developed. Please do not put in more housing/traffic, high rises, etc. Keep it beautiful, scenic, and a beauty that attracts outdoor enthusiasts! 1 Pedestrian crossing lights from neighborhoods on east side 5 Accentuate open space already in place – dovetail with current master planning for trails and trail 1 Speed bumps on Overland 2 No speed bumps on Overland 2 Mixed use open space/residential (some affordable) 1 Tell CSU to keep part as something easy on the eyes/breathing room and sell the rest 2 Speed bumps on Stuart 1 Build overpass or means to cross Drake to get to Overland Park – if traffic increases 1 Zipcar station pick-up point within development and bus line to help congestion PUBLIC COMMENTS RECEIVED NOVEMBER 6, 2019 THROUGH MARCH 10, 2020 H u g h e s N e i g h b o r h o o d L i s t e n i n g S e s s i o n P a g e 13 | 14 4 Concern with overloading of Drake & Prospect 2 Increased housing will increase traffic to Horsetooth Reservoir for recreation 1 Light at Dixon Canyon Rd./Overland 6 CSU tear down stadium and return property to the people to make into a natural space @ CSU’s expense 3 Once building starts it will never stop and lead to increased expense and traffic 4 Congestion on Drake is terrible 5 Decrease traffic by affordable housing so CSU employees do not have to commute in to Fort Collins 3 Shuttle service for employees and students to campus 2 Shuttle service to games and events for fans 6 Greenway through property on Overland to Prospect 2 You lied to us – the letter said we were talking tonight about whether to redevelop or not. If you do, you raise the money yourself, including the stadium demo and leave the land as open space and consider animals, people, and the environment – not the money. 6 Interested in reducing traffic & pollution 24 In favor of more open space 8 Affordable options for housing 11 More bike lanes 5 More transportation options 1 City/County partnership 6 No lights on Overland which causes congestion 3 No lights on Elizabeth which causes congestion 1 No lights on Mulberry which causes congestion 11 Roundabout on Overland and W Elizabeth and Mulberry is very dangerous 7 Stoplight at Overland and W Elizabeth 9 Relieve congestion on Prospect 1 Light on Yorkshire/Drake needs to be on a regular timed cycle 1 Yorkshire/Drake light cycle is okay as is 5 Volume concerns on Stuart 8 Stoplight at Overland/Drake needed 1 Opposed to stoplight at Overland/Drake. If something is needed – prefer roundabout 8 Wildlife concerns with traffic (more roadkill) 9 Overland/Drake – roundabout should be added 6 Add pedestrian sidewalk on east and west side of street 4 Noise reduction needed with added traffic 4 There is only transit to CSU but not downtown. Please add downtown too! 5 Sell the land to Pat Stryker for music venue – Red Rocks of Ft. Collins PUBLIC COMMENTS RECEIVED NOVEMBER 6, 2019 THROUGH MARCH 10, 2020 H u g h e s N e i g h b o r h o o d L i s t e n i n g S e s s i o n P a g e 14 | 14 3 Add low density housing 3 Use some of the acreage for horses 11 Protect wildlife migration with corridor 4 Do not widen Overland to 4 lanes 2 Keep the speed limits low 1 Add housing development like Harmony cottages 2 Encourage living and playing in the area vs. driving elsewhere 6 Do not make the area a retail or destination spot 2 Add a stoplight and pedestrian crossing at Hampshire/Drake 12 Use Hughes to connect Maxwell and Pineridge as a natural open space 2 Widen Dixon Canyon Rd. if development happens 1 Will traffic study push traffic to Dixon Canyon Rd? 1 Left turn on westbound land on Dixon Canyon Rd 1 Would like to partner and have involvement in the planning process for the 40 acre Miller property north of the Hughes Stadium property 1 Relocate the city offices out to Hughes since they currently occupy prime real estate space and generate no taxable income. Instead rent that space to tax generating occupants PUBLIC COMMENTS RECEIVED NOVEMBER 6, 2019 THROUGH MARCH 10, 2020 HUGHES ONLINE FEEDBACK FORM COMMENTS: Aug. 28-Dec. 21, 2017 H u g h e s R e d e v e l o p m e n t O n l i n e F e e d b a c k P a g e 1 | 33 The below comments were received between August 28 and October 31, 2017, through the Hughes website online feedback form. More than 100 community members have used the online form to email their ideas, questions and concerns. All feedback received is cut and pasted below with all identifying information about the submitter removed. CSU will continue to update this document as more input is received via the online feedback form. 1. I would like to see any type of program/project that would benefit the Northern Colorado/CSU community. * Low-income housing for CSU staff and students (not like the upscale/overpriced housing options near campus) *Non-profit Fort Collins Rec outdoor adventure park with subsidies for Fort Collins residents (http://www.colorado.com/ziplining-aerial-parks/epic-sky-trek) * Convert the stadium to a large seating amphitheater for outdoor concerts * a really awesome outdoor space for residents. * a tree research area (in other words an area where CSU can plant a variety of species of trees to learn how different trees grow and adapt to Colorado weather and species) or gardens since the CSU gardens were relocated with the new stadium What I don't want to see *Investment opportunity for a corporation for high end housing (similar to the ponds) or high end student housing like those near campus * no green space or parks for residents *removal of disc golf course 2. What type of housing are they planning for the redevelopment of Hughes Stadium? I am a resident in this neighborhood and do not want to see low income housing in my neighborhood. Can you provide more details on the type of housing? 3. What is the best method for me to give specific feedback to Colorado State University, in particular Tony Frank, and to the Board of Governors? Will we be able to see the comments and information that you collect and forward to CSU and the Board of Governors? 4. My highest priority is natural features, trails, wildlife and open space. Please fully explore a sale to the City of Fort Collins Natural Areas Department so that it can be preserved as an open space. The department has a large conservation fund and can pay fair market value. I am a neighbor and the reason I chose this area is the access to the outdoors. Please don't pave paradise! 5. I live in Quail Hollow Neighborhood, very near Hughes Stadium. I don't recall seeing an invitation for the September listening session. Is there a way for me to attend? Thank you PUBLIC COMMENTS RECEIVED NOVEMBER 6, 2019 THROUGH MARCH 10, 2020 HUGHES ONLINE FEEDBACK FORM COMMENTS: Aug. 28-Dec. 21, 2017 H u g h e s R e d e v e l o p m e n t O n l i n e F e e d b a c k P a g e 2 | 33 6. Overcrowding the west side and the foothills is not good for the city or the natural areas near by the proposed site. If it has to be developed larger lots and buffers to minimize the amount of vehicle traffic is preferred. Since there is no shortage of buyers in Fort Collins making some arbitrary non-market based price should not be done. Cramming more apartments like the area just north of the site will increase traffic, noise and lights on the foothills ecosystem. The city just paid a large sum to buy the BACK half of the Horsetooth Rock area which is viewed by only a few daily so putting more housing next to the foothills effects all in the city and lessens the open areas. 7. This would be a great place to build an outdoor amphitheater to compete with Red Rocks and have CSU build a west campus since student population is growing. No other universities in America are selling their land for development. I would hate to see another boring development take this over and ruin this side of town. 8. Please keep it natural, no dense housing projects, please. A concert venue would be nice. Something tasteful. 9. We live on Coneflower Dr, in the Ponds subdivision. We have not received an email, or physical invitation to this Sept 20th Listening Session. Please send an invitation, as our neighborhood is adjacent to Hughes Stadium, and we wish to attend. 10. A concert venue or the drive in theater could move there. Please do not sell it to residential developers. There is too much housing construction on the west side of Fort Collins. The open space is critical to Fort Collins' culture and values. 11. I definitely feel that CSU should look at developing affordable housing for its employees. The cost of living is so high here, and it is becoming harder and harder for us to hire employees for jobs that pay below $24 hour. This is our chance to develop housing that can be used by our employees - Fort Collins is rapidly running out of room to build housing. I am a CSU employee, and feel very strongly about this. 12. Regarding the affordable housing option: The west and north-west portions of Fort Collins already have a very high concentration of lower income housing. Schools such as Bauder Elementary, Blevins Middle School, Lincoln Middle School etc are already at a 70% free and reduced lunch rate - a valid proxy for determining the percentage lower income families in an attendance area. While I understand the Universities need for developing lower income housing for staff, it is important to consider the impact to those schools and communities that are already struggling to provide the support and resources needed to assist those families in need. Affordable housing projects in Fort Collins need to more fairly dispersed into other school attendance areas (east and south-east Fort Collins) where funding and resources are more available. Bottom line - affordable housing is needed in the city but concentrating it all on the west side of Fort Collins will only hurt already struggling schools and the community. Feel free to call me any time. I haven't received an invite to PUBLIC COMMENTS RECEIVED NOVEMBER 6, 2019 THROUGH MARCH 10, 2020 HUGHES ONLINE FEEDBACK FORM COMMENTS: Aug. 28-Dec. 21, 2017 H u g h e s R e d e v e l o p m e n t O n l i n e F e e d b a c k P a g e 3 | 33 the September open house but would like to attend as I live less than 1 mile west of Hughes. Thank you for your consideration. 13. Good morning, Hughes Stadium (re-development) gatekeepers; Ever since Hughes Stadium was built, a key component of its 'sizzle' was the natural backdrop. If you read past articles about Hughes Stadium, time and again, it is described as being nestled in the foothills, splendor and beauty surrounding it, making it a 'special' place, not because of the stadium, but because of what it lay next to. Turning the now defunct Hughes Stadium into housing will be a lost opportunity for future generations. The noble sounding "build affordable housing' for the masses is a bunch of bull - you all know that. No matter what the price point is (and housing nestled against the foothills isn't going to be given away), or how many houses are built, housing availability will still be chronically short in Fort Collins. At current growth rates, Northern Colorado will be a blob of indistinguishable development from Cheyenne into Denver in less than 50 years. There is no vision in adding to that reality - and really, putting housing on this site shows no effort at making Fort Collins, and Colorado, a better place, a special place. Against the wisdom of the bean counters, the true visionary choice for Colorado State University is to protect this land for future generations. CSU is a Land Grant University - national land given to the State to teach citizens about agriculture. There is no better way to honor this legacy than to protect this land, taking advantage of the natural resource in place, and adding something that will be a true gift to the citizens of Colorado, something that will last forever. This is from Colorado State University's own website: "At Colorado State University, sustainability is foundational to who we are. As a land-grant university, we’re compelled to steward, conserve, and protect the world around us. It's central to everything we do - from academics, research, and operations to outreach. It's an ongoing mission that we embrace together." When there is money to be made, there are bad choices to be had. The singular opportunity to protect and preserve this space is the higher and greater use for the old Hughes Stadium footprint - it fits with the vision that Colorado State University itself says is important, helps to protect a unique Colorado ecosystem, and ensures that as growth and development continue unabated, the citizens of Fort Collins and Colorado have a legacy from Colorado State University that provides a respite, instead of chewing up this beautiful site with housing and development that will economically benefit only a handful of citizens. 14. I hope this land is not developed as affordable housing. When have few enough open spaces. I hope this can be maintained as open for the citizens to enjoy. Its location is optimal for this. We do not need more homes or apartments blocking one the views left. I think more residential units would be the worst possible uses of this land. PUBLIC COMMENTS RECEIVED NOVEMBER 6, 2019 THROUGH MARCH 10, 2020 HUGHES ONLINE FEEDBACK FORM COMMENTS: Aug. 28-Dec. 21, 2017 H u g h e s R e d e v e l o p m e n t O n l i n e F e e d b a c k P a g e 4 | 33 15. The land including Hughes Stadium should not be sold or leased for development. CSU has made a commitment to achieving 100% "renewable" sourcing of electricity and this land could be advantageously used to install a massive solar photovoltaic farm serving the CSU campus, thus showcasing a part of CSU's contribution towards mitigating climate change. Alternatively, this land could be used as part of a pumped hydroelectric energy storage project (using Horsetooth reservoir), but my preliminary estimations are that this may not be feasible. Thank you 16. Open space has the greatest long-term benefit to the people of Fort Collins and northern Colorado. While the idea of affordable workforce housing sounds appealing, I have no faith that that could ever be achieved. It's simply rhetoric. Once the land has been declared for sale, the highest bidder will eventually win. 17. I have commented to the City and city council that I think we should build a large recreation/bike park for our residents. Something akin to Valmont Park in Boulder. With the announcement that Hughes will have to be demolished and the rewriting of the City Plan, I think the ideal location for that park would be in the stadium's grave and the ideal time is now. The location already has existing bike trails (up Maxwell), a disc golf course, and is near enough town but not in the way of current development to be ideally useful and successful. We have wonderful bike paths and some great hiking/biking trails in town. What we are missing, however, is a quality bike park. Valmont Bike Park in Boulder is a great example and has been hugely successful. These efforts reduce crime, encourage healthy living, and increases the quality of life for residents. Boulder was able to re-draw their city Master Plan and open the park within just a couple of years, and I think Fort Collins could be even more successful using Boulder's signature project as a guide. PLEASE consider this option. It will have a large impact on the City, and draw more quality students and workers to the town and University. Thank you. 18. Northern Colorado lacks a large concert venue that is big enough to attract bigger, more well- known acts which bring a huge list of benefits. With minor retrofitting, part of the stadium could be converted to that kind of concert venue and amphitheater and still maintain a piece of Hughes as part of its legacy. Think Red Rocks, but right here in town, and similar to Red Rocks, it doesn't need to be limited to concerts. They host a variety of events, have day uses, and it adds a sense of place and community. Not all of the land in the area would be required for a concert venue either, and it could still allow those other pieces to be developed as the market sees fit. It would be a great add to our community, become a huge economic draw, and become a landmark that has historical and sentimental value. Fort Collins overall is slowly developing the arts and music scene. It would build upon that and add a place of entertainment and culture, as well as some geographical balance to Fort Collins by adding a destination to the west side. Having an anchor facility would bring Fort Collins to a new level that all residents could enjoy and appreciate. 19. Hello, I live in the area of Hughes Stadium but unfortunately I won't be able to make it to the Neighborhood Listening Session, so I would like to make sure my voice is heard on how to proceed PUBLIC COMMENTS RECEIVED NOVEMBER 6, 2019 THROUGH MARCH 10, 2020 HUGHES ONLINE FEEDBACK FORM COMMENTS: Aug. 28-Dec. 21, 2017 H u g h e s R e d e v e l o p m e n t O n l i n e F e e d b a c k P a g e 5 | 33 with this unique opportunity of development in west-central Fort Collins (of course FC must eventually annex the site in order to provide proper zoning, permitting, etc). I am glad that CSU is seeking ideas for this site, and I like what the web page says about community needs ("affordable housing, walkable neighborhood, community culture, sustainability"). Here is my vision for the site which I hope someone will listen to: a mixed-use, walkable/bikeable neighborhood - not just residential! - with a *grid* narrow streets (no dead-end cul-de-sacs!) that have bike lanes, easy transit to Fort Collins' main attractions of CSU and Old Town, buildings close to the sidewalks like they are in Old Town, pedestrian-scale infrastructure like lighting and bike racks rather than gigantic wide open parking lots, and almost everything a community would need within walking/biking distance including an elementary school, restaurants, houses of worship, and a local market. The site is approximately 2500 feet by 2500 feet, and it would take the average person only about 10 minutes to walk from one side to another which is nothing. Biking would be even faster! Add a transit station near the edge that connects to both the CSU transit station and the Downtown transit station. With the huge size of this location, if density is done properly, it could serve tens of thousands of people and allow Fort Collins to grow WISELY instead of sprawling out all the way towards Wellington. It could be an ideal location right up against the beautiful natural asset of the foothills and those trails/lakes/creeks, but also easy access to Campus West and CSU. Find a way to connect trails in the neighborhood to the Spring Creek Trail just south of the site, along with the Natural Areas just to the west. Avoid sprawling apartments where parking lots surround the buildings like Rams Pointe, instead have the buildings up against a street for a more urban feel. Aim for unique living like lofts above retail & restaurants for the multi-unit buildings that front the street. Red brick buildings of 3-5 stories can be beautiful and aren't too imposing, rather than the bland beige stucco of some parts of 70's era Campus West or the giant dorm towers on campus near Moby Arena. There should also be plenty of room for single family housing provided that it's done in a traditional manner with houses close to the street, with front porches, on narrow but deep lots (think of the Old Town neighborhoods). Houses on 0.20 of an acre is plenty to work with, and alleys provide multiple ways to traverse the neighborhood while also hiding cars. Additionally lofts should be available for purchase, not just rent, to encourage property ownership and longevity in the neighborhood. Work with Poudre School District to make sure neighboring elementary schools can handle the incoming load of new housing. Kids should be able to safely walk and bike to elementary school without fear of being struck by a car going 40mph! DO NOT widen roads. Overland Trail and Prospect so far west can stay 2-lane roads. Instead add *safe* bike lanes, build trails, and work with Transfort to make riding buses easy (routes that operate every 20 minutes is ideal, and if a coffee shop is nearby to wait in while the bus comes that is even better!) Avoid big-box retail of all kind, including grocery. Those have no charm and encourage driving. PUBLIC COMMENTS RECEIVED NOVEMBER 6, 2019 THROUGH MARCH 10, 2020 HUGHES ONLINE FEEDBACK FORM COMMENTS: Aug. 28-Dec. 21, 2017 H u g h e s R e d e v e l o p m e n t O n l i n e F e e d b a c k P a g e 6 | 33 Instead think of a small local market, similar to Beavers or the Fort Collins Food Co-op, that would meet most day-to-day needs of residents and would also make the big trips to King Soopers, Safeway, or Costco less frequent (this equals less cross-town traffic!) Do away with parking minimums for this development, but learn the lessons of The Summit and provide real transit options instead. Consider financial incentives for those who don't drive a car. Remember that it doesn't have to be all done at once. Building in phases, incrementally over time, is a workable approach. Developers likely won't agree to this because they want their money back quick, so you might have to sub-divide the site into smaller acreage and sell to different developers. Don't worry they will still come crawling because of how hot Fort Collins is! I hope that this provides a vision for a more sustainable, traditional, new-urbanist spot in west Fort Collins. I can't wait to ride my bike and come visit! 20. I am a FC resident and want to see something built here for the community! What I mean: since the stadium is so far west, it isn't practical to tear it down for a regional attraction since people from other cities would have to drive across town to get there, clogging the roads. Instead let us turn it into a Community Attraction, for the residents! How about a "New Town" (similar to Old Town) with all the charm and fun places that could go there. Loft studios, retail, bars and restaurants. Make it accessible with transit with bus stops that go to CSU, and trails, like to Spring Creek trail. Make it easy and safe to walk around this new development, not like the new Super Target at Harmony and Corbett, too many blazing cars! Make it something that Fort Collins residents will be proud of! Not chain restaurants and strip malls! Thank you for listening. 21. We live in the neighborhood that is invited to the listening session. However, we were out of town most of the summer and didn't get the invite in time. We would like to be invited to the invitation only listening session. Please let me know how to get on the list. 22. I would like to see the University strategically keep the property and expand the veterinary equine and food animal veterinary center. I am not in favor of selling the property to a developer, as it would impact the access and egress to the dam, centennial road and to the trails and wildlife. 23. I share concern about the fate of the Hughes stadium site, and hope that it can be preserved as open space or agricultural land. I am a member-owner of Poudre Valley Community Farms, (PVCF) which purchases land and leases it back to farmers for local food production. This model provides farmers access to land that might otherwise be lost to development at relatively low costs. I’d encourage you to explore this model – and the idea of converting Hughes stadium into farm land more generally. PUBLIC COMMENTS RECEIVED NOVEMBER 6, 2019 THROUGH MARCH 10, 2020 HUGHES ONLINE FEEDBACK FORM COMMENTS: Aug. 28-Dec. 21, 2017 H u g h e s R e d e v e l o p m e n t O n l i n e F e e d b a c k P a g e 7 | 33 Converting the Hughes stadium site to agricultural land for local food production would be enormously beneficial to the community, and would align much better with CSU’s mission as a land- grant university than would converting the site into a housing subdivision. I hope you will consider the former concept – as well as simply converting Hughes into open space – seriously. 24. I am a musician, business person, and teacher at PSD Laurel Elementary School of Arts & Technology. I would like to share this idea for a perfect use of the old Hughes Stadium site. Interested parties would include Pat Stryker/The Bohemian Foundation and all participants in the Fort Collins arts and education community. Please view this link to enjoy the Idaho Shakespeare Amphitheater. It is a flexible venue that fits perfectly into an outdoor, foothills locale. In addition to supporting our performing arts community, this is a perfect draw for residents and visitors to northern Colorado. http://idahoshakespeare.org/ 25. Hello! I am a Fort Collins resident for 2 decades and I found this web page from the Coloradoan article. First I want to say to the ICON Venue Group that we do not want a Texas or California style MEGA development here in our town. At least ICON is based in Denver so they should know that we Coloradoans like to BIKE and WALK and enjoy our beautiful state! Too much out of state developers not knowing our Colorado CULTURE building things that no one likes, like General Growth and that Foothills mall, what a mess, it's like they were making it up as they went along and didn't have a PLAN. And speaking of Colorado, this spot where Hughes was built is GORGEOUS and UNIQUE right up against the foothills. Whatever is built there should HONOR that BEAUTY as well as the CSU TRADITIONS like the big A on the mountains! If there's a neighborhood, I hope it's SMALL and the houses have front PORCHES so people can have COMMUNITY and chat with their neighbors. If there's restaurants, I hope they have PATIOS next to large SIDEWALKS so people can have COMMUNITY and have their DOGS with them outside. I hope there are PLAZAS and SQUARES so people can informally gather and LINGER and have COMMUNITY. Also, aside from neighborhoods and restaurant uses, don't forget the other uses that can help build COMMUNITY: Libraries Schools Churches, Synagogues, Mosques (YES even in this day and age there is LOVE!) Bus Stops (being inside our own cars having ROAD RAGE in traffic does not build community!) Coffee Shops Corner Stores (make it CLASSY like Fort Collins Food Co-op, NOT a 7-11 or Loaf-N-Jug!) Trails THANK YOU FOR LISTENING! Please make us PROUD to be FORT COLLINS! PUBLIC COMMENTS RECEIVED NOVEMBER 6, 2019 THROUGH MARCH 10, 2020 HUGHES ONLINE FEEDBACK FORM COMMENTS: Aug. 28-Dec. 21, 2017 H u g h e s R e d e v e l o p m e n t O n l i n e F e e d b a c k P a g e 8 | 33 26. I can't attend the listening session, but I have some concerns... It seems like ICON only has experience building arenas and stadiums based on their website... So why are they involved in deciding what goes here? Seems like a conflict of interest if you ask me!! Of course they'll want to build another stadium!! I live on the west side town in the Rossborough neighborhood and everyone here likes it nice and quiet... Except for game days at Hughes but those are over now. We would oppose any gigantic "attractions" on that side of town that bring crowds and noise and traffic. The drive-in is unique and not a problem, everyone loves it, but some new taxpayer-subsidized sports stadium like ICON builds all over the world?? No thanks!! 27. Hughes stadium and its surrounding property should include an easement along the foothills that could be donated to the City of Fort Collins. This natural area should be used as a park. This would go a long toward repairing CSU's and Dr. Franks reputation to residents of the city. 28. Due to the traffic concerns on the West side of town an additional housing development of up to 1000 single/multi-family dwellings seems inappropriate. It would be best if the University were to partner with Poudre R-1, The Fort Collins Soccer Club, Fort Collins Youth Baseball, etc. and the City of Fort Collins to develop sporting venues which could support these activities. 29. During the development process CSU should be held accountable for maintaining the property. The weeds, the bone yard of discarded materials from CSU, etc. are an eyesore and a haven for the transients in town. 30. Why should we think that anyone is going to listen to what the community says? It was the perfect location for a stadium, as past attendance has shown. The next best use would be a community park. High density residential use would make the poorly planned road system in the area a nightmare in early morning and evening hours, I get the feeling that these "listening sessions" will be one sided. Please prove me wrong. 31. Affordable, aka low income housing will negatively affect property values. I am opposed. Additionally, traditional "affordable housing" is provided as high density housing. More units per land measure equals more$$ for developer, right? This would add greater population utilizing the services and infrastructure, not to mention additional traffic, adding to the increased transit problems already associated with CSU. Let's put them in Tony's front yard. I support addition to Maxwell Natural area, CSU agricultural use or other LOW density usage. 32. Unfortunately, I am on travel for work this week and will not be able to attend the meeting. We live in the Ponds neighborhood off of Overland Trail and have been impacted by CSU game day traffic for 17 years up until this year. We learned to deal with it and planned as best we could to avoid driving on Overland Trail during games. Traffic has been increasing on Overland Trail over the years as it has in much of the city. It would be extremely nice for us if the new use for the Hughes stadium land be not something that would severely increase traffic on this already busier road. I was hoping the garden area that had to be PUBLIC COMMENTS RECEIVED NOVEMBER 6, 2019 THROUGH MARCH 10, 2020 HUGHES ONLINE FEEDBACK FORM COMMENTS: Aug. 28-Dec. 21, 2017 H u g h e s R e d e v e l o p m e n t O n l i n e F e e d b a c k P a g e 9 | 33 moved due to the construction of the new stadium could have been moved to Hughes. Then have the cross country teams run at this site through the gardens and CSU could have had another world class athletic facility. Maybe there are other options for CSU besides selling it for development. I realize that CSU needs to make money, but I recommend something that better fits the boundary here between dense urban development and the Foothills. 33. We prefer NOT to have anything like the mall, shopping square, etc. I know this may not work out economically, but would LOVE to have them as nature area, if you take the stadium down. Or, somehow use the stadium as it is (or do a bit of taking down so as not to be needing frequent maintenance) for, maybe, youth athlete training etc. 34. I think it is a shame to tear down such a beautiful facility. I think it should be USED! 35. Thank you for hosting the neighborhood listening session on September 20th. It was very informative and well organized. I agree with CSU's decision to have the property annexed into the City of Fort Collins. It makes sense to have the city control ultimate development of the site. I would like to see the plot developed for affordable and workforce housing primarily for CSU staff. I think the idea of having Habitat for Humanity use part of the lot in the same way they are doing Harmony & Taft Hill will significantly improve our community. Most of the lot should be for townhouses and smaller homes. WE DO NOT NEED ANY MORE 4,000 SQFT McMANSIONS eating up land and not contributing to our community. WE need to encourage transit routes into the section which should include the underserved areas east of Hughes Stadium. WE also need bikeways, like Spring Creek bikeway, to connect residents to the city without forcing them to use automobiles every time. 36. I was at the Listening Session last night (Sept. 20). I found it to be helpful and liked that my voice was being "heard". One question that I neglected to ask: Will the public have access to the list of developers that have submitted an RFP and RFQ? 37. Whatever goes in there, don't widen Overland Trail, because of induced traffic (it's a *provable* fact that adding more lanes to roads brings in more traffic - if you don't believe this, read about it!) Lots of cyclists including me ride along here, we need bigger bike lanes, but *not* more cars! Keep Overland Trail on a road diet please! So whatever goes in there, please don't make it something that will bring in more traffic and then the traffic study says "Oh we need to widen the roads" - *wrong*! 38. At least some of the property could be designated for "affordable housing' as defined by HUD and FHA standards because there is very little, if any, truly affordable housing for first time home PUBLIC COMMENTS RECEIVED NOVEMBER 6, 2019 THROUGH MARCH 10, 2020 HUGHES ONLINE FEEDBACK FORM COMMENTS: Aug. 28-Dec. 21, 2017 H u g h e s R e d e v e l o p m e n t O n l i n e F e e d b a c k P a g e 10 | 33 buyers in the lower middle income range of earnings, young families, and persons in the service and hospitality jobs so vital to the economy of Fort Collins. Developers and builders could be given the land which should shave $15-30,000 or more off the ultimate price of a home to the initial home buyer, and a deed restriction and/or covenant could run with the land keeping the home in the affordable "pool" for 20-30 years. Affordable housing is not "low-income" housing although some of that might be considered as well. It is not sub-standard housing. It is generally a bit smaller and with fewer frills but good quality starter housing. There should be some reasonable restrictions on profiteering on this land by developers and builders. Some of the "profit" or income from the land should go to the real estate department at the University for scholarships to study and come up with more, new, and creative ideas for providing affordable housing in Fort Collins to its hard working citizens who could not otherwise afford to buy a home in Fort Collins, Loveland, or this area generally. There should be some neighborhood commercial area which would be retained by the University Endowment so the net profit could benefit the worthy students who might need financial assistance and especially in those curricula which are needed and will benefit the society of the future...not to faculty or administrative salaries and benefits. 39. I strongly encourage the University to consider the long term impact this large space and the use of it will have on the Fort Collins community. Understandable why decisions have to be made on what to do with the land and of course money is a factor, but a broader look at the appeal of our hills/open space/trails to our town. People from all over the region come to these trails to hike, run, and bike. My concern is the long term affect if the spaced is subdivided and the inevitable increase of foot traffic. Living near to this space I am also concerned about overall traffic increase/patterns. I have seen one too many accidents in the last year with the increase in automobiles during busy times on Overland Trail. The general consensus of the community near to the old stadium is that the University is asking the community for input but the decision has been made - subdivide for lower income housing. Many feel that no matter what they say, their voice will not be heard. Please do the right thing and listen to the residents and take their ideas/input seriously and not just for "show". I haven't met a person yet that has said, "Yes, add new homes which will increase the traffic on the trails and roads". 40. Senior housing cottages, coexisting with affordable housing for CSU staff, in a park like setting. If the homes can go up the west foothill a quarter of the way it could be beautifully tiered and then down into the "valley"... The stadium hill road going up to Horsetooth needs to be at least 3 lanes, and overland trail needs to be 4 lanes. Overland trail and drake road needs to be A ROUND A BOUT...thank you for reading this!!! 41. The thing about Fort Collins that sets it apart from all other cities in the Front Range, and in our county, actually, is the abundance of open spaces. Repurposing Hughes Stadium into a recreation area/open space will benefit our city for generations to come. We've got to stop the sprawl of development against the foothills. 42. Hello, I am writing to provide feedback on the Hughes Stadium property, as we were unfortunately unable to attend the Neighborhood Listening Session that was held on the 20th. PUBLIC COMMENTS RECEIVED NOVEMBER 6, 2019 THROUGH MARCH 10, 2020 HUGHES ONLINE FEEDBACK FORM COMMENTS: Aug. 28-Dec. 21, 2017 H u g h e s R e d e v e l o p m e n t O n l i n e F e e d b a c k P a g e 11 | 33 As a home-owner/resident in the immediately surrounding area to the Hughes property (and as a small business owner here in Fort Collins), my hope is that the property will end up being used for some type of recreation; for example: a park, an open space with trails for walking/bike-riding, a place for athletes to train, etc. At the very least, whether the property is leased or sold, my hope is that whatever company takes over its use keeps that area's wide-open, picturesque scenery (being right up against the foothills) and will be mindful of the environment, as it already seems very wasteful to be tearing down the stadium (which, based on my understanding, will be part of the eventual plan), as opposed to re-purposing it as some type of outdoor athletic/training facility, for example. As Fort Collins is already becoming overly congested and housing developments (apartment buildings, etc.) are already being squeezed into what feels like every inch of space that we have left, having something that is open and natural would be wonderful in keeping Fort Collins a destination for people who want to get out and explore - really keeping with the community culture. As it is, I talk to more and more people over the years that think about leaving Fort Collins (including myself and my family) due to the increasing congestion, roadwork and construction...which is unfortunate. So I think something that keeps the sanctity of the natural area on that property would go a long way in terms of sustainability for the area. I'm not sure what ideas or proposals might already have been shared at the listening session, but thanks very much for your time and consideration. If you could please email me back at the email address indicated, so I know my comments were received, I would greatly appreciate it. Thank you! 43. I would love to see this transform into a natural area, park, or other place to be outside enjoying our beautiful community. 44. The Hughes Stadium property should be maintained as open space for the city of Fort Collins. Access to the foothills adds value to the community, and to the university - it’s already hard enough to compete with CU/Boulder for outdoor-oriented students. 45. No housing....change into natural area or fair venue. 46. Open space along with some affordable, sustainable housing (but not low-income housing). 47. Just make sure that some open space is preserved. Super high density housing there after many years of a large open area would be devastating. 48. Please, please, please NOT another housing development. A big park or natural area would be best for the community! 49. The easy solution is to force through housing that no one wants. That is what happened with the new on campus stadium. The city didn't want it, but CSU did so they said they would use private finding, which ended up being insufficient. So, they bonded it out to get their money. It feels like CSU is going to do the same thing here. People overwhelmingly do not want housing on this very PUBLIC COMMENTS RECEIVED NOVEMBER 6, 2019 THROUGH MARCH 10, 2020 HUGHES ONLINE FEEDBACK FORM COMMENTS: Aug. 28-Dec. 21, 2017 H u g h e s R e d e v e l o p m e n t O n l i n e F e e d b a c k P a g e 12 | 33 unique piece of land. Have it be natural space, a park, recreation center, or music venue. Nearly anything would be better than more housing on this side of town. Overland Trail already feels packed for a small road because the city comes to this side of town to get to the mountains, hike the "A Trail", mountain bike, etc. At the first community meeting, it was very clear and overwhelming that people do not want housing there. I hope an institute for higher learning will be more creative with this awesome piece of land than but more houses on it. One would only hope. 50. The area immediately surrounding Hughes Stadium - to the north, west, south and even east, has been a paradise for many residents for many years. I'm sure you have heard many stories, but I want to impress upon you that this space has afforded a rich history and spiritual wonderment to all that have wandered the trails. Personally, I have a connection that spans over thirty years. Selfishly, I want to protect those memories and experiences that have ultimately made me who I am (I am a CSU graduate, upstanding and contributing citizen), and I am just one of many thousands (no data to back up that number, just the folks I have seen their daily, year in and year out over decades, now). We have been borrowing freely, exploring and enjoying that which was never ours in the first place, without compensation, and I sincerely thank you for giving me (us) a wonderful place in FC to grow up in and experience life. We have no right to ask, demand, kibitz or negotiate any preservation of this space - I know this. If I had a magic wand or a winning lottery ticket - any means to buy and maintain this incredible part of Fort Collins and my life, I would do it within a heartbeat. You have a choice, and obviously you have a business and legacy to maintain. I respectfully ask that you consider some option that will preserve the beautiful space surrounding the old stadium - at least to the north and west. If housing is built there, the new residents will love and appreciate this space, too - for decades to come. Thank you for providing a forum for feedback. 51. Please preserve the nature of the property in some way. I realize that the almighty dollar is calling and CSU stands to make a tidy profit from selling the land. Putting in any kind of housing development, especially high-density will forever alter the neighborhoods that feed into this area. Where Hughes sits it really a destination area while Prospect and Drake are the only road in ... and out! In my opinion, high-density will be a disaster in planning. I can barely turn in or out of my neighborhood from Yorkshire onto Drake. Just since I've moved here the traffic has multiplied exponentially. Do we really want out of control growth and a re-make of one of the most scenic and photographed areas of FoCo...turning it into an urban jungle? 52. I would love to see it continue to be a space that can be shared with our community. An open space... Place for concerts... Natural area...etc. 53. Make it an open air park or outdoor music venue. Open some of the land up to student gardening. They can sell the food like a CSA. Use it for student hands-on learning. Please don't put housing there. The Mountains Edge property will be full of multi-family homes soon and will totally fill PUBLIC COMMENTS RECEIVED NOVEMBER 6, 2019 THROUGH MARCH 10, 2020 HUGHES ONLINE FEEDBACK FORM COMMENTS: Aug. 28-Dec. 21, 2017 H u g h e s R e d e v e l o p m e n t O n l i n e F e e d b a c k P a g e 13 | 33 Overland Trail with too much traffic. Don't make the west side of FC like the East side. Let's come up with low impact, outdoor learning solutions everyone can enjoy. 54. Will there be a genuine community input process? The "listening session" was what I would call "we're doing this because we have to" and not designed to have a discussion. The overwhelming majority of people want no development, but I think protecting a large part by keeping open space with low density development might be acceptable to many. People are talking on neighborhood forums about how CSU has already made up their mind and will sell to the highest bidder. I hope this is not the case. I'm hoping that LEED design concepts will be incorporated and that wildlife corridors will be maintained. Traffic studies and mitigation will be of utmost importance since the only collectors from Overland in that area are Drake and Prospect. Prospect is only three lanes (middle turn lane, so essentially two lanes) from Overland to Taft Hill. Traffic will be increasing a lot, especially with the housing development going in on the NE corner of Drake and Overland. I hope CSU does right by the community, even though they have shown they don't really care about community input since they agreed to "listening sessions", probably to avoid conflict. 55. I think the area needs to be developed to reflect the best of permaculture systems and values especially given we are supposed to be an agricultural school and have been an agricultural area that has been encroached upon by development that does not reflect consciousness about the fragile bio-system we live in that includes the air which has become painfully poor due to traffic and lack of development of a public transit system of consequence. I would therefore suggest an intentional community with gardens and housing and entertainment and shop services that demonstrates environmental acuity. Such a small example of this kind of system has been developed in Buena Vista and could be used to model this project. I can only hope you would consider this given the evidence of environmental decline that has occurred with the developments presently and has further created an imbalance in all socioeconomic strata. 56. Please no housing!!! The building that is going on in this town is sad. Any little piece of open space is being turned into something. Soon there will be none left. Please turn it into a natural area. 57. I currently live in The Ponds subdivision, close to Hughes Stadium. I plead to keep the property as a natural area/open space (maybe with an event center), and to NOT develop housing. This property has a long history with Fort Collins as a natural area and connector to other open space. Fort Collins is often on "best place to live" lists because of the mindfulness put behind our natural area planning and open space opportunities. There is value in keeping this property natural, and contributing to the quality of life of its CURRENT residents. Sacrificing the property to the highest housing develop goes against the characteristics and qualities of what makes Fort Collins great. 58. This property is one of the only remaining areas along the foothills in the City. It is a gem! Please don't add more housing here to an area that has much more potential. Selling this land that CSU acquired for nearly nothing to make a huge profit and going against what the community wants is NOT the answer. No one that lives in this area wants more house here. It will affect traffic, light and noise pollution and overall enjoyment of our natural areas and open spaces. Please try to be more conscious of what is best for our community. As it is now, Fort Collins citizens think CSU is only PUBLIC COMMENTS RECEIVED NOVEMBER 6, 2019 THROUGH MARCH 10, 2020 HUGHES ONLINE FEEDBACK FORM COMMENTS: Aug. 28-Dec. 21, 2017 H u g h e s R e d e v e l o p m e n t O n l i n e F e e d b a c k P a g e 14 | 33 thinking of themselves -- please prove us wrong. Everyone I talked to (including myself) that attended the community listening sessions believe that our voice doesn't matter, that CSU will do whatever is best for their pocketbook and that is their only motive. Prove us all wrong. Do the right thing. Be a hero, not a developer of open space. Don't ruin the beauty of our community and upset citizens with another greedy choice. Sell the land to the City for a fair price for natural areas or recreation. Don't pack a bunch of housing in this area. We don't want more housing in this area. Please, do something you can be proud of for generations to come!! 59. I am most concerned about the plan to handle the increase in traffic and people in this area. I am not a proponent for more congestion, foot and vehicle traffic and possibly more crime. I question the true motivation of CSU in this endeavor believing what they are most interested in is increasing revenue and influence for the university. Please consider continuing to keep the area a low key residential area. Fort Collins has plenty of growth in other parts of town and the city is not keeping up with infrastructure needs to support that growth. 60. This land was purchased with public funds, as CSU is a state school. The idea that it can now sell this land, for profit, to a developer and not pay taxes on the property is absurd. This land, which is bordered by City of Fort Collins Natural Areas, should be sold back to the city and remain public property. Adding housing in an area set aside for outdoor recreation would be a huge, irreversible mistake and one that will forever decrease the quality of life for all Fort Collins residents and visitors who now are able to peacefully access and enjoy the adjoining property. There are plenty of areas already under development that are in much more logical locations to build housing, and ones with more correct property tax status. If CSU were to lease the land, it would therefore have to provide all emergency and support services as the City and County are not receiving property taxes to fund such support. This land should be returned to the City of Fort Collins and the city should decide how best to use it. That's the only course of action that is reasonable. 61. Despite the neighborhood meetings and online feedback forms, I fear CSU has already made the decision to develop this land for some kind of density housing, commercial use and/ or lease it to the highest bidder for development, no matter what the impact on the environment, water, land and neighborhood community. I live in a nearby neighborhood to Hughes Stadium. PLEASE do not make the old stadium and land into more housing with a retail mini mall! Leave open space around Hughes and if the land must be used, then limit use and buildings for one of CSU's horticulture or green land management programs. Let's not add more density and stress to the land and water resources that we already have. We don't want Overland Trail to become a 4-lane highway for all the traffic! CSU is supposed to be the 'green university' so how about bringing those green concepts to this opportunity in an innovative way that benefits this particular environment, Horsetooth reservoir and Fort Collins? The idea of CSU developing some kind of housing for their low-paid employees is ridiculous as CSU should not be in the business of real estate development. 62. My first choice would be to keep it an open space. Keep Fort Collins unique and beautiful. Second choice, sell it back to the City for the cost of demolishing the old stadium. The city could work with the CSU Design program and students in landscape architecture to design a sustainable city-owned recreation center on the current stadium footprint. CSU could attract high quality PUBLIC COMMENTS RECEIVED NOVEMBER 6, 2019 THROUGH MARCH 10, 2020 HUGHES ONLINE FEEDBACK FORM COMMENTS: Aug. 28-Dec. 21, 2017 H u g h e s R e d e v e l o p m e n t O n l i n e F e e d b a c k P a g e 15 | 33 students to these and other programs by using this as a demo project and the City would benefit from a state of the art recreation and art center that serves the public and preserves surrounding open space. 63. This area should be kept as open space/ recreational. No houses, condos, or development of any kind other than hiking/ mountain bike trails. Please keep me informed as plans progress. 64. Please don’t put more low income housing here. Keep it as beautiful open space! 65. I am strongly against housing or music venues. I realize CSU wants to make money. I hope the university also considers he burden on city infrastructure that housing or music venues would create. Many homeowners have intentionally chosen this end of town for its lack of traffic and/or noise. Low income housing may cause property values in the area to drop. We need to consider open space management. We need to consider environmental concerns. I pray city officials will speak up and university officials will seriously listen. 66. The west side of Fort Collins suffers the worst air quality. Adding more housing will exacerbate this. Please do not develop as high density. This side of town can't support the traffic (even with more lanes on Overland). 67. I live on the west side of town close to the stadium. I think housing is the worst option for the city. Prospect Road is already an irritating road to drive on and adding a larger population to the west side would make it so much worse. I think the area should be for recreation, open space, park system, bike park, amphitheater. The land is located in an ideal spot for outdoor recreation. Please no housing! 68. Please do not turn this property into low-cost housing. It is a beautiful site and deserves better than cheaply built housing. The surrounding area already has enough shoddy construction. I would like to see it turned into a nature appreciation area. In keeping with the golf Frisbee course already there, maybe add a bicycle course, skate park, ropes course, etc. Make it an area the entire community can use and enjoy, not a rapidly deteriorating eyesore of shabby housing. Take into consideration how much it will cost to build the infrastructure necessary to support the addition of hundreds of people. Do NOT try to cram as many ugly, cheap apartment complexes as possible into this area. Yes, that would fit in perfectly with the housing that is already in the area but not at all fitting for the scenic setting. I especially would not like to see development such as that which has recently been built on Willox Lane (west of McDonalds). A prime example of ugly, cheap construction that was allowed to be built because the area was already ugly and economically depressed. Please do not destroy the beauty of the area that Hughes Stadium occupies. Use this area for recreational and educational purposes, please. 69. Please maintain open space for this property. We will never get it back if it is developed. We have new housing going in on the corner of Harmony and Taft Hill, housing going in on Horsetooth just East of Taft Hill. Traffic is getting worse by the day in this area and if this land is developed it will PUBLIC COMMENTS RECEIVED NOVEMBER 6, 2019 THROUGH MARCH 10, 2020 HUGHES ONLINE FEEDBACK FORM COMMENTS: Aug. 28-Dec. 21, 2017 H u g h e s R e d e v e l o p m e n t O n l i n e F e e d b a c k P a g e 16 | 33 become intolerable. I bet if the land were offered to the city, we could come up with a way to purchase it. 70. The property needs to be deed restricted to allow for reasonably priced, attainable housing only. 71. Open space is most important to me. My preference would be to keep the entire thing as a natural area, but that doesn't seem realistic from what I've read. Please, please work with City of Fort Collins Natural Areas Dept to conserve as much of the open space, trails, wildlife habitat and other natural values on this site. 72. Please, no housing. That beautiful foothills area is prime for a foothills park, open-space, watch beautiful sunsets, bike, stroll, walk, enjoy fresh clean air in a rural setting as our "choice city" was meant to be! Please don't ruin our "choice city" with more tall apartments, condos and air pollution infiltrating those beautiful foothills and Overland Trail access. Please don't let the "almighty dollar" rule and ruin your lives and ours forever. We could all enjoy a lovely, open-space park for a long, long time while we are on this earth! 73. I live in the area and would NOT like to see high density housing, nor low or affordable housing. The area already has a high level of low income housing and it is a major eyesore. The area is starting to look like "the projects" and additional low income housing will make the area worse. The area should be kept as open space or CSU botanical / green house facilities. If CSU is concerned about affordable housing for its employees, then CSU should pay its employees a better wage! 74. While I want affordable housing in Fort Collins, surely any for profit housing in place of Hughes Stadium will be on par with current rental / housing rates and therefore not affordable. I also live just off Mulberry and walk my two kids and two dogs east on Mulberry to City Park and do not want more traffic on Mulberry; if massive housing units were built West of us then surely there would be more traffic on Mulberry than already is. People speed on Mulberry, they run the red light on Bryan, they race to pass each other, none of these are helping keep our city safe and why I don't want more housing West of us. 75. I am totally opposed to housing being built at Hughes Stadium our city is being inundated with more large complex housing which impacts city streets and detracts from the charm of our city. Keep it open space!!!! 76. No more housing! Outside public pool, fitness center for families kids and/or concert venue! Absolutely no housing!! 77. I am not ok with a music venue! I live very near the corner of Drake and Overland. When they started the music for the marathon at 6:30 Saturday morning it worked me from my bed! The sound of the announcer from the football game was regularly audible in our house. I can't fathom how loud a concert venue would be, with the sound reflecting off of the hills into our neighborhood. Please, this is not red rocks, out alone in the hills. We do not want an open concert venue across the street from our neighborhood. PUBLIC COMMENTS RECEIVED NOVEMBER 6, 2019 THROUGH MARCH 10, 2020 HUGHES ONLINE FEEDBACK FORM COMMENTS: Aug. 28-Dec. 21, 2017 H u g h e s R e d e v e l o p m e n t O n l i n e F e e d b a c k P a g e 17 | 33 Those are my only two cents. Appreciate the opportunity to respond. 78. Please, please, please do not put in new housing on the stadium grounds. It will ruin the quality of life for both the people that live on the west side, as well as for the wild life that calls this area home. We have all moved to this side of town to get away from the busy side of FC, and adding a huge development would take so much of that away. It will increase traffic and possibly lower our home values, by taking away such a beautiful recreational area. We love going sledding there in the winters, playing Frisbee golf and hiking in the spring, summer and fall. Please, if anything, turn it into a music venue that will bring something positive to the area. A music venue is something that the city of Fort Collins is missing and just think of what it can bring to the city. I understand that this is business and that money is the bottom line. I guess I am just hoping that you care more about the people of Fort Collins, than you do the bottom line. Thank you for your time. 79. Housing and/or commercial development is the last thing this area needs! This part of the City is crowded and there is minimal open space and few recreational opportunities. Bike paths end on busily trafficked streets and biking is becoming increasingly dangerous. Housing development is rampant on the South side with new "communities" in FOCO, and developments in Loveland which eventually will merge into a densely populated megalopolis. One of the successes of FOCO that has drawn so many new residents, is the small town feel in a City that has so much to offer. As the population grows, and as the present population ages, more activities are needed for youth lest FOCO follow the example of so many other cities where youth have inadequate opportunities to keep them active and fall prey to drugs and alcohol, which is already a significant problem here. With increased traffic, seniors will have more difficulty getting around town to carry out their routine errands, and to enjoy the cultural events. The Old Town area, that has so much to offer, has become almost inaccessible if you are not in walking distance in the evenings and weekends. The stadium area would be a perfect location to serve both the existing and the future population with indoor and outdoor recreational activities, hands-on classes (e.g. pottery, stained glass, jewelry making, weaving), lectures, live theater, and other venues to draw people of varied ages. 80. My husband attended the first "listening" session, where it was made abundantly clear that no one associated with the redevelopment plan wants to hear concerns or opposition to what has obviously already been decided. The density of population in this area is already intense, the unique environmental area in question cannot be replaced ... yet build, build, build is all that is ever offered. It is well known that Overland Trail Road is not a good candidate for expansion due to its lovely route along the foothills. Adding congestion, pollution and too many people is a recipe for disaster. Decisions need to be made with regard to what is best for the environment and our future not the wallets of developers and CSU. 81. I am strongly opposed to the demolition of Hughes stadium with housing development. As it is, you cannot even cross Overland without an extended wait due to severe traffic. A new housing development will greatly exacerbate this problem and make west Fort Collins a gridlock just like central Fort Collins and downtown. I know that expressing my opinion will do nothing to stop this PUBLIC COMMENTS RECEIVED NOVEMBER 6, 2019 THROUGH MARCH 10, 2020 HUGHES ONLINE FEEDBACK FORM COMMENTS: Aug. 28-Dec. 21, 2017 H u g h e s R e d e v e l o p m e n t O n l i n e F e e d b a c k P a g e 18 | 33 process but feel obligated to state my strong opinions as a faculty member at CSU. I am so disappointed with this decision. 82. I am a neighbor in the Ponds and can see the stadium lights from my back porch and have listened to the games that were held at the stadium for close to a decade, (which is easy to hear from our house). I welcome the use of the stadium as a music venue or some other public event spot. I do not believe high density housing is a good use of the property and am strongly opposed to this type of development in particular. It would have a negative impact on the adjacent neighborhoods. We already have lots of high density and low income housing in the immediate vicinity. 83. No more houses, please! We do not need more traffic, more congestion, more noise, more people on this side of town! This property would best serve the public as an open-space/park. Please help Fort Collins retain its nice-place-to-live character by not succumbing to the short-sighted "more is better" ideology! What happened to the "quality of life" view that used to be on the forefront of city planners? 84. I agree with the idea of using the NE corner of the property for CSU employee housing, as it would expand the residential housing directly north (Sumac St). I am much more passionate about maintaining the remaining land as open space, natural habitat and keeping the CSU disc golf course. I would support a community garden on the site, perhaps near future housing. I am in favor of demo and removal of Hughes Stadium. I am very passionate about no other development on the entire site, including turning any of it into a park or adding additional landscaping. I would like to find out if the dirt parking lots could be re- planted with prairie grasses after removing the noxious weeds. The beauty of this area and a few other open spaces is not due to resources and amenities on the ground, but in the unobstructed views of the big sky. 85. I am a 2 time CSU graduate, long time Fort Collins resident, and Colorado native. I am currently a resident of the Quail Hollow neighborhood which sits at the intersection of Overland and Taft Hill Road, very near the stadium location. I am sorry I couldn't attend the listening session last night but I had a funeral to attend. I would like to very strongly advocate for selling the land so that it can be preserved as open space/recreational use. It is adjacent to the Pine Ridge Natural Area, at the base of popular mountain biking trails, and is used by the City's children as a sled hill all winter. We have so much rapid development going on within our community that the qualities that make it the recently named "4th happiest" city in the nation are going to be tested. One reason we are so happy is due to our amazing open space and recreational areas within biking distance of the city and our neighborhoods. I believe development of the property into residential or affordable housing would cause real disruption to this area due to increased traffic along Drake/Overland, negatively impact the few remaining wildlife corridors on the west edge of town, mar our views of this beautiful area, create PUBLIC COMMENTS RECEIVED NOVEMBER 6, 2019 THROUGH MARCH 10, 2020 HUGHES ONLINE FEEDBACK FORM COMMENTS: Aug. 28-Dec. 21, 2017 H u g h e s R e d e v e l o p m e n t O n l i n e F e e d b a c k P a g e 19 | 33 conflicts with long established recreational use, and necessitate expensive roadwork to accommodate increased congestion in the area. My vision for this property is one in which the land, if annexed by the city, is designated for a natural open space and recreational area to augment our quality of life and embrace our wildlife as well. My vision includes habitat hero gardens (pollinators), a sled hill for the kids, a conduit for mountain bikers and hikers, and the like. Please consider open space and recreation and prioritize it over residential or commercial development. It isn't the right space for that and this is one of our last crown jewels in the area for open space (certainly within city limits)! 86. Let’s keep Hughes Stadium as natural of an area as possible. Our beautiful state of Colorado is becoming so over run with overwhelming population I fear it will be ruined. Please keep a little piece of paradise around for our future generations to enjoy. 87. Please leave it as open space, we really need it. 88. The west side of town is already too congested and Overland Tr/ Prospect/Drake already have trouble handling existing traffic at times. In addition, the foothills open space helps make FoCo what it is. Please do not develop it further. CSU has already gone against public opinion by building the new on campus stadium. Please do not further disrespect FoCo by selling this land to a developer. 89. Please consider not developing this area with MORE housing. Fort Collins is really beginning to lose its charm with the incessant building in almost every corner of this city. The additional traffic on Overland, being one lane, and Prospect between Overland and Taft will be ridiculous if the projected housing comes to fruition. Let's think about Fort Collins and not about lining the pockets of developers. 90. There is a lot of great Open Space along Overland, and Hughes is such an icon of our community, especially with the A-Trail there. These types of spaces are quickly getting swallowed up by development and West Fort Collins is beginning to lose what makes it special - a place to access trails, view the Foothills, and appreciate that Fort Collins is so unique in that it sits at this "urban- rural interface." I understand the need for affordable housing, but I feel we should be building "up" closer to and more densely within the city. The development that is sprawling into our more rural areas across Fort Collins is so ugly, cookie cooker, and not the types of homes that are built to last years and conserve water and energy. I would love to see the Hughes stay a cultural icon in some way, celebrating a natural landscape that is becoming so uncommon. It would be great to see a skate park, bike park, playground, something that can engage youth and families, or be a place for music, events and festivals - the events/festivals downtown have become so standardized and everyone feels exactly like the one before. It was so nice having events like the Peach Festival when it was still at Hughes. PUBLIC COMMENTS RECEIVED NOVEMBER 6, 2019 THROUGH MARCH 10, 2020 HUGHES ONLINE FEEDBACK FORM COMMENTS: Aug. 28-Dec. 21, 2017 H u g h e s R e d e v e l o p m e n t O n l i n e F e e d b a c k P a g e 20 | 33 91. Would really like to see this unique property left as open space/foothills buffer. A concert venue at most. The push for "low-income housing for CSU employees" seems unrealistic and unworkable in fact - a mere talking point. (Plenty of low-income housing on this side of town already. What happened to the City's vision of mixed-density neighborhoods?) More housing would affect both the traffic on limited arterials and pollution in this area. Back in the 1980s, there was concern about further development west of Overland Trail negatively impacting air quality along the foothills. (What happened to that?) A recent study indeed showed Fort Collins' pollution is worse on the west side. 92. Let's do something big: http://money.cnn.com/2017/10/18/technology/future/google-toronto- sidewalk-labs/index.html?sr=fbCNN101817future0302PMStory. 93. Please take the traffic situation into consideration when deciding what to put in place of Hughes Stadium. The situation in town is already VERY difficult with very few good east-west avenues through the city. Adding additional housing would significantly impact the traffic situation. Spreading out the housing a bit more would help, but the proposed "affordable housing" would be sure to increase the traffic problem exponentially. Thank you for your consideration. 94. I am a resident of Westgate Townhomes (the neighborhood which shares a fence-line with the stadium on the north side). As a resident, I would like to offer my feedback regarding any redevelopment. I think the property should be used for open space. This area already has a very high concentration of rental properties, usually with more than one tenant, which has created quite a bit of traffic congestion during busy times and a lot of noise pollution. Also, the scenery and character of the area would be ruined if this area was developed for housing. 95. Is there a possibility that this could be used as a High School sports complex? 96. Hope CSU chooses to sell to a developer with low-cost housing in mind. Whatever CSU chooses to do, remember all of Fort Collins has to live with that choice. Thank you. 97. The Hughes Stadium property has been a fantastic resource for Fort Collins residents, even outside of games and special events. The disc golf and sledding hill are popular and trails behind the stadium are an important connection between the local open spaces. I would vastly prefer a continuation of a public space, be that open space or an auditorium. Our foothills public lands are a great draw for the city: an ugly dense development alongside the road to Horsetooth Reservoir would be a shame. The west side of town lacks the infrastructure investment and high tax base of the southeast part of town - how would the city cope with hundreds of new homes? We on the west side would like to keep things less crowded. 98. Let it return to grassland and utilize it as open space or natural area for all residents. I'd be happy if the disc golf course got an upgrade too. NO CONDOS!! PUBLIC COMMENTS RECEIVED NOVEMBER 6, 2019 THROUGH MARCH 10, 2020 HUGHES ONLINE FEEDBACK FORM COMMENTS: Aug. 28-Dec. 21, 2017 H u g h e s R e d e v e l o p m e n t O n l i n e F e e d b a c k P a g e 21 | 33 99. This property should NOT be used to build more housing or residential areas. Keeping this space open and natural is crucial to the environment of Fort Collins. We are known for being natural and agricultural and we need to keep it that way! 100. As a CSU Alumni 1990, 2000 and a thirty year Fort Collins Resident. The Hughes property should be donated to open space. Located next to Dixon reservoir and a key view shed entry into Horsetooth Reservoir the last thing the City of Fort Collins needs is more apartments right there. It's tragic that the decision to develop this has already been made any community engagement is a farce, developers clearly drive government and approval processes. Maintaining livability and desirability of current residents means nothing. 101. It would be great if CSU could convert the Hughes Stadium property into open space or a recreation area. With the neighboring natural areas, it would be beneficial to keep the space free of residential housing units. The traffic and light pollution would impact the surrounding natural areas in a negative way. With so many areas of Fort Collins filling up with houses, we have very few real open spaces for CSU students and city residents to enjoy. If given the opportunity, I think it is worth preserving this space and the surrounding natural areas. A second idea would be to convert it into a natural space that could be utilized by CSU classes, so that it has some functionality for the school. Some extension classrooms or laboratories could be built, that would preserve some open space while serving an academic purpose. This would not negatively impact the other natural areas as much as residential housing, and could provide a fun learning environment for students. 102. The space around Hughes Stadium should be developed and maintained as open space/recreational space. It is such an important space for those uses currently- both the Frisbee golf course and the space around the stadium. Coyote, deer, and other wildlife are also frequent users of these spaces and with the proposed impending development on the corner of Drake and Overland and ever-expanding development filling in space northwards on the west side of Overland, having these wildlife and recreation areas on the edge of town are important to support those animals and prevent them moving even further into town than they already do. Please take a long look at the current use and its enrichment of the current community and its importance ecologically during this process. IF the option does not exist for the land to be used as open space/recreational space it should be used for something innovational and beneficial to the community... some type of community garden with family programming...tiny house cohousing... something that isn't just more housing or businesses, and something that honors the importance of this space. 103. Bikes 104. You should build a BMX race park! 105. Want me a BMX bahk park pls and thanks. PUBLIC COMMENTS RECEIVED NOVEMBER 6, 2019 THROUGH MARCH 10, 2020 HUGHES ONLINE FEEDBACK FORM COMMENTS: Aug. 28-Dec. 21, 2017 H u g h e s R e d e v e l o p m e n t O n l i n e F e e d b a c k P a g e 22 | 33 106. I am a homeowner living on Overland Trail. I am concerned that the Hughes stadium land will turn into yet another large housing development. Please do not litter the west side of town with more crumby condos, automobiles, noise, pollution, and traffic. There needs to be a wildland-urban transition from the foothills to town. The space between the foothills and Overland Trail should be preserved for this purpose. Filling it with housing would be a desecration to the landscape and to the community. I would encourage the City of Fort Collins to act reverently and turn the Hughes space into public open space or natural area. 107. Please do NOT build housing on the Hughes land. This will destroy the open space around that area! This is a great collaborative opportunity for the City, County and CSU to work together to keep this land undeveloped. So many possibilities, including an area that students can use for environmental studies, etc. The idea of all of those homes on that land makes me sick. Keep this land as some kind of natural open space. 108. Preserve the existing parking as a renewable energy hub with wind/solar energy hookups provided by the city of Fort Collins for short/long-term lot rental and fee-based charging of electric vehicles, RVs and tiny homes in support of local tourism by providing an Overland Trail alternative to U.S. 287 through Fort Collins. The existing field could also be preserved and rented as a soccer field for both men and women at the collegiate/olympic/professional levels by installing metal bleachers after the concrete bleachers are removed. The existing waste removal infrastructure could be used to support waste removal for both the soccer field and renewable energy transportation hub. Women's soccer in particular is looking for non-artificial turf to play on and the high number of days of sunshine we experience makes Colorado an ideal location. The existing stadium is an ideal location for promoting local tourism with access to both the Poudre and Big Thompson canyons via Horsetooth Reservoir. The parking could also be used by alumni and family members of CSU students for short-term rentals and to provide long-term rentals and affordable housing for CSU employees, students and the homeless. 109. I would like to see this turned into some sort of active/sport outdoor recreation area, with a mix of things like the Frisbee golf course; running and biking circuits (like the Valmont Bike Park in Boulder); maybe a fitness park or open-use courts for yoga, tai chi, and other meet ups/classes; and most of all, fitness stairs that go up the hills (Like the Lyon Steps in San Francisco or the Baldwin Hills Overlook in L.A.). This all would act as both a popular tourist destination and a spot for locals to enjoy the outdoors. You could even zone in some commercial pads to allow cafes, outdoorsy shops, bike repair shops, food trucks, etc. to serve the type of people frequenting this area. Lyon Steps: https://urbanhikersf.blogspot.com/2013/05/wordless-wednesday-lyon-street- steps.html Baldwin Hills: https://modernhiker.com/hike/hiking-the-baldwin-hills-scenic-overlook/ Valmont Bike Park: https://bouldercolorado.gov/parks-rec/valmont-bike-park Outdoor fitness court: https://nationalfitnesscampaign.com/the-fitness-court1/ PUBLIC COMMENTS RECEIVED NOVEMBER 6, 2019 THROUGH MARCH 10, 2020 HUGHES ONLINE FEEDBACK FORM COMMENTS: Aug. 28-Dec. 21, 2017 H u g h e s R e d e v e l o p m e n t O n l i n e F e e d b a c k P a g e 23 | 33 110. I'm a homeowner who lives at XXX Ross Drive Unit XXX, which is directly across from Hughes Stadium. As a homeowner who has lived across from the stadium for four years, I am very interested in seeing the land be used for open space/recreation. I believe using the land for open space/recreation is the most consistent with its current context. Maxwell, directly to the west of the stadium, is used by walkers and hikers. The disc golf field is utilized by the community. And, the grounds of the stadium are home to hundreds of dog walkers like myself. My two beagles and I walk the area at least a few times each week. Further, dozens of families with children use the area for sledding in the winter. These are only a few examples, but they illustrate that the area is already being utilized recreationally on a daily basis by multiple different groups within our local community. Developing the area for commercial or residential use would be a loss for walkers and hikers, disc golfers, those with dogs, and families with children, among others. 111. Big mistake to build the new stadium. Hughes could have been renovated at a much lower cost, but that wasn't good enough for the bigwigs running CSU. 112. Ask CSU to annex land back to the city then let city turn the land into a beautiful golf course. 113. Of course this Stadium needs to be torn down and become open space to preserve for future generations! Look at the map, it is surrounded by natural areas, lakes, the reservoir, trails, the historic A on the hillside. Think of the legacy we will be leaving here. Do we as a community want to pass down a strip mall with a 20-year life, or open space and trails for people to enjoy for many decades to come? ICON may not like this idea because they are builders and they don't make money from this, but those who came before us had the foresight to save land as open space rather than sprawl and pave in every direction, and we are grateful, let us show our gratitude by doing the same. Fort Collins resident for 18 years! 114. Hello, I'm writing to provide feedback on the Hughes Stadium property, as I could not attend the Neighborhood Listening Session that was held on the 20th. As a home-owner/resident in the immediate surrounding area to the Hughes property (and as a multiple small business owner here in Fort Collins), my hope is that the property will end up being used for some type of recreation; such as a park, an open space with trails for walking/hiking or especially as a place for athletes to train such as an athletic park or even a cycling velodrome. At the very least, whether the property is leased or sold, I hope that whatever company takes over its use keeps that area's wide-open landscape and will be mindful of the environment, as it already seems very wasteful to be tearing down the stadium (which, based on my understanding, will be part of the eventual plan) as opposed to re-purposing it as some type of outdoor athletic/training facility, for example. As Fort Collins is already becoming drastically overly congested and housing developments PUBLIC COMMENTS RECEIVED NOVEMBER 6, 2019 THROUGH MARCH 10, 2020 HUGHES ONLINE FEEDBACK FORM COMMENTS: Aug. 28-Dec. 21, 2017 H u g h e s R e d e v e l o p m e n t O n l i n e F e e d b a c k P a g e 24 | 33 (apartment buildings, etc.) are being squeezed into what feels like every inch of space that we have left, having something that is open and natural would be great to keep Fort Collins a destination for people who want to get out and explore. I talk to more and more people over the years that think about leaving Fort Collins (including myself and my family) due to the increased congestion, constant roadwork and construction...which is unfortunate. So I think something that keeps the beauty of the natural area on that property would go a long way in terms of sustainability for the community. I'm not sure what ideas or proposals might already have been shared at the listening session, but thanks very much for your time and consideration. 115. I am a 46 year Fort Collins resident, CSU Alumni and a graduate of the College of Natural Resources and believe that if CSU is truly the “Green University” they should turn the site into open space. I intend to fight any other option. 116. I agree with the idea of using the NE corner of the property for CSU employee housing, as it would expand the residential housing directly north (Sumac St). I am much more passionate about maintaining the remaining land as open space, natural habitat and keeping the CSU disc golf course. I would support a community garden on the site, perhaps near future housing. I am in favor of demo and removal of Hughes Stadium. I am very passionate about no other development on the entire site, including turning any of it into a park or adding additional landscaping. I would like to find out if the dirt parking lots could be re-planted with prairie grasses after removing the noxious weeds. The beauty of this area and a few other open spaces is not due to resources and amenities on the ground, but in the unobstructed views of the big sky. 117. The VAST majority of the LOCAL COMMUNITY does NOT want the land to be developed into even more homes and/or condos. Part of the reason we bought our first home in this neighborhood is because it backs up into open space. Huge numbers of citizens currently use the area as a recreation area/open space not to mention it is a major gateway to Horsetooth. CSU is supposed to be pro green but they aren’t. If CSU sells this land to developers, I will officially be disgusted to be a graduate. I will never donate money to the school and my children will not attend. I know countless people in the area who feel the exact same way. CSU does not have the best interest of the citizens of Fort Collins in mind. They’ve turned into a greedy institution. They should think a little bit harder about the long term effects of this decision and not just the financial gains. Hopefully the decision hasn’t already been made and you aren’t just taking input from actual citizens as a formality. I will say that most people sadly think this to be the case. All eyes are on you, CSU. Don’t blow it. 118. Please no retail or homes. The traffic is already going to be increased with the new homes going in on Drake and Overland. I really wish someone from CSU lived over in our quiet neck of the woods and realized how awful it will be to add thousands of more cars to this area. There really is no respect from CSU regarding the quality of life in this town. Listen to the neighbors that will have to live next to this development. I would suggest keeping it an open space or a concert venue. The temporary use as a concert venue would be far less hideous than housing. It wouldn't be a concert PUBLIC COMMENTS RECEIVED NOVEMBER 6, 2019 THROUGH MARCH 10, 2020 HUGHES ONLINE FEEDBACK FORM COMMENTS: Aug. 28-Dec. 21, 2017 H u g h e s R e d e v e l o p m e n t O n l i n e F e e d b a c k P a g e 25 | 33 venue nightly so dealing with extra cars would be the occasional thing instead of daily (like a development). 119. I'm a professor emeritus at CSU. We live very near to the Hughes Stadium area. Very broadly, my recommendation is to create most of the area around Hughes into a friendly and usable open space. There might well be some spaces for small but needed housing projects. But fundamentally, I urge that the area become a public park. A generous park for future residents of Larimer Country would be precious and broadly appreciated. To me, a smaller public Children's Park might also be considered. Altogether, instead of aiming at strictly practical goals to please us now, we should think of a gift for the next generations to our remarkable community. 120. PLEASE - NO housing at the Hughes property!!! I am a local resident of the area and the consensus is that we DON'T want more housing, more traffic and more property development! The traffic has greatly increased on Overland Trail road, as well as W Mulberry and W Drake that connect to Overland. Many are concerned about additional pressure on the land, water resources and air quality. So, CSU - NO housing, please! 121. I am aware that FoCo needs more low-income / affordable housing, and hope that will be included in the re-development. The Drake & Overland Trail intersection is already very busy and dangerous. It will need to be improved when the Hughes stadium property is redeveloped. What is the plan for this? Will traffic lights be installed? Also, I am concerned about traffic on Drake and Overland Trail. Will additional bus lines be provided to reduce traffic? I believe they are needed. Will there be any efforts to mitigate the traffic noise from Drake and Overland? 122. I have read the feedback thus far and requesting the property be kept as open space is overwhelming. I hope CSU is listening this time. 123. Why doesn’t the university designate the land for preservation of natural grasses and wildlife? That would go a long way to make peace with the town and might make it easier to work with them later on! 124. I'd love to see the area become a natural area. There is already too much new development in front of Horsetooth, so it'd be nice to have some natural space preserved there. 125. The Hughes stadium property is very special in that it is next to existing open space, and a tremendous opportunity to expand our outdoor recreation opportunities. As FTC grows, the existing trails are becoming overcrowded. Selling this land to a developer is the wrong long-term decision. Please make it into open space. 126. The overall property could showcase two of the most compelling and historic areas of study at CSU: Sustainability & Agriculture. The entire property can become a mix of housing surrounding a central gathering place located where the existing field is today. This central gathering place can be a mixed-use space, activated as a pedestrian village lane, greenspace, and/or farmer's market facility. The existing stands on both sides can be re-purposed into LIHTC affordable apartments as PUBLIC COMMENTS RECEIVED NOVEMBER 6, 2019 THROUGH MARCH 10, 2020 HUGHES ONLINE FEEDBACK FORM COMMENTS: Aug. 28-Dec. 21, 2017 H u g h e s R e d e v e l o p m e n t O n l i n e F e e d b a c k P a g e 26 | 33 well as market-rate condos that incorporate the unique concrete support arches on the west side. There are several examples of this adaptive reuse in Europe, using old soccer stadiums. Surrounding the village that was formerly the stadium, community gardens as well as CSU experimental gardens could exist side-by-side, sharing infrastructure. Additionally, value-added agriculture ventures could be incubated, such as a hop farm, commercial kitchen incubation, finished retail products, etc. Finally, a mix of housing types is essential (including tiny home village), and LMN zoning would seem to be appropriate here. Ultimately, the former Hughes Stadium property could become an agricultural village, designed and developed with advanced sustainability techniques. 127. Hi - I live within a mile of Hughes, and would love to see it preserved as open space. If not, please please please be sure that the light pollution from whatever is developed does not shut down the Drive-In Theater. The owners have said before that if Hughes is developed, that the lights would be the end of the theater. Let's keep this piece of history alive and plan any development as dark-sky approved. 128. Please keep it as open space or turn it into an amphitheater to preserve the Colorado beauty and heritage. Thank you! 129. The open space backing up to foothills is unique and of high value to the entire Fort Collins community... some combination of gardens and open space for mountain biking, hiking, dog park, etc. 130. Please preserve the area as an outdoor recreational multipurpose area. We moved here 10 years ago and were impressed by the open fields throughout the town, the great parks and the ease of driving in Fort Collins. I was so inspired by what I thought was one of the most stunning settings for a stadium. Now every vacant lot is either filled in or has a yellow sign to redevelop. The growth here is exponential as is the traffic. The town is getting over run with cheap LEGO block apartments and housing developments at the expense of green areas. There is very little to be excited about here. The town is getting uglier by the day. In addition, the city is already one of the most polluted cities in the country and west Fort Collins has the worst air quality in the city limits. The brown cloud and the diesel smell is getting worse, let’s not add even more cars and houses. There are so many great recreational ideas for this area. I would like to see the city put in a cross country track in the winter. I ski at my local park and would love to have a groomed path. We could use more winter sports here. Please don’t pave over this gem of an area. Thank you. Please keep this gem of an area natural. 131. A considerable sized music venue would be a great fit. It would also help bring revenue to the city since anytime a major act is in the state we have to travel to Denver area. There is no decent venue in northern Colorado or within the Wyoming area. The location also has enough space to support parking for a large venue as well. PUBLIC COMMENTS RECEIVED NOVEMBER 6, 2019 THROUGH MARCH 10, 2020 HUGHES ONLINE FEEDBACK FORM COMMENTS: Aug. 28-Dec. 21, 2017 H u g h e s R e d e v e l o p m e n t O n l i n e F e e d b a c k P a g e 27 | 33 132. I feel the powers that be should be thinking outside the box. The suggestions people have provided so far are typical. Housing in Fort Collins is not and never will be affordable for most people. Open space. We have enough. Fort Collins certainly needs much more than it has to make it an appealing place to live, in reality, rather than in hype. In any case, my idea for that space is a bit unusual and maybe not practical, but would hopefully appeal to many people. I suggest that the space be turned primarily into a bicycle velodrome. This might appeal to Olympic hopefuls. Also, I imagine there would be space enough for an outdoor roller skating venue (ice skating is too common) and also a skateboard park. Maybe you could throw in a full size running track. There is a sad lack of activities here for young people and a skateboard park might be something kids would really use plus give them physical activity. 133. I’d love to see a music venue replace Hughes stadium ... it’s a perfect location. 134. I am a long time resident with a family in Fort Collins. I believe Hughes stadium should remain as recreational/event type facility. The open space on all sides of the stadium are an integral and priceless commodity for the City of Fort Collins. The trails have become a major recreational area for the town and is getting more traffic each year. I am afraid if this property is developed into housing that the trail system will be overcrowded and will lose its appeal to many people. Not to mention the traffic on Overland. I believe the city should purchase this property for a once in a lifetime chance and provide a park/open space connecting a continuous area of open space to the north and south. If it is developed into housing, then they should be mandated to upgrade and enhance the entire trail system to allow mountain biking and hiking on separate trails since it will surely become overcrowded. This is the gateway to the foothills of the Rocky Mountains, please don't develop it into housing and ruin this area of town? Go east or north for more housing, there is plenty of open space. By the way, there is a dam just above the property, do we want houses below it? I hope profit hungry developers don't get their way with this property, if so, this will be a big hit to the City of Fort Collins way of life. Thank you. 135. I think this is the perfect opportunity to move the basketball games offsite; Moby should be moved to the Hughes site. Think of how much better access there will be, and far fewer parking issues. This would be a great opportunity to showcase our foothills to returning Alumni. There is no good reason to keep Moby on campus; it should be torn down in favor of a parking garage for the football games. 136. I very much liked (and copied) this entry in the Coloradoan on 11/30/17. Thanks for asking! A mixed-use, walkable/bikeable neighborhood, not just residential, with a grid of narrow streets (with) bike lanes, easy transit to ... main attractions of CSU and Old Town, buildings close to the sidewalks like they are in Old Town, pedestrian-scale infrastructure like lighting and bike racks rather than gigantic wide open parking lots, and almost everything a community would need within walking/biking distance, including an elementary school, restaurants, houses of worship and a local market. With the huge size of this location, if density is done properly, it could serve tens of PUBLIC COMMENTS RECEIVED NOVEMBER 6, 2019 THROUGH MARCH 10, 2020 HUGHES ONLINE FEEDBACK FORM COMMENTS: Aug. 28-Dec. 21, 2017 H u g h e s R e d e v e l o p m e n t O n l i n e F e e d b a c k P a g e 28 | 33 thousands of people and allow Fort Collins to grow wisely instead of sprawling all the way toward Wellington. 137. I would love to see this area developed into an amphitheater as a venue for music and other entertainment. It is in a beautiful location nestled against the foothills. The music scene in Fort Collins has always been big. Being a college town with a diverse population, it is a natural fit. I think it would also be a great venue for events like New West Fest, the 4th of July Fireworks show, Craft Shows for local artisans during the warm months. Possibly a Colorado Winter Wonderland 2-3 day event with local shops having booths selling Xmas gifts and showing off what their shops sell in their Old Town stores and restaurants. Maybe even have a skating rink for the event. Very quaint, very Colorado. Stuff like this makes people feel good, puts a smile on your face. So, it could be used as a multi-use venue with lots of local events mixed in with some small - medium sized concerts featuring nationally known artists. I am envisioning a multi-use amphitheater venue that offers a variety of music concerts with special local events throughout the year. There will ALWAYS be a need for more affordable housing. Please, let's use this this area for something special. 138. Starting as a freshman at CSU 23 years ago, I have enjoyed the open space around Hughes Stadium for walks, sports and a quiet place to read a book. Now as a resident of Quail Hollow, just across Drake, I would be heartbroken to lose that open space. Please help protect our wildlife, dark night sky, quiet atmosphere, and decent traffic flow by keeping the old Hughes an open area. I am in favor of selling to our Department of Natural Resources and other proposals that keep the area as natural and wild as possible. 139. Many residents in this area's highest priority is natural features, trails, wildlife, and open space. Please fully explore a sale to the City of Fort Collins Natural Areas Department so that it can be preserved as open space. The department has a large conservation fund and can pay fair market value. I am a neighbor, and the reason I chose this area is the access to the outdoors. Please don't pave paradise! This area, on the East side of Overland is already low-income, high density housing. Fort Collins doesn't need more housing, it needs open space preserved for future and current generations. 140. If Hughes will not be used for a music venue, as the plan is already to demolish it no matter the cost, then please let the land be incorporated into Maxwell Natural Area to provide more space for wildlife, natural resources, hiking trails, and the beauty of what most of us moved to this area for. As the City of Fort Collins continues to sprawl and become overly developed, the last thing we need is more housing to cram an overabundance of people in our idyllic town. Please think about the impacts on the natural environment here before adding more concrete and asphalt to our already warming globe. 141. Please preserve the open space and nature that is present today. Housing, commercial development, and traffic will not preserve what is disappearing in our landscape. Taking down the stadium will allow for continued use of the area for low impact recreation in a natural park setting. The area is a part of the foothills which continues to be encroached upon. Preserving this landscape will allow individuals and families to enjoy the reason why we will allow choose Colorado to be our PUBLIC COMMENTS RECEIVED NOVEMBER 6, 2019 THROUGH MARCH 10, 2020 HUGHES ONLINE FEEDBACK FORM COMMENTS: Aug. 28-Dec. 21, 2017 H u g h e s R e d e v e l o p m e n t O n l i n e F e e d b a c k P a g e 29 | 33 home. Please consider what our future holds. We can travel to Denver to see developed landscapes. Let us keep something natural and beautiful. 142. Not housing. Not housing. Not housing. Not housing. Not housing. How is it that the stadium location is too far from campus to host football games 6 times a year, but ideal for housing? Tear it down and put in a park and open space. As it has been used by west side residents for 299 days a year. 143. I applaud CSU and the City opening an idea forum for citizens. Wish they would have done same for the on campus stadium. That blemish and personal failings by CSU to do the right thing put a damper on our home team spirits. Since 1978, we have enjoyed going to games at Hughes Stadium. More than the lure of watching the home team was the experience of that great scenic location and the chance to connect with friends at the tailgating area. I doubt very much that we will ever go to the new stadium. I appreciated the suggestions by the people who live close to that area and many wanted to retain the natural beauty as augmented by trails and maybe a pond or park, or nature center, bike trails so it feeds into the pride of Fort Collins, which is its parks and trail system. I also think the idea of some quadrant allocated to employee housing or low income housing would be a nice marriage of creating a place for low income people that anyone would be proud to enjoy. I know of a small group in Fort Collins wanting to design a community for an underserved market. I love Fort Collins and as a long time strategic thinker for HP and for other large organizations, I see opportunities for Fort Collins to create examples that other states follow. Stuff like closing the gap between industry and education, diversity appreciation, strengthening business and market ecosystems are just a few examples of the scope of my involvements. I'd love to see the land around Hughes Stadium used to increase the value of living here by allocating a large portion to something natural. 144. My family and I have lived our entire life in Fort Collins and we love this city. We are supportive of CSU as a key component of the Fort Collins community. The city needs to manage growth and part of that is the continuing encroachment into our foothills. We would prefer to see the area become open space to also support our wildlife. Please consider our environment by using the land for open space. Thank you. 145. I live in the Ponds Neighborhood and I moved there because of the easy access to the sledding hills at Hughes Stadium and the bike paths and running paths. I am hopeful that whatever plans will keep some of that resource for the community. I know my sons will love the Frisbee golf as they grow older. I wanted to make a suggestion of gardens and perhaps a hops field for your brewery classes and degree. I read in a magazine a few weeks ago about a small college in Texas that turned their football field into a vegetable and spices garden. https://www.pbs.org/newshour/show/one- college-turns-football-field-farm-sees-students-transform The school now makes most of the vegetables that the school uses for its student meal plan (which PUBLIC COMMENTS RECEIVED NOVEMBER 6, 2019 THROUGH MARCH 10, 2020 HUGHES ONLINE FEEDBACK FORM COMMENTS: Aug. 28-Dec. 21, 2017 H u g h e s R e d e v e l o p m e n t O n l i n e F e e d b a c k P a g e 30 | 33 saved on costs to the school) as well as allow the students to sell the left over vegetables at a farmers market. The students loved it because it was a peaceful place to connect with the earth and the out of state recruitment went through the roof as students really identified with that type of atmosphere. You also have significant land and you might be able to grow your own hops or grain for the beer classes and you might also start to be a leader in developing new hops in this field. I think that would fit in with the Fort Collins community and you might even be able to get sponsorship from the local breweries to assist in this process and in keeping up with the land. It would be another good partnership that you have with the community and the business community. 146. I think it would be great to keep a portion of the stadium as a music venue. This would create a unique venue and would also preserve part of the history of the site (being a stadium). Being a unique venue with a scenic view, this would be a draw for people to come watch a show. People would also be able to recall their times spent at the stadium. Additionally, parkland surrounding the stadium could act as a sound buffer and provide recreational opportunities. 147. Public bike park similar to Valmont bike park in Boulder. Funding could be raised publicly through donations/grants and maintained through city employee structure and volunteers. In addition to bike trails and obstacles, a playground and skate park could also be integrated to appeal to more recreationalists. There is plenty of space and enough interest from the Fort Collins bike community to make this a reality. The worst thing would be a high density housing development. Look at what Boulder had been able to accomplish with Valmont...while keeping it public. 148. Instead of selling the land to a developer at a discount for affordable housing, why not sell it at fair market value to the city and keep it as a natural area or open space? Use the additional money from the sale to raise the pay of your employees. $10 per hour is pathetic in this day and age. My college work study job paid more than that 20 years ago. CSU should be ashamed if their pay is that low. 149. I do not agree with the idea of building housing on the Hughes Stadium property. I don't think that Overland Trail can handle the traffic increase that would happen as a result. At best, I think the space could be reserved as a natural area. I know that the city can afford to purchase and maintain the space. Most people I know who live on the west side of town enjoy hiking the trail behind the stadium that is part of the Maxwell Natural Area. If the stadium must be demolished, perhaps it could be replaced with a live music/events venue. Fort Collins is in need of a larger venue that would attract more diverse acts than theaters such as the Aggie and Lincoln Center. As the population continues to increase, acts that attract larger audiences will be interested in making a stop in Fort Collins. So I believe the ideal use of this land would be a mixed use live music/events venue surrounded by a natural area complete with a disc golf course, gardens, a play area, a dog park (which is greatly needed in this area) and scenic paths winding throughout. The paths could be open to pedestrian and bicycle traffic. The gardens could include community vegetable gardens as well as a home for PUBLIC COMMENTS RECEIVED NOVEMBER 6, 2019 THROUGH MARCH 10, 2020 HUGHES ONLINE FEEDBACK FORM COMMENTS: Aug. 28-Dec. 21, 2017 H u g h e s R e d e v e l o p m e n t O n l i n e F e e d b a c k P a g e 31 | 33 native flowers and plants such as are in other parks in town. Some of the space could be left open for public use such as exists in City Park. Of course in the summer it could be utilized as an outdoor event space. Having a music venue on the property could help fund the Parks department if operated by the city. As someone who lives near Hughes Stadium I have seen the deer, coyotes and other wildlife who frequent the area. I shudder to think that they would never be seen in this area again if it became built up like the east side of town. Please respect all of what makes Fort Collins great: the nature, the wildlife and most of all its residents. Keep Fort Collins the unique place that it is by refraining from building housing and paving over one of its most scenic and enjoyable pieces of property. 150. I have lived by the stadium for 16 years and would like to see a plan that is best for our property values and traffic situation. 151. Open space, no homes at all. And please no homes or housing. Make it like Spring Creek. 152. Open space, bike and walking paths like Spring Creek Park down the road. A large fishing pond, playgrounds, mountain bike paths, outdoor concert venue, Frisbee golf course, 9 hole chipping and putting golf course. No more homes or student housing please. 153. In favor of expanding CSU equine program or a large community garden, maybe a bike trail as well. NO HOUSING WHATSOEVER. 154. Please do not consider high density housing! Natural areas, horse trails, biking, hiking should be explored! We do not need more high density housing. Consider mixed use natural areas and park areas to be used by the public. 155. I believe that CSU should follow the example of Indiana University and use the site of the stadium for an arboretum. Of course the site of their former stadium was on campus. 156. First, thanks for soliciting feedback on this process, and making it easy to do so online. I live about a half a mile from the entrance to Hughes Stadium. This area is a gorgeous natural space; as other have mentioned, that's what made Hughes Stadium such a wonderful venue. It's a unique, often-photographed part of the FoCo foothills that make FoCo (and CSU) a wonderful place. With that I mind, I ask that you prioritize protecting the natural character, and unique ecosystem, of this area. The sale to the City of Fort Collins as a natural space would be the best option. I think a park emphasizing trails could mesh nicely with the area as well. 157. The land Hughes is a special place, a scarce resource in this town. It's still mostly open, and right by the foothills and other wonderful open spaces. It's one of the little things that makes Fort Collins, the city that CSU calls home, a great place to live. The trails, meadows, and running access have given the public a place to recreate and enjoy nature. PUBLIC COMMENTS RECEIVED NOVEMBER 6, 2019 THROUGH MARCH 10, 2020 HUGHES ONLINE FEEDBACK FORM COMMENTS: Aug. 28-Dec. 21, 2017 H u g h e s R e d e v e l o p m e n t O n l i n e F e e d b a c k P a g e 32 | 33 Keeping this property open to the community in some fashion- an amphitheater, an open space, a garden, so on and so forth- keeps this special spot in town part of the vibrant community that makes CSU a great place to study. Developing new housing that shuts out the public & nature, reverses that. I'm not opposed to housing development. But there are many other places to build housing around town, on land that is not quite so special. Please consider how this property can be kept a part of the community, rather than a development of ritzy housing that cordons off ever more of the foothills for the enjoyment of a few. 158. I know CSU does not want the property, but for years they held there cross country meets there. I think it should stays as it is, minus Hughes Stadium, for cross country meets for CSU and for the local high schools. CU in Boulder has a nice piece of open undeveloped land that they use for cross country meets. 159. My suggestion for the property is to do an exchange with the Gardens on Spring Creek for their property. Build your housing at the Gardens property as that area is already tuned in for additional traffic with the new stadium. Set up the Gardens at Hughes location with more room for the Gardens and build an amphitheater as part of the Gardens there. The Gardens has been fighting to put a music venue in anyway. 160. In considering options for the Hughes Stadium property, my priorities are: 1. Open space. Close-in open space and wildlife habitat is critical to a quality community. Ideally the entire site would be set aside in perpetuity, administered by City of Fort Collins Natural Areas or Larimer County Open Lands program, with restoration efforts to jumpstart natural processes on disturbed portions of the property. If not the whole acreage, let's set aside the bulk of the property and consider the following priority on a small portion . . . 2. Cluster development. If some sort of housing and/or commercial development is deemed part of the property's future, smart design must allow it to be clustered on a small portion of the property, ideally adjacent to existing development and roads, so that priority 1 above can also be accomplished. Clustering can reduce infrastructure costs, making development more affordable. I'll hold up my own neighborhood as an example of what's possible. Greyrock Commons, in NW Fort Collins, is a 16-acre site. Zoning would allow 30 houses to be built on 1/2-acre lots, fragmenting the entire site. However we chose to cluster the 30 houses on about 4 acres so that 75% of the property could be preserved as open space. Over 20+ years, we have worked to restore native vegetation and have seen extremely positive results in terms of diverse habitat and wildlife. The approach we took benefits residents, neighbors and the environment. 161. Open space, open space, open space! Once we develop that land and that view we will never get it back. But why are you asking for our feedback? Tom Milligan, VP of External Affairs was already quoted as saying that the space would definitely be "monetized", which means that leaving the land open and natural really isn't an option to CSU because it doesn't generate income. His PUBLIC COMMENTS RECEIVED NOVEMBER 6, 2019 THROUGH MARCH 10, 2020 HUGHES ONLINE FEEDBACK FORM COMMENTS: Aug. 28-Dec. 21, 2017 H u g h e s R e d e v e l o p m e n t O n l i n e F e e d b a c k P a g e 33 | 33 quote in last Thursday's Coloradoan ("We are going above and beyond what is traditionally done in terms of gathering input.") indicates to me that they are more interested in saying 'See, we went out of our way to ask for input.' than 'We will take your input seriously. 162. I am a 24-year resident of west Fort Collins not far from Hughes Stadium. For 22 1/2 of those years I was also employed as a Research Associate at CSU. As for the fate of the stadium property, I think the last thing most residents want to see is more development. Keeping most of the property as open space and/or park land would provide the greatest benefit to the citizens of Fort Collins. However, I am acutely aware of the high cost of housing in this region and the difficulty many CSU employees have affording a place to live. Therefore, perhaps 25% or so of the property could be developed as affordable housing for the CSU workforce. I sincerely hope the University will take the community's input to heart, rather than completely ignoring it as they did when the decision to build the new stadium was made. 163. Do not build housing! Build housing out east or north of Wellington. Our traffic situation is a huge problem already. Either leave it open space or a multiuse recreation park. Field space for athletics is hard to find and at a premium. So an athletic park w multiple fields for soccer, lacrosse, football, etc. would be nice. Hope CSU does not decide to get greedy and develop into housing. I am a CSU alumni and am supporting the new stadium and all the other new upgrades to the University. But sometimes it feels like they want everybody to buy in to their projects but don’t really give back or share their facilities. 164. This is an opportunity for CSU and Fort Collins to do the right thing and not blindly follow the developers($). This area is far too important to the community to just throw up more condensed housing to the detriment of all else. We as West Fort Collins residents would appreciate a truly respectful community and nature oriented approach! PUBLIC COMMENTS RECEIVED NOVEMBER 6, 2019 THROUGH MARCH 10, 2020 From: Delynn Coldiron To: Delynn Coldiron Subject: RE: Documents for Public Records Date: Tuesday, November 19, 2019 2:58:55 PM From: Melissa Rosas <mrosas50375@gmail.com> Sent: Tuesday, November 19, 2019 2:53 PM To: Rita Knoll <RKNOLL@fcgov.com> Subject: Documents for Public Records Hi Rits, I would like to submit the following documents to be part of the records for tonight's City Council meeting. I would like to make sure that each City Council member has a copy of these documents for themselves. Thank you, Melissa Rosas PUBLIC COMMENTS RECEIVED NOVEMBER 6, 2019 THROUGH MARCH 10, 2020 From: Tamra Meurer To: Wade Troxell; Kristin Stephens Cc: City Clerk Office Subject: Hughes Stadium Date: Wednesday, November 20, 2019 9:34:03 PM Mayor Troxell and Ms. Stephens, I am writing to say thank you for following the processes with the ethics complaint that was addressed to you. I am sure this was not a pleasant letter to receive and have to deal with. However, I also hope you can see from an outsiders perspective how members of the community need reassurance of fair dealings especially in reference to this very convoluted process. Both CSU and the City have not been forthcoming with many things in this process and the community is not very trusting at this time. I appreciate that you are following proper process to ensure that doubts can be resolved and delaying the voting process until the process can be conducted appropriately. As a long term citizen of Fort Collins, I have witnessed a LOT of change over the past 35+ years that I have resided here. What I have always loved about Fort Collins is the “home town” feel and the comradery that seems to be present everywhere. Even with the significant growth that I have witnessed, I still feel the warmth of community members and feel fortunate to have been able to grow with the town professionally as well. Although I am FROM South Dakota, I consider Fort Collins my “home”. My mother was a Council member in her community in South Dakota for over 20 years. ( I cannot even imagine). Because of her experience, albeit in a much smaller town, I asked her what her actions would be if she were in your situation. She mentioned that she would feel uncomfortable representing her community whether or not there was LEGAL or CONTRACTUAL conflicts. She felt that even with possible SOCIAL associations, she would recuse herself from voting on this issue. Over the years, she had to recuse herself from many issues because she never wanted any press about bias or conflict. There is a lot of dissention and disagreement with the Hughes issue and I know I don’t have to even mention that. I understand that you also are passionate about growth in the community and making Fort Collins an even better place to live. That is the reason you have both been placed into your positions. The people of Fort Collins entrust you to do just that and feel you have been successful. Mayor Troxell, I heard your comment on your desire for a transparent government in Fort Collins and I appreciate that. I am hopeful that as things progress on the Hughes issue that we will see that. Honestly, it seems to not be the case to this point. I am aware of too much that has not been disclosed and that has been “secret.” I am aware that there were “calls to action “ requesting attendance and support of the City Proposed Zoning at the November 19th meeting from both the realtor board and the Chamber of Commerce. What I find both interesting and extremely disturbing was learning of an email BLAST PUBLIC COMMENTS RECEIVED NOVEMBER 6, 2019 THROUGH MARCH 10, 2020 sent out early Tuesday afternoon between 1pm and 4pm that notified these agencies that the Hughes topic was not going to be discussed that evening. I am not sure why these organizations were privy to content and actions of the Council that had not yet been officially decided upon until calling the Council Meeting to order and all council voting. This does NOT demonstrate good faith, honest or transparency in our local government. These are the actions that I am very concerned about and what the community is questioning. I hope this changes and I am holding you to your word Mr. Troxell. Sincerely, Tamra Meurer 1137 Wyndham Hill Road Fort Collins, CO 80525 PUBLIC COMMENTS RECEIVED NOVEMBER 6, 2019 THROUGH MARCH 10, 2020 From: Thomas Schipper To: City Leaders Subject: The former Hughes property Date: Thursday, December 26, 2019 9:17:16 PM I know the final vote to approve the zoning for the former Hughes property is fast approaching but before you vote I ask you to consider something that was recently mentioned in a Coloradioan article. The article was about the EPA air quality ratings. It mentioned the Western part of Fort Collins was the area that exceeds the air quality standards. Do you really want to add that much housing and additional vehicles to the portion of town that already suffers from the poorest air quality in town? Thank you for taking the time to read my concerns. If I had known these statistics when I talked at the Council meeting where premiliary approval was given I would have mentioned them at that time. Thomas Schipper 3025 W Stuart St., Apt. D Fort Collins, CO. 80526 Get Outlook for Android PUBLIC COMMENTS RECEIVED NOVEMBER 6, 2019 THROUGH MARCH 10, 2020 From: Charles Kopp To: City Leaders Subject: Next Hughes redevelopment site vote Date: Tuesday, January 21, 2020 1:32:32 AM Dear City Leaders----I’m disappointed by your recent vote to approve the Montava project before more considerations of consequences, which I believe were warranted for such a massive project. I still fear many negative unintended consequences. However, at least this project and its developer have some positive attributes, which seems much harder to say about the current plans for the Hughes redevelopment site and its proposed developer. First, I found out that the Lennar company- ---though currently the largest home-builder in the U.S.----has very poor customer satisfaction ratings. The Consumer Affairs online link gave the company a mere one-star rating based on 113 reviews. And the Better Business Bureau received 587 complaints against them in the past three years. Lennar is also not even currently accredited by the BBB. At the very least, it looks like a better developer should be found for whatever development is considered. I don’t live near the Hughes site, so I wouldn’t be directly affected by whatever happens there. However, I have a broad-minded interest in what’s good for our community, and the idea of another big development at this location----though it’s no where near the size of massive Montava--- -seems like another environmental insult that can also have many negative consequences. From what I’ve read, the proposed project has no environmental or public benefits; and can only have deleterious effects on local traffic , the nearby natural areas, and cause lots of local congestion and possibly even more flooding potential. There should be better locations and ways to address the city’s housing, including affordable housing needs----which this project seems deficient in anyway. I’m one of the many who believe CSU made a foolish decision in building the new stadium instead of renovating Hughes; and that institution’s consequent debts have resulted in its willingness to sell the property to a high bidder like Lennar. This is certainly not CSU’s best example of their concern for the local environment and its stewardship. And the city should be firm with them and not enable them to do what’s most profitable for them after the hole they got themselves into. Please oppose the next adoption of the rezoning ordinance that would enable the proposed project to go through with the current developer. Sincerely, Charles Kopp Fort Collins Sent from Mail for Windows 10 PUBLIC COMMENTS RECEIVED NOVEMBER 6, 2019 THROUGH MARCH 10, 2020 From: Emily Gorgol To: Delynn Coldiron Subject: Fw: Representing Your Constitutes Date: Monday, January 20, 2020 1:56:15 PM Thank you, Emily Gorgol Pronouns: She, Her, Hers City of Fort Collins Councilmember, District 6 970-556-4748 With limited exceptions, emails and any files transmitted with them are subject to public disclosure under the Colorado Open Records Act (CORA). To promote transparency, emails will be visible in an online archive, unless the sender puts #PRIVATE in the subject line of the email. However, the City of Fort Collins can’t guarantee that any email to or from Council will remain private under CORA. ________________________________________ From: Cindy Harris <cindyh53@msn.com> Sent: Sunday, January 19, 2020 8:38 AM To: Emily Gorgol Subject: Representing Your Constitutes Ms. Gorgol: With the contentious Hughs Stadium development vote coming up for second reading on Tuesday, I want to remind you that you were elected by the people of this district, who trusted you to represent them. I want to remind you that your represent us, and not your personal agenda or the realtors. You haven’t lived in Ft. Collins long enough to fully understand what made this a great place to live in the past. It appears that you are drinking the realtors Kool Aid, and voting for what they are selling as affordable housing. You know darn well that high density development of the Hughs Stadium property will ruin the west side of the city. Where are those roughly 2,000 people going to drive to get to their workplace, etc? Who’s going to build new schools for them? Increase emergency services? It’s already congested over here, with student traffic and virtually no law enforcement. I honestly do not think that you understand the west side. Does the majority of people in your district want high density housing on Hughs ? I doubt it. So do the right thing- represent us honestly and faithfully. We voted you in. Not the realtors and not CSU. Do not be a one term wonder who leaves the City in un- doable tatters. Do not model Troxell & his toadies. PUBLIC COMMENTS RECEIVED NOVEMBER 6, 2019 THROUGH MARCH 10, 2020 Sincerely, Cindy Harris 931 Kimball Rd. Ft Collins, 80521 Sent from my iPad PUBLIC COMMENTS RECEIVED NOVEMBER 6, 2019 THROUGH MARCH 10, 2020 From: Jackie Leidholt To: City Leaders Subject: Hughes Stadium site development Date: Thursday, January 16, 2020 9:17:40 PM I would like to add my urgent plea to the city council to keep the old Hughes Stadium area as an open space. As a 25 year resident of Bellvue, living just west of Horsetooth Reservoir, I have seen so much crowding happening in my area that it breaks my heart. My once peaceful home now has non-stop traffic, especially on the weekends, heading toward Lory State Park, or crowding the dam road so that it is really uncomfortable riding a bike or running up there. I know most people see this as inevitable. Certainly that’s been the story of my life, growing up in Denver. But is there any point at which we can choose to slow development down, to not cover every inch with cement and roads and electrical grids, preserve some sense of peace and calm? I urge you to do whatever you can to keep this an open space where there are no houses and cars. I know the powers that be have rejected this as an open space. But someone, somewhere has to take a stand for nature. It is essential for human happiness. We have to take a stand against money being the bottom line for every decision! PUBLIC COMMENTS RECEIVED NOVEMBER 6, 2019 THROUGH MARCH 10, 2020 From: gabriele rearick To: City Leaders; gabriele rearick Subject: please read: Hughes Stadium site -- rezoning vote Date: Monday, January 20, 2020 10:56:46 AM Dear honored and respected Ladies and Gentlemen of the Fort Collins City Council, This letter is with regard to your vote on the rezoning of the former Hughes Stadium site. We would like to ask you to vote on rezoning in such a way that the developer would like to choose to walk away from the contract with CSU. The CSU Stadium site is an absolutely unique Foothills location adjacent to significant open space that, in our opinion, constitutes one of Fort Collins’ signature attributes. We find it unwise to consider handing over this gem to a private nationwide developer driven by maximizing shareholder value rather than keeping the best interests in mind for the City of Fort Collins. In your elected roles as the guardians of our city’s future, we appeal to you to vote on the side of sustainability and quality of life and preservation of nature over short-term financial gain. There is plenty of other lands near the city better suited for development; please don’t sacrifice this one-of-a-kind location to become just another subdivision. We strongly think there are much more viable alternatives and forward-looking opportunities with different use cases, not involving medium or high-density housing! Consider Boulder’s Chautauqua Park area: it is a bridge between existing residential areas and hiking trails, much like the Hughes site, and includes an auditorium and is an anchor for the Interurban park area with high-tech facilities nearby. We believe that this very different vision than just another Lennar neighborhood is a more sustainable development opportunity which would: create significant income streams for the City of Fort Collins, preserve the uniqueness of the land, be in balance and satisfy the needs and wishes of citizens to maintain the uniqueness of this beautiful area and nature, be accomplished in a sustainable, renewable energy and thus lighthouse project fashion which could enable Fort Collins to be a leader in adopting sustainable, new energy concepts, and potentially give several local developers business and income. We understand that CSU needs about $10 million. We think that this could be accomplished via a crowdfunding initiative and/or a City-backed plan to rezone the land appropriately, repurpose it in a sustainable and forward-looking way, and mandate renewable energy usage! Perhaps CSU itself would be interested in being a partner in this vision as a way to enhance their image as a leader in 21st -century science and engineering. PUBLIC COMMENTS RECEIVED NOVEMBER 6, 2019 THROUGH MARCH 10, 2020 This approach would allow our citizens to see the future preservation and prospects of the land in balance with their usage model, all while the City could maintain various income streams. We are hoping you will vote according to your conscience and do everything you can to protect this unique land instead of sacrificing it to a national faceless developer to become just another tract of generic housing. Thank you for your consideration. Warmest regards, Jeff and Gabriele Rearick. PUBLIC COMMENTS RECEIVED NOVEMBER 6, 2019 THROUGH MARCH 10, 2020 From: Jen Strating To: City Leaders Subject: Hughes development Date: Monday, January 20, 2020 4:09:54 PM Thanks for all of your service to our community! Although I cannot make the meeting tomorrow night, I'd like to express my opinion on the Hughes development. I agree with the PATHS group about wanting to see less development in this area. This area is SO special and I hope it can be retained as some sort of natural area or at the very least less homes. This is a special piece of land up against the foothills and doesn't need to be ruined with a huge housing development. 600 houses would be too much! Traffic would be a nightmare for those of us who live over on this side of town. Please be forward thinkers with tomorrow's vote. Have the best interests of citizens in mind and NOT developers and greed. Choose the legacy you want to leave on this choice city. Don't be remembered as the council who developed the whole city into a place non of us want to live anymore. Please choose to keep our city great which includes keeping the beauty! Thanks for listening and also for your service. Thanks, Jen Strating 970-690-2153 PUBLIC COMMENTS RECEIVED NOVEMBER 6, 2019 THROUGH MARCH 10, 2020 From: Karen Kalavity To: Wade Troxell; City Leaders Subject: Hughes Stadium Redevelopment Date: Friday, January 17, 2020 8:19:42 AM Hughes Stadium Redevelopment CORRUPT, DISRUPT and then CONSTRUCT Let’s remember that the GREAT RECESSION was caused, in large part by the housing and banking industries to begin with… After the recession of 2008-2012, there were only a few developers ready to fill in the void. Unfortunately, the most opportunistic of them filled in quickly. This is when you witness the likes of Lennar Homes and its “designer/approval expediter” firm of Norris Design, come into the new decade with out-of-date, non-sustainable, large-scale and generic home-building plans for acreages from Thornton, to Ft. Collins to Parker and beyond. Please keep this in mind. Also, if the whole “Ethics-Board Thing” that went down in December of 2019, is any indicator of the ETHICS involved with the relationship of CSU and Lennar Homes, then we should all be forewarned: In the ethics complaint, in November of 2019, against two Fort Collins councilmembers, Nicolas Frey and Mary Grant wrote that Mayor Wade Troxell and Mayor Pro Tem Kristin Stephens should not be participating in decisions about the Hughes rezoning because, as Colorado State University employees, they have financial and personal conflicts of interest. When the “Ethics Board” addressed this complaint by holding a sham of a hearing in December of 2019, it seemed to do nothing but confirm the VOID or absence of any ETHICS revolved around the whole project in its totality. In other words, putting together a group of supposed “ETHICS” experts who do not send out proper notification of a hearing, then allow the defendants (mayor Wade Troxell and Kristin Stephens) to have lawyers present, but give no notice for the complainants to even be AWARE the formal hearing was even being held, well . . . then we all know how “ETHICAL” this whole real estate deal really is, in the first place. And of course, it was held in December when most people are involved with holiday planning and other focuses. This is another key component of working with the “professional firms” of Lennar Homes and Norris Design. The most “professional trait” of these groups is how they sideline any real proper design and construction or public interest . . . instead these firms regularly involve themselves in politically-timed development, rather than truly responsible development. As a person who was involved with developers and construction for over 25 years, before the recession, I can attest to how both Lennar Homes and Norris Design function as a “development team”. Although I do not know the particulars of this PUBLIC COMMENTS RECEIVED NOVEMBER 6, 2019 THROUGH MARCH 10, 2020 particular project and how it really went down, based on past experience, I can only conjecture that it went down something like this: In 2014, or so, John Norris, head of Norris Design, went and talked with Tony Frank, president of CSU. This is likely as John N. loves to connect himself with powerful people who can help him with real estate deals … and sports-related projects. John Norris is a Basketball Player Wannabe who is, theoretically tall enough to have played basketball, but was never talented enough to play basketball. I think this has always haunted him to the point that he has to “compensate” over and over and over and over again. Anyway, John Norris and Tony Frank got to talking about real estate and sports then came up with a . . . WONDERFUL, AWFUL IDEA! They could kill two valuable, unique birds with one stone! By moving the stadium into town, they could require significant sums of money be spent on a stadium that had been paid off long ago, and then they could exercise eminent domain powers on adjoining residents and businesses within Ft. Collins, proper. This would also allow 165 acres of real estate to become “AVAILABLE” on the south side of town so that John Norris could get his typical client/partner, Lennar Homes another great place to put up another one of its obsolete and gigantic generic “neighborhoods”. By “SELLING” the stadium concept as a way of constructing a “great” NEW Stadium, and thereby, “creating a great football team” (JEEZE, these guys are really bonehead “optimists”) and then by promising that no outside funds would be needed, Tony Frank and John Norris had a perfect plan! Of course, there became architectural and construction problems, but that really did nothing but JUSTIFY the need, even more, to sell off the old Hughes Stadium to pay off the newly-generated “DEBT”. Anyway, I surmise this is a likely scenario because this is the METHOD of OPERATION these two Clown firms often use. Add on the METRO DISTRICT component and you have a perfect recipe for expensive disaster on a piece of property that BELONGS to CSU, the students of CSU and the tax-paying residents of the State of Colorado. This piece of property should be doing some good beyond lining the pockets of Lennar Homes and the pockets of CSU. This site should be used for something of real meaning. All this empty rhetoric about respecting the Native Americans might actually have some substance if we returned a predominant amount of this old Hughes Stadium land back to nature and to the plants and animals who already call this place home. A Wildlife Rehabilitation Center would only cement the intent. As well, other parts of this 165-acre site could be used for responsibly-designed neighborhoods with net zero carbon use (solar, geothermal, energy etc.) and green infrastructure (drainage swales rather than pipes, pervious pavement rather than PUBLIC COMMENTS RECEIVED NOVEMBER 6, 2019 THROUGH MARCH 10, 2020 concrete and asphalt, planting trees and other carbon neutral implementation etc.) This work could be sourced out locally, or best case scenario – involve the students at CSU for some true education! Any time I hear Lennar Homes or Norris Design, I cringe. We can do a lot BETTER. We need to be thinking long term, NOT simply considering constituents who want to make a quick buck on their REMAX home sale commission. Please REVERSE YOUR VOTE! Sincerely, Karen Kalavity CSU ALUM PUBLIC COMMENTS RECEIVED NOVEMBER 6, 2019 THROUGH MARCH 10, 2020 From: matt clark To: City Clerk Office; Rebecca Everette; Wade Troxell; Darin Atteberry; Julie Pignataro; Susan Gutowsky; Ken Summers; Emily Gorgol; Ross Cunniff; Kristin Stephens; jburks@fcgov.com; Cameron Gloss Subject: Please Take the Planning and Zoning Recommendation Date: Sunday, January 19, 2020 8:59:57 PM City Council has heard numerous public comments and received many letters consistently asserting that Fort Collins residents do not favor LMN and RF zoning for the Hughes redevelopment, as recommended by City staff. At several Council meetings, you have heard consistently that the community does not want 500-1000 homes on this site. Residents have repeatedly expressed their concerns about problems that the proposed redevelopment will create: increased pollution next to the foothills, greater traffic congestion, limited means for emergency evacuation, inadequate consideration of residents’ safety, lack of accessibility to public transportation, overcrowding in local elementary schools, unsightly sprawl in a beautiful area, and more. Instead of following the Planning and Zoning Commission’s recommendation for RF Housing zoning, Council is now considering the staff recommendation for LMN as well as RF housing. According to Fort Collins Zoning Codes, LMN and RF zoning can allow over 1,000 houses to be built on the Hughes property. As you know, Lennar Builders has a contract with CSU incentivizing the University with bonuses once 625 homes are built at this site. Although Cameron Gloss, the City’s Long Range Planning Manager, stated before Council that the builder will probably not construct more than 550 houses at Hughes, there is no incentive or motivation for Lennar to stop at this estimated number of units. In fact, nothing can block Lennar from building the maximum number of homes on this parcel unless City Council decides to take a different path. Therefore, we, the undersigned, recommend the alternative that a majority of our community would support—the P&Z recommendation for RF. If the land is zoned RF, there are a number of advantages: CSU and Lennar have their purchase agreement satisfied. PUBLIC COMMENTS RECEIVED NOVEMBER 6, 2019 THROUGH MARCH 10, 2020 CSU gets its $10 million. Lennar gets to build homes on this site. The community and 500,000 visitors to Horsetooth continue to enjoy open space. Increased traffic congestion is avoided. PSD will be able to accommodate any new students at existing schools. Bicyclists on Overland Trail will not be endangered by greater traffic congestion. The safety of residents will be less compromised during an evacuation. The City’s Night Sky Initiative will be supported with less light pollution. Reduced GHG emissions will help the City reach the goals of its Climate Action Plan. The City will have up to 200 new houses on the west side and enjoy other benefits from RF zoning. The best interests of the residents of Fort Collins will be served if the City agrees to the RF zoning for the entire Hughes redevelopment. Signed, Russell Ayer 80525 *Brendon Sullivan 80521 *Scott Umbreit 80526 Julie Raaz 80525 Marilyn Peltzman 80526 Carol Montgomery 80525 Marianne Flenniken 80526 David Grossett 80526 Beth Grossett 80526 *Tamra Muerer 80525 Bonnie Ayer 80525 Arleen Erber 80526 *Aja Jha 80528 *Renee Walkup 8052 Doug Henderson 80521 Ted Walkup 80521 Gary Faris 80521 Matt Clark 80521 Susan Leopold 80528 John Leopold 80528 Rachel Walkup 80521 Ann Conroy 80525 Diane Couvier 80528 Liz Thompson 80524 *John Thompson 80524 Liz Irvine 80525 Jenny Morse 80521 PUBLIC COMMENTS RECEIVED NOVEMBER 6, 2019 THROUGH MARCH 10, 2020 Gretchen Iberra 80528 Fernando Iberra 80528 *Ann Baron 80525 *Jephta Bernstein 80528 *Greg Tjossem 80521 Karen Tjossem 80521 *George Soderling 80524 Cath Nelson 80528 *Mary Grant 80521 *Susan Frost Davis 80521 Maureen McCarthy 80525 *Rex Miller 80526 *Denotes business owners in Fort Collins. PUBLIC COMMENTS RECEIVED NOVEMBER 6, 2019 THROUGH MARCH 10, 2020 From: Russ Ayer To: City Clerk Office; wtroxill@fcgov.com; Julie Pignataro; Kristin Stephens; Emily Gorgol; Ross Cunniff; Cameron Gloss; Rebecca Everette Subject: Another Thoughts for consideration Date: Saturday, January 18, 2020 9:33:08 AM Dear Recipients: A great deal of time, money and effort to arrive at a reasonable solution the question(s) as how to agree upon a reasonable solution concerning the Hughes Property development. I respectfully request that each of you take the time to carefully consider a reasoned approach to meet the needs of all parties in this very important matter for our community. Thank You, Russ Ayer russ.ayer46@gmail.com PUBLIC COMMENTS RECEIVED NOVEMBER 6, 2019 THROUGH MARCH 10, 2020 From: Russ Ayer (via Google Docs) To: City Clerk Office Cc: wtroxill@fcgov.com; Julie Pignataro; Kristin Stephens; Emily Gorgol; Ross Cunniff; Cameron Gloss; Rebecca Everette Subject: Hughes Signature Letter 1-17-2020 - Invitation to edit Date: Saturday, January 18, 2020 9:15:39 AM russ.ayer46@gmail.com has invited you to edit the following document: Hughes Signature Letter 1-17-2020 WE appreciate your taking the time to read and consider this proposal. Russ Ayer russ.ayer46@gmail.com Open in Docs This email grants access to this item without logging in. Only forward it to people you trust. Google Docs: Create and edit documents online. Google LLC, 1600 Amphitheatre Parkway, Mountain View, CA 94043, USA You have received this email because someone shared a document with you from Google Docs. PUBLIC COMMENTS RECEIVED NOVEMBER 6, 2019 THROUGH MARCH 10, 2020 City Council has heard numerous public comments and received many letters consistently asserting that Fort Collins residents do not favor LMN and RF zoning for the Hughes redevelopment, as recommended by City staff. At several Council meetings, you have heard consistently that the community does not want 500-1000 homes on this site. Residents have repeatedly expressed their concerns about problems that the proposed redevelopment will create: • increased pollution next to the foothills, • greater traffic congestion, • limited means for emergency evacuation, • inadequate consideration of residents’ safety, • lack of accessibility to public transportation, • overcrowding in local elementary schools, • unsightly sprawl in a beautiful area, and more. Instead of following the Planning and Zoning Commission’s recommendation for RF Housing zoning, Council is now considering the staff recommendation for LMN as well as RF housing. According to Fort Collins Zoning Codes, LMN and RF zoning can allow over 1,000 houses to be built on the Hughes property. As you know, Lennar Builders has a contract with CSU incentivizing the University with bonuses once 625 homes are built at this site. Although Cameron Gloss, the City’s Long Range Planning Manager, stated before Council that the builder will probably not construct more than 550 houses at Hughes, there is no incentive or motivation for Lennar to stop at this estimated number of units. In fact, nothing can block Lennar from building the maximum number of homes on this parcel unless City Council decides to take a different path. Therefore, we, the undersigned, recommend the alternative that a majority of our community would support—the P&Z recommendation for RF. If the land is zoned RF, there are a number of advantages: • CSU and Lennar have their purchase agreement satisfied. • CSU gets its $10 million. • Lennar gets to build homes on this site. • The community and 500,000 visitors to Horsetooth continue to enjoy open space. • Increased traffic congestion is avoided. • PSD will be able to accommodate any new students at existing schools. • Bicyclists on Overland Trail will not be endangered by greater traffic congestion. • The safety of residents will be less compromised during an evacuation. PUBLIC COMMENTS RECEIVED NOVEMBER 6, 2019 THROUGH MARCH 10, 2020 • The City’s Night Sky Initiative will be supported with less light pollution. • Reduced GHG emissions will help the City reach the goals of its Climate Action Plan. • The City will have up to 200 new houses on the west side and enjoy other benefits from RF zoning. The best interests of the residents of Fort Collins will be served if the City agrees to the RF zoning for the entire Hughes redevelopment. Signed, Russell Ayer Brendon Sullivan 80521 Scott Umbreit 80526 Julie Raaz 80525 Marilyn Peltzman 80526 Carol Montgomery 80525 Marianne Flenniken 80526 David Grossett 80526 Beth Grossett 80526 Tamra Muerer 80525 Bonnie Ayer 80525 Arleen Erber 80526 Aja Jha 80528 Renee Walkup 80521 Doug Henderson 80521 Ted Walkup 80521 Gary Faris 80521 Matt Clark 80521 Susan Leopold 80528 John Leopold 80528 Rachel Walkup 80521 Ann Conroy 80525 Diane Couvier 80528 Liz Thompson 80524 John Thompson 80524 Liz Irvine 80525 Jenny Morse 80521 Gretchen Iberra 80528 Fernando Iberra 80528 Ann Baron 80525 Jephta Bernstein 80528 Greg Tjossem 80521 Karen Tjossem 80521 George Soderling 80524 Cath Nelson 80528 Mary Grant 80521 Rex Miller 80526 Kelsey Meurer 80526 Alexis Coover 80526 Jennifer Hernandez 80525 Neslie Hernandez 80525 Chelsea Evans 80521 Jeri Davis 80526 Tamra Meurer 80525 Lonna Miller 80526 Mary Wenhoff 80526 Glenn Wemhoff 80526 Marc McKee 80526 Codi McKee 80526 PUBLIC COMMENTS RECEIVED NOVEMBER 6, 2019 THROUGH MARCH 10, 2020 From: Cameron Gloss To: Delynn Coldiron Cc: Tom Leeson Subject: FW: please read: Hughes Stadium site -- rezoning vote Date: Tuesday, January 21, 2020 10:23:49 AM Delynn, I assumed you saw this message, but I’m sending it on just in case you hadn’t. Another one for the record. Cameron From: gabriele rearick <gsz05@msn.com> Sent: Tuesday, January 21, 2020 10:20 AM To: Cameron Gloss <cgloss@fcgov.com> Cc: gabriele rearick <gsz05@msn.com> Subject: Fwd: please read: Hughes Stadium site -- rezoning vote Hi Mr. Gloss, Please see fyi below. Best regards, Gabriele From: gabriele rearick <gsz05@msn.com> Sent: Monday, January 20, 2020, 10:56 To: cityleaders@fcgov.com; gabriele rearick Subject: please read: Hughes Stadium site -- rezoning vote Dear honored and respected Ladies and Gentlemen of the Fort Collins City Council, This letter is with regard to your vote on the rezoning of the former Hughes Stadium site. We would like to ask you to vote on rezoning in such a way that the developer would like to choose to walk away from the contract with CSU. The CSU Stadium site is an absolutely unique Foothills location adjacent to significant open space that, in our opinion, constitutes one of Fort Collins’ signature attributes. We find it unwise to consider handing over this gem to a private nationwide developer driven by maximizing shareholder value rather than keeping the best interests in mind for the City of Fort Collins. In your elected roles as the guardians of our city’s future, we appeal to you to PUBLIC COMMENTS RECEIVED NOVEMBER 6, 2019 THROUGH MARCH 10, 2020 vote on the side of sustainability and quality of life and preservation of nature over short-term financial gain. There is plenty of other lands near the city better suited for development; please don’t sacrifice this one-of-a-kind location to become just another subdivision. We strongly think there are much more viable alternatives and forward-looking opportunities with different use cases, not involving medium or high-density housing! Consider Boulder’s Chautauqua Park area: it is a bridge between existing residential areas and hiking trails, much like the Hughes site, and includes an auditorium and is an anchor for the Interurban park area with high-tech facilities nearby. We believe that this very different vision than just another Lennar neighborhood is a more sustainable development opportunity which would: create significant income streams for the City of Fort Collins, preserve the uniqueness of the land, be in balance and satisfy the needs and wishes of citizens to maintain the uniqueness of this beautiful area and nature, be accomplished in a sustainable, renewable energy and thus lighthouse project fashion which could enable Fort Collins to be a leader in adopting sustainable, new energy concepts, and potentially give several local developers business and income. We understand that CSU needs about $10 million. We think that this could be accomplished via a crowdfunding initiative and/or a City-backed plan to rezone the land appropriately, repurpose it in a sustainable and forward-looking way, and mandate renewable energy usage! Perhaps CSU itself would be interested in being a partner in this vision as a way to enhance their image as a leader in 21st -century science and engineering. This approach would allow our citizens to see the future preservation and prospects of the land in balance with their usage model, all while the City could maintain various income streams. We are hoping you will vote according to your conscience and do everything you can to protect this unique land instead of sacrificing it to a national faceless developer to become just another tract of generic housing. Thank you for your consideration. Warmest regards, Jeff and Gabriele Rearick. PUBLIC COMMENTS RECEIVED NOVEMBER 6, 2019 THROUGH MARCH 10, 2020 From: Holcombe, John - SSC To: City Leaders Cc: csusboard@colostate.edu Subject: Former Hughes Stadium Development Date: Tuesday, January 21, 2020 9:13:32 AM Dear City Leaders, Apparently CSU and the City sold out to Lennar Development company to build a mix of residential units at the former Hughes site. This was a huge mistake and sad day for the parcel of land that was a gateway into the foothills and a corridor for wildlife and open space for the residents of Fort Collins. Since this huge mistake has already been approved, please consider limiting the amount of development on that land so that it does not look like the Lennar development that is currently being built on the northeast end of town. The lack of foresight on the former Hughes property is disgusting and makes me sick, so much that I want to pack up my family and leave Fort Collins. With all of the current development and proposed development on that area off of Overland trail, I can only predict that the foothills trail, nature and community around that area will be impacted negatively forever. If only the City would stop the madness, find the funds and purchase the land as open space. The corridor along the foothills is more important to this City than packing in as much as possible in an area that is extremely important for the future of this City and the environment. Please share. Thanks John Holcombe PUBLIC COMMENTS RECEIVED NOVEMBER 6, 2019 THROUGH MARCH 10, 2020 From: Trish Babbitt To: City Leaders Subject: A Plea to Reverse the Vote on Hughes Stadium Zoning Date: Tuesday, January 21, 2020 10:46:04 AM Dear City Council Members, Before I say more, I want to thank council members Ross Cunniff and Susan Gutowsky who listened carefully to and voted on behalf of their constituents last week, when they expressed concerns about the Montava development proposal— which included some good ideas, but which also is slated to be a Metro District. Ross and Susan seem to understand how devastating Metro Districts can be to whole communities— especially to those seeking affordable and attainable housing. In all likelihood, if Lennar obtains the Hughes site, they will create a crowded Metro District and a terrible mess at the same time, all the while displacing wildlife that has depended on this land for years. A poor zoning choice on the Hughes property could result in irreparable damage to a piece of land that is worth much, much more than the mere $10 million that CSU has promised to sell it for to Lennar Homes. A recent Denver Post article discussed the devastation that Colorado homeowners in Metro Districts faced when the taxes for the homes they bought at an “affordable” price soared in less than a year. One homeowner said that her taxes went from $812 the first year to almost $3,500 less than a year later and $4,400 two years after that. Even though she felt she could afford the mortgage, it was the taxes that were creating unanticipated financial hardships for her. On Sunday, I spent a few hours talking with people in City Park and the City Park neighborhood (in Emily Gorgol’s District 6) to hear their ideas about the potential development. Many people said that the Hughes Stadium site is a prime example of the natural areas that make people want to live in and visit Fort Collins. They wished that CSU would find a different way to cover its debts and keep the land as open space. But if this isn’t “in the cards”, they agreed that the 100% RF zoning option seemed to be the next best scenario. PUBLIC COMMENTS RECEIVED NOVEMBER 6, 2019 THROUGH MARCH 10, 2020 If I had more time, I would have tried to get signatures from more people in other Districts—where I know many people who want to see the land stay as open space. We still hope that CSU and its Board of Governors will finally see the light, start making fiscally sound and truly green decisions, and stop moving in the reckless, unsustainable way that has been going on in recent years. Some of the people with whom I spoke wanted to attend tonight’s City Council meeting but had other commitments. They thanked me for the opportunity to sign a special T-shirt to represent their voices at tonight’s meeting. We hope that tonight, more of our City Council members will show the courage that Ross and Susan showed last week to vote on behalf of their constituents, rather than buckling to the pressures of CSU’s Board of Governors and Lennar Homes. Thank you, Patricia Babbitt, 80521 PUBLIC COMMENTS RECEIVED NOVEMBER 6, 2019 THROUGH MARCH 10, 2020 PUBLIC COMMENTS RECEIVED NOVEMBER 6, 2019 THROUGH MARCH 10, 2020 January 21, 2020 To: Fort Collins City Council Members, Cameron Gloss, CSU Board of Govenors CC: Matt Blum, KUNC While the meeting tonight is a zoning hearing, it is clear that the city’s proposed plan, the CSU/Lennar Agreement and the comments of many City Council members focus on how the property will be developed and therefore it is difficult to separate zoning and development. Additionally, some of these questions may seem too global, however, they ultimately relate to the City Plan. Council members refer to the City Plan in discussions of identified growth areas, including Hughes, and the impact zoning will have on this area forever. We feel it is important to ask and receive answers to the following questions: Cameron Gloss 1. Why after the P & Z Board recommended 100% RF did you completely disregard their recommendation and you presented your recommendation to City Council with just the briefest mention that the P & Z Board recommended 100% RF? 2. Why are you saying 500 - 550 units would be built on the Hughes property? We all know that you worked with CSU regarding the zoning. We also know that the agreement CSU signed with Lennar states a minimum of 600 units and provides incentives for every unit built over 625 and also includes additional bonuses as units are sold? 3. What is the exact number of units that can be built on the Hughes property with the LMN/RF zoning you have recommended? Not what you think, but the ACTUAL number. Please breakdown the number down by LMN and RF. 4. Why was the City Plan with identified growth areas implemented after CSU and Lennar signed their agreement regarding the Hughes Property? 5. Why after all of the feedback from the community to the City and CSU regarding the Hughes Property did you and your team only present housing development options for consideration? 6. Why if there is not a formal plan from Lennar for the Hughes Property, why are people meeting at the city building discussing the infrastructure issues for 550 units on the Hughes Property? 7. Why hasn’t the concept of a Public/Private/Philanthropic Partnership been explored? Colorado State University 1. Cameron Gloss stated in a City Council Meeting that CSU refused to consider selling the Hughes Property to the City. Please explain why this decision was made. 2. The Hughes Property was a land grant for and by the people. The community should have a say in what happens to this property. The community has been very clear, time and again, regarding the use of the Hughes Property. Why did you completely discount the public input on the Land Grant Property? 3. Why, after CSU has been so vocal regarding affordable housing for your workforce, did you not make workforce housing a requirement of the sale? PUBLIC COMMENTS RECEIVED NOVEMBER 6, 2019 THROUGH MARCH 10, 2020 City Council 1. When will City Council start demanding answers and information for example, when will the studies the community has requested be completed and results “published” a. Ecological Characterization Study b. Emergency Response and Rescue c. Traffic study from Drake to LaPorte d. Educational Capacity e. Air Quality f. Structural Engineering Impact Study to the Reservoir g. Environmental Assessment Study 2. Many people in the community believe the Zoning for Hughes is a done deal. They find it hard to believe in transparency in government when secret meetings and communications continue between players. The realtors and were informed that the 2nd Hughes reading would not take place on November 19, 2019 hours before City Council voted to delay the vote. Mayor Troxell stated at the start of the City Council Meeting that he had not had the opportunity to speak with his fellow council members so how could the Realtors already know? 3. Some council members continue to assert that affordable housing is desperately needed and believe it will be built on the Hughes parcel. The community would like to know, by approved housing developments currently be built and/or considered exactly how many affordable and attainable units will be built in each development. 4. Once zoning is approved, what control does the city have over how many affordable and/or attainable units are built if the plans submitted by a builder meet all codes and regulations? 5. Why aren’t affordable/attainable units being included in developments within the City Core which already has access to transportation and needed amenities? 6. Many of the cities starting out on the “Top Ten Places to Live” quickly lost their place because increasing population became more important than livability. The Fort Collins community wants Livability what does the City and the City Council want? If you decide to support the recommendation of LMN/RF recommended by the City Planners, it will ultimately destroy the night sky’s, wildlife habitats and access to Horsetooth Reservoir, also referred to as the “Crown Jewel of Fort Collins”. Safety in the foothill’s community will also be impacted since the City Plan identifies floods and wildfires as an ever-increasing threat as climate changes continue to occur. Residents in the area prior to the Ponds and Bella Vira developments report that RF Zoning was fervently promoted and supported by the City to obtain buy-in that the buffer to the foothills would always be maintained. Subsequently, home buyers in this same area have relied on this promise. We ask that you vote no tonight and not support LMN/RF for Hughes. Rather, support the P & Z Boards’ recommendation of RF as a compromise between the Community, CSU and The City. Sincerely, Tamra and Robert Meurer 80525 Rex and Lonna Miller 80526 Alexis Coover 80526 Mary Grant 80521 Marc and Codi McKee 80526 Jeralyn Davis 80526 Glenn and Mary Wemhoff 80526 Doug and Pat Macallister 80521 David Thompson 80521 PUBLIC COMMENTS RECEIVED NOVEMBER 6, 2019 THROUGH MARCH 10, 2020 From: Anna Goldetsky To: City Leaders Cc: Ross Cunniff Subject: Vote NO to the City Planners zoning proposal at Hughes Date: Tuesday, January 21, 2020 4:00:29 PM Fort Collins City Council members, As citizen of district #5, I ask you to vote NO to the city planners zoning proposal and support the Planning and Zoning boards recommendation of 100% RF zoning at Hughes. The Planning and Zoning Board's recommendation is a solid middle-ground for both progress and protection. Progress towards building out a robust community while protecting the integrity of Fort Collins character and the social, economic, and health benefits we reap from its unique attributes. As stated in the Nature in the City Strategic Plan, properties in close proximity to natural areas yield a 10% price premium. So please steer clear of the false logic that affordability/attainability will be a product of greater density. Final build-out costs and road improvements, combined with demand and scarcity, will ultimately drive price point; not your zoning decision. Furthermore, preserving the character and serenity of the surrounding neighborhoods (your constituents homes) should be your primary goal; not continuity with the surrounding housing types. Development of any kind is going to bring more noise pollution, vehicle emissions, network- wide traffic congestion, light pollution, etc... so consider carefully your decision and how it contributes to the quality of life here in Fort Collins. Your vote against the City Planner's proposal is most appreciated. Regards, Anna PUBLIC COMMENTS RECEIVED NOVEMBER 6, 2019 THROUGH MARCH 10, 2020 1 Sara Gonzales From: Sarah Kane Sent: Tuesday, January 21, 2020 5:01 PM To: Delynn Coldiron; Sara Gonzales Cc: Cameron Gloss Subject: FW: City Council Meeting Public Opinion Statement What do we do with this? Packets are already done. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Sarah Kane Executive Administrative Assistant to Deputy City Manager Jeff Mihelich and Mayor Wade Troxell 970-416-2447 office From: Jessica C <underthemidnightskies66@gmail.com> Sent: Tuesday, January 21, 2020 4:56 PM To: Sarah Kane <SKane@fcgov.com>; Wade Troxell <WTroxell@fcgov.com>; Kristin Stephens <kstephens@fcgov.com>; Susan Gutowsky <sgutowsky@fcgov.com>; Julie Pignataro <jpignataro@fcgov.com>; Ken Summers <ksummers@fcgov.com>; Ross Cunniff <rcunniff@fcgov.com>; Emily Gorgol <egorgol@fcgov.com> Subject: City Council Meeting Public Opinion Statement Hello, I am unable to attend the City Council Meeting tonight, 1/21/2020. But I would like to express my opinions on discussion item #18 “Second Reading of Ordinance No. 138, 2019, Amending the Zoning Map of the City of Fort Collins by Changing the Zoning Classification for that Certain Property Known as the Hughes Stadium Site Rezoning and Approving Corresponding Changes to the Residential Neighborhood Sign District Map”. I do not agree with the current proposal to make the Old Hughes Stadium Space a high‐density subdivision. I feel this is an unwise and unnecessary use of this most precious space. It would be far more appropriate to utilize this space as a Residential Foothills Low‐Density Mixed‐Use Neighborhood zone district. Keeping this space low‐density is not only safer for the local ecology, but also for the residents who do and would come to live in that area. As community safety, climate concerns, and natural open spaces are pinnacles of the City of Fort Collins and Larimer County values it is paramount that we keep these values at the core of every decision we as a city make. Please do not let other ideas compromise the morals and values of this city, its citizens, and its community. We are a people who love the outdoors, open spaces, wildlife, and nature. There are other, safer, more efficient places to build high‐density housing, but the Old Hughes Stadium is not the right place. Please also consider the inclusion of a Wildlife Rehabilitation Center in this geographic area. As stewards of the planet it is our duty to care for the wildlife that lives alongside us humans. By not having a center that is solely dedicated to their welfare and rehabilitation we are doing a great disservice to local wildlife and the local community. These rehabilitation PUBLIC COMMENTS RECEIVED NOVEMBER 6, 2019 THROUGH MARCH 10, 2020 2 centers provide care for wildlife as well as public education which improves community safety by lowering public contact with injured, lost, or otherwise distressed animals where either party can become injured. In conclusion, please listen to The Planning and Zoning Board, there is value in their recommendation. Make the Old Hughes Stadium a Residential Foothills Low‐Density Mixed‐Use Neighborhood zone district. Please vote tonight with the community’s wishes and the local ecology’s and best interests in mind. Thank you, Jessica Cunningham 970‐237‐9345 Fort Collins Resident since 2008 PUBLIC COMMENTS RECEIVED NOVEMBER 6, 2019 THROUGH MARCH 10, 2020 From: Trish Babbitt To: City Leaders Subject: A Plea to Reverse the Vote on Hughes Stadium Zoning Date: Tuesday, January 21, 2020 10:46:04 AM Dear City Council Members, Before I say more, I want to thank council members Ross Cunniff and Susan Gutowsky who listened carefully to and voted on behalf of their constituents last week, when they expressed concerns about the Montava development proposal— which included some good ideas, but which also is slated to be a Metro District. Ross and Susan seem to understand how devastating Metro Districts can be to whole communities— especially to those seeking affordable and attainable housing. In all likelihood, if Lennar obtains the Hughes site, they will create a crowded Metro District and a terrible mess at the same time, all the while displacing wildlife that has depended on this land for years. A poor zoning choice on the Hughes property could result in irreparable damage to a piece of land that is worth much, much more than the mere $10 million that CSU has promised to sell it for to Lennar Homes. A recent Denver Post article discussed the devastation that Colorado homeowners in Metro Districts faced when the taxes for the homes they bought at an “affordable” price soared in less than a year. One homeowner said that her taxes went from $812 the first year to almost $3,500 less than a year later and $4,400 two years after that. Even though she felt she could afford the mortgage, it was the taxes that were creating unanticipated financial hardships for her. On Sunday, I spent a few hours talking with people in City Park and the City Park neighborhood (in Emily Gorgol’s District 6) to hear their ideas about the potential development. Many people said that the Hughes Stadium site is a prime example of the natural areas that make people want to live in and visit Fort Collins. They wished that CSU would find a different way to cover its debts and keep the land as open space. But if this isn’t “in the cards”, they agreed that the 100% RF zoning option seemed to be the next best scenario. PUBLIC COMMENTS RECEIVED NOVEMBER 6, 2019 THROUGH MARCH 10, 2020 If I had more time, I would have tried to get signatures from more people in other Districts—where I know many people who want to see the land stay as open space. We still hope that CSU and its Board of Governors will finally see the light, start making fiscally sound and truly green decisions, and stop moving in the reckless, unsustainable way that has been going on in recent years. Some of the people with whom I spoke wanted to attend tonight’s City Council meeting but had other commitments. They thanked me for the opportunity to sign a special T-shirt to represent their voices at tonight’s meeting. We hope that tonight, more of our City Council members will show the courage that Ross and Susan showed last week to vote on behalf of their constituents, rather than buckling to the pressures of CSU’s Board of Governors and Lennar Homes. Thank you, Patricia Babbitt, 80521 PUBLIC COMMENTS RECEIVED NOVEMBER 6, 2019 THROUGH MARCH 10, 2020 From: Deana Munoz To: City Leaders Subject: Hughes Stadium Vote Date: Wednesday, January 22, 2020 10:30:14 AM Good Morning Mayor Troxell and City Council Members, Good Morning Mayor Troxell, Last night's delay of the vote was an extreme disappointment. As a student at CSU, every event starts with the acknowledgment that the land our university sits on was stolen from the natives who once lived here. As a land grant university, the point is to steward the land and use it for educational purposes. The point is NOT to sell it to the highest bidder to create more high priced homes that price folks such as myself who hope to make Fort Collins a home out of the area. I am finishing a graduate degree and have set my eye on the next prize - where to buy a home and raise my family. I have to seriously consider the motives of the City Council and this city if they would bow to developers' wishes in order to make more money rather than listen to the wishes of their constituents, the ones who pay taxes to live and play here. Do we want to talk about Fort Collins' beauty in the past tense? Because once these areas are gone, they are gone. When you hike at Devil's Backbone and make it to the keyhole, you look through at the Rockies -- and a giant sprawl of ugly subdivisions. Is that what your legacy will be? Opening our precious open spaces to development that we cannot sustain? What about the dire warnings of air pollution and water shortages? Please reverse the vote on the Hughes land and make it 100% residential Foothills zoning to ensure the impact on our beautiful land is minimal. Unfortunately, I was unable to stand before you and speak my piece. Twice now I have been denied this opportunity, due to unforeseen ethics complaints and delays. You've rescheduled the third vote to a date I will be traveling for school, and felt I needed to reach out. Respectfully, your constituent Deana Muñoz Occupational Therapy Student Class of 2021 Colorado State University PUBLIC COMMENTS RECEIVED NOVEMBER 6, 2019 THROUGH MARCH 10, 2020 1303 W. Swallow Road Bldg. 11, Fort Collins, CO 80526 www.carehousing.org (970)282-7522 or TTY (800)659-2656 January 21st, 2020 Dear City Leadership, I am writing on behalf of CARE Housing regarding this evening’s second reading of ordinance No. 138, 2019. I support the Staff recommendation to zone the site as Residential Foothills (RF) and Low Density Mixed-Use Neighborhood (LMN) in comparison to the P & Z Board’s recommendation of zoning the site entirely RF. The Hughes Stadium site presents an opportunity to address equity in our community, as well as what 90% of Fort Collins residents agree is the top challenge: housing affordability. We, as a community, need to do better when it comes to providing our citizens with affordable housing options, especially our lower wage earners and historically marginalized people. A stable home provides opportunities for families such as this CARE Housing resident: “My 3 children and I have been residents of CARE Housing since January of 2019. I left a marriage of 16 years in 2017 and had little to no life skills to get me along in the real world. I obtained employment and have had the same job since November of 2017. I am so very happy with the success that I’ve had while living at CARE Housing and the ability to make lifelong dreams of freedom from daily terror and a happy place to heal for my children a reality.” Through smart design, we can achieve shared goals of creating a vibrant, sustainable community without sacrificing opportunities for all residents. Our City will continue to grow in population. We as a community need to ask if we want policies that exacerbate inequality, and favor only the highest wage earners, or grow in a way that provides opportunity to all walks of life. Sincerely, Steve Kuehneman Executive Director PUBLIC COMMENTS RECEIVED NOVEMBER 6, 2019 THROUGH MARCH 10, 2020 From: Steve Kuehneman To: City Leaders Subject: CARE Housing comments on Ordinance No. 138, 2019 Date: Tuesday, January 21, 2020 5:18:06 PM Attachments: image003.png CARE Housing comment- Hughes Site.pdf Dear City Leaders, Please see attached letter on behalf of CARE Housing in regards to Ordinance No. 138, 2019. Thank you for your time and efforts. Best, Steve Steve Kuehneman, Executive Director CARE Housing|1303 W. Swallow Road, Bldg 11|Fort Collins, CO 80526 Office: 970.829.1606 |Cell: 970.222.6649 www.carehousing.org PUBLIC COMMENTS RECEIVED NOVEMBER 6, 2019 THROUGH MARCH 10, 2020 From: Erin Hottenstein To: City Leaders Subject: Save the sledding hill Date: Wednesday, February 5, 2020 8:15:09 AM Dear City Leaders, In your consideration of the CSU stadium property, I hope that there is some way to save the sledding hill. It is really a unique park. There's nothing else quite like it in Fort Collins. I take my kids there every year. It's big and dozens of families can use it at the same time. It's wholesome and promotes healthy activity at a time of year when it is easy to stay indoors and loaf around. We get out and enjoy the fresh air while enjoying the thrill of sliding down and the huff and puff of hiking back up. Sledding there is good, clean fun for the whole family. We are making happy memories every time we go. I hope that there is a way to make that spot a city park and ensure healthy, happy memories for families going forward. Sincerely, Erin Hottenstein PUBLIC COMMENTS RECEIVED NOVEMBER 6, 2019 THROUGH MARCH 10, 2020 From: Development Review Comments To: Cameron Gloss; Delynn Coldiron Subject: FW: Hughes Stadium Redevelopment Date: Wednesday, February 5, 2020 11:35:45 AM Wanted to make sure this was added to comments on Hughes Stadium. It came through the devreviewcomments inbox. See below. Marcy Yoder Neighborhood Services Manager MYoder@fcgov.com 970-221-6676 From: Airica Parker <hands.in.soil@gmail.com> Sent: Saturday, January 18, 2020 7:14 PM To: Development Review Comments <devreviewcomments@fcgov.com> Subject: Hughes Stadium Redevelopment To Whom It May Concern: I appreciate the need for affordable housing in Fort Collins. However, I urge you to select a development plan that carefully balances our values as a community, one which will substain a long- term quality of life for residents. 600ish houses does not express this balance in my mind. Over a thousand new cars in this area and heavy new foot traffic + noise, light, and other pollution near the nature areas is not respectful of the many beings already calling this area home. I am a homeowner who put my faith in the city of Fort Collins for my long-term well being. I urge you to consider carefully the healthiest and most well-balanced plan of development for this site and for all City Planning. If we lose the natural harmony which Fort Collins was founded upon - a respected balance between nature and human use - we will destroy the very fiber of our beautiful city. My last related concern is nearby biking paths, which already have many travelers, sometimes moving at quite high speeds. These trails are already very heavily used. What we need is City Planning respectful of natural spaces and cautious of overcrowding, which also includes caring housing options. We need the balance. I've always seen Fort Collins as a leader in this PUBLIC COMMENTS RECEIVED NOVEMBER 6, 2019 THROUGH MARCH 10, 2020 area, and I hope we will continue the important task of modeling sustainable, nature-framed living for each other and other communities. Please, be brave and wise in pursuit of right balance. Thank you, Erica Parker, 80526 PUBLIC COMMENTS RECEIVED NOVEMBER 6, 2019 THROUGH MARCH 10, 2020 From: Macchietto, Isabella - Student To: City Leaders Subject: Hughes Stadium land Date: Monday, February 17, 2020 12:21:14 PM Dear City Council Members, I am a student at Rocky Mountain High School in Fort Collins Colorado. I am taking a class called "We the People" in which we are doing a civic action project. For my project, I am focusing on Fort Collins population issues and what can be done about it. I found out that Lennar Corporation bought the Hughes Stadium land from CSU and is planning to build 600 to 700 houses. In order to lower the effects of this huge building project I am proposing building less houses and making them for low income families. What I need from you, if you are willing to help, is just information. What do you know about this project? Do you think the amount of houses they want to build will poorly affect Fort Collins? Can you do anything to help lower said effect? Any information will help. I realize this may not be a priority and you may not think of this project as a bad thing. My concern about it comes from living in that area near Hughes and already finding it very busy. Thank you so much for your time. Isabella Macchietto PUBLIC COMMENTS RECEIVED NOVEMBER 6, 2019 THROUGH MARCH 10, 2020 From: Sarah Kane To: Delynn Coldiron Subject: FW: Hughes Property 2nd Reading Date: Tuesday, March 3, 2020 12:41:47 PM For you… . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Sarah Kane Executive Administrative Assistant to Deputy City Manager Jeff Mihelich and Mayor Wade Troxell 970-416-2447 office From: BARBARA BONILLA <barbarab91@comcast.net> Sent: Tuesday, March 3, 2020 12:38 PM To: Ross Cunniff <rcunniff@fcgov.com>; CAO Admin <caoadmin@fcgov.com>; Emily Gorgol <egorgol@fcgov.com>; Susan Gutowsky <sgutowsky@fcgov.com>; Sarah Kane <SKane@fcgov.com>; Julie Pignataro <jpignataro@fcgov.com>; Kristin Stephens <kstephens@fcgov.com>; Ken Summers <ksummers@fcgov.com>; Wade Troxell <WTroxell@fcgov.com> Subject: Hughes Property 2nd Reading To: Fort Collins City Council and City Attorney I am writing to request that the second reading of Ordinance No. 138, 2019, addressing the zoning for the property known as Hughes Stadium, be moved from March 17, 2020 to a date that does not conflict with the Poudre School District and CSU spring break. As you are well aware, many Fort Collins citizens are extremely concerned about the zoning for the Hughes Property. To hold the second reading during Spring Break when many families will be out of town seems unfair. Please reconsider and move the date of the second reading to a time when more citizens will be able to attend. Thank you, Barbara Bonilla 80525 PUBLIC COMMENTS RECEIVED NOVEMBER 6, 2019 THROUGH MARCH 10, 2020 From: Sarah Kane To: Delynn Coldiron Subject: FW: Hughes Property 2nd Reading Date: Tuesday, March 3, 2020 12:43:43 PM Mayor’s response. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Sarah Kane Executive Administrative Assistant to Deputy City Manager Jeff Mihelich and Mayor Wade Troxell 970-416-2447 office From: Wade Troxell <WTroxell@fcgov.com> Sent: Tuesday, March 3, 2020 12:43 PM To: BARBARA BONILLA <barbarab91@comcast.net> Cc: Ross Cunniff <rcunniff@fcgov.com>; CAO Admin <caoadmin@fcgov.com>; Emily Gorgol <egorgol@fcgov.com>; Susan Gutowsky <sgutowsky@fcgov.com>; Sarah Kane <SKane@fcgov.com>; Julie Pignataro <jpignataro@fcgov.com>; Kristin Stephens <kstephens@fcgov.com>; Ken Summers <ksummers@fcgov.com> Subject: Re: Hughes Property 2nd Reading Hi Barbara: Thank you for your email. There will always be conflicts to someone’s schedule on an agenda item on a particular night. There are multiple ways to share input with City Council including email. Please provide your input. Regards, Mayor Wade Troxell City of Fort Collins, Colorado 2017 Malcolm Baldrige Award - City of Fort Collins recognized for “an unceasing drive for radical innovation, thoughtful leadership, and operational excellence.” --- With limited exceptions, emails and any files transmitted with them are subject to public disclosure under the Colorado Open Records Act (CORA). To promote transparency, emails will be visible in an online archive, unless the sender puts #PRIVATE in the subject line of the email. However, the City of Fort Collins can’t guarantee that any email to or from Council will remain private under CORA. --- Sent from my iPhone PUBLIC COMMENTS RECEIVED NOVEMBER 6, 2019 THROUGH MARCH 10, 2020 On Mar 3, 2020, at 12:38 PM, BARBARA BONILLA <barbarab91@comcast.net> wrote: To: Fort Collins City Council and City Attorney I am writing to request that the second reading of Ordinance No. 138, 2019, addressing the zoning for the property known as Hughes Stadium, be moved from March 17, 2020 to a date that does not conflict with the Poudre School District and CSU spring break. As you are well aware, many Fort Collins citizens are extremely concerned about the zoning for the Hughes Property. To hold the second reading during Spring Break when many families will be out of town seems unfair. Please reconsider and move the date of the second reading to a time when more citizens will be able to attend. Thank you, Barbara Bonilla 80525 PUBLIC COMMENTS RECEIVED NOVEMBER 6, 2019 THROUGH MARCH 10, 2020 From: Carrie Daggett To: Ted Walkup Cc: City Leaders Subject: RE: Second Reading on March 17 Date: Monday, March 2, 2020 12:55:36 PM Mr. Walkup, Thank you for your email. The Council voted on January 21 to postpone to March 17 its consideration of second reading of the ordinance rezoning the Hughes site. Any further postponement would also be by vote of Council, and would occur, if at all, at the time of consideration of the ordinance on March 17. The ordinance was adopted on first reading on November 5, 2019. It was originally scheduled for second reading on November 19 and was at that time postponed to January 21, 2020. Please note that Council does receive input via email and you and any others who have objections or concerns to express are welcome to submit those to Council via email in advance of the 17th. The "City Leaders" address includes all of the City Council and several members of City staff. I have copied the "City Leaders" email distribution group so that Council and others will be aware of your request and my response to it. Thank you again for your interest in this item, and for your effort to communicate your concerns. ~Carrie Carrie Mineart Daggett City Attorney City of Fort Collins 300 La Porte Avenue Fort Collins, CO 80521 970-221-6520 cdaggett@fcgov.com -----Original Message----- From: Ted Walkup <twalkup8@gmail.com> Sent: Sunday, March 1, 2020 9:05 PM To: Carrie Daggett <CDAGGETT@fcgov.com> Subject: Second Reading on March 17 Ms. Daggett, as you are aware, the rezoning of the Hughes site remains a contentious issue in our community. A sizable number of Fort Collins residents continue to oppose the proposed rezoning, which is scheduled for its second reading on March 17. This date, of course, falls during Spring Break and on St. Patrick’s Day and, as a result, will likely provide an obstacle for many residents who want their voices heard during public comment. I urge you to support postponing this second reading. A vote on March 17 would give the impression that Council is trying to dispose of this issue when fewer opponents are present to raise objections. For the sake of fairness and transparency, Council should facilitate public comment on this important issue by postponing the Hughes rezoning vote to a later date. Thank you for your consideration. Ted Walkup 3514 Pratolina Court Fort Collins, CO 80521 PUBLIC COMMENTS RECEIVED NOVEMBER 6, 2019 THROUGH MARCH 10, 2020 Sent from my iPad PUBLIC COMMENTS RECEIVED NOVEMBER 6, 2019 THROUGH MARCH 10, 2020 From: Ann Conroy To: Julie Pignataro; Ross Cunniff; Ken Summers; Kristin Stephens; egorgot@fcgov.com; Wade Troxell; Carrie Daggett Cc: City Leaders Subject: Hughes site Date: Sunday, March 1, 2020 2:45:17 PM Dear Fort Collins City Council, Please reschedule the vote for the old Hughes Stadium site to sometime after the week of March 16th, since it is the week of Spring Break. This would give more people the opportunity to attend this important city council vote. The vote scheduled for March 17th really isn’t fair to both sides, since equal representation is a must for our city. Thank you, Ann Conroy 2038 Scarecrow Rd Fort Collins, CO 80525 Sent from my iPad PUBLIC COMMENTS RECEIVED NOVEMBER 6, 2019 THROUGH MARCH 10, 2020 From: Ann Conroy To: Wade Troxell Cc: Julie Pignataro; Ross Cunniff; Ken Summers; Kristin Stephens; egorgot@fcgov.com; Carrie Daggett; City Leaders Subject: Re: Hughes site Date: Monday, March 2, 2020 11:17:09 AM Since the Hughes project will probably go forward in some fashion, I think you should consider less housing instead of more. Thank you, Ann Conroy Sent from my iPhone On Mar 1, 2020, at 9:29 PM, Wade Troxell <WTroxell@fcgov.com> wrote: Hi Ann: Thank you for your email. There will always be conflicts to someone’s schedule on any agenda item on a particular night. There are multiple ways to share input with City Council including email. Please provide your input. Regards, Mayor Wade Troxell City of Fort Collins, Colorado 2017 Malcolm Baldrige Award - City of Fort Collins recognized for “an unceasing drive for radical innovation, thoughtful leadership, and operational excellence.” --- With limited exceptions, emails and any files transmitted with them are subject to public disclosure under the Colorado Open Records Act (CORA). To promote transparency, emails will be visible in an online archive, unless the sender puts #PRIVATE in the subject line of the email. However, the City of Fort Collins can’t guarantee that any email to or from Council will remain private under CORA. --- Sent from my iPhone On Mar 1, 2020, at 2:45 PM, Ann Conroy <amcbookmom@msn.com> wrote: Dear Fort Collins City Council, Please reschedule the vote for the old Hughes Stadium site to sometime after the week of March 16th, since it is the week of Spring Break. This would give more people the opportunity to attend this PUBLIC COMMENTS RECEIVED NOVEMBER 6, 2019 THROUGH MARCH 10, 2020 important city council vote. The vote scheduled for March 17th really isn’t fair to both sides, since equal representation is a must for our city. Thank you, Ann Conroy 2038 Scarecrow Rd Fort Collins, CO 80525 Sent from my iPad PUBLIC COMMENTS RECEIVED NOVEMBER 6, 2019 THROUGH MARCH 10, 2020 From: Colleen Hoffman To: Ross Cunniff; Julie Pignataro; Kristin Stephens; Ken Summers; Susan Gutowsky; Emily Gorgol; Wade Troxell Cc: Carrie Daggett; Delynn Coldiron Subject: Requesting City Council to reschedule vote from Spring Break date Date: Monday, March 2, 2020 11:38:12 AM Date: March 2, 2020 To: Members of the Fort Collins City Council I am writing to request that the Second Reading of Ordinance No. 138, 2019, addressing the Zoning for the property known as Hughes Stadium be moved from the March 17, 2020 agenda to a date that does not conflict with the Poudre School District and Colorado State University Spring Break. As you are aware, the Community is extremely interested and passionate about the zoning for the Hughes Property. To hold the Second Reading during Spring Break, when many families have made plans to be out of town, seems disingenuous and unfair to interested citizens. Please respect the Community and move the Second Reading to a more appropriate date. Respectfully, Colleen and Rick Hoffman 1804 Wallenberg Dr Fort Collins CO 80526 PUBLIC COMMENTS RECEIVED NOVEMBER 6, 2019 THROUGH MARCH 10, 2020 March 8, 2020 To: Fort Collins City Council Members, Cameron Gloss, CSU Board of Governors CC: Matt Bloom, KUNC While the meeting set for 3‐17‐2020 is a zoning hearing, it is clear that the city’s proposed plan, the CSU/Lennar Agreement and the comments of many City Council members focus on how the property will be developed and therefore it is difficult to separate zoning and development. We feel it is important to ask and receive answers to the following questions: Cameron Gloss 1. Why after the P & Z Board recommended 100% RF did you almost exclusively disregard their recommendation and you presented your recommendation to City Council with just the briefest mention that the P & Z Board recommended 100% RF? 2. Why are you saying 500 ‐ 550 units would be built on the Hughes property? We all know that you worked with CSU regarding the zoning. (We also know that the agreement CSU signed with Lennar states a minimum of 600 units and provides incentives for every unit built over 625 and also includes additional bonuses as units are sold.) 3. What is the exact number of units that can be built on the Hughes property with the LMN/RF zoning you have recommended? Not what you think it may be limited to, but the allowed maximum number? Please breakdown the allowed maximum number down by LMN and RF. 4. Why was the City Plan with identified growth areas implemented after CSU and Lennar signed their agreement regarding the Hughes Property? 5. Why after all of the feedback from the community to the City and CSU regarding the Hughes Property did you and your team only present housing development options for consideration? 6. Why if there is not a formal plan from Lennar for the Hughes Property, why are people meeting at the city building discussing the infrastructure issues for 550 units on the Hughes Property? 7. Why hasn’t the concept of a Public/Private/Philanthropic Partnership been explored, once which would still achieve both CSU’s and the State’s financial objectives? Colorado State University 1. Cameron Gloss stated in a City Council Meeting that CSU refused to consider selling the Hughes Property to the City. Please explain why this decision was made. 2. The Hughes Property was a land grant for and by the people. The community should have a say in what happens to this property. The community has been very clear, time and again, regarding the use of the Hughes Property. Why did you completely discount the public input on the Land Grant Property? 3. Why, after CSU has been so vocal regarding affordable housing for your workforce, did you not make workforce housing a requirement of the sale? City Council 1. Why is the 2nd reading of the zoning for the Hughes Property taking place during Spring Break? A time when the community has already made plans to be away and is not in a position to change plans. 2. When will City Council start demanding answers and information for example, when will the studies the community has requested be completed and results “published”? PUBLIC COMMENTS RECEIVED NOVEMBER 6, 2019 THROUGH MARCH 10, 2020 a. Ecological Characterization Study b. Emergency Response and Rescue c. Traffic study from Drake to LaPorte d. Educational Capacity e. Air Quality f. Structural Engineering Impact Study to the Reservoir g. Environmental Assessment Study 3. Many people in the community believe the Zoning for Hughes is a done deal. They find it hard to believe in transparency in government when secret meetings and communications continue among players. The realtors and were informed that the 2nd Hughes reading would not take place on November 5, 2019 hours before City Council voted to delay the vote. Mayor Troxell stated at the start of the City Council Meeting that he had not had the opportunity to speak with his fellow council members so how could the Realtors already know, and therefore found no need to be in attendance? It is clear that that group was warned off ahead of time. 4. Some council members continue to assert that affordable housing is desperately needed and believe it will be built on the Hughes parcel. The community would like to know, based on approved housing developments currently being built and/or considered, exactly how many affordable and attainable units will be built in each development. 5. Once zoning is approved, what control does the city have over how many affordable and/or attainable units are built if the plans submitted by a builder meet all codes and regulations? 6. Why aren’t affordable/attainable units being included in developments within the City Core which already has access to transportation and needed amenities? 7. Many of the cities starting out on the “Top Ten Places to Live” quickly lost their place because increasing population became more important than livability. The Fort Collins community wants Livability; what does the City and the City Council want? While some of these questions may seem global, they do ultimately relate to the City Plan. Council members refer to the City Plan in discussions of identified growth areas, including Hughes, and the impact zoning will have on this area forever. If you decide to support the recommendation of LMN/RF recommended by the City Planners, it will ultimately destroy or drastically alter/limit the night sky, wildlife habitats and access to Horsetooth Reservoir, also referred to as the “Crown Jewel of Fort Collins”. Safety in the foothill’s community will also be impacted since the City Plan identifies floods and wildfires as an ever‐increasing threat as climate changes continue to occur. Residents in the area as far back as the early 90’s, prior to the Ponds and Bella Vira developments, report that RF Zoning was fervently promoted and supported by the City to obtain buy‐in that the buffer to the foothills would always be maintained as RF. Subsequently, home buyers in this same area have relied on this promise. We ask that you vote no tonight and not support LMN/RF for Hughes. Rather, support the P & Z Boards recommendation of RF as a balanced solution among the Community, CSU and The City. Sincerely, Tamra Meurer Mary Grant PUBLIC COMMENTS RECEIVED NOVEMBER 6, 2019 THROUGH MARCH 10, 2020 Gordon Hadfield 215 W Magnolia St #201 Sara Stieben Fort Collins, CO 80521 Bill Doutt+ Ph: (970) 221-2800 Pete Dusbabek+ Fax: (970) 360-1004 Shannon Sharrock+ Cassandra Wich +Also licensed in Wyoming March 5, 2020 SENT VIA EMAIL: cdaggett@fcgov.com Carrie M. Daggett City Attorney City of Fort Collins 300 Laporte Avenue Fort Collins, CO 80521 RE: Second Reading of Ordinance No. 138, 2019/ Ethics Complaint filed by Rory Heath. Dear Ms. Daggett: We write with two concerns. First, we understand that council has received requests from several community members to postpone the second reading of the ordinance to a time that does not fall during spring break. Other than an acknowledgment that you received our last letter regarding the timing of the reading, we have not heard from you as to whether council has determined to go forward as planned on March 17, 2020, with the second reading. Second, we understand that council members have not been provided the exhibits attached to Rory Heath’s ethics complaint due to the volume of the exhibits. We do understand that the exhibits will be made available at the hearing. A fair deliberation cannot be had by council if members of council are not provided with voluminous exhibits until the time of the hearing. If council is only provided copies of the exhibits at the hearing itself, the entire process is undercut as the entirety of the complaint cannot be understood or considered on its merits. PUBLIC COMMENTS RECEIVED NOVEMBER 6, 2019 THROUGH MARCH 10, 2020 Carrie M. Daggett City Attorney City of Fort Collins Page | 2 Sincerely, HADFIELD STIEBEN & DOUTT, LLC Sara K. Stieben, Esq. SKS PUBLIC COMMENTS RECEIVED NOVEMBER 6, 2019 THROUGH MARCH 10, 2020 From: Carrie Daggett To: Martha Zook Cc: Sarah Kane; Delynn Coldiron; CAO Admin; Jacy Marmaduke; Matt Bloom; City Leaders Subject: RE: Request to reschedule second reading of Ord #138 (Hughes Stadium) Date: Tuesday, March 3, 2020 4:55:34 PM Attachments: image001.png Ms. Zook, Thank you for your email. The Council voted on January 21 to postpone to March 17 its consideration of second reading of the ordinance rezoning the Hughes site. Any further postponement would also be by vote of Council, and would occur, if at all, at the time of consideration of the ordinance on March 17. The ordinance was adopted on first reading on November 5, 2019. It was originally scheduled for second reading on November 19 and was at that time postponed to January 21, 2020. At that time it was again postponed to the next Council meeting at which all Councilmembers were expected to be in attendance. Please note that Council does receive input via email and you and any others who have objections or concerns about the proposed rezoning are welcome to submit those to Council via email in advance of the 17th. I have copied the "City Leaders" email distribution group so that Council and others will be aware of my response to your request. (The "City Leaders" address includes all of the City Council and several members of City staff.) Thank you again for your inquiry about this item, and for your interest in communicating your concerns to Council. ~Carrie Carrie Mineart Daggett City Attorney City of Fort Collins 300 La Porte Avenue Fort Collins, CO 80521 970-221-6520 cdaggett@fcgov.com From: Julie Pignataro <jpignataro@fcgov.com> Sent: Tuesday, March 3, 2020 4:02 PM To: Martha Zook <mzook.colorado@gmail.com>; Susan Gutowsky <sgutowsky@fcgov.com>; Ken Summers <ksummers@fcgov.com>; Kristin Stephens <kstephens@fcgov.com>; Ross Cunniff PUBLIC COMMENTS RECEIVED NOVEMBER 6, 2019 THROUGH MARCH 10, 2020 <rcunniff@fcgov.com>; Emily Gorgol <egorgol@fcgov.com>; Wade Troxell <WTroxell@fcgov.com>; Carrie Daggett <CDAGGETT@fcgov.com> Cc: Sarah Kane <SKane@fcgov.com>; Delynn Coldiron <DECOLDIRON@fcgov.com>; CAO Admin <caoadmin@fcgov.com>; Jacy Marmaduke <jmarmaduke@coloradoan.com>; Matt Bloom <matt.bloom@kunc.org> Subject: Re: Request to reschedule second reading of Ord #138 (Hughes Stadium) Thank you for reaching out Ms. Zook and I am including the City Attorney so that she can respond. Julie Pignataro City of Fort Collins Councilmember, District 2 With limited exceptions, emails and any files transmitted with them are subject to public disclosure under the Colorado Open Records Act (CORA). To promote transparency, emails will be visible in an online archive, unless the sender puts #PRIVATE in the subject line of the email. However, the City of Fort Collins can’t guarantee that any email to or from Council will remain private under CORA. From: Martha Zook <mzook.colorado@gmail.com> Sent: Tuesday, March 3, 2020 2:40 PM To: Susan Gutowsky <sgutowsky@fcgov.com>; Julie Pignataro <jpignataro@fcgov.com>; Ken Summers <ksummers@fcgov.com>; Kristin Stephens <kstephens@fcgov.com>; Ross Cunniff <rcunniff@fcgov.com>; Emily Gorgol <egorgol@fcgov.com>; Wade Troxell <WTroxell@fcgov.com> Cc: Sarah Kane <SKane@fcgov.com>; Delynn Coldiron <DECOLDIRON@fcgov.com>; CAO Admin <caoadmin@fcgov.com>; Jacy Marmaduke <jmarmaduke@coloradoan.com>; Matt Bloom <matt.bloom@kunc.org> Subject: Request to reschedule second reading of Ord #138 (Hughes Stadium) Good afternoon members of City Council, I was recently reached out by several of my neighbors asking if there's any way the "Second reading of Oridinance #138 regarding the re-zoning of the Old Hughes Stadium" be rescheduled to another date other than March 17, 2020. Not only is it St. Patrick's Day, in which multiple people will be out celebrating, but also being on "Spring Break". Many of the people who reached out to me indicated that this is a very important meeting in which they want to attend; however, will not be in dtown. I told them to email you making the same request to change the date. Many are speculating this date was set on purpose by the City Council, very well knowingly that half of Fort Collins would be out of town on Spring Break. I urge you to please consider changing the date so that the people of Fort Collins who voted for you may attend this meeting that is very apparent important to us all. PUBLIC COMMENTS RECEIVED NOVEMBER 6, 2019 THROUGH MARCH 10, 2020 Sincerely, Martha Zook PUBLIC COMMENTS RECEIVED NOVEMBER 6, 2019 THROUGH MARCH 10, 2020 Gordon Hadfield 215 W Magnolia St #201 Sara Stieben Fort Collins, CO 80521 Bill Doutt+ Ph: (970) 221-2800 Pete Dusbabek+ Fax: (970) 360-1004 Shannon Sharrock+ Cassandra Wich +Also licensed in Wyoming January 6, 2020 SENT VIA EMAIL AND US MAIL Carrie M. Daggett City Attorney City of Fort Collins 300 Laporte Avenue Fort Collins, CO 80521 cdaggett@fcgov.com RE: Second Reading of Ordinance No. 138, 2019. Dear Ms. Daggett: As you may recall, this law firm has been retained by Mr. Rex Miller, Ms. Tamra Meurer, and Ms. Mary Alice Grant regarding the City Council’s decision to exercise its quasi-judicial powers to rezone the former Hughes Stadium site in west Fort Collins. I know you have spoken to my partner, Gordon Hadfield, regarding this issue. Our clients request the opportunity to present a single focused presentation at the upcoming City Council meeting scheduled for January 21, 2020. Specifically, they would like to present information related to the origin of the RF zoning currently in place to the west of Overland Trial. They also request the opportunity to question staff members of the Planning and Zoning Department. I understand that public comment is currently limited to 3-minutes per speaker. Allowing a single presentation by a core group of the public will allow for a more efficient and less schizophrenic use of the City Council’s time. As a result, my clients are requesting a minimum of 20 minutes to present information and ask questions. Please provide a response to this request by January 10, 2020. PUBLIC COMMENTS RECEIVED NOVEMBER 6, 2019 THROUGH MARCH 10, 2020 Fort Collins City Council Page | 2 . Sincerely, HADFIELD STIEBEN & DOUTT, LLC /s Sara K. Stieben Sara K. Stieben SKS/eo PUBLIC COMMENTS RECEIVED NOVEMBER 6, 2019 THROUGH MARCH 10, 2020 From: Kathryn Dubiel To: Susan Gutowsky; Julie Pignataro; Ken Summers; Kristin Stephens; Ross Cunniff; Emily Gorgol; Wade Troxell Cc: Sarah Kane; Delynn Coldiron; CAO Admin; Jacy Marmaduke; Matt Bloom; Kathryn Dubiel Subject: Rescheduling request - second reading of Ordinance No. 138, 2019 (Hughes Stadium zoning) Date: Sunday, March 1, 2020 3:55:15 PM Attachments: 15-2020-02-27.pdf Greetings, City Council members, I urge you to reschedule the second reading of Ordinance No. 138, 2019, addressing the Zoning for the property known as Hughes Stadium, to a date after March 17th which falls during the week of Spring Break. I propose that either of the two Council meeting dates in April would be more appropriate for this discussion, but keeping in mind any conflicts with public holidays or well-established periods for shut down of normal activities in large segments of the community, like Spring Break week for public schools and universities. I received the updated six month planning calendar on Thursday, 2/26/2020, attached. The agenda for the April 7 City Council meeting shows three items: a second reading consent agenda item, a discussion of ebikes on paved trails following a one-year pilot, and a staff report on Census 2020. None of these items would likely require a significant amount of Council time. Another date, April 21, has no agenda topics listed other than a staff report. At this point in time, a rescheduling looks very reasonable. The opportunity for citizens wishing to be present for the second reading of this important zoning proposal should not be denied by holding the discussion on a date which is a known conflict with Spring Break week for CSU and PSD. I make this request in the interest of public participation, fairness and the importance of deliberating this decision in the presence of all interested citizens without unnecessary obstacles caused by the meeting date. Respectfully submitted, Kathryn Dubiel Citizen of Fort Collins PUBLIC COMMENTS RECEIVED NOVEMBER 6, 2019 THROUGH MARCH 10, 2020 From: Paul Patterson To: Susan Gutowsky; Julie Pignataro; Ken Summers; Kristin Stephens; Ross Cunniff; Emily Gorgol; Wade Troxell WTroxell@fcgov.com Cc: Sarah Kane; Delynn Coldiron; CAO Admin; Jacy Marmaduke; Matt Bloom Subject: Regards scheduling of second reading of Ordinance No. 138, 2019 (Hughes Stadium zoning) Date: Sunday, March 1, 2020 7:40:47 PM Dear Council Members, Please reschedule the second reading of Ordinance No. 138, 2019, addressing the Zoning for the property known as Hughes Stadium, to a date after March 17th. The opportunity for citizens wishing to be present for the second reading of this important zoning proposal should not be denied by holding the discussion on a date which is a known conflict with Spring Break week for CSU and PSD. This request is in the interest of public participation, fairness and the importance of deliberating this decision in the presence of all interested citizens without unnecessary obstacles caused by the meeting date. Sincerely, Paul Patterson 2936 Eindborough, 80525 PUBLIC COMMENTS RECEIVED NOVEMBER 6, 2019 THROUGH MARCH 10, 2020 From: Sarah Kane To: Cameron Gloss; Delynn Coldiron; Carrie Daggett Subject: FW: We would appreciate answers to the questions contained in the attached document Date: Monday, March 9, 2020 9:12:10 AM Attachments: march 8 2020 CC Letter.docx Cameron Is this something you need to review or respond to? . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Sarah Kane Executive Administrative Assistant to Deputy City Manager Jeff Mihelich and Mayor Wade Troxell 970-416-2447 office From: Mary Grant <msgrant026@gmail.com> Sent: Sunday, March 8, 2020 5:59 PM To: Susan Gutowsky <susan.gutowsky@gmail.com>; Wade Troxell <WTroxell@fcgov.com>; Julie Pignataro <jpignataro@fcgov.com>; Ken Summers <ksummers@fcgov.com>; Ross Cunniff <rcunniff@fcgov.com>; Emily Gorgol <egorgol@fcgov.com>; Kristin Stephens <kstephens@fcgov.com>; Matt Bloom <matt.bloom@kunc.org>; Carrie Daggett <CDAGGETT@fcgov.com>; Sarah Kane <SKane@fcgov.com>; marc.sallinger@9news.com; Jacy Marmaduke <jmarmaduke@coloradoan.com>; CSU Board of Govenors <csus_board@mail.colostate.edu>; Cameron Gloss <cgloss@fcgov.com> Subject: We would appreciate answers to the questions contained in the attached document City Council, CSU Board of Govenors, City Attorney We are requesting a formal response to the attached document. Thank you. Best, Mary Alice Grant 703-969-9555 CC: New Media PUBLIC COMMENTS RECEIVED NOVEMBER 6, 2019 THROUGH MARCH 10, 2020 PUBLIC COMMENTS RECEIVED FROM MARCH 11 THROUGH MARCH 25, 2020. Any comments received between March 25 until 12:00 pm, March 31 will be provided in the read‐before packet given to Council on March 31. ATTACHMENT 3 From: Sarah Kane To: Delynn Coldiron; Tom Leeson Subject: FW: Hughes Stadium Date: Monday, March 16, 2020 2:45:21 PM Should this be included in your records? I haven't been copying you on all the emails I'm getting regarding postponing Hughes item, but this one talks about their viewpoint, not their request to cancel. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Sarah Kane Executive Administrative Assistant to Deputy City Manager Jeff Mihelich and Mayor Wade Troxell 970-416-2447 office -----Original Message----- From: Eclectic Reader Books -Gmail <eclecticreaderbooks@gmail.com> Sent: Sunday, March 15, 2020 5:59 PM To: Carrie Daggett <CDAGGETT@fcgov.com>; Wade Troxell <WTroxell@fcgov.com>; Darin Atteberry <DATTEBERRY@fcgov.com>; Kristin Stephens <kstephens@fcgov.com>; Susan Gutowsky <sgutowsky@fcgov.com>; Julie Pignataro <jpignataro@fcgov.com>; Ken Summers <ksummers@fcgov.com>; Ross Cunniff <rcunniff@fcgov.com>; Emily Gorgol <egorgol@fcgov.com>; Sarah Kane <SKane@fcgov.com>; Jeff Mihelich <jmihelich@fcgov.com> Subject: Hughes Stadium To All, I would like to once again register my support for the preservation of the Hughes Stadium land as an open space natural area. To bow to the pressures of Lennar and CSU for the complete development of land that should remain in its natural state for future generations is contemptible greed. This would create irreversible damage for the next hundred years or more. Vote with your conscience. Cynthia Manuel 970-2234019 -- This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software. https://www.avast.com/antivirus PUBLIC COMMENT RECEIVED MARCH 11 THROUGH MARCH 25, 2020 From: Nathalie Rachline To: Darin Atteberry; Wade Troxell; Ross Cunniff; Julie Pignataro; Emily Gorgol; Ken Summers; Susan Gutowsky; Kristin Stephens Cc: Carrie Daggett; City Clerk Office Subject: Urging City Council to postpone discussion on Hughes Stadium scheduled for March 17th Date: Monday, March 16, 2020 3:10:08 PM City Council, As a concerned citizen, and in light of the current State of Emergency, I ask that City Council postpone its discussion on the Hughes Stadium development to a further date when citizens will be able to gather at City Hall accordingly to voice their concerns and questions. Thank you NR -- Nathalie Rachline nathalie.rachline@comcast.net / nathalie.a.rachline@gmail.com Business Strategy, Operations, and Transformations Member of the Board - SIM Colorado - Chair membership Member of the City of Fort Collins Transportation Board - Vice Chair Member of the Board - Off the Hook Arts - President + 1 (970) 215 07 05 Skype: rachline.nathalie PUBLIC COMMENT RECEIVED MARCH 11 THROUGH MARCH 25, 2020 From: Sarah Kane To: Simla Subject: RE: Please POSTPONE second hearing of Hughes Stadium hearing/decision sesssion... Date: Monday, March 16, 2020 2:46:00 PM Hello Simla and Josh, Please see the press release notifying the public of the changes to tomorrow’s Council meeting. https://www.fcgov.com/news/?id=7689 “March 17 City Council meeting modified for remote public participation; Hughes Stadium agenda item recommended for postponement to March 31” Thank you. Sarah Kane . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Sarah Kane Executive Administrative Assistant to Deputy City Manager Jeff Mihelich and Mayor Wade Troxell 970-416-2447 office -----Original Message----- From: Simla <simla.somturk@gmail.com> Sent: Sunday, March 15, 2020 8:42 AM To: Sarah Kane <SKane@fcgov.com> Subject: Please POSTPONE second hearing of Hughes Stadium hearing/decision sesssion... ... so that we can participate in our civic duty to keep each other safe by staying in our homes right now. Citizens have a right to show up safely and in a timely manner to participate in this decision. Right now it’s not that time. Thank you and respectfully, Simla Somturk & Josh Mooradian Residents - Fort Collins / Overland Trail area Sent from my iSimla PUBLIC COMMENT RECEIVED MARCH 11 THROUGH MARCH 25, 2020 From: Sarah Kane To: Samara Subject: RE: PLEASE POSTPONE HUGHES REZONING MEETING Date: Monday, March 16, 2020 2:45:00 PM Hello Samara, Please see the press release notifying the public of the changes to tomorrow’s Council meeting. https://www.fcgov.com/news/?id=7689 “March 17 City Council meeting modified for remote public participation; Hughes Stadium agenda item recommended for postponement to March 31” Thank you. Sarah Kane . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Sarah Kane Executive Administrative Assistant to Deputy City Manager Jeff Mihelich and Mayor Wade Troxell 970-416-2447 office From: Samara <samaracohen@hotmail.com> Sent: Sunday, March 15, 2020 10:34 AM To: Sarah Kane <SKane@fcgov.com> Subject: PLEASE POSTPONE HUGHES REZONING MEETING I am writing as a concerned citizen in light of the COVID-19 crowd restriction to please postpone the Hughes rezoning mtg that is scheduled for Tues. March 17. Residents deserve a fair voice to be heard for this meeting. This development affects many residents that live in the area, not to mention how it will impact school classroom numbers and traffic flow. Samara Cohen PUBLIC COMMENT RECEIVED MARCH 11 THROUGH MARCH 25, 2020 From: Sarah Kane To: Lindsay Morgan Subject: RE: Please cancel the March 17 City Council Meeting Date: Monday, March 16, 2020 2:45:00 PM Hello Lindsay, Please see the press release notifying the public of the changes to tomorrow’s Council meeting. https://www.fcgov.com/news/?id=7689 “March 17 City Council meeting modified for remote public participation; Hughes Stadium agenda item recommended for postponement to March 31” Thank you. Sarah Kane . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Sarah Kane Executive Administrative Assistant to Deputy City Manager Jeff Mihelich and Mayor Wade Troxell 970-416-2447 office -----Original Message----- From: Lindsay Morgan <Lindsette@comcast.net> Sent: Sunday, March 15, 2020 3:23 PM To: Sarah Kane <SKane@fcgov.com> Subject: Please cancel the March 17 City Council Meeting Dear Ms. Kane, It would be irresponsible not to cancel the March 17th City Council Meeting. The COVID-19 Virus is an international Pandemic and puts the citizens of Fort Collins at risk for their lives. Added to that, the Hughes Property Re-zoning vote is extremely important to many of the citizens who have worked very hard on trying to find a reasonable compromise to the plan of 600+ houses, condos, duplexes, and apartments presented by a very questionable developer. It is simply NOT FAIR for the City Council to slip this issue under the table and take advantage of the fact that few citizens will compromise their health in order to be heard in person by the Council before vote. We will continue to object and fight against this kind of tactic. Sincerely, Lindsay Morgan PUBLIC COMMENT RECEIVED MARCH 11 THROUGH MARCH 25, 2020 From: Sarah Kane To: Rose Macalister Subject: RE: Council meeting 3/17/20 Date: Monday, March 16, 2020 2:44:00 PM Hello Rose, Please see the press release notifying the public of the changes to tomorrow’s Council meeting. https://www.fcgov.com/news/?id=7689 “March 17 City Council meeting modified for remote public participation; Hughes Stadium agenda item recommended for postponement to March 31” Thank you. Sarah Kane . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Sarah Kane Executive Administrative Assistant to Deputy City Manager Jeff Mihelich and Mayor Wade Troxell 970-416-2447 office -----Original Message----- From: Rose Macalister <r_macalister@yahoo.com> Sent: Monday, March 16, 2020 8:40 AM To: Sarah Kane <SKane@fcgov.com> Subject: Council meeting 3/17/20 I am requesting for city council to consider cancelling tomorrow’s meeting d/t the recommendation by state federal authorities to maintain social distancing. I want to go but concerned about the number of people who may be there and my risk for being affected by the Covid-19 virus. Please postpone the meeting to a time when the infection rate and risk is less, to allow for community participation and in person comment. Rose Macalister 2931 Pleasant Valley Rd Fort Collins Sent from my iPhone PUBLIC COMMENT RECEIVED MARCH 11 THROUGH MARCH 25, 2020 From: Sarah Kane To: susan aubin Subject: RE: Hughes Meeting Date: Monday, March 16, 2020 2:42:00 PM Hello Susan, Please see the press release notifying the public of the changes to tomorrow’s Council meeting. https://www.fcgov.com/news/?id=7689 “March 17 City Council meeting modified for remote public participation; Hughes Stadium agenda item recommended for postponement to March 31” Thank you. Sarah Kane . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Sarah Kane Executive Administrative Assistant to Deputy City Manager Jeff Mihelich and Mayor Wade Troxell 970-416-2447 office From: susan aubin <susanaubin@hotmail.com> Sent: Monday, March 16, 2020 9:02 AM To: Sarah Kane <SKane@fcgov.com> Subject: Hughes Meeting Hi Sarah, I am sure city council is aware of recent CDC recommendations so, here they are. Following new recommendations from the Centers For Disease Control and Prevention, the Larimer County health department also urged the cancellation or postponement of events with 50 or more attendees. The CDC's recommendation is to hold off on such events for at least eight weeks and does not apply to "the day-to-day operation of organizations such as schools, institutes of higher learning, or businesses. I hope there will be a way for citizens who are at risk and unable to attend to remotely participate in the meeting. If not, it seems to send a cynical message, either that concerns about the coronavirus and the importance of social distancing don't apply to council or citizens of Fort Collins or two, that community participation in the meeting will be compromised due to people unable to attend. PUBLIC COMMENT RECEIVED MARCH 11 THROUGH MARCH 25, 2020 I am surprised the meeting is not being postponed. It seems like a good opportunity for city leadership to model good social distancing practices to keep our community safe. Sincerely, Susan Aubin PUBLIC COMMENT RECEIVED MARCH 11 THROUGH MARCH 25, 2020 From: Sarah Kane To: Trish Babbitt; Wade Troxell; Kristin Stephens; Susan Gutowsky; Julie Pignataro; Ken Summers; Ross Cunniff; Emily Gorgol; Carrie Daggett; CAO Admin; Matt Bloom; marc.sallinger@9news.com; Jacy Marmaduke; tips@coloradosun.com; Darin Atteberry; Jeff Mihelich; denis@democracynow.org Subject: RE: Please listen to CDC and CANCEL 3/17/20 City Council Meeting Date: Monday, March 16, 2020 2:41:00 PM Hello Trish, Please see the press release notifying the public of the changes to tomorrow’s Council meeting. https://www.fcgov.com/news/?id=7689 “March 17 City Council meeting modified for remote public participation; Hughes Stadium agenda item recommended for postponement to March 31” Thank you. Sarah Kane . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Sarah Kane Executive Administrative Assistant to Deputy City Manager Jeff Mihelich and Mayor Wade Troxell 970-416-2447 office From: Trish Babbitt <chaang61@gmail.com> Sent: Monday, March 16, 2020 10:09 AM To: Wade Troxell <WTroxell@fcgov.com>; Kristin Stephens <kstephens@fcgov.com>; Susan Gutowsky <sgutowsky@fcgov.com>; Julie Pignataro <jpignataro@fcgov.com>; Ken Summers <ksummers@fcgov.com>; Ross Cunniff <rcunniff@fcgov.com>; Emily Gorgol <egorgol@fcgov.com>; Sarah Kane <SKane@fcgov.com>; Carrie Daggett <CDAGGETT@fcgov.com>; CAO Admin <caoadmin@fcgov.com>; Matt Bloom <matt.bloom@kunc.org>; marc.sallinger@9news.com; Jacy Marmaduke <jmarmaduke@coloradoan.com>; tips@coloradosun.com; Darin Atteberry <DATTEBERRY@fcgov.com>; Jeff Mihelich <jmihelich@fcgov.com>; denis@democracynow.org Subject: Please listen to CDC and CANCEL 3/17/20 City Council Meeting City Council Member and Other City Staff, While I wish I could be sending you an email thanking you for your service, that isn’t the purpose of this email. Instead, I am writing to ask you to seriously take into consideration the CDC’s announcement that large events expecting more than 50 people should be banned due to the dangers of the Coronavirus. https://www.nbcnews.com/health/health-news/cdc-recommends-canceling-all-events- 50-people-or-more-until-n1159771 https://www.cnn.com/2020/03/15/health/us-coronavirus-sunday-updates/index.html PUBLIC COMMENT RECEIVED MARCH 11 THROUGH MARCH 25, 2020 Hopefully you will take the CDC announcement seriously and postpone the tomorrow’s scheduled City Council meeting, in which (among other things) members will vote on the zoning for the Hughes Stadium property. I know that you're hoping for fewer than 50 people to show up for this event, but I, personally, am planning to take my chances and attend if it is decided that the meeting will proceed as planned. I'm very concerned about the future of our wildlife and our children, and as much as I don't like attending meetings in any situation, (and I'd definitely prefer not to attend tomorrow!), I will, if necessary. Unfortunately, over the past several months, it has become clear to many of your constituents, including myself, that most of you have shown a tendency to put the wishes of developers and those in charge of large institutions above the wishes of those who voted for you to represent our views. If this weren’t the case, how could the decisions regarding the zoning of Montava, Hughes, and the ethics review board resulted in the way that they did over the recent months? It was also very obvious to those of us who have dealt with CSU over the years that when you chose March 17 as the date for the decisive vote on zoning for the Hughes Stadium land, that you had adopted CSU’s tactic of waiting until a vacation time to make an important vote—fully aware that this would be a time when many concerned citizens would be away with family, likely visiting other far-away family members, or taking a long-awaited trip that couldn’t be taken during regular work time. We have seen this strategy used over, and over again--and many of us were disappointed and disgusted to see our City Council use it for scheduling the Hughes Stadium zoning vote date. Hopefully you will show your Fort Collins constituents that even though you haven’t voted on their behalf in the past, you will at least show concern for the health of the people who are fighting the developers out of concern for our precious wildlife. Please listen to the CDC and postpone tomorrow’s very important meeting until it will be safer for everybody to continue the discussions scheduled for tomorrow. Thank you, Patricia K. Babbitt 309 Scott Ave. Fort Collins, CO 80521 PUBLIC COMMENT RECEIVED MARCH 11 THROUGH MARCH 25, 2020 From: Sarah Kane To: Freymuth,Valerie Subject: RE: Please cancel the City Council meeting on Tuesday 3/17/20 Date: Monday, March 16, 2020 2:41:00 PM Hello Valerie, Please see the press release notifying the public of the changes to tomorrow’s Council meeting. https://www.fcgov.com/news/?id=7689 “March 17 City Council meeting modified for remote public participation; Hughes Stadium agenda item recommended for postponement to March 31” Thank you. Sarah Kane . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Sarah Kane Executive Administrative Assistant to Deputy City Manager Jeff Mihelich and Mayor Wade Troxell 970-416-2447 office From: Freymuth,Valerie <valerie.freymuth@colostate.edu> Sent: Monday, March 16, 2020 10:21 AM To: Sarah Kane <SKane@fcgov.com> Subject: Please cancel the City Council meeting on Tuesday 3/17/20 Please cancel the City Council meeting on Tuesday 3/17/20 or at least cancel the vote on Hughees zoning due to covid-19 and spring break. Valerie Freymuth PUBLIC COMMENT RECEIVED MARCH 11 THROUGH MARCH 25, 2020 From: Sarah Kane To: Nathan Robinson Subject: RE: March 17th city council meeting Date: Monday, March 16, 2020 2:40:00 PM Hello Nathan, Please see the press release notifying the public of the changes to tomorrow’s Council meeting. https://www.fcgov.com/news/?id=7689 “March 17 City Council meeting modified for remote public participation; Hughes Stadium agenda item recommended for postponement to March 31” Thank you. Sarah Kane . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Sarah Kane Executive Administrative Assistant to Deputy City Manager Jeff Mihelich and Mayor Wade Troxell 970-416-2447 office From: Nathan Robinson <nrobins133@gmail.com> Sent: Monday, March 16, 2020 10:39 AM To: Sarah Kane <SKane@fcgov.com> Subject: March 17th city council meeting Hello- I am writing to urge city leadership to postpone the city council meeting scheduled for tomorrow, March 17th. The latest CDC recommendation for social distancing during the developing COVID19 pandemic is to not hold any gatherings of more than 50 people. With such a locally contentious item as Hughes stadium property rezoning on the agenda, tomorrow night's council meeting will certainly draw at least that many people. Though we currently have only one confirmed case of COVID19 in Larimer County, testing had been limited and people may be infected with COVID19 and show few or no symptoms, and the virus may thus be more prevalent in our community than we are currently aware. Being an RN at a local hospital, I am acutely aware of the extreme strain an outbreak is likely to place on our local health care system, as well as the additional risk that such a scenario will pose for me, my colleagues, and our families. I believe that it would be irresponsible of the City of Fort Collins to hold tomorrow night's council meeting as scheduled, and I urge city leaders to show the leadership for which they were elected or appointed and postpone the meeting. Thank you. Nathan Robinson PUBLIC COMMENT RECEIVED MARCH 11 THROUGH MARCH 25, 2020 Show quoted text PUBLIC COMMENT RECEIVED MARCH 11 THROUGH MARCH 25, 2020 From: Sarah Kane To: Kirsten Hartman; Ross Cunniff; CAO Admin; Emily Gorgol; Susan Gutowsky; Julie Pignataro; Kristin Stephens; Ken Summers; Wade Troxell Cc: "Ed Meek" Subject: RE: Cancel City Council Hearing Date: Monday, March 16, 2020 2:40:00 PM Hello Ms. Hartman, Please see the press release notifying the public of the changes to tomorrow’s Council meeting. https://www.fcgov.com/news/?id=7689 March 17 City Council meeting modified for remote public participation; Hughes Stadium agenda item recommended for postponement to March 31 Thank you. Sarah Kane . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Sarah Kane Executive Administrative Assistant to Deputy City Manager Jeff Mihelich and Mayor Wade Troxell 970-416-2447 office From: Kirsten Hartman <kirstenhartman@comcast.net> Sent: Monday, March 16, 2020 10:43 AM To: Ross Cunniff <rcunniff@fcgov.com>; CAO Admin <caoadmin@fcgov.com>; Emily Gorgol <egorgol@fcgov.com>; Susan Gutowsky <sgutowsky@fcgov.com>; Sarah Kane <SKane@fcgov.com>; Julie Pignataro <jpignataro@fcgov.com>; Kristin Stephens <kstephens@fcgov.com>; Ken Summers <ksummers@fcgov.com>; Wade Troxell <WTroxell@fcgov.com> Cc: 'Ed Meek' <edmeek@comcast.net> Subject: Cancel City Council Hearing Dear Council Members and Mayor I am writing to URGE you to consider cancelling the Second Reading addressing the Zoning for the Hughes Stadium Property on March 17,2020. My reasons for this request are numerous, but the main one is that due to Corona Virus precautions, many people will be unable to attend the hearing. The second reason for this request is that in light of the virus, at this point we have no idea what the city will need in one year or five years. Yes, the devastating financial impacts may make the rezoning of Hughes Property even more ridiculous than it currently is. PUBLIC COMMENT RECEIVED MARCH 11 THROUGH MARCH 25, 2020 Kirsten Hartman 6715 Enterprise Dr B-104 (until very recently homeowner in Quail Hollow) Fort Collins, CO 80526 PUBLIC COMMENT RECEIVED MARCH 11 THROUGH MARCH 25, 2020 From: Sarah Kane To: Mary Grant; Julie Pignataro; Ross Cunniff; Ken Summers; Kristin Stephens; Carrie Daggett; Susan Gutowsky; Emily Gorgol; Wade Troxell; Matt Bloom Cc: Sara Stieben Subject: RE: 2nd Reading of the Zoning for Hughes Stadium - Urgent request for information Date: Monday, March 16, 2020 2:39:00 PM Hello Mary Please see the press release notifying the public of the changes to tomorrow’s Council meeting. https://www.fcgov.com/news/?id=7689 March 17 City Council meeting modified for remote public participation; Hughes Stadium agenda item recommended for postponement to March 31 Thank you. Sarah Kane . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Sarah Kane Executive Administrative Assistant to Deputy City Manager Jeff Mihelich and Mayor Wade Troxell 970-416-2447 office From: Mary Grant <msgrant026@gmail.com> Sent: Monday, March 16, 2020 11:47 AM To: Julie Pignataro <jpignataro@fcgov.com>; Ross Cunniff <rcunniff@fcgov.com>; Ken Summers <ksummers@fcgov.com>; Kristin Stephens <kstephens@fcgov.com>; Carrie Daggett <CDAGGETT@fcgov.com>; Susan Gutowsky <susan.gutowsky@gmail.com>; Sarah Kane <SKane@fcgov.com>; Emily Gorgol <egorgol@fcgov.com>; Wade Troxell <WTroxell@fcgov.com>; Matt Bloom <matt.bloom@kunc.org> Cc: Sara Stieben <sara@hsdlawfirm.com> Subject: 2nd Reading of the Zoning for Hughes Stadium - Urgent request for information Good Morning All, I am writing to find out the status of the 2nd Reading of the Zoning for Hughes Stadium, I saw on the Larimar County Website that they are urging the cancellation of all gatherings over 50 people (See Below). The disposition of this issue is very important to me and the Fort Collins Community as is evidenced by the high turnout every time the Hughes property is on the agenda. I am over 65 and I do have complicating heath issues. Please let me know if the 2nd reading will be postponed or if I need to show up on Tuesday 3-17-2020 in the event that this issue is actually discussed during the City Council Meeting. If this issue is going to be discussed, what precautions will be in place for people like me who will be attending so that my voice is heard? PUBLIC COMMENT RECEIVED MARCH 11 THROUGH MARCH 25, 2020 Thank you in advance for your prompt attention to my request Best, Mary Alice Grant 703-969-9555 Helping organizations stay the course and navigate rough seas. Restrictions and Guidelines for Events, Large Gatherings, and Public Spaces Rather than waiting for additional positive test results, public health officials have issued proactive protective measures to minimize the impact of COVID-19. Larimer County Public Health Director, Tom Gonzales, has issued a public health order requiring the cancellation or postponement of events with more than 250 attendees and the closure of senior community centers in Larimer County. This order is intended to prevent an increase in the number of people with serious infections, resulting in an overwhelmed healthcare system. We are also urging the following: The cancellation or postponement of events with 50 or more attendees for the general population. People at high-risk for severe illness from COVID-19 (aged 60 or over, those with underlying health conditions, and pregnant people) not attend events, public areas, and business locations where 10 or more people will be gathered. Elective surgeries and non-critical medical appointments should be postponed until further notice to conserve medical resources. Avoid all nonessential travel. Travel in and out of the community is highly discouraged. f you are planning to attend any social gathering of any size, take precautions to lower the chances of getting sick yourself or spreading respiratory illness to others. Stay home if you are not feeling well Avoid others who are sick PUBLIC COMMENT RECEIVED MARCH 11 THROUGH MARCH 25, 2020 Cover your cough and sneeze with a sleeved arm or a tissue Wash your hands regularly with soap and water. Alcohol-based hand sanitizer with at least 60 percent alcohol is also effective against COVID-19 PUBLIC COMMENT RECEIVED MARCH 11 THROUGH MARCH 25, 2020 From: Barbara Gotshall To: City Leaders Subject: Hughes Stadium Property Date: Monday, March 16, 2020 2:22:14 PM Dear City Council Members: It is a grave mistake to make the Hughes Stadium into housing developments. What a tragedy it would be. This property is one of the few undeveloped pieces of land between Overland Trail and the foothills and for the sake of the citizens it should be preserved as open space, land for all to enjoy. A partnership between the City and County and CSU with funding fro the State could keep this land from development and maintain Fort Collins as a beautiful place to live. The council should think long-term and of future generations rather handing this precious land over to developers. I do hope that you postpone your Tuesday vote in the midst of the coronavirus crisis and wait until a time when citizens can safely attend the city council meeting and voice their concerns and opposition. Thank you. Barbara Gotshall 2509 Tucker Court Fort Collins, CO 80526 970-217-2035 bhgotshall@gmail.com PUBLIC COMMENT RECEIVED MARCH 11 THROUGH MARCH 25, 2020 From: K.A. Wagner To: City Leaders Subject: Gatherings of Over 50 People (CDC) Date: Monday, March 16, 2020 10:59:11 AM Council Members: By now I hope Council has made the decision to postpone Fort Colins City Council meetings (gatherings of over 50 people) based on the strong recommendation of the Center for Disease Control. Considering the heightened interest in matters before Council, many people have planned to attend and comment on critical agenda items. However, the CDC’s caution will keep many, if not most, away. Many city events and activities have already been postponed or cancelled and some facilities have closed. Why not Council meetings and council-related gatherings? I sincerely hope you will not move forward with major Council decisions without the fullest involvement of your constituents. Regards, Karen Wagner PUBLIC COMMENT RECEIVED MARCH 11 THROUGH MARCH 25, 2020 From: Mary Humstone To: City Leaders Subject: Hughes Stadium Property Date: Monday, March 16, 2020 10:24:38 AM Dear City Council Members, I strongly oppose the development of the Hughes Stadium property for housing. This is one of the few undeveloped stretches of land between Overland Trail and the foothills, and it should be preserved as open space. A partnership between the City, the County and CSU, with funding from the state, could make this happen. We don't need more housing of any kind hemming us in from the foothills and mountains that make Fort Collins such a beautiful place to live. I would like to attend the meeting Tuesday night but will not because it is irresponsible considering the threat of Coronavirus. In fact, I'm surprised that you would hold a public meeting on such a controversial issue in the midst of this crisis. Sincerely, Mary Humstone 4420 Bingham Hill Rd Fort Collins, CO 80521 970 420-5275 humstone@gmail.com PUBLIC COMMENT RECEIVED MARCH 11 THROUGH MARCH 25, 2020 From: Adam Musielewicz To: Emily Gorgol Cc: Delynn Coldiron Subject: Re: Development of old Hughes Stadium Area Date: Monday, March 16, 2020 10:22:45 AM Thank you! From: Emily Gorgol <egorgol@fcgov.com> Sent: Monday, March 16, 2020 9:32 AM To: Adam Musielewicz <a_musielewicz@hotmail.com> Cc: Delynn Coldiron <DECOLDIRON@fcgov.com> Subject: Re: Development of old Hughes Stadium Area Hello Adam, As this is a quasi-judicial matter I cannot discuss this matter in detail. I am copying the City Clerk so your comments will be part of the record. Thank you, Emily Gorgol Pronouns: She, Her, Hers City of Fort Collins Councilmember, District 6 970-556-4748 With limited exceptions, emails and any files transmitted with them are subject to public disclosure under the Colorado Open Records Act (CORA). To promote transparency, emails will be visible in an online archive, unless the sender puts #PRIVATE in the subject line of the email. However, the City of Fort Collins can’t guarantee that any email to or from Council will remain private under CORA. From: Adam Musielewicz <a_musielewicz@hotmail.com> Sent: Monday, March 16, 2020 9:14 AM To: Emily Gorgol <egorgol@fcgov.com> Subject: Re: Development of old Hughes Stadium Area Hi Emily, I just wanted to follow-up to this email I send a while ago. Did you receive it? PUBLIC COMMENT RECEIVED MARCH 11 THROUGH MARCH 25, 2020 It seems there will be a 2nd reading of this proposal tomorrow. Due to the virus, I will not be there in person. However, I strongly oppose any development of the Hughes area and prefer it to be left alone. I wanted to reiterate my view as one of your constituents. Thank you for you representation. Adam Musielewicz From: Adam Musielewicz Sent: Saturday, February 8, 2020 1:45 PM To: egorgol@fcgov.com <egorgol@fcgov.com> Subject: Development of old Hughes Stadium Area Hi Emily, Hope this email finds you well. My name is Adam Musielewicz and my wife, 2 boys and I live in the Rogers Park neighborhood. We feel lucky and fortunate to live where we do. From good neighbors to access to foothills trails, we are grateful for our neighborhood. I know there had been some public meetings about the development of the old Hughes Stadium area. Unfortunately, we were not able to attend, and while it is likely a bit late, I wanted to share my view that I oppose the development of this area for housing. I value the areas around me (like Maxwell and Reservoir Ridge) that offer opportunities to enjoy the outdoors, family friendly style. I would like to see the same with the Hughes Stadium area. I understand that our city is growing and will continue to do so, but sprawling outward I don't believe is the best practice. Though it has it's own challenges, I think investing in (affordable) housing, building vertical, it better route. Also, simply, I believe over development ousts wildlife from their home. We are so lucky to have wild and semi-wild places right next to us, and I feel strongly we need to protect them. If deliberation is still occurring regarding development, then I hope this email provides more input. Thank you, Adam Musielewicz (2524 W. Plum St.) PUBLIC COMMENT RECEIVED MARCH 11 THROUGH MARCH 25, 2020 From: taisusan@aol.com To: Wade Troxell; City Clerk Office; Darin Atteberry; Carrie Daggett; rcunnif@fcgov.com; Julie Pignataro; Emily Gorgol; Ken Summers; Susan Gutowsky; Kristin Stephens Subject: City Council meeting regarding Hughes Development Date: Monday, March 16, 2020 12:09:36 AM To: Council Members From: Susan Taylor, 2608 Kansas Drive, G-145, Fort Collins, CO RE: Tuesday Council Meeting I am very interested in attending the proposed council meeting to make a final decision on a development plan for the Hughes Property. However,I willl not be able to attend due to the Coronavirus limits on gathering more than 50 people in one location - and actually that is too close contact for someone my age - 78. I respectfully ask that you postpone this meeting until a time that it is safe for community members to attend. Literally every other activity that I engage in has been canceled to keep people safe from the virus. I don't understand why this meeting would go forward at this time. Thank you for your consideration. PUBLIC COMMENT RECEIVED MARCH 11 THROUGH MARCH 25, 2020 From: Doug Henderson To: City Leaders Subject: holding Council meetings-as-usual poses risk of COVID-19 exposure Date: Sunday, March 15, 2020 11:14:29 PM Attachments: COVID-19 mortality.png Note: please excuse the previous email which contained an error -- this one is corrected -- Dear Mayor Troxell and members of City Council, Looking at the City's website and the agenda for this week's Council meeting, it appears that the Council meeting this Tuesday will proceed as usual, since there there is no announcement to the contrary. As we are all aware, the COVID-19 pandemic poses serious health dangers, and extraordinary public health measures are needed. While the officially reported confirmed COVID-19 incidence in Larimer is low, it would be mistaken to assume this means that the virus doesn't now pose a risk locally, and that extraordinary public health measures are not needed. To the contrary, there is strong reason to believe that official numbers lag significantly behind actual infections -- and that any delay in implementing extremely strong precautionary measures can (almost certainly will) result in significantly higher COVID-19 infections with major negative consequences. Analysis of COVID-19 trajectories in different countries shows COVID-19 presence and exponential increase in infections preceding official numbers (presumed and confirmed infections), especially when testing is very limited and inadequate to identify early non- symptomatic infections as is the current situation in Colorado and in Larimer County. What is clear is that containment requires extraordinary public health measures that minimize to the greatest degree possible COVID-19 exposure and possible transmission among people, and implementation of public health measures sooner rather than later. With the COVID-19 epidemic, sooner means immediately, not in 2 or 3 days. Coronavirus: Why You Must Act Now makes clear the terrible consequences of waiting for official infection numbers to climb before implementing extraordinary public health measures to prevent spread of COVID-19. Fort Collins residents appreciate the tremendous commitment by City Council to proceed apace with Council business. However, in this highly unusual time, extraordinary public health measures to contain COVID-19 should take priority. Proceeding with a City Council meeting this Tuesday will bring together Council members, City staff, law officers, and possibly dozens of other people, all in close proximity in the Council chamber -- a situation that will put these people in danger of COVID-19 exposure, and many others who could be subsequently exposed to COVID-19, as well as increasing risk to our community's health system. For people above 60, the risk from COVID-19 infection rises significantly, from 3.5% mortality to 15% mortality. PUBLIC COMMENT RECEIVED MARCH 11 THROUGH MARCH 25, 2020 Please prioritize and take immediate public health measures to contain COVID-19 -- including not proceeding with a Council meeting-as-usual on Tuesday, or after, until such time as the public health situation becomes safe again and participation does not pose risk to individuals and to the community's health. City residents should not need to consider if attending a Council meeting they deem important is worth risking an infection that -- especially to older people -- could be fatal. Respectfully, Doug Henderson Virus-free. www.avast.com PUBLIC COMMENT RECEIVED MARCH 11 THROUGH MARCH 25, 2020 From: Tara McCormac To: City Leaders; Governorpolis@state.co.us; Eric Larsen Subject: Silence from local leadership here in Fort Collins Date: Tuesday, March 17, 2020 10:00:31 AM To whom it may concern: I woke up this morning disappointed that there was nothing to read by email, on any government websites or in the Coloradoan newspaper from our local leadership. It's been 5 days since the federal government started showering us with mandates and directives. It's been 4 days since Colorado Governor Jarid Polis started making huge decisions for our state’s safety. The only city council/mayoral uttering we have heard is about whether to delay the Hugh’s stadium development proposal vote. Yes, delay the vote; it is of NO importance next to protecting our community from a Pandemic! Some of us are using social media to stay informed; we are supporting one another keeping our social distance, washing our hands and "holing up" to do our part to prevent the exponential spread of this virus. We have read the countless emails from organizations in our full lives that have shut their doors to the public. We have researched our questions and educated our families and friends. We know that COVID-19 is particularly dangerous because it is novel meaning it comes from another species and we have no natural immunity against it. Collectively, I believe we are doing what we are supposed to be doing to protect ourselves and others. What about the others in this town? What about those who get their only information from the Coloradoan? There has been no community address from our mayor. He could sit in his living room and record a “fireside chat” and send it to the city website administrator to post. He could do a tele-chat interview with the Coloradoan and they could put it front page so all the folks out there that use the newspaper as a viable source of information could have a sense of leadership. This clearly is unprecedented and super scary for businesses, individuals, schools and government so we should be educated and reassured from our local leaders. City Council leaders could access those pesky databases and send out an email, text or robocal assuring the community that they are indeed working behind the scenes. The silence from local leadership is dangerous and alarming. By not reaching out to Fort Collins citizens directly, the mayor and city council are failing those who need leadership the most. There are plenty of people in this town that don’t have the savvy, sense of responsibility or resources to be practicing the basics of protecting themselves and others. It is past time for local leadership to do their part to advocate and protect the entire community. PUBLIC COMMENT RECEIVED MARCH 11 THROUGH MARCH 25, 2020 Thank you for your consideration, Tara McCormac Fort Collins, Colorado PUBLIC COMMENT RECEIVED MARCH 11 THROUGH MARCH 25, 2020 From: gabriele rearick To: City Leaders Cc: gabriele rearick Subject: Cancelled? Fort Collins city council meeting tonight 3/17? Date: Tuesday, March 17, 2020 11:18:27 AM Honorable Fort Collins city leaders, Have you cancelled the City Council meeting tonight, 3/17/20, due to Covid19 health threat? We haven't seen such note. Please kindly ensure responsible, "in-charge" persons will take the lead and postpone meeting and voting. There is a high likelihood that this will yet be another crowded, high density meeting, due to more contentious issues. Thus presenting a high likelihood of further unmeasured accelerated virus spread. Consequently potentially exposing many more citizens eventually than just the ones present at the meeting. It seems, common sense suggests, based on former meetings and status quo of nationwide developments, that it is neither safe & wise to proceed with this meeting, with it previous form, today. Especially considering the most recent developments & orders in CO and Larimer County. What are you planning to do? Regards, Gabriele PUBLIC COMMENT RECEIVED MARCH 11 THROUGH MARCH 25, 2020 From: Nick Frey To: Darin Atteberry; City Clerk Office; Carrie Daggett; Wade Troxell; Ross Cunniff; Julie Pignataro; Emily Gorgol; Ken Summers; Susan Gutowsky; Kristin Stephens Subject: Council meeting currently schedule for March 17th Date: Sunday, March 15, 2020 11:01:03 PM Hello Council and members of City staff: I would like to request the city respect the current pandemic, the safety and health of its citizens, and the guidelines set by the Centers for Disease Control: https://www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/2019-ncov/community/large-events/mass-gatherings-ready- for-covid-19.html The meeting currently scheduled for Tuesday evening, open to the public, generally has over 50 in attendance in a small, confined space. This is in direct violation of the guidance set nationally and being followed by most major cities at this moment. Even more seriously, some citizens wishing to attend / speak / participate, as well as some members of Council, are considered part of the “Vulnerable Population”. It is recommended they not only follow general safety guidelines, but even go as far as preemptively self- quarantine. Holding a public meeting in the face of this crisis is an obvious and severe breach of public trust and confidence, and would set a precedent that ignoring warnings directed at health and safety is acceptable. I am sure you will make the right decision here and continue to provide steadfast guidance and leadership to Fort Collins. — Nick Frey The NMF Group, LLC nfrey09@gmail.com 970.215.2826 — PUBLIC COMMENT RECEIVED MARCH 11 THROUGH MARCH 25, 2020 From: roxanne griffin To: Wade Troxell Cc: City Leaders Subject: Re: March 17 Council Meeting - request cancellation Date: Sunday, March 15, 2020 6:48:25 PM Dear Mayor Troxell, Thank you for your response. As I am certain you and our county's health director are abundantly aware this is a fluid situation. The CDC as of just a few hours ago is now recommending all gatherings of 50 people or more to be cancelled. Sincerely, Roxanne Griffin Resident of Fort Collins On Sunday, March 15, 2020, 5:26:17 PM MDT, Wade Troxell <wtroxell@fcgov.com> wrote: Dear Roxanne: We are looking at various options to be responsive to Gov. Polis’ 250 person gathering mandate and the recommendations from the county’s health director. More to come tomorrow. Regards, Mayor Wade Troxell City of Fort Collins, Coloradoan 2017 Malcolm Baldrige Award - City of Fort Collins recognized for “an unceasing drive for radical innovation, thoughtful leadership, and operational excellence.” --- With limited exceptions, emails and any files transmitted with them are subject to public disclosure under the Colorado Open Records Act (CORA). To promote transparency, emails will be visible in an online archive, unless the sender puts #PRIVATE in the subject line of the email. However, the City of Fort Collins can’t guarantee that any email to or from Council will remain private under CORA. --- Sent from my iPhone On Mar 15, 2020, at 9:15 AM, roxanne griffin <turningrox@yahoo.com> wrote: Dear City Leaders, In light of the coronovirus and recommendations of the CDC for at risk populations, I request postponement of the upcoming meeting on March 17, 2020. As you know a large crowd is expected which should be of PUBLIC COMMENT RECEIVED MARCH 11 THROUGH MARCH 25, 2020 concern to you personally as well as concerns for those residents you represent. Also there are citizen's voices that may not be heard due to the recommended social distancing that otherwise would have been at the table. Sincerely, Roxanne Griffin Resident Fort Collins PUBLIC COMMENT RECEIVED MARCH 11 THROUGH MARCH 25, 2020 From: Jamie Callahan To: City Leaders Subject: Hughes rezoning vote and covid 19 Date: Saturday, March 14, 2020 2:52:16 PM Dear city leaders, I am writing today to ask you to delay the vote on Hughes stadium rezoning currently scheduled for march 17, in light of the rapidly escalating covid 19 situation and city emergency declaration. Myself, along with MANY members of the community are planning to attend this meeting and at this point would put ourselves at risk by being with such a large gathering. Citizens should be allowed to voice their opinions, and to do so safely. This vote should NOT continue without community input, and at this time as it's unsafe for such a large gathering I'm asking you to delay the vote until it's safe for us all to gather together once again. I appreciate your quick attention to this matter, Jamie Callahan, RN 2450 Hampshire Rd #17, Fort Collins, CO 80526 PUBLIC COMMENT RECEIVED MARCH 11 THROUGH MARCH 25, 2020 From: Beverly Hill - Real Estate To: City Leaders Subject: Rescheduling meeting for Hughes land Date: Tuesday, March 17, 2020 10:31:42 PM To All City Council Members: I'm hoping that the meeting which is now scheduled for March 31 is rescheduled way into the latter part of April. I, for one, am a very high risk individual (on Chemo drugs). The public's health should come first vs. scheduling a meeting about Hughes. I hope you all reconsider and look further down to April, perhaps even late May. Thank you. All stay well. Take care. Beverly Beverly Hill 3605 Mead Street Fort Collins, CO 80526 Phone: 970-226-1386 Fax: 970-226-2014 PUBLIC COMMENT RECEIVED MARCH 11 THROUGH MARCH 25, 2020 -1- ORDINANCE NO. 138, 2019 OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FORT COLLINS AMENDING THE ZONING MAP OF THE CITY OF FORT COLLINS BY CHANGING THE ZONING CLASSIFICATION FOR THAT CERTAIN PROPERTY KNOWN AS THE HUGHES STADIUM REZONING AND APPROVING CORRESPONDING CHANGES TO THE RESIDENTIAL NEIGHBORHOOD SIGN DISTRICT MAP WHEREAS, Division 1.3 of the Fort Collins Land Use Code (the “Land Use Code”) establishes the Zoning Map and Zone Districts of the City; and WHEREAS, Division 2.9 of the Land Use Code establishes procedures and criteria for reviewing the rezoning of land; and WHEREAS, on October 16, 2018, City Council approved Ordinance No. 123, 2018, annexing the Hughes Stadium Annexation property (the “Property”) consisting of approximately 164.56 acres into the City; and WHEREAS, on October 16, 2018, City Council approved Ordinance No. 124, 2018, to place the Property into the Transition (T) zone district upon annexation; and WHEREAS, on July 16, 2019, City Council adopted Resolution 2019-084 to initiate the rezoning of the Property and directed City staff to prepare a rezoning application on behalf of the City and make a recommendation to the Planning and Zoning Board and City Council regarding the appropriate zoning for the Property, all in accordance with Land Use Code Section 2.9.4; and WHEREAS, City staff submitted an application for rezoning requesting that the Property be rezoned as “Low Density Mixed-Use Neighborhood (LMN) on the east half of the property and Residential Foothills (RF) on the west half of the property, with a condition that residential units be clustered and 50% of the area be retained in an 'open' condition” (the “Proposed Rezoning”); and WHEREAS, on September 19, 2019, the Planning and Zoning Board on a 4-2 vote recommended that City Council not adopt the Proposed Rezoning and instead that Council rezone the Property entirely as Residential Foothills (R-F); and WHEREAS, City staff is recommending that City Council implement the recommended condition by requiring that residential development on the Residential Foothills zone district portion of the Property meet the requirements for Site Design for Residential Cluster Development set forth in Land Use Code Section 4.3(E)(2); and WHEREAS, after publishing public notice on Sunday, October 13, 2019, City Council held a public hearing on November 5, 2019, to consider the rezoning as set forth herein and at that hearing City staff and members of the public provided information and testimony. -2- NOW THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FORT COLLINS: Section 1. That the City Council hereby makes and adopts the determinations and findings contained in the recitals set forth above. Section 2. That City Council, after considering at the November 5, 2019, hearing the Planning and Zoning Board recommendation, the testimony of the public and City staff, and the information provided for the hearing, hereby finds that the Proposed Rezoning is: (1) Consistent with the City's Comprehensive Plan; (2) Is compatible with existing and proposed uses surrounding the Property and is the appropriate zoning for the Property; (3) The proposed zoning would not result in significantly adverse impacts on the natural environment; (4) Would result in a logical and orderly development pattern. Section 3. That City Council hereby rezones the western half of the Property as Residential Foothills (R-F) zone district and the eastern half of the Property as Low Density Mixed-Use Neighborhood (LMN) as follows: A north to south dividing line (“Dividing Line”) shall be established on the Property with such line running parallel to and 1368.63 feet west of, as measured perpendicularly, the eastern line of the southeast quarter of Section 20, Township 7 North, Range 69 West of the Sixth Principal Meridian, City of Fort Collins, County of Larimer, State of Colorado. The portion of the Property located west of the dividing line shall be designated as Residential Foothills Zone District and the portion of the Property located east of the dividing line shall be designated as Low Density Mixed-Use Neighborhood District (L-M-N). Section 4. That Council imposes the following condition of approval upon this rezoning pursuant to Land Use Code Section 2.9.4(I): All residential development occurring on the portion of the Property zoned Residential Foothills (R-F) shall be residential cluster development in compliance with the version of Land Use Code Section 4.3(E)(2), Site Design for Residential Cluster Development, in effect on the effective date of this Ordinance and attached to this Ordinance as Exhibit “A”. However, any Land Use Code section or defined term referenced within Land Use Code Section 4.3(E)(2) shall be to the version of such section or defined term in effect at the time such section or defined term is applied to any development application for any portion of the Property zoned Residential Foothills. -3- Section 5. That Council finds that the condition of approval imposed in above Section 4 is necessary to accomplish the purposes of the Land Use Code, specifically, Land Use Code Section 1.2.2(A), (C), (D), (I), and (N), and is consistent with City Plan. Section 6. That Council finds that the rezoning and condition of approval adopted herein are in the best interests of the citizens of Fort Collins. Section 7. That the Residential Neighborhood Sign District Map adopted pursuant to Section 3.8.7(E)of the Land Use Code be, and the same hereby is, changed and amended by showing that the above-described property is included in the Residential Neighborhood Sign District. Section 8. The City Manager is hereby authorized and directed to amend said Zoning Map in accordance with this Ordinance. Introduced, considered favorably on first reading, and ordered published this 5th day of November, A.D. 2019, and to be presented for final passage on the 31st day of March, A.D. 2020. __________________________________ Mayor ATTEST: _____________________________ City Clerk Passed and adopted on final reading on this 31st day of March, A.D. 2020. __________________________________ Mayor ATTEST: _____________________________ City Clerk EXHIBIT “A” Land Use Code Section 4.3(E)(2): Site Design for Residential Cluster Development. Property in the Foothills Residential District may be developed in clusters, subject to approval by the Planning and Zoning Board. In a cluster development, lot sizes may be reduced in order to cluster the dwellings together on a portion of the property, with the remainder of the property permanently preserved as public or private open space. The following standards shall apply to cluster developments in this District: (a) Only the uses specifically permitted in subsection (B) above shall be allowed. (b) Minimum lot sizes may be waived by the Planning and Zoning Board, provided that the overall density of the cluster development is not greater than one (1) unit per gross acre. (c) A cluster development shall set aside at least fifty (50) percent of the total land area of the proposed development as private or public open space that is permanently preserved as open space through dedication of ownership, if acceptable to the City, or placement of an appropriate easement granted to the City or other nonprofit organization acceptable to the City, with such restrictive provisions and future interests as may be necessary to ensure the continuation of the open space use intended. As a condition of approval, the City may also require the property owners to maintain the dedicated open space to city standards through a maintenance agreement. (d) Building envelopes shall be identified on the cluster development, and the minimum area of lot, minimum width of lot, minimum front yard, minimum rear yard, minimum side yard and maximum building height shall conform to the requirements established in the Residential Low Density District. (e) The design of the cluster development shall be appropriate for the site, as demonstrated by meeting the following criteria: 1. preservation of significant natural resources, natural areas and features, native vegetation, open lands or agricultural property through maintenance of large, contiguous blocks of land and other techniques. 2. provision of additional amenities such as parks, trails, common areas or access to public recreational areas and open space. 3. minimizing the visual intrusion by dwellings and other structures and blocking of vistas to the foothills and prominent mountain vistas by avoiding building in the center of a meadow or open area. 4. protection of adjacent residential development through landscaping, screening, fencing, buffering or similar measures. 5. the layout of lots on the cluster development is designed to conform to terrain and is located so that grading and filling are kept to a minimum. Natural features such as drainage swales, rock outcroppings and slopes shall be preserved. 6. taking into account the unique micro-climate of the foothills so that building envelopes are selected and individual structures are built for protection from high winds and to function with maximum conservation of energy. 7. if farm animals are intended to be allowed within the area, indicating those portions of the area to be developed that will be reserved for the keeping of farm animals and the mitigation efforts used to buffer these areas from surrounding uses. !" #$ % # & &' ' ' $ $ $(" #& ) ' *' '+ ( * +# #*, # xyz{~~~~~~~~ ~ ~ -B5:LMNOPQRSTUVPWQNXYZ[cdefghijgklhi . ~~~~ y| ~ /456@0123456/ ~~x y}~}CD/mnopqrogistkgpfufgvw ~~{B4C2E@WYYWNZ\ 72. ] ~~ N^8/ ~~~~~~|UP\/9:FG; ~ N_`PaZQTb ;H/<5;.=//I6J61;02526.~~~~~~ ~~ />K6:6.5/. 4/ ~ ~~ >;?@ ~ A ~~ ~ ~~ ~ ~~¡ ¢~ ~~~~~ ~~ ~~~~¢~~~ ~~~~~ ~~~~~~~~~ ~~~ ~~~ ~~~ ~ ~ ~~ ~~ ~~ ~~~~¤¥~~ ~¡ ~~~ ~¦ ~~~~ ~~~ ~~ ~ ~ ~£~ ~~ ~ ~ ~£~ ~ ~ ¢ ~¢~ ¨y~~ }~~~~~~~ ~~ ~~¢~ ~~§~~£~~~x ~ ~ ~¢~~ ~¦~¨| ~ ~ ~ ~~ ~~~~¦~~ ©~~ª~x ~~~~ ~ ~~~ ~ ~~ ~~~© ~~ ~¡ ~~~ ~~~ ~ ~ ~~~ ~ ~~¦ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~£ ¦ ~~~~ ~ ~¡ ~~~~~~~ ~~~ «PRSNRSNMU¬QNYZSTNQWWNZQTR`_ ~~~ ¬¯S`QR¯WNTUNTPWN«R°WS YW® ~~ ~~ ¢~~~~~ ~~} ~ ~~ ~~ PUBLIC COMMENTS RECEIVED NOVEMBER 6, 2019 THROUGH MARCH 10, 2020 habitat for wildlife corridors along the foothills, require less new utility and street infrastructure, and better maintain a more ‘open’ character. Common open space areas could be sited to contribute to a larger network of green spaces adjacent the site. Further, the LMN portions of the site provide an opportunity to create a new neighborhood that provides a wide variety of housing choices that are fully integrated into the surrounding community. The LMN district has the capacity to provide a small neighborhood center that provides a focal point for residents and services benefitting the surrounding area. Residential Foothills (RF) District The Residential Foothills zone district predates the original City Plan and Land Use Code (1997) and has its origins in the Foothills Area Study (1982) embodied in the first Intergovernmental Agreement (IGA) between the City and Larimer County. The IGA restricts all development below a datum of 5,250 feet in elevation, above which no structure can project, to protect the community’s foothills backdrop. The Study concluded that the Foothills area should be changed from a Rural designation to a Rural Non-Farm designation and residential density allowed to increase from 1 unit/35 acres to 1 unit/2.2.9 acres. Prohibited Prohibited Type 2 Type 2 Prohibited Multi-family dwellings >8 units per building, > 50 units, or >75 bedrooms Prohibited Prohibited Type 2 Type 2 Prohibited Long-term care facilities Prohibited Prohibited Type 2 Type 2 Prohibited Mixed-Use Dwellings Prohibited Prohibited Type 1 Type 1 Prohibited Mobile Home Parks Prohibited Prohibited Type 2 Type 2 Prohibited Extra Occupancy Rentals >4 tenants Prohibited Prohibited Type 1 Type 1 Prohibited Fraternity and sorority houses Prohibited Prohibited Prohibited Type 2 Prohibited Minor public facilities Prohibited Type 1 Type 1 Type 1 Prohibited Public and private Elementary, Intermediate and High school education Type 1 Type 2 Type 1 Type 1 Prohibited 1982-Foothills Area Study. Five privately held parcels west of Overland Trail were surveyed, four of which were recommended for inclusion in the UGA and changed in designation from Rural to the Rural Non-Farm designation and the maximum residential density increased from 1 unit per 35 acres to 1 unit per 2.29 acres. The study established the following guidelines (suggested) and standards (required) for the foothills area: 1. Public water and sewer utilities will be required. (standard) 2. Structures should be placed below the 5,200’ elevation line in order to avoid physical constraints and ridgelines, and to facilitate water service. 3. Underground utilities will be required. (standard) 4. Development should be designed to conform to the terrain of the area. 5. Design should demonstrate a concern for the view of the foothills as well as from the foothills. 6. Design should take into account the unique micro-climate of the area, particularly high winds. 7. Design should consider wildlife habitat.