Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutNORTHEAST CORNER OF EAST PROSPECT ROAD & I-25 - REZONING - 16-07 - CORRESPONDENCE - (5)Ken Waido - Re: Prospect, 1-25 Rezoning Page 2 you, because it certainly is a work in process. It appears that your are receiving more input on our rezoning application than we are. This is VERY frustrating to us. Many factors played into this rezoning decision, but none more important than being able to meet the APF requirements the City will impose on the developed properties surrounding the interchange. You being a land owner and developer in the City understand better than we. Any property must be able to meet the APF along with all the other criteria in order to be able to develop. Without major interchange funding from either CDOT or Ft. Collins, both of which seem pretty far fetched to expect, the rezoning is the only way our consultants believe that the interchange will be built in the near future. We are sorry Staff jumped the gun on this matter. It has never been and will not be in the future our plan to keep anything this important from you or the other adjoining neighbors. You know how we operate and hope you have a better opinion of us than that. We will be happy to discuss these matters with you when we work out the issues with Staff. Thanks for caring. We certainly want to remain good neighbors. We sincerely apologize for any ill will which you may be feeling as a result of your conversations with Staff. Dave and Rick White From: "Lester Kaplan" <lesterkaplan@comcast. net> Date: Wed, 5 Sep 2007 12:29:11 -0600 To: "David White" <dwhite@csd.net> Subject: Prospect, 1-25 Rezoning David: I met yesterday with Cameron Gloss, Fort Collins Director of Current Planning, at his invitation to see your rezoning request for the NEC of Prospect and 1-25. This morning I met again with Cameron, plus Joe Frank and Ken Waido with City Planning to discuss your request further. Quite frankly, as an adjoining property owner and considering our long-standing relationship, I am disappointed that I learned of your request from the City and not from you directly. There are concerns on my part and the City0s. I have given the City some ideas on how these might be addressed, and the City is trying to arrange a meeting. Speaking to you in advance would be advisable. les CC: Cameron Gloss <cgloss@fcgov.com>, Steve Olt <SOLT@fcgov.com>, Ken Waido <kwaido@fcgov.com>, Mike Freeman <mfreeman@fcgov.com>, Wendi Birchler <wbirchler@norris- design.com>, Steve Pfister <spfist@hotmail.com>, Rick White <xpeak@aol.com>, Teena Harvey <tharvey@laam.biz>, Gene Andrist <GAndrist@aol.com> e 1 Ken Waido - Re: Prospect, I-25 Rezoning _ _ _ -_ 9 From: Dave White <dwhite@csd.net> To: Les Kaplan <lesterkaplan@comcast.net> Date: 9/5/2007 9:11:15 PM Subject: Re: Prospect, 1-25 Rezoning Dear Les, As you know, we have been internally working on a variety of development ideas for our property for quite some time. All of these have been conceptual as we try to find a fit with all of the variables in play for this dynamic interchange corner. We have been very active financially as well as with time spent in working on Box Elder Creek issues, the North 1-25 EIS, GWET project, and a variety of other things that effect our property as well as yours. We have learned over the years, how closely private property owners musVwork with adjacent property owners and the City and in some cases regional entities to achieve benefits to both the private sector as well the City. We have been working diligently for the past several years in an attempt to coordinate with all concerned and to keep folks appraised of mutual issues; probably more so than any other land owner in town. We always try to be open and above board in our dealings with others. Some time ago, we sought the services of an experienced financial consultant who helped us better understand that with our current zoning as well as the zoning at the other three corners, if kept as is, the interchange could not be built. Current estimates of the interchange and related Prospect improvements are conservatively $30 MM. Thus it would be virtually impossible for the four corners of the interchange to meet the City's APF requirements. He determined that with a more intense retail development the interchange could potentially be financed by the corners alone. This is what the COFC apparently wants. Almost a year ago, we approached Ft. Collins Economic Development about the conundrum the property was in and began to discuss these issues. Prior to anything any rezoning application being submitted, an economic absorption study was undertaken by the City. There has been ongoing dialogue with the City then since that time. We felt confident we had received enough positive feedback from certain staff member to begin to rezone the property. We submitted our rezoning request and have had a series of meetings with them. As of late last Thursday, we had still not received all comments back from Staff on what they might support. Staff told us they were going to meet on Friday to discuss what they would support and get back to us. The long Labor Day weekend as well as some key people being on vacation has delayed that information getting to us as of close of business today. Also, last Thursday the importance of neighborhood meetings was discussed. We informed staff that when we reached a consensus plan that Staff and we as landowners could all support, we would be in touch with all the adjoining property owners to present to them something a bit more tangible than the conceptual plans we have been working on internally. As noted above, we still do not have those comments back from staff. We did, and still plan on talking to you BEFORE any public meeting to solicit your valuable input. We very much appreciate your wise counsel in the past regarding Boxelder Creek and feel that we have developed a very good rapport with you. However, the appropriate time for us to talk to you is when we have something specific in hand that staff could support. We are not sure what Staff has showed to