Important Facts

Greetings everyone, 

PATHS has engaged with research by local planning and environmental experts and would like to share a few facts we've recently discovered regarding the Hughes property and the current proposed development. 

If the information below speaks to you, we urge you to write a letter to the City of Ft. Collins and the Ft. Collins City Council ASAP sharing your thoughts, concerns, and ideas. If you've never done this before, not to worry. We've composed some helpful instructions on letter writing to your representatives here: https://www.pathsforhughes.com/take-action.html

We MUST have public engagement if we are to have a chance at a sustainable, community-friendly space at Hughes. It will not be possible if you don't take action. 

So, choose a topic you're passionate about and write your letter today!

-PATHS Organizers


                                        NEW HUGHES FACTS

Hughes and Larimer County

• Larimer County Commissioners have stated that they would be interested in partnering with other entities to purchase part of the Hughes site to expand trails and parking for those using the trails.
• ​A Larimer County proposal was presented to John Stokes and The City of Fort Collins, it was rejected. 

  Hughes Area Environmental Facts

• Citizens have demanded that the site developers prepare a wildlife environmental impact study (EIS) or an ecological characterization study (ECS), due to the unique make up of this land and wildlife that inhabit it. The City Planning Office explained that these studies are customarily not required of builders. However, experts have described this land as unique to certain wildlife and plants.
• According to a prominent local environmental and engineering researcher, a dense housing development in this area increases the risks of flooding. The researcher reports that heavy density prevents water from being absorbed on the west side of the area during micro storms. (Note that The City Plan includes a prediction that there will be more floods during the next 20 years.)
  • The researcher also concluded that the cumulative impact of heavy rains will adversely affect Spring Creek, causing devastating erosion on both sides of the creek, and that the east side of town will have to try and absorb the water, but City infrastructure isn’t adequate. We would like to know who will foot the bill in the case of excessive erosion to Spring Creek and what the future environmental costs will look like.
  • The researcher also predicts that the developer will not be required to accommodate water structures that are well outside of their building area, leaving the City and the Community responsible for the inevitable repairs required as a result of the development.
  • He says regardless of how a builder prepares their area, a dense housing development this close to the foothills will cause contamination, flowing downstream, creating a negative impact on Fort Collins, Loveland, and Greeley.
• For a development the size of 600 homes, PATHS thinks a sustainability study should be required by the City. Other cities, including Longmont, require sustainability studies for developments this dense. ​
• Another local environmental and planning expert says “The larger the development footprint, 200 meters and beyond, the more a ‘halo’ effect takes place, disturbing the environment around the perimeter of the development.”
  • She says an alternative development plan would consist of a group of clustered homes with a designated “conservation development plan”, which uses open space to allow for conservation. There are over 100 conservation districts already established in Larimer County and over 400 in the State of CO. 

​
Area Residents Want Conscious Planning: Requested Studies

Members of the local community have requested the following studies be considered a requirement for any new development at Hughes. PATHS agrees. 

• Environmental Impact Study 
• Financial Impact Study
• Economic Impact Study
• Horsetooth Dam Failure Risk Study
• An extended traffic study from LaPorte Ave. to Drake 

Facts About Schools 

• A local economics expert reports that households in the proposed plan will have 2.5 residents, and that translates to between 480 to 1,000 projected new students in K-12 schools.
• A resident active in K-12 education in the area says that schools in the district are “at or over capacity”. 
• 30% of our population has children in the K-12 age range. An influx of 480-1000 students will require at least one new elementary school, however there isn’t enough land near Hughes to build a school.
• 480-1000 new students to this area would require 3 additional school buses required to run twice daily into the development. That will increase Co2 levels from school buses to six trips daily, 9 months out of the year, and increase pollution next to the foothills where combustion lingers. Capital costs, in today’s dollars, are $115,000 per bus, including operating costs. Each bus driver receives, in today’s dollars, $60,000, including benefits. That translates to $180,000 in new drivers with benefits for one development. 
• Per pupil cost to the district is currently $8,000 per student annually. Conservatively, annual figures are somewhere between $3,840,000 and close to $8,000,000 for ONE development and in 2019-dollar figures.
• The cost to build a new school, today, is $80,000,000, and requires 60 acres of land. Voters would need to approve a bond for a new school. A new school also requires 24 months to build. So, from land purchase to completion, the timing to build a new school is 3 years. 
• If modules are used to “expand” school space, the cost, today, is $200,000 per module. These modules also require additional land. 

Safety and Evacuation Issues

Rebecca Everette, with City Planning & Zoning, has stated that during an emergency, “Evacuations and emergency vehicles having access to this area are a valid concern.” 
Traffic

• According to Martina Wilkinson, with the City’s traffic department, “There have been a disproportionate number of accidents just north of Hughes at Elizabeth and Overland Trail over the past year.” (2018/2019).
• Additional cars in the area are projected to increase incidents, particularly with an abundance of bike traffic, public buses on Overland/Elizabeth, and additional school buses on the south side of Overland Trail. 

Inconsistencies with City of Fort Collins Climate Action Plan 

• According to the 2015 Climate Action Plan, climate changes will greatly impact Fort Collins. Here are the facts as presented in the City’s document which directly impact the Hughes Development Site:
  • Soaring summer temperatures will increase heat, ozone, smog, and affect citizens’ health. (pg. 6)
  • Increased and more intense droughts. (pg. 6)
  • Heavier rainfall coming in downpours, increasing the risk of flooding. (pg. 6)
  • Higher temperatures and lower soil moisture will increase the threats to forests for fire, insects and disease, affecting recreating, timber, and air and water quality. (pg. 6)
  • More severe heat waves forecasting more extreme heat, “especially if future emissions of heat-trapping pollution are high.” (pg. 6)
  • “Build in Efficiency from the Start” (pg. 19) 

Inconsistencies With the Ft. Collins City Plan, as Adopted by the City and City Council, 2019 

• Core Values: Livability, Community, Sustainability. The proposed plan is inconsistent with the City’s adopted core values as outlined by Ft. Collins's Triple Bottom Line theme. 
• No access to arts, culture, history in this development without a car.
• No resource conservation and environmental stewardship in this development.
• No representation of a diverse range of cultures due to the proposed high-end houses. 
• No access to programs and amenities enhancing the lives of residents in this area.
• No creative industries in the plan.
• No innovation. No workforce attraction. No workforce development.
• No sensitivity to the environment. No protection of air, water, and night skies.
• No support of the City of Ft. Collins's Climate Action Plan.
• No plan for affordable housing in this development.
• No plan for integrating land use and transportation.
• No access to mobility-as-a-service with new transportation modes.
• Limited access to bus lines, particularly for residents on the south side of the proposed development. 

---