HomeMy WebLinkAboutWEST PLUM STREET PUD - PRELIMINARY ..... FIRST NEIGHBORHOOD MEETING - 10-96 - CORRESPONDENCE - CITIZEN COMMUNICATION (5)RE(. VED APR 9 8 1996
PwZa`Z-
the houses closest to Plum will have their back yards facing Plum
Street while all our front yards face Plum Street. Effectively, we
will be viewing their back yard activities (where the most intimate
domestic events take place) from our front windows. While we
understand that the developer intends to create a small autonomous
community in the PUD, the design effectively creates a visual and
symbolic barrier to the larger neighborhood. This PUD should not be a
separate community but exist as part of the larger community. The
best solution is to extend the existing grid system of streets so that
the PUD houses are oriented the same as those that surround it. If
this cannot be done, we suggest that along with decreasing housing
density, the developer reorient the houses on Plum Street so that
their back yards face the back yards of the houses on Timber Lane and
Rocky Road.
The architectural design of the houses within the PUD should also be
compatible with houses in the surrounding neighborhood. There are
very few two-story houses in this neighborhood. It consists
mostly of one and one -and -one -half -story split level houses from the
1960s and 1970s. Thus, the overall neighborhood profile is relatively
low and horizontal. This quality should be retained. We suggest that
two-story houses be replaced with one -and -a -half story houses and that
the developer avoid the vertical, neo-Victorian style so popular in
some new developments. This would also retain some of the view and
the light to existing houses.
We commend the developer for some features of the PUD that will
enhance the neighborhood. For instance, the landscaping within the
PUD and especially the trees within a parking strip facing Plum
improve the overall streetscape. Plum Street has alot of pedestrian
traffic (especially dog walkers) and the parking strip will provide
some barrier from traffic. The current, narrow sidewalks that
directly abut the street are far too narrow and dangerously close to
traffic, which will become worse with the new development. Front
porches and recessed garages are architectural features that give the
feeling of community, unlike some small houses that place the garage
directly in front on the street.
Thank you for soliciting our comments. As you are both well aware,
such infill developments as the West Plum PUD in previously empty
pastures are an emotional issue. We understand that we cannot stop
change despite our longing for the open space to remain. But we also
firmly believe that what is built within our existing neighborhood
must be compatible, visually and socially, with its surroundings. We
urge you as city planners and developers to seriously consider our
concerns. We look forward to talking to you at future meetings.
Sincerely,
�a� mite., A,a t, r_ 1,,
Janet Ore
Mark Fiege
2524 W. Plum
Ft. Collins, CO 80521
RFCFIvj,�40
March 31, 1996
Mitchell Haas, City Planner
Community Planning & Environmental Services
City of Fort Collins
281 N. College Ave.
P.O. Box 580
Ft. Collins, CO 80522-0580
Dear Mr. Haas and Mr. Viita;
APR 08 1998
fme lGFZ
Thank you for soliciting community comment on the proposed PUD on W.
Plum Street. We live directly north across Plum from the site and so
are very interested in what will be built. Judging from the
presentation on January 25, 1996, we have two main areas of concern we
hope the developer will remedy: the density of housing and the
development's overall compatibility with its surrounding neighborhood.
Our biggest concern is the high density of housing proposed for the
site and the problems that such density will bring with it. Because
the current proposal packs in 16 houses on only three acres with lot
sizes between 50 X 90' and 50 X 125', we think the development is too
densely occupied. Density of housing should replicate the surrounding
neighborhood which has lot sizes considerably larger (ours is almost
100' X 100')_ To preserve the neighborhood's character, this infill
development should not exceed the density of the overall neighborhood_
We feel very strongly that the PUD's plan should be modified to reduce
its density.
Such high density will bring with it the attendant problem of greatly
increased traffic and subsequent deterioration of air and noise
quality. The PUD will generate substantially increased traffic on
what is currently a very quiet street. We would like the developer
and the city to take all measures possible to diminish the amount of
traffic and preserve air quality. We have a few suggestions. Require
all residents in the PUD to hire a single garbage hauler. Now at
least four different garbage companies have garbage trucks and
recycling trucks rumbling down our street. This is way too many to
enter such a small development. For maximum traffic efficiency,
ideally the PUD should extend the street grid rather than utilize a
cul-de-sac. Knowing this won't happen, we suggest clear pedestrian
access to Elizabeth Street. This could diminish needless car trips
and encourage riding public transportation. The PUD homeowners'
association should restrict off-street parking within the PUD and on
Plum Street, allowing cars parked only in driveways. This would
encourage fewer personal cars and prevent a street full of parked
cars. Such parking restrictions are especially important for Plum
Street which is our front yard but PUD houses' back yard.
We are also concerned with the general incompatibility of this small
infill development with the larger neighborhood. Most of houses in
this area face a grid system of streets. Though we have some small
cul-de-sac streets, they have only six or so houses. In the proposed
PUD, all sixteen houses will face inward on the cul-de-sac. In fact,