Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutTHE GROVE AT FORT COLLINS - FDP - FDP110015 - CORRESPONDENCE - (48)�._._ WJNPTRAIL Ot� r w.--f§PRING`CREEK ___ • � w MMN i �\ n _r$ f i a(i -------------- L N,..✓ gyp♦ /A C ft.,UE BE w nesmexnu THE GARDENS ON SPRING CREEK �N uwnn+nrvenu�°u; / CSURF PROPERTY i i THE GROVE AT FORT COLLINS FlWLLC LOGMEMFVN LEGEND '•'�' rcaa.: �. mumreau.r¢mrl.urr +a me w r w rwarun.cspm NOTES.µ4 FW eeN: l.'1B' POOL FENCE SITE PLAN oswroxuxwx. ttwc r-w•-o' 7 OF 23 No Text CSURF PROPERTY NOTES THE GROVE AT FORT COLLINS FW4 O ILOPMENT PV �I FCP SrFE PLAN 5 OF 23 LEGEND _ ® me ersuu ,:Y.S unwn® � w�w¢rt ��ueaem.�muea�L uvxxa�nnusam[ ❑ vnunu®mwnw[WF.cwasp f3 aamwml t40iES nmv�.uwo aarw. m�'wva THE GROVE AT FORT COLLINS FINK MELgT1ENi Pl FOP I ms®n�T�I 4 OF 23 j on LEGEND w.vg.a.c.era �YH _ onn¢ars«rrt Si' 1 1 l - o 'rr � s tlQTES: __-___ _.. THE GROVE AT FORT COLUNS M OEVELCN WM �I cw SITE PLAN 3 of 23 m�wiibnEw®mAraiml/Wn�ME\ MXsu1MX THE GROVE AT FORT COLLINS rwnaeE.aP.Exrww NRCWR WOI/➢O C Y i ',.gyp rcnmx. ���;E PUMP AND FI%.IT�TATIONPUMP AND FIbIT STATION �n K }RUEhb tRl W EF4 OVERALL SITE PLAN I 2 OF 23 1 '26 nsecp mgT gro e THE GROVE AT FORT COLLINS A TRACT OF LAND LOCATED IN THE SECTION 23, TOWNSHIP 7 NORTH, RANGE 69 WEST OF THE 6TH P.M., CITY OF FORT COLLINS, COUNTY OF LARIMER, STATE OF COLORADO NC RL �. E G SITE C W y co E W ,.«►s C7 w VEl. W HOSP. J y 0 NC, NC U DROAD d R ,,rm.4 F IN SChL ,e MI. THE GROVE AT FORT COLLINS FIWLOEV WWENIPU FW SITE PLAN 1 of 23 • Page 1 of 1 Steve Olt From: Lindsay Ex Sent: Tuesday, December 06, 2011 8:22 AM To: 'Sarah Burnett' Cc: Steve Olt; Poncelow, Stacy - SSC Subject: Fence design at the Grove Attachments: SITE PLANS.pdf Good morning Sarah, As you've seen in the resubmitted final plans for the Grove, the applicant has provided an alternative fence design to the originally approved design during the PDP process. This new fence is an ornamental wire fence, whereas the old fence was a metal picket fence. Based on Council's requirement to ban pets from the Grove property and the neighbors concerns regarding wildlife corridors being diminished as a result of the fence, staff tried to work with the applicant to select a different design that increased wildlife connectivity on the site. From discussions with the applicants and several neighbors, many felt that a wood -based fence would not be compatible with the project's modern architecture. However, this revised design (see attached .pdf document, page 2 of the pdf), in staffs opinion, is less desirable than the originally approved metal picket fence. Based on a brief discussion with the applicant yesterday, staff is now trying to work with Campus Crest and their consultants to modify the originally proposed, metal picket fence from 6' in height down to 4' in height. This would provide a fence that is compatible with the site's architecture, still provides a significant discouragement to residents and passers-by to enter into the Natural Habitat Buffer Zone, while increasing the ability of wildlife to jump over the fence as needed. I appreciate all the feedback you and your neighbors have provided on this issue, and hope that we are reaching a resolution as to what the best fence is for this project. I'll plan on seeing you tomorrow, where I expect more details will be provided on the fence type. Please let me know if you have any additional thoughts and forward this on to others as you see fit. Thanks again! Lindsay Lindsay Ex Environmental Planner CDNS I City of Fort Collins lex@fcgov.com 970.224.6143 Office Hours: M 8-5; T-Th 8-12 12/6/2011