Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMARTINEZ PUD - Filed GC-GENERAL CORRESPONDENCE - 2005-04-21WONDERLAND April28, 1999 Ms. Sheri Wamhoff Engineering Dept. City of Fort Collins 281 No. College Ave Fort Collins. CO 80522 Re: Martinez, P.IJ.D. Dear Sheri, In the Martinez. F.U.D. Amendment No. 2, we are allowed eleven permits and seven certificates of occupancy before the construction of Mason Court is completed. We have received a verbal offer for the sale of five of our single family lots (wc have already closed on four of the single famihlots). However the sale would be contingent upon the buyer being able to get permits. We have eight buildings in our cohousing project and a building has been started on Lot 1, and we expect another home to be started on lot 8 in May and lot 10 in June. These planned construction starts would use all of our allocated permits. We are unable to sell these lots unless we can get additional permits allocated to Martinez P. U.D which is the purpose of this letter to you. The Buyer we are negotiating with would like to start construction early this summer so they can have homes up this fall and still catch some of the selling season, and also get all of their foundations in before the winter hits. As you are aware, the City will be building a storm sewer through Mason Court in June and for this reason we did not complete our street since it would have to be torn up again. Additionally, Mark Scars has met with the railroad and is coordinating the removal of tracks for the storm sewer and the raising of the tracks which cross our Mason Court. We now expect to be able to start the completion of Mason Court in July and should be able to complete it no later than August, 1999. We also have a letter of credit to the City in the amount of $97,000 for the completion of Mason Court. Is there some way we can get additional permits allocated to our Martinez P.U.D. project? If you arc not the one who makes this decision, could you pass this letter on to the appropriate person. Thanks for your assistance in this matter. Sincerely, y J Bruce L. Richardson Wonderland Hill Development Company 745 Poplar Avenue, Boulder, Colorado 80304 (303) 449-3232; Fax: (303) 449-3275 WONDERLAND August 13, 1998 Sheri Wamhoff Engineering Department City of Fort Collins PO Box 580 Fort Collins, CO 80522-0580 Dear Sheri: Re: Amendment to Jim Leach's August 11 Proposed Modification to the Martinez PUD Development Agreement Regarding the proposed modification to the Martinez PUD Development Agreement in Jim Leach's letter to you dated August 11, he indicated four buildings that we would like to start prior to the completion of curbs, gutters, and streets. In further discussion with the builder, we realize we made an error in this request. The correct buildings (as shown on the site plans sent to you) for which'we would like this agreement are these three: Building K Building H Building A Thanks again for your assistance in this matter. Sincerely, Marilyn Moses Assistant to the President Copy to Dennis Sovick mm c\wamhoM da Wonderland Hill Development Company 745 Poplar Avenue, Boulder, Colorado 80304 (303) 449-3232; Fax: (303) 449-3275 LIND, LAWRENCE & OTTENHOFF LLP ATTORNEYS AT LAW THE LAW BUILDING 1011 ELEVENTH AVENUE P.O. BOX 326 GREELEY. COLORADO 80632 GEORGE H. OTTENHOFF KENNETH F. LIND KIM R. LAWRENCE JEFFREY R. BURNS September 25, 1998 City of Fort Collins Engineering Department 281 N. College Avenue Fort Collins, CO 80524 Attention: Sheri Wamhoff Re: Martinez PUD Dear Ms. Wamhoff: TELEPHONE (970) 353-2323 (970) 356-9160 TELECOPIER (970) 356-1111 During the past several months there have been some issues raised concerning the water line owned by the North Weld County Water District ("North Weld") which runs through the Martinez PUD. As you may be aware, the developers of the Martinez PUD had requested that North Weld sign off and approve the engineering plat. Due to a lack of review and information, North Weld declined to sign off on said plat. Subsequent to that date, the Martinez PUD developers have demanded that North Weld remove its water line, however, North Weld has determined that that would not be feasible nor practical. Due to that request, North Weld initiated a review of the situation. Our review has included title matters as well as interviews with engineers and planning personnel and I can advise you that North Weld will not remove or relocate its existing water line. Furthermore, North Weld has determined that initiation of eminent domain proceedings will not be necessary due to both the factual circumstances and filings related to the Martinez PUD. The Martinez PUD plat, as approved by the City of Fort Collins, was recorded on June 4, 1998 as Reception No. 98046472 with the Larimer County Clerk and Recorder. The plat makes the Martinez PUD subject to all easements of record, existing or "indicated on this plat." The plat also contains a statement of dedication to the public of streets and easements as indicated on the plat. Specifically delineated on the recorded plat is a utility easement and located within the utility easement is a sewer line owned by the City of Fort Collins as well as the specifically identified North Weld water line. North Weld considers F:\KFL\NWCWD\FTCOLLIN.E NG this easement dedication to be adequate and accepts the utility easement as platted and dedicated. Factually related to this utility easement were conversations and discussions between North Weld engineers and personnel with your Engineering Department. It was determined that the City of Fort Collins closely worked with the Martinez PUD engineers to create the designated utility easement for the purpose of protecting both the sewer line and water line as well as allowing the PUD to be developed around this utility easement. Somewhere in this process, North Weld was not contacted and North Weld had very little input. While the utility easement is not "ideal", the same is acceptable and can be utilized by both the City of Fort Collins for its sewer line as well as by North Weld for its water line. At this time, North Weld has no objection to the ongoing construction of the Martinez PUD, however, North Weld declines to sign off on any plats. We have been informed that the Martinez PUD has received various construction permits and the sign off by North Weld is not necessary or required for the ongoing activities or completion of the Martinez PUD. However, it is the request of North Weld that the construction activities at the Martinez PUD be monitored in accordance with generally accepted construction standards so as to protect both the water line and sewer line within the utility easement. We appreciate your Department's attention and cooperation related to this situation, however, we would request that the District be involved at an early stage concerning any future development or activities that take place within the City of Fort Collins that affect the North Weld County transmission line. This is a matter of communication and coordination and we would ask that for future communication and coordination that you feel free to contact the manager of North Weld County Water District, Don Posselt, at District headquarters, phone numbers 1-970-356-3020. Again, the District would like to thank you for your attention and cooperation and we look forward to working with you on future matters. Very truly yours, KFL/cg OTTENHOFF PC: North Weld County Water District Kenneth Robinson, Esq. (counsel for Martinez PUD developers) F:\KFL\NWCWD\FTCOLLIN. ENG April 15, 1998 Sheri Wamhoff City of Fort Collins Engineering Dept. 281 North College Avenue Fort Collins, CO 80522-0580 RE: Martinez P.U.D. • Variance request for horizontal and vertical curves, and cross slope on Mason Court • Request to set the posted speed limit at 15 mph Dear Sheri, We are respectfully requesting a variance from the City of Fort Collins Design and Construction Criteria, Standards and Specifications for Streets, Sidewalks, Alleys and Other Public Ways (Design Standards) dated July 1996 for the proposed Mason Court. We request approval to deviate from four standards due to numerous site restraints. Mason Court is a short cul-de-sac, approximately 450' long that terminates at a private drive and an entrance to a parking lot. The street is shown in plan and profile on Sheet 6, entitled "Mason Court Plan and Profile" in the Final Utility Plans for Martinez P.U.D. A plan view is attached to this letter for quick reference. According to the Design Standards, Section 1.02.03.03 (table 2), the required minimum horizontal centerline radius for a residential 30-mph street, is 240 feet. The design provides a 95 feet centerline radius. The road geometry is designed to preserve an existing stand of trees on the north side of the property in Lee Martinez Park. The street alignment is set a sufficient distance away from the north property line and the existing trees to ensure the grading does not adversely effect the; trees and the root systems. We also considered the following in the design; 1) posting a 15-mph speed limit, and 2) the short length of the road. When considering the total length of the street is 450 feet to the end of the cul-de-sac, and subtracting out the circular end of the cul-de-sac this leaves approximately 350 feet of actual street. A driver will be required to stop or yield at both ends of the street. The request for a posted speed limit of 15 mph is tied closely to the reduced centerline radius. A second variance request pertains to the vertical alignment, which is covered in the Design Standards, Section 1.02.03.06 (figure la). The Design Standards list minimum curve data for 30- mph. The vertical curves shown in the profile for Mason Court near Sta. 1+10 (left and right) correspond to a 25 mph design speed. The design speed is set using an AASHTO 1990; Table 111-40. The vertical curves at the railroad tracks are designed using a rate of curvature (K) of 20 and the average grade break (A) of 2.5%. The vertical curves at Sta. 2+63 (left) and Sta. 2+98 (right), also correspond to a design speed of 25-mph (K of 20, and A of 1.0%). Again the request for a posted speed limit of 15-mph will address the vertical curves not specifically matching the design parameters for a 30-mph street. The third variance request pertains to the minimum cross slope listed in the Design Standards Section 1.02,03.14. A section of Mason Court between the railroad track (Sta. 0+85) to the edge of the cross -pan (Sta. 1+75 .) does not comply with the minimum 2% cross slope. The cross 4836 S. College, Suite 12 Ft. Collins, CO 80525 (970) 226-5334 FAX (970) 282-031 1 Page 2 April 6, 1998 Project No. 1558-01-97 Re: Martinez P.U.D. slope at the railroad track is controlled by the limitations on the track grade. The cross slope at the cross -pan is kept at a minimum to maintain the smoothest vertical profiles as possible. The distance between the edge of the railroad track (Sta. 0+85) and the edge of the cross -pan (Sta. 1475 �) is approximately 90 feet. At most there would only be 30 feet of roadway that could be set at 2.0% cross slope, when you apply the standard 30 feet transitions (90' total — 30' transition at the railroad tracks —30' transition at the cross pan). Bottom line, having only 90' from a fixed 1.0% cross slope at the railroad track to a 0.6% cross slope at the flowline of the cross pan, there is not enough room to effectively transition from 1.0% to 2.0% then back to 0.6%. Furthermore, the 90 feet section of road between Sta. 0+85 to Sta. 1+75 is a localized area of pavement. The curb and gutter on the left side of the area is inflow curb, which will intercept the nuisance flow. The only water possibly flowing over the pavement in the smaller rain events is the water that falls directly onto the pavement. Finally, we request to post the speed limit at 15-mph. The minimum design speed listed in the Design Standard is 30-mph. The reasons for the reduced speed limit have been listed previously in this letter; they include the proposed horizontal centerline radius and the vertical profile. The reduced speed limit is an important factor in the design of the horizontal and vertical profiles. Taking into account: the short length of Mason Court and the potential traffic calming elements, which include the stop and yield signs, the cross pan and the railroad crossing — a speed limit of 15-mph is reasonable and consistent with the other design elements. If you have any questions, please call me at 226-5334. Sincerely, Larry P. Ketcham, P.E. Shear Engineering Corporation Ipk Attachment cc Bruce Richardson, Wonderland Hill Development Mikal Torgerson, M. Torgerson Architects April 6, 1998 Sheri Wamhoff City of Fort Collins Engineering Dept. 281 North College Avenue Fort Collins, CO 80522-0580 RE: Martinez P.U.D. Dear Sheri, This letter summarizes the responses and revisions to the Martinez P.U.D. Utility Plan Set and Final Drainage and Erosion Control Report, as a result of the recent City Departmental reviews. PROJECT COMMENT SHEET: The following section addresses the comments included on the Project Comment Sheet dated March 2, 1998: Landscape Plan (separate submittal): I. Features in the Landscape and Final Utility Plans have been coordinated. 2. The riprap areas are now consistent. A tree has been moved near the north end of the co -housing parking lot to avoid placement of the tree in the riprap. 3. The label on the 10' concrete surface near the southwest corner of the commercial building has been corrected to call it out as a `10'concrete pad". The concrete surface is at the request of the Water/Waste Water Department to provide their crews a solid surface from which to work in the event of a future water line break. It is not intended to be used as a sidewalk. 4. The wheel stops in the parking lot have been shown and labeled. 5. The retaining wall adjacent to the path are shown and labeled. 6. Redlines have been reviewed and revised as requested. Plat Sheet 2 of2 The word "quitclaim deed" has been eliminated from the railroad easement label south of the commercial lot, as requested. 2. The label has been revised to indicate that the offsite easement on the east edge of Mason Court is an "Utility Easement". 3. At a meeting held April 1, 1998 with the Stormwater Department, sufficient evidence was provided in the revised drainage report to eliminate the need for any drainage easement from the railroad. Refer to the drainage report for new cross sections and water surface data in the railroad right of way. As a result of the 4836 s- College, Suite 12 Ft. Collins, CO 80525 (970) 226-5334 FAX (970) 282-0311 Page 2 April6, 1998 Project No. 1558-01-97 Re: Martinez P.U.D. April 1, 1998 meeting the previous label for the easement in the railroad right of way has been erased from the plat and the plans. Street Typical Sections (Sheet 5): I. The typical section on Mason Court Section N-N has been revised to indicate a 1' level portion of shoulder adjacent to the back of curb on the north side of the road. 2. Inflow curb is called out on the Mason Court Section A -A. Compliance with the request for a 2.0% cross slope is not possible between the railroad track (Sta. 0+85) and the edge of the cross -pan (Sta. 1+75 J The cross slope at the railroad track is controlled by the limitations on the track grade. The cross slope at the cross pan is kept at a minimum to maintain the smoothest vertical profiles as possible - as it is the lengths of vertical curves used force a variance request of a 15 MPH design speed rather than the standard 30MPH design speed. The distance between the edge of the railroad track (Sta. 0+85) and the edge of the cross -pan (Sta. 1+75 +) is approximately 90'. At the edge of the railroad track the cross slope is set at 1.0%, using the standard 30' transition would end at Sta. 1+15. The cross slope at the edge of the cross -pan is nearly 0.7%, using the standard 30' transition into the pan would start at Sta.1+45 ±. In the 30' distance between the two transitions, 20' falls within the vertical curves for the right and left profiles (Sta. 1+15 to Sta. 1+35) - which to revise has a significant impact on the obtainable design speed. The 10' between Sta. 1+35 to Sta. 1+45 ±has a cross slope of 1.0% and a profile slope of 2.4% - the resultant slope is 2.6%, which exceeds the requested 2.0% slope of the pavement surface. In summary, having only 90' from a fixed 1.0% cross slope at the railroad track to a 0.6% cross slope at the flowline of the cross pan, there is not enough room to effectively transition from 1.0% to 2.0% then back to 0.6%. We believe the best solution is contained within the plan set where the 1.0% cross slope is consistently maintained until the necessary transition to the 0.6% cross -pan. Mason Court Plan and Profile (Sheet 6): 1. Refer to the previous response for the discussion of the requested 2.0% cross slope in the respect to the proposed 1.0% cross slope. 2. Inflow curb and gutter is provided on both sides of Mason Court as requested. The requested inlet at Sta. 1+88 on the left side of the road is not provided due to the fact that its tributary area is only 90' by 13' (0.03 acres). The tributary area only contains a short stretch of concrete sidewalk, grass strip and the curb and gutter itself. The possible storm flow generated from such a small area does not warrant a catch basin. What little flow is generated will easily be removed by way of the cross -pan. 3. Inflow curb is proposed to terminate at the edges of the cross -pan. As such the curb section within the cross -pan will transition from the inflow gutter with a 2" drop into the curb to a modified out flow gutter with a Vs' drop (0.6%) into the cross pan. Refer to the revised spot grades to clarify the transition. Page 3 April 6, 1998 Project No. 1558-01-97 Re: Martinez P.U.D. 4. The transitions questioned on the intersection ramps will transition from the '/4" lip at the standard ramp to a zero height edge of concrete. Admittedly from a construction point of view this transition will be practically non-existent, however the detail was provided at the earlier request. It shows spot grades at the end of the intersection ramp with two elevations to portray the 1/4" lip, then a transition zone is noted, which terminates in a section labeled as "no curb". 5. The sidewalk alignment has been revised to coincide with the right of way line. Sherwood Street: Plan and Profile (Sheet 8): 1. A triangular section of concrete has been added near the south edge of the entrance drive as requested. 2. The location where the access drive is 20' is labeled. 3. The note pertaining to the asphaltic concrete pavement patch has been revised to indicate the limits of patch/overlay to be determined in the field by the city inspector. Emergency and Pedestrian Access (Sheet 9Z 1. The note on the "Emergency Access Section H-H" has been revised to indicate that the material used to construct the road shall be landscape stone or crushed gravel over base course. Mason Court and Parking Lot Detail (Sheet 11): l A line has been added to indicate the transition from concrete to asphalt occurring in the street. 2. The flowline elevation where the centerline of Mason Court intersects the cul-de- sac island had been provided, as requested. PLAN SET REDLINES: The following section addresses the redlines included on the plan set: Master Utility Plan (Sheet 22 The note calling out the 10' walk near the commercial building has been revised to "10 concrete pad". 2. The line between the bike path and the gravel access road is a fence. Mason Court and Parking Lot Detail (Sheet l 1): 1. The future pedestrian trail has been labeled as requested. 2. No extra catch basin is provided as discussed in the previous response number 2, on the Mason Court Plan and Profile (Sheet 6). Page 4 April6, 1998 Project No. 1558-01-97 Re: Martinez P.U.D. Detail Sheet (,Sheet 19): The retaining wall will be located adjacent to the edge of the 20' Emergency Access Drive. The walls shown near the co -housing units which provide for the proposed walkout basements will be located as shown in the various plan sheets. If you have any further questions or comments, please call me at 226-5334. I believe we have adequately addressed all of your concerns. If there are any further discussion items, we world appreciate sitting down with you and our client to resolve the issues as quickly as possible. Sincerely, Larry P. Ketcham, P.E. Shear Engineering Corporation Ipk cc Bruce Richardson, Wonderland Hill Development Mika] Torgerson, M. Torgerson Architects December 9, 1998 Project No: 1558-01-97 Sheri Wanthoff Citv of fort Collins Engineering Department P_O Box 580 Ft, Collins, Colorado 80524 Re: Amendment to Martinez P.U.D.; Ft. Collins, Colorado Dear Sheri, This letter serves as the response to your review comments concerning the final utility plans for Amendment to Martinez P.U.D.. The plans were submitted on December 8, 1998, and the review comments are dated January 4, 1999. We have addressed the utility plan review comments as follows The revisions to the plans have been clearly labeled on all sheets. ]'he additional parking created in Lot I 1 along the private drive necessitated changes to tracts D and E Copies of the easement vacation and dedication documents, prepared by Sear Brown Group, for Tracts D and E are attached for your convenience. `['his concludes our response to your review comments concerning the final utility plans for Amendment to Martinez P.U.D.. Mylars are submitted per your transmittal letter dated January 4, 1999, If you have further questions or comments, or if you require additional information, feel free to contact us at 226-5334. Sincerely, Mark Oberschmidt Shear Engineering Corporation Attachments cc- Jim Leach and Bruce Richardson, Wonderland Hill Development Mika] Torgerson, Torgerson Architects Tom Dugan; Pinecrest Planning and Design Roger Buffington, City Water Utility Basil Hamdan, City Stormwater Utility Response-1 4836 S. College, Suite 12 Fr Collins, CO 80525 (970) 226-5334 FAX (970) 282-0311 December 9, 1998 Project No: 1558-01-97 Sheri Wamhoff City of Fort Collins Engineering Department P.O. Box 580 Ft. Collins, Colorado 80524 Re: Amendment to Martinez P.U.D.; Ft. Collins, Colorado Dear Sheri, This letter serves as the response to your review comments concerning the final utility plans for Amendment to Martinez P.U.D.. The plans were submitted on October 13, 1998, and the review comments are dated November 12, 1998. Please note that we have met with personnel from several City departments in the last few weeks concerning the proposed grading in Lee Martinez Park. These meetings resulted in changes to the proposed grading in the park. The proposed grading is attached for your reference. No additional draina-e calculations have been provided. This was discussed with Stormwater personnel and agreed to. Refer to the letter to Basil Hamdan, which we have attached for your convenience Wehave addressed the utility plan review comments as follows; Written Comments • All changes that were included with the amendment are now clearly indicated on the appropriate plan sheets by the following note. These areas are circled as well. AMENDMENT TO APPROVED PLAN I. Eight (8) parallel parking places have been added to the south side of the private drive in the vicinity of the co -housing area (Lot 11). 2. Three (3) new garages were added to the western parking lot in lot 11. These garages replaced some existing parking places. 3. Three (3) new garages were added to the eastern parking lot in lot 11. These garages replaced some existing parking places. 4 The shape of the island in the eastern parking lot was changed from a semi circle to and oval. 5_ Grading in park was revised at the request of the Parks and Recreation Department 4836 S. Collegc, Suite 12 Ft, Collins, CO 80525 (970) 226-5334 FAX (970) 282-0311 December 9, 1998 Page 2 Project No: 1558-01-97 This concludes our response to your review comments concerning the final utility plans for Amendment to Martinez P.U.D.. We feel that all comments have been addressed adequately and a request for molars after your next review is appropriate. if you have further questions or comments, or if you require additional information, feel free to contact us at 226-5334. Sincerely, ---ram Larry ,,, P. Ketcham, P.E. Shear Engineering Corporation Attachments cc- Jim Leach and Bruce Richardson, Wonderland Hill Development Mikal Torgerson, Torgerson Architects Tom Dugan; Pinecrest Planning and Design Roger Buffington, City Water Utility Basil Harridan, City Stormwater Utility Response-1 Sheri Wamhoff - Martinez PUd emerger access Page 1 From: Sheri Wamhoff To: Ron Gonzales Date: 10/14/98 8:51 PM Subject: Martinez PUd emergency access Ron I need to try and set up a meeting with you sometime next week if possible to discuss the Martinez PUD and there two points of access It does not appear that the rail crossing will be done any time soon and it would be advantageous to the city to delay the completion of Mason court. The basics A major stormwater channel is scheduled to be built next year through this site and under Mason Court (It was not anticipated it would be this soon ) It is therefor to the City's advantage if the road is not complete so we do not have to tear up a new road and replace it. The developer is currently required to have Mason Court complete in order to get building permits for the site. The railroad has not yet scheduled the work for the rail crossing so this does not seem that the road could be completed in the near future So what we are looking at is modifying the development agreement so that the road would not need to be complete in order to get building permits and not necessarily with the first certificate of occupancy They would be required to do what you need in order to provide this as a second point of access At the time that the rail crossing would be done, they are proposing to provide a second point of access to the west of Mason court still off of Cherry. This seems to be a solution that would benefit the City as well as the developer What this requires though is your by off on the access points. So we would like to meet with you to discuss this and see iP this might work for you Meeting over here would be best as we could walk out to the site if necessary I would be able to meet Tuesday afternoon, Wednesday afternoon or Friday right now Please let me know if you can meet any of those times. thanks Sheri Aion Services Engineering Department City of Fort Collins September 29, 1998 James W. Leach Wonderland Hill Development Company 745 Poplar Avenue, Boulder. Colorado 80304 RE: Proposed modifications to Martinez PUD Development Agreement Dear Mr. Leach, After reviewing the request to modify paragraph I.0 of the Development Agreement for Martinez PUD, dated August 11, 1998, it has been determined that no change will be made to paragraph. I.C. But the following Section and paragraph can be added to the Development Agreement. G. Footing and Foundation Permits 1. Notwithstanding any provision in this Agreement to the contrary, the Developer shall have the right to obtain a Footing and Foundation permit, for the buildings within Lot 11, upon the installation of all underground water, sanitary sewer, and storm sewer facilities, and an emergency accessway for the area in which the permit is being requested. Facilities shall include but not be limited to all mains, lines, services and appurtenances for the buildings as shown on the final development plan documents. Prior to the construction of said accessway, a plan for the accessway shall be submitted to and approved by the Poudre Fire Authority and City Engineer. (Three plan sets shall be submitted to the Poudre Fire Authority at 102 Remington Street for review and processing.) If such accessway is at any time deemed inadequate by the Poudre Fire Authority or City Engineer, the accessway shall be promptly brought into compliance and until such time that the accessway is brought into compliance, the City may issue a stop work order for all or part of the Development. In order to meet the requirements of the Development Agreement, the City Code and the Fire Code, no building permits can be issued until the installation of all public water lines, fire hydrants, sanitary sewer lines, and an emergency accessway are completed and accepted. 281 North College Avenue • PO. Box 580 1 Fort Collins, CO 80522-0580 • (970) 221-6605 In a discussion with Ron Gonzales of the Poudre Fire Authority a thru accessway would not be required for the issuance of footing and foundation permits, but would be required for any additional work such as framing and/ or a building permit. It should be noted that in order to provide a through accessway the rail crossing at Mason Court will need to be completed. As indicated in the Development Agreement no building permits shall be issued until Mason Court is constructed with a minimum of curb, gutter, sidewalk and pavement with at least the base course completed (Section II.D.2). Several different plans for the accessway may need to be provided in order to insure that an accessway is maintained at all times throughout the installation of any remaining utilities, street and access improvements needed in order to obtain full building permits for the buildings within Lot 11 (the cohousing area). Attached is a draft copy of the amendment agreement for your review. This is also being forwarded to the City attorney for review. Please let me know if you would like to proceed with this amendment. If you have any questions, please call me at 221-6750. Sincerely, Sheri Wamhoff Civil Engineer II cc: Todd Juergens Ron Gonzales August 11, 1998 Sheri Wamhoff Engineering Department City of Fort Collins PO Box 580 Fort Collins, CO 80522-0580 Dear Sheri: WONDERLAND Re: Proposed Modification to the Martinez PUD Development Agreement As I discussed with youTuesday, we would like to request a modification to our development agreement to allow us to begin construction on the first multi -family buildings in the cohousing portion of the Martinez PUD prior to the installation of curb, gutter, and streets. As you know, we are currently proceeding with the development work and have completed the earthwork overlotting and will be starting the installation of water and sewer utilities within the next week. Our present schedule indicates that we would have the streets completed by sometime in November. The reason for our request to start construction on the cohousing buildings prior to the completion of streets is that we would very much like to begin installing foundations prior to the onset of winter. The project has been held rlp several months longer than we anticipated and we have thirty cohousing homebuyers eagerly awaiting their new community. —Delays are c^sting them money, costs which we would like to avoid if at all possible. Our schedule has been set back partially due to the fact that we encountered a number of old foundations and other miscellaneous trash on the site that had to be removed, most of which we did not anticipate. This is the downside of doing infill development and one of the reasons why we need to request your help in allowing us to make up for some of the losses we have incurred. I have indicated on the enclosed site maps the buildings which we would like to start prior to completion of the curb, gutter, and streets, as well as the fire access that will exist during the interim times until the streets can be completed and driveable. We would like to be able to get foundation permits for at least three of the buildings and would agree, if we needed to go beyond mmrrcl.amhoff.doc 9,21i98 Page 1 Wonderland Hill Development Company 745 Poplar Avenue, Boulder, Colorado 80304 (303) 449-3232; Fax: (303) 449-3275 concrete foundations and start framing, that we would provide the fire access with an 80 foot diameter turnaround as I have shown on the site plan. We would also agree not to begin any framing until after the; water lines were installed and pressurized and the fire hydrants were operable as shown on. the plan. Thank you for your assistance on this matter. We greatly appreciate the cooperation we have received from the City of Fort Collins to date on this somewhat challenging project that hopefully will be a real asset for the City and the Martinez Park neighborhood. Sincerely, James W. Leach President m *&wamhoffdoo 9/2V98 Paget