Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutINDIAN MEADOWS WEST - Filed GC-GENERAL CORRESPONDENCE - 2004-08-26r MELINE & IIRELAN E.N(:1N EEI?S - CONSTRUCTORS A AI P 12 1 ( A R U 1 1, 1) 1 N G • H' O R T C O L L I N S, C O L O R A D O S U 5 2 1 • P 11 4 8 2- S 2 4 1) April 3, 1969 City of Fort Collins Municipal Bldg. Fort Collins, Colo. 80521 Attn: Mr. :Roy Bingman Gentlemen: Transmitted herewith on behalf of the developers of the Indian Meadows West Subdivision, find two copies of the Utility Plan and Sanitary Sewers & Curb and Gutter designs for the proposed development. I believe the drawings correctly reflect these utilities and easements as we have previously discussed them. Please review them at your earliest, convenience and notify me of your approval or comments. Very truly yours, MELINE & IRELAN i Wayne. Irelan, P.E. Enclosures: 2 cc: Mr. Orm Sherwood Mr. Win. Bartran WCI: ad Page 7 October 29, 1969 E ir ryi My personal view is that your represents an added dimension to available a type of housing which h Collins hereto -Fore. While there wi of housing. there wilt also be many wh preferred housing style. Your project low-rise housing in a style other than an environment of their choice. protect is the housing s as not been 11 be many o wou make the a most successful one and that it took in Fort Collins. it makes available to the residents of Fort who are not attracted to this type Id make this type of housing their s it possible for those who want duality conventional detached house to live in ver"DonaldE. truly ours � Reynolds Planning Director DER/ic cc: Roy Bingman Gordon Clyde Indian Meadows Unit Development File W. Bartran Febrr,_--y 15, 1913 Mr. Gord-n Clyde Building 1 ns; onar City of Fort Collins 300 Wnrtc Avcn,:, Fort collins, CO 80521 RE: Indiao Kn dows Dear Mr. Clyde. It is the ondurstdndinr of Phnades, Inc. that the air spone in IndiaH Meade= Apartment, may be sole, to individual residents providing the necessory bdal steps have been taken to provide a title pelicy to the new owners. Should this not he an accurate understanding of this conversion of ownership, please advise us . Resp;gtfu'.ly yours, f Reuel Y. Colston Rhoades, Inc. cc: Gene Fisher F-M)OR ua (305) 462vuw; 13'c' ' r,' ": i' CA!—, V[ -' FORT CO; L IN:,. C01,01,AD'? 805)i L P . O . Box 580 - 300 West La Porto Avena� Fort Collins, Colorado Telephone 303 434-4220 80521 .February 23, 1973 Mr. Reuel Y. Rolston Rhoades, Inc. Savings Building Fort Collins, Colorado 8652-L Dear Mr. Rolston: Your letter dared February 15, 1973 inquires about changing the form of ownership of the Indian Meadows Apartment Complex. The subdivision is located in an RM Residential Medium Denoity 'Lone, which was developed as a planned unit development containing 34 dwelling units. So long as the individual purchasers are informed that the revised ownership aprcement must continue to conform to the approved unit development plan, there would be no objection by the City of Fort Collins. If and when a revised ownership agreement is developed two copies should be furnished to the Building Inspection Department; one copy will be furnished to the Planning Department for file with the unit develo —ant plan and the other copy will be permanently mainwined in the Building Inspection Department files. Very truly yours, For t e City of Fort Cellins zp --�� - Gordon F. Clyde, Chief Building Inspector GFC/lin Coordination: Itz Planning Department Date r Community D.,ve kpment D partmentj� Date0-51 � l cityAttorney--- �— -- — - Date \ `y TIME CENTER OF THE 'ViORLD P. O. Box 580 300 West Lo Porta. Avenue Fort Collins, Colorado 80521 February 26, 1973 Mr. Reuel Y. Rolston Rhoades, Inc. Savings Building Fort Collins, Colorado 80521 Dear Mr. Rolston: Telephone 303 484-4220 Your letter dated February 15, 1973 inquires about changing the form of ownership of the Indian Meadows Apartment Complex. The subdivision is located in an RM Residential Medium Density Zone, which was developed as a planned unit development containing 34 dwelling units. So long as the individual purchasers are informed that the revised ownership agreement must continue to conform to the approved unit development plan, there would be no objection by the City of Fort Collins. If and when a revised ownership agreement is developed two copies should be furnished to the Building Inspection Department; one copy will be furnished to the Planning Department for file with the unit development plan and the other copy will be permanently maintained in the Building Inspection Department files. GFC/lln Very truly yours, For e�City ,Jof Fort Collins Gordon F. Clyde, Chief Building Inspector j TIME CENTER OF THE WORLD fe-WrIWIV. iee ( 11) 01 1 Ohl ( OI I I.A'S P.C. Box_5813_Fort Collins,. Colorado 80522 Telephone 303-484 4220_ ENGINEERING SERVICES DEPARTMENT June 28, 1976 Dr. Russell. T. Jordan 1809 Indian Meadows Lane Fort Collins, Colorado 80521 Dear Doctor Jordan, This letter follows your request for verification of our telephone conversation several days ago regarding the erosion situation on Spring Creek adjacent to the Indian Meadows Development. The week before last I visited the area to see the extent of erosion. As I indicated on the phone, the only visible area was a small section of grass which had apparently washed out adjacent to the stream. Generally speaking, the maintenance of the Spring Creek Channel is a City function. This should be qualified in the follow$n, way; the area behind Indian Meadows is grass and maintained on a weekly basis, which the City of course cannot do. I would say that the differentiation between City maintenance and owner maintenance, is that major work along the creek channel would be done by the city and the more frequent, ordinary kinds of maintenance would necessarily have to be done by the property owners. I also indicated that there are long range plans for the improvement of the Spring Creek Channel in this general area. The design work for these improvements has not been completed as yet. When we do the detailed engineering design for the section of the Spring Creek adjacent to Indfan Meadows development, we will look carefully at the question of maintenance along the creek. It mrty be a number of years before we will be able to do this design work because of: a large work load and other higher priority projects. In the meantime, if it is necessary to do major main- tenance work in this area, we will do this on an as needed basis. If you have any other questions in this regard, please call. Y truly, R . Bingman Engineering Services Director 100% Recycled Ronal August 23, 1977 TO: Roy Bingman, Director of Engineering Services FROM: Lloyd McLaughlin, Civil Engineer II. On August 22, 1977, I met with Dr. Russell Jordan of the Indian Meadows devel- opment to discuss drainage along Spring Creek. Dr. Jordan is a resident of Indian Meadows and reoresents the homeowners therein. He indicated he had dis- cussed Spring Creek numerous times over the last two years with representatives of the City and as of yet has never gotten any answers concerning improvements or flood control. He said that the water elevation in the most recent rainstorm was up to the patio level of those units backing up to Spring Creek. I explained to Dr. Jordan that the City does have a preliminary proposal for channel improvements along Spring Creek, (Black & Veatch Report 1971) and that within that section adjacent to Indian Meadows a concrete channel was proposed. IIe expressed his concern about aesthetics of a concrete channel and the time of the improvements. I had said a minimum of five years before final engineering completion and commencing construction. At this Dr. Jordan became upset and questioned what they were supposed to do in the interim. I attempted to explain that the delay consisted of analysis, design, and administrative work to provide the improvements. He asked for direction in speeding up the actual construction of the improvements. I suggested that he talk to you on the actual timing and if he was still dissatisfied perhaps his problem could be presented to the City Council for their consideration. Dr. Jordan requests that you call him to discuss this matter. His phone numbers are: 482-7785 (Home) and 221-2550 (Office). He desires that council consider the topic at their September 6, 1977 meeting. I.Cd4: cs CITY OF FORT COLLINS MEMORANDUM DATE: August 13, 1984 TO: Jim Hibbard, Transmission & Distribution Systems Manager FROM: Bob Smith, Assistant City Engineer - Storm Drainage RE: Indian Meadows - Spring Creek Sanitary Sewer Crossing Currently in the Indian Meadows development a sanitary sewer main traverses Spring Creek east of Remington Street. This main is covered and provides the support for a wooden foot bridge that is used by the Indian Meadows residents as access to Spring Creek. I bring this to your attention because of the potential problem that can be foreseen if a larger than normal flow in Spring Creek is experienced. Recently runoff from a thunderstorm was at or near the bottom of this sewer main. Studies show this can be expected from storm events having a magnitude of occurring once every 2 years. Flows in excess of this magnitude would be expected to back up behind this crossing until over-topping'of the foot bridge or collapse of the main itself occurs. A major storm event (100 year) can generate flows in excess of 4 feet over this crossing. I would appreciate your review of this matter at your earliest convenience and I would be happy to discuss this in person if you so desire. Thank you! MELINE & IRELAN B,NU INFERS - CONSTR IT CTORS A M K RIG A IIII LDI NO • PORT COLLINS, GO LOR A DO 80521 • PH 49$-F240 May 16, 1969 Mr, Charles L,1quin Director of Public Works Municipal Bldg, Fort Collins, Colo, 80521 Re: Sewer line at Indian Meadows West Dear Chuck: Per our telephone conversation of yesterday, I have revised the grade of the referenced sewer line at the point where it crosses Spring Creek so that it will be on piers at an elevation approxi- mately two feet lower than it now exists. The revised grades are noted on the sepia transmitted herewith. The line has been staked for these revised grades, and the contractor plans to begin construction this afternoon if weather permits. Thank you very much for your assistance in resolving this problem quickly. Very truly yours, MEL THE &--RFLAN i r, Wayne/ C, Irelan, P.E. Enclosure cc: Mr, Bill. Bartran WCI :ad C1 ir September 22, 1969 Rhoades Agency Realtor Fort Collins Colorado Gentlemen: In regard to the Indian Meadows Development on Stuart Street, one of the streets was constructed with a concrete curb only, instead of the curb and gutter as indicated on the Utility plan filed with the City. This will have to be reconstructed as curb and gutter before the City can approve the construction. We would appreciate your cooperation in this matter. RAB/bkm Very truly yours, Roy A. Bingman City Engineer 0 September 29, 1969 Kr. William Eartran Lartran Hom•s, Inc. 1220 West Elizabeth Fort Collins, Colorado Dear Mr. Bartran: In regard to your request for a change from the curb and gutter indicated on the utility plan for the Indian Meadows Development, to a curb only on a portion of the street: I feel we must turn down your request, since the private streets within planned unit development areas are intended to be constructed to City standards, except for width. The City does not permit installation of curb only on City streets and I don't feel we can permit it in this instance. You can apply to the Planning and Zoning board for a change in the plan for this development if you wish. This should be in a letter of request to the Planning and Zoning hoard through the Planning office. BAB/bkm Very truly, yours, Roy A. Bingman City Engineer October 8, 1969 Mr. Om Sherwood Rhoades Agency Savings Building Oak and Howe Fort Collins. Colorado U Dear Mr. Sherwood: Your request for final inspection on units in the Indian Meadows Unit Development area has bean referred to this office for inspection for compli- ance with the approved Unit Development Plan. Results of an on -site inspec- tion indicate the following departures from the approved Unit Development Plan: 1. The! two "Unit D" structures touted on the east edge of the property near Stuart Street have been joined by a carport and patio canopy whereas the Unit Development Plan shows two l'I separate structures. 2. The two -space parking bay adjacent to the swimming pool area has not been curved or asphalted. 3. the swimming pool has not been constructed. �n 4. The brick and wood patio watts shorn on the Unit Development J Plan and the accompanying sketches of the "A" units adjacent to Spring Creek have not been built. S. The sidewalk in front of the middle "A" unit has been relocated, thus reducing the lawn area, eliminating one parking space and expending the asphalt drive which serves as an entrance to the garage building. 6. The sidewalk in the pool area and providing access to the ped- estrian bridge is not in place. 7. The pedestrian bridge is not in place. Page S. 1969 a. The asphalt drive on the western edge of the property and the vertical concrete curb are not in conformance with City speci- fications or the approved utility plan for this area. A con- crete pan is required adjacent to the curb. 9. The skin entry walk into the center courtyard is not located in accordance with the site plan. 10. The short diagonal walk which leads from the main entry walk to the rear of the easterly "C" units which face Stuart Street is missing. 11. The two stepping stone walkways which lead from Stuart Street �J to the "C" units are missing. 12. The sketches which have been made a part of the Unit Develop- ment plan indicate extensive exterior use of brick veneer. Instead, the siding used is almost exclusively board and batten with the exception of the 'A' units. 13. The sidewalk adjacent to Stuart Street is incomplete. I rec- ognize that the location of the two power poles presents a problem to you. I think, therefore, that an indication of your intent would be helpful here. 14. The two tree wells which have been developed in the parking area adjacent to the west property line are not shown on the Unit Development Plan and appear to effect the number of L available off-street parking spaces. 15. Landscaping is, of course, not complete at this time. I recogniin that the timing of construction and landscaping cannot preeti- tally be completed before some units art ready for occupancy. Many of the above items are simply matters which are the last items which can be completed as a matter of logistics. On such items, your timetable for completion of these items will be sufficient response at this time. Other of the above comments, however, reflect departures from the Unit Development Plan and should be brought into compliance before Certificates of Occupancy are issued or cause should be shown why the City should not require changes be made to bring about compliance. I would like to rake a few observations which relate to subjects not speci- fically covered by the Unit Development Plan but which may be helpful to you in avoiding potential problems. The fill area adjacent to Spring Creek represents an obstruction to the natural flood plain and can be expected to wash out in time of high water. Evidence of this can be seen already at the too of the fill slope in back of the two easterly "A' units where rinor washout took place from the rather minor creek rise attributed to the melting of the recent snowfall. Further west, the fill has been carried south too far to allow sufficient roam in the natural stream valley. Casual observation of the area directly west of the south end of your property shows a much wider flood plain which the stream can be expected to Page 3 October S. 1969 seek during periods of high run-off. I would suggest that a broad terrace effect giving a wider space for high water would be more satisfactory and would minimize eventual undercutting of your yard and patio areas during periods of high water flow. The proposed pedestrian bridge shouid be carefully designed to avoid any possibility of its acting as a dam and backing water into your property and others which lie upstream. Care should also be taken to see that storm drainage which passes through the the under the sidewalk adjacent to the southeast corner of the garage stays within your property on its way to the creek. A potential problem also exists in the parking areas adjacent to the north- west carver of the eight unit structure. Here, the right rear Quarter panel of the southernmost car parked in the head -in parking north of the eight unit structure is extremely vulnerable to attack by the front or rear bumper of the northernmost perallel-parked car, west of the building. You may want to extend the sidew&IP directly west for a few feet to avoid this problem. (He are prepared to authorize that extension as a minor change to the Unit Development Plan. This letter should In no way be construed to supplant or preempt inspection for compliance with the utility plan and the storm drainage plan by the City Engineer and for compliance with applicable codes by the Building Inspector Department. Very truly yours, _— Donaid E. Reynolds �1I Planning Director OER/le cc: Gordon Clyde Roy Eingman ✓ Indian Meadows Unit Development file Mr• 0 October 2_9 1969 Rhoads Sgency Savings ufld Oak and Howes n4 Fort Collins, Colorado Dear 0rm: Posithave r feview . 3 letter. of items 2� Your response 4, to 6, 7, 11 l3Y letter of Octobe Item i and 7 5 will be d si ass The Manner of units ;FA IIa item relating ed later in dis- be BPeara+ice of is a minor tothepitch t. of this D port me by the 1annpdingly�rgoee cord nge he p roand v@d� entsran roof between Item 5 9 and Zonfn9 b�radnce with them t Develop, ement to does Therelocation of uthorf plan will • heent ParkiMaterially i atio the tY delegated to ng sPaces mProve of Sidewalk f Inis within the nave been access Into the garage front of the middle „ glyg Board• area of author rated, this area an ddle A" The approved Ity delegated represents d 1nasmu as unit Unit Develop., to me b a minor cl no Item S S. This Item has been comAli TQPmert plan will Ee �mende� accord_ Your reasonsave inspectedsite ed with - no COnment• Is Item 10aose��ft re The Un1t DeveTo t p• toocrearto esfs Item and f Item 12. This it nd T onse as for It 9. Tan wilt he a^�nded accordiing ye does have an differs fr, consulted wi effect o om those if th a number of plot aPPea nreviousT than this subfeCt lop ce. Y discussed MeML In 9e• the COhCQtsuS sell the ng and ZOnIn4 Boaror ds �'ason that it erred 1 have to be that ft@W s.efinftiO e{ Ito dat rmfMinor ne I there oreataok it Page 2 October 29, 1969 upon myself to seek the opinion of disinterested trained design pro- fessionals as to the relative aesthetic qualities of brick veneer and board and batten siding as related to this project. It was the opinion of both individuals that the choice of board and batten was fortunate and that the wood tended to give the entire project a warmer and more natural residential quality and that the brick, conversely, would have given the project a heavier commercial appearance which would have emphasized the tightness of the project. Based upon this advice. I approve the change of exterior materials. The Unit Develop- ment Plan will be amended accordingly. Item 14. This change is minor if, in fact, there is no need for the ,Parkingcupy. We will reserve jdgment that pectuntiletheich the projecttis9fully occupied and needs cane be more on determined. Items 2, 3, 4, 6, 7, 11, 13 and 15 remain to be completed. We have therefore requested the Building Department to issue temporary Certifia cates of Occupancy which will expire on June 15, 1970. This should, according to your time schedule, allow for completion of all aspects Of the project and allow for the contingency that landscape plantings may be delayed until spring. At that date, a final inspection will be made to determine compliance with the Unit Development Plan as amended. kith respect to your request to erect a six foot fence along the wand est eteenndingiine northerllyynfromm thatng at hpoint I find his requested rthwest comer of the rehange to be minor in anture. I therefore approve this change and authorize the D Building Department to issue a building permit for same subject to the following conditions: (1) That the fence be so designed as to provide an attractive "face" on both sides, and (2) that the fence be extended northerly to a point not closer than 65 feet from the centerline of Stuart Street. Your request to remove the concrete structure located in Spring Creek east of your pool area has been referred to the Engieering Department for their determination as to whether or not this structure has any pur- pose relating to regulation of water flow. You should expect a letter from that department in the near future. I think 11; should be mentioned that in choosing to develop under the Unit Development concept, you make the City a party to an agreement to develop in accordance with a specific plan. When, in the process of design and construction, the need for minor changes becomes evident, the time to request those changes is before they become an accomplished fact. By proceeding with changes without request o r amendment of the Unit Development Plan, you subject yourself to the possibility of having to go back and change your work ito comity with the plan. Fortunately, has this instanter there were no instances where the decision prior to the fact would have been counter to that which was actually constructed.