Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutSANCTUARY WEST - FDP - FDP110004 (FORMERLY 30-07A) - CORRESPONDENCE -* January 10, 2012: Draft Development Agreement sent to Bill Veio for review and signature (1:31). The agreement that was sent to Bill needed to be modified yet because of the incomplete Wetland Mitigation Report. A new draft development agreement was sent to Bill just before 5 pm with additional language in the Natural Resources section. Comments on the development agreement were received from Bill at 11:55 pm. All comments were regarding Storm drainage language. * January 10, 2012: Floodplain Administration finished its technical review of the January 6, 2012 comments and found most comment were still unresolved. Management at Utilities was immediately alerted that Sheet 70 of 70 did not meet Utility standards. A phone call was placed to Current Planning, and then to Bill Veio at 4:00 PM. Bill expressed surprise that recurring comments had not been resolved, noting his consultants assured him all had been completed. I stated that this was not the case, and the final sheet in the plan set, Sheet 70 of 70, was still incorrect and incomplete. Bill said he would get his consultants to fix these problems immediately, and Floodplain Admin promised to provide a written record of comments still outstanding. An e-mail was drafted to Bill summarizing Floodplain Admin.'s findings for his records. The final draft was submitted to Bill and to City staff. * January 10, 2012: Revised title insurance meeting the City's needs was provided. The eight easements can be accepted. * * January10, 2012: Date of possible expiration of PDP based on May 23, 2011 approval of 6-month extension request. * January 12, 2012: Letter sent notifying Applicant that PDP had expired on January 10, 2012. Stephen Olt, Project Planner DRAFT Current Planning, City of Fort Collins January 18, 2012 that we could move forward without it providing all references to this easement was removed from the plans and plat. * January 9, 2012: Draft development agreement reviewed by City attorney's office. Due to changes it needed to be reviewed by stormwater to make sure the paragraphs keep the original intent. * January 9, 2012: Environmental planner sent draft comments on the mitigation and monitoring plan to Bill Veio and Terence Hoagland at 7:58 am. These comments included the note that a copy of the permit for the wetland mitigation from the Army Corps of Engineers (pursuant to 3.4.1(0) of the Land Use Code had not been received. * January 9, 2012: Utility plan mylars submitted to the City, but they do not have the Mercer Ditch Company or PR-1 signatures yet, so the applicant picked them back up to work on obtaining those. * January 9, 2012: Title insurance document submitted to the City covering 4 of the easement that were provided. This was reviewed and Vignette Studios and Bill Veio were informed that as provided the title insurance could not be accepted as it excepted out coverage for the reason the insurance was needed. Because Bill had recorded some of the easement documents prior to the City accepting a non standard way of accepting them was needed as determined by the attorneys office this was worked out and created this day. * January 10, 2012: Utility plan mylars with Mercer Ditch Company and PR-1 signatures were received around noon. At this time Traffic Operations and Utilities worked on reviewing the plans and signing the sheets which they were comfortable in signed. It should be noted that Traffic Operations signed the plans with the expectation that revisions would be provided since their comments from April 2011 had not yet been addressed. The flood plain sheet within the plan set can not be signed as prior comments had not been addressed and the sheet is incorrect. Because this sheet can not be signed the rest of the set can not be signed. * January 10, 2012: Environmental Planning staff sent an email to Bill Veio and Terence Hoagland (copying all staff) at 8:15 am indicating that I would not sign mylars until the Mitigation and Monitoring Plan was deemed sufficient. Staff also contacted the Army Corps of Engineers to determine if a permit for the wetland mitigation was forthcoming; a call was not returned by the deadline. * January 10, 2012: Bill Veio responded to the Environmental Planner stating that he would like to address my comments (and his responses) as an appendix in the Mitigation and Monitoring Plan (instead of fixing the plan directly) due to time constraints. There was significant disagreement as to the mitigation requirements and the City could not agree to these lowered standards. Instead of trying to add the comments as an appendix, staff worked with the Attorney's Office to amend the Development Agreement to ensure the City's standards were met on the mitigation area (see bullet point below for additional details). Once these development agreement amendments were revised (including the requirement for an Army Corps of Engineers permit prior to signing off on a Development Construction Permit) environmental planning staff was reluctantly willing to sign the mylars. y received from Water/ Wastewater on December 23, 2011. Draft language received from Stormwater and Floodplain on January 6, 2012. * December 13, 2011: Email from Engineering provided to Vignette Studios regarding Engineerings remaining outstanding issues and items on the utility plans. Met with Vignette Studios on December 14, 2011 to go over comments. * December 13, 2011: At the request of Bill Veio, environmental planning staff provided examples of approved mitigation and monitoring plans. * December 14, 2011: Environmental Planning staff received the updated landscape plans from Vignette Studios addressing comments from the 8/24/11 staff comment letter. * December 16, 2011: Email from Environmental Planning provided to Terence Hoagland, cc'ing Bill Veio, indicating not all of the staff comments had been addressed and reminding the applicants of the remaining outstanding issues as they regarded the mitigation and monitoring plan and the landscape plans. * January 3, 2012: Updated plat submitted to Engineering Technical Services. * January 4, 2012: Street plan and profile sheets dropped off for Engineering review by Vignette Studios. * January 4, 2012: Easement documents submitted for review by Bill Veio. A response email was sent that evening identifying issues and items needed to make the easements complete and acceptable. * January 5, 2012: Email sent to Vignette Studios and Bill Veio reminding them of the January 10, 2012 deadline and that the code does not authorize any further extensions. * January 5, 2012: Engineering Technical Services redlined comments on the plat placed on the FTP site and Vignette Studies and King Surveyors notified. * January 5, 2012: Email to Terence Hoagland again requesting a set of utility plans to evaluate the wetland mitigation plan. * January 6, 2012: Full paper copy of the utility plan set provided to the Environmental Planner. Set was passed amongst the departments to review items over the next several days. * January 6, 2012: Engineering Technical Services received an updated plat for review. It was reviewed by Engineering Technical Services and Stormwater. Additional changes were needed. Most floodplain comments from Stormwater were specifically identified as repeat comments from April 29, 2011. * January 6, 2012: Remaining items to be completed and needs list was emailed to Vignette Studios and Bill Veio. * January 6, 2012: Environmental planner received the draft Mitigation and Monitoring Plan at 3:00 pm. This plan acknowledges that both the City and the Army Corps of Engineers required additional details on the Sanctuary West Mitigation Plan. * January 6, 2012: Engineering comments on the plan and profile sheets emailed to Vignette Studios and Bill Veio. Revised Easement documentation submitted. * January 7, 2012: Engineering spoke with the consultant engineer on this project regarding issues on the plans and outstanding comments. Email sent regarding the remaining issues on the easement documents. It was also determined that one easement noted on the plans had not yet been provided, it was also determined * July 26, 2011: A staff review was conducted, where the Environmental Planer outlined the mitigation and monitoring plan requirements, submittal of the Army Corps of Engineers permit is required, and other minor changes to the plans. * July 28, 2011: Staff comment letter to Vignette Studios for the 5`h round of Final Plan review, copied to Bill Veio. * August 24, 2011: Staff comment letter resent to Vignette Studios for Final Plan review, copied to Bill Veio. * September 14, 2011: Staff sent an email to Bill Veio and Terence Hoagland reminding them that a concept plan for redesigning the wetland mitigation area needed to be submitted. * September 20, 2011: Terence Hoagland provided staff with a draft wetland mitigation concept, in response to the July I 1 conversation with the Environmental Planner. * September 28, 2011: A coordinated staff response was sent to Terence Hoagland regarding the concept. Environmental planning staff signed off on the concept, but remind the applicant of the need for the mitigation and monitoring plan and a copy of the Army Corps of Engineers permit. Stormwater staff needed to see a utility plan. * November 15, 2011: A permit application is sent to the Army Corps of Engineers for the Sanctuary West project's wetland mitigation. * December 1, 2011: Revised site and landscape plans were received regarding the wetland mitigation plans on the site. Environmental planning staff forwarded these plans to staff members, requesting any comments from other staff. Stormwater staff immediately responded to Vignette Studios stating that Utility Plans would also be required to evaluate the mitigation area. * December 2, 2011: Street plan and profile sheets dropped off for Engineering Review by Vignette Studios. * December 7, 2011: Engineering requested Information for Development Agreement be provided and a copy of the plat be provided (legal information needed to create DA). Information was provided December 8, 2011. * December 7, 2011: Environmental planning staff reminded Bill Veio and Terence Hoagland of the requirement for the submittal of a mitigation and monitoring plan. * December 7, 2011: Environmental planning staff received a response from Bill Veio indicating that their team was working on the mitigation and monitoring plan for the Army Corps of Engineers and that between this submittal to ACOE and the landscape plan, that he believed what they had was sufficient. * December 8, 2011: Environmental planning staff responded to Bill Veio indicating that several of the items in the outline still had not been addressed via the landscape plan or the permit application to the Army Corps of Engineers. I reiterated that I still had not seen the Utility Plans. (Additional communication on 12/8 and 12/9 indicating these issues would be resolved took place). * December 12, 2011: Engineering sent request to all departments requesting development agreement language be provided. Draft language received from Environmental Planning on December 13, 2011 (final language to be provided once a Wetland Mitigation Plan has been provided and reviewed). Draft language T * February3, 2010: City staff provides interim comments on the floodplain hydraulic model and finds work from the January 15, 2010 comments has not been completed. * February 10, 2010: URS and city staff continue to exchange information based on a teleconference from Oct. 23, 2009, and based on a Feb. 3, 2010 hydraulic model interim submittal (incomplete). Floodplain Admin and Master Planning staff provide direct technical guidance to URS on how specific errors can be rectified, and how challenges can be overcome to satisfy Chapter 10 City Code standards. * May 6, 2010: Awaiting re -submittal of Final Plans for review. * November 16, 2010: Floodplain Administration discovered a major BFE rise on private property outside the limits allowed by Chapter 10 of City Code. URS was asked to mitigate the rise or obtain approval from affected property owners. As an alternative, the design team was encouraged to continue to work with staff at Floodplain Administration to find project modifications that would eliminate BFE rises. A meeting was recommended, to be scheduled as soon as possible to expore all options and discuss creative solutions. * December 3, 2010: Staff comment letter to Vignette Studios for the P round of Final Plan review, copied to Bill Veio. * February 24, 2011: URS provides Floodplain Administration with an interim hydraulic model results output for limited review. The problem of flooding existing houses with proposed designs and associated hydraulic models appeared to be resolved. * March 0l, 2011: Floodplain Administration staff responds to the interim review request from URS on the hydraulic model, noting results look promising and an official submittal should be prepared. URS is reminded to provide a CD of all digital data, which was never received at Utilities. * April 6, 2011: Final Plan revisions submitted, with Applicant's response letter to staff comment letter. * Apri127, 2011: Staff review meeting fore round of Final Plan review. * April 29, 2011: Stormwater staff floodplain comments letter to William Veio. A detailed checklist was also provided with the comments to provide direct feedback on what was to be completed * May 4, 2011: Staff comment letter to Vignette Studios for the 4a` round of Final Plan review, copied to Bill Veio. * May 23, 2011: The Director approved the Applicant's request for a 6-month extension to the Sanctuary West PDP. The Final Plans must be approved by the City no later than January 10, 2012. Letter sent to Vignette Studios, copied to Bill Veio, Solitaire Homes. * July 11, 2011: Staff contacted Vignette Studios to inform them that, based on the soils and drainage report provided, that the site selected for wetland mitigation did not appear to have hydrology, and thus, mitigation at the proposed site would not be successful. Staff suggested developing a mitigation plan surrounding the existing wetland, to increase the likelihood of success. SANCTUARY WEST, Project Development Plan & Final Plan: City Staff Development Review Process Timeline * October 12, 2007: PDP submitted. * May 7, 2008: Floodplain Admin and Master Planning provide comments to URS on the floodplain modeling report. * May 21, 2008: Larimer County Engineering provides comments on a referral basis. Significant comments are returned on the floodplain modeling report and associated hydraulic results. * June 26, 2008: Administrative public hearing (Rich Lopez, hearing officer). * July 10, 2008: PDP approved w/no condition. * August 27, 2008: Final Plans submitted. * September 23, 2008: Floodplain Admin and Master Planning provide comments to URS on the floodplain modeling report, and include a development review checklist of floodplain items to help guide the consultant in completing all tasks. Many of the comments are in direct agreement with Larimer County's May 21, 2008 assessment of the floodplain modeling report and associated hydraulics. * October 30, 2008: Staff comment letter to Vignette Studios, copied to Solitaire Homes. * September 16, 2009: Final Plan revisions submitted, with Applicant's response letter to staff comment letter. * October 7, 2009: Staff review meeting for 2"d round of Final Plan review. * October 13, 2009: Floodplain Admin and Master Planning provide comments on the hydraulic model report, which is incomplete and could not be fully reviewed. Comments on significant problems require extensive revisions to the hydraulic models and the report. A development review checklist for floodplains is provided to guide consultants in completing all outstanding tasks. * October 23, 2009: URS and city staff at Floodplain Admin and Master Planning hold a teleconference to discuss the flood hazard map update proposed by URS. Comments from October 13, 2009 review are discussed in detail. A development review checklist for floodplain is delivered to URS as guidance for completing all outstanding tasks. * October 26, 2009: Staff comment letter to Vignette Studios for 2"d round of review, copied to Bill Veio. * November 2, 2009: E-mail communication from Susan Joy to Terence Hoaglund about ROW/easement dedication. * December 14, 2009: Developer & Applicant re -informed about the need for another formal round of Final Plan review. * January 11, 2010: Received turn lane (LaPorte Avenue) Variance Request from LSC and waiver from Ward Stanford, City Traffic Engineer. * January 15, 2010: Floodplain Admin and Master Planning staff provides an interim review of hydraulic models and associated report. Many comments from previous review on October 13, 2009 are repeated. Significant modeling errors still exist. f have to be between the St. Clairs and Bill Veio. We also discussed the possibility of reducing or waiving fees if Mr. Veio submitted a new application for Sanctuary West. Patrick St. Clair left me a voice mail on January 24, wanting to know why I was "holding (the project) open." I returned his call, and told him that the project was expired, and that he would have to deal with Mr. Veio on his easements. I also left Mr. Veio a voice mail (not sure of the date) saying that I had reviewed the code and discussed the expiration with the City Attorney's office, and that there was no provision for exceptions or appeal. Late Thursday afternoon, Bill Veio filed an appeal with the City Clerk. There is really no vehicle to appeal the expiration, and Paul Eckman will be notifying Mr. Veio of that fact. At some point in the week of January 16, I asked the planners to check to see if my home was within the notification boundary for Sanctuary West. It is 300 ft. from the boundary of the project, so it is not appropriate for me to be involved in the conversations about the project. Even as acting CDNS Director since Steve left, my role has been to report information, but not to act as decision -maker. However, I am formally noting my conflict with the Sanctuary West project, and withdrawing from participation. a Sanctuary West The Sanctuary West project is a residential subdivision located west of Taft Hill, on the north side of Laporte. A Project Development Plan (PDP) was approved in 2008. The City's Land Use Code (LUC) requires that a Final Plan (all documents, agreements, etc.) be completed in three years. The CDNS director can approve a six-month extension. Such an extension was granted, and the final deadline was January 10, 2012. A detailed timeline of all action on this application was developed by the development review staff, and is attached. Steve Dush had mentioned the pending expiration of the project in both the list of open or pending issues he provided before his departure, and in a short e-mail on January 7. On January 11, Steve Olt sent a draft letter to me for review notifying the developer of the expiration. It was finalized and sent (both e-mail and hard copy) on January 12. Mr. Bill Veio, the developer, called me late in the day on the 13`h with his response to the letter. He said that everything was done except for three clauses in the Development Agreement, and that he had been trying to work with the City to resolve all issues, even though some requirements had been added very late in the game (wetlands mitigation plan). He also said that the drainage/stormwater matter was not part of the original agreement, and he never had any responsibility for it. Mr. Veio also called me on the 17`h, saying that I had the authority to grant an exception to the deadline. I promised to review the applicable portions of the code, talk to the City Attorney, and get back to him. I reviewed the situation with the development review staff, and learned that there was still a major outstanding issue ($350,000 or $400,000 for a future crossing of a drainage master planned channel. I also reviewed the code talked to the City Attorney's office to confirm that there really is no provision for exceptions or appeals of a project deadline. Because a PDP is not a "site specific development plan" under the LUC, the project is not vested. During this time period, I also received phone calls both from Patrick St. Clair and Alita St. Clair, who live on property adjacent to Sanctuary West. They granted easements to the project, although they claim not to be aware of the impacts of the easements when they signed them. These easements were recorded by Mr. Veio, by have not been accepted by the City. Patrick and Alita St. Clair would like these easements "released" and Patrick told me that if the City did not enforce the expiration, he would be first in line to protest. City staff (Paul Eckman, Steve Olt, Sheri Langenberger, Glen Schlueter, Wes Lamarque, and Karen Cumbo) met on Monday, January 23 to discuss the easements, and the status of the project. We determined that since the City had not accepted the easements, the City did not have a formal role in the easements. Any action on the easements would Page I of 1 Steve Olt From: Karen Cumbo Sent: Saturday, January 28, 2012 1:27 PM To: Diane Jones; Steve Olt; Sheri Langenberger; Wanda Krajicek; Paul Eckman Subject: sanctuary west Attachments: summary-kc.doc; notice of expiration.pdf; SanctuaryWestPDPFDP- DevelopmentReviewProcessTimeline_final.doc Hello all, Here is the summary of my involvement with the Sanctuary West project, and my hand -over of the project to Diane. Karen Karen Cumbo Director, Planning Development and Transportation City of Fort Collins 970-221-6287 1/30/2012