The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutTHE GROVE AT FORT COLLINS - FDP - FDP110015 - CORRESPONDENCE - (22)Page 4 of 4 Planning Development and Transportation City of Fort Collins 970-221-6287 10/19/2011 Page 3 of 4 kc Karen Cumbo Director, Planning Development and Transportation City of Fort Collins 970-221-6287 From: Karen Cumbo Sent: Wednesday, October 19, 2011 8:56 AM To: Marlys Sittner; Mark Jackson; Helen Migchelbrink; Joe Olson; Joe Frank; Steve Dush; Randy Hensley; Larry Schneider Cc: Polly Bennett Subject: Council Meeting follow-up 10.18.11 Good morning! I'm not entirely sure what all happened last night, but here's a mix of info and to-do's: 1. Mobile Home Park issue: continued resident concerns, continued Council concerns. 2. Development Review: ditto - specific follow-up on public notice signs (already underway), criticism of quasi-judicial/public comment changes as well as staff role (all being addressed) 3. Boulder Bike Park - very positive comments from Councilmember Marvel. Forwarded link to slide show to Diane. 4. Urban Design: Kudos from the Mayor for "spectacular event" including mention of the Planning Department - "part of what makes Fort Collins excel." 5. Skyview GID (street maintenance issue) mill levy, wayfinding appropriation and all PDT consent items passed without problem, or even much discussion. Nice job, Clark, on the brief wayfinding presentation. I'd like to have a conversation with AP and Traffic Ops re implementation of the wayfinding project. 6. Budget work session: This is where things get really confusing. There was little discussion of most of the questions that came out of last week's work session conversation (south side transit service, trails, etc.). There does seem to be clear support for $300,000 in 2012 KFCG "other transportation" funding for pedestrian improvements, including the old program providing partnership opportunities with property owners. This is in addition to the $300K in BOB dollars for ped improvements that we have been discussion. Other PDT items of note: Affordable Housing Relocation Assistance (mobile home park): some dissent on funding, outcome unclear • Regional Planning Assistance (Embrace Colorado or other NoCo regional planning/grant match opportunities: also a little iffy • Neighborhood Planning Outreach (Ombudsman): generally supported. We'll need to start developing a job description. Dev Review Succession Planning: iffy • Dev Review —Customer Service and Enviro Planner: no new discussion, looks safe • Affordable Housing/Human Services shift in funding for local program administration: not clear. Councilmember Horak read rapidly through his own list of cuts and additions. I heard a reference to this item as a cut, but neither Mark nor Diane heard that. Mark will check it out today. Overall, Mark may have better notes than I do. To the best of my knowledge, there won't be any more new items added to the list before first reading on November 1, but there is really nothing predictable about this process. Karen Karen Cumbo Director, 10/19/2011 Page 2 of 4 share the trench with the Light & Power facilities. I believe that in this case, the Light & Power trench is planned to be shared with phone and CATV. As far as utility plans are concerned, most of the time the electric, gas, phone and TV facilities are not shown. During the development review process the developer's site and utility plans are looked over by all utilities to make sure that there is a space. Onlyoccasionally is there a conflict since all these utilities have a standard installation location. When a conflict does arise, there is a utility coordination meeting called where all utilities discuss it together with the developer. Also, the following information has been provided by Mike Gebo and Russ Hovland of the Building Department: The Grove has not yet submitted plans for review and it is unknown if they plan to proceed with electric heat. Although the majority of the adopted Green Code Amendments go into effect January 1, 2012, one requirement, which went into effect earlier this year, was a requirement that electrically heated buildings be insulated to a higher R value than for non -electrically heated buildings. Any project which is submitted for plan review and is shown to be electrically heated will need to show that the exterior wall insulation meets a minimum of R 20 plus R 5, rather than the R 13 plus R 5 minimum required for non -electrically heated buildings. Thu increase in insulation value is significant, not only in the insulating value but also in the construction needed to achieve the R 20 which would be a 2x6 wall versus a 2x4 wall of a non -electrically heated building. The increase in insulation is expected to offset the less energy efficient electric heat. Lastly, the following information has been provided by Marc Virata of Engineering regarding the Development Agreement: The development agreement has not yet been done. We don't typically begin drafting a development agreement until we know the final plans are ready for signature. We just received the fast round of final plan review and is not due for staff discussion until next week Please let me know if you need additional information. c�'&t 6114. Steve Olt From: Karen Cumbo Sent: Wednesday, October 19, 2011 9:53 AM To: Steve Dush; Mike Gebo; Sheri Langenberger; Steve Olt Cc: Polly Bennett; Mark Jackson Subject: FW: Council Meeting follow-up 10.18.11 I forgot another question. It came up during the Council discussion of electric rates. Is The Grove using all electric heat? My recollection is that they are not, and that the revised plan noted that, or the developer committed to it. I don't know if you have building plans yet, but could someone let me know what the story is? And is the development agreement done? Mtx 10/19/2011 Page 1 of 4 Steve Olt From: Steve Olt Sent: Wednesday, October 19, 2011 4:16 PM To: Karen Cumbo Cc: Polly Bennett; Mark Jackson; Ted Shepard; Marc Virata; Doug Martine; Russell Hovland; Steve Dush; Mike Gebo; Sheri Langenberger Subject: RE: Council Meeting follow-up 10.18.11 Karen, It is my recollection that the developer, during The Grove at Fort Collins discussion with City Council, committed to not using all electric heat. So far the Final Development Plans that are under review apparently do not reflect this. Regarding the electric vs. gas heat discussion, the following information has been provided by Doug Martine of Light & Power: Thus far, all of the direction I have received from the developer is that NO electric space heating will be used in the development. Based on that direction, the only electric utility system I have designed for this development assumes no electric space heating. The Light & Power plan would change substantially (as would the cost to the developer) should any form of electric heat be used. I checked with my counterpart at Xcel. She said that the developer has to this point only inquired about availability of natural gas, which she said is available. However, the developer has not yet requested an actual design of the gas system from Xcel. I don't think that it is uncommon for a developer to wait to request a design from Xcel until close to start of development. I believe that Xcel charges the developer a deposit at the time a request is made, and a developer wouldn't want to tie up money any longer than necessary. Light & Power policy does not require a deposit from the developer to initiate a design of the electric system Developers are required to pay for installation of the electric system, including engineering and their share of off site facilities. We need to receive 50% of the total in order to install the electric system; with the remaining 50% due before the electric system can be energized. In the unusual case of a developer requesting electric space heating, the rate charged for the electric utility system is substantially higher than for a non -electric heat development. The Light & Power underground facilities are planned to be located predominately in the road right-of- way, between the sidewalks and the curbs. There is a 9 ft. utility easement behind the right-of-way (back of the sidewal4, which is where Xcel normally installs their gas mains. The Light & Power pad type electric transformers will also be placed in this easement (Xcel lines easily go past the transformers in the easement). In other words, there is adequate space for the gas lines in The Grove. The construction practices and policies that have been coordinated with all utilities, call for utilities to be installed from deepest to shallowest. For example, sewer lines being the deepest will be installed first, followed bywater, etc. Light & Power facilities are installed after sewer and water (including their service `stubs' toward each building) and after the curbs are installed, but before the sidewalks. Natural gas (shallower than electric) will be installed after the electric system, but also before the sidewalks are poured. Telephone and/or Cable TV lines are typically the shallowest and usually installed in the back of the property, but occasionally they will 10/19/2011