Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutTHE GROVE AT FORT COLLINS - PDP - 16-10B - CORRESPONDENCE - (73)Page 2 of 2 Lindsay Ex Environmental Planner CDNS I City of Fort Collins Iex(c)fcgov.com 970.224.6143 Office Hours: M 8-5; T-Th 8-12 3/29/2011 �r Page 1 of 2 Steve Olt From: Lindsay Ex Sent: Tuesday, March 29, 2011 8:26 AM To: Steve Olt Subject: my bullet points... Attachments: Board letter 031011.pdf; 030711_Site visit regarding ditch relocation —REVISED notes.dot Steve, We can obviously work on the wording of all of these, but these are my thoughts: Issue #1 — the ditch relocation The meeting regarding the ditch relocation was actually called by the City's Environmental Planner to understand the effects of the ditch relocation on the existing trees and wildlife habitat of the site. Until this field visit, it was unclear to us whether the ditch relocation was being driven by the ditch company or by the development. After this meeting, it was clear to us that two options were presented by the ditch company: either the existing trees would be removed along the ditch to reduce seepage from the canal or the ditch company would relocate the ditch to prevent this from being an issue. Obviously, from all perspectives, we believe that preserving the existing trees is a critical component of the Grove project, as this area is within their Natural Habitats Buffer Zone. Thus, as the City, we wanted to take every measure to work out how these trees could be saved. In addition, we actually saw the relocation of the ditch as increasing the southern Natural Habitats Buffer Zone on this property — with the ditch not being refilled, this creates areas for refuge for wildlife species, ensures the viability of the trees, and we are now working with Ripley Design for how the vegetation along the existing canal can be improved for vertical and horizontal structure for enhanced wildlife value. But, to be clear, it was our impression that the ditch company was prepared to act on the protection of their asset (the ditch), whether the Grove project went through or not. We believe one could argue the Grove project only accelerated this issue that was on the board's mind — certainly from our discussions with the City's attorney, he also believes this issue could be argued either way. Unfortunately, when it comes to actions of the ditch companies, the City has no ability to regulate their activities. See attached letter from their board? • We could also send them the meeting notes (see attached) so they could see more clearly what was discussed Issue #2 — communication Sorry if you feel we haven't been 100% open regarding the Grove proceedings. Again the driver for this meeting was to ... (see above). Please let us know the best way to involve you in these proceedings in the future. We're more than happy to be inclusive. That's what I have so far... I'm free from 11 to 12 today if you want to finalize this. Thanks, Lindsay P.S. I just briefly looked over what you sent and I think your explanations about the relocation are extremely thorough — so we should use them! 3/29/2011