HomeMy WebLinkAboutOLD TOWN NORTH SUNTERRACE TOWNHOMES - MAJOR AMEND./REPLAT - 16-09 - CORRESPONDENCE - (14)Page 3 of 3
1) Which engineering fees can be reduced or eliminated as a result of
"affordable housing" designation? Sunterrace needs to vacate water/sewer
stubs, overlay Cajetan street as a result, and warrant such overlay for an -
extended period of time. Can these requirements be eliminated? I understand
that certain landscaping modifications can be made? Which ones? I
understand sidewalks can be reduced from 4' to 3.5'. Is this for public as well as
private walks?
2) What is the likelihood of receiving a variance for Osiander Street being built
to the former local street standard, as built throughout the rest of the
subdivision, rather than the current local street standard?
3) Can the existing OTN landscape escrow be utilized to install the portion of
ROW landscaping with the Sunterrace project?
4) Currently the OTN DA requires Redwood, Blondel, and Vine to be funded
upon the 52nd and 104th permits. Can these or a portion of these requirements
be delayed and tied to a permit app on the remainder of Block 6 rather than with
this project?
I appreciate you returning my phone call today to discuss this matter. I can be
available at your convenience tomorrow morning to meet with the three of you.
Please call me to confirm the time.
Very sincerely,
Monica Sweere
970-443-4421
Y
Page 2 of 3
2) What is the likelihood of receiving a variance for Osiander Street being built.
to the former local street standard, as built throughout the rest of the
subdivision, rather than the current local street standard?
A variance to this standard will not be approved. The narrow residential roadway x-section is no longer a
standard that is allowed and when it was allowed was limited in its usage adjacent to single family detached with
alley projects only in which the street Wbuld have less than 700 vehicles per day on it. With what you are
wanting to do with this project these parameters are no longer met and the roadway needs to be widened out to
the current minimum local street width.
3) Can the existing OTN landscape escrow be utilized to install the portion of
ROW landscaping with the Sunterrace project?
No - an existing escrow put in place to secure landscaping needs to remain in place until that landscaping is in
place. And a new escrow will need to be provided with this project if necessary to install any landscaping that is
not in place at the time a certificate of occupancy is requested.
4) Currently the OTN DA requires Redwood, Blondel, and Vine to be funded
upon the 52nd and 104th permits. Can these or a portion of these requirements
be delayed and tied to a permit app on the remainder of Block 6 rather than with
this project?
We would be willing to delay the construction of Blondel and tie it to the development of Block 6. It would need
to be designed and constructed as a part of Block 6 construction. The remaining obligations need to stay in
place and 50% of the Vine obligation will be due a the time of the 52 building permit (which is in 2009 dollars
$111,545.96) with the remaining due at 102 building permit. And the portion of Redwood not being constructed
with this project will need to be fully paid prior 52 building permit.
Thank you for the list of topics to discuss. I hope this information is helpful. Please let me know if you still have
questions and if you would still like to meet. Unfortunately our schedules do not allow us to meet with you until
late Thursday morning.
Sheri
Sheri Langenberger, P.E.
Engineering Development Review Manager
City of Fort Collins, Engineering Dept
970-221-6605
>>>'Triune Holdings, LLC" <triuneoffice@earthlink.net> 8/10/2009 4:21 PM >>>
Dear Steve,
Regretfully, I do not have Helen's e-mail address and trust that you or Sheri can
forward this to her for consideration.
do not expect "decisions" regarding these matters tomorrow, only a good faith
consideration of which ones merit realistic consideration for modification for cost
saving for the Sunterrace project. As you know, I seek to modify my request to
the URA CAG Wednesday morning and need to have a good expectation which
items I should. modify in my TIF request. Again, the goal is to reduce cost for
the Sunterrace project.
Fn""z��� ��S_3 �.t�5k�YY ....r,tuc�, .� _n�>Pe �.b.. - • • � - �� • 1 _ _ �.. �V _ UI I O
Pagel of 3
Ted Shepard - Re: Old Town North - Sunterrace replat DA discussion
list
From: Sheri Langenberger
To: Helen Migchelbrink; LLC Triune Holdings; Steve Dush
Date: 8/11/2009 11:29:11 AM
Subject: Re: Old Town North - Sunterrace replat DA discussion list
CC: Christina Vincent; Peter Barnes; Ted Shepard
Monica
I will also give you a call, but wanted to respond to your questions in writing as well. Steve, Helen and I met this
morning to discuss the questions that you had regarding your project and I have answers for you.
1a) Which engineering fees can be reduced or eliminated as a result of
"affordable housing" designation?
The LUC in Section 2.2.3(D)(3) identifies that the development review fees (planning and engineering) are
reduced by the percent the project is considered certified affordable housing. So if the project is 20% affordable
then the fees are reduced by 20%. For the project to be certified affordable housing project you will need to
work with advanced planning and enter into an agreement committing to the number of unit being affordable for
a period of time.
1 b) Sunterrace needs to vacate water/sewer stubs, overlay Cajetan street as a
result, and warrant such overlay for an extended period of time. Can these
requirements be eliminated?
As to how exactly water or sewer service stubs are to be vacated are up to the
utility provided they meet Engineering standards. Engineering standards
require that any abandoned pipeline or conduit shall be removed or abandoned
in place by plugging and filling with sand or appropriate alternative. This project
is served by Elco Water District and Fort Collins sewer service. If the street
needs to be cut to install new services or abandon existing service, street cut
standards shall be followed and will not be waived. In streets where more than
one cut is made within a 75 foot long roadway segment, an overlay of the entire
street width is required.
1c) I understand that certain landscaping modifications can be made?
Per Section 3.2.1(D)(5) of the LUC a reduced caliper tree size is allowed for affordable housing projects. Please
see this section for standards.
1d) I understand sidewalks can be reduced from 4' to 35. Is this for public as
well as private walks? The minimum width for public sidewalks adjacent to a
local street is 4.5 feet. The code does not define a minimum width for most
private sidewalk situations (some are defined) but this was discussed recently
with another project and a condition was placed on that project when it went to
hearing that the internal sidewalks to the development needed to be 4.5 feet min
fileWCADocuments and Settings\tshepard\Local Settings\Temp\GW}00002.HTM 8/17/2009