HomeMy WebLinkAboutOVERLAND RIDGE (SIENA) PUD - PRELIMINARY - 39-95 - CORRESPONDENCE - LUC REQUIREMENTSJohn Minatta 970-498-9479
2037 Lexington Crt, Fort Collins, Co 80526
August 2nd, 1995
To: Bob Blanchard
Gary Diede
Joe Frank
Copy: Gina Janett
My name is John Minatta and I am a partner in a family
partnership which owns 29 acres of undeveloped pasture ground on West
Elizabeth directly North and East of Overland Park.
We are proposing a development consisting of approximately 110
units that are tentatively in the $130,000.00 price range. We
presented the plan to Ted Shepard and City Staff at the June 19th
Conceptual Review and are working with RBD Engineering and BHA
Planning in an effort to submit a Preliminary Subdivision Plat on
August 21st.
In an attempt to enhance the project we are proposing some
neo-traditional concepts such as alleys and detached sidewalks.
Although the planning department seemed receptive to these ideas the
response from the street department was not exactly encouraging. In
addition to my concerns about the cities somewhat contradictory
position on certain aspects of a "traditional neighborhood
development" I really hoped to submit the plan as a straight
subdivision which translates to a simpler process and streamlined
schedule, and lower cost allowing me to keep home prices down. It is
essentially a simple project and for the most part it would seem to
qualify. I would like to get further clarification from the following
excerpts in the cities planning and zoning regulations manual that
are in conflict with my current plan.
Sec.29-656
(d)... Lots adjacent to an arterial street shall have a minimum
depth of one hundred fifty (150) feet.
(g) Alleys and other easements shall be controlled by the following
requirements.
(1) Alleys in residential subdivisions shall not be permitted
except in cases when the same are necessary and desirable to
continue an existing pattern.
Sec 29-658. Lots and Blocks
(a) All blocks in a subdivision shall have a length of at least
four hundred (400) feet...
Nothing in the "Article V. Subdivisions*" mentions that a twenty
eight (28) foot flow line street is allowed on a street that is
single loaded. Does this mean that it is not allowed at all ?
q"
Sec. 29-627
When permitted, the Planning and Zoning Board may authorize
variances under this Article upon it's finding that the following
requirements in (1), (2) or (3) have been satisfied
(3) The applicant demonstrates that the plan as submitted is equal
to or better than such plan incorporating the provision for which a
variance is requested.
Finally, I need direction regarding the improvements to the
width and ROW for a quarter mile section on the South side of West
Elizabeth. The current Master Street Plan classifies West Elizabeth
as an Arterial. Current ROW improvements on the South side of West
Elizabeth from Taft Hill for approximately .6 miles up to our
property are at the Collector width. I need direction regarding this
matter so that the engineers under contract to me (at a significant
cost) can complete the plat for a 8\21 submittal date.
We are very excited about this project and the potential to
bring housing to this side of town at the lower end of the cost
spectrum. The detached sidewalks and alleys will allow us to provide
refreshing architecture de-emphasizing the garages and making for a
more attractive streetscape. The alleys will be sixteen feet wide,
paved with a concrete pan. My engineers feel the alleys in some cases
will handle stormwater run-off much better and it will be easier to
design the grade and slope of the streets and lots.
Although these ideas have rarely been used in new developments
we are not dealing with radically new or complicated concepts. The
city has successfully accommodated alleys and detached sidewalks
since it's inception. Of course the additional cost incurred by these
items is difficult to recover on lower priced homes. If these simple
concepts are a burden to deal with through the city, then of course
new applications of enhancements proven to work well in the community
should be shelved along with any rhetoric encouraging them.
I am looking forward to finding common ground and resolving
these issues in a manner that will be of mutual benefit to everyone
involved. I really need to get clarification on these issues in order
to provide direction to my engineers and planners. Please let me know
when we could possibly get together and discuss the project.
Sincerely
O��
John Minatta