Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutCOBBLESTONE CORNERS PUD - PRELIMINARY - 55-87E - CORRESPONDENCE - CITY COUNCIL i Mayor . ® City of Fort Collins June 28, 1993 Margaret Gorman 3630 Richmond Drive Fort Collins, CO 80526 Dear Ms. Gorman: Thank you for sharing your concerns about the propose Cobblestone Corners P. and its impact on Skyline Acres with City Council . The Lan e men Guidance System was designed to offer citizens the opportunity to become involved in the development process. By your letter, I feel the system is fulfilling its purpose and encourage you and your neighbors to continue discussions with the Planning and Zoning Board and the developer. City Planner Ted Shepard from the Planning Department, 221-6750, is in charge of this project and can address your concerns in detail . If you have additional questions, please contact me at 221-6878. Sincerely Atari Mayor cc: City Council Greg Byrne, CPES Director Tom Peterson, Planning Director Ted Shepard, Senior City Planner 300 LaPorte Avenue • P.O. Box 580 • Fort Collins, CO 80522-0580 • (303) 221-6505 u • • J' IIP: COUNCIL Greg Byrne MEMO Tom Peterson ,. , Support , June 17, 1993 se.pendi;ng From: yfltje� i .rgaret i_: rm. r,/� ,4fc�,ycsc� 1��._1+�,1�' :�'� 3630 R i chm nd Dr i re } . Collins, CO 80526 i C I a93 TO : CITY R wlan�� in,� and coning ooard M1�I�AyE Subject : Cobblestone Corners PUD impact on Skyline Acres I have 1 i ved at 3630 Fhmond Drive for 30 years. My four acres are in the center of3kyl ire c-s so Cobblestone Corners does not affect me i n pro imi ty . It does impinge pon my r i ghts as a property owner and will have a negative affect cr pr erty values in the future . I reali7 _. that development adjacent to Richmond Drive is inevitable . Once it happe s one has to live with it . My concern is that' what comes at the end of the treet is something our 35 years old neighborhood can live with . ---- . 1 r neighborhood was warned by the city of Ft . Collins for several years that we ould be exempt from compromise when we were forcibly annexed. Our reason for . resisting annexation was that we were happy with our lifestyle and did not want to be a part of the city. , In the county we were unaffected by Ft . Collins growth and turmoil . We were a happy close group of people . While in the county we each paid our share and contracted with Flatiron of Boulder to surface Richmond Drive . No County or city funds were used. Since we N_ are now in the city of Ft . Collins, city traffic uses the street . Several requests have been made to the city that maintenance is needed on the street . This has been refused and we were told that in order for the city to maintain y the street it must be brought up to city standards-ENTIRELY AT -THE EXPENSE OF 49l THE PROPERTY OWNERS. Now the city=NOT THE RESIDENTS has agreed with the developer of Cobblestone Corners, to allow Richmond Drive to be used as a '�"DDD secondary fire corridor . As a tax paying property owner on the street I oppose this use . If the developer is to use the street and the city wishes to control jurisdiction over the uses, then the city should share the responsibility and cost of up grading and assume maintance of the street . If not , the street should be deeded to the residents as a private drive and maintained as such . It may be many years before a street is built to join Wabash , thus a secondary fire corridor may become a permanent right to egress .and our street could become a thoroughfare . We have repeatedly been told by the city the street is a dead end with no outlet . Before Cobblestone Corners is approved as a PUD this problem must be resolved. After thought-Where is the secondary corridor to Richmond Drive in case of fire? We don' t even have .a fire hydrant ! In the absence of law, policy is law. The LDGS is the bible of development for Ft .Corriin ."'According to the LD , OMPATIBILITY constantly is referred to as necessary in neighborhood planning. Certainly what has been demonstrated graphically is the incompatibility of Cobblestone Corners 14 people per acre compared to Skyline Acres one person per acre-WITH NO BUFFER ZONE. Street cul - de-sacs in Cobblestone Corner come within three feet of Skyline Acres property lines-and what sort of berm and buffer can be created in ten feet between fences. The LDGS speaks to buffer zones between drastic changes in density-from 411 one person per acre to fourteen poeple per acre is drastic change . Landscaping , distance , fencing and berms are commonly referred to as methods of privatizin, personal zones. A real buffer zone needs to be planned between Skyline Acre= and Cobblestone Corners . Neither area is a ghetto that should be hidden behind a privacy fence ! ! Two neighborhood meetings were held . At the first the plans for Cobblestone Corners were revealed and suggestions were made to make it compatible with R i ._hmond Drive . At the second meeting no s i gn i f i c.an t Changes were made . We were informed that the purpose of neighborhood meetings is to make the neighborhood compatible-not to change the plan These were meetings to vent concern but no issues were solved. Requests for acceptable changes in the PUD were ignored completely. Is this the intent of the LDGS? If so,' it is true- "You can' t fight city hall . " This development is not all bad . There are serious faults that need to be corrected before the plan can be acceptable to residents of Richmond Drive . I feel the developer, should be willing -to make some concessions to contribute to neighborhood compatibility. cc Bernie Strom Jim Klataske' Jan Cottier Renee Cooney . Laurie O'Dell Joe Carroll Lloyd Walker Tom Peterson Ann Azari