Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutGib and Lee Plimpton_28-NOV-25November 28, 2025 Mr. John Leybourne Garfield County Planning and Development 108 8th Street, Ste, 401 Glenwood Springs, CO 81601 Dear Mr Leybourne, Re: Harvest Roaring Fork PUD We are writing today to express our concerns about the massive HARVEST ROARING FORK PUD being submitted for approval to Garfield County. We live across the River from this parcel and were alarmed by the scope of the development proposed. We hope you will consider the impact on surrounding property in this residential area which has already been REZONED from larger lots to higher density. 1). Water: Will there be enough water for that many residential homes in addition to hotels and commercial? - Not just for normal use, but in case of fire. Every time I pass Ironbridge, I am alarmed at the density and the problem there would be in case of a fire - condsidering some of the recent fires in Boulder and elsewhere. Aspen Glen now requires unbuilt lots to mow the grass because of this consideration. How fast would fire spread in the Ironbridge neighborhood? These narrow setbacks and high home density, where some homes are extremely large, can be seen clearly from 109 Road. At this time there are already continual fire restrictions on water use with the amount of development in the valley. It's suppose to only get worse. 2). Traffic: Highway 82 is becoming more and more congested and will be more so in the future considering all the development in the Glenwood Meadows with many of those people commuting to Aspen, etc. The CIVIC intersection is already a problem as we observe the number of accidents clogging traffic on a regular basis (photo attached). It seems to be a real problem which more people coming and going will only exacerbate. It also seems as though there are more careless drivers in the area, ignoring speed limits, crossing double yellow lines and passing in intersections with no accountability. This consideration is important because more enforcement becomes necessary - a result of more growth. It seems to be a self - generating problem. 3). Community Services: Medical services are already stretched. Try getting appointments and procedures for health issues - vital if involving emergencies such as heart attack, stroke or cancer treatment. Are you going to build new hospitals? Rifle already had to do so with all the growth in that area. Considering the LARGE number of housing units just built in the Glenwood Meadows, do we really need another town of housing in addition. (As a side note, the Employee Housing system is broken. Instances of people who own thriving construction companies bragging that they only pay themselves enough to qualify for this housing.) Also, how about schools and fire protection? Will we need more of them or will they be crowded or in short supply? How about the Glenwood Hot Springs pool? 4). Lighting: At the moment this part of the valley is fairly dark at night with only a few commercial areas along the highway not having to conform to residential and more restrictive lighting ordinances. How much of this new development will be required to keep the lighting at this current level? Do we want to live in New York City where you can't see the stars. This will be a real problem if commercial development and it's less restrictive lighting is approved. Also, are you prepared to enforce the lighting code for residential properties, which is not even being enforced currently - down and light source covered? 5). Wildlife: The deer and elk seem to be able to cope just fine with the older subdivisions with large lots, but they could not do that with the density proposed by Harvest. 6). The Economy: A project of this size has to have a significant impact on the local economy - land values, property taxes (which have skyrocketed), rentals - a particularly uncertain concern for those who are retired and living on a fixed income. 7). Soil Stability: Hopefully the review will include a due diligence study to avoid what happened in Iron Bridge. The question is: Do we need more housing than has recently been built in Glenwood (The Meadows Apartments) and Carbondale, or more commercial space than we see sitting empty now in Glenwood (K Mart and Mall) and Carbondale (Old City Market)? If this property is developed, which they have every right to do, it is your office which will make a difference on the quality of life for those of us who live here now and for those who will be here in the future. We are hopeful that you see that your mission is to protect local people above developers and realtors. This is not just a subdivision; it is an additional TOWN comparable in scope to Basalt and Carbondale. What are they thinking? Perhaps the zoning at 2 acre lots would be more reasonable or maybe a donation of the property to Aspen Valley Land Trust. People are sick of out of state developers coming here and ruining this Colorado valley, leaving it a mess only to go back "home" elsewhere. The reason that this area is desirable to many is that despite several subdivisions, the large size of the lots and open space in these older subdivisions has maintained a rural feel. People enjoy the rural feel as long as they don't have to provide for it. Harvest will change all of that - development until "there is no more room". Many local residents are astonished that a project of this magnitude is even being proposed. It's okay, even appropriate, to say "NO" to more people, traffic congestion, bright lighting and shortages of police, medical, fire and school services. We are hopeful that you will seriously consider these concerns and any others raised during the review of this project as your decision will have dire consequences now and far into the future. Sincerely, Gib and Lee Plimpton Attachments: By Comparison Schedule Highway 82 Traffic During an Accident at CMC light... Adjacent to proposed Harvest PUD BY COMPARISON: Aspen Glen Subdivision (Including an open space Golf Course): 938 Acres w/ 477 lots (a little less than 2 Acres per lot) Iron Bridge Subdivision (Including an open space Golf Course): 530 Acres w/ 292 Lots (a little less than 2 Acres per lot) Coryell ranch Subdivision (Including 100 Acres of Open Space): 240 Acres w/ 20-30 Lots (around 8 Acres per lot) Westbank Subdivision (Including a golf course): Very large lots and water rights. Teller Springs Subdivision (Including a large 31 Acre Open Space): 175+ Acres w/ 21 Lots (Lots of varying sizes, averaging 5+ Acres per lot) New: Meadows Apartments: 68 Acres w/ 222 or 191 Units (a little less than 1/3 Acre per unit) Harvest Roaring Fork PUD: 283 Acres w/ 1,500 lots plus 450 ADUs. (Between 1/3 and 1/4 Acre per unit excluding a 120 room Hotel and 55,000 SF of commercial space and the relaxed lighting codes that go with it,) Reserve at Aspen Glen. Sages at Aspen Glen.