Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutSILO STORAGE (EAST VINE STORAGE) - ODP - ODP120003 - SUBMITTAL DOCUMENTS - ROUND 1 - CORRESPONDENCE-CONCEPTUAL REVIEW• It would be beneficial to contact Karen McWilliams, historic. preservation planner in the Advance Planning Department, to determine if there is any significant historic value to the property (buildings, etc.) that will be affected by redevelopment or new development. Karen can be reached at 224-6078. • The proposed new uses on this property are: an enclosed mini -storage facility; and, an outdoor storage facility. A neighborhood meeting may or may not be required for this development request, depending on whether the PDP request is to be a Type 1 or Type 2 review, 9. This development request will be subject to the Development Review Fee Schedule that is available in the Planning & Zoning Department office. The fees are due at the time of submittal of the required documents for the appropriate development review process (overall development plan, project development plan, final compliance, etc.) by City staff and affected outside reviewing agencies. 10. This development proposal is subject to the requirements as set forth in the City's LUC, specifically Articles 2. Administration (Development Review Procedures), Article 3. General Development Standards, and Division 4.28 - Industrial Zoning District. Copies of Article 3 and Division 4.28 are available in the Current Planning Department or on the City of Fort Collins website @ www.fcgov.com. Go to City Services A-Z, then Departments, then Planning & Zoning. 11. The proposed land uses (self -storage and outdoor storage) will be subject to an administrative (Type 1) review. If any uses are proposed that would be subject to a Planning and Zoning Board (Type 2) review, as set forth in Section 4.28(8)(3) of the LUC, then the developer/applicant may be required to hold a neighborhood meeting prior to formal submittal of the project. This is set forth in Section 2.2.2 of the LUC. The required notification area, depending on the land uses, is set forth in Section 2.2.6 of the LUC. In this case (if there is more than 25,000 square feet of new non-residential uses), the notification area would be a minimum of 1,000' in all directions from the property boundaries. Please contact Steve Olt, at 221-6341, to assist you in setting a date, time, and location for the meeting if one is requested or necessary. 12. The City's Planning & Zoning Department will coordinate the development review process. The required submittal package will be submitted to the Development Review Center, at 281 North College Avenue, and distributed accordingly to other City departments and outside reviewing agencies involved in development review. 8 - ,yj /f) (,(' (f% 2 roc{F° TI JP.P�j�S/ T+l�:.�'�:.f%fr! •fit g. A copy of the Aerial Site View (provided by the applicant) of the property, showing the required Cooper Slough buffers, is attached to this comment letter. Please contact Dana, at 224-6143, if you have questions about these comments. 7. Carle Dann of the Poudre Fire Authority offered the following comments: a. Water supply and emergency access to this development will be required. b. All structures must be within 300' of a fire hydrant. C. The drive aisles must be Fire Lanes, with emergency access easements, at least 20' wide unobstructed. d. The drive aisles must be able to support 40-ton trucks. At least recycled asphalt surfaces will be needed. e. PFA must be able to get through the electric gate; therefore, a Knox Box is required. There is a lock system that could work but it is not as good. Please contact Carle, at 416-2869, if you have questions about these comments. 8. The Planning & Zoning Department has significant comments regarding this proposed development: • With redevelopment or new development being proposed, please be aware of the requirements set forth in Section 3.5.1 - Building and Project Compatibility in the LUC. Also, if any buildings are to be more than 40' in height then the development request is subject to a Building Height Review as set forth in Section 3.5.1(G) of the LUC. • If other than industrial uses, any new non-residential development on this property would be subject to the requirements and standards set forth in Section 3.5.3 - Mixed -Use, Institutional and Commercial Buildings of the LUC. • The request will have to comply with all the applicable regulations and standards set forth in Article 3 - General Development Standards and the Permitted Uses, Land Use Standards and Development Standards in Division 4.28 - Industrial District of the LUC. • This property is located within the City's adopted East Mulberry Corridor Plan study area; therefore, a development request will be subject to the rules, regulations, requirements, standards, and guidelines set forth in this plan. r L, %�:c+.^[i' :d�r� . i/��/.Cl ��i'1" ✓Cya,:,L. 'll.:a�9ia*..... LX%Yv-t.G,r..w-- V � 6. Dana Leavitt of the Natural Resources Depart ent offered the following comments: a. The East Mulberry Corridor Plan calls for a consistent policy for the protection and preservation of the Cooper Slough. As such, it is incumbent upon the applicant to propose similar protection methods for Cooper Slough. b. Per the corridor plan a regional trail is envisioned adjacent to the Cooper Slough. C. Native plants and grasses should be used in the Landscape Plan, particularly within the buffers for the Cooper slough and associated wetlands. d. This development request will be subject to a PDP review. Therefore, it will be subject to the requirements set forth in the following sections of the LUC: • Section 3.4.1(D)(1) - An Ecological Characterization Study must be submitted to the City for review. Several such studies have been completed for various sections of the Cooper Slough and will be relevant to this application. • Section 3.4.1(D)(2) - A Wetland Boundary Delineation must be submitted to the City for review. • Section 3.4.1(E) - This request will be subject to the Buffer Zone Standards set forth in this section. There is a 300' buffer zone standard along the Cooper Slough: In addition associated wetlands require buffering based upon the size and value of the wetland. • Section 3A.1(F) - This request will be subject to the sensitive or specially valued plant and / or animal species requirements set forth in this section. • Section 3.4.1(1) - The Design and Aesthetics of any development on this property must comply with the standards set forth in this section, such as fencing, lighting and mitigation of visual impacts. e. As the emergency access is required to be an all-weather surface capable of carrying a 40-ton fire truck, it is recommended that porous pavement be considered for this project. f. Any future upstream improvements will not affect the requirements for a buffer zone for the Cooper Slough. 6 e. On -site detention is required, with a 2-year historic release rate, for water quantity and extended detention is required for water ug ality treatment if there is an increase in imperviousness greater than 1,000 square feet on the property. f. The majority of the property is in the FEMA-designated Cooper Slough floodplain. There is both flood play and flood fringe on the site. g. Non-residential construction and outdoor storage is allowed in the flood fringe. Any structure must have the lowest floor and all HVAC & electrical equipment elevated or floodproofed at least 18" above the 100-year flood level. h. Non-residential use is only allowed in the floodway if "no -rise" to the water surface elevation can be shown. Both the structures and the outdoor slorage must be included in the analysis. Critical facilities are not allowed. Any waste facility for the RV's must be out of the floodplain. j. Each structure and site element in the floodplain will require a Floodplain Use Permit and $25.00 permit fee. If any floodplain modeling is done to show "no -rise" then the perinit fee is $325.00. k. A FEMA Elevation Certificate or a Floodproofing Certificate is required to be submitted and approved prior to the issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy for each structure. The floodplain administration contact is Marsha Hilmes-Robinson, at 224-6036. Please contact Wes, at 416-2418, if you have questions about these comments. 5. Alan Rutz of the Light & Power Department offered the following comments: a. The City has power on the south side of East Vine Drive in this location. There is an existing electric transformer on this property, which currently has single-phase power. b. Please coordinate any new transformer and meter locations with Light & Power. C. The normal electric development charges will apply to this development request. d. A C-1 Commercial Form may be needed to help determine the power needs for this development. Please contact Alan, at 224-6153, if you have questions about these comments. 5 Redman Drive to the south, as they are developable or redevelopable properties. n. The drive'Nay ar ra parking area for the office for the facility must be paved. o. A Development Agreement (between the developer/property owner and the City) and a Development Construction Permit will be required with development on this'property. P. Because of signifk:ant ;,rues associated with development on this property, ; it is being recommended that the applicant schedule a Design Scoping Meeting (or Extent of Design Meeting) with City staff and affected outside I evi caving agencies to discuss this project before submittal of the ; aql Jrcd PDP documentation package. q. More comments will follow when an actual site !a, -out as part of a PDP submittal is provided. r. The City's adopted Transportation Development Review Fee will apply to this development. Plea se contact Susan, at 221-6605, for the actual amount of the fie that will be due. The fee is to be paid to the Engineering Department at time of submittal of the PDP. Please contact Susan, at 221-6605, if you have questions about these comments. 3. Roger Buffington of tie City's Water/Wastewater Department indicated that this property is in the East Larimer County Water District (ELCO) and the Boxelder Sanitation District service areas. Please contact these two service providers directly for infermntion about their requirements. 4. Wes Lamarque of the Stormwater Utility offered the following comments: a. The design of t lis Site must conform to the drainage basin design of the Boxelder & Cooper Slough Master Drainage Plan, as well as the City's Design Criteria and Construction Standards. b. The City-wide development fee is $3,070 per acre ($0.0705 per square foot) for new impervious area over 350 square feet. No fee is charged for existing impervious area. The fee is to be paid at the time of issuance of building permits. C. The site is on Stormwater Utility Inventory Map #15G. A copy of the map can be obtained at the City's Utilities Building, 700 Wood Street. d. The standard drainage and erosion control report and construction plans are required for any new development on this property. The documents must be prepared by a professional engineer registered in the State of Colorado. 4 thirty (30) pe.-cent of the building frontage. Such a building face shall not consist of a blank wall." d. The development will be subject to the minimum landscaped yard standard set forth ir. Section 4.8(E)(3)(a)2 of the LUC. This section states: "A minimum thirty-foot deep landscaped yard shall be provided along all arteria! streets, and along any district boundary line that does not adjoin a (esidential land use. Is a district boundary line abuts upon or is within a street right-of-way, then the required landscaped yard shall commence at the street right-of-way line on the district side of the street, rather than at the district boundary line. This requirement shall not apply to development plans that comply with the standards contained in Section 3.5.3." e. The deve!opment will be subject to the screening of storage standard set forth in Section 4.8(E)(3)(b)1 of the LUC. This section states: "Storage, lo;adin; and work operations shall be screened from view along all district boundary lines and all public streets." The internal driveways & vel iicular use areas in this development are not required to be paved, other than the parking area for the office for the self -storage. g. Section 3.2.2(C)(4) of the LUC sets forth the bicycle parking requirements for development. h. Section 3.2.2(K)(2)(a) of the LUC sets forth the maximum parking allowance for tl ie office use iri the facility. The required number of handicapped parking spaces for the office use will apply to this development proposal, per Section 3.2.2(K)(5)(d) of the LUC. j. Section 3.5.2(B) of the LUC sets forth the requirements for areas and design of any trash/recycle enclosures. Please contact Jenny, at 416-2313, if you have questions about these comments. Susan Joy of the Engineering Department offered the following comments: a. The standard utility plan submittal requirements will apply to this development request. b. Street oversizing fees will apply to this development request. The fees are based on vehicle trip generation for the proposed land uses in the i to 0 t 6aCC NY—_ _i'1F 1A REVIEW STAFF COMMENTS City of Fort Collins MEETING DATE: September 10, 2007 ITEM: 38011� East Vine Drive — Self -Storage arid Outdoor Storage APPLICANT: Bob Paterson P.O. Box 461 Windsor, CO. 80550 LAND USE DATA: Request for Self -Storage and Outdoo Storage on a partially developed property at 3805 East Vine Drive. The proposed new CO,000 — 80,000 square feet of enclosed self - storage would occur on the cmrently developed 5 - 6 acres, being a portion of a 36-acre property that is located on the south side of East Vine Drive between the Cooper Slough drainage area (to the west) and the Interstate 25, West Frontage Road (to the east). The outdoor storage of motor homes, boats, and campers. would be on the balance of developable ground. The two existing single-family residences on the property would eliminated. The entire 36-acre property is in the I - Industrial Zoning District. COMMENTS: Jenny Nuckols of tlls Zoning Department offered the following comments: a. This property is in the I - Industrial Zoning District in the City of Fort Collins. The I District permits enclosed mini -storage facilities and outdoor storage facilities, subject to an administrative (Type 1) review, which results in a public hearing, where a decision on the development proposal is given. b. As a Type 1 review, the request will have to comply with all the regulations and standards set forth in Article 3 - General Development Standards and the Permitted Uses, Land Use Standards and Development Standards in Division 4.28 - Industrial District of the Land Use Code (LUC). A PDP request is also subject to the rules, regulations, standards, anU guidelines set forth in the East Mulberry Corridor Plan adopted by City Council. C. The development will be subject to the building orientation standard set forth in Section 4.28(E)(2)(b) of the LUC. This section states: "Along arterial streets and any other streets that directly connect to other districts, buildings shall be sited so that a building face abuts upon the required minimum landscaped yard for at least COMMUNITY PLANNING AND FNVIRONNIFNT�ALS`,__."+"_CS 1 2,81N.0,11c,•eAve. P.C`.Fo, 7`0 Fo,tCollins, COS05__'_O,SO (970)221-67�n PLANNING DEPARI"\ I FN r Plannin,,;, Pl -:­- City of Fort Collins September 14, 2007 Bob Paterson P.O. Box 461 Windsor, CO. 80550 Dear Bob: e2vices For your information, attached is a copy or the 3taff's comments for 3805 East Vine Drive — Self -Storage arid Outdoor Storage, which was reviewed by the Conceptual Review Team on Monday, Sspb_ rnber 10, 2007. This is a request Self-Stpraye aid Outdoor Storage on a partially developed property at 3805 East Vine Drive. The proposed new 60,000 — 80,000 square feet of enclosed self - storage would occur on the currently developed 5 - 6 acres, being a portion of a 36-acre property that is located or. the s3uth side of East Vine Drive between the Cooper Slough drainage area (to the west) and ;hp Iritcrstate 25, West Frontage Road (to the east). The outdoor storage of motor homes, �o3ts, and campers would be on the balance of developable ground. The two existing tingle -family residences on the property would be eliminated. The entire 36-acre property is in the I - Industrial Zoning District. The comments are informally oftEred by staff to assist you in preparing the detailed components of a project applicatiun. Modifications and additions to these comments may be made at the time of formal review of this project. The City's Current Planning Dep�,rtrnent coordinates the development review process. I will be the Project Planner for ;/cur project. I will be commenting as well as assisting in the coordination proces3. If ycu h_*e any questions regarding these comments or the next steps in the review process, please feel free to call me at 221-6341. S i nc e re ly, Steve Olt, City Planner cc: Stormwater Traffic Operations Project File 281 North College Avenue • PO. Pox 5£30 i c„ t _o;lins, CO SQE 22-0580 ^ (970) 221-6750 • FAX (970) 416-2020 8. Item 5. Historic significance. The Owners have discussed with Karen McWilliams about the property. She indicated that she saw no particular need for preservation of structures on the site. The Owners informed her that one of the houses was within the required R.O.W. for Vine Drive and would be removed. The house further south would be maintained as the office/caretakers unit. The outbuildings would all be removed. 8. Item 6. The proposed uses are enclosed mini -storage and out -door storage. A Type 2 development will require a neighborhood meeting. Only Type 1 uses are being proposed. 9. Development Review Fee is required for this PDP. Understood. 10. Requirements of LUC Article 2, 3 and 4.28 are to be met by this submission. These sections of the Code are addressed by this submission. 11. A neighborhood Meeting may be required if the proposal is a Type 2. The uses proposed are all Type 1. 12. Submission of development packages will be to the Planning & Zoning Department. Understood. We believed that within our submission you will find the concerns raised sufficiently addressed for your review. Sincerely; Ric F nan 6.f Any future up -stream drainage improvements will not affect requirement for buffer of the Cooper Slough. Understood. 6.g. Cooper Slough setback boundaries provided to the Owner. We have reviewed the minimum and maximum setback drawing that you provided the Owner and have discussed these with you. We have delineated a setback from the Slough and wetlands on the plan. POUDRE FIRE AUTHORITY 7.a. Water supply and emergency access is required. This has been provided in the design. 7.b. All structures need to be within 300 feet of a hydrant. Our hydrant spacing meets this requirement. 7.c. Drive isles must be minimum of 20 feet wide, be emergency easements, and designated as fire lanes. This has been provided. 7.d. Drive isles must support 40-ton trucks and be at minimum recycled asphalt. So provided. 7.e. Gates require a Knox Box. Plan shows the location of the Knox Box and notes the requirement as well. PLANNING & ZONING Item 1. Building compatibility as per Section 3.5.1 and building height. We believe that the variation of materials, building massing, and colors provides the compatibility called for in the standards. No building will be more than forty feet high. Item 2. Other than industrial uses will change review type. Only the industrial consistent uses as shown at Concept Review are requested with this submission. 8. Item 3. Plan must meet all requirements of Article 3 and 4.28 of the LUC. We believe that we have met the criteria of these articles. 8. Item 4. East Mulberry Corridor. We have reviewed these requirements and incorporated the standards where warranted. openspace. All drainage released to the Slough will be processed through an extended detention water quality pond. 6.b. The Corridor Plan requires a regional trail be constructed. We see the logical place for the trail is on the west side of the Slough. This will disturb the least amount of wetlands which are found on the south and east part of this property. The trail can be more direct and have a more logical path if located on the west side of the Slough. Since no trail exist at this time it would be unwise to construct a trail that just starts and stops at this property. We have identified a trail easement on the plan and potential continuity of the trail off -site. 6.c. Native grasses and plants should be used within the landscape plan. We have included native grasses, plants and tree species in areas of our plan that provide a transition between natural areas and the built environment. We see no intrusion into the Cooper Slough, wetland areas, Cooper Slough setback, wetland setback, and the floodway. We plan no change to the turf cover for these areas. 6.d. The property is subject to the LUC Standards for environment as specifically found in Section 3.4.1 3.4.1(D)(1) We have provided a preliminary ecological study of the property. We have reviewed and provided studies from adjacent properties as they provide continuity of the Slough. We have reviewed City documents for the Cooper Slough and included aspects into the plan that apply. 3.4.1(D)(2) A wetland Boundary Delineation as provided by Cedar Creek Associates and reviewed by you is provided. This delineation has been shown on the plan. 3.4.1(E) Buffer for Cooper Slough and wetland areas is required. These buffers, as we discussed, as to sizes has been provided on this plan. 3.4.1(F) The proposal is required to provide species sensitivity for plants and animals. These studies will be provided at final due to the time of year that they need to be preformed. 3.4.1(I) Design aesthetics as to fencing, lighting, visual impact apply to this project We believe that we have addressed the interface on native environment to built environment in a sensitive manor. We believe that by variation in scale, materials, color and proportions that the buildings preserve the rural character of the native environment. We have limited the amount of lighting provided on the property in number and size. All sources of light are shielded type restricting visual contact with the light source. The landscaping provides a buffer that enhances the native environment by providing plant species that would typically be found in the transition from water dominant area to dryland areas. 6.e. Consider porous pavement for required all weather emergency access ways. We have taken this under advisement and are examining the life cycle costing of these paving solutions. 4.g. Non-residential uses and outdoor storage is allowed in the flood fringe with the lowest floor level 18" above the 100 year flood level. This is provided for all new and reused construction. 4.h. Non-residential uses are allowed in the Flood Plain if `no -rise' is proven. Proof of no -rise to the flood plain is not provided since no development in the floodway is shown. 4.i. Critical Facilities No waste dump facility for RV's is provided on this property. 4.j. Each Structure and site element in the floodplain will require a Floodplain Use Permit. Understood. 4.k. FEMA Certificates are required to be submitted and approved prior to C.O. for each structure. Understood. 4.1. Floodplain administrator is Marsha Hilmes-Robinson. Understood. LIGHT & POWER 5.a. City power is provided on the south side of Vine. There is an existing transformer, single phase serving this site. Understood. 5.b. Coordinate meter and transformer locations. This has been provided. 5.c. Normal development charges will be collected. Understood. 5.d. C-1 maybe required. We will coordinate this issue. NATURAL RESOURCES 6.a. The East Mulberry Corridor Plan calls for a consistent policy to protect the Cooper Slough. We are preserving the Cooper Slough as it traverses the property by leaving it in its native state. We are also providing a varied setback that will be preserved as native grassland that setup a preservation buffer space that is a no development area. We see this area as an area set apart for no human impact and as a dedicated 2.n. Paving. Access drive to Vine, interior drive isles for the mini -storage, and parking for the office/caretaker are to be asphalt paved. 2.o. Development Agreement. We understand that a Development agreement between the Developers and the City will be required. 2.p. Design Scoping Meeting. 2.q. No layout was provided so additional comments may follow. Understood. 2.r. Transportation Development Fee will be required for a PDP. Understood. WATER / WASTE WATER 3. ELCO provides the water for this property and Boxelder provides the sanitary for the property. Coordination directly with these agencies id required. Understood. STORMWATER 4.a. Design as per Boxelder & Cooper Slough Drainage Plan as well as City Standards. This submission provides the required detail. 4.b. Drainage Development Fee will be charged at time of Building Permit. Understood. 4.c. Site information is found on SUIM # 15G. Thank you. 4.d. Standard drainage, erosion control reports and construction plans are required. These are provided with the plan submission. 4.e. On site detention and water quality treatment is required. This is provided in the documents. 4.f. The majority of the property is within the FEMA Cooper Slough floodplain. There is both floodway and flood fringe on the property. Understood. 2.e. The property will be responsible for providing all utilities underground. All above ground electric utilities will be placed underground with the construction of the project and the cost covered by the standard Electric Utility Charges. The communication utilities will be relocated and placed underground with the construction of our portion of Vine Drive. 21 A Subdivision Plat is required. This is provided with the submission. 2.g. Provide arterial R.O.W. with 15-foot utility easement at Vine Drive. R.O.W. for Vine Drive will be provided with this project. 2.h. LCUASS apply to any public improvements. All streets are designed to LCUASS. 21 Design of Vine needs to be designed 1,000 feet east and west of the property. This has been already designed by adjacent properties so this information needs to be tied to the plans. Understood. 2 J. Provide standard street transitions at each end of the construction. Understood. 2.k. Culverts for Cooper Slough We understand that we will need to construct the must be widened with this project. We have included this culvert design within the plans submitted. 2.1. Spacing of site access. The site access point meets the required separation distance from existing curb cuts on both sides of Vine Drive. The access is outside of the floodway. 2.m. Access to adjacent properties. The access to Vine Drive on our property is a private access. Environmental considerations limit the need to provide access to the west and to the south. The Mulberry Corridor Plan places a premium on preserving the Cooper Slough at the expense of connectivity. The parcels that surround the property are all large parcels and due to the size are not prohibited accesses due to spacing criteria. No access to Redman Drive is provided because of the potential conflict with wetland setbacks. On further discussions with you and engineering the properties to the east have multiply opportunities for access. Redman Drive will not be extended to the west due to conflicts with the Cooper Slough, so access to Redman would only serve this property. Our single use and limited development of the site best suits the sensitive areas that dominate the property. l.c. Building orientation standard. The building elevations that face Vine Drive provide a variety of materials, features that create a module that breaks the scale of the building length, a cornice feature at the roof line and a variation of the roof line. It is not a blank wall. The building abuts the landscape setback, exceeding the required minimum. Id. Site minimum landscape buffer. A landscape buffer yard of 30 feet is provided along Vine Drive. Le Storage screening The storage features of this project are screened from public view or district boundaries. IS. Only parking area for the office is required to be paved. We have paved the project entry, all drives within the mini -storage area, and the office parking areas. l.g. Bicycle parking We have provided the appropriate bike parking adjacent to the office. l.h. Vehicle parking. We have provided what we believe to be appropriate parking for this land use adjacent to the office. Li. Handicapped parking. One accessible space is provided as per the code. 1.j. Trash/recycling. The trash for the residential / office use is located conveniently to the existing building. ENGINEERING 2.a. Standard utility plans are required to be submitted. Plans are included with this submission. 2.b. Street Oversizing Fee will be collected at building permit. Understood. 2.c. T.I.S. required. This report is provided with the submission. 2.d. Latimer County impact Fee applies to this application at building permit. Understood. May 1, 2009 HATTMAN ASSOCIATES Architecture & Planning 145 W. Swallow Road * Ft. Collins, CO 80525 970.223.7335 * * * Fax 970.223.0511 Steve Olt 281 N. College Ave. Ft. Collins, CO 80524 RE: 3805 E. VINE DRIVE CONCEPT REVIEW COMMENTS Dear Steve; I have reviewed the comments from the City Concept Review Letter and have the following notes as a reply as to how we have addressed each of the concerns listed. These comments are not sent to examine the possible hurdles that the City may put out there that will need to be overcome in the design process. These comments follow the Concept Review notes that you provided. ZONING La. Land use shown falls within the Type 1 review process. We have kept the land uses as originally presented so the review should remain a Type 1. 1.b. Project need to conform to Articles 3 and 4.28 of the LUC. The East Mulberry Corridor Plan also applies. We have reviewed the LUC standards for general application of the code as well as the specific standards for I — Industrial land uses and applied them to the information provided for the project. East Mulberry Corridor Plan calls for storage yards to be visually enhanced. We have provided this by the design elements of the project, the orientation of the buildings, and fencing that screens the land uses. The Plan notes that one of its goals is to `Protect Wildlife Habitat' and to `Keep development away from Cooper Slough.' These are two requirements are met by the setback that we have provided from the slough as well as from wetlands. We have kept the native vegetation in these setback areas leaving approximately half of the property in its native habitat. We have no building placed within the flood plain and have no storage areas located in the floodway. The Owners would be interested in discussing a conservation easement for the property that is to be provided as natural areas and the associated setback areas related to them.