HomeMy WebLinkAboutFOX HILLS 2ND FILING RF SITE PLAN REVIEW - 36 93C - CORRESPONDENCE - CITIZEN COMMUNICATIONNo Text
,- -----required --to--stop--and--wait--for :an-acceptable-gap--in--the-ea-stbound
traffic...-, -• --
�.. V. ':RECOMMENDATIONS/CONCLUSIONS
Based on the findings of he technica-l� analyses, recommen-
.dations for required roadway improvements can be identified:These
recommendations account for development within Wildf1ower.Ridge and
=.:Fox Hi.11s.._,The ~following is a 'brief summary of 'the above findings
and.a general:_description of -the recommended-:improvements.:f.or the
analyzed'.elements of the roadway network -serving Wildflower Ridge_-
and Fox Hills.
In_the short range future (1995)'with furl`' development of
Wildflower -;Ridge" and Fox Hills, a westbound. left -turn lane .is
required on_-CR -38E at •.the:- Red Fox ..Road.. _intersection. No other
_ auxi.liary_lanes are recommended.
_.... _.- ."Ar1 _traf f i c. :movements are.expected to -operated at: level,:of
_... service - A under •both -short -:and long:. -,term conditions. This will
provide excellent operating conditions.
- No specific -improvements are appropriate'.on .:Red Fox Road .
given, -the distribution of residential traffic to a number of access
.e.: ...points.
Site .traffic is not anticipated to noticeably impact the
CR 38E/Taft Hill Road intersection given the moderate volume of
6 -
r-
2
If the subdivision is going to be built, however, then at
the very least the county should consider taking these steps:
■There must be a guarantee that construction vehicles stay
on main roads, such as County Road 38 E.
■There should be a sign at the intersection of Windom and
County Road 38 E that says "No Through Traffic."
■There should be two new stop signs to slow and discourage
the flow of through traffic. One should be at the intersection of
Windom and Baxter. The second should be at either the
intersection of Windom and Powell, or the intersection of Windom
and Dalton.
■There should be a subdivision entry gate installed at
Windom and County Road 38E that forces drivers to slow down,
similar to gates at other subdivisions in Fort Collins.
Finally, let me raise one more question. It is logical when
looking at this proposed new subdivision to ask if this is just a
back door way to force the extension of Overland further south to
County Road 38 E. Residents of Springfield Subdivision have
opposed this in the past because it would increase traffic in
their residential area. It would be unfortunate if there is a
hidden agenda in which the county first approves a new
subdivision without adequate road access, in order to justify a
later extension of Overland, despite the opposition of residents
in the area. I do not know if this is the intent of the county. I
would hope that there is no hidden agenda. But the consideration
of a subdivision with apparently such limited access does raise;
the question.
1
Statement of:
David H. Morrissey
3919 Windom St.
Fort Collins, Colo. 80526
Home: (303) 226-3044
Office: (303) 491-5986
(Department of Technical Journalism - CSU)
Dec. 1, 1993
Concerns About the New Subdivision:
As presently designed, the subdivision does not appear to
have adequate access to main through streets. It appears that
there is access to a single through street, Highway 38 E to Taft
Hill. My concern is that this will result in residents of the new
subdivision taking an alternate route by driving through an
existing residential area -- the Springfield Subdivision.
How big a problem will this be? Unfortunately, a big one.
If there are 35 new residences, and they have an average of
2.5 cars per residence (which is the national average) then we
are talking of 87 or 88 new vehicles driving in this area. The
problem of increased traffic will be compounded greatly if
children in the new subdivision go to Olander Elementary. This
would mean that parents driving children to school would drive
through the Springfield Subdivision several times daily. Most of
this increased traffic would be channelled down Windom Street, to
Dalton, to Mead and out to Horsetooth.
It also appears likely that this will result in increased
heavy construction vehicle traffic on Windom, and in the
Springfield Subdivision, as the subdivision is being built.
This increased traffic is a concern because there are many
children in the neighborhood. They play and ride their bicycles
in the street. Children in the Springfield Subdivision also walk
to and from Olander Elementary School. Many of these children
walk by themselves without parents. Already cars ignore the 25
mph speed limit and travel on these streets at excessive rates of
speed. Speeders have included construction vehicles from building
now going on in the area.
For these reasons, this proposed subdivision is a matter of
serious concern, and it raises several questions.
■Has the county considered this lack of access to the new
subdivision?
■Has the county considered the likely harm this new
subdivision will cause an existing residential area?
■Has the county designed any traffic flow pattern for the
new subdivision that will not harm the existing residential area
of the Springfield Subdivision?
If the county has not addressed these questions, and if
there is no plan to deal with this greatly increased traffic flow
in what has until now been a quiet residential area, then this
new subdivision should not be approved. The lives and safety of
the children in the Springfield Subdivision demand no less.