Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutASPEN HEIGHTS STUDENT HOUSING - PDP - PDP110018 - REPORTS - CITIZEN COMMUNICATIONDr. Mr. Shepard, I am a resident of the Redwoods at Conifer, and I am greatly concerned about the proposed Aspen Heights Development. I feel that the addition of 800 cars to our small area in the north will greatly impact our roads, in terms of congestion at the proposed Vine/redwood intersection. The frequency of the trains is frustration enough for us, and I hate to imagine the addition of 800 cars trying to get across the tracks as well. The new development is about three miles from campus. It is just far enough that students (especially rich, entitled ones who can afford on campus parking) won't want to ride bikes or walk; they will use their cars. And we Americans don't car pool. What will result will be congestion, an increase in carbon monoxide, and noise at all hours of the day. Northern Fort Collins is the "poorer" area of Fort Collins. We worry about crime and our children's' schools much more than our southern counterparts. This housing development will only make northern Fort Collins even less desirable, as the development will decline into a student "slum", noisy and filthy, with drunk undergraduates speeding and texting behind the wheel. What assurance do we have that this developer won't eventually sell off the u nits to smaller rental property management companies? Their on-line track record doesn't back up their smooth words of assurance that they are somehow different. Undergraduate students are undergraduate students. It doesn't matter how the lawn looks. This proposed development, in my mind, goes directly against the Northside Neighborhood Plan. There are MANY children in our neighborhood. We are a quiet neighborhood that is safe for children, and it is actually, amazingly, affordable to working class families. We were so thrilled to find a place that fits our budget, yet is still good for children. Aspen Heights would take that away from us. Over 15 children catch the school bus at Confier and Redwood. My six year old daughter has already almost been hit TWICE crossing Conifer, by cars who ignored the school bus stop sign. This proposed development will endanger our children even further, with the huge increase of traffic on Conifer. If you approve this development, you will be condemning North Central Fort Collins to becoming a slum, unsafe for families. The economic./social differences between north and south Fort Collins will become even more marked. I understand that it is a question of economics for you, but please consider this from a human, family standpoint. Would you like to raise your 6 and 8 year old children next to 800 undergraduates? I am almost certain that you wouldn't have to make that choice. I sincerely hope that you side with us, the working families of North Fort Collins, and not an out-of-state developers who are in it only for the money. What do they care about us? But you, in your role, do. Sincerely, F_ Jo . tersteen 1043 Mullein Dr. 1037 Mullein Drive Fort Collins, CO 80524 May 13, 2010 Ted Shepard, City Planner 281 North College Avenue P.O. Box 580 Fort Collins, CO 80521 Dear Mr. Shepard: I am writing to you regarding the development of the proposed Aspen Heights Student Housing complex that is currently under development review with the City of Fort Collins. I have serious concerns about the multiple boarding houses serving several hundred CSU students, such as noise and traffic on Redwood (immediately back of our house), as well as an out-of-state landlord of the development. (Who will supervise and maintain housing for 700+ students?) But even worse for the entire community is the funneling of 700 or 800 cars, several times a day, right through the already -congested streets of Old Town as students drive back and forth from the campus to their housing. And when a train is crossing North College, the line of waiting cars will stretch for miles rather for blocks. We are relative newcomers to Fort Collins, and we find it a wonderful place to live. The only negative things about the community are the congested streets and multiple train crossings. If you allow this student housing to be built in this location, an already troublesome situation will be even worse. Please don't let that happen. Sincerely yours, Theodora R. Wintersteen �Proven Financial Capability • Willing Capital Sources • Aspen Heights' operational efficiency and occupancy rates have allowed the company to remain well capitalized while attracting several equity partners and financial institutions. • Debt Financing • Aspen Heights has existing relationships with the nations leading construction lenders. To date Aspen Heights has secured over $400MM in construction financing. Past and current lenders include JP Morgan Chase, BB&T, Frost Bank, Arvest, and Key Bank. • Equity • Aspen Heights' projects are fully funded through 2013. Since 2008 Aspen Heights has raised over $80MM in equity to fund its developments. • The company is currently in talks with several private equity firms to fund projects slated for development in 2014 and beyond. JPMorganChase l j KeyBank OMMO Fro s t ANET BANK EXHIBITOVI- �'� N RSPE Comprehensive Capabilities The Aspen Heights Market Research team performs extensive market analysis to identify potential campuses across the country. The team continuously tracks more than 20 key metrics per market analyzing numerous data points in each. It also conducts interviews and holds focus groups with students and university administration representatives at each potential campus. More than 5,000 students have participated in focus groups, which enables Aspen Heights to refine its product to the most up-to-date needs and desires of its residents. The Aspen Heights Corporate Development and Construction team has more than 75 years of combined experience in multifamily, single family and commercial development. With in-house expertise for all general contracting, infrastructure, vertical construction, development, and design as well as regular risk -management audits and proven construction management systems, Aspen Heights consistently achieves the highest construction standards attracting praise from lenders, investors, students and their parents. The expert Aspen Heights Property Management and Leasing teams have developed strategies, training, and property management systems to reliably attain some of the highest lease -up and retention statistics in the industry: • 60%+ resident retention versus the industry average of 30% • 95% customer satisfaction rating • 100% leased in several projects 6+ months in advance of school year start • 100% leased in subsequent year's operations Aspen Heights also utilizes the latest strategies in social media, innovative websites and videos that both educate and sell students on the Aspen Heights concept. Once students have chosen Aspen Heights, they enjoy best -in -class customer service that is reflected in resident retention and overall satisfaction ratings. ASPEN HEIGHTS REMAND EXHIBITS FROM APPLICANT - I support the development of North College. I support residences and business being built on this site. I cannot support a high -density all student, all rental, monoculture there. I fear that this type of development will lead to more fast food restaurants and low -culture development vs. the desire to bring North College up rungs of livability and improve the aesthetics and quality of life associated with this area. 6—X,CZ-A.6A, ric - Could this site not serve the city better as a park? Or as single family homes? Or as a prairie dog refuge? - Please consider those of us already living in this area. Consider how this will decrease our home values and our quality of life. Consider how this will drive existing homebuyers to potentially sell and look elsewhere. Please stop seeing tax dollar potential and see the lives this would impact. - If the city continues to support this, then please - focus on ways to keep us and our children safe, and to keep traffic out of our community and on major roads: - DO NOT connect Blondel (to New Vine) and Blue Spruce at this time — Wait it, Vine Drive can be pushed through to College (to help prevent traffic flowing through the heart of our community) or make it a requirement that Vine Drive is pushed all the way through to College with this Development! - Install large speed bumps in the neighborhood to deter it being used as a cut-thru. - Install Children at Play signs throughout the neighborhood. - Put in`s�op igl'—Ft nd stop signs to make it undesirable to use the neighborhood as a cut through. - Find way to ensure safety at the Redwood and Cajetan intersect — as our community garden is there and it is heavily used pedestrian area — and child play area. Consider requesting the developer to build a small park and playground i on its remaining undeveloped 1.8 acres on the southeast side of the retention pond. If they really want to fit in with the existing community - then add a feature that makes it seem like they are trying to do that - something that would serve as a bridge between the two and would benefit everyone. I would also like to provide these comments to the administrative hearing officer and the Aspen Heights developer but do not have their contact information. Could you please provide it to me? Thank you. Jen Hayes From: hayes jen [mailto:jacraw0@hotmail.com] Sent: Tuesday, May 22, 2012 1:32 PM To: Ted Shepard Subject: Aspen Heights - comments for consideration Hi Mr. Shepard - Please confirm receipt of this email. I attended the administrative hearing last night on Aspen Heights. I live at 244 Pascal Street in Old Town North. I know the city has already recommended this project go forward - much to my dismay, for it is destined to have signifigant negative impact on our local neighborhoods. I would just like to reiterate a few of the comments I heard, and plea for several considerations in my last bullet: - Placing 500-700 students in a upscale monoculture neighborhood, which is surrounded by neighborhoods occupied by range of income levels and a nice mix of families and professionals is not in alignment with the desire to create a diverse community or to retain community relationships. How does someone moving in and out every year add to the fabric of the community - it does not. How do loud partying nights and drunken students cutting through our neighborhood to Old Town create a peaceful community? It does not. - The student lifestyle can sometimes lend itself to reckless behaviors, such as drinking and driving or distracted driving - the communities surrounding the site are heavily occupied with children who regularly ride their bikes and play outside - which will have to completely change if this neighborhood is built. Childhoods changed in a day:( - I have heard potential new homeowners say they are not looking in our neighborhood any longer because they don't want to live next to a large student housing complex. This is wrecking home values and the stability of already fragile single family home ownership on North College. - The fear of traffic is literally keeping me awake at night. Blondel being extended to connect with Blue Spruce will create a direct corridor for Aspen Heights residents to cut through our community. Students will NOT go north to go south. PLEASE refrain from connecting these streets until after Vine is extended all the way to College. If they do not have the outlet from Vine to College they will come through Old Town North to get onto Old Vine. Our children play outside, ride bikes on these safe streets, and will no longer be able to do this safely if the neighborhood becomes this constant flow of traffic. There were no study results or predictions of flow on the Blondel-Blue Spruce network shown last night - that is very disturbing that this was not evaluated. Page 1 of 1 Ted Shepard From: lunarowan@q.com 0\1>1 Sent: Tuesday, August 07, 2012 11:51 AM To: Ted Shepard E`0 S Subject: Aspen heights student housing VJ Mr. Shepard, I would like to comment on the review for the Aspen Heights Student Housing proposal. I have a number of concerns about the project as proposed- 1- I believe that this is the only student housing project proposed -that -.has 81 houses with 4-5 bedrooms this does not seem consistent with the current city law of three unrelated law- why are there extra bedrooms in the houses if they are not proposing to rent the►, and whp will enforce that they are not rented? As I understand the city law states that only 25% of houses in a block may become boarding houses. Since there is no policy in place for student housing I believe that allowing a development that is intending not to comply with current city codes should not be allowed. 2- This student housing project is 3 miles and 2 railroad crossings from CSU. North College Ave and Lemay Ave. are already backed up when trains come and having more cars will only make this situation worse. 3- Public transportation from this site to CSU is complicated and not direct. 4- I believe that a regular housing development would be a better choice for the proposed site. thank you for your time, David Slater 8/7/2012 SOME NOTES Land use patterns have been fairly well established, particularly within the residential neighborhoods and industrial areas. The vision and goals for continued evolution of the corridor pertain mainly to the two mixed commercial areas - the Commercial North College and Community Commercial areas shown on the map. These areas have been the main focus of analysis and discussion in the planning process. These two areas along with the industrial area contain most of the property which likely to be developed or redeveloped within the foreseeable future. The corridor contains a wide range of land uses from industrial to commercial to residential uses. Most of the various types of uses fit the secondary, supporting, service role of the corridor as an area of relatively low levels of investment and land values, compared to areas of the City south of the river. In the C-N and C-C-N areas in particular, the vision and goals reflect a desire to improve the area with reinvestment and new investment, redevelopment and new development, both public and private, to address problems and deficiencies and give the area a more positive character. STREETS Black dashed lines show the updated skeleton and circulation system of future development patterns, with new streets and intersections providing a more complete street network, on -street parking, new access to areas east and west of College, and localized travel connections. A few additional local streets and connections will likely be needed as part of development plans, but will be determined in the development design process. "NEW VINE" The Master Street Plan has been updated since the original 1994 adoption date of this plan, and the Access Management Plan was adopted in 2000. These efforts identify the need to realign Vine Drive, moving it approximately V4-mile to the north, and sizing it appropriately to manage larger traffic volumes. As Vine Drive does now, it will continue east to the Interstate 25 frontage road, connecting to industrial areas east of Lemay Avenue in the East Mulberry corridor. The proposed realignment of Vine Drive would bring a standard arterial street into and through an area of the corridor previously envisioned for a mixed -use neighborhood development pattern, similar to transitional areas around Downtown to the south and west of the core. The realignment bisects this area, and the major traffic facility affects the land use pattern. ENHANCED TRAVEL CORRIDOR City Plan designates an "Enhanced Travel Corridor" along Conifer Street, and southward from Conifer along North College Avenue connecting to Downtown and the Mason Transportation Corridor. Along Conifer, the Enhanced Travel Corridor continues eastward to ultimately connect with future development in 53 Goals for Land Uses and Activity Policy LU 1.1- Synergy. Zoning, City actions, URA, and business association efforts will assist "high multiplier" uses that bring people and economic activity, and add synergy with surrounding properties. Examples include 1) dwellings, 2) stable living -wage jobs, 3) retail sales and 4) attractions. a. Uses that detract from these attributes will be discouraged, restricted, or limited to appropriate portions of the area. (Examples of such uses include used car lots, outdoor storage, and storage units in areas with potential for more active mixed -use development.) b. Zoning will continue to allow for a very broad mix of uses and businesses realistic for market conditions, serving neighborhood and community commercial needs of the trade area; serving the highway and commuters; and continuing a service, supply, and light industrial role; all with incremental improvement of the community infrastructure and image. land uses in the corridor will fit City Plan's broad view recognizing Downtown as the primary focal point of the clty7 and its retalUentertainment core the source of its vitality. Policy LU 2.1- Complementary Uses. Development in the North College corridor will support Downtown with jobs and housing bringing residents and workers; will add different attractions 'across the river' for people who come Downtown, as Jax Outdoor does at the time of this plan; will improve the attractiveness of Fort Collins for travelers and visitors, ideally with a new or refurbished hotel; and will accommodate expansion of Downtown arts uses, especial with suppor6�ustom small industry and workshop space. Mdlti-storybuildings help make the most of the close -in opportunity offered by the corridor and infrastructure investments in it; create more synergy; create more significant architecture; and create a stronger sense of place. Policy LU 3.1- .The City and URA will encoyrage multi -story buildings, and additional height In one-story buildings, in development projects. 48 Goals for a More Complete Street Network This goal fs inseparable from Access Management goals for North College Itself. It WB be realized incrementally over the long term. Policy STN 1.1 - Multiple objectives. In addition to access control, new infrastructure will be developed in a manner that facilitates redevelopment. STN 2.1 - Collaborative Approach. City staff will collaborate with owners and developers on desirable projects which achieve vision and goals, invoking the flexibility built into city-wide street standards, as needed to foster the kinds of places that achieve the vision and goals. A proactive, flexible, solution -oriented approach is needed due to compact, mixed areas of old and new development where new streets and North College Avenue widening will remove land from existing properties. Many properties are small, shallow, downtown -size parcels; and the few larger parcels are constrained by demands for new infrastructure as well. Every foot of space is important. Ultimately, decisions will balance local circumstances and desires with broader highway mobility functions. Examples of key standards likely to involve needs for flexibility include street and drive cross sections, streets vs drives, alignments, curvatures, design speeds, stacking lengths, driveway spacing, parking setbacks, and on -street parking. STN 2.2 -On-street Parking. The network will provide on -street parking to accommodate overflow demands and bring pedestrian activity to streets (or drives). Redeveloping compact land areas with more ground devoted to public infrastructure means less buildable ground to pay for the infrastructure. This will require increased intensity of development, thus placing parking spaces at a premium on building sites, increasing the importance of an overflow network. STN 2.2 - Other Infrastructure. Utility corridors, easements, channels, and detention basins will be integrated with the network for multiple purposes (e.g. recreation, personal mobility, image and identity.) 44 i, f , 111 l F, ,i I I .., .. , z .: 1 i. .. F I. , USED -CAR SALES AND OTHER VEHICLE -RELATED USES Vehicle -related uses have been prominent in the corridor since the rise of the automobile (e.g. sales, servicing, washing, drive-thrus, trucking operations, storage, salvage, etc.). These kinds of businesses are viable and necessary, and highway entry corridors like North College are typical locations for them. In recent decades, used -car and truck sales in particular have become prominent enough to generate attention and concern as an issue. Market analysis and planning discussion have noted negative effects of this particular use on image and identity, investment and values, and spin-off activity. The concern is that these effects can combine to create a domino effect in which proliferation inhibits a more desirable mix of commercial uses. One result of the original 1994 plan was a limit on proliferation of used car lots -- zoning now limits vehicle sales uses to a percentage of North College frontage. While other vehicle -related uses may have some similar effects, concerns about proliferation are not as pronounced. Vehicle -related uses are expected to remain a prominent part of the North College economy and market for some time, even as the city and its market continue to evolve around the corridor. There is general agreement that vehicle -related uses can fit into a more mixed commercial district, along with more active, attractive, and valuable urban uses, using design and public improvements. INDUSTRIAL AND EMPLOYMENT USES The corridor has been a place for industrial and supply uses related to the railroad and highway, and also for office and light industrial uses. Increased employment would be a positive contribution to the corridor, as additional employees would add to the immediate market for goods and services. Whether and how to promote the corridor to companies is an issue. HOUSING The economic strength of businesses in the corridor is largely dependent upon customers in the trade area. As noted previously, market analysis indicates a need for building up the customer base within the trade area and the corridor itself. Market analysis encourages a mix of housing, which in this case refers to a need to encourage some moderate and higher income housing in addition to lower income housing, which is naturally expected given the nature of the area and its existing housing stock. As part of the original 1994 plan rezoning, residential uses are not permitted along North College Avenue itself - a minimum setback of 200 feet was established. The main reasons had to do with appropriate use of limited highway frontage land, and livability concerns. This issue should be revisited with regard to the possibility of future vertical mixed -use development - that 19 City Plan /V(I-(- V In 1997, Fort Collins' Comprehensive Plan was overhauled and unified into a new document named City Plan. A corresponding new system for zoning and land use, the Land Use Code, accompanied City Plan. The material from the original 1994 plan for the corridor is reflected in City Plan and the Land Use Code. City Plan recognizes that "the community is made up of many unique neighborhoods, districts, and places"; and recognizes the need for subarea plans to adapt its city-wide perspective to specific circumstances in certain areas. It identifies the North College corridor among "Targeted Redevelopment Areas" -- where general agreement exists that infill and redevelopment are beneficial; increased economic activity is desired; and it is appropriate to facilitate urban evolution. This plan helps implement CityPlan by providing the forum to: • convene people of different disciplines and interests, • stimulate crucial conversations, • explore issues and possibilities, ■ create a framework to guide decisions and investments over time, • stimulate additional projects to pursue over time, ■ review City requirements for development, ■ recommend small and large ways to improve the area, • discuss priorities, and • maintain the broad base of community support regarding improvements in the corridor. 14 - ; . £+.• 1•, pia 1 1, •, ego: .ti.ilE'.t. it t is V •� IoeN �n Blade shapes are buildings in this figure -ground diagram above. Much of the area developed in a strip along the highway about a half -block deep. In this diagram, white lines are street rights -of --way. A relatively disjointed patchwork pattern of development in much of the corridor can be compared to the grid pattern of Downtown in both diagrams. West Central Neighborhoods Plan Current and Future Student Housing Needs A. Neighborhood based organization(s), should work with developers, Colorado State University, the Colorado State University Research Foundation, and the City to seek solutions to increased student housing demands, not only on specified properties adjacent to the Colorado State University Main Campus, but on sites throughout the City to encourage dispersion of student housing throughout other areas of the community adequately served by mass transit. B. New development intended for student housing should be designed to be compatible to the surrounding neighborhoods by being evaluated from the perspectives of both density (housing units per acre) and intensity. C. Redevelopment in the vicinity of the Colorado State University Main Campus should take into consideration the long-term goals of the University. D. The City should encourage Colorado State University to develop the recommended areas for student housing identified in this Plan. Future Housing Needs A. The re -use of existing buildings rather than demolition for new development should be encouraged where practical and consistent with the land use and housing densities policies presented in this Plan. B. Certain areas consistent with the land use and housing densities policies presented in this Plan should be designated to buffer high traffic volume streets, commercial or high density multi -family areas from single-family neighborhoods, with the intent of mitigating traffic, noise, and other issues. These buffer areas could be made up of lower density multi -family housing, such as town homes and other attached single-family residences and small-scale apartment buildings or professional and service office uses. Targeted areas include: areas which have been converted to rentals; areas which maybe in considerable disrepair: areas which adjoin vacant land; or areas where well -maintained neighboring areas are being adversely impacted. The following should be designated as buffer areas (see Map 3): the property located between the properties fronting on Westward Drive and the properties fronting on University Avenue, to buffer residences on Westward Drive south side of Prospect Road, between "Young's Pasture" and Shields Street Chapter 4 N Implementation Actions Page 9 Community and Neighborhood Livability CORRIDORS Corridors provide a connection between different areas or destinations and include travel corridors and other natural and water corridors. Corridors are not just about more streets and open space in the city - they are about a network of travel routes, choices for how people move throughout the city, reducing the need for vehide trips, Inking pockets of green space, and maximizing every positive feature that these corridors can contribute to Fort Collins. Major transportation corridors link destinations and activities and make it easier to move around the City using various modes of travel. Among these are Enhanced Travel Corridors, multi -modal corridors supported by complementing land uses that link key areas of the city. Other corridors such as the Poudre River, streams, drainageways, and trails collectively create a network that links open lands to areas of the city where residents live and work, and provide for wildlife habitat and movement Three types of Corridors are identified on the "I Structure Plan Mao: • Enhanced Travel Corridors Open Lands, Parks, and Water Corridors Poudre River Corridor (Overiay) A more detailed explanation for each type of Corridor is provided below, along with detailed principles and policies for each. ENHANCED TRAVEL CORRIDORS Purpose: Enhanced Travel Corridors provide multi -modal connections between two or more Districts or activity centers. Enhanced Travel Corridors promote safe, convenien4 and comfortable access to high- frequency transit service and bicycle and pedestrian facilities. Enhanced Travel Corridors are mufti -modal In nature and emphasize wide sidewalks, bike lanes on designated routes, transit stops, and parking facilities. Enhanced Travel Corridors correspond with Targeted Infill and Redevelopment Areas, and as such, they are anticipated to support the expansion of economic opportunity and accommodate a higher -intensity, transit -supportive pattern of development over time. (Aiso see the Transportation chapter for more information on Enhanced Travel Corridors) The images above illustrate the transfumration of a typical intersection (top) to a Mgher-intensity, mixed -use Enhanced Travel Corridor (bottom). Principle LIV 43: Enhanced Travel Corridors will be strategic and specialized Transportation Corridors that contain amenities and designs that specifically promote walking, the use of mass transit, and bicycling. Enhanced Travel Corridors will provide high- frequency/high efficiency travel opportunities for all modes linking major activity centers and districts in the city. Policy LIV 43.1 - Integrate Land Use and Transportation Decisions Reflect the important relationship between land use and transportation in policy decisions, management strategies, and investments to ensure they are coordinated, complementary, and support the City Structure Plan Map. The City may provide transit service in advance of demonstrated demand to support development of key Districts on high -frequency lines. (Also see the Transportation chapter.) Policy LIV 43.3 - Support Transit -Supportive Development Patterns Support the incorporation of higher intensity, transit - supportive development along Enhanced Travel Corridors through infill and redevelopment. Encourage the densities and broader mix of uses necessary to support walking. bicyding, and transit use while accommodating efficient automobile use. 95 COMMUNITY COMMERCIAL DISTRICTS Purpose Community Commercial Districts are higher intensity, mixed -use activity centers intended to serve as destinations for surrounding neighborhoods and the community. Community Commercial Districts offer a mix of retail, restaurants, offices, small civic uses, and higher density housing. Existing patterns and intensities of development in the City's Community Commercial Districts vary greatly; therefore, both vertically and horizontally mixed -use development forms will be encouraged. Higher density development is encouraged in Community Commercial Districts to support their role as hubs of the City's high -frequency transit system and to promote an active, pedestrian -friendly, environment The physical environment will promote walking, bicycling, transit use and ridesharing as well as provide a high quality urban life for residents. Examples of Community Commercial District areas include Campus West and the Foothills Mall. The Foothills Mall is one of the city's Community Comrrmrual Distria vcas Principle LIV 35: Community Commercial Districts will be communitywide destinations and hubs for a high -frequency transit system. They will be quality mixed -use urban activity centers that offer retail, offices, services, small civic uses, and higher density housing, in an environment that promotes walking, bicycling, transit and ridesharing. Policy LIV 35.1—Location Community Commercial Districts are located along Enhanced Travel Corridors where they may be more readily served by existing or future transit 88 Policy LIV 35.2 — Mix of Uses Community Commercial Districts may include a mix of uses, as follows: • Phadpal uses• Retail, restaurants, offices, and other community services. • Supportlng uses. Higher density housing, day care (adult and child), civic and institutional uses, pocket parks and other outdoor gathering spaces, and other supporting uses. Discourage drive -through facilities. Where such facilities are allowed, they should be secondary in emphasis to outdoor spaces for people, and relegated to secondary locations. Policy LIV 35.3 -Scale Encourage higher intensity infill and redevelopment in Community Commercial Districts to promote the creation of active destinations for surrounding neighborhoods and the community and to create concentrations of housing and employment sufficient to support high -frequency transit Encourage vertical mixed -use; however, limit maximum building height to five (5) to six (6) stories. Policy LIV 35.4 — Transform through Infill and Redevelopment Support the transformation of existing, underutilized Community Commercial Districts through infill and redevelopment over time to more intense centers of activity that include a mixture of land uses and activities, an enhanced appearance, and access to all transportation modes. (Also see the Infill and Redevelopment section in this chapter.) Policy LIV 35.5 — High -Frequency Transit Many of the city's Community Commercial Districts are located along Enhanced Travel Corridors and are intended to serve as primary hubs of the city's high -frequency transit system. Locate transit stops centrally and adjacent to the commercial core of the District. Retail, restaurants, and other active uses should be visible and accessible from the transit stop. Provide for transfers to feeder buses (local bus network) in the design and locadon of these stops. Provide comfortable waiting areas, appropriate for year-round weather conditions, at all transit stops. Passenger loading zones should be close to the stop, but should not interfere with pedestrian access. CITY PLAN Community and Neighborhood Livability DESIGN PRINCIPLES AND POLICIES FOR EXISTING NEIGHBORHOODS Design principles and policies for Existing Neighborhoods are intended to protect the character and stability of established neighborhoods throughout the City. They are intended to be applied in conjunction with the policies for the specific types of neighborhoods in this section, as applicable. Principle LIV 26: Neighborhood stability should be maintained and enhanced. Most existing residential developments will remain largely unaffected by these City Plan Principles and Policies. Policy LIV 26.1- Maintain Existing Neighborhoods Aim to preserve the character of existing neighborhoods through neighborhood planning, assistance to neighborhood organizations, and supportive regulatory techniques. Changes, if any, will be carefully planned and will result from Initiatives by residents or from a specific subarea plan prepared in collaboration with residents. Other changes may result from specific initiatives intended to improve the quality of existing neighborhoods, such as improving mobility and access to everyday activities and services, adding flexibility for vacant and underutilized land, and introducing new neighborhood centers, parks, and small civic facilities. Policy LIV 26.3 - Promote Compatibility of Uses Encourage low intensity residential uses within predominantly residential neighborhoods, including but not limited to single-family, low density multi -family, and group homes. Allow other compatible uses to the extent that they reinforce and do not detract from the primary low density, residential function of the neighborhoods. Policy LIV 26.4 - Balance Resident Preferences with Communitywide Interests In determining the acceptability of changes to parcels of land adjacent to existing residential developments, balance the adjacent residents' preferences with communitywide interests. For example, if a commercial center is proposed in an existing neighborhood, provide direct community access but also seek context -sensitive solutions to reduce cut -through traffic within the neighborhood. Policy LIV 26.5 - Retain Differences among Neighborhoods Retain the size and pattern of lots and blocks, building style, street design details, street and outdoor lighting, and landscape characteristics in ways unique to a given neighborhood as infill and redevelopment occur. CITY PLAN An array of older and newer existing neighborhoods can be founo throughout the city. 77 Community and Neighborhood Livability HOUSING The housing principles and policies support the vision for a community that provides opportunities for people to live in safe, habitable, and accessible housing and carry forward existing policies related to affordable housing. They also build on ideas from previous editions. of City Plan related to sustainable housing units and resource efficiency and conservation as well as the need to provide various housing options as population and household composition and needs change over time. Principle LIV 7., A variety of housing types and densities for all income levels shall be available throughout the Growth Management Area. Policy LIV 7.1- Encourage Variety in Housing Types and Locations 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. Single-larnily delached dwelling units compose the largest portion of the community's housing supply Policy LIV 7.2 - Develop an Adequate Supply of Housing Encourage public and private for- profit and non-profit sectors to take actions to develop and maintain an adequate supply of single- and multiple -family housing, including mobile homes and manufactured housing. Policy LIV 7.3 - Encourage Accessory Housing Unit Development Recognize accessory housing units as a viable form or additional and possibly affordable housing and encourage their development provided such development is consistent with existing residential neighborhood character. Policy LIV 7A - Maximize Land for Residential Development Permit residential development in most neighborhoods and districts in order to maximize the potential land available for development of housing. and thereby positively influence housing affordability. Policy LIV 7.5 - Address Special Needs Housing Plan for and meet the housing needs of special populations within the community. Disperse residential - care facilities, shelters, group homes, and senior housing throughout the Growth Management Area. Special populations, such as seniors, disabled citizens, and students have different housing needs. The photo above shows an affordable senior housing development. Policy LIV 7.6 - Basic Access Support the construction of housing units with practical features that provide basic access and functionality for people of all ages and widely varying mobility and ambulatory related abilities. Policy LIV 7.7 - Accommodate the Student Population Plan for and incorporate new housing for the student population on campuses and in areas near educational campuses and/or that are well -served by public transportation. CITY PLAN 59 ` ttauns Targeted Infill and Redevelopment Areas pi-in,Forlcoltns Targeted Redevelopment Areas NO NAME 1 East MLdbeffy Corridor Z Midtown Corridor 3 Cam � West 4 Nodb College 5 Downbn 5 CSu Targeted Activity Center Other Activity Center Growth ManagementArea i City Limits Enhanced Travel Corridor Transit Oriented Development Overlay F gurc LIV I Community and Neighborhood Livability Policy LIV 5.3 - Identify Additional Redevelopment and Infill Areas as Appropriate Utilize subarea plans to help designate areas for redevelopment and infill that are not identified on the Targeted Infill and Redevelopment Areas Map. Within these plans, support the development of appropriate design standards to protect the character of neighborhoods and to ensure conformance with City Plan. See Figure LIV 2 for a map of completed subarea plans. Policy LIV 5.4 - Contribute to Public Amenities Explore options for private development to help contribute to the additional public amenities needed in areas where infill and redevelopment occurs. Public amenities will be key to transforming outdated areas into distinct places with identifiable character and more marketable frontage that promotes redevelopment Needed amenities usually include pedestrian improvements like streetscapes, plazas, special walkways, and lighting; access improvements like new secondary streets; and landscaping and signage for identity and wayfinding. Options for helping developers with these amenities include tax increment financing, improvement districts, and context -sensitive design and engineering standards for streets and development. Principle LIV 6: Infill and redevelopment within residential areas will be compatible with the established character of the neighborhood. In areas where the desired character of the neighborhood is not established, or is not consistent with the vision of City Plan, infill and redevelopment projects will set an enhanced standard of quality. Policy LIV 6.1- Types of Infill and Redevelopment in Residential Areas Infill and redevelopment in residential areas may occur through: a. The addition of new dwellings on vacant lots and other undeveloped parcels surrounded by existing residential development. b. Dwelling units added to existing houses (e.g., basement or upstairs apartments). c. Small, detached dwellings added to lots of sufficient size with existing houses (e.g., "alley houses" or "granny Flats"). d. Expansion or redevelopment of properties. e. Neighborhood -related, non-residential development. CITY PLAN Without guidelines or regulations to guide the scale and character of infill and redevelopment in established areas, new development can either detract from or complement the neighborhood's established character. (Photos for demonstrative paposes only, properties are not located in Fort Collins.) Policy LIV 6.2 - Seek Compatibility with Neighborhoods Encourage design that complements and extends the positive qualities of surrounding development and adjacent buildings in terms of general intensity and use, street pattern, and any identifiable style, proportions, shapes, relationship to the street, pattern of buildings and yards, and patterns created by doors, windows, projections and recesses. Compatibility with these existing elements does not mean uniformity. Policy LIV 6.3 - Encourage Inboduction of Neighborhood -Related, Non -Residential Development Encourage the addition of new services, conveniences, and/or gathering places in existing neighborhoods that lack such facilities, provided they meet performance and architectural standards respecting the neighborhood's positive characteristics, level of activity, and parking and traffic conditions. 53 Community and Neighborhood Livability Policy LIV 4.1 - Ensure Adequate Public Facilities Utilize the provision of public facilities and services to direct development in desired directions, in accordance with the following considerations: a. Only permit development 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. b. Do not extend new roads and other City services to serve development that is inconsistent with City Plan or other regional plans as adopted by the City. Moreover, the City should not enter into any agreements with other jurisdictions to jointly fund or construct infrastructure improvements or provide services that might foster growth that is inconsistent with these plans. The City is not precluded from working with other jurisdictions to provide services and facilities that benefit the entire community such as water and wastewater facilities, regional trails, open space and parks. c. Give preferential consideration to the extension and augmentation of public services and facilities to accommodate infll and redevelopment before new growth areas are prepared for development. d. Review applications for the creation of new special service agencies and the expansion of existing special service agencies for conformance with these City Plan principles and policies. e. Work with Larimer County to develop plans and policies for public services and Facilities required for new and existing development located in unincorporated areas of the Growth Management Area. f. Charge additional fees to non -city residents who utilize City services. (Also see the Tran ,r=6on Master Plan and the Transportation, Environmental Health, High Performing Community, Culture, Parks, and Recreation, and Safety and Wellness chapters) Policy UV 4.2 - Utilize Fees and Development Requirements Maintain an efficient and fair system of fees and development requirements that assesses the costs and CITY PLAN benefits of financing public facilities and services, the need for which is generated by new development (Also see the Economic Health chapter.) INFILL AND REDEVELOPMENT Much of the "greenfield" land within the City's Growth Management Area (GMA) has been developed. As a result, there is increasing emphasis on infill and redevelopment opportunities within certain established areas of the city, as existing development becomes outdated or underutilized. The principles and policies in this section identify areas in the city that are targeted for infill development and redevelopment and also address the need for compatibility with the character of existing residential neighborhoods. These principles and policies are intended to be applied in conjunction with the LU Structure Plan Man principles and policies for Districts and Neighborhoods, as applicable. Principle LIV 5: The City will promote redevelopment and infill in areas identified on the Targeted Infill and Redevelopment Areas Map. Policy UV 5.1 - Encourage Targeted Redevelopment and Infill Encourage redevelopment and infill in Activity Centers and Targeted Infill and Redevelopment Areas Identified on the Targeted Infill and Redevelopment Areas Map (See Figure LIV 1), The purpose of these areas is to: • Promote the revitalization of existing, underutilized commercial and industrial areas. • Concentrate higher density housing and mixed -use development in locations that are currently or will be served by high frequency transit in the future and that can support higher levels of activity. • Channel development where it will be beneficial and can best improve access to jobs, housing, and services with fewer and shorter auto trips. • Promote reinvestment in areas where infrastructure already exists. • Increase economic activity in the area to benefit existing residents and businesses and, where necessary, provide the stimulus to redevelop. 51 EXHIBIT#-77 POLICIES LIV 5.1 Encourage ... infill in ... Targeted infill and Redevelopment Areas ... concentrate higher density housing ... increase economic activity ... provide stimulus to redevelop ... LIV 6.1 ... new dwellings on ... undeveloped parcels surrounded by existing residential ... LIV 7.2 ... develop and maintain an adequate supply of single- and multiple -family housing ... LIV 7.7 ... incorporate new housing for the student population ... in areas ... well -served by public transportation ... LIV 26.4 ... balance the adjacent residents' preferences with community -wide interests LIV 35.3 Encourage higher intensity infill ... in Community Commercial Districts ... create concentrations of housing ... LIV 35.4 Support the transformation of existing, underutilized Community Commercial Districts through infill ... to more intense centers of activity LIV 43.3 Support the incorporation of higher intensity, transit -supportive development along Enhanced Travel Corridors through infill ... WEST CENTRAL NEIGHBORHOODS PLAN IMPLEMENTATION ACTIONS Current and Future Student Housing Needs ... encourage dispersion of student housing throughout other areas of the community ... August 7, 2012 — Aspen Heights Meeting — Hayes Opposition to Aspen Heights I support the development of North College. I even support residences and business being built on this site. I cannot support a high -density all student, all rental monoculture there. I fear that this type of development will lead to more fast food restaurants and low -culture development vs. the desire to bring North College up rungs of livability and improve the aesthetics and quality of life associated with this area. Prairie dogs are a huge concern in our neighborhood. I support the humane removal of these animals if Aspen Heights goes through, but I am more concerned about what this will mean for the growth of the population in our neighborhood given these animals will be pushed out from their northern home. I suggest (based on ideas from other neighbors) that Aspen Heights work with Old Town North to jointly remove and relocate prairie dogs as a joint solution. In an effort to increase livability in the North College area, would this site not serve better as a nice park or in single family homes or really anything that involves home purchases and is not an all rental high density student housing development? Should the city continue with the shortsighted desire to approve this project, could they at least help us existing homeowners by accepting Aspen Heights desire to deed the portion of land on the southeastern end of the development to the city and make it into a nice playground and grassy area for the children of the surrounding neighborhoods to use? Our closest park is either Lee Martinez on the other side of College or GreenBriar on the other side of Willox. Given the number of children and families in Redwood Meadows, off Conifer, and in Old Town North, and given that Redwood Drive will become a major corridor for all those northern neighborhoods, a nice community park and playground makes sense here. Should the city continue to support this proposal, please work with our community to install Children at Play signs? Also, I know the City Traffic Engineer is against the use of stops signs, but PLEASE consider stop signs on Blondel so people do not go flying down this straight street through our community. Let's not make it easy to cut through our community! These are not major arterials, they are our neighborhood!! Thank you for your consideration. Very sincerely, and very concerned, Jennifer Hayes 1 For Pascal St. Fort Collins, CO 80524 August 7, 2012 — Aspen Heights Meeting — Hayes Opposition to Aspen Heights I support the development of North College. I even support residences and business being built on this site. I cannot support a high -density all student, all rental monoculture there. I fear that this type of development will lead to more fast food restaurants and low -culture development vs. the desire to bring North College up rungs of livability and improve the aesthetics and quality of life associated with this area. Prairie dogs are a huge concern in our neighborhood. I support the humane removal of these animals if Aspen Heights goes through, but I am more concerned about what this will mean for the growth of the population in our neighborhood given these animals will be pushed out from their northern home. I suggest (based on ideas from other neighbors) that Aspen Heights work with Old Town North to jointly remove and relocate prairie dogs as a joint solution. In an effort to increase livability in the North College area, would this site not serve better as a nice park or in single family homes or really anything that involves home purchases and is not an all rental high density student housing development? Should the city continue with the shortsighted desire to approve this project, could they at least help us existing homeowners by accepting Aspen Heights desire to deed the portion of land on the southeastern end of the development to the city and make it into a nice playground and grassy area for the children of the surrounding neighborhoods to use? Our closest park is either Lee Martinez on the other side of College or GreenBriar on the other side of Willox. Given the number of children and families in Redwood Meadows, off Conifer, and in Old Town North, and given that Redwood Drive will become a major corridor for all those northern neighborhoods, a nice community park and playground makes sense here. - Should the city continue to support this proposal, please work with our community to install Children at Play signs? Also, I know the City Traffic Engineer is against the use of stops signs, but PLEASE consider stop signs on Blondel so people do not go flying down this straight street through our community. Let's not make it easy to cut through our community! These are not major arterials, they are our neighborhoodl1 Thank you for your consideration. Very sincerely, and very concerned, Jennifer Hayes C� l For Pascal St. Fort �J /ice Collins, CO 80524 U August 7, 2012 — Aspen Heights Meeting — Hayes Opposition to Aspen Heights ')/trl "; aaIIS- August 7, 2012 To The City Official and Administrative Officer Overseeing the Aspen Heights Meeting: My name is Jennifer Hayes. My husband Thomas, my four year old son Ellis and I live at 244 Pascal Street in Old Town North. I would like to state my opposition to the Aspen Heights project for the record. I support the development and growth of the North College corridor. I would not have bought a home here if I did not. We have high hopes for this area, and know it can become a gem of our already awesome community. For this and many other reasons stated below, please consider declining the Aspen Heights proposal. Placing 500-700 students in an upscale monoculture neighborhood, which is surrounded by neighborhoods occupied by range of income levels and a nice mix of families and professional's is not in alignment with the desire to create a diverse community or to retain community relationships. How does someone moving in and out every year add to the fabric of the community - it does not — it creates a transient, distant community. How do loud partying nights and drunken students cutting through our neighborhood to Old Town create a peaceful community - it does not! The student lifestyle can sometimes lend itself to reckless behaviors, such as drinking and driving or distracted driving (students on cell phones and texting, applying makeup, etc.) - the communities surrounding the site are heavily occupied with children who regularly ride their bikes and play outside - which will have to completely change if this neighborhood is built. Bringing hundreds of students into a location where they will likely cut through our neighborhood to get to other main streets is just asking for the death of a small child. This will be on your conscious when it happens. I respect the experience of the city planners for transportation and I disagree with their assumption that cars will not come through our neighborhood. Drunk drivers will do everything they can to stay off main roads to remain undetected. When College backs up due to traffic and trains, our neighborhood streets will be seen as the solution to get south quicker. There have not been any traffic studies in our neighborhood that I know of. I recommend that if approved, the city install traffic counters on the north and south end of blondel and on Cajetan, Osiander and Pascal at both the east and west exits to get a solid baseline of current traffic patterns. This can then be re - measured if the development goes in to prove the amount of traffic that will be re-routed through our neighborhood. These are assumptions of mine, just as the assumption of the city planners is that there will not be that much additional traffic. Myself, and several of my neighbors, have stated they will put their houses on the market and move south if this development goes forward. Two neighbors have already listed their homes in anticipation of this development, and two more have rented their houses out, seeking refuge in another community in town. This is wrecking home values and the stability of single family home ownership on North College and is wrecking our community relationships. The fear of traffic is literally keeping me awake at night. The thought of Blondel being extended to connect with Blue Spruce - will create a direct corridor for Aspen Heights residents to cut through our community. Students will NOT go north to go south. PLEASE refrain from connecting these streets until after Vine is extended all the way to College. If they do not have the outlet from Vine to College they will come through Old Town North to get onto Old Vine. Our children play outside, ride bikes on these safe streets and will no longer be able to do this if the neighborhood becomes this constant flow of traffic. 0 8' Ilege a violation of Fort Collins Land Use Code Section 3.4. 1 (A)(2)(j) and (C) as follows: The proposed development will occur on a parcel of land which, with its adjacent parcel, contains a prairie dog colony that exceeds 50 acres. Subsection (C) requires that the proposed development plan restore or replace the resource value lost to the community (either on -site or off -site.) According to the Administrative Hearing Decision, in order to satisfy this requirement, the developer will financially contribute to the restoration of property owned by the city of Fort Collins Natural Areas Program. Specifically, the City will collect a restoration fee of $900.00 per acre to be applied to the McKee Farm which is presently undergoing restoration, totaling $27.900.00. Appellants allege: A. Contrary to the Administrative Hearing Decision, the value lost to the community is not restored or replaced with a donation to McKee Farm for the following reasons: 1. McKee Farm currently maintains no prairie dog habitat and has no plans to accept prairie dogs who need to be relocated from property within the city. Restoration of prairie, without iwairie dogs, is missing the point in this case, and thus subverts the intent of the code. "Prairie," per se, is not listed as a "sensitive resource" by Section 3.4.1 and is implicitly not of equal resource value. 2. We interpret the code to require a "like for like" replacement, or restoration of, the affected habitat/colony, which would mean that a contiguous 50 acre parcel of land must be purchased for a prairie dog colony of this size or, at a minimum, a similar size habitat should be created on city land for prairie dogs to migrate to. 3. Furthermore, the language in 3.4.1(A)(2)(c), "Potential habitats and known locations of rare, threatened, or endangered animals" would also apply to this site; a 50 acre prairie dog colony is a "potential habitat" for the endangered black -footed ferret. Thus, a restoration or replacement of this resource for endangered animals must include prairie dogs for the "potential habitat" to be replaced. Additionally, burrowing owls often live in prairie dog burrows, so loss of this site is a loss of "potential habitat" for this severely declining species also. B. The negotiated amount of $27,900.00 is inadequate and does not allow for a complete replacement of the resource lost: 1. The cost to replace the resource is equal to the cost of purchasing a parcel of land large enough to allow relocation of a 50 acre prairie dog colony. In Larimer County, such a parcel of land, and its development into suitable habitat, would cost significantly more than $27.900.00. 71 oho/� C t�►A�j 1 st issue - I'm upset that I moved away from the student district because I wanted to be I/ in a more family -friendly neighborhood, only to find that 700+ students will be moving in !! pretty much across the street from my house. I realize that at some point this parcel will be developed, but I'd prefer pretty much anything over student housing, with its traffic and noise concerns, massive turnover and lack of investment in the area, and potential for significant police presence. 2nd issue - I think that the city has misapplied land use code section 3.4.1(A) and (C). There is a requirement that the development plan restore or replace the value of the sensitive resource that is lost by construction. That sensitive resource in question is a large prairie dog colony. The city suggests that a restoration of McKee Farm replaces this resource, but I don't see how that can be the case. I've been told that there is no plan for prairie dog habitat creation or restoration on this property. So, the way I understand it is that we're losing the sensitive resource - the prairie dog colony - and we are not restoring it or replacing it, as required by the Land Use Code. I'd like to suggest that the city re -negotiate with the developer to actually provide a replacement of the prairie dog colony - that is, 50 acres of habitat that can be used for relocation or for migration to by other displaced prairie dogs. I'd like to submit written comments outlining this in more detail. EXHIBIT «4y� cl EXHIBIT+�3 . I-, 3 August 7, 2012 To Whom It May Concern regarding the proposed Aspen Heights development, We currently reside just NE of the proposed development, near Greenbriar Park, in a home we purchased about 5 years ago. My husband and I are concerned about the proposed development and the likelihood that it will bring student housing into an area that is primarily family -oriented. We are also very concerned about the prairie dog colony that is located on the property in question. We hope that EVERY effort possible will be taken to relocate the prairie dog colony. Cost should not be an issue given the nature of the proposed development. We have walked, run, biked, and driven by these prairie dogs for 5 years, and appreciate the natural beauty they contribute to an otherwise urban existence. It is also my understanding that they are a keystone species, and their ecological benefit as such should not be under -appreciated. Besides the prairie dog colony, we are concerned about the fact that this development will change the dynamics of our neighborhood. Although I have completed a second bachelor's and am close to finishing a master's degree in engineering at CSU, we chose this neighborhood because it is largely non -transient family housing. Its distance from CSU will probably create more vehicle traffic, and students, because they are likely transient, may not respect their neighbors as much as families buying homes in this area. Thank you for your time. We truly hope you will consider moving this development to a more appropriate area. At the very least, if the development happens as proposed, we hope that the prairie dogs will be humanely relocated. Sincerely, Kim and Yarrow Fewless 678 Brewer Dr. Ft. Collins, CO 80524 F EXHIBIT o2 Page I of 1 fiv C, Subj: Re: Admin Hearing Decision Date: 6/14/2012 10:42:49 A.M. Mountain Daylight Time From: tomlawton(dmac.com To: tomlawton(amac.com CC: atomicwaters(a)_ gmail.com, tevafoot(o)vahoo.com, andrew manshel(d),yahoo com, kellvcollett601(o,comcast.net, heaven scentcarpetcleaning@msn.com, cdianni(dlgmail.com, prince. carpentry(c?gmail. com, taaskds3earthlink.net, brobst(cDpeakpeak.com, sutherix(a)Vahoo.com, jacraw0(wahoo.com, ienmaydew(mgmail. com, joyalaneayahoo com, khmadiganPvahoo.com, katherineioyicearvna.info, lorinitzel(oDmac.com, mrmandv5(a)hotmail com, mlakena-vahoo com, mbellol0Qcomcast.net, mickwillisaaol.com, mikepett(a)msn com, som1981(@,gmail com, tntwag boom(cbmsn. com Dear all, apologies for the mass email, but, since the city openly CC'd everyone.... Does anyone have any plans, or grounds, to appeal this decision? The deadline is tomorrow, and the appeal fee is $100. Rather than the city extorting fees from everyone appealing, perhaps we could file a single one ..? While an appeal is sure to be rejected with minimal consideration (the city is after all a whore unto developers), should the procedure cause sufficient delay, it may possibly spoil Aspen Heights' timeline to the extent they pull out... The appeals form is here: http://www_fcgov com/cityclerk/pdf/appealform pdf Does anyone have any grounds in addition to: 1. Inadequate display of mandatory Development Proposal signboard on Conifer St 2.??? Apologies again for the mass email, Tom Lawton 387 Cajetan St Old Town North On 5 Jun 2012, at 15:57, Delynn Coldiron wrote: Hi everyone — Attached is the decision from Admin Hearing Officer Richard Lopez regarding Aspen Heights. Please let us know if you have any questions. Thanks! Delynn <Aspen Heights Admin Hearing Decision_060512.pdf> Tuesday, August 07, 2012 AOL: MickWiilis ASPEN HEIGHTS REMAND EXHIBITS FROM CITIZENS - I support the development of North College. I support residences and business being built on this site. I cannot support a high -density all student, all rental, monoculture there. I fear that this type of development will lead to more fast food restaurants and low -culture development vs. the desire to bring North College up rungs of livability and improve the aesthetics and quality of life associated with this area. - Could this site not serve the city better as a park? Or as single family homes? Or as a prairie dog refuge? - Please consider those of us already living in this area. Consider how this will decrease our home values and our quality of life. Consider how this will drive existing homebuyers to potentially sell and look elsewhere. Please stop seeing tax dollar potential and see the lives this would impact. - If the city continues to support this, then please - focus on ways to keep us and our children safe, and to keep traffic out of our community and on major roads: DO NOT connect Blondel (to New Vine) and Blue Spruce at this time — Wait until Vine Drive can be pushed through to College (to help prevent traffic flowing through the heart of our community) or make it a requirement that Vine Drive is pushed all the way through to College with this Development! Install large speed bumps in the neighborhood to deter it being used as a cut-thru. Install Children at Play signs throughout the neighborhood. Put in stop i—g ttss and stop signs to make it undesirable to use the neighborhood as a cut through. Find way to ensure safety at the Redwood and Cajetan intersect — as our community garden is there and it is heavily used pedestrian area — and child play area. Consider requesting the developer to build a small park and playground i, on its remaining undeveloped 1.8 acres on the southeast side of the retention pond. If they really want to fit in with the existing community - then add a feature that makes it seem like they are trying to do that - something that would serve as a bridge between the two and would benefit everyone. I would also like to provide these comments to the administrative hearing officer and the Aspen Heights developer but do not have their contact information. Could you please provide it to me? Thank you. Jen Hayes 9 From: hayes jen [mailto:jacraw0@hotmail.com] Sent: Tuesday, May 22, 2012 1:32 PM To: Ted Shepard Subject: Aspen Heights - comments for consideration Hi Mr. Shepard - Please confirm receipt of this email. I attended the administrative hearing last night on Aspen Heights. I live at 244 Pascal Street in Old Town North. I know the city has already recommended this project go forward - much to my dismay, for it is destined to have signifigant negative impact on our local neighborhoods. I would just like to reiterate a few of the comments I heard, and plea for several considerations in my last bullet: - Placing 500-700 students in a upscale monoculture neighborhood, which is surrounded by neighborhoods occupied by range of income levels and a nice mix of families and professionals is not in alignment with the desire to create a diverse community or to retain community relationships. How does someone moving in and out every year add to the fabric of the community - it does not. How do loud partying nights and drunken students cutting through our neighborhood to Old Town create a peaceful community? It does not. - The student lifestyle can sometimes lend itself to reckless behaviors, such as drinking and driving or distracted driving - the communities surrounding the site are heavily occupied with children who regularly ride their bikes and play outside - which will have to completely change if this neighborhood is built. Childhoods changed in a day:( - I have heard potential new homeowners say they are not looking in our neighborhood any longer because they don't want to live next to a large student housing complex. This is wrecking home values and the stability of already fragile single family home ownership on North College. - The fear of traffic is literally keeping me awake at night. Blondel being extended to connect with Blue Spruce will create a direct corridor for Aspen Heights residents to cut through our community. Students will NOT go north to go south. PLEASE refrain from connecting these streets until after Vine is extended all the way to College. If they do not have the outlet from Vine to College they will come through Old Town North to get onto Old Vine. Our children play outside, ride bikes on these safe streets, and will no longer be able to do this safely if the neighborhood becomes this constant flow of traffic. There were no study results or predictions of flow on the Blondel-Blue Spruce network shown last night - that is very disturbing that this was not evaluated. Page 1 of 1 Ted Shepard From: lunarowan@q.com Ie Sent: Tuesday, August 07, 2012 11:51 AM To: Ted Shepard ` i`o S Subject: Aspen heights student housing Mr. Shepard, I would like to comment on the review for the Aspen Heights Student Housing proposal. I have a number of concerns about the project as proposed- 1- I believe that this is the only student housing project proposed -that -.has 81 houses with 4-5 bedrooms this does not seem consistent with the current city law of three unrelated law- why are there extra bedrooms in the houses if they are not proposing to rent the, and whg will enforce that they are not rented? As I understand the city law states that only 25% of houses in a block may become boarding houses. Since there is no policy in place for student housing I believe that allowing a development that is intending not to comply with current city codes should not be allowed. 2- This student housing project is 3 miles and 2 railroad crossings from CSU. North College Ave and Lemay Ave. are already backed up when trains come and having more cars will only make this situation worse. 3- Public transportation from this site to CSU is complicated and not direct. 4- I believe that a regular housing development would be a better choice for the proposed site. thank you for your time, David Slater 8/7/2012