HomeMy WebLinkAboutRIDGEWOOD HILLS RESIDENCES (4TH FILING) - PDP - 33-10 - CORRESPONDENCE - (61)Page 2 of 2
Electronic Communication Privacy Act, U.S.C. 18 Sections 2510-2521, is
confidential, and may contain privileged information. If you are not the
intended recipient, or believe that you have received this communication in
error, please do not print, copy, retransmit, disseminate, or otherwise use
this communication or any of the information contained herein. Also, please
notify sender that you have received this e-mail in error, and delete the
copy you received. Sending E-mail to us or receiving e-mail from us does
not create an attorney -client relationship nor impose any obligations on us
to treat information you send us as confidential. Unless otherwise
expressly stated, nothing herein is intended as an electronic signature nor
as an intention to make an agreement by electronic means. Thank you.
5/9/2011
Page 1 of 2
Steve Olt
From: Steve Olt
Sent: Monday, May 09, 2011 1:11 PM
To: 'Rvlopez@aol.com'
Subject: RE: FINAL DECISION
Rich,
I have noticed a few items to be clarified/changed. They are:
• Page 3, fourth paragraph ... "during the hearing the following evidence: (1) Planning Department Staff
Report: (2) application, plans" ... need space between semi -colon and (2). Also, based on the sign -in
sheet I think there were approximately 55 members of the public present, not 40.
• Page 6, second paragraph ... you have a Hearing Officer's Findings about the Medium Density Mixed -
Use Neighborhood District but no Findings about the preceding Low Density Mixed -Use Neighborhood
District on page 5. Is this intended?
• Page 8, top of page under Section 3.2.2(K)(1) ... there should be a single line space between:
- 30 spaces for the proposed 20 one -bedroom dwelling units, at 1.50 spaces per unit.
- 221 spaces for the proposed 126 two -bedroom dwelling units, at 1.75 spaces per unit.
• Page 15, fourth paragraph, second sentence ... this should read: "The Hearing Officer has
considered those concerns in making this Decision."
• Page 15, Conclusion B ... did you intentionally not include reference to Division 3.4 — Environmental,
Natural Area, Recreational and Cultural Resource Protection Standards?
• Page 16, item D regarding Medium Density Mixed -Use Neighborhood ... your Hearing Officer
finding should reference Medium Density Mixed -Use Neighborhood standards, not Low Density.
• Page 16, item F, second sentence ... this probably should read: "The applicant has stated that the
final decision to make these units affordable will be deferred to a later date."
Steve
From: Rvlopez@aol.com [mailto:Rvlopez@aol.comj
Sent: Monday, May 09, 2011 11:51 AM
To: Steve Olt
Subject: FINAL DECISION
STEVE, CHECK TO SEE IF I MISSED ANYTHING. I TRIED TO SIMPLIFY THE FORMAT. RICH
LOPEZ LAW OFFICE
4450 Arapahoe Avenue Suite 100
Boulder, CO 80303
303 415 2585 voice
303 415 0932fax
lopezlawofficeco@gmail.com
rvlopez@aol.com
NOTICE: This communication (including attachments) is covered by the
5/9/2011