Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutFOSSIL LAKE P.U.D., THIRD FILING - COUNTY APPROVAL - 33-01F - CORRESPONDENCE - CITY STAFFSection 29. Default/Enforcement: Upon default of the provisions of this Development Agreement and/or the Addendum the parties agree that this Agreement may be specifically enforced by either party or either party may proceed in any other manner authorized by law for a breach of contract. The remedies set forth herein are cumulative and the election to use one shall not preclude use of another. In the event of default by either party, such party agrees to pay all expenses incurred by the other party occasioned by said default, including, but not limited to, a reasonable expense for attorney's fees in enforcing this Agreement. In addition, the County or the City may: (a) Demand payment under the Development Loan and use the proceeds to complete the improvements specified herein. Nothing herein shall be construed as requiring the City to complete all of the improvements specified herein in the event the proceeds of such Development Loan are not sufficient to finance all the improvements. (b) Issue a written notice to the Developer to appear and show cause why the plat shall not be vacated. Giving the notice shall be deemed complete upon mailing the same certified mail to the address stated herein. Said notice shall designate the date, time and place the Fort Collins City Council will conduct a hearing to consider vacation of the plat. Said hearing shall be not less than thirty (30) nor more than sixty (60) days from the date of the notice. (c) Proceed in the manner described in the Latimer County Land Use Code or State Statutes for a violation of the State or local subdivision regulations. (d) Withhold building permits. »»>DRAFT««< Attachment B to the Petition for Annexation # CONDITIONS OF ANNEXATION page 6 Engineer shall convene a meeting between the Developer, the City Engineer and the County Engineer within two (2) business days of receipt of the notice. Said dispute shall be resolved at this meeting by the County Engineer. If the County Engineer determines that the work is not in compliance, the Developer, within the time frame set by the County Engineer, shall correct it, and if not so corrected, the City Engineer may declare the Developer in default of this Agreement, and the Addendum. Section 24. Issuance of Building Permits and Certificates of Occupancy: For purposes of this Agreement, `Building Permit" shall mean any permit to begin work to construct a building on the Property, including permits for footings and foundations. Unless otherwise described, the County, the City and the Developer acknowledge and agree that building permits for individual lots shall be issued by the City, and only after installation of water and sewer facilities, successful inspection of subgrade, application of aggregate road base surfacing, as well as any necessary storm improvements, immediately adjacent to the lot for which a Building Permit is sought, as well as such same improvements for those areas of Fossil Lake Second Filing which are immediately adjacent to the Property. The City may restrict the issuance of building permits or Certificates of Occupancy if construction is not in compliance with an approved schedule, to be agreed upon by the Developer and the City. The Developer acknowledges that all of the lots in the development include building envelopes and that all structures must be located within the approved building envelopes as shown on the approved Final Plat. Prior to the issuance of any Certificate of Occupancy, the Developer shall submit a written certification (condominium map) by a Colorado Licensed Surveyor verifying that the structure is located within the building envelope and that the structure is located at an elevation that is consistent with all approved drainage plans. Section 25. Fees: The Developer shall pay to the County, at time of execution of this Agreement, as and if required by the County, County and Regional Transportation Capital Expansion Fees, Community and Regional Park Fees In Lieu of Dedication, School Fees, and Drainage Fees. Other development fees shall be paid to the City, in the amounts in effect at the time of execution of this Agreement, prior to the commencement of work. The Developer acknowledges and agrees that such fees are roughly proportional to impacts created by this development. The Developer shall also pay any other applicable legislatively formulated and duly adopted fees which are in effect and required to be paid at the time of building permit issuance provided such fees are imposed on a broad class of property owners. Section 28. Liability/Indemnity: The County's or the City's review and approval of any plans, reports, or drawings or the City's inspection and approval of any improvements constructed by the Developer under this Agreement does not constitute a representation, warranty, or guarantee by the County or the City that such improvements are free from defects or will operate adequately for the purpose intended. Current and successor owners of the Property assume responsibility for all maintenance, repairs, or replacements of all private improvements, including, but not limited to streets, curbs, gutters, sidewalks, landscaping, and common areas. The Developer agrees to indemnify and hold the County and the City, its officers, employees and assigns harmless from and against all claims, costs and liabilities of every kind and nature, for injury or damage received or sustained by any person or entity in connection with, or on account of the performance, condition or quality of work at the development of the Property pursuant to this Agreement. The Developer further agrees to aid and defend the County and the City in the event either or both is named as a defendant in an action concerning the performance, condition or quality of work pursuant to this Agreement, except where such suit is brought by the Developer against the County or the City. The Developer acknowledges it is not an agent or employee of the County or the City. Nothing in this Agreement shall be construed as a waiver, either express or implied, of the immunities, rights, benefits, and protections afforded the County and the City under the Colorado Governmental Immunity Act. »»>DRAFT««< Attachment B to the Petition for Annexation #_ CONDITIONS OF ANNEXATION page 5 Ten (10) days prior to the request for Release of Collateral, the City Engineering Department shall be notified of the request. The City shall schedule an on -site walk through inspection of those elements that it is to inspect within five (5) days of being notified. Within five (5) days of said inspection, the City shall provide the Developer with notice of acceptance of improvements and acceptance to maintain said improvements; or, in the event improvements are not acceptable, the City shall provide to the Developer a description of the deficiencies that do not meet the specifications. The Developer shall make whatever modifications are necessary to overcome said deficiencies and shall then notify the City, requesting re -inspection. Re -inspection and approvals shall follow the time line as described above. Landscape Collateral. The installation and warranty for landscaping shall be separate and apart from the improvements attached as Exhibit "B", and are as set forth on the approved Landscape Plan for the Property. The Developer may complete landscape installations on a phased basis as depicted on the approved Landscape Plan, with the associated perimeter areas as logistically feasible. On this phased basis, a letter of credit for 125% of the landscape subcontractor's bid amount for each lot shall be issued to the City prior to issuance of any Certificate of Occupancy for any condominium on that lot, unless the required landscape installations have been substantially completed, as confirmed by the City inspection. Upon completion of installation of the landscaping of each phase and the City inspection and approval of same, the City shall release said letter of credit amount. Section 22. Developer Guarantees and Warrantv Collateral: The Developer warrants and guarantees that all public improvements required to be constructed pursuant to this Agreement shall be free from defects in design, materials and/or workmanship and shall properly function for the purpose intended for two years following approval of the improvement by the City (the warranty period). The Developer shall correct, replace or repair any public improvement discovered to be defective or faulty during the warranty period. Any required correction, repair or replacement shall be commenced within thirty (30) days of the City's written notice advising the Developer of the necessary work. Upon completion of the public improvements not otherwise collateralized, The Developer shall post warranty collateral with the City in a form acceptable to the City. The warranty collateral shall be not less than 15% of the costs of the public improvements and shall remain in effect during the entire two-year warranty collateral period. In the event the Developer fails to make the necessary corrections, repairs, or replacements: (a) The City may use the warranty collateral to do the work to the extent of available funds. Nothing herein shall be construed to require the City to complete the work in the event the warranty collateral funds are insufficient to finance the work. (b) The City and/or any Property owner may commence an action against the Developer for specific performance or for money damages for costs of the necessary work; and/or pursue any other legal or equitable action against the Developer. (c) The City may withhold building permits. The above remedies shall be cumulative and the election to pursue one shall not preclude the use of another. Section 23. Inspections: (a) No construction shall commence without written approval of the County or the City Engineer following a pre -construction meeting scheduled by the County or the City Engineer. The Developer shall supply the County or the City a schedule of construction and shall notify the County or the City of commencement of construction. (b) Any inspections of public (City) improvements shall be performed by City Engineering inspectors. There shall be no fees paid by the Developer for said inspections. Said inspectors shall have the authority to halt construction of any portion of the construction that may be found to be out of compliance with the approved plans and specifications for the development. In the event there is a dispute over the decisions made by the field inspectors, the Developer shall promptly notify the City Engineer, in writing. The City »»>DRAFT««< Attachment B to the Petition for Annexation # CONDITIONS OF ANNEXATION page 4 Section 17. Landscaping Improvements: The Developer shall install the landscaping improvements as required in the Final Landscape Plans for the Fossil Lake PUD 3rd Filing. Building permits and/or Certificates of Occupancy shall not be subject to completion of landscaping improvements; however, any final non -warranty collateral for landscaping improvements will be released only upon the receipt of certification of completion. Section 20. Addressing: The Developer agrees that individual addressing of the lots in the development is an important factor for identification and safety during construction. The Developer agrees to obtain addresses, as prescribed by the County and the City, including street name and house numbers for each lot and to install identifying street and address signage. Section 21. Cost Estimates and Guarantee of Improvements: Estimates of the costs of completing the improvements required in this Agreement are shown in Exhibit `B". The Developer shall fully comply with the County and the City regulations and policies for improvements, agreements and requests for release of collateral. The County, the City and the Developer agree that improvements will be constructed in a single phase. The Developer shall furnish collateral to the County for the completion of the improvements shown in Exhibit "B" in the form of a Development Loan issued by a federal or state licensed financial institution. The purpose of the collateral provided by the Developer hereunder is to guarantee that sufficient funds are available for the completion and warranty of the improvements described. The Development Loan shall state at least the following: (a) Development Loan shall be in the amount of 115% of the estimated cost of constructing the improvements. (b) The Development Loan shall provide for payment upon demand by the City, if the Developer has not performed the obligations specified in this Agreement, and the issuer has been notified of such default. (c) The Developer may draw from the Development Loan in accordance with the provisions of this Agreement, and the Development Loan Agreement executed as an Addendum to this Development Agreement. (d) The issuer of the Development Loan shall guarantee that at all times the unreleased portion of the Development Loan shall be equal to a minimum of 115% of the estimated costs of completing uncompleted portions of the required improvements, based on inspections of the development by the City. In no case shall the disbursement for an improvement item exceed the cost estimates in this Development Agreement. (e) The Development Loan shall specify that 15% of the total cost of the improvements amount cannot be drawn upon and will be available to the City until released by the City, which release shall be effected as soon as practicable following completion and inspection of the required work. This amount will be considered warranty collateral and will be proportionately allocated to the construction infrastructure categories as listed on Exhibit "B", based on total cost within each category. (f) The Development Loan shall specify the date of proposed expiration, which shall be the date of release as established in paragraph (e) above, or two (2) years from the date of final improvement, whichever shall occur first. Said Development Loan shall stipulate that in any event, the Development Loan shall remain in full force and effect until after the City has received sixty (60) days written notice from the issuer of the pending expiration. Said notice shall be sent by certified mail to the City Engineering Department. The collateral shall be returned to the Developer pursuant to the Addendum and the City regulations and policies for development agreements and requests for release of collateral. In the event of a conflict between the Addendum and the City regulations and policies, the terms of the Addendum shall control. »»>DRAFT««< Attachment B to the Petition for Annexation # CONDITIONS OF ANNEXATION page 3 September 1, 2002. This date is not applicable to the dwelling structures proposed Section 10. Streets: All streets within the development shall be designated as "Private", as approved by the County and the City staffs during the preliminary plat review process. The Developer shall construct all street improvements as shown on the Final Plat and in the supporting documents for the Development in accordance with the plans and specifications, as prepared by the Developer's licensed engineers and professionals, and approved by the County and City Engineers. All street layout and geometric design shall be in accordance with applicable standards and as portrayed on the approved construction drawings. The Developer shall obtain a construction permit and any required access permits prior to start of construction of any street improvements. Although streets to be installed on the Property are private, the Developer agrees to obtain a statement from an engineer registered in Colorado that the street improvements have been completed in substantial compliance with approved plans and specifications and that the documenting engineer or his representative has made regular outside on -site inspections during the course of construction and the field plans used are the same as those approved by the County and the City. Any excavations in existing City rights -of -way, for utility connections or any other purpose, will only be allowed following the issuance of an Excavation Permit from the City. The Developer agrees to obtain such permit(s) as needed and to comply with all requirements associated with such permit(s). Section 11. Storm Drainage Improvements The Developer shall construct all storm drainage improvements as shown on the Final Plat and on the final construction specifications for the Property, in accordance with the plans and specifications, as prepared by the Developer's licensed engineers and professionals, and approved by the County and City Engineers. Completion of improvements shall be certified by a professional engineer licensed in the State of Colorado, stating that the improvements and facilities have been constructed in substantial conformance with said final development plan documents. Release of any final construction collateral is subject to the submittal and approval of the Developer's engineer's certification of approval. Ten (10) working days prior to the issuance of any Certificate of Occupancy, the portions of the drainage improvement system that are immediately adjacent to or a part of each lot, including lot grading required to be performed on any lot, shall be certified by an engineer licensed in Colorado confirming that said improvements are completed and operational in accordance with the final development plan documents. The certification shall confirm that any construction, landscaping, fencing, or other improvements have not materially interfered with the system's functionality and adequacy. Furthermore, the certification shall identify the lot corner elevations and the top of lowest window well or lowest opening elevations of any improvements as well as indicate the direction of drainage away from improvements, swales, drain lines or any other elements that may Section 13. City of Fort Collins -- Electric: The Developer shall construct improvements as required by the City to supply Property with electric utility service. Improvements shall be in accordance with the City specifications. In no event, however, shall the County be responsible for the inspection and/or acceptance of electric utility improvements to the Property. Section 16. "As Built" Plans: The Developer shall provide to the City three (3) copies of "as built" plans prepared by a professional engineer for all drainage structures and facilities, street improvements, and other site improvements constructed in connection with the development of the Property. All testing and quality control reports relative to public improvements shall also be provided to the City and must be submitted prior to final City approval. The Developer shall provide to the particular service provider "as built" plans for all water facilities, sewer facilities, and utilities. »»>DRAFT««< Attachment B to the Petition for Annexation # CONDITIONS OF ANNEXATION page 2 ««DRAFT»» ATTACHMENT "B" TO THE PETITION FOR ANNEXATION #3 CONDITIONS OF ANNEXATION FOSSIL LAKE PUD THIRD FILING Upon completion of the annexation of the Property to the City, the City shall be deemed as successor to the County and shall be subject to all of the rights and obligations of the County hereunder The annexation of the Property to the City of Fort Collins, Colorado ("City") shall be subject to the terms and conditions of this Petition for Annexation #31 including this Attachment "B", and the Agreement between Larimer County, Colorado ("County'_') and KEM Builders, LLC ("Petitioner") for Fossil Lake P.U.D., Third Filing (recorded at Reception #. ) and referred to herein as the "Agreement", including but not limited to, the following sections of said Agreement which are cited herein for clarity of reference: Section 3. Larimer Countv and the Citv of Fort Collins The development is located in proximity to the City and there has been cooperation between the County, the City and the Developer throughout the planning and approval process. Density, lot layout, street configuration and other land planning elements were approved by the County in consultation with the City. Furthermore, it is understood that the County, the City, and the Developer intend that this development be annexed into the City shortly after Final Plat approval. Should the City not annex this development, the County and the Developer agree to execute an amendment to this Agreement within thirty (30) days of the City's decision not to annex, said amendment to delete references to the City and to delegate the various City obligations and benefits by and between the Developer and the County. Certain, engineering criteria and obligations described in the Intergovernmental Agreement for the Fort Collins Urban Growth Area ("IGA") were negotiated by the County, the City, and the Developer and are as cited in the approved Plat, Site Plan and construction drawings for the development. The final construction plans for all required improvements have been carefully coordinated with the City, as the inspecting and certifying entity during actual construction, to insure that certain technical requirements have been addressed. The County Engineer shall insure that the final construction plans are given to the City for review and that all applicable City comments and requirements are addressed. Section 4. Water Rights and Interests: The Developer shall satisfy water rights for this Property at or before time of building permit issuance under the conditions as established for multi -family dwellings within the City of Fort Collins. Section 5. Imarovements: The Developer shall design, construct and install at its own expense all infrastructure improvements including but not limited to streets, curbs, gutters, sidewalks, utilities, drainage facilities, water and sewer facilities, and other improvements shown on the Final Plat or in the supporting documents in accordance with the plans and specifications, as prepared by the Developer's licensed engineers and professionals, and as approved by the County and the City. All construction shall be performed in a good and workmanlike manner and in accordance with applicable County and City standards, rules and regulations governing such construction. It is understood that the standards, rules, and regulations of the City shall apply to the actual construction and inspection of the herein described improvements. All improvements required for development of the Property, under the terms of this Agreement, and all other matters agreed to be performed, shall be installed, constructed or performed by the Developer on or before Attachment "A" LEGAL DESCRIPTION OF REAL PROPERTY INCLUDED IN THE ANNEXATION AGREEMENT A tract of land situate in the County of Larimer, State of Colorado, to wit: Fossil Lake PUD 3`d Filing, being a replat of Tract B, Fossil Lake PUD 2nd Filing, County of Larimer, State of Colorado IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the undersigned has executed this Petition for Annexation #3 this day of November, 2001. PETITIONER/OWNER: KEM BUILDERS, LLC, a Colorado Limited Liability Company By: William R. Krug, Manager 3000 South College Avenue, Suite 103 Fort Collins, CO 80525 PETITION FOR ANNEXATION #3 THE UNDERSIGNED (hereinafter referred to as the "Petitioner") hereby petitions the Council of the City of Fort Collins, Colorado for the annexation of an area to be referred to as the Fossil Lake PUD Annexation No.3to the City of Fort Collins ("City"). Said area, consisting of approximately 6.026 acres, is more particularly described on Attachment "A", attached hereto and incorporated herein by reference (the "Property"). A. The Petitioner alleges: 1. That it is desirable and necessary that such area be annexed to the City. 2. That the requirements of Sections 31-12-104 and 31-12-105, C.R.S., exist or have been met. 3. That not less than one -sixth of the perimeter of the area proposed to be annexed is contiguous with the boundaries of the City. 4. That a community of interest exists between the area proposed to be annexed and the City. 5. That the area to be annexed is urban or will be urbanized in the near future. 6. That the area proposed to be annexed is integrated with, or capable of being integrated with, the City. 7. That the Petitioner herein owns more than fifty percent (50%) of the area to be annexed, excluding public streets, alleys and lands owned by the City of Fort Collins. 8. That landowners constituting more than fifty percent (50%) of the landowners in the area are subject to a covenant running with the land which affirmatively consents to the annexation of the Property to the City. 9. That the City shall not be required to assume any obligation respecting the construction of water mains, sewer lines, gas mains, electric service lines, streets or any other services or utilities in connection with the property proposed to be annexed except as may be provided by the ordinances of the City. B. This Petition for Annexation P is specifically subject to those conditions of annexation set forth in Attachment "B", attached hereto and incorporated herein by reference, which shall be incorporated into the ordinance annexing the Property (the "Annexation Ordinance"). C. The Petitioner reserves the right to withdraw this Petition for Annexation 4,3'prior to the hearing on second reading of the Annexation Ordinance only in the event that the City fails to adopt the Annexation Ordinance with the conditions set forth in Attachment `B". WHEREFORE, said Petitioner requests that the Council of the City approve the annexation of the area described on Attachment "A". Furthermore, the Petitioner requests that said area be placed in the "P.U.D." Zone on the Annexation Map and pursuant to the Land Use Code of the City. KEM Builders, LLC 3000 South College Avenue, Suite 103 Fort Collins, CO 80525 November 2, 2001 Mr. Troy Jones City of Fort Collins Current Planning P. O. Box 580 Fort Collins, CO. 80522-0580 HAND DELIVER A Colorado Limited Liability Company Telephone: (970) 223-4900 Fax:(970) 223-4901 RE: (Draft) Annexation Agreement, Fossil Lake PUD Third Filing Dear Troy: Attached is the (draft) Annexation Agreement for the Fossil Lake PUD Third. My understanding is that (the City) desires to have this in the works prior to the County's approval of the Final Plat. We are hoping that approval can be obtained not later than Thanksgiving. This is new territory for me, so please feel free to holler, throw rocks, or whatever, and we'll try to get things worked out as quickly as possible. On the one hand, I suppose there isn't much that needs to be very complicated. On the other hand, I believe the document properly reflects the tie between the City and the Development Agreement, which seems to be of some concern to some parties. I would certainly be willing to eliminate much of Attachment 'B' to the petition, if you feel some other clear reference to the Development Agreement will be adequate. I'm not sure about the required numbering scheme for the petitions, therefore the shaded, #3 Please redline me as soon as you wish. Can you also let me know what fee(s) are involved with this annexation? I can also be e-mailed at dbrownPkemhomes. com. Thanks again for all of the facilitating Sincerely, David S. Brown Project Manager DSB/s Attachment M. Matt Lafferty, Larimer County Planning Mr. Matt Lafferty Page 13 November 2, 2001 connection will be constructed, as'all plans and agreements indicate, prior to the;"(later) construction of Phases 3 and4. These are commitments of-Everline LLC; as developerof,Fossil Lake Second... (KEM Builders, LLC — Dave Brown) Following the October 23 work session, Matt, I believe you indicated to me that the variances being sought could be processed in very short order. Under the circumstances, we're hoping for one week. I am copying the variance requests directly to Sherri Wamhoff in hopes of facilitating that processing. Certainly, either Roxanne or Sherri can contact anyone on the development team to expedite the process if need be. I also believe you indicated that, assuming the variances being sought were approved, the remaining approvals for this project could be obtained, again, in very short order. We hope that all final approvals can be obtained not later than November 26 to enable us to proceed without further delays. To this end, I am also requesting once again that the Larimer County Engineering Department authorize us to immediately initiate overlot grading on this project. Such clearance might effectively enable us to proceed with the remaining sewer and water installations, pending the District's final signoff on the administrative items listed earlier in this letter. Once again, we're in the position of asking that you please do all that can possibly be done to expedite all final approvals. This is a well -planned, thoughtfully designed, attractive project, and we need to get to work. Sincerely, KEM Builders, LLC David S. Brown, Project Manager DSB/s Attachments cc: Larimer County — Planning Department, Russ Legg Larimer County — Engineering Department, Roxanne Hayes Larimer County — Engineering Department, Traci Downs City of Fort Collins — Planning Department, Troy Jones City of Fort Collins — Engineering Department, Sheri Wamhoff North Star Design, Inc. — Patricia Kroetch Aller-Lingle Architects PC — Brad Massey King Surveyors, Inc. — Larry Pepik Mr. Matt Lafferty November 2, 2001 Page 12 building plan review s,'permitting, and COs will be under the auspices of the City. We certainly, hope that the approval process will not be further'delayed or complicated such as to negate this anticipation. (KEM 8uilders,.LLC - Dave Brown) 2. We agree to secure the Annexation Agreement upon final approval. (KEM Builders, LLC— Dave Brown) A draft of the proposed Annexation Agreement is being submitted to the City's Current Planning office concurrently with this letter. 3. _ We believe the Plat properly reflects that Tract D,- as relabeled as per comments above, as:a'„ ;Utility', Drainage, Access; "and Landscape Easement _ That "access'. encompasses pedestrian` use and no further delineation should be required.'"An easement is being providedfor that walk section (from between Lots 3 and 4) which connects the subject propertyto Trilby Road. (KEM Builders, LLC — Dave. Brown) , 4. The suggested change has been addedf to the `''Notice,to Prospective Buyers to the: paragraph describing the Annexation Agreement o;(KEM'Builders,.LLC- Dave'Brown) No com ent� 6-14 : All comments from Stormw-ate care being resolved via direct,conversation between Basil Hamdan; and Patricia Kroetch. Relative to'comment 011,;our-response is the same as under #19 in the preceding section We believe that County requirements (i.e. centerline profiles) are adequate and we request that the' submission be.approve'd' as is in this regard. (North Star.Design =Patricia Kroetch) `` Larimer County Attorney (Jeannine Haag) — October 13 1. 'The clarifying sentence has ;been added°as.the-f'ourthI paragraph of the Agreement. (KEM 'Builders, LLC = Dave Brown) 2. As we understand the process, the City is not a signatory, but has had full review and consultation as to the adequacy of the Agreement. We also understand that the Annexation Agreement for Fossil Lake PUD Third should be structured to address the necessary Development Agreement elements, in a manner similar to the Annexation Agreement being structured for Fossil Lake Second. If the County Attorney's office feels that the City cannot be bound by the agreement as structured, perhaps in combination with the Annexation Agreement, but should be, then we would suggest that as an issue to be rectified jointly by the County and City attorney's offices--- (but not at the expense of further delay on the approval of this project!!). (KEM Builders, LLC — Dave Brown) 3. A statement, as suggested, has been added under Section 3. (KEM Builders, LLC — Dave. Brown) 4. The minor changes urider Sections,19, 26, and 27.have been made. >(KEMBuilders, .LLC —Dave Brown) - City of Fort Collins Traffic Operations (Ward Stanford) — October 15 Phases 1 and 2 of, the Fossil Lake Second are just now being constructed. The CR 36 / Trilby Road Mr. Matt Lafferty November 2, 2001 Page 11 33. Details of 7-20C, 7-14, 7-33,-22-1, and 7-21 or 22 have been added where applicable. (North Star Design — Patricia Kroetch) Notice to Prospective Purchasers ...... 1. The statement ompage 2 relative to roads and streets has been changed as suggested. (KEM Builders, LLC —Dave Brown) Aller-Lingle letter of 8/21/01 (Review Criteria) 1. This. project's:connect on to the. (future) trail is shown at 8-feet, as previously agreed. Drawings and the project narrative have been`altered so'as n t to indicate any width'for the (future) trail;°as this has not been determined nor is its installation the applicant's responsibility., (KEM Builders, LLC — Dave Brown) (North Star Design — Patricia'Kroetch) (Aller-Lingle Architects —Brad Massey) 2. The narrative has been altered as indicated. (Aller-Lingle_ Architects — Brad Massey) 3. The narrative has been altered as indicated to reflect consistency in sidewalk width statements.' (Alter -Lingle Architects - Brad Massey) Development Agreement 1: The reference has been changed.to read as follows: "Use of the open space is largely passive,'i with theexception of an &foot:bicycle-pedestrian path connecting the development with the proposed regional trail `at'the southern boundary of.the project:" .Reference to any width for the' (future) trail'has been omitted.from this submission; `as the width has riot been determined norls; its installation the applicant's responsibility (KEM Builders, LLC'Dave Brown) 2. Section 24 of the Agreement Has been altered to reflect that the necessary improvements.tok adjacent portions of Fossil Lake 2nd must also be in place. _(KEM Builders, LLC— Dave Brown) 3. Section 26 of the Agreement has been slightly altered, as suggested. (KEM Builders, LLC. Dave Brown) 4. Section 10 has been changed,as requested. (KEM Builders, LLC - Dave Brown) 5. Section 18 has been changed as requested. (KEM Builders, LLC = Dave Brown) 6. If such an inspection statement were to be included,'t would probably be better. placed under-, Section 10. However, since Section 10 alreadyprovides for inspections by licensed engineers,! the streets are private, all maintenance responsibilities are private,'and since (appropriately) the City is divesting itself of any and all responsibility for,the streets,'why does the City inspect them? What action could be. required subsequent to such inspection under such conditions? 7. Section 22 has been changed as requested.. (KEM Builders, LLC - Dave Brown) City of Fort Collins Current Planning (Troy Jones) — October 8 1. We do not anticipate that the County will issue any building permits. Given the timeline we have been left with, and our understanding of immediate subsequent annexation, we anticipate that all. Mr. Matt Lafferty November 2, 2001 Page 10 adequate. Once again, these are private streets and driveways. The most significant issue here seems, frankly, to be an inane standard that, on the one hand, requires a 20 foot driveway, 'so that vehicles can park without obstructing walkways' and, on the other hand, will not allow the parking spaces thus created (mandated) to be counted towards the parking requirements. We maintain that this standard is totally unreasonable, particularly within the context of the elements often required in a successful, aesthetically pleasing site. HOA rules require that garages be used for vehicle parking only. In addition to the two spaces thus provided for each residence via the garages (a total of 96), the Site Plan also provides for a total of 21 designated, marked parking spaces, and the design provides for an additional 54 driveway spaces. There are in reality, therefore, a total of 75 spaces other than garage spaces. From any logical perspective, a total of 171 fully functional parking spaces for 48 dwelling units is, at the very least, adequate. That computes to over 3.5 spaces per unit. Further imposition of this standard at this point in the review process will destroy the entire site plan. We are requesting that this very unreasonable standard not be imposed. (KEM Builders, LLC— Dave Brown) (North Star Design — Patricia Kroetch) (Aller-Lingle Architects — Brad Massey) [A variance request is being submitted relative to this comment.] As agreed at the October 23 work session, a variance request is being submitted relative to 19.2.3, seeking approval as submitted based upon the spaces provided by the Site Plan in combination with those additional on -street spaces that will be available on Swallow Pond Drive and Snowy Creek Drive. (KEM Builders, LLC — Dave Brown) 27 A "typical'cross section detail for the ,internal roads ha ',been added, -to the .finaI Ians,'as requested. (North Star Design-Patricia'=Kroetch) 28. Site 'and Utility Plans °have been modified to indicate "(typical) 17-400t wide driveway width"s.i Station offset.information has also been included ;(North Star Design — Patricia-Kroetch) (Alley Lingle Architects ;Brad Massey) 29: In a logical and practical engineeririg and site, context, the cul-de-sac slopes presented are ff adequate. _Holding to a rigid; printed, minimum standard requirement in.an instance such as this is an example of,how not to facilitate a'logicai, efficient'planning3process: The slopes are adequate as designed and meetthe standard as closely as'is practic'al.-Any variance'that does remain is inconsequential (KEM`Builders, LLC - Dave,Brown) (North Star Design = Patricia; Kroetch) Details 30. The non -applicable portion of the sidewalk drawing detail has been eliminated. (North Star Design — Patricia Kroetch), 31. We do notbelievethat driveway cuts will contribute any appreciable improvement to the site., Costs, however, would be significantly increased. ;We also believe.that the rollover curb and gutter as planned will help in reducing vehicle speeds. Once again, as these are private streets and driveways, we are requesting that this` recommendation not be iriiposed. (KEM Builders, LCC' — Dave Brown). (North`Sta`r Design _ Patricia'Kroetch) 32. We agree to the installation of the ramp,'in the same design and standard format,as consistent with the other portionsof the Fossil Lake PUD. (North Star Design— Patricia Kroetch) =(Aller= Lingle Architects — Brad Massey) Mr. Matt Lafferty November 2, 2001 Page 9 18. Spot elevations, as appropriate; and "a horizontal control plan have been added to the drawings.` (North Star Design — Patricia' Kroetch) 19. We believe.that County requirements (i.e. centerline profiles) are adequate and request that the submission be approved as 'is in this regard. "(North Star Design - Patricia Kroetch) 'Flowline'profiles will be,provided'as'further requested.. 20. The curve length, has been changed to 70 feet." (North Star Design - Patricia Kroetch) 21: Actual in -the -field realities do not always allow strict compliance with"extremelyspecifiostandards such as this one. The flows are adequate as designed and meet -the standard as closely as'stl practical. Any variance that does remain is inconsequential. `(North Star Design - Patricia" Kroetch) 22. [essentially the same comment as Landscape #3] The strict imposition of such standards will not necessarily serve to facilitate and create a desirable and practical site plan. These islands and cul-de-sacs were designed to moderate the visual/aesthetic impacts of the necessary hardscape. The islands are not typical of those configurations and locations for which the standards were developed (i.e., there are no cross streets; very light traffic volume, etc.). The configurations and dimensions of the cul-de-sac islands are an integral conceptual element. They have been previously discussed at some length. Imposition of the indicated standards would impose a significant, cumulative, negative impact on the site plan. We desire the somewhat tighter outside radii, which will serve to slow traffic down in these denser -use cul-de-sacs (i.e., 10-12 units adjoining, as opposed to 6-7 in the usual residential cul-de-sac). The Poudre Fire Authority has approved the radii indicated for the center islands. As they are fully functional for the site conditions and meet the primary health and safety requirements, we do not believe there is a viable issue here. We are requesting that these unnecessary restrictions not be imposed. (KEM Builders, LLC — Dave Brown) (North Star Design — Patricia Kroetch) (Alter -Lingle Architects — Brad Massey) (King Surveyors — Larry Pepik) [A variance request is being submitted relative to this comment.] We do not wish to eliminate the islands. As agreed, we are submitting a variance request for administrative action. Poudre Fire Authority supports the islands as designed. Further, we are submitting an additional diagram detail with the request which clearly demonstrates that the islands and cul-de-sacs as designed provide fro more truck turning space than the dimensions specified in the standard. (North Star Design — Patricia Kroetch) (Aller-Lingle Architects— Brad Massey) 23. A curve table has been provided -as requested, as of the horizontal control data., (North Star. Design — Patricia Kroetch) 24. The necessary data has been provided as requested, as part of the "horizontal control data, (North Star Design - Patricia Kroetch) 25. Island curbs have been specified as outflows; and spot elevations as appropriate and a horizontal control plan have been added to the drawings. -(North Star Design — Patricia Kroetch) 26. This issue has been thoroughly discussed during earlier conceptual reviews, within the context of logical site planning. There was clear conceptual assent that the parking being provided was Mr. Matt Lafferty Page 8 November 2, 2001 15. See item #10 under Stormwater comments. Street Plan and Profile 16. [same comment as Site Plan #1] We do not believe these are valid comments for this project, and particularly at this stage of the review. These are private streets, and the impetus for that was to enable accommodation of the design elements integral to the site and product. These are conceptual comments and should have been raised earlier in the review process. Further, the enforcement of such details becomes quite arbitrary when overall density and design requirements are considered, and such requirements at thisjuncture of the process would require a very significant site re -design. We cannot discern any physical (engineering) or health and safety implications relative to these standards on this site. We are requesting. that these unnecessary restrictions not be imposed. (KEM Builders, LLC— Dave Brown) (North Star Design — Patricia Kroetch) (Alter -Lingle Architects — Brad Massey) [A variance request is being submitted relative to this comment.] We have altered the driveway angles for buildings 2-3, 8, and 11. The angle for the common drive between 10 and 11 has not been altered because of the designated parking space indicated there. Once again, we go on record —particularly in the case of the building 2-3 drive-- that altering the plan to meet this standard carries no practical value and, indeed, will serve only to create an unsightly and maintenance -intensive areas which will be constantly run over by automobiles.) (North Star Design — Patricia Kroetch) (Aller-Lingle Architects — Brad Massey) Relative to the required 6-foot wide medians between driveways, Appendix 'A' to this letter visually expresses the practical circumstances. The condominium structures have attached double garages, side -by -side. The median spaces are T-Y or 2'-9" (dependent on building elevation) with each 17'-0" driveway pad extending 6" beyond each side of the door opening (which is a standard configuration). The total space possible between garage door rough openings is 4'-0". The maximum separation between drives, then, might be 3=6" (practically speaking, a drive slab must abut at least 3" beyond the edge of the door opening). From a practical site and product standpoint, it does not seem feasible/reasonable to require medians larger than the (present) T-0" (average), and we much prefer to leave them as presently designed. We do agree to ensure that non sight -impairing landscaping is placed within the medians, and have so depicted on the Landscape Plan. Narrowing the driveway widths at the street would only serve to satisfy a mathematically stated standard (e.g., 36') and would certainly diminish both the practical and safe use of the drives. We do agree to ensure that non sight -impairing landscape is placed within the medians, and have so depicted on the Landscape Plan. We would once again state that this standard should not be so strictly applied in the case of a multi -family development such as the proposed (which configuration has been built before and with which residents and all concerned are most pleased). We request that this standard essentially be waived. We believe we have done an excellent job of mitigating the impact of hardscape wherever possible, and the strict imposition of this standard (once again, especially at this point in the review process), would effectively destroy both this product and this site plan. 17. We agree to the installation of the ramp, in the same design and standard format as consistent with the other portions of the Fossil Lake PUD. '(North Star Design — Patricia Kroetch) (Alter - Lingle Architects — Brad Massey) Mr. Matt Lafferty November 2, 2001 Page 7 9. The requested statement per-3.3:1:F'has been added (North SterDesgn—Patricia Kroetch.` 10. Construction notes have'been added, as appropriate. _ Staff will, provide the desired construction notes tothe project engineer for incorporation. (North:' Star Design —,Patricia Kroetch 11. The Fort Collins -Loveland Water,District and South Fort Collins Sanitation'District do,not allow non-existent utilities to°be designated as existing: Utilities'that do exist as of the submission date` will be indicated as existing.'(North�StarDesign'=Patricia'Kroetch) Grading and Drainage Plans 12. The"property, through -which-the"connecting walk to Trilby Road is to b"econstructed is fully: developed --,-An easementwillte"plattedand recorded by separate "docu"rrientto accommodate' this connecting walk. _(North "Star De'sign= Patricia Kroetch) I(KEM Builders; LLC - Dave Brown) (King Surveyors — Larry? 13. We do not believe these are valid comments for this project, and particularly at this stage of the review. These are private streets and driveways, and the impetus for that was to enable accommodation of the design elements integral to the site and product. These are conceptual comments and should have been raised earlier in the review process. Further, the enforcement of such details becomes quite arbitrary when overall density and design requirements are considered, and such requirements at this juncture of the process would require a very significant site re -design. We cannot discern any physical (engineering) or health and safety implications relative to these standards on this site. We are requesting that these unnecessary restrictions not be imposed. (KEM Builders, LLC — Dave Brown) (North Star Design — Patricia Kroetch) (Aller- Lingle Architects — Brad Massey) [A variance request is being submitted relative to this comment.] We seek an appeal to 9.4.11 on the following bases: • The standard is arbitrary. We question the viability of its application, especially in a strict context, to multi -family developments. Upon discussion at the October 23 work session, there was no clear response from staff as to the basis for the 500 sq. ft., nor is the standard clarified/justified by any quantitative flow calculations. • We believe that conceptual drainage and stormwater plans for this site were submitted for review with the Preliminary Plat on March 20, 2001. We believe any concerns related to this standard could have and should have been raised in comments at that time, and/or during the subsequent County and City staff work session held on June 12. We do not believe raising this issue at this stage of the review process is fair, equitable, or practical. • Given the overall site plan and configuration, meeting this standard in a strict context will require a very significant site redesign. When the (proposed) drainage plans were developed, practical knowledge and awareness of drainage flows were fully considered. We believe we have done everything practically feasible, given the site configuration and product nature, to accommodate this requirement while also establishing adequate drainage configurations throughout the site and maintaining compliance with the approved site drainage plan for Fossil Lake, as provided by Northern Engineering. 14. The retaining wall has been -relocated closer to Building "I and completelyclear of the access' easement. Site and Landscape drawings have been coordinated with Utility drawings to so, reflect. (North Star Design -- Patricia Kroetch) (Aller-Lingle Architects - Brad Massey) Mr. Matt Lafferty Page 6 November 2, 2001 [A variance request is being submitted relative to this comment.] We do not wish to eliminate the islands. As agreed, we are submitting a variance request for administrative action. Poudre Fire Authority supports the islands as designed. Further, we are submitting an additional diagram detail with the request which clearly demonstrates that the islands and cul-de-sacs as designed provide for more truck turning space than the dimensions specified in the standard. (North Star Design — Patricia Kroetch) (Aller-Lingle Architects — Brad Massey) 4. We do =not believe these requirements are necessary for this site.. These are private streets; They are low volume, low' speed. There are no street intersections. We have provided conceptual -compliance`as stated,in accordance with�Landscape 'Plan'comments #-.1 and #'2 above. We, are requesting that this sight :distance easement restriction be waived as unnecessary. (KEMBuildeis,LLC—Dave Brown) (North Star Design - Patricia Kroetch) '(Aller Lingle Architects - Brad Massey) (King Surveyors - Larry Pepik) As agreed, .Tracts 1Y and °C" have been given -additional designation as ,sight distance easements. The sight distance easement restriction statement has been added to the Plat, (Aller Lingle Architects — Brad Massey) (King Surveyors - Larry Pepik) ' 5.. 'The following note°has been added to the Plat: "All maintenance of.the'various tracts described shall,be the responsibility of,the Village'at Fossil Lake Homeowners' Association." (King Surveyors =. Larry Pepik) . 6. The notice, as presented on the comment sheet, has been'added to the Plat.. (King Surveyors — Larry Pepik) 7. The strict imposition of such standards will not necessarily serve to facilitate and create a desirable and practical site plan. These islands and cul-de-sacs were designed to moderate the visual/aesthetic impacts of the necessary hardscape. The islands are not typical of those configurations and locations for which the standards were developed (i.e., there are no cross streets; very light traffic volume, etc.). The configurations and dimensions of the cul-de-sac islands are an integral conceptual element. They have been previously discussed at some length. Imposition of the indicated standards would have a significant, cumulative, negative impact on the site plan. We desire the somewhat tighter radii, which will serve to slow traffic down in these denser -use cul-de-sacs (i.e., 10-12 units adjoining, as opposed to 6-7 in the usual residential cul-de-sac). The Poudre Fire Authority has approved the radii indicated for the center islands. As they are fully functional for the site conditions and meet the primary health and safety requirements, we do not believe there is a viable issue here. We are requesting that these unnecessary restrictions not be imposed. (KEMBuilders, LLC— Dave Brown) (King Surveyors — Larry Pepik) [A variance request is being submitted relative to this comment.] Utility Plans 8. Current general notes (to match Appendix'E') have been used, where appropriate. (North Star Design — Patricia Kroetch) staff will provide the desired construction notes to the project engineer ffor incorporation, (North Star Design - Patricia Kroetch) Mr. Matt Lafferty November 2. 2001 Page 5 6. The Plat and the Site Plan have been changed so as to reflect the following: Tract "A Utility, brainage, and Access Easement Tracts "B" and "C" = Utility, Drainage, Access, Landscape Easement, and Sight `Distance Easement Tract"D" = Utility; Drainage, Access; and Landscape Easement (Aller-Lingle Architects - Brad Massey) (King Surveyors — Larry Pepik) Landscape Plan 1.= These islands have=been conceptually -discussed previously=- The arbitrary imposition of generalized standards will not serve to facilitate and create a desirable and practical site plans: These islands have been designed to moderate the visual/aesthetic'impacts of the necessary hardscape. We submit that these islands are not typical of those configurations and locations for: which the cited standards were developed (i.e., there .are no cross, streets; very light traffic volume, etc,). -Nonetheless, we have amended SheetLS2 toindicate that the designs meet line-' of -sight requirements. (Aller-Lingle Architects— Brad Massey) 2. The landscaping wall height has been reduced to a maximum of 24". (Aller-Lingle Architects.--= Brad Massey) Plat 1. The .Plat properly reflects an effective re -platting of Fossil Lake,Tract °B", whereby individual and/or separate drainage easements have been included within the -Tracts of.this submission; (i.e,' all of Tract"D" is -properly designated' as drainage easement). The Site Plan and. utility.. drawings have been revised so a's not to reflect (any) separate drainage easements. (North Star Design - Patricia'Kroetch) (Alter_ -Lingle Architects - 8radrMassey) .(King Surveyors — Larry: Pepik)" _ .. 2. Our drawings have been changed to indicate this easement in a manner consistent with the plat and plans already approved for Fossil Lake P.U.D.'2nd which delineate this easement as a 15 foot access easement. Everline '•LLC, as developer of -FossilLake 2nd, would assume responsibility for any change,in designation _of this easement. (North' Star Design - Patricia Kroetch) (Alter -Lingle Architects — Brad Massey) (King Surveyors — Larry Pepik) 3. [essentially the same comment as Street and Profile #22] The strict imposition of such standards will not necessarily serve to facilitate and create a desirable and practical site plan. These islands and cul-de-sacs were designed to moderate the visual/aesthetic impacts of the necessary hardscape. The islands are not typical of those configurations and locations for which the standards were developed (i.e., there are no cross streets; very light traffic volume, etc.). The configurations and dimensions of the cul-de-sac islands are an integral conceptual element. They have been previously discussed at some length. Imposition of the indicated standards would impose a significant, cumulative, negative impact on the site plan. We desire the somewhat tighter outside radii, which will serve to slow traffic down in these denser -use cul-de-sacs (i.e., 10- 12 units adjoining, as opposed to 6-7 in the usual residential cul-de-sac). The Poudre Fire Authority has approved the radii indicated for the center islands. As they are fully functional for the site conditions and meet the primary health and safety requirements, we do not believe there is a viable issue here. We are requesting that these unnecessary restrictions not be imposed. (KEM Builders, LLC — Dave Brown) (North Star Design — Patricia Kroetch) (Alter -Lingle Architects — Brad Massey) (King Surveyors — Larry Pepik) Mr. Matt Lafferty November 2, 2001 Page 4 health and safety implications relative to these standards on this site. We are requesting that these unnecessary restrictions not be imposed. (KEM Builders, LLC— Dave Brown) (North Star Design — Patricia Kroetch) (Aller-Lingle Architects — Brad Massey) [A variance request is being submitted relative to this comment.] Relative to detail 7-29B, we have altered the driveway angles for buildings 2-3, 8, and 11. The angle for the common drive between 10 and 11 has not been altered because of the designated parking space indicated there. (North Star Design — Patricia Kroetch) (Alter -Lingle Architects — Brad Massey) Relative to the required 6-foot wide medians between driveways, Appendix 'A' to this letter visually expresses the practical circumstances. The condominium structures have attached double garages, side -by -side. The median spaces are 3'-3" or 2'-9" (dependent on building elevation) with each 17'-0" driveway pad extending 6" beyond each side of the door opening (which is a standard configuration). The total space possible between garage door rough openings is 4'-0". The maximum separation between drives, then, might be 3-'9" (practically speaking, a drive slab must abut at least 3" beyond the edge of the door opening). From a practical site and product standpoint, it does not seem feasible/reasonable to require medians larger than the (present) 3'-0" (average), and we much prefer to leave them as presently designed. We do agree to ensure that non sight -impairing landscaping is_placed within the medians, and have so depicted on the Landscape Plan. Narrowing the drive connections at the street would only serve to satisfy a mathematically stated standard (e.g., 36') and would certainly diminish both the practical and safe use of the drives. We do agree to ensure that non sight -impairing landscape is placed within the medians, and have so depicted on the Landscape Plan. (Aller-Lingle Architects — Brad Massey) We would once again state that this standard should not be so strictly applied in the case of a multi -family development such as the proposed (which configuration has been built before and with which residents and all concerned are most pleased). We are requesting that this standard essentially be waived. We believe we have done an excellent job of mitigating the impact of hardscape wherever possible, and the strict imposition of this standard (once again, especially at this point in the review process), would effectively destroy both this product and this site plan. 2. We agree to the installation of the ramp, in the samedesign and standard format as consistent with the other portions of the Fossil Lake PUD. (North Star Design — Patricia Kroetch) (Alter- Lingle Architects — Brad Massey) 3. The mailbox assembly is indicated on both the Utility and Site Plan drawings (on the Building "A". side of Stonewater Drive). Its placement took utility installations into account. The assembly requires a concrete pad only. There will be no Utility conflicts. A note has been added on the utility plans to further identify the installation. (North Star.Design — Patricia Kroetch)-(Alter-Lingle; Architects — Brad Massey) 4. The retaining wall has been relocated closer to Building "I" and completely -clear of the access easement. Site and Landscape drawings have been coordinated with Utility drawings to so, reflect. (North Star Design — Patricia Kroetch) <(Aller-Lingle Architects —Brad Massey) 5. A note referencing a(typical) 20-foot setback from back edge of sidewalk to garage doors has been added to the Site Plan. (Aller-Lingle Architects — Brad Massey) Mr. Matt Lafferty November 2, 2001 Page 3 4. The cross slope for the indicated curb has been re-evaluated and changed to ensure a-1%' minimum. (North Star Design —Patricia Kroetch) 5. The cited curb return grading has been re-evaluated and altered to ensure minimum standards. (North Star.Design — PatriciaKroetch) 6. Notes have been checked against Appendix E and altered where required. (North Star Design: Patricia Kroetch). 7. Calculations have been revised as requested. Riprap.has been, indicated. Calcs and details have been included in the -'plan set, as requested. (North Star Design - Patricia Kroetch) 8. We understand that Transportation Expansion Fees (will be) required at the time of building permitting. Since permitting (will be) under the auspices of the City of Fort Collins, is this item properly clarified between the entities? (KEM Builders, LLC — Dave Brown) Neither the County nor the City has administratively clarified this item. 9. We understand that drainage fees (will be) required at the time of building permitting. Since permitting (will be) under the auspices of the City of Fort Collins, is this item properly clarified between the entities? (KEM Builders, LLC — Dave Brown) Neither the County nor the City has administratively clarified this item. City of Fort Collins Transportation Planning (Tom) — October 3 1. This project's connection to"they(future) trail is shown,'af 8 feet, aspreviously`agreed. Drawings and the project narrative have`been altered sobs not to indicate any width'for.the (future) trail f as` this has not been determined nor is its installation ourresponsibility. (KEM Builders, LLC= Dave Brown) (North Star Design —'Patricia Kroetch) (Allen -Lingle Architects — Brad Massey) 2. Everline LLC, as developer of Fossil Lake 2nd, will provide the enhanced crosswalk as: requested. Applicant's drawings have been changed to so reflect. (North Star Design — Patricia" Kroetch) (Alter -Lingle Architects — Brad Massey) 3. Previous discussions with the planning staffs resulted in an understanding that connecting'walks would be maintained at 4.O1feet with the exception of the walk connecting to'Trilby Road that is indicated at 4.5 feet. Applicant has not made any changes in this regard from the plans submitted on August 21. (KEM Builders, LLC — Dave Brown) (Aller-Lingle Architects — Brad Massey) City of Fort Collins Engineering (Sheri Wamhoff) — October 4 Site Plan [same comment as Street Plan and Profile #16] We do not believe these are valid comments for this project, and particularly at this stage of the review. These are private streets, and the impetus for that was to enable accommodation of the design elements integral to the site and product. These are conceptual comments and should have been raised earlier in the review process. Further, the enforcement of such details becomes quite arbitrary when overall density and design requirements are considered, and such requirements at this juncture of the process would require a very significant site re -design. We cannot discern any physical (engineering) or Mr. Matt Lafferty Page 2 November 2, 2001 • Larimer County Engineering Department (Dale Greer) — September 14 1. Boundary monuments and descriptions per CRS 38-51=105 (1)(a) and —106 (f) have been added to the Plat as requested... (King Surveyors — Larry Pepik) Y 2. A`Basis'of Bearings statement per CRS 38-51-106(e) has been added to the Plat as requested. (King Surveyors — Larry Pepik) 3. The monument record for theNorth quarter corner of Sec 9'has been reviewed and revised as, requested :'(King Surveyors -"Larry-Pepik) ■ Larimer County Planning & Building Department (Katherine Huber) — September 17 The Plat and Site drawings have been revised to reflect the approved street name of Lost Lake Place, and that the stub entering into the project is to remain at Stonewater Drive (as opposed to:"Court").. Eighteen (18) copies of the (final), Plat will be provided as requested. (King Surveyors— Larry Pepik) (North Star Design — PatriciaKroetch) (Aller-Lingle Architects -Brad Massey) • Fort Collins -Loveland Water District and South Fort Collins Sanitation District (Terry Farrill) — September 15 1. Verification of the formation of -the Village at Fossil Lake' Homeowners Association is being provided to the. District. '.(KEM Builders; LLC — Dave Brown) 2. We are providing the .requested" District easement forms.. (KEM. Builders, LLC — Dave Brown) (King Surveyors - Larry;Pepik)` 3. The District's signature: block has been added :to the construction .drawings cover sheet, .as requested `;(North Star Design `- Patricia`Kroetch) 4. Meter pits, have beenadded to the utility'drawings'for each of the 12 buildings, as requested. (North Star Design —Patricia Kroetch) . 5. A corrected test pressure of 150 psi has been included, as requested, and thrust blocks adjusted accordingly.- (North Star'Design Patricia Kroetch) 6. The (typ) curb stop diagram has been eliminated, as requested. (North Star Design — Patricia' Kroetch) ■ Larimer County Engineering Department (Traci Downs) — September 26 1. A typical cross section detail for the internal roads and ni -WR-sass has been added to the final plans, as requested. (North Star Design — Patricia Kroetch) 2. A horizontal control plan has been added to the final plans, as requested. (North Star Design Patricia Kroetch) . 3. Outfall curbs have been specified at the islands, as requested, and detail provided. The Landscape Plan has been revised to indicate that sleeves will be provided for irrigation water to the islands. (North Star Design — Patricia Kroetch) {Alley -Lingle Architects — Brad Massey} A KEM Builders, LLC 3000 South College Avenue, Suite 103 Fort Collins, CO 80525 November 2, 2001 Mr. Matt Lafferty Larimer County Planning Department P. O. Box 1190 Fort Collins, CO 80522-1190 HAND DELIVER A Colorado Limited Liability Company Telephone: (970) 223-4900 Fax: (970) 223-4901 RE: Fossil Lake P.U.D. Third Filing Comment responses from October 23, 2001, County/City staff work session Resubmission of documents as requested Dear Matt: Includ-6d below are the responses to those items left open as a result of the work session held on October 23 with the County and City staffs. The numbers/format is as used on the summary letter of October 18. Items we believe to be resolved, via changes made on drawings, etc., as submitted herewith, as agreed to in our letter of October 18, and as discussed on October 23 have been shaded in this present letter. As you requested, attached herewith are: • Fifteen (15) copies of the Plat, Site Plan, and Construction Drawings. • Eight (8) copies of additional documents: ✓ The re -drafted (10/19/2001) Development Agreement. ✓ The Notice to Prospective Purchasers .... ✓ The (yet -to -be recorded) easement for the sidewalk connecting the project to the Trilby Road area. • A copy of the variance request letter to Roxanne Hayes and Sherri Wamhoff for four (4) variances from standards, on the administrative basis, which was also discussed on October 23. We wish to express our appreciation for processing these requests in this far more expeditious manner. • A copy of a memo (October 17, 2001) from the Poudre Fire Authority, clarifying their letter dated May 14, 2001. The memo confirms that none of the proposed buildings need be fitted with sprinklers. • A draft of the proposed Annexation Agreement. I understand that its approval process is through City Current Planning, and I am providing the draft document for their review concurrently with this letter. Status of the Review Comments is as follows. Items that we believe to be resolved, via changes made on drawings as submitted herewith, as acknowledged in our response letter of October 18, and as discussed on October 23 have been shaded in this present letter. Mr. Matt Lafferty October 18, 2001 Page 12 4. The minor changes under Sections 19, 26, and 27 have been made. (KEM Builders, LLC — Dave Brown) ■ City of Fort Collins Traffic Operations (Ward Stanford) — October 15 Phases 1 and 2 of the Fossil Lake Second are just now being constructed. The CR 36 / Trilby Road connection will be constructed, as all plans and agreements indicate, prior to the (later) construction of Phases 3 and4. These are commitments of Everline LLC, as developer of Fossil Lake Second. (KEM Builders, LLC — Dave Brown) Thanks again, Matt, for your assistance. As soon as the October 23 meeting is concluded, I need all of the assistance I can get in moving forward as quickly as possible. There really are no major issues here of any sort. It's time to facilitate our being able to get to work. Sincerely, KEM Builders, LLC David S. Brown, Project Manager DSB/s Attachment cc: Larimer County — Planning Department, Russ Legg Larimer County — Engineering Department, Traci Downs City of Fort Collins — Planning Department, Troy Jone City of Fort Collins — Engineering Department, Sheri Wamhoff North Star Design, Inc. — Patricia Kroetch Aller-Lingle Architects PC — Brad Massey King Surveyors, Inc. — Larry Pepik Mr. Matt Lafferty October 18, 2001 Page 11 ■ City of Fort Collins Current Planning (Troy Jones) — October 8 1. We do not anticipate that the County will issue any building permits. Given the timeline we have been left with, and our understanding of immediate subsequent annexation, we anticipate that all building plan reviews, permitting, and COs will be under the auspices of the City. We certainly hope that the approval process will not be further delayed or complicated such as to negate this anticipation. (KEM Builders, LLC — Dave Brown) 2. We agree to secure the Annexation Agreement upon final approval. (KEM Builders, LLC — Dave Brown) 3. We believe the Plat properly reflects that Tract D, as relabeled as per comments above, as a, "Utility, Drainage, Access, and Landscape Easement." That "access" encompasses pedestrian use and no further delineation should be required. An easement is being provided for that walk section (from between Lots 3 and 4) which connects the subject property to Trilby Road. (KEM Builders, LLC — Dave Brown) 4. The suggested change has been added to the "Notice to Prospective Buyers ... ", to the paragraph describing the Annexation Agreement. (KEM Builders, LLC — Dave Brown) 5. No comment 6-14 All comments from Stormwater are being resolved via direct conversation between Basil Harridan and Patricia Kroetch. Relative to comment #11, our response is the same as under#19 in the preceding section: We believe that County requirements (i.e. centerline profiles) are adequate and we request that the submission be approved as is in this regard. (North Star Design — Patricia Kroetch) ■ Larimer County Attorney (Jeannine Haag) — October 13 1. The clarifying sentence has been added as the fourth paragraph of the Agreement. (KEM Builders, LLC — Dave Brown) 2. As we understand the process, the City is not a signatory, but has had full review and consultation as to the adequacy of the Agreement. We also understand that the Annexation Agreement for Fossil Lake PUD Third should be structured to address the necessary Development Agreement elements, in a manner similar to the Annexation Agreement being structured for Fossil Lake Second. If the County Attorney's office feels that the City cannot be bound by the agreement as structured, perhaps in combination with the Annexation Agreement, but should be, then we would suggest that as an issue to be rectified jointly by the County and City attorney's offices--- (but not at the expense of further delay on the approval of this project!!). (KEM Builders, LLC — Dave Brown) 3. A statement, as suggested, has been added under Section 3. (KEM Builders, LLC — Dave Brown) Mr. Matt Lafferty Page 10 October 18, 2001 r Aller-Lingle letter of 8/21/01 (Review Criteria) 1. This project's connection to the (future) trail is shown at 8 feet, as previously agreed. Drawings and the project narrative have been altered so as not to indicate any width for the (future) trail, as this has not been determined nor is its installation the applicant's responsibility. (KEM Builders, LLC — Dave Brown) (North Star Design — Patricia Kroetch) (Aller-Lingle Architects — Brad Massey) 2. The narrative has been altered as indicated. (Alley -Lingle Architects — Brad Massey) 3. The narrative has been altered as indicated to reflect consistency in sidewalk width statements. (Alley -Lingle Architects — Brad Massey) Development Agreement The reference has been changed to read as follows: "Use of the open space is largely passive, with the exception of an 8-foot bicycle -pedestrian path connecting the development with the proposed regional trail at the southern boundary of the project." Reference to any width for the (future) trail has been omitted from this submission, as the width has not been determined nor is its installation the applicant's responsibility. (KEM Builders, LLC — Dave Brown) 2. Section 24 of the Agreement has been altered to reflect that the necessary improvements to adjacent portions of Fossil Lake 2nd must also be in place. (KEM Builders, LLC —Dave Brown) 3. Section 26 of the Agreement has been slightly altered, as suggested. (KEM Builders, LLC — Dave Brown) 4. Section 10 has been changed as requested. (KEM Builders, LLC — Dave Brown) 5. Section 18 has been changed as requested. (KEM Builders, LLC — Dave Brown) 6. If such an inspection statement were to be included, it would probably be better placed under Section 10. However, since Section 10 already provides for inspections by licensed engineers, the streets are private, all maintenance responsibilities are private, and since (appropriately) the City is divesting itself of any and all responsibility for the streets, why does the City inspect them? What action could be required subsequent to such inspection under such conditions? 7. Section 22 has been changed as requested. (KEM Builders, LLC — Dave Brown) Mr. Matt Lafferty Page 9 October 18, 2001 residence via the garages (a total of 96), the Site Plan also provides for a total of 21 designated, marked parking spaces, and the design provides for an additional 54 driveway spaces. There are in reality, therefore, a total of 75 spaces other than garage spaces. From any logical perspective, a total of 171 fully functional parking spaces for 48 dwelling units is, at the very least, adequate. That computes to over 3.5 spaces per unit. Further imposition of this standard at this point in the review process will destroy the entire site plan. We are requesting that this very unreasonable standard not be imposed. (KEM Builders, LLC — Dave Brown) (North Star Design — Patricia Kroetch) (Aller-Lingle Architects — Brad Massey) 27. A typical cross section detail for the internal roads has been added to the final plans, as requested. (North Star Design — Patricia Kroetch) 28. Site and Utility Plans have been modified to indicate (typical) 18 foot wide driveway widths. Station offset information has also been included. (North Star Design — Patricia Kroetch) (Alter -Lingle Architects — Brad Massey) 29. In a logical and practical engineering and site context, the cul-de-sac slopes presented are fully adequate. Holding to a rigid, printed, minimum standard requirement in an instance such as this is an example of how not to facilitate a logical, efficient planning process. We are requesting that this standard not be so unnecessarily imposed. (KEM Builders, LLC — Dave Brown) (North Star Design — Patricia Kroetch) Details 30. The non -applicable portion of the sidewalk drawing detail has been eliminated. (North Star Design — Patricia Kroetch) 31. We do not believe that driveway cuts will contribute any appreciable improvement to the site. Costs, however, would be significantly increased. We also believe that the rollover curb and gutter as planned will help in reducing vehicle speeds. Once again, as these are private streets and driveways, we are requesting that this recommendation not be imposed. (KEM Builders, LLC— Dave Brown) (North Star Design —Patricia Kroetch) 32. We agree to the installation of the ramp, in the same design and standard format as consistent with the other portions of the Fossil Lake PUD. (North Star Design — Patricia Kroetch) (Alley -Lingle Architects — Brad Massey) 33. Details of 7-20C, 7-14, 7-33, 22-1, and 7-21 or 22 have been added where applicable. (North Star Design — Patricia Kroetch) Notice to Prospective Purchasers ...... 1. The statement on page 2 relative to roads and streets has been changed as suggested. (KEM Builders, LLC — Dave Brown) Mr. Matt Lafferty October 18, 2001 Page 8 19. We believe that County requirements (i.e. centerline profiles) are adequate and request that the submission be approved as is in this regard. (North Star Design — Patricia Kroetch) 20. The curve length has been changed to 70 feet. (North Star Design — Patricia Kroetch) 21. Actual in -the -field realities do not always allow strict compliance with extremely specific standards such as this one. The flows are adequate as presented, but further accommodation towards the 1 % will be made where practical and possible given the overall configurations. (North Star Design — Patricia Kroetch) 22. The horizontal control figures provided will verify the flowline radius at a minimum of 45 feet. Beyond this, the arbitrary imposition of generalized standards will not serve to facilitate and create a desirable and practical site plan. These islands and cul-de-sacs were designed to moderate the visual/aesthetic impacts of the necessary hardscape. The islands are not typical of those configurations and locations for which the standards were developed (i.e., there are no cross streets; very light traffic volume, etc.). The configurations and dimensions of the cul-de-sac islands are an integral conceptual element. They have been previously discussed at some length. Imposition of the indicated standards would have a significant, cumulative, negative impact on the site plan. We desire the somewhat tighter radii, which will serve to slow traffic down in these denser -use cul-de-sacs (i.e., 10-12 units adjoining, as opposed to 6-7 in the usual residential cul-de-sac). The Poudre Fire Authority has approved the radii indicated for the center islands. As they are fully functional for the site conditions and meet the primary health and safety requirements, we do not believe there is a viable issue here. We are requesting that these conditions not be imposed. (KEM Builders, LLC — Dave Brown) (North Star Design — Patricia Kroetch) 23. A curve table has been provided as requested, as part of the horizontal control data. (North Star Design — Patricia Kroetch) 24. The necessary data has been provided as requested, as part of the horizontal control data. (North Star Design — Patricia Kroetch) 25. Island curbs have been specified as outflows; and spot elevations as appropriate and a horizontal control plan have been added to the drawings. (North Star Design —Patricia Kroetch) 26. This issue has been thoroughly discussed during earlier conceptual reviews, within the context of logical site planning. There was clear conceptual assent that the parking being provided was adequate. Once again, these are private streets and driveways. The most significant issue here seems, frankly, to be an inane standard that, on the one hand, requires a 20 foot driveway, 'so that vehicles can park without obstructing walkways' and, on the other hand, will not allow the parking spaces thus created (mandated) to be counted towards the parking requirements. We maintain that this standard is totally unreasonable, particularly within the context of the elements often required in a successful, aesthetically pleasing site. HOA rules require that garages be used for vehicle parking only. In addition to the two spaces thus provided for each Mr. Matt Lafferty October 18, 2001 Page 7 Gradinq and Drainage Plans 12. The property through which the connecting walk to Trilby Road is to be constructed is fully developed. An easement will be platted and recorded by separate document to accommodate this connecting walk. (North Star Design — Patricia Kroetch) (KEM Builders, LLC — Dave Brown) (King Surveyors — Larry Pepik) 13. We do not believe these are valid comments for this project, and particularly at this stage of the review. These are private streets and driveways, and the impetus for that was to enable accommodation of the design elements integral to the site and product. These are conceptual comments and should have been raised earlier in the review process. Further, the enforcement of such details becomes quite arbitrary when overall density and design requirements are considered, and such requirements at this juncture of the process would require a very significant site re -design. We cannot discern any physical (engineering) or health and safety implications relative to these standards on this site. We are requesting that these unnecessary restrictions not be imposed. (KEM Builders, LLC — Dave Brown) (North Star Design — Patricia Kroetch) (Aller-Lingle Architects — Brad Massey) 14. The retaining wall has been relocated closer to Building "I" and completely clear of the access easement. Site and Landscape drawings have been coordinated with Utility drawings to so reflect. (North Star Design —Patricia Kroetch) (Aller-Lingle Architects — Brad Massey) 15. See item #10 under Stormwater comments. Street Plan and Profile 16. We do not believe these are valid comments for this project, and particularly at this stage of the review. This is a private street development, and the impetus for that was to enable accommodation of the design elements integral to the site and product. These are conceptual comments and should have been noted earlier in the process. The enforcement of such details become quite arbitrary when overall density and design requirements are considered. Such requirements at this juncture of the process would require a significant site re -design. We cannot discern any physical (engineering) or health and safety implications relative to these standards on this site. We are requesting that these conditions not be imposed. (KEM Builders, LLC — Dave Brown) (North Star Design — Patricia Kroetch) (Aller-Lingle Architects — Brad Massey) 17. We agree to the installation of the ramp, in the same design and standard format as consistent with the other portions of the Fossil Lake PUD. (North Star Design —Patricia Kroetch) (Aller-Lingle Architects — Brad Massey) 18. Spot elevations, as appropriate, and a horizontal control plan have been added to the drawings. (North Star Design — Patricia Kroetch) Mr. Matt Lafferty October 18, 2001 Page 6 4. We do not believe these requirements are necessary for this site. These are private streets. They are low volume, low speed. There are no street intersections. We have provided conceptual compliance as stated in accordance with Landscape Plan comments # 1 and # 2 above. We are requesting that this sight distance easement restriction be waived as unnecessary. (KEM Builders, LLC — Dave Brown) (North Star Design — Patricia Kroetch) (Alter -Lingle Architects — Brad Massey) (King Surveyors — Larry Pepik) 5. The following note has been added to the Plat: "All maintenance of the various tracts described shall be the responsibility of the Village at Fossil Lake Homeowners' Association." (King Surveyors — Larry Pepik) 6. The notice, as presented on the comment sheet, has been added to the Plat. (King Surveyors — Larry Pepik) 7. The arbitrary imposition of generalized standards will not serve to facilitate and create a desirable and practical site plan. These islands and cul-de-sacs were designed to moderate the visual/aesthetic impacts of the necessary hardscape. The islands are not typical of those configurations and locations for which the standards were developed (i.e., there are no cross streets; very light traffic volume, etc.). The configurations and dimensions of the cul-de-sac islands are an integral conceptual element. They have been previously discussed at some length. Imposition of the indicated standards would have a significant, cumulative, negative impact on the site plan. We desire the somewhat tighter radii, which will serve to slow traffic down in these denser -use cul-de- sacs (i.e., 10-12 units adjoining, as opposed to 6-7 in the usual residential cul-de-sac). The Poudre Fire Authority has approved the radii indicated for the center islands. As they are fully functional for the site conditions and meet the primary health and safety requirements, we do not believe there is a viable issue here. We are requesting that these unnecessary restrictions not be imposed. (KEM Builders, LLC — Dave Brown)(King Surveyors — Larry Pepik) Utility Plans 8. Current general notes have been used, where appropriate. (North Star Design — Patricia Kroetch 9. The requested statement per 3.3.1. F has been added. (North Star Design —Patricia Kroetch 10. Construction notes have been added, as appropriate. (North Star Design — Patricia Kroetch 11. The Fort Collins -Loveland Water District and South Fort Collins Sanitation District do not allow non-existent utilities to be designated as existing. Utilities that do exist as of the submission date will be indicated as existing. (North Star Design— Patricia Kroetch) Mr. Matt Lafferty October 18, 2001 Page 5 Landscape Plan These islands have been conceptually discussed previously. The arbitrary imposition of generalized standards will not serve to facilitate and create a desirable and practical site plans. These islands have been designed to moderate the visual/aesthetic impacts of the necessary hardscape. We submit that these islands are not typical of those configurations and locations for which the cited standards were developed (i.e., there are no cross streets; very light traffic volume, etc.). Nonetheless, we have amended Sheet LS2 to indicate that the designs meet line -of -sight requirements. (Aller-Lingle Architects — Brad Massey) 2. The comments above apply again. Nonetheless, the landscaping wall height has been reduced to a maximum of 24". (Aller-Lingle Architects — Brad Massey) Plat The Plat properly reflects and effective re -platting of Fossil Lake Tract "B", whereby individual and/or separate drainage easements have been included within the Tracts of this submission (i.e., all of Tract "D". is properly designated as drainage easement). The Site Plan and utility drawings have been revised so as not to reflect (any) separate drainage easements. (North Star Design — Patricia Kroetch) (Alter -Lingle Architects — Brad Massey) (King Surveyors — Larry Pepik) 2. Our drawings have been changed to indicate this easement in a manner consistent with the plat and plans already approved for Fossil Lake P.U.D. 2nd, which delineate this easement as a 15 foot access easement. Everline LLC, as developer of Fossil Lake 2nd, would assume responsibility for any change in designation of this easement. (North Star Design — Patricia Kroetch) (Aller-Lingle Architects — Brad Massey) (King Surveyors — Larry Pepik) 3. The arbitrary imposition of generalized standards will not serve to facilitate and create a desirable and practical site plan. These islands and cul-de-sacs were designed to moderate the visual/aesthetic impacts of the necessary hardscape. The islands are not typical of those configurations and locations for which the standards were developed (i.e., there are no cross streets; very light traffic volume, etc.). The configurations and dimensions of the cul-de-sac islands are an integral conceptual element. They have been previously discussed at some length. Imposition of the indicated standards would have a significant, cumulative, negative impact on the site plan. We desire the somewhat tighter outside radii, which will serve to slow traffic down in these denser -use cul-de-sacs (i.e., 10-12 units adjoining, as opposed to 6-7 in the usual residential cul-de- sac). The Poudre Fire Authority has approved the radii indicated for the center islands. As they are fully functional for the site conditions and meet the primary health and safety requirements, we do not believe there is a viable issue here. We are requesting that these unnecessary restrictions not be imposed. (KEM Builders, LLC— Dave Brown) (North Star Design — Patricia Kroetch) (Allen -Lingle Architects — Brad Massey) (King Surveyors — Larry Pepik) Mr. Matt Lafferty October 18, 2001 Page 4 3. Previous discussions with the planning staffs resulted in an understanding that connecting walks would be maintained at 4.0 feet with the exception of the walk connecting to Trilby Road that is indicated at 4.5 feet. Applicant has not made any changes in this regard from the plans submitted on August 21. (KEM Builders, LLC — Dave Brown) (Aller-Lingle Architects — Brad Massey) ■ City of Fort Collins Engineering (Sheri Wamhoff) — October 4 Site Plan We do not believe these are valid comments for this project, and particularly at this stage of the review. These are private streets, and the impetus for that was to enable accommodation of the design elements integral to the site and product. These are conceptual comments and should have been raised earlier in the review process. Further, the enforcement of such details becomes quite arbitrary when overall density and design requirements are considered, and such requirements at this juncture of the process would require a very significant site re -design. We cannot discern any physical (engineering) or health and safety implications relative to these standards on this site. We are requesting that these unnecessary restrictions not be imposed. (KEM Builders, LLC — Dave Brown) (North Star Design — Patricia Kroetch) (Aller-Lingle Architects — Brad Massey) 2. We agree to the installation of the ramp, in the same design and standard format as consistent with the other portions of the Fossil Lake PUD. (North Star Design — Patricia Kroetch) (Aller-Lingle Architects — Brad Massey) 3. The mailbox assembly is indicated on both the Utility and Site Plan drawings (on the Building "A" side of Stonewater Drive). Its placement took utility installations into account. The assembly requires a concrete pad only. There will be no utility conflicts. A note has been added on the utility plans to further identify the installation. (North Star Design — Patricia Kroetch) (Alter -Lingle Architects — Brad Massey) 4. The retaining wall has been relocated closer to Building "I" and completely clear of the access easement. Site and Landscape drawings have been coordinated with Utility drawings to so reflect. (North Star Design —Patricia Kroetch) (Aller-Lingle Architects — Brad Massey) 5. A note referencing a (typical) 20-foot set back from back edge of sidewalk to garage doors has been added to the Site Plan. (Aller-Lingle Architects — Brad Massey) 6. The Plat and the Site Plan have been changed so as to reflect the following: Tract "A" = Utility, Drainage, and Access Easement Tracts "B" and "C" = Utility, Drainage, Access, and Landscape Easement Tract "D" = Utility, Drainage, Access, and Landscape Easement (Aller-Lingle Architects — Brad Massey) (King Surveyors — Larry Pepik) Mr. Matt Lafferty Page 3 October 18, 2001 ■ Larimer County Engineering Department (Traci Downs) — September 26 1. A typical cross section detail for the internal roads and cul-de-sacs has been added to the final plans, as requested. (North Star Design — Patricia Kroetch) 2. A horizontal control plan has been added to the final plans, as requested. (North Star Design — Patricia Kroetch) 3. Outfall curbs have been specified at the islands, as requested, and detail provided. The Landscape Plan has been revised to indicate that sleeves will be provided for irrigation water to the islands. (North Star Design — Patricia Kroetch) (Alter -Lingle Architects — Brad Massey) 4. The cross slope for the indicated curb has been re-evaluated and changed to ensure a 1 % minimum. (North Star Design — Patricia Kroetch) 5. The cited curb return grading has.been re-evaluated and altered to ensure minimum standards. (North Star Design — Patricia Kroetch) 6. Notes have been checked against Appendix E and altered where required. (North Star Design — Patricia Kroetch) 7. Calculations have been revised as requested. Riprap has been indicated. Calcs and details have been included in the plan set, as requested. (North Star Design —Patricia Kroetch) 8. We understand that Transportation Expansion Fees (will be) required at the time of building permitting. Since permitting (will) be under the auspices of the City of Fort Collins, is this item properly clarified between the entities? (KEM Builders, LLC — Dave Brown) 9. We understand that drainage fees (will be) required at the time of building permitting. Since permitting (will) be under the auspices of the City of Fort Collins, is this item properly clarified between the entities? (KEM Builders, LLC — Dave Brown) ■ City of Fort Collins Transportation Planning (Tom) — October 3 1. This project's connection to the (future) trail is shown at 8 feet, as previously agreed. Drawings and the project narrative have been altered so as not to indicate any width for the (future) trail, as this has not been determined nor is its installation our responsibility. (KEM Builders, LLC — Dave Brown) (North Star Design — Patricia Kroetch) (Aller- Lingle Architects — Brad Massey) 2. Everline LLC, as developer of Fossil Lake 2nd, will provide the enhanced crosswalk as requested. Applicant's drawings have been changed to so reflect. (North StarDesign— Patricia Kroetch) (Aller-Lingle Architects — Brad Massey) Mr. Matt Lafferty October 18, 2001 Page 2 quickly as possible following the October 23 meeting, and not later than October 26. We are then asking that the necessary approvals be obtained just as quickly as is possible. A copy of the revised Development Agreement (incorporating comments received to date) is also attached. Comments received to date are from the following: ■ Larimer County Engineering Department (Dale Greer) — September 14 1. Boundary monuments and descriptions per CRS 38-51-105 (1)(a) and —106 (f) have been added as requested. (King Surveyors — Larry Pepik) 2. A Basis of Bearings statement per CRS 38-51-106(e) has been added as requested. (King Surveyors — Larry Pepik) 3. The monument record for the North quarter corner of Sec 9 has been reviewed and revised as requested. (King Surveyors — Larry Pepik) ■ Larimer County Planning & Building Department (Katherine Huber) — September 17 The Plat and Site drawings have been revised to reflect the approved street name of Lost Lake Place, and that the stub entering into the project is to remain at Stonewater Drive (as opposed to "Court"). Eighteen (18) copies of the Plat will be provided as requested. (King Surveyors — Larry Pepik) (North Star Design — Patricia Kroetch) (Alley -Lingle Architects — Brad Massey) ■ Fort Collins -Loveland Water District and South Fort Collins Sanitation District (Terry Farrill) — September 15 1. Verification of the formation of the Village at Fossil Lake Homeowners Association is being provided to the District. (KEM Builders, LLC — Dave Brown) 2. We are providing the requested District easement forms. The Plat clearly provides utility easements in all required areas. (KEM Builders, LLC — Dave Brown) 3. The District's signature block has been added to the construction drawings cover sheet, as requested. (North Star Design — Patricia Kroetch) 4. Meter pits have been added for each of the 12 buildings, as requested. (North Star Design — Patricia Kroetch) 5. A corrected test pressure of 150 psi has been included, as requested, and thrust blocks adjusted accordingly. (North Star Design — Patricia Kroetch) 6. The (typ) curb stop diagram has been eliminated, as requested. (North Star Design — Patricia Kroetch) KEM Builders, LLC 3000 South College Avenue, Suite 103 Fort Collins, CO 80525 October 18, 2001 Mr. Matt Lafferty Larimer County Planning Department P. O. Box 1190 Fort Collins, CO 80522-1190 HAND DELIVER A Colorado Limited Liability Company Telephone: (970) 223-4900 Fax: (970) 223-4901 RE: Fossil Lake P.U.D. Third Filing Comment responses from August 21, 2001, submission Dear Matt: As you know, comments from the City of Fort Collins were significantly delayed. (They stated they did not receive the plan sets for review.) Once again, we are faced with the very real need of expediting this process to every extent possible. As you and I have discussed, the following are our responses relative to specific comments received from the departments indicated. (The responsible development teams member(s) are indicated in italics following each response.) As noted in my conversations with you, we believe several of the comments from City staff are unreasonable, particularly at this point in this review process, and we are asking that you and your staff assist in ameliorating the impacts of such requests. Please keep me advised of any additional input in this regard. We'll look forward to finalizing these resolutions at the joint staff meeting scheduled for Tuesday, October 23, and then proceeding with all possible haste to actual construction. Schmidt Earth Builders, Inc., will be doing our development work and is well under way with site work for Everline, LLC, for the remainder of Fossil Lake 2nd. We are seeking clearances to proceed with initial work (e.g., overlot grading and initial utility staking) just as soon as possible, and I have already discussed this possibility with Traci Downs. Again, any assistance you can provide in this regard will be most appreciated. Also, following my discussions with Traci Downs and (via Traci) Sherri Wamhoff, Terry Farrill of Fort Collins -Loveland Water District and South Fort Collins Sanitation did approve changes to the water and sewer stubs from Fossil Lake 2nd to our site, allowing that work to continue unabated and avoiding any later need to tear up newly installed streets. The water and sewer lines into Fossil Lake 3rd have been installed as so approved. Concurrent with submission of this letter, the changes indicated are being made to the project documents. It is our intent to have the completed, changed documents back in your hands as To: Sheri Wamhoff Basil Hamdan Tom Reiff From: Troy Jones Date: November 5, 2001 Re: County Referral - Fossil Lake PUD, 3`d Filing I received the following 3 items from KEM Homes responding to comments regarding the final plat review of the Fossil Lake,PUD, 3`d Filing: 1. A letter dated October 18`h to Matt Lafferty responding to each of the outstanding comments. 2. A letter dated November 2°d to Matt Lafferty updating responses to each of the outstanding comments. 3. A draft Petition for Annexation including a lengthy section on conditions of annexation (including language on streets, stormdrainage improvements etc.). Please review and respond to these attached documents with regard to your department's outstanding comments and any of the conditions of annexation that pertain to your department. I'd like to discuss the project at staff review on 11/14/01, if that time schedule works for you. Let me know if that time frame doesn't work. ,a.