Tim Drnec's letter to the Neighborhood re Sierra Vista
Erie Air Park HOA
Hello Mayor and Council Members.
My name is Tim Drnec and I live at 3040 Cherokee Court in the Erie Airpark. I’d like mention some concerns we have regarding the rezoning of the Sierra Vista project.
In the Town’s last Comprehensive Plan, this area was assigned an “employment” use classification. We suspect this classification was issued due primarily to the parcels location along Highway 7 and its proximity to the airport. However, perhaps not as much consideration was given to the northern half of the property, which directly abuts a legacy agricultural farm to the east and the Rural Residential community to the north. When this classification was made, the Airpark community didn’t fully understood the ramifications of the “employment” designation for this parcel, and by extension, the Air Park.
The area is currently zoned ‘Low Density Residential’, which is more consistent with the adjoining Rural Residential zoning and was the legacy zoning when many residents purchased their homes.
The towns acceptance of this escalated zoning proposal may hinge on whether the “employment” classification effectively prohibits keeping the current Low Density Residential zoning or expressly forbids it. We’ve been led to believe by the applicant that it does forbid it, and requires zoning more oriented towards “employment.” If that’s the case, and no exception or reclassification is possible, then the Air Park residents may have lost this zoning fight before we even knew we were in it.
The Air Park does not believe that expanding zoning to more commercial, industrial and higher density designations is appropriate directly adjacent to a Rural Residential zone. While those uses are perfectly reasonable and acceptable for the southern portion of the parcel nearer the highway, the northern portion would need to take into account the rural nature of the
Air Park and the unique circumstances of being adjacent to active aviation.
The proposed zoning divides the northern section roughly evenly between Airport (AP) and Community Mixed Use (CMU).
Erie's own CMU zoning documents state in part that it is intended for “...mixed-use development at a higher scale than is appropriate for neighborhood locations. “ and “The CMU district is intended to include commercial, institutional, recreational, and service facilities needed to support surrounding neighborhoods and the community at-large. Medium to higher-density housing should be incorporated within or located around the CMU zone district…”
The possible presence of businesses, including Recreation centers, Athletic fields and Courts, Restaurants, Nightclubs, Taverns, Hotels/motels .... (These are all permitted uses!) so close to private homes is worrying from a late-night noise, parking/security lighting and vandalism perspective. And raises Airport Security, Safety and noise complaint issues for the town.
One very pertinent issue is that there is an aircraft movement easement running east to west along much of the northern boundary. This is an active aircraft taxiway, with all the safety, security, and noise considerations that come with it. This aircraft easement connects directly to the main runway, and we are concerned that with transient (apartment style) housing near by, this taxiway will be an attractive vector for kids, dogs and curious tenants to find themselves in close proximity to aircraft, Security concerns for the airport not to mention the inevitable noise complaints the town will field from a higher density of people so close to active aviation.
The Airport (AP) zoning in the northeast section is, somewhat ironically, an even greater concern. On its face, airport zoning next to an airport seems appropriate—we are, after all, an Air Park, and we're your one constituency that you will not hear complaining about aircraft noise.. However, because this area is located on the east side of the runway, there can be no direct vehicular access to Airport facilities and the site cannot realistically support most aviation uses that would require access without crossing an active runway. In practice, this limits viable development of this almost 16 acre site primarily to hangars. While in itself not a poor use, we’ve already seen how a similar situation has played out on the west side of the airport, where developers proposed aviation-related uses, were unable to sustain them, and ultimately obtained an industrial overlay that turned the area into a generic industrial park. Given that this proposed AP zone has even greater constraints on legitimate aviation use, we are concerned that the same pattern will repeat—placing industrial development directly adjacent to the Rural Residential Air Park. This is not hyperbole, it has already happened to the residents on the western side and its effects would be just as keenly felt by the eastern Air Park residents.
We do want to acknowledge the applicant's offer to stipulate a minimum of a one hundred foot buffer area between the Air Park and any future construction should the proposal pass. We appreciate their willingness to negotiate at this stage and feel that this offer serves as tacit acknowledgement that all parties recognize the importance of the gradient and separation issues inherent in this rezoning proposal. We understand that these specific development details would come at a later stage when a site plan is submitted. But as the Town has experienced, once certain uses are legally permitted under zoning, it becomes much more difficult to restrict them later. Better to address these concerns now, at the zoning stage, so that potential issues can be avoided rather than managed after the fact.
At previous public meetings, Sierra Vista has stated that these proposed zoning changes are consistent with the Town’s Comprehensive Plan. That may be true, but the Air Park feels that the original decision to classify the entirety of this parcel—particularly the northern portion—was not as fully thought through as it could have been. The result is a proposal that introduces the potential for higher-density residential, commercial, and industrial uses directly adjacent to a unique rural residential neighborhood.
Others residents will draw attention to the increased traffic that will be concentrated on Bonanza Dr and the loss of views and neighborhood character in any resulting 40’ high constructions on the site but, in summary, we believe the Comprehensive Plan erred in applying an “employment” designation to the entire parcel which has resulted in this rezoning proposal. At minimum, the northern portion adjacent to the Airpark should retain its Low Density Residential zoning or some other significant transition or buffer area needs to be established. Preserving this transition area would significantly reduce potential conflicts and better protect the character and safety of the Airpark community.
Thank you for your time.
Tim Drnec
3040 Cherokee Ct
Erie, CO 80516
Lou Mazzola
--
To send a message to the group, email mem...@eahoa.org or eap...@googlegroups.com
To join the group, visit https://groups.google.com/g/eap-hoa/members or email eap-hoa+...@googlegroups.com
---
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Erie Air Park HOA" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to eap-hoa+u...@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/eap-hoa/4276e54b-8f18-46a4-9ced-965e29a0a4a6n%40googlegroups.com.