HomeMy WebLinkAboutTHE GREEN SOLUTION - PDP/FDP - FDP150045 - CORRESPONDENCE - CITIZEN COMMUNICATIONNate Heckel
Vice President
Direct: 970-267-7724
Mobile: 970-412-0225
Fax: 970-267-7419
nate. heckel(cDcushwake. com
IIII1III WAK FIIELD
772 Whalers Way, Suite 200
Fort Collins, CO 805251 USA
www.cushmanwakefield.com
Linkedln i Facebook i Twitter I YouTube I Google+ I Instagram
This email (including any attachments) is confidential and intended for the named recipient(s) only. It may be subject to legal or other professional privilege and contain
copyright material.
Any confidentiality or privilege is not waived or lost because this email has been sent to you by mistake.
Access to this email or its attachments by anyone else is unauthorised. If you are not the intended recipient, you may not disclose, copy or distribute this email or its
attachments, nor take or
omit to take any action in reliance on it. If you have received this email in error, please notify the sender immediately, delete it from your system and destroy any copies.
We accept no liability for any loss or damage caused by this email or its attachments due to viruses, interference, interception, corruption or unauthorised access
Any views or opinions presented in this email or its attachments are solely those of the author and do not necessarily represent those of the company.
Stephen Olt
From: Heckel, Nate <nate.heckel@cushwake.com>
Sent: Wednesday, March 16, 2016 4:44 PM
To: Ryan Mounce
Cc: Mike Jensen; Kevin Brock
Subject: 810 N. College
1. My concerns here are simple. I feel the site planning and design standards to ensure that the parking and circulation of the proposed development are
well designed with regard to safety, efficiency and convenience are not being met.
2. The applicant's site plan allows for parking on the north side of the property, contrary to historical use. Historical use of the driveway has been a means
for accessing each properties separate parking lot whereas the proposed uses the driveway as a parking isle. I am surprised the traffic engineer didn't
feel there was any impact and I am also surprised this didn't involve any type of minor amendment to their site plan.
3. The applicant has requested various easements for the 15' strip of land owned by the liquor store adjacent to their property. This 15' strip of land dead -
ends at the same east line of the applicant's property. Reasonable site circulation would include some means of turning around a) should their not be a
parking space immediately available and b) should someone choose to attempt to exit the property by the same means of turning around rather than
backing into ingress as well as egress traffic.
4. The applicant has not requested easements for the remaining 18' of strip of land owned by the bowling alley.
5. The parking has intensified the use this driveway of which the bowling alley and the liquor store are financially responsible for maintaining. I am
somewhat surprised that the traffic engineer has not been more critical of how the parking is c
In summary, although the applicant has requested easements from the liquor store property those were requested approximately one week ago leaving
little time for a real solution. In discussing their request, I stressed this last minute solution was not the right solution. I shared my belief that there
needs to be an agreement between the liquor store, bowling alley and the applicant. That agreement can create the terms by which these properties
work together in a manner that is well designed, well circulated, is efficient and as well as safe. I encourage you to ask the applicant to work together
with the neighboring properties and allow us the time necessary to do such.
Thank you for your time,
1