HomeMy WebLinkAboutSTRAUSS LAKES DEVELOPMENT - ANNEXATION & ZONING - 47-02 - CORRESPONDENCE - REVISIONSTroy Jones
March 17, 2003
Page 5 of 5
Should you have any questions regarding these responses to comments, please give me a call. Thank you
for your assistance on this project.
Sincerely,
Jim Sell Design, Inc.
Kent Bruxvoort, P.E.
Senior Engineer
cc: Bill McDowell, Strauss Lakes Company
Lucia Liley
46
EAPROJECT FILES\LAND\2222\DOCS\TROYJONES 03.17.03.DOC
Troy Jones
March 17, 2003
Page 4 of 5
As the development application for this project is prepared, we will coordinate with Park Planning on the
location of the Poudre Trail, but believe that the trail will be located to the north of this project.
Department: Stormwater Utility
Topic: General
6
No comments.
Noted.
Department: Transporation Planning
Topic: General
3
No comments.
Noted.
Department: Technical Services
Topic: General
15
Boundary and Legal Close.
Noted.
Issue Contact: Basil Hamdan
Issue Contact: Tom Reiff
Issue Contact: Jim Hoff
16
Call to reception # in legal does not match drawing (rec. no.).
The annexation map has been resubmitted with correct, matching reception numbers for the Roselle -
Shields parcel, referenced in the comment.
Department: Water/Wastewater
Topic: General
7
No comments.
Noted.
Department: Zoning
Topic: Zoning
I
No comment.
Noted.
E:IPROJECr FILES\LAND\R22\DOCS\TROYJONES 03.17.03.DOC
Issue Contact: Roger Buffington
Issue Contact: Jenny Nuckols
Troy Jones
March 17, 2003
Page 3 of 5
Department: Engineering Issue Contact: Dave Stringer
Topic: General
2
Adjust annexation line to include east side of canal right-of-way or easement boundary.
Applicant's attorney discussed this issue with Paul Eckman. The annexation line along the north and
east side of the property coincides with a property boundary. Adjusting the annexation line as
recommended would require either acquisition of property or participation of the adjoining property
owner, an entity different than the applicant, both of which unnecessarily complicate the annexation.
Additionally, the property to the north and east is anticipated to be annexed into the City within the next
several years.
Department: Excel Energy Issue Contact: Len Hilderbrand
Topic: General
11
PSCO has gas & electric facilities in the road right-of-ways along the west and south boundaries of
this project.
Noted.
Department: Light & Power Issue Contact: Ellen Switzer
Topic: General
13
This area is in Xcel Energy's electric service territory. No REA Service Rights fees will apply to
electric service following annexation.
Noted.
Department: Natural Resources Issue Contact: Doug Moore
Topic: General
4
No Issues with Annexation.
Reminder: A 100' natural habitat and features buffer distance will be required on Fossil Creek
and tributaries.
The comment regarding annexation is noted. The comment regarding a 100' buffer distance has been
discussed with Doug Moore. He has visited the site and has since determined that a 100' buffer on the
Fossil Creek Reservoir Inlet Ditch is unwarranted.
Department: Park Planning Issue Contact: Craig Foreman
Topic: General
14
Information: The Poudre Trail will come through this development. Park Planning and
Development staff has been working with Jim Sell Design on the trail layout. Otherwise, no
comment.
E TROJECT FlLES\LAND\2222\DOCS\TROYJONES 03.17.03.DOC
Troy Jones
March 17, 2003
Page 2 of 5
a) Realignment requirements for both County Road 9 (Ziegler Road) and Horsetooth Road will be
analyzed at the time of the development application. Realignment of County Road 9 (Ziegler
Road) at the ditch is currently planned as part of the proposed Rigden Farm project.
b) It is assumed that the term "interested parties" refers to the ultimate purchasers of property
expected to be platted in the proposed development, after annexation and the development
application. In the event that property is to be sold under the development expected to be
proposed after annexation, and that the sale of developed property is to occur while LaFarge
operations are ongoing, it is anticipated that a relevant disclosure notice will be prepared
with the development application.
8
Please revise the annexation boundary to reflect the Engineering Department comment. The new
legal description will need to be reflected in a revised petition.
See response below to Comment 2.
9
As discussed in our meeting between the applicant's team and City staff on 1/14/03, please revise
the petition to eliminate the reference to an annexation agreement.
See response above to Comment 12.
10
Please e-mail me a text file of the legal description to tionesrfe2ov.com
The legal description has been e-mailed to the above address.
18
Public hearing dates are scheduled before the City Council on the following dates:
February 4, 2003 — Resolution Finding Significant Compliance
March 18, 2003 — First Ordinance Readings '
April 1, 2003 — Second Ordinance Readings
Noted.
19
On January 16, 2003, the Planning and Zoning Board voted 5 to 0 to forward a recommendation to
approve the annexation with LMN zoning to the City Council.
Noted.
'.:%ND\2222\DOCS\TROYJONES 03.17.03.DOC
March 17, 2003
Mr. Troy Jones
Current Planning
City of Fort Collins
281 North College Avenue
Fort Collins, CO 80524
RE: Strauss Lakes Development Annexation & Zoning #47-02
Response to 01/21/03 Comments
Dear Troy:
La ..4nnpvin hiedmr
&ngmewi,iq
Forinnrmntln( &Canna ndy Pl mnzrq
The City of Fort Collins provided written comments dated January 21, 2003 on the submittal for the
Strauss Lakes Development Annexation and Zoning (City #47-02). The following are responses to these
comments, with the comments provided in bold text.
Department: Advance Planning
Topic: General
17
No comment.
Noted.
Issue Contact: Pete Wray
Department: City Attorney's Office Issue Contact: Paul Eckman
Topic: General
12
I need to see the annexation agreement if one is still being proposed! See first paragraph on Page 2
of petition. Otherwise, revise the petition.
The developer of the property has had discussions in the past with the City of Fort Collins regarding a
number of issues related to its properties east of Ziegler Road and north of Horsetooth Road. We have
met with City staff and believe that these issues can be addressed .through means other than an
annexation agreement for this property. Thus, the annexation petition has been revised and resubmitted
without reference to an annexation agreement.
Department: Current Planning Issue Contact: Troy Jones
Topic: General
5
Larimer County forwards the following comments:
a) There may be a need to realign County Road 9 and/or Horsetooth at the ditch with
increased traffic from development.
b) Interested parties must be advised of the existing LaFarge sand & gravel pit and batch
plan operations north of this property.
EAPROJECT FILES\LAND\2222\DOCS\TROYJONES 03.17.03.DOC