Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutARAPAHOE FARM TOWNHOMES PUD - PRELIMINARY - 55-87G - CORRESPONDENCE - ADJACENT OR AFFECTED PROPERTY OWNERS 111 • December 7 , 1993 CC� GDVg Cityof Fort Collins DEC 10 Community Planning and Environmental Services 281 North College Avenue P.O. Box 580 Fort Collins, CO 80522-0580 Re: Arapahoe Farm Townhomes PUD - Preliminary #55-87G To Whom It May Concern: I am a resident of the Regency Park subdivision, residing at 4402 Hilburn Court. I travel regularly so I have not had time to play an active role in opposing the Arapahoe Farm Townhomes (AFT) . I will take this opportunity to express my views. As you may guess I am not in favor of this proposal. We in Regency Park have enjoyed significant appreciation on our homes, and the City of Fort Collins has enjoyed significant increases in property taxes. It's very basic, we do not want to reverse that trend. Nobody can accurately predict what will happen to our home values, but historically a moderately dense area located nearby will not help our home values. In addition, we enjoy some open spaces between homes and a low density population. This is why we built in Regency Park. Once again, we do not wish to lose that benefit of Regency Park. Lastly, I 'd like to ask if similar subdivisions are planned for The Ridge or Clarendon Hills, or are they immune from these projects? My best judgement tells me the people in those areas do not have to worry about a project like this. I am highly against this project because of the reasons stated above. I will not be able to attend the meeting on December 13th, but I hope this letter helps prove that we in Regency Park are united against this project. Please feel free to call me at work at 962-7618 if you would like to discuss this further. Sincerely, 4-71 Philp R. Bellio cc Regency Park Committee t - t V t i111 OEC 101993 Dear P & Z Board: As a neighborhood, Regency Park , we are all very concerned with the compatibility of this project. We are the neighbors that back up to the east side of the Arapahoe Farm Townhomes PUD . The majority of us do not have fences along the property line because we like the open character and not have the feeling of being confined. We all moved into this area because of the open space and the view of the mountains . We were told that single story patio homes and a large greenbelt would back up to us. This was one of the main reasons we built our homes here. This new project has a two story townhome on higher elevation making the transitional element not acceptable. This will def- initely obstruct our view. We do not care to be looking at a 36 ' building and seeing all roof . These townhomes consist of mostly roofing material which is not compatible. The surround- ing neighborhoods all have wood shake. These townhomes need a roofing material that is a substitute or similar to a wood shake in order to blend in with the exisiting houses. There is not enough greenbelt to allow adequate buffering or water drainage from our properties. The buildings are too close to us and it looks too congested. We would like special attention given to the two buildings C & J that are adjacent to our properties : 1) We would like to see a further reduction in size and units for these buildings . The Planning Dept. has already requested these two buildings to be four units or smaller. We highly agree with the Planning Dept. 2) We would like the builder to upgrade these buildings : A) more percentage of brick used on the front side B) less roof line C) more trees planted in front of the buildings and across the sidewalks (This would make the buildings more attractive to look at) 3) We need greater distance in the greenbelt from the closest corner of the buildings to our property line. Add more berms and landscaping so that all of the greenbelt flows through . (This would be necessary to achieve the transitional element that would separate this project from Regency Park) mit Page (2) 4) There is a drainage problem as the land sits vacant right now. The land elevation is much higher then our backyards. We want proper drainage, so that the water doesn ' t flow back into our yards . Also we don ' t want free standing water in the greenbelt area. 5) The dead end part of Hilburn Drive needs to be taken care of . 6) The exterior lighting has not been addressed. yet. In summary, we would like this transition to be a smooth one between all neighbors. We hope you will take our concerns into consideration when reviewing this project. Thank you for your time. A . 45-/ 7 /-1 r n G 7- .4&C(A / 0- W aNU Ac 4-Ni a se,nee, f+- C gos2CP (, /- 4413 \ � Z 7" i/yn e li1/ G"y t ' L_ ° QaiairtA..) 451/ c41-,•1h i l-4. r'b11;ns gD5 z 40 MEMORANDUM _ ���� �� O�� ��r �� �� U �� �� \ /! RE: ARAPAHOE FARMS TOWNHOMES DEC K� ��� e�� ^ � =�w TRAFFIC STUDY U� ~� As a neighborhood, several of us have met to discuss the possible construction of townhomes directly west of us. Among our concerns was the matter of the traffic study which was done by Matthew J. Delich, P. E. , 3413 Banyan Avenue, Loveland , Colorado. The following is a breakdown of our concerns: 1 ) We have several busy, major intersections in the neighborhood which will experience a large increase in volume of traffic from these townhomes. The traffic study only addresses one of these intersections. New Harmony and Seneca Street . The intersections not addressed are. Wakerobin and Shields and Regency and Horsetooth. Many of the townhome residents will use these intersections when leaving and returning to their homes. We feel the traffic study inadequately studied the area involved. 2) The peak hours covered in the study were not what we consider to be the busiest hours in the neighborhood . Because we have both Johnson Elementary and Webber � Junior High, our busiest times for traffic are when � school is about to begin in the mornings and when they � let out in the afternoon ' The traffic study covered one hour in the morning, 7: 30 - 8: 30 a, m. , In the afternoon it covered 4: 30 - 5: 30 p. m, . Johnson' s classes start at 9: 00 in the morning and school lets out at 3: 30 in the afternoon. Webber , s classes start at 7: 50 in the morning and school lets out at 2: 30 in the afternoon. The study � should be conducted to cover at least the hours of 7: 15 - 9: 15 in the morning and 2: 15 - 5: 15 in the afternoons. The traffic for the schools will also increase greatly from the townhome development which is proposed for this area. 3) The traffic study suggests a redesigning of the intersection of Seneca and New Harmony and only mentions one stop sign. We feel this design will create a more difficult [low of traffic rather than easing the traffic as necessary. For traffic safety, we feel it would be safer if a traffic light were installed at the intersection of Seneca and Harmony. This would also ease the traffic congestion of the area. Safety is a great concern of ours for children traveling to and from school . 4) There is no reference made to the very strong possibility of Seneca Street being extended beyond (South) of Harmony Road in the near future. The suggested redesigning of this intersection in that case would certainly not work . 5) The tuwnhomes being added to this residential neighborhood are not the only increase in traffic for the area. The continuing growth of The Overlook and The Gates have not even been considered in this traffic study and will certainly have a large affect on the traffic , 6) A 3% increase in traffic flow has been mentioned in this study and that is very hard to believe. There is no justification for this figure and we feel it will be much larger than that . Because of the items listed above we feel the traffic study which has been done is very inadequate for the proposed construction of the townhomes. 110 • D • , • DEC t Q 1993 Dear P & Z Board: We want to express to you our concerns of the Arapahoe Farm Townhomes PUD Preliminary, #55-87G. Since this project affects several neighborhoods, we are referred to as the Johnson-Webber Neighborhood Group. We have all formed together and have written up a petition. We have several signatures supporting our concerns . Attached you will find our petition along with a cover letter from the Regency Park neighbors that back up to this project. We would like to thank you for giving us this opportunity to express our concerns . We look forward in meeting with you on Dec. 13th and at that time we will expand on our points. 1 The JoLSon-Webber Neigib pWE PETITION: DEC I 0 190 , November 26, 1993 Now came the hoar owner's from the following level upuiraits within the townlip of Fort Collins Cot orado: Westbrook,The Gates, Regency Park,The Overlook, hi sal Estates, R.ossburough Estates and The Ridge;who for the purpose of this dccurrent will be referred to as the Johnson-Webber Neighborhood Group. The Johan-Webber Neighborhood Group now comes before the City of Fort Collins, Planning and Zoning Board and prays far the following considerations and requests to be hear d 1.) The Legality of the process used in the RE-zoning of the Arapahoe Farm Master Plan. We the Neighborhood Group feel the process for proper and complete notification ofzare changes regar ding the Arapahoe Mountain P.i dge Farm Master Plan re-zoning which occurre d during atime period frown Feb, 1991 thru April, 1991, failed init's prcces s to effectively deliver proper, adequate and complete notification regarding details concerning sane,to all surrounding neighborhoods. L) The completeness of the Traffic Study was deficient and in adequate creating a safety problem. We the Neighborhood Group further feel that the Traffic Study submitted by Matt Delich, dated at. 23, 1993, did not address the traffic patterns and denrity ofsurrounding areas sifficien+ly. These additional areas irclude the Webber Junior High and Johnson Elerrentary Schools Further the study omitte d c onsiderati on of the traffic flow of the two primary intersections feeding traffic v olurra into the develop:ur.,.,t itmlf. These intersects was are located at Harmony Road and R.egerzy drive and at the irter.ti on of Walter obin and Shields. (Plea¢ refer t o figure #6 of the 1995 traffic report.) We feel this report also does not take into ccnthdaration the Pre litional are hundred or more houses yet to be built,completing "The Gates" and the "Overlook" de; lopnents. The only intersection included in the course of this study was where Sereca and New Harnvony interact. Mr. Delichi di dnot irrlude the other previously nrentiored irrersections in his study,which are in fact the main artenal inter actiori for these thvel oprrents. Based on these facts, we feel this study to be incomplete. Furthenrlare by omitting the traffic surveillarre o f the key intersecti oar, we feel that the safety of the children attending "Webber Jr. High" and"Johnson Eieiir.. Lary" schools and the farrnty's living in these r> ghborhoods is corn rornised. Peak hours covered in study were only are hour in the mamng arid are hour in the afternoon,not at true PPalc times in relationt o the schools. Traffic study ssggests a temporary solution with stop signs where a traffic light is r&=+1ty necessary- No reference is macb to Sereca, eventually emending beyond (south) of Harmony and consequently a greater increase in traffic. 3.) "Johnson Elementary" and "Webber Jr. High" schools are already over crowded. Townhom es would only compound an already bad situation. We the Neighborhood Group feel that ark-veloprrerr of this will drive the stunt populati an at "Johnson IIementary" an already over crowds d Track-3, rated.school, beyond the 1 Dec.9 , 1993 Zot'iv mod, ar" vetr i 4-►ng -N�t►s I ever +o ;ndr r» cioc� off' +ht irnpo cJ. +ht proposed 4rapo-boe +orrns 'bevetoprne rl. had on +he sole o.P my hors e► . My caktity ipt;tI be re loca4ivt94 Wis censlh i n laic "becero ber and needed +o se1I our halt , y5I I t I burn Cl*% © .Lr houst si+s dire,c4ly eas-- oc +hc proposed 4ret.pa3"+oe, 1=arrv)s ''eve.lop,R,ne + Zi fie. • Whe.r, show inc3 our how* Vicahl Ae.„ er»ax Was g 1wo..rel Ct,bou,4- the proposed deve..I op- Man� . P .Pcu n i I u` . o. Co n�r a c.�- on o u.r- home, Wi 9tnera.( in rma+,'oh Ko.- G.n40 44.1t,ir reali . "MI S �.'anni 1 -Pas c..A1 edy ► 1 ed Skt.pard ;or re)ort Corma41oh or •Ple d . .praserk.1.. A 4.4,►s Ch a c.,Jc.. 101-u o '�tr was rese • us A a 4-he. reason be.i ng 4Ne c.1- 4rei_ pcol Can ►e)5 woi td have on pro, per va.►�e. n Area ajJ enera.l concern5'�� m 4- ; n' So aj u � 41.) a sinc3It 4?o..m;k dtvetop►ne..v4, mice ha✓.r, AS tyLk. c&t, i mail;ne phis news was qua utI believe 4-h;s will nod- be. e exc- e Salcs Of oTher how) �I-had- • 1 e5 i M act Arcipahoe. Farms . pi - J-1 9(ea-4- c on si dercc.-1 oe) , • �r1Cer OEC I 01993 1 ettsa ©56. - i'.N:_CYCIX Lsa Ira.Inc. • • 4400 Craig Drive �� � i` Fort Collins, CO 80526 ' i December 7, 1993 DEC- 91993 Mr. Ted Shepard Community Planning and Environmental Services 4 281 North College Avenue P.O. Box 580 Fort Collins, CO 80522-0580 Dear Mr. Shepard, Thank you for your letter sent to residentials of Regency Park on December 2. It gave me a name and address to send my own comments. I am well aware of activity in my neighborhood to discourage the building of the townhouses and I want you to know that not everyone in Regency Park is opposed to it. I do not agree with my neighbors when they talk about becoming crime infested, problems of busing children to outside schools, traffic safety concerns, incompatibility in the neighborhood, the change from patio homes to townhouses. There may be some legitimate questions to be asked, but a sense of panic and extreme self-preservation is simply not in order. Busing is nowhere near as serious a problem as homelessness is for children. The city needs to do all that it can to provide shelter for people of all economic levels. I believe that there are many homes in a one mile drive off of Harmony Drive that will always be out of reach for most citizens of Fort Collins. We need to share the 10.39 acres with those who cannot afford those homes, but would like to live in that space in a home which is more affordable. I trust that the school district will continue to provide excellent schools to residents throughout the city, that those responsible for safety will continue to provide the best possible traffic systems. Thank you for the work you will do on this project. Sin rel , gi (,a),a_j Linda Letnes