The Downs HOA

New Reata Annexation Position

Concerns of Canterberry

Regarding REATA

The residents of Canterberry Crossing hereby present our letter of concern regarding the annexation of REATA North and the associated proposed rezoning to the Planning Commission and Town Council of Parker, Colorado. We, the residents of Canterberry Crossing, will do our duty as citizens and document our concerns regarding the proposed REATA North development. It is our hope that the Parker Planning Commission and the Parker Town council are open to debate regarding this issue and that there will be a forum for open exchange of ideas, thoughts, opinions and concerns. The Parker master plan should guide the discussions and include citizen participation in community problems and resolution of policies and principles.

There appears to be strong evidence that the proposed REATA development is not consistent with the goals, objectives and policies as outlined in the Town of Parker Master Plan and Title 13 of the Parker Land Development Code.

Our concerns will address the following issues:

* The annexation/rezoning "process" and our concerns regarding recent comments made in the Douglas County News-Press dated 15 March 2000.
* Unprecedented Growth and associated concerns with regards to:
* impacts to existing city infrastructure
* impacts to land use
* impacts to wild-life
* impacts to vegetation
* protection of existing ridgelines,
* overlot grading
* public safety.

Douglas County News-Press Wednesday, March 15, 2000

Mr. Rob Tinnes, a member of the Parker Town Council was recently quoted in the Douglas County News-Press with the following statement regarding Terrrabrook's REATA North proposed development: "We want this project to happen. The sooner the better. It's a great project."

Statements like this really call into question whether there is a process for allowing inputs from citizens (in the form of public hearings) regarding growth in our community. And why would this statement be made just a few short weeks after an Emergency Ordinance was passed to give the town a breather to find out how we can deal with the unprecedented internal growth?

What ever happened to "Citizen Participation and Community Problem solving", a resolution that was passed just last year by the Council? What about the requirement for public comment and review by appropriate commissions prior to making any decisions?

Could it be that the Town Council is being influenced by the developer providing $2 Million to the Town as an incentive? According to the News-Press article, "Terrabrook has offered $2 Million to eliminate residential units north of Bayou Gulch Road, replace the units with open space and designate the land as a horse park, said Mark Leidel, Parker planning director. Some might call the process a density transfer, Leidel said, which lifts the residential use rights from Gondolier Farms and transfers those rights to the proposed Reata North project."

It appears that there is not an interest on the part of the Parker Town Council to allow for a free exchange of information between the developer, the citizens, and the affected commissions (for their scrutiny), for public comment and for the formulation of recommendations to the Town Council. Only after hearings, evaluations, recommendations and final negotiations at the Council level should a Council member voice such a conclusion.

"We want this project to happen soon. The sooner the better. It's a good project". Why bother with a "process" when the Council's mind seems to be made up?

Conflict with Master Plan

The following policies and objectives from the Parker Master Plan have been identified by the residents of Canterberry Crossing to be in conflict with the proposed REATA North annexation and rezoning:

4.0 GROWTH MANAGEMENT

From the Master Plan - Current annexation and zoning could increase the Town's population from the current 10,000 to 65,000 if all approved dwelling units were constructed. Recent growth trends and regional projections indicate this level of growth is unlikely in the next 20 years. Even if the economy returns to a portion of what it was in the early 1980's, such growth rates would be unlikely. An increase to only a fraction of this potential population will present a tremendous challenge to the Town in providing complete infrastructure and acceptable levels of services. In light of these problems, it is imperative that the Town initiate a strong growth management program. Growth should occur only where it can be economically and efficiently provided with services. Town resources should be allocated to strategic improvements which provide the greatest benefit for the cost. Annexations should be carefully considered and approved only when a clear benefit to the Town is demonstrated.

Our Objection - The current population in Parker already exceeds the projections for the year 2005 as presented in the Parker Master Plan (dated 1997). The MasterPlan indicted that the year 2000 population would be 14,700, but it is generally regarded to have exceeded 20,000 people as of this date. Therefore, the annexation of the REATA property is inconsistent with plans that have been outlined for the growth of the Town of Parker.

The Town Council has recognized the growth problem by adopting the emergency ordinance in February 2000 to suspend consideration of new applications. Why is the town moving forward with a project, which will result in a significant increase in population and is in itself, a significant portion of forecasted growth for the ^Town of Parker?

The 1999 Parker Citizens Survey shows that the biggest concern of the citizens is the pace of GROWTH. Most citizens were discouraged by it the unprecedented growth in the town. 61% of the respondents say the "biggest issues facing the Town of Parker is too much growth". The rate of residential growth was seen as too fast by 90% of the respondents. That's an overwhelming majority!!! In the same survey, when asked about their opinions on Town Government, 51% said that Town Government should be MORE INVOLVED in the role taken with regard to regulating growth. And, in addition, the respondents favorable opinions dropped steadily when asked if the "Town Government welcomed citizen involvement (43% - yes); Town Government run for benefit of all people (33%); Elected officials care what people like me think (26%)". It is obvious that the citizens have spoken, and 90% of the residents of the town of Parker think that there is too much growth and it is happening too fast.


5.12 SENSITIVE DEVELOPMENT AREAS

GOAL: To protect natural elements which shape the town's identity and quality of life.

Policies: From the Master Plan
1. Development shall preserve the visual character of key natural features and areas. Building on top of major ridgelines shall be discouraged or, at a minimum, sufficient setback will be required so as to avoid profiling structures above ridgelines as seen from Parker Road and arterial roadways. New development will be required to reinforce existing landforms by preserving the dominant ridges or side slopes.

Our Objection -Terrabrook has proposed to build approximately 200 homes on one of the most prominent ridgelines in the town of Parker located at the extreme North end of the REATA North parcel (referred to as PA-1 in Terrabrook development plan drawings). This ridge-line is viewable from Parker Road, Lincoln Avenue, E-470, Hilltop Road and Main Street.

If it is determined that the REATA North project is necessary and is good for the Town and annexation and rezoning is approved, there appears to be an option for Terrabrook to preserve the dominant ridgeline on the far North edge of the parcel (and remain compliant with the Parker master plan). This could be accomplished by transferring the proposed development (PA-1) to the southeast portion of the REATA North property. If the ridgeline is preserved and the resulting open space is maintained, multiple communities will benefit from an open space buffer zone. This would be consistent with preserving the visual character of the community and with maintaining the town's identity and quality of life (also compliant with the Parker master plan).

Terrabrook originally identified the southeast section of the parcel for custom homes on five-acre lots. This was met with opposition from the Town and Terrabrook therefore retracted that portion of the proposal and designated it as open space. By transferring the parcel from the North end to the Southeast corner, Terrabrook can develop higher density housing and not subject theTown to higher infrastructure costs (use of Hilltop Road and recent road improvements).

The Parker Master Plan clearly requires preserving the dominant ridges or side slopes. Building on the ridgeline on the North end of the parcel will clearly violate the intent of the Parker Master Plan and will not allow for proper or sufficient setback from the prominent ridgeline or hilltops.

5.4 FRINGE RESIDENTIAL

GOAL: Enhance the identity of the Town and separation from other urban areas.

Policies: From the Master Plan
2. Residential uses near the border of the planning area should decrease in density, provide open space buffers, provide larger lots, provide large setbacks, or a combination of these techniques in order to provide acceptable transitions to the edge of Town, adjacent County large lot subdivisions, or open space.
3. As a general guideline, overall gross density for new residential developments are encouraged not to exceed two (2) dwelling units per acre. The density should decrease toward the outer edge of the Fringe Area to provide progressive density transitions to County large lot development, open space, or agricultural uses. Transferring densities or clustering development is encouraged in order to provide these transitions.

4. Where site conditions warrant due to the prevalence of native vegetation, significant natural land forms, or slopes in excess of 12% ("sensitive development areas"), creative land planning approaches shall be utilized. Clustering of units, building envelope restrictions, alternative roadway standards and other design approaches which minimize site disturbance will be required.

5. General overlot grading is not acceptable as a standard practice in areas with an elevation higher than 6,000 feet.

6. Non-standard roadway sections with grass swales instead of curb and gutter and other alternative designs should be considered in areas in excess of 6,000 feet in elevation.

7. Alternatives to suburban tract subdivisions and production housing, such as custom homes, are encouraged in the Fringe Residential Areas.

Our Objection - Annexation and rezoning means the border of the planning area is never fixed and thus the goals and policies of the Master Plan can never really be complied with for new development. Policy #1 of Section 5.4 FRINGE RESIDENTIAL of the Master Plan is designed to meet the goal of not overbuilding the town on its fringes. Reata North is not currently in the town so clearly annexation and rezoning will expand the border of the Town and thus push the so-called buffer zones further and further away leaving the entire ever-growing interior of the town limits as a place of very dense urban development. Why not start an economic development committee to promote the Aurora-Parker metropolitan area? The best way to prevent this is to enforce the policy according to the existing Town boundaries. Annexations to the Town must provide this buffer next to the existing town boundaries or uncontrolled urban sprawl and the destruction of the very character of Parker will be the result.

Policy four says that "General overlot grading is not acceptable as a standard practice in areas with an elevation higher than 6,000 feet." Terrabrook has proposed suburban tract subdivisions which implies general overlot grading would be the preferred practice for building homes on the REATA North property. Topographic data shows nearly all of REATA North is above 6000 feet in elevation.

The proposed rezoning as presented by Terrabrook appears to also violate policy six. Their proposal has areas designated for suburban tract subdivisions that are adjacent to the existing town boundaries. The proposed development does not provide significant buffer with the existing town boundaries whatsoever. In fact, Terrabrook has stated that the Town was in opposition to large lot custom homes on the REATA North property and they have amended their plan which now calls for only building suburban tract subdivisions and even higher density patio homes. This proposed annexation and rezoning only pushes out the buffer zones, which of course can be displaced again by future annexations.

Additional Concerns

Regarding REATA North development:

1. Traffic/Safety-1100 new homes will pose significant traffic concerns to the surrounding communities. Traffic patterns from REATA North will dump out onto Tallman, Omaha, Riva Ridge and Pioneer Elementary School greatly increasing traffic flow through neighborhoods and sensitive school zones posing significant safety issues and dangers to all residents.
2. Wildlife-It is possible that development will have a detrimental impact to wildlife in this area, perhaps in violation of state and federal laws. Residents of Canterberry Crossing have sighted the following species: Coyote, Owls, Eagles, Hawks, Deer, Antelope, snakes, rabbits, foxes and other wildlife.


Recommendation

We request that the Parker Planning Commission and the Parker Town Council vote AGAINST the annexation and rezoning of the 684 acres of land (925 homes planned for REATA North) into the Town of Parker. Our recommendation to vote AGAINST the annexation and rezoning is based on the following issues and concerns:

1. Unprecedented growth in Douglas County and the Town of Parker
* Current population (>20,000) exceeds Master Plan projections for the year 2005
* Land currently annexed and zoned could increase the Town's population to 65,000 (per Parker Master Plan)
* Annexation should be carefully considered and approved only when a clear need exists in the Town (Parker Master Plan and Parker Land Development Code)
* A fraction of this potential population will present a tremendous challenge to the Town in providing complete infrastructure and acceptable levels of service (Per Parker Master Plan)
2. The Parker Master Financial Planning Task Force will determine whether Parker can withstand the impact of additional growth. The results of the Task Force should drive annexation decisions.
3. The Town MUST initiate a strong growth management program (Per Parker Master Plan)
* Emergency Ordinance enacted in February 2000 by the Parker Town Council
4. Proposed development in "Sensitive Development Areas"
* 188 homes proposed to be built on a major ridge-line (PA-1 of Terrabrook design) with no setback (inconsistent with policy outlined in Parker Master Plan)
5. Increased traffic and congestion on our streets (to include residential streets)
* Traffic patterns from REATA North will dump out to Tallman Ave, Unbridled Ave, Donerail Drive, Omaha Drive, Riva Ridge Street, Willow Drive, Canterberry Parkway, and Pioneer Elementary School, greatly increasing traffic flow through neighborhoods and sensitive school zones.
6. Public safety issues and concerns as a result of increased traffic and congestion
7. Additional overcrowding of schools
8. Impacts to watersheds and wild-life habitats

Critical decisions for the Town of Parker require Citizen participation for the successful resolution of such community issues. Therefore, we will use the open public forums of the Planning Commission (May 11, 2000) and Parker Town Council (June 5, 2000) meetings to more fully express our opinions and concerns regarding the proposed annexation and rezoning.

Email us
Randyruthe@aol.com