HomeMy WebLinkAboutCOLLEGE EIGHT THIRTY - PDP - PDP150019 - REPORTS - CITIZEN COMMUNICATIONIt does not look like the number of parking spaces on the ground level can be increased without
reducing the commercial use. The obvious reduction should be in the number of residential units.
A density of 50-60 units per acre, plus commercial may work on the site and incorporate a
realistic number of parking spaces to support the development.
I appreciate your consideration of these comments.
Sincerely,
Charlie Foster
CHARLES D. FOSTER, AICP
5099 Ten Mile Place
Castle Rock, CO 80108
December 30, 2015
Mr. Clay Frickey, Associate Planner
Development Review Center
281 North College Avenue
Fort Collins, CO 80522
Dear Mr. Frickey:
Thank you for providing the site plan for the College Eight Thirty PDP. I cannot attend the
hearing on January 7 so will provide my comments in writing. As an adjacent landowner, and
also a former Summit County Planning Director, land planner and development consultant with
more than 30 years of experience, my assessment is both personal and professional.
I do not object to the uses but oppose the density and lack of parking. The site plan clearly
demonstrates that the property cannot support the density proposed. Mixed Use at 50 units per
acre is a challenge because of parking. This plan is for an equivalent density of over 100 units
per acre — plus commercial. To cram all of these units on the site the proponents cut corners and
request variances. Compact spaces were invented by the auto body industry.
Because of the location across College Avenue from Colorado State University there is already a
very serious neighborhood parking problem. The old 3,400 sq. ft. commercial building on this
site had 16 off street spaces. The PDP proposal is for 27,455 sq. ft. with 48 beds in 34 units, and
2,400 sq. ft. of commercial uses - with just 27 parking spaces. This adds up to inadequate
parking for the apartments and no commercial, employee or guest parking.
The side of our house is about 10 feet east of the alley, 30 feet from the project. Specific negative
impacts to our property are that the driveway from the proposed parking area - with 150-200
vehicle movements per day — enters/exits directly across from our gate, the trash enclosure is
directly across from the bedroom in the house - so trash trucks will be maneuvering in the alley
about 15 feet from the bedroom window, and the 2"d and 3`d story balconies on the east
apartments will expose our house to lots of noise and activity. I would appreciate having the
trash enclosure relocated and balconies minimized.
A continuous stream of cars, pedestrians and cyclists currently use the alley and these folks will
have to avoid the increased vehicle traffic. For safety it will be necessary to improve and light
the alley, and I hope the lights can be located so they do not shine into our property.
Neighbors and alley users will experience extreme increases in noise, lights, vehicles, exhaust,
dust, trash, and safety concerns.