HomeMy WebLinkAboutPINNACLE TOWNHOMES - PDP - 34-00A - CORRESPONDENCE - CITIZEN COMMUNICATION (3)Page 2 of 2
And we are aware of the overall wisdom and necessity of vM m the cit4 but our family lives
less than 100 yards from this proposed development There are many other families who live
almost as near, some of them with young children, and many more with senior citizens who are
already threatened with injury or death when crossing Prospect Road The concern you heard
on January W", and that you will hear again on February 13t" are genuine and, if they are not
addressed, the City as a whole will no doubt suffer as needlessly as we will.
Thanks for your willingness to listen, and in advance, for your willingness to conduct fin ther
study before approving this 33-unit proposal
i
David Lauer
Fort Collins, CO 8OS24
493-5100 David (days)
493-1515 (home)
fotplOattbi.coin
cc: John Fishbach, City Manager
Reggie Lauer
1404 Robertson
2/8/2002
Page 1 of 2
David and Reggie
From: "David and Reggie" <fotpl@attbi.com>
To: <jschubart@hotmail.com>
Sent: Wednesday, February 06, 2002 10:04
Subject: PINNICLESItr0202
February 6, 2002
Carneron Gloss
Current Planning Director
City of Fort Collins
281 N College Ave.
Fort Collins, CO 90524
Re: Pinnacle Townhomes Project Development Plan File *34-00A
Dear Mr. Gloss,
We received your notice of the continuation of the hearing on the project cited above.
My wife or I will try to attend as we have done for the first two hearings I think it important;
however, that we provide you feedback on this plan in writing in the event we are unable to
attend.
In your notice of continuation there is no mention of the petition presented to Current
Planning by 25& area residents, some of whom also attended the first couple of meetings about
this project. We are concerned that the recommendations contained in the petition, and the
presentation the citizens group made on the 16e' are not being taken seriously by your
departrnen t or by the developers We are concerned that Current Planning, having gone through
a lengthy process with the developers to satisfy all or most of Code requirements, intend to
discount this citizen initiative, and allow the plan to proceed with only minor changes.
While I hope this is not the case, I got the feeling that the City and the developers are
both inclined to ignore the results of research and studies done on the three components in Joan
Schubart's presentation
Area residents are asking that all development proposals for the stretch of
East Prospect between Stover and Lemay be put on hold until more in-
depth studies are completed on I) traffic congestion, the attendant 2) safety (especiauy
children' safety) consideration, and 3) stormwater and ground water concerns.
Part of our motivation for this has to do with some 15 additional acres of land west of the
proposed site along this corridor that are likely to be developed in the next five to ten years If a
precedent for dense infill is set with Pinnacle Townhomes, the impact on East Prospect; an
already seriously constricted arterial, will result in gridlock with no adequate planning in place to
alleviate that gridlock
In other words, we are asking that Current Planning take responsibility for longer range
planning rather than simply judging the Pinnacle proposal by itself vis-a-vis City Code. I
continue to be amazed that the planning department would permit two proposed structures be
built partially in 100 year flood plain after all the effort that has gone into revamping floodplain
regulation over the past three years Now could this possibly "fit within the City's guidelines"?
We know that there will have to be something built on this open land.
2/8/2002