Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutWATERFIELD PUD - PRELIMINARY - 7-95B - REPORTS - RECOMMENDATION/REPORT W/ATTACHMENTSf m I 40 1 39 38 37 36 35 - -- - -- 34 32 31 30 29 28 27 ----- 26 25 24 23 22 41 42 43 59 I 1 66 20 - - - 60 / I 67 68 69 70 71 72 73 74 r 1 j_ `� 19 65 -- _- 1125 ` 18 44 45 61 t 64 - 75 I I I 126 ` 1 g 1 76 1 1 t 127 461 62 63 1 t \ tt 124 . 128 1 47 I . t 77 123 i 1 78 t` \ \ ` 130 122 131 49 1 50 I i 1 51 I 52 53 1 54 1 I 55 1 56 k WETLANDS 0 80 `\ � � 119 118 81 �` ��120 e 82 83 � t f1 84 115 85 t 11 114 B P4DESMAN PATHWAY 1 113 86 1 87 l 1 112 88 t 1 110 89 1 1 9t t 10 0 1 10 1 91 1 1 92 1 `� c 93 �) / 1 94 1 / 1 1 C 95 1 104 / 86 1 103 97 102 98 1 101 99-J 1 100 tlt 69 16 t 1 173 I 'S.. T BY:FT. COLLINS, COLORADO ;"1-13-96 ; 2:27PM ; POUDRE SCHOOL DIST.- 9704823038;# 2/10 RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE ACCEPTANCE OF A DONATION OF LAND FROM COLORADO LAND SOURCE, LTD. WHEREAS, the Board of Education of Poudre School District (Board' finds it advisable to accept a donation of eleven acres of land from the Colorado Land Source, Ltd., and WHEREAS, the Board has received the opinion of its attorney that it has full authority and power to accept this donation, NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that Poudre School District shall accept the proposed donation of eleven acres of land from the Colorado Land Source, Ltd., and that the President of the Board and the Board Secretary are hereby authorized and directed to execute such documents as are necessary. Dated this )9 day of 1996. BOA D OF EDUCATION OF OUDRE SCHOOL DIPITRICT . President SEAL / V / Apr-09-97 10:08A P.02 BFUSBM COMPANIES 7AM1 Fa:7 K124Pr.R Rr7w0 CmeiNPUT1. Oluo 45249 (513) 489-1990 VAX (713) 489-7780 Mr. Michael Ludwig Current Planning Department 281 North College Avenue Fort Collins, CO 80521 RE: Waterfield PUD, Preliminary April 9, 1997 The Brisben Companies is the developer of the Bull Run Apartments component of the Waterfield PUD, which will consist of 175 rental apartments set aside as Affordable Dwelling Units. Dickson Robin of the Advanced Planning Department approved Waterfield PUD for priority processing as a Qualified Affordable Housing Project on January 24, 1997 based upon the affordability of the Bull Run Apartments. The City of Fort Collins has secured a tax exempt bond allocation, to develop the Bull Run Apartments as affordable housing. This financing requires a long term affordable compliance period enforced by deed restriction in the form of the Land Use Restriction Agreement on the property. This document will be submitted to Dickson Robin for his review and approval in compliance with the City's policies and procedures for the monitoring of affordable housing projects. Please let me know if you require additional information at this preliminary stage. Best Regards, THE BRISBEN CQhAPANIES E. Scott McFadden Development Director, Western Region OTHER OP/1Ce3: 2725 N W .43Ro STAlar . Pr. Iaomrtvnwl.n• F7.OPI6A 33309 . 1305) '729-WOO . VAX (305) 739-7563 520 ZI'.Rst4Tr AVENUE . (. HVILt.r. TnNwrssrr'477.11 . 16I5) 831-3337 . F-AX (615) 841.0501 .1700 IIAuuz Scnoot. tz vn . MwPF. PCNNrvLVAMIA 16046 . (412) 770-1140 . PAX (412)'t71! •M70 1651 bourn F.,m STRcrr - DA1 Om, Omo 45449 . (513) ReA A7O0 . FAX (513) AM 94A2 2071 5' :)Nr BKOOIL 17PIvr . ),,;,Utnvluu. KnmrtICKY 40220 . (5021 40-P. 1177 . FAX (502) 4VV -I4000. 4101A STUARr Arvnrrw Bavu. . lower nrrr, N.JPIn lnRULlPtw 2l1710 . 1704) 1,23 4113 . FAX (704) 521 •441� fmc 7 mm Gi M momumnIr an ►s /smu .P.0.8. A PORTION OF THE WEST 1/2 OF SECTION 5, TOWNSHIP 7 NORTH, RANGE 68 WEST OF THE 6th P.M. COUNTY OF LARIMER, STATE OF COLORADO I I I` 15.00 n UMM rASO&Wr I I I I I I I I i I I I' I Uv.Wn I sluu'1! I / mm CWIS'4ra1'r 1 1 ,1 Cm OF FDRr CGUINS PARK SITE 6.124 ACRES e�oc� 1'�100' S/7/97 KtP/MVS COUNTRY CLUB FMMS VEND, LLC. 948SEJ(1 D.P. LANDSTAR SLRVEYMG INC. 1327 N. Lincoln Ave., Uweland, CD 80537. (970) 667-3294. FAX (970) 667-7151 West 300.00 feet; thence parallel with said East line of the Southwest Quarter of Section 5 South 0000015411 East 300.00 feet to the True Point of Beginning. Containing 140.094 acres more or less. EXCEPTING THEREFROM that portion of the West Half of Section 5, Township 7 North, Range 68 West of the 6th P.M., County of Larimer, State of Colorado described as follows: Considering the West line of the Southwest Quarter of said Section 5 as bearing North 00025/55/1 East and with all bearings contained herein relative thereto. Beginning at the Southwest corner of said Section 5; thence along said West line of the Southwest Quarter North 0002515511 East 1241.77 feet; thence South 890341'05" East 57.00 feet to the True Point of Beginning; thence South 8903410511 East 281.82 feet; thence South 36012135" East 73.53 feet; thence South 6704014111 East 214.09 feet; thence South 31002'24" East 402.20 feet; thence North 8903414411 West 734.34 feet; thence North 0002515561 East 481.99 feet to the True Point of Beginning. Containing 6.148 acres more or less. The Grantor shall only have such easement rights as shall be necessary to meet access, utility or drainage requirements imposed by the City of Fort Collins in conjunction with the development of the PUD Property, provided that such easement rights shall not materially impair the Grantee's intended use of the Conveyed' Property as a public park nor materially diminish the useable area of such property. 3 That portion of the West Half of Section 5, Township 7 North, Range 68 West of the 6th P.M., Larimer County, Colorado, described as follows: Considering the South line of the Southwest Quarter of said Section 5 as bearing North 89011126" West and with all bearings contained herein relative thereto. Commencing at the South Quarter corner of said Section 5; thence along said South line of the Southwest Quarter North 89011'26" West 300.00 feet to the True Point of Beginning; thence continuing along said South line North 89011126" West 470.00 feet; thence North 00048'34" East 596.71 feet; thence North 89011126" West 146.00 feet; thence South 00048134" West 82.22 feet; thence North 89011'26" West 254.00 feet; thence South 00044101" West 514.49 feet to said South line,of the Southwest Quarter; thence along said South line North 89011126" West 1424.94 feet; thence North 00025155" East 176.34 feet; thence North 89034132" West 50.67 feet to the West line of said West Half of Section 5; thence along said West line North 00025155" East 2957.41 feet to the centerline of the Larimer and Weld Canal; thence said centerline the following 11 courses and distances: 1) South 52037149" East 492.00 feet; 2) South 61045149" East 418.00 feet; 3) South 70034149" East 260.00 feet; 4) South 60004149" East 389.00 feet; 5) South 53049149" East 176.30 feet; 6) South 55057132" East 234.78 feet; 7) South 63035157" East 117.81 feet; 8) South 83027154" East 187.84 feet; 9) North 87045111" East 295.91 feet; 10) North 84033109" East•153.85 feet; 11) North 74026145" East 133.23 feet to the West line of that certain parcel of land as described at Reception No. 87068478, records of said County; thence along said West line the following four courses and distances: 1) South 00000154" East 54.54 feet; 2) South 80°00'54" East 23.00 feet; 3) South 00000154" East 72.00 feet; 4) South 45000154" East 70.71 feet to the East line of said Southwest Quarter of Section 5; thence along said East line South 00*00154" East 1666.00 feet to a point 300.00 feet North of said South Quarter corner of Section 5; thence parallel with said South line of the Southwest Quarter of Section 5 North 89011126" 2 EXHIBIT B Reservations to Special Warranty Deed Between Country Club Farms,.LLC ("Grantor") and The City of Fort Collins, Colorado ("Grantee") This Exhibit "B" is an attachment to a Special Warranty Deed by which the Grantor conveyed that property described on Exhibit "A" (the "Conveyed Property") to the Grantee. The Grantor reserves for itself and its successors ,and assigns, the utility easement described below: 15-Foot Utility Easement The West 15 feet of the following -described parcel of land: That portion of the West Half of Section 5, Township 7 North, Range 68 West of the 6th P.M., County of Larimer, State of Colorado described as follows. Considering the West line of the Southwest Quarter of said Section 5 as bearing North 00025155" East and with all bearings contained herein relative thereto. Beginning at the Southwest corner of said Section 5; thence along said West line of the Southwest Quarter North 00025155" East 1241.77 feet; thence South 89034105" East 56.00 feet to the True Point of Beginning; thence South 89034105" East 282.82 feet; thence South 36012'35" East 73.53 feet; thence South 67040141" East 214.09 feet; thence South 31002124" East 402.12 feet; thence North 89033159" West 714.60 feet to the beginning of a non - tangent curve concave to the Northeast having a central angle of 11029112" and a radius of 1033.00, the chord of which bears North 05.018141" West for 206.75 feet; thence Northerly along the arc of said curve 207.10 feet; thence tangent from said curve North 00025155" East 276.07 feet to the True Point of Beginning. Containing 6.124 acres more or less. Following this reservation is a map showing the area of the Conveyed Property and the above -described utility easement which the Grantor hereby reserves. Subject to City Council approval, Grantee agrees to grant additional easements and rights -of -way to Grantor as may reasonably be required to develop its property adjacent to the Conveyed Property which is more particularly described as follows (the "PUD Property): EXHIBIT A TO SPECIAL WARRANTY DEED FROM COUNTRY,CLUB FARMS, LLC TO THE CITY OF FORT COLLINS, COLORADO That portion of the West Half of Section 5, Township 7 North, Range 68 West of the 6th P.M., County of Larimer, State of Colorado described as follows. Considering the West line of the Southwest Quarter of said Section 5 as bearing North 00025155" East and with all bearings contained herein relative thereto. Beginning at the Southwest corner of said Section 5; thence along said West line of the Southwest Quarter North 00025155" East 1241.77 feet; thence South 890341'05" East 56.00 feet to the True Point of Beginning; thence South 89034105" East 282.82 feet; thence South 36012135" East 73.53 feet; thence South 67040141" East 214.09 feet; thence South 31002124" East 402.12 feet; thence North 89033159" West 714.60 feet to the beginning of a non - tangent curve concave to the Northeast having a central angle of 11029'12" and a radius of 1033.00, the chord of which bears North 05018141" West for 206.75 feet; thence Northerly along the arc of said curve 207.10 feet; thence tangent from said curve North 00025155" East 276.07 feet to the True Point of Beginning. Containing 6.124 acres more or less. EXHIBIT C Recorded at tiClock _ M. on floception No. r A 0 Book page Recorder c `8Pccial `Warraitty-`Deed THIS DEED is A conveyance of the reel properly described below, inrhiding tiny improvements And other appurtermnres (the •'properly'l from the Individual(s). Cnrporation(i). parinership(s).Or other entily(ies) named below as GRANTOR to the imfividual(s) ,if entty(les) named below as GRANTEE. 1 hn nnANTOR hmnby stilts and conveys the. ploflerty to life C.11AN I EE. mid life. G11AN I On warrants the title ngahtsl fill pCnons claiming under the rVIANT On. exr-epl for any pndicular mallets drtsCribshl below undm "Additionnl Wnrranly ExcePlions; nlatea- capt for any of the following matters established by the GRANTOR and evidenced by recorded document: easements, dghls-of- way, mineral grants, mineral leases. and proleclive convenants and restrictions. The GRANT On does not walrard against llte lien of the general properly taxes for the year of this Dead. The Specific Terms of This Deed Are: Grantor: (Giro names) and Placl•(sl of residence, it the spouse of this owner -grantor is Joining In this Deed to release homestead tlghb, identify grsnlors as Mrshand slid wile 1 CouflLry Club Farms, LLC, a Colorado limited liability company c/o Colorado Land Source Ltd. 8101 E. Prentice Avenue, Suite M180 i:nglew(xxl, CO 80111 Grantee: IObe names) and adAresslesl. stalement of add,@$ inclrMinp Available road of street member, N rpwred l Thu City of Fort Collins, Colorado, a municipal corporation 300 Ia)xutu Avenue Fort Collins, CO 80521 Form of Co -Ownership: (it firer- are two fir mere grnniers named, They will let cal"Almea In lake as tenants in cdmmimi.1", amilm"ls joint lenanej' or words of the same MCAnirgl are added in the space below) properly Description: Wrchtde county and state) Sue Exhibit "A" attached hereto and incorporated herein by reference property Address: Ulxleveluped property Consideration: It he amlemenl Ma dollar 8111OMnl is oil inn al, ndrptml- consideralinn for trill deed will be presumed unless Ibis conveyance is identified M a gill. In any case this conveysnce is absolute, final slid unconditional I Reaervallons•Redrletlons: pl ate G"ANtOn Intends inresmveally ... tea,li"ule PrnP-rlY a. mennveYless dun he owm.olan,e GnnNton i,,eslrictmg Ilw GnAN fEE'S ,ighl in the prolrelly. make sPPrmniAle mrimabdm 1 It„survatictIS aril easements described on Exhibit "Bit attached hereto and incorporated herein Iry reference and reservations and restrictions of record described under "Additional Warranty Exceptions" below. Additional Warranty Exceptions: llnamde dre s of trust being ns,mned And othel minims not cer ered steam 1 Exceptions of rCC( 1) ztnhiq reyulations alxl similar restrictions imposed by the g(rverrmental bGdy(ics) u jur:is(lictiun over the Property; 2) the lien of general taxes for 'the year of closing; 3) all. reservations, easements, exceptions and rights -of -way of record; 4) protective eovellant-s; 5) those rights, if any, of third parties in the Property not shown by pub. records. May 9 ly 97 Eseculed by the Grantor on slgnshne pause I,, hldMdustPl: signetors clwn fa cerparalklk Is M e hlp of Assechtbn: Country Club Farms, LLC, a Colorado limited liability calgaTly Dental me" of District: DMppalb0, ppinefamp or baocbltM 9y Granlp James R. MQC=4 meager fly Arrest SPATE OF COLOnADO 1 a$. COUNTY OF IARIMER 1 9th day of May the fotegomp mstmeneM was acknowlodged before me this or- James R. Mr -Cory, Manager, Country Club Farms, LI`�C•dl- / A w ter NFSSmyll End oklqeI My*.pins: sommlulon*.sapins: STATE OF COUNTY OF 1 day of lb lorpmng .mirumenl was sc%r AwltAped before we this is by r+rs as MesMenl or Mee ptsldent aid secrelmyor 1• nsmr indnM,pl 011-IMM in it Glamor isempoullon, Parlrlmsliper Assrlelalion.lhen IAenlily sip assnbnl secretor of corppnpon: or as pamunp) of partnership. a as aomori,ed mamba(sl of association I V/r I rir ni my ha"A and nfllrlal s-al. Mr cemrnbsmn nplro: Na1M public EXHIBIT B TO ESCROW AGREEMENT BETWEEN COUNTRY CLUB FARMS, LLC AND THE CITY OF FORT COLLINS, COLORADO That portion of the West Half of Section 5, Township 7 North, Range 68 West of the 6th P.M., County of Larimer, State of Colorado described as follows. Considering the West line of the Southwest Quarter of said Section 5 as bearing North 00025155" East and with all bearings contained herein relative thereto. Beginning at the Southwest corner of said Section 5; thence along said West line of the Southwest Quarter North 00025155" East 1241.77.feet; thence South 89034FO5" East 56.00 feet to the True Point of Beginning; thence South 89034105" East 282.82 feet; thence South 36012135" East 73.53 feet; thence South 67040141" East 214.09 feet; thence South 31002/24/1 East 402.12 feet; thence. North 89033159" West 714.60 feet to the beginning of a non - tangent curve concave to the Northeast having a central angle of 11029112" and a radius of 1033.00, the chord of which bears North 05018'41" West for 206.75 feet; thence Northerly along the arc of said curve 207.10 feet; thence tangent from said curve North 00025155" East 276.07 feet to the True Point of Beginning. .Containing 6.124 acres more or less. to the East line of said Southwest Quarter of Section 5; thence along said East line South,0000015411 East 1666.00 feet to a point 300.00 feet North of said South Quarter corner of Section 5; thence parallel with said South line of the Southwest Quarter of Section 5 North 89011'26" West 300.00 feet; thence parallel with said East line of the Southwest Quarter of Section 5 South 00000/54/1 East 300.00 feet to the True Point of Beginning. containing 140.094 acres more or less. EXHIBIT A TO ESCROW AGREEMENT BETWEEN COUNTRY CLUB FARMS, LLC AND THE CITY OF FORT COLLINS, COLORADO That portion of the West Half of Section 5, Township 7 North, Range 68 West of the 6th P.M., Larimer County, Colorado, described as follows: Considering the South line of the Southwest Quarter of said Section 5 as bearing North 89011126" West and with all bearings contained herein relative thereto. Commencing at the South Quarter corner of said Section 5; thence along said South line of the Southwest Quarter North 89011'26" West 300.00 feet to the True Point of Beginning; thence continuing along said South line North 89011126" West 470.00 feet; thence North 00048'34" East 596.71 feet; thence North 89011126" West 146.00 feet; thence South 00048134" West 82.22 feet; thence North 89011'26" West 254.00 feet; thence South 00044101" West 514.49 feet to said South line of the Southwest Quarter; thence along said South line North 89011126" West 1424.94 feet; thence North 00025155" East 176.34 feet; thence North 89034132" West 50.67 feet to the West line of said West Half of Section 5; thence along said West line North 00025155" East 2957.41 feet to the centerline of the Larimer and Weld Canal; thence said centerline the following 11 courses and distances: 1) South 52037149" East 492.00 feet; 2) South 61045149" East 418.00 feet; 3) South 70034149" East 260.00 feet; 4) South 60004149" East 389.00 feet; 5) South 53049149" East 176.30 feet; 6) South 55057132" East 234.78 feet; 7) South 63035'57" East 117.81 feet; 8) South 83027154" East 187.84 feet; 9) North 87045111" East 295.91 feet; 10) North 84033109" East 153.85 feet; 11) North 74026145" East 133.23 feet to the West line of that certain parcel of land as described at Reception No. 87068478, records of said County; thence along said West line the following four courses and distances: 1) South 00000154" East 54.54 feet; 2) South 80000154" East 23.00 feet; 3) South 00000154" East 72.00 feet; 4) South 45000154" East 70.71 feet 4. This Escrow Agreement shall inure to the benefit of, and be binding upon, the successors and assigns of the parties hereto. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties have executed this Escrow Agreement as of the date written above. COUNTRY CLUB FARMS, L.L.C., a Colorado limited liability company, By: James R. MECoy, Manager CITY OF FORT COLLINS, COLORADO, a municipal corporation By: 6-p- q- tmz'a Joh F. Fischbach, City Manager APPROVED AS TO FORM: Carrie Mineart Daggett•; Assiis ant City Attorney ATTEST: Wanda Krdjicek, it Clerk 3 1. Concurrently with the execution of this Escrow Agreement, Country Club shall deliver to the City the original, fully -executed Dedication Deed to the City Clerk. 2. The City Clerk shall hold the Dedication Deed in escrow until notified in writing by Country Club of the occurrence of one of the following events, at which time the City Clerk shall proceed as follows: a. In the event that Country Club does not receive preliminary approval of the Waterfield P.U.D. and after all appeal and referendum periods have expired with no appeal or referendum having been filed by Country Club, the City Clerk shall return the Dedication Deed to Country Club and this Escrow Agreement shall be terminated. b. In the event that Country Club obtains preliminary approval of the Waterfield P.U.D. and final approval of at least one phase of the.Waterfield P.U.D. and after all appeal and referendum periods have expired with no appeal or referendum having been filed or, if timely filed, has resulted in upholding such approval, then the City Clerk shall deliver the Dedication Deed to the Office of the Clerk and Recorder of Larimer County, Colorado for recording in the real property records. 3. All notices or other communications given the parties to this Escrow Agreement shall be personally delivered to or sent by express or overnight mail, or by first-class postage prepaid or by facsimile to the parties at the following addresses, or to any change of address given in writing by one party to the other: TO COUNTRY CLUB: James R. McCory, Manager 8101 E. Prentice Ave., Suite M180 Englewood, CO 80111 Telephone: (303) 290-9009 Facsimile: (303) 290-9097 WITH COPY TO: Lucia A. Liley, Esq. March & Myatt, P.C. 110 East Oak St., Suite 200 Fort Collins, CO 80524 Telephone: (970) 482-4322 Facsimile: (970) 482-3038 TO THE CITY: Stephen J. Roy, Esq. City Attorney 300 Laporte Ave. Fort Collins, CO 80521 Telephone: (970) 221-6520 Facsimile: (970) 221-6327 2 ESCROW AGREEMENT _r4%. THIS ESCROW AGREEMENT is made and entered into this Q day of :rn(y y , 1997, by and between Country Club Farms, L.L.C., a Colorado limited liability company, whose address is c/o Colorado Land Source Ltd., 8101 E. Prentice Avenue, Suite M180, Englewood, Colorado 80111 ("Country Club"), and the City of Fort Collins, Colorado, a municipal corporation, having its principal offices at 300 Laporte Avenue, Fort Collins, Colorado 80521 (the "City"). WITNESSETH: WHEREAS, Country Club is the owner of a 140.09-acre parcel of property located in north Fort Collins, more particularly described on Exhibit "A" attached hereto and incorporated herein by reference (the "Property"); and WHEREAS, Country Club has submitted to the City an application for preliminary approval of the Waterfield P.U.D., a mixed -use development of the Property; and WHEREAS, Country Club has agreed to dedicate a 6.124-acre parcel within the Waterfield P.U.D., described more particularly on Exhibit "B" attached hereto and incorporated herein by reference, to the City for public use as a neighborhood park (the "Park Site"); and WHEREAS, on January 22, 1997, the City's Parks and Recreation Board unanimously recommended acceptance of the Park Site by the City for use as a neighborhood park; and WHEREAS, the City Attorney for the City has reviewed the title and Phase I environmental study for the Park Site and is satisfied that the condition of the property is acceptable to the City for use as a neighborhood park; and WHEREAS, the City Attorney has reviewed and approved the form of the deed dedicating the Park Site to the City (the "Dedication Deed"), a copy of which is attached hereto and incorporated herein by reference as Exhibit "C", and the City has agreed to accept deposit of the Dedication Deed into an irrevocable escrow with the City Clerk as set forth below. NOW, THEREFORE, by and in consideration of the above premises and the within terms and conditions, the parties hereto agree as follows: MAY 1sR 1 Mike Ludwig, City Planner City of Fort Collins 281 N. College FTC 80522 Re: Waterfield PUD. Mike Ludwig: 19 May 1997 Written comments for the meeting tonight, for what they are worth ... as someone living at the corner.of Summitview (now called Timberline Road extended?) and East Vine, in the Plummer School. I'm going to feel the impact of this development from all directions.... increased traffic to the south and to the east, apartments to the west, senior citizen housing to the north. I would like to know if the developer of . Waterfield will (or can be requested to) put up a privacy fence/barrier of some kind on my north and west borders. I believe that the density of the Waterfield project (whether required by the city, or by the developer trying to recoup profits lost to acreage for the school and the wetlands) is entirely too high, given the existing - and projected transportation corridors. East Vine will also be used, presumably by the Waterglen project to the east. Traffic along Summitview - both from the north and the south will continue to be stalled at the intersection as trains sit ... this is a railroad switching yard, and is outside the city limits so the 10 min. limit for tying up traffic is not in force. Also I am curious as to what will happen to the traffic from Waterfield emptying onto Vine Drive if Vine eventually becomes the Northeast Truck Corridor - an idea somewhere in the transportation department works. --phvsi` Patricia Maimon-Music P.S. On a personal level ... sorry for the inadvertent insult - When M. Herzig came.to see me, I thought he wanted to bring Waterfield developer people. 1. Is Rob Wilkinson May 13, 1997 Page 2 Nonetheless, we are definitely committed to continuing working with the City on all of these issues after preliminary approval. Perhaps the discussions will suggest new ideas and approaches. If we reach agreement on any changes, Jim is committed to amending the preliminary PUD plan to reflect such changes. Thanks, Rob, for your willingness to work with Jim and his consultants to help satisfactorily resolve natural resource issues. LAL/glr cc: Jim McCory Frank Vaught By: Sincerely, MARCH & MYATT, P.C. `,r M M MARCH & MYATT, P.C. ARTHUR E. MARCH, JR. ATTORNEYS AND COUNSELORS AT LAW RAMSEY D. MYATT 110 E. OAK STREET ROBERT W. SRANDES, JR. FORT COLONS, COLORADO 80524-2880 RICHARD S. GAST (970) 482-4322 LUCIA A. LILEY FAX (970) 482-3038 J. BRADFORD MARCH LINDA S. MILLER May 13, 1997 JEFFREY J. JOHNSON MATTHEW J. DOUGLAS Rob Wilkinson Natural Resources Department City of Fort Collins 281 North College Avenue Fort Collins, Colorado RE: Waterfield PUD Dear Rob: ARTHUR E. MARCH 1908-1981 MAILING ADDRESS: P.O. SOX 469 FORT COLLINS, CO 80522-0469 VIA FAX TO 224-6177 This letter is to confirm that, if the Waterfield Preliminary PUD is approved, Country Club Farms, LLC, the owner and developer of the PUD property, will continue to explore with City staff between preliminary and final approvals the following items: (1) Possible purchase by the City of the on -site wetlands, a portion of the single-family lots around the wetlands or the entire PUD property; (2) Possible realignment and/or reclassification of County Road it in order to maximize the wetland buffer area; and (3) Possible shifting of the park and/or school sites. Although Jim McCory is willing to discuss a possible purchase of land by the City, he believes it would be difficult to arrive at an acceptable price on a purchase of all or a portion of only the single-family lots in the PUD because of extremely high infrastructure costs and the fact that the multi -family units are all affordable housing. A purchase of the wetlands and buffer area may be more realistic. I should also stress that it may be difficult to do much with relocating the school and/or park sites since deeds to those parcels have already been dedicated, unless the City were to purchase the entire PUD property. so 0* MAY 19 RECD Michael Ludwig May 13, 1997 Planning & Zoning Board Arr 7-956 City of Fort Collins, Co Re. Waterford PUD , Preliminary #7-95B WATMIGLD Dear Mr. Ludwig We will not be able to attend your meeting on May 19, but would like to make a few comments as you offered. We have been residents for nine years in the Lindenwood Subdivision just north and west of the development Site 'in question. Directly south of our property is vacant land used for agriculture and is not in the City of Fort Collins. However, as residents of the near area we would like to present some problems which should concern any future Resident or Developer of the Site. 1. The Railroad property south of East Vine Drive and the Site is a Switching Yard. At all hours of the day and night, Railroad Cars are being moved and bumped to get them in position for attachment to a train. This operation is very noisy - at times it sounds like multiple automobile wrecks. The Locomotives must blow their whistle at the Summitview and Lemay crossings again and again as they have to recross these streets to make up a new collection of railroad cars. In summer with our windows open, the train noises are louder than our tv set - and we are a half mile away. 2. The Railroad, at times, carries Nuclear Radioactive Materials as well as dangerous Chemicals. A train derailment, fire, etc, in this area might require evacuation of all nearby residents. 3. Through the middle of the Site, going east and west, are High Voltage Power lines. There are many scientific studies and litigations going on about the effects of High Voltage Power lines to the humanbody especially pregnent women and children . 4. To the north of the Site is the Larimer-Weld County Canal which is usually full of water. Last year there were two little boys from a mobile park west of highway 287 who drowned in the canal. The body of one boy was recovered near I25. A high fence along the entire canal would be necessary if the Site were to include residences. These above problems concern possible residential development of the Site. A Park, a Commercial Center, Light Manufacturing or even better, leaving it agriculture would be the best option. Thank you Mynarr aylor Donelda Taylor •y r.. _r ... iT `�., �'.i.l� �'' a.; ..ui ,... �.ir�Ci:,'j.'; ..?:/.dr T�'�CZ'P_n!°Y!: 4 i ri:�L SC ii'✓'iTiatrj.' �*i' a .. r. . &S ACRES CONFER R.O.W. 22 ACRES POWERLRNE EASEMENT 2.S ACRES V2 DITCH EASEMENT/ BUFFER 0.7 ACRES tO ACRE —1.71 AC. L _7.78 ACRES BUFFER / BUFFER / DETENTION 1�1 COMMERCIAL BUFFER / DETENTION / DETENTION / R.O.W. P.O.W. P.O.W. EXHIBIT FOR OVERALL NET DENSITY CALCULATIONS WATER FIELD P.U.D. CO► I EACIAL t71 AC. POND -/ WETALNDS / OPEN 1&0 AC. PARK 0.12 AC. SCHOOL - 10.0 AC. OAS EASEMENT / R.O.W. / DUFFER 4.14 AC. POWER LINE EASEMENT 22 AC. DITCH EASEMENT / BUFFER SS4 AC. BUFFER / DETENTION / P.O.W. 14AS AC. CONFER P.O.W. S.S AC. TOTAL UN -DEVELOPABLE - 00.40 AC. TOTAL GROSS ACRES 140MO AC. LESS UN -DEVELOPABLE - SOAB AC. TOTAL NET DEVELOPABLE 78.80 AD. OVERALL NET DENSITY 477 D.U. + 70.8 AC. - 80 D.V. / ACRE ( MI MIM PER ORDINANCE 1 OVERALL NET DENSITY - 488 DU. . 79.6 AC. - 0.08 DU. / ACRE ( ACTUAL UNITS 1 MAY 9, 1997 w Introduced, .considered favorably on first reading, and ordered published this 16th day of April, A.D. 1996, and to be presented for final passage on the 21st day of May, A.D. 1996. Mayor ATTEST: City Clerk Passed and adopted on final reading this 21st day of May, A.D. 1996. Mayor ATTEST: City Clerk S a minimum of sixty (60) percentage points for any residential development of six (6) or fewer dwelling units per acre; and WHEREAS, Section 29-45 of the City Code provides that the City Council may impose reasonable conditions on zoning and rezoning designations which relate to the use of the subject property in order to preserve and promote the public health, safety and welfare of the inhabitants of the City and the public generally, and to encourage and facilitate the orderly development of the City. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FORT COLLINS: . Section 1. That the Zoning District Map adopted by Chapter 29 of the Code of the City of Fort Collins be, and the same hereby is, amended by changing the zoning classification for Parcel 1, which is legally described on Exhibit "A", attached hereto and incorporated herein by reference, from "T", Transition Zoning District, to "I-L", Limited Industrial Zoning. District, and further amended by changing the zoning classification for Parcel 2, which is legally described on Exhibit "B" attached hereto and incorporated herein by reference, from "T', Transition Zoning District, to "R-LrP", Low Density Planned Residential District. Section 2. That the Sign District Map adopted pursuant to Section 29-593.1 of the Code of the City of Fort Collins be, and the same hereby is, changed and amended by showing that the properties described on Exhibits "A" and `B" are included in the Residential Neighborhood Sign District. Section 3. That the zoning granted herein is expressly conditioned upon Parcels 1 and 2 both being developed as one or more planned unit developments in accordance with the ordinances of the City and that any residential development on Parcel 1 shall be at a minimum overall average density of six (6) units per net developable acre of Parcel 1 and that the minimum overall average. density of any residential development on both Parcel. I and Parcel 2 shall be six (6) units per net developable acre. For purposes of this Ordinance, the term "net developable acre" shall be defined as total gross acreage less any acreage, or any part thereof, devoted to one or more of the following uses: public schools; utility and storm drainage easements; access easements or rights -of -way; ditch easements; or open space, wetlands, park, or buffer areas which are to be permanently dedicated to such use. Section 4. The City Engineer is hereby authorized and directed to amend said Zoning District Map in accordance with this Ordinance. ORDINANCE NO. 52, 1996 OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FORT COLLINS . AMENDING THE ZONING DISTRICT MAP OF THE CITY OF FORT COLLINS BY CHANGING THE ZONING CLASSIFICATION FOR THAT CERTAIN REAL PROPERTY KNOWN AS THE COUNTRY CLUB FARMS WHEREAS, Section 29-423 of the City Code provides that the owner of any property in the "T" Transition Zoning District may at any time petition the City to remove such property from said zoning district and place it in another zoning district; and WHEREAS, the owner of certain real property described in Section 1 of this Ordinance (the "Property") has petitioned the City to rezone said property from the "T" Transition Zoning District into the RLP Zoning District, with a P.U.D. condition; and WHEREAS, on April 8, 1996, the foregoing zoning request was reviewed by the Planning and Zoning Board as required by the City Code; and . WHEREAS, at a public hearings on April 16, 1996 and May 7, 1996, the City Council considered evidence and. received recommendations from City staff and the Planning and Zoning Board with regard to said rezoning request; and WHEREAS, the City Council has determined that it would be in the best interests of the City to place a portion of the Property in the "I-L" Zoning District ("Parcel 1 "1 and the remaining portion in the "R-L-P" Zoning District ("Parcel 2") and that such rezoning would be consistent with the goals and objectives of the City's Comprehensive Plan and with Policy Nos. 3a, 3d, 19, 39, 41, 60, 61, 78, 79b, and 79d of the City's Land Use Policies Plan; and WHEREAS, attaching a condition that the Property be developed as a planned unit development would allow for the residential development of the Property, as well as other land uses, so long as the provisions of the City's Land Development Guidance System were met with regard to any such land use proposal; and WHEREAS, the City Council also believes that it would be in the best interests of the City to attach an additional condition to the zoning of Parcel 1 so that any residential use thereon would have a minimum overall average density of six (6) dwelling units per net developable acre as hereinafter defined and that the minimum overall average density of any residential development on both Parcel 1 and Parcel 2 shall be six (6) units per net developable acre; and WHEREAS, the City Council believes that this additional condition is necessary and in the best interests of the City to satisfy Land Use Policy Nos. 12, 41, 75, 80b, 80c, 80d, and 80e of the City's Land Use Policies Plan; and WHEREAS, requiring any residential development on Parcel I to be at a minimum overall average density of six (6) dwelling units per net developable acre is consistent with Criterion 1. of the Residential Use Point Chart of the City's Land Development Guidance System, which requires MAY-05-1997 15:01 gENIOR COTTAGES OF AMERIC. S12 897 9002 P.03iO4 AFFORDABLE HOUSING TASK FORCE OF LARIMER COUNTY 1715 West Mountain Avenue Fort Collins, Colorado 80521 January 9, 1997 V Bruce Larson Senior Cottages of America 1660 South Highway 100, Ste, 122 St. Louis Park, Minnesota 55416 Dear Mr. Larson: The Affordable Housing Task Force of Larimer County members, collectively, support the proposed project at Vine Drive and Summitview, Fort Collins, Colorado. As proponents of affordable housing opportunities for low income populations, your project will add additional units to address low cost rental housing for our vulnerable senior citizens. We understand that the project affordability depends upon financing through the State of Colorado Low Income Housing Tax Credit Program. The proposed rent rates and population to be served fall within the spirit of the tax program; we endorse your application. Sic rely, OC C4A Ro elle S. Stephens Co -Chair RSS/rh MAY-05-19W 15:01 SENIOR COTTAGES OF AMERIC 4,12 697 9002 P.04iO4 1715 West Mountain, FL Collins, Colorado 80521 Telephone (970) 221-54M HMING AUTHORITY TDD 221.3093 FAx 221.0821 Colorado Housing & Finance Authority 1981 Blake Street Denver, Colorado 80202 January 9, 1997 Subject: Senior Cottages of America Proposed Development, City of Fort Collins To Whom This May Concern: The Fort Collins Housing Authority is pleased to support and endorse subject project. Our waiting list for low income elderly exceeds 200 households. This translates to a 2 - 4 year wait for sorely -needed housing for a special needs population. For many low income elderly, constraints on their minimum budgets adversely impact other community and social services. Senior Cottages of America's proposed development promises to address unmet housing needs of our elderly citizens. The Low Income Tax Credit application warrants consideration for approval. Sincerely, City of Fort Collins fjidusing Authority 0C�LCCL ochelle S. Stephens Executive Director RSS/rh TOTAL P.04 MAY-05-1997 15:03 SENIOR COTTAGES OF AMERIC 612 897 9002 P.02iO3 Community Planning and Environmental Services Advance Planning Department January 17, 1997 City of Fort Collins Bruce Larson, Vice President Community Relations Senior Cottages of America 1660 South Highway 100, Suite 122 St. Louis Park, MN 55416 Dear Mr. Larson: I am writing to express support from the City of Fort Collins Advance Planning Department for a 120 unit affordable senior housing project proposed by Senior Cottages of America. This proposed project is consistent with the City's affordable housing goals and objectives in addressing the low income senior population. The City of Fort Collins Consolidated Plan identifies a need for additional rental housing units for low income seniors in the 40% to 60% Area Median Income Range. This demand is further exacerbated by the 200 low income seniors on the housing waiting list at the Fort Collins Housing Authority. Clearly, the development of a 120 unit affordable seniors project is essential in meeting current demand. To support and facilitate the development of a 120 unit seniors project, the City of Fort Collins has committed the resources available through several of our affordable housing programs. These programs include the Development Impact Fee Delay Program, the Development Impact Fee Rebate Program, Priority Development Processing and plan application fee waivers for affordable housing. In particular, the Development Impact Fee Rebate Program could provide a rebate of impact fees of an estimated $150,000. The particular site proposed for the Senior Cottages project is also important to the City in terms of its location. The proposed project is part of a much larger development that would include market rate single family housing, condominiums and affordable family apartments, as well as a school and City park. This is very important to the City in that the integration of various housing types on one site is an integral part of both the City of Fort Collins Affordable Housing Policy and Comprehensive Plan. As indicated previously, Senior Cottages of America's proposed affordable senior rental project would enhance the City of Fort Collins in many ways. To help facilitate our goal to provide housing opportunities for low income seniors, we strongly advocate that the Colorado Housing and Finance Authority approve an allocation of Low Income Housing Tax Credits for the Senior Cottages project. If you have any questions please call me at (970) 221-6342. Sincerely, 9UL. Dickson Robin City Planner - Affordable Housing 281 North College Avenue • P.O. Box 580 Fort Collins, CO 80522-0580 • (970) 221-6376 FAX (970) 224-6111 • TDD (970) 224-6002 MAY-05-1997 15:04 SENIOR COTTAGES OF AMERIC 612 897 9002 P.03iO3 City Manager _ t City of FortCollins: January 17, 1997 Bruce Larson, Vice -President Community Relations Senior Cottages of America 16ov Suutir ignway luv, autte lLti St. Louis Park, MN 55416 Dear Mr. Larson: Thank you for you letter dated January 9, 1997 regarding Senior Cottages of America's proposed 120 unit affordable rental housing project for seniors residents of Fort Collins. Considering the need for additional affordable housing units in our community, in particular for seniors, the City appreciates your efforts and will continue to work with you to bring this project to fruition. The City also supports the efforts of Senior Cottages of America in securing financing for this project through the acquisition of Low Income Housing Tax Credits from the Colorado Housing and Finance Authority. If you have any questions or comments please call me at (970) 221-6505. Sincerely, at- Q' jo1 F. Fis_hbac:; City Manager cc: Greg Byrne, Director, Community Planning & Environmental Services 3U0 LaPorte Avenue • CO. Box 580 • Fort Cullins, CO 80522-0580 • (303) 221-6505 TOTAL P.03 Cowdrj C&b Ems Lax. 8101 Fast Pr[Mttu Avoac, Saita MISO Eag6004 C06gh 80111-2929 (303) 790-9009 a Fad 290-9097 May 7, 1997 Mr. Pat Roche P. B. Roche Development Company, LLC 361 71st Avenue, Suite 103 P. O. Box 1136 Greeley, CO 80632 Dear Pat: As you know, I am the manager.of Country Club Farms L.L.C., which owns and is developing the Waterfield P.U.D. in Fort Collins. Waterfield P.U.D. is a residential, multi -use development with two significant affordable housing components located at the northwest comer of East Vine Street and Summitview Drive. Waterfield P.U.D. is approximately two miles west of the Waterglen development, which I understand you now own. Based on your discussions with my attorney, Lucia Liley, I want to confum my commitment to share in the cost of providing jitney bus service to the residents of Waterfield and Waterglen. We can work together with the City to establish routes so that the residents of Waterfield and Waterglen have an alternate means of accessing employment, shopping, and recreational oppor- tunities in other areas of the City until such time as public transit service is available. I appreciate your willingness to work cooperatively on this venture as I am sure it will be beneficial to the residents of both neighborhoods. Sincerely, COUNTRY CLUB FARMS L.L.C. James R- McCory Manager /ha MAY-12-97 MON 12:21 PM P P. 02/04 1715 West Mountain, Ft. Collins. Colorado 80521 ToWphorre MM) 2215454 RMSM N TDD 221-30M FAX 221.0821 May 91 1997 City of Fort Collins Fort Collins, Colorado Subject: Bull Run Town Homes, Fort Collins, Colorado The Fort Collins Housing Authority supports and endorses subject project to develop 176 town homes that will accommodate rental opportunities for low and very low income level households. The proposed rent rates will enable Section 8 rental certificate and rental voucher holders to have greater choice opportunities in our City. The project warrants approval consideration to expand affordable housing opportunities. Sincerely, City Fort Collins H rig Authority Ro elle S. Stephens Executive Director RSS/rh water quality in our design. 56. What kind of water is seen in the detention pond? A. It'll be a dry -bottom pond. 57. How long does water stand in it? A. Probably 24 to 48 hours. It would release over a period of time. It's not intended to have water in it all the time. 58. Another part of the wetland is the wildlife. This is the end of the wildlife! A. There's not much nesting habitat currently at this wetland. It is proposed as part of this development though part of this development proposal to add nesting habitat. 59. People will not keep their pets in. 60. Will we have an opportunity to see the,changes before the final meeting? A. There are no more meetings planned before submittal, but you are welcome to visit the Planning Department and look at any plans. 61. How do you aggregate the comments and concerns expressed on Richards Lake, Hearthfire etc. with this development? A. Many of the Planning and Zoning are the same. I provide minutes of this meeting with the Planning and Zoning Board packet. You may write letters to the Planning and Zoning Board in care of Mike Ludwig. Finally you can attend the Planning and Zoning Board hearing and provide citizen input. 62. These are the same concerns as before. We keep hearing, "I don't know." 63. 1 have sympathy with the developer. He has to meet city requirements. People move out there for the quiet life. There is a conflict in what the city wants versus what people want. 46. What about kids walking to school from the south side of the tracks? A. The school will bus if there is a hazard. 47. Will there be any fencing around the senior place or will it come up to my 2 acres? A. There will probably be a fence. We don't know now. 48. How are you going to protect that little fox who runs from the wetland every night? A. No answer. 49. It makes me sad. The wetland area is so special in Colorado. You can't bring that back. Why this site? There has got to be a better place to -build. A. It is not our intent to destroy it. We intend to enhance the wetland. We will work with the City's Natural Resources Department to protect the wetland. 50. You don't have any public access planned to the wetland? A. It is private property. There isn't public access now. 51. How many points do you get for donating land for the school and park? A. In order to gain any points, the park would have to be in City ownership. 52. What's the tax situation? What will we have to pay? A. I don't believe your taxes change as long as you're farming the land. If you stop farming, you'd go into another category. 53. The City Plan is encouraging schools to be central to neighborhoods-- they certainly don't mean on an arterial street. A. Access to the school is from a local street. It's far enough away from Vine. 54. What will the area between the wetland and the path be like? A. The path will act as a line on one side are the homes with sod. The area between the wetland and the path will be tall native grass. 55. About the density around the wetland ... what do about if lawn fertilizer, etc. run off into it? Also, it shrinks in dry periods and swells in wet ones, it will probably run right to the back yards. A. That's an issue that Natural Resources needs to look at. We will have to address morning. We intend to modify the design in that area to minimize the number of streets off of County Road 11. 35. The city hates cul de sacs now. Those are out. 36. It seems to me, this is another example of putting in a site and not thinking of what's around it. It's absolutely crazy to put this in with out roads to accommodate it. A. It makes even less sense to build all of the roads with tax payer money before any development occurs. 37. We try to cross Vine Drive and we can't do it. 38. If you widen Vine Drive to 2 lanes each way, you'll be in my living room. A. I'm not sure that this development will require Vine Drive to be four lanes. However, in the future, Vine Drive will be four lanes as it is classified as an arterial. 39. It's imperative that the City be aware of the County residents issues. We can't vote against anyone, because we don't live "in" the city. 40. This site equates exactly to the net density of Adriel Hills. 41. Will the townhomes and the senior cottages be their own phase? Or will they be with the rest? A. We don't know the phasing yet. 42. How will you prevent flooding of the basements? A. We will address this in our design. 43. Running a sump pump will boost the utilities. A. Some of these homes, will not have basements. 44. When Jeff Donaldson's project was proposed, the concerns were about the rail road switch yard.... kids at the school will go there. A. They would have to cross Vine Drive to get there. I'm not too worried about that. 45. What about the transients? A. No answer. A. Prices are not reviewed by the Planning and Zoning Board. However, it is expected that the single-family units will be comparable to the City average which is approximately $150,000 to $160,000. 27. Do you take in to consideration the homes around this? A. Not much surrounds this property. 28. If the city didn't have a 6 unit/acre requirement, would the applicant propose something like this? A. I don't sell multi -family homes. I like single family lots. 29. Will there be a place for the neighborhood to meet? A. The townhomes will have a place and outsiders will be discouraged. The senior cottages will also have their own place to meet. The school might be available for some meetings. 30. Would you be opposed to seeing a slightly lower density? A. Personally, I would not be opposed. The City is after higher density. Since the condition on the zoning was just decided a few months ago, I don't see them changing it at this time. (City) There seems to be confusion over net density and gross density. The City's minimum density for PUD's is 3 dwelling units per acre. This project is about 3.5 to 4 dwelling units per acre. 31. The congestion out there gets worse as the developments go on. (We have no overpasses in the city.) A. Vine is planned to be a transit corridor. In order to support that we need higher density along Vine Drive. 32. Will the upper road and Conifer be connected? A. Not as part of this development. We aren't sure where Conifer is proposed to align. 33. There's no set line for Conifer, but it will go through the farm. A. I am unable to provide an answer to that. 34. If County Road 11 is an arterial why are there 6 cul de sacs proposed along it? A. I'm glad you said that. We are thinking of changing that. We just talked about it this 19. How long will it take to widen Vine? A. I don't know. The traffic study will identify when certain improvements will be required. 20. Compatibility is an issue. This is the first significant development, so it will set the tone of future densities. A. The density which is proposed is consistent with the conditions the City Council placed on the Zoning. It is pretty much consistent with the direction of the new City Plan. 21. When was the land annexed? A. It was annexed in the 1980's and zoned T, Transition since until a permanent zoning was decided. In April 1996 the applicant submitted a rezoning petition. The City Council zoned approximately the northern half of the property RLP, Low Density Planned Residential with a PUD condition. The southern portion of the property was zoned I-L, Limited Industrial with a PUD condition. In addition, the Council placed a condition on the property that any residential development have an overall average density of 6 dwelling units per net developable acre. 6 dwelling units per net developable acre is approximately dwelling units per gross acre in this instance. 22. Who is the current developer? A. He's sitting right next to you. His name is Jim McCory. ' 23. What provisions will be made for noise? For example a train whistle. A. That is something that will develop with this project. There will likely be berming along Vine Drive which will help mitigate train noise. 24. Who will own the senior cottages? - A. A company in Minnesota. They will be single story, private entrance, private carport, own kitchen, community center, subsidized, attractive rental properties for senior citizens who are income qualified. 25. Will there be an on site manager? A. Yes. 26. What are the price ranges? 10. Are there any plans for the traffic flow on Vine? A. Vine is an arterial on the city master plan. There also is a planned overpass in the area of Vine and Lemay. There is no plan for an overpass at Vine and Summitview at the present time. 11. On this map, is the right of way figured in? A. Yes, that would be the intent. 12. I'm confused about the number of units. Can you clarify the number of single family units? A. The numbers may change slightly. The number count on this is 488 total dwelling units. That is the minimum requirement for the City based upon the conditions which were placed on the zoning. 13. How many single family? A. There are 175. 14. What is the size of the single family lots? A. The larger lots on the upper east side are approximately 7,500 square feet. The rest are approximately 6,500 square feet. 15. Will there be sidewalk, curb, and gutter? A. Yes, in fact it will be a detached sidewalk. 16. Are there plans to put in a signal at Vine and Summitview? A. We don't know that yet. If traffic volumes, levels of service, etc. require, then yes. However, it is not likely at this time. 17. Won't Vine and Summitview be rather dangerous without an overpass? Children will get killed. It's very dangerous there unless there is something there for safety. 'A. I don't know if this development will trigger those improvements or not. 18. How long will it take to bring Timberline down to Summitview? A. I'm not sure of the schedule. I do know that the Engineering Department is in the process of designing the road for the Council's review. Initially it will be 2 lanes with an ultimate buildout of 6 lanes. 2. Is the park right along the railroad tracks? A. The railroad tracks are on the south side of Vine Drive. This development is on the north side of Vine Drive. 3. The eastern most border is Summitview and the western border is County Road 11 (extended). Will County Road 11 be connected with this development? A. No. It may be extended along this property, but a connection will not be made until the property to the north develops. s 4. In regards to the wetlands: what study was done, so that in the development process it's shown what you will do in protecting water going in and out? A. We will not drain into the wetland (the City's Natural Resources Department and Stormwater Utility will not allow this). We believe that the wetland is fed by a combination of ground water and surface water. We want to do everything we can to protect it. 5. Will the wetland be accessible to people living outside the development? A. The wetland is currently private property and will continue to be private property, but there will be no signs or fences. The park will be public. 6. Are there any foot paths planned? A. Yes, there will be paths running along the back of the lots. There will be no actual boardwalks or anything. (City) The city would have to purchase the land for it to be public. 7. Who is going to be responsible for the maintenance for the wetlands? A. The homeowners association. 8. What about the design of the- houses? How high will they be? Will the roofs obstruct the views? A. I don't have the drawings yet for that. 9. What about the senior citizens? You think they will move in where a bunch of kids will be? A. Very possibly. PROJECT: DATE: APPLICANT: CONSULTANT: STAFF: NEIGHBORHOOD MEETING MINUTES Waterfield P.U.D. November 19, 1996 Jim McCort', Colorado Land Source Linda Ripley and Cathy Mathis, V-F Ripley Associates Michael Ludwig, City Planner APPLICANT'S PRESENTATION - 488 dwelling units, 140 gross acres, 3.5 dwelling units/acre. - access to site -- 1 or more onto Vine and 2 on County Roads 9E and 11. - topography of property basically runs from the NE to SW - variety of housing types and density. - propose to donate 6 acres for park site to the City. school site to Poudre R-1. - patio homes, townhomes are at 12 dwelling units/acre. - senior cottages 9-10 dwelling units/acre. Tenants must be income qualified. - want to provide a diverse neighborhood. - trail along canal will continue. QUESTIONS / CONCERNS / COMMENTS 1. I walk along the canal. I see red marks, stakes etc. on the property. Is this a done deal? A. This is a long way from a done deal. What you are seeing on the property are surveyor markings. We are collecting data on the site. We feel that it is an appropriate land use but we have not even submitted a development application to the City yet. 0 SENIjt Cp r 7w(R of AmenCa LLC April 14, 1997 Mr. Mike Ludwig Current Planning Department 281 N. College Ave. Fort Collins, CO 80521 Re: Waterfield PUD, Preliminary Dear Mr, Ludwig: Senior Cottages of America, LLC is the developer of the Senior Cottages component of the Waterfield PUD, which will consist of 120 1 and 2-bedroom cottages set aside as Affordable Dwelling Units for senior citizens. Dickson Robin of the Advance Planning Department approved Waterfield PUD for priority processing as a Qualified Affordable Housing Project on January 24, 1997 based on the affordability of the senior cottages. Senior Cottages of America, LLC is in the process of seeking government tax exempt financing which would automatically require a long term period of compliance for affordability. Also, in connection with the Waterfield PUD final plan, Senior Cottages will submit covenants to Dickson Robin for his final review and approval to insure that the Affordable Dwelling Units, as defined by the L.D.G.S., will remain as affordable housing for a period of not less than 25 years. Please advise if you need additional information at this preliminary stage. Thank you. //S^^in//cerely, Uv Kurt Laughinghouse Vice President Tax Credit Development Phone 612 897 90M 1660 South Highwav 100, Suite 122 Ar Lounq Ch& Fam L.L.C. $101 Ea MMUCZ AWW, Skate M180 zq&1lMO4 cokah 801I1-2929 (303) 290-9009 0 FAX 290-9097 April 17, 1997 Mr. Mike Ludwig Current Planning Department 281 North College Avenue Fort collies, CO 80522 RE: Waterfield P.U_D. Preliminary Dear Mike: In the event that Senior Cottages of America, LLC, is unable to secure financing for the afforda- ble senior housing portion of Waterfield P.U.D., Country Club Farms, L.L.C_ (as owner of Water - field P.U.D.) will, in conjunction with the final plan, submit covenants to Dickson Robin for his review and approval to ensure that the Affordable Dwelling Units, as defined by the L.D.G.S., will remain available as affordable housing for a period of not less than twenty-five (25) years. Please advise if you need additional information at this preliminary stage. Thank you. Sincerely, COUNTRY CLUB FARMS L.L.C. James R. McCory Manager /ha MAY-121-97 MON 12:21 PM P. 04/04 Carrie Mineart-Daggett, Esq. April 18, 1997 Page 2 with the Registry Ridge open space purchases in that the final easements and/or rights -of -way will be determined after final approval of the first phase. The preliminary PUD is scheduled fr the Planning and Zoning Board hearing on May 19th. By ICY 12thff the Planning Department needs to have a letter from you confirming that the park deed has been placed in an irrevocable escrow with the City. I am sending you the Escrow Agreement and deed so that you can begin your review, and I will follow up with the exhibit regarding reservations as soon as City Engineering approves the preliminary roadway designs next week. Please call if you have any questions. sincerely, MARC9 & MYATT, P.C. By Lu is A. Liley LAL/glr Enclosures cc: Mike Ludwig Jim Mccory Bud Curtiss Cathy Mathis MAY-12-97 MON 12:21 PM P. 03/04 ARtl47R E UNICK JR pAMWf a MYATT ROBERr W. BR P4)M JR u1QA A uLEr J.8AAW=WXH L&Ma—IER jo*W J. JOHNSON rArrnEw J. COWAAS MARCH & MYATT, P.C_ ATTORNEYS AND COUNSELORS AT LAW no E OAK ssRFET FORT OWN& COLCKWO 400" o W% 4824= FAX PM 48Z7WL April 18, 1997 Affl"W B UAFC" I*WIWI MaW40 FORT CMMN% OO 00 224NOY Carrie Mineart-Daggett, Esq. City Attorneys Office City of Fort Collins DELI 300 Laporte Avenue Fort Collins, Colorado RE: Waterfield PUD Escrow Agreement and Deed for Park Site Dear Carrie: Enclosed please find a draft of an Escrow Agreement and a copy of the deed to the park site within the Waterfield P.U.D. As you may recall, County Club Farms, L.L.C., the owner of the Waterfield P.U.D. property, had agreed last year to dedicate a 6.14-acre park site to the City. The Parks and Recreation Division staff helped identify and locate the exact site. On January 22, 1997, the Parks and Recreation Board unanimously recommended acceptance of the site. The dedication deed was scheduled for City Council acceptance in early February when questions arose regarding additional title and environmental reviews. These reviews were accomplished, and I was advised that the City was satisfied with regard to both issues. Shortly thereafter, however, Mike Powers called to let me know that the City preferred to handle this dedication by placing it in an irrevocable escrow prior to the Planning and Zoning Board hearing on the Waterfield Preliminary P.U.D., as was done with the Registry Ridge P.U.D. park site. I confirmed with you that this was the procedure directed by the City to accomplish the dedication prior to the Planning and Zoning Board's approval of the preliminary plan. Since we have no escrow agent as with Registry Ridge, I have provided that the City Clerk will hold the park deed until either the project is denied, in which event the deed will be returned, or its approval, in which event the deed will be recorded. As with the Registry Ridge deeds, I have excepted from the grant those reservations which the owner's engineers advise me are needed for development of the project, with language providing for additional easements or rights -of -way if required by the City. This concept is the same as that negotiated with you in connection Parks and Recreation Board Minutes January 22, 1997 Page 6 • Diane also previously asked staff about the Editorial in the Coloradoan about the lack of Teen programs in the Recreator. Mike said staff is addressing this. He explained that this is an area of our business that teens haven't showed much interest in prior to the Youth Activity Center and staff is reexamining the age requirements. • Lance asked if the Youth Activity Center is sold, where will this center go? Mike said there has been discussion with the School District. • Jackie reminded the Board that the Senior Advisory Board subcommittee wants to meet with the Parks and Recreation Board subcommittee to discuss senior fees. The Board members on this subcommittee are: Lance Freeman, Marilyn Barnes, Diane Thies, and Rebecca Chavez (alternate). Jackie asked the subcommittee if they would be willing to meet for a breakfast meeting since the Senior Board representatives would rather not meet in the evening? The Board representatives agreed to a breakfast meeting at the Senior Center to discuss the senior fees and charges. Staff will make the arrangements. Secretary's Note: Meeting with the Senior Advisory Board representatives will be Wednesday, February 26, at 7:00 a.m. at the Senior Center. Marilyn Barnes, Diane Thies, and Rebecca Chavez will represent the Parks and Recreation Board Adjournment On a motion by Lance Freeman, the Board adjourned at 9:30 p.m. Respectfully Submitted, Jackie Rael, Administrative Aide Meeting Attendance Board Members Staff Marilyn Barnes Marty Heffernan Rebecca Chavez Karen Manci David Hughes Janet Meisel Lance Freeman Mike Powers Jessica MacMillan Jackie Rael Mary Ness Tom Shoemaker Del Price Roger Tarum Diane Thies, President Guest K-Lynn Cameron, Larimer County Parks and Recreation Board Minutes January 22, 1997 Page 5 renovations, parking lots, and fencing. Marilyn asked about Hickory Park as it was the Number 1 project on the Board's list. Marty said that the City Manager stated that we need to self -fund something that minimal size and not fund in the large capital project, as well as the infrastructure for park improvements. City Council was presented with three packages or to combine them together. They showed interest in packaging. A meeting for community choices to discuss campaign strategies will be held on January 29, at noon at the Egg and I. Board members and other community members who are interested in helping raise money in the $40,000 - $50,000 range are asked to attend, along with those who are interested in speaking about the projects to community groups. The Coloradoan is interested in promoting this project. Marty said as City employees, we cannot go out and campaign, we can only answer community questions. Under Amendment One rules will be a summary of comments for or against each package. As citizens or Board members can write to the City Clerk supporting the packages or each project by mid - February. These letters will be mailed to all registered voters. Parks and Recreation 1996 Annual Report Jackie Rael previously sent the Board members a draft copy of the annual report for their review. The Board, on a motion by Roger Tarum, seconded by Jessica MacMillan, unanimously (8-0) approved the Parks and Recreation Board's annual report as submitted by staff. Other Business • Mike Powers said that we have submitted an additional $1,500,000 grant request to LOCO. If received, the money will be used for trails to Greeley. • School District Representative -- The Board members are concerned that the Poudre School District Representative to the Board has not shown up for the last year. They asked Mike Powers to call Don Unger and ask who can represent the School District. Mike suggested that staff check with the School District and if there is an issue brought to the Board that concerns Poudre School District that there should be a representative present to answer questions. • David Huges asked what staff thoughts are about GOCO and the possibility of redistributing the money for schools? Mike said there is a bill introduced to carve out $35,000,000 for schools. Colorado Municipal League, who is opposed to this, and GOCO are working on this and have sent material to our Legislative representative. • City Park Suicide -- Mike addressed this incident. Diane Thies previously called staff to ask why we didn't evacuate the park. Mike spoke to John Mulligan, Fire Chief, and he responded that this would have brought more attention to the scene. The area was secured by Police and Fire Personnel and no unauthorized persons were allowed near the scene, which was well camouflaged by the grove of trees. Parks and Recreation Board Minutes January 22, 1997 Page 4 Del Price left the Board meeting at this time. Building Community Choices/Capital Improvements Plan Marty Heffernan gave the Board the results from the City Council meeting on the CIP. Parks and Recreation Projects and the recommended funding are: • Fossil Creek Community Park $81000,000 Some of the expenditures that would be cut are: road improvements on Lemay Avenue, $500,000; and street over sizing. Craig Foreman is reviewing these costs and says the cut won't affect the contents of the park. • EPIC Studio Ice Rink $295009000 This studio sheet of ice would be used for patch, free style skating, and lessons, and in the summer it will be used for in -line hockey. • Northside Aztlan Community Center $699409000 The new facility would replace the present Northside Center and will be three times the size of the existing site. • Community Horticulture Center $290009000 The supporters will have to undertake a fundraising effort which they are willing to do. • School District Cooperative Projects $ 600,000 In cooperation with Poudre School District, this money would be used for projects in shared facilities such as ballfields, gymnasiums, and libraries. • Regional Trails Project $1,250,000 The Cities of Loveland, Greeley, and Fort Collins and the town of Timnath will create a regional trail system linking all these communities. • Park Improvements $ 450,000 This will only make improvements at the Community Parks and will cut the improvements at the neighborhood parks. The renovations will be made to the existing community parks of ballfield Parks and Recreation Board Minutes January 22, 1997 Page 3 Natural Areas Acquisitions Tom Shoemaker asked for the Board's approval for acquisition of two parcels between Loveland and Fort Collins in the corridor. Outside the UGA, acquisitions are made between the City and the County. The first parcel is referred to as the Steppel property. The County will partner with the City of Fort Collins to purchase this land for $278,500 (appraised value is $300,000). This 84-acre parcel is adjacent to the 315-acre Coyote Ridge open space and is located on the ridge line. The second parcel is 478 acres south of County Road 32, and on the west side of Highway 287, known as the Snowy Ridge parcel. It would remain in agricultural land and would remain open space. It is proposed as a joint acquisition among Larimer County, Loveland, and Fort Collins. Loveland will contribute 1/6, Fort Collins 1/3 and Larimer County''/z. The purchase price is $2,100,000. David Hughes asked if this will continue to be used as agricultural land, will there be proceeds back to the City? Tom replied that any revenues would be first used to maintain the land and secondly it would be redistributed to the communities involved for their natural areas. Larimer County would be the management source of the property. Marilyn Barnes made a motion to recommend purchase of these two properties, seconded by Roger Tarum, the Board voted unanimously (9-0) to recommend purchase of these two properties. Larimer County Open Lands Manager K-Lynn Cameron further added that a grant application to GOCO for $500,000 toward the purchase of this land and if received, the money would be appropriated accordingly. Roger asked how the City acquires these properties? Is the seller coming to us or vice - versa? Tom said it goes both ways. He explained that staff has developed a plan and we try to act on the availability. Waterfield Park Park Planner Janet Meisel asked the Board for their recommendation on the acquisition of a donated 6.3 acres of land (Vine Drive and Summitview) and is located adjacent to the future elementary school site. The School District needs to start developing this school in the next two years. Poudre School District's Construction/Property Manager Ron Daggett told staff the School District is anxious to develop this jointly. If this doesn't happen, we will build a two -acre neighborhood park. Mary asked if the School District doesn't build a school, what would the developer do with the school site? Janet said that this is zoned for multi -family. She said we would want to develop the larger park site next to the school. The developer needs to dedicate the park and we need to hold title in order to increase their density. Janet said there is no compensation to the developer in lieu of the parkland fees. Rebecca. said Northside wants to relocate and would this.affect this area? Janet said no, it wouldn't. Lance asked about the cooperative CIP money with the School District and would it be used for something like this? Mike Powers responded that no it would be potential expansion of what is already existing. On a motion by Marilyn Barnes, seconded by Mary Ness, the Board unanimously (9-0) recommends acceptance of this donated parcel for a neighborhood park. Parks and Recreation Board Minutes January 22, 1997 Page 2 Cameron replied that an irrigation company owns it. This reservoir collects all the storm drainage in the area from the Foothills Mall south and east and is not clean water. The surface water is leased by a private club. Del asked from a public point of view, that water sports not be included in the plan? K-Lynn said that it will be zoned, so that certain areas would be allowed for fishing. DOW would help in stocking the area. Del asked why we are allowing the DOW govern what we will do there? K-Lynn responded that we need to look at the total recreation amenities in this area. Karen explained that we have state and federal regulations on this area. K-Lynn said the wildlife is not necessarily the preservation factor. However, water utilities said that if we would allow swimming in this area then the City would have to spend millions of dollars for alternative water treatments. The area has been identified as passive recreation, with nature observation, picnicking, etc. K-Lynn said we are looking at the balance of active and passive recreational use in the county. A regional trail is planned for alternative transportation use in the area. Mary Ness asked how many access points do the private club have on the lake? K-Lynn said they have two access points. Del asked if this land is included in the UGA? Staff response was that it is not in the UGA. However, it could be added to the UGA depending on the infrastructure needed there. Jessica MacMillan asked how many members in the private club? Reply: about 30. The landowners are concerned about the development around this area. Roger Tarum said the intent is to focus on the open space acquisitions. Lance asked what the City's intent is to get out of this. Janet replied that this is in context of the City Plan and to hold on to the open space and keep the vital link of open space among Fort Collins, Windsor, and Loveland. Diane asked if this area is zoned into the City, where will we get the money to develop the parks? Janet said that this will be worked out through the IGA, and since it will be low density, there probably won't be neighborhood park amenities. Marilyn asked about the development rights? K-Lynn explained the transfer of development rights and that would not change the zoning. Roger said this is a key area for the Great Blue Heron and this should not be developed as recreational areas. Del asked if the zoning is not changed, then how can we make this work? Janet said there will be a land use plan and that will be the overriding plan and it is presently zoned agricultural. Diane asked what the mixed use district center is? Janet said it is mixed use commercial. Marilyn asked for the definition of a conservation easement? Karen explained that it is giving up the development rights. Karen asked the Board if they want her to come back with the next rendition of the plan? Marilyn said that it would be a good idea for Karen to come back to explain the changes and an aerial photograph of the City would help. Karen agreed. Del would like to make a motion to recommend expansion of the UGA boundary to include the Fossil Creek Reservoir area. Janet said it is already in City Plan. Del Price made a formal recommendation to endorse the Fossil Creek Area Plan according to the language that addresses this in City Plan, Section GM-1.4 which states "the City shall review the current Urban Growth Area boundary, and shall consider amendments as necessary to expand or contract the boundary so as to bring it into conformance with City Plan," seconded by Lance Freeman, the Board voted unanimously (9-0). Roger said we need to assess the development within the City. And if citizens are enjoying the amenities of the City, then they should pay the parkland fees. K-Lynn said in the UGA, the development fees are collected and 80 percent is distributed to the City for parkland. Call Meeting to Order: The regular meeting was called to order at 6:35 p.m. by President Diane Thies. She welcomed new Board member David Hughes. Each Board member explained to David their interest in Parks and Recreation and reasons why they serve on the Board. Agenda Review: No changes to the printed agenda Approval of the Minutes: The minutes of the regular meeting of December 4, 1996 were unanimously (9'-0) approved on a motion by Lance Freeman, seconded by Marilyn Barnes. Citizen Participation: No citizen participation. Fossil Creek Reservoir Area Plan Environmental Planner Karen Manci spoke to the Board about the updated plan. She explained the team, comprised ofLarimer County and City of Fort Collins staff, has been working with a consultant who developed three sketch plans and came up with a preliminary preferred plan, "Plan C." This plan was presented to the public at open houses in January. Karen reviewed the land use categories showing sketch plans of future land uses. She explained the zoning and development proposals in this area. She further explained there are 700 property owners in the area with a handful north of the reservoir. Most of the concerns were to the south, around the developed sections and according to the Land Use Plan, there could be a potential population of more than 9,000 in this area. The only site that is protected is the Fossil Creek Natural area. The reservoir has been identified as a recreational preserve. One hundred twenty acres have been designated for a regional park south of County Road 32. Karen then asked for comments: Diane Thies asked what is meant by airport critical zone? Karen responded that it is a designated crash zone. Marilyn Barnes asked about the effect of the wildlife in the open spaces adjacent to the houses? Karen said that the wildlife has accepted the minimal disturbances in the area. However, there won't be additional homes, other buildings, or roads in the area. Del Price asked who owns the reservoir? Larimer County Open Space Manager K-Lynn Cultural, Loirary, and Recreational Services , City of Fort Collins MEMORANDUM DATE: April 21,1997 TO: Planning and Zoning Board FROM: Michael W. Powers, Director of Cultural, Library, and Recreational Services RE: Waterfield Planned Unit Development Park Dedication The purpose of this letter is to inform you that the City's Park Planning and Development Division has reviewed the proposed dedication of a neighborhood park site by the developers of the Waterfield PUD and recommends acceptance of the dedication of the park site to the City. The park site is approximately 6.148 acres and is in a location that will allow the City to provide neighborhood park services in accordance with the City's Parks and Recreation Policy Plan. The Parks and Recreation Board reviewed the proposed dedication of this park site at their January 22, 1997 meeting. The Board gave their enthusiastic support to this dedication. A copy of the minutes from this meeting are attached for your review. Please let me know if I can provide any further information. MWP:jmr Attachment cc: Mike Ludwig, City Planner 281 North College Avenue • P.O. Box 580 • Fort Collins, CO 80524 • (970) 221-6640 • FAX (970) 221-6586 1 Mr. and Mrs. Donald Weiss April 15, 1997 Page 2 If I have not accurately described your understanding, please contact me immediately. Thank you. By: LAL/glr cc: Jim McCory APPROVED BY: Be erly Wei Sincerely, MARCH & MYATT, P.C. ARTHUR E. MARCH, JR. RAMSEY D. MYATT ROBERT W. BRANDES, JR RICHARD S. GAST LUCIA A. ULEY J. BRADFORD MARCH UNDA S. MILLER JEFFREY J. JOHNSON MATTHEW J. DOUGLAS MARCH & MYATT, P.C. ATTORNEYS AND COUNSELORS AT LAW 110 E. OAK STREET FORT COLLINS, COLORADO 80524-2880 (970) 4824322 FAX (970) 482.3D38 Mr. and Mrs. Donald Weiss 1924 E. Vine Drive Fort Collins, CO 80524 April 15, 1997 Re: Waterfield PUD, Preliminary Dear Mr. and Mrs. Weiss: ARTHUR E. MARCH 19MI981 MAILING ADDRESS: P.O. BOX 489 FORT COLLINS, 00 80522-04M Thank you for meeting with Jim McCory and me last week to talk through your concerns about Waterfield and .workout satisfactory solutions. As we discussed, Mr. McCory will give notice, in the covenants for the project and in the form of a plat note, that your land is private property used for agricultural purposes. The goal of providing such notice is to prevent trespass situations and complaints from Waterfield residents about your agricultural operations. Mr. McCory will also purchase the materials you need to install barbed wire fencing along the setback of your west property boundary. Finally, Mr. McCory will hire a surveyor to accurately locate all irrigation ditches and pipelines that may be affected by construction on the west side of Waterfield and will commit to preserving those facilities and repairing any damage that occurs, so that your irrigation system continues to function properly when construction is complete. Mr. McCory will also underground that segment of your system that runs where County Road it will be constructed on the Waterfield project. Having addressed these items in a way that is satisfactory to you, we understand that you have no further objections to the Waterfield PUD. If this is correct, we ask that you acknowledge that fact by signing the bottom of this letter and returning it to our office in the envelope provided. The enclosed copy of this letter is for your files. M ARTHUR E. MARCH. _R. RAMSEY D. MrATT ROEERT W. 9R4NCES. �R. RK,HARO S. GAST LUC:A A. UL=Y J. 5RADFCnD MARCH UNDA S. MILER JEFFREY J.;OHNSCN MATTHEW J. OCUGLAS Mr. and Mrs. 1924 E. Vine Fort Collins, MARCH S, %IYATT. P.C. ATTCRNEYS AND COUNSELORS AT LAIN 1 10 E. CAK STREET FC;; =LL:NS. CCLCRADO E^.=24"2W 19701-S2-4722 FAX :970)-e2-3C_'8 Donald Weiss Drive CO 80524 May 6, 1997 Re: Waterfield PUD, Preliminary Dear Mr. and Mrs. Weiss: AFMr UR E. MARCH 190&' 9m 1 MAILING ADDRESS: P.O. RC% 469 FORT COLONS. CO 905=-Ca Per our understanding of the discussion which took place at last week's meeting with Jim McCory and the City, in an attempt to prevent trespass situations on to your property by Waterfield residents, Mr. McCory agrees to furnish acceptable fencing materials so that you may install such fencing along the setback of your west property boundary. As we discussed with the City's staff, barbed wire is not a desirable option because of safety concerns regarding users of County Road 11. A two -strand wire fence is one option we could consider. At the time Mr. McCory submits his final plan to the City, we will get together with you to finalize the details regarding this fence. Thanks for your continuing cooperation. LAL/glr cc: Jim McCory Mike Ludwig Sincerely, MARCH &/ MYATT, P g ucjra A. Z"ileV i MAY-07-97 WED 02:18 PM P. 02/03 ARMUR E. MARCM. JR AAMS6y D. MvATT RCBERT W.BRANDES, JR RCNARD & GAST U)CIA A. ULEr J. RRADFOAD MARrl1 UNDA S. MUCR JEFFREY J. Xt(NSON MAiM@M J. DOUOLAS MARCH & MYATr, P.C. ATTORNEYS AND COUNSELORS AT LAW 110 E OAK STREET FORT COUJNs, COIARADO 8052a2M (870) 4Wz = FAX (870) 482-30W Mike Ludwig Planning Department City of Fort Collins 281 North College Avenue Fort Collins, Colorado May 7, 1997 RE: Waterfield PUD, Preliminary Dear Mike: ARMOR E. MARCH 1808-1881 MAiUNG ADDRESS: P.O. am AN FORt GOWNS, CO 80=2-0e88 VIA FAX TO 416-2020 Attached is a copy of my letter to Donald and Beverly Weiss confirming that we do not want to share in the costs of a barbed wire fence on their property boundary because of safety concerns but stating that Jim McCory is still committed to providing the materials for another type of acceptable fencing. I am also confirming that the bike lane pavement will be installed when County Road 11 is constructed with this development but that the bike lane on the west, adjacent to the Weiss property, will not be striped until either the Weiss or the Moore property develops. Please call if you have any questions. Sincerely, LAL/glr Attachment cc: Jim McCory Cathy Mathis i is A PORTION OF THE WEST. 1/2 OF SECTION 5, TOWNSHIP 7 NORTH, RANGE 68 WEST OF THE 6th P.M. COUNTY OF LARIMER, STATE OF COLORADO T.P.0.8. r 15.t10 H LMLITY EASDJEHT I I t2o7-ton Git7Vtt I / m°Cit fw LC20LTM sw mi sm s mm S Alm tX 1IN S mm^M ox CITY OF FORT COLLINS PARK SITE 6.124 ACRES I, -toff I 5/7/97 I KLP/WS COUNTRY CLUB FMis.LS LAND. LLC. 948500 1 D.P. LANDSTAR SIRVEYMG INC. 1327 N. Lincoln Ave-. Lwelond. CO 80537. (970) 667-3294. FAX (970) 667-7151 West 300.00 feet; thence parallel with said East line of the Southwest Quarter of Section 5 South 00000'54" East 300.00 feet to the True Point of Beginning. Containing 140.094 acres more or less. EXCEPTING THEREFROM that portion of the West Half of Section 5, Township 7 North, Range 68 West of the 6th P.M., County of Larimer, State of Colorado described as follows: Considering the West line of the Southwest Quarter of said Section 5 as bearing North 00025'55" East and with all bearings contained herein relative thereto. Beginning at the Southwest corner of said Section 5; thence along said West line of the Southwest Quarter North 00025155" East 1241.77 feet; thence South 89034'05" East 57.00 feet to the True Point of Beginning; thence South 89034105" East 281.82 feet; thence South 36012'35" East 73.53 feet; thence South 67040141" East 214.09 feet; thence South 31002124" East 402.20 feet; thence North 89034'44" West 734.34 feet; thence North 00025155" East 481.99 feet to the True Point of Beginning. Containing 6.148 acres more or less. The Grantor shall only have such easement rights as shall be necessary to meet access, utility or drainage requirements imposed by the City of Fort Collins in conjunction with the development of the PUD Property, provided that such easement rights shall not materially impair the Grantee's intended use of the Conveyed Property as a public park nor materially diminish the useable area of such property. 3 That portion of the West Half of Section 5, Township 7 North, Range 68 West of the 6th P.M., Larimer County, Colorado, described as follows: Considering the South line of the Southwest Quarter of said Section 5 as bearing North 89*11126" West and with all bearings contained herein relative thereto. Commencing at the South Quarter corner of said Section 5; thence along said South line of the Southwest Quarter North 89011/26/1 West 300.00 feet to the True Point of Beginning; thence continuing along said South line North 89011126" West 470.00 feet; thence North 00048'34" East 596.71 feet; thence North 89011126" West 146.00 feet; thence South 00048134" West 82.22 feet; thence North 89011126" West 254.00 feet; thence South 00044"01" West 514.49 feet to said South line of the Southwest Quarter; thence along said South line North 89011126" West 1424.94 feet; thence North 00025155" East 176.34 feet; thence North 89034/32/1 West 50.67 feet to the West line of said West Half of Section 5; thence along said West line North 00025155" East 2957.41 feet to the centerline of the Larimer and Weld Canal; thence said centerline the following it courses and distances: 1) South 52037/49/1 East 492.00 feet; 2) South 61045/49/1 East 418.00 feet; 3) South 70034/49/1 East 260.00 feet; 4) South 60004/49/1 East 389.00 feet; 5) South 53049/49/1 East 176.30 feet; 6) South 55057132" East 234.78 feet; 7) South 63035157" East 117.81 feet; 8) South 83027/54/1 East 187.84 feet; 9) North 87045111" East 295.91 feet; 10) North 84033109" East 153.85 feet; 11) North 74026/45/1 East 133.23 feet to the West line of that certain parcel of land as described at Reception No. 87068478, records of said County; thence along said West line the following four courses and distances: 1) South 00000/54/1 East 54.54 feet; 2) South 80000154" East 23.00 feet; 3) South 00000154" East 72.00 feet; 4) South 45000154" East 70.71 feet to the East line of said Southwest Quarter of Section 5; thence along said East line South 00000154" East 1666.00 feet to a point 300.00 feet North of said South Quarter corner of Section 5; thence parallel with said South line of the Southwest Quarter of Section 5 North 89011126" 2 v- EXHIBIT B Reservations to Special warranty Deed Between Country Club Farms, LLC ("Grantor") and The City of Fort Collins, Colorado ("Grantee") This Exhibit "B" is an attachment to a Special Warranty Deed by which the Grantor conveyed that property described on Exhibit "A" (the "Conveyed Property") to the Grantee. The Grantor reserves for itself and its successors and assigns, the utility easement described below: 15-Foot Utility Easement The West 15 feet of the following -described parcel of land: That portion of the West Half of Section 5, Township 7 North, Range 68 West of the 6th P.M., County of Larimer, State of Colorado described as follows. Considering the West line of the Southwest Quarter of said Section 5 as bearing North 00°25'55" East and with all bearings contained herein relative thereto. Beginning at the Southwest corner of said Section 5; thence along said West line of the Southwest Quarter North 00125155" East 1241.77 feet; thence South 89034105" East 56.00 feet to the True Point of Beginning; thence South 89034105" East 282.82 feet; thence South 36012135" East 73.53 feet; thence South 67040141" East 214.09 feet; thence South 31002124" East 402.12 feet; thence North 89033'59" West 714.60 feet to the beginning of a non - tangent curve concave to the Northeast having a central angle of 11029'12" and a radius of 1033.00, the chord of which bears North 05018141" West for 206.75 feet; thence Northerly along the arc of said curve 207.10 feet; thence tangent from said curve North 00025155" East 267.07 feet to the True Point of Beginning. Containing 6.124 acres more or less. Following this reservation is a map showing the area of the Conveyed Property and the above -described utility easement which the Grantor hereby reserves. Grantee agrees to grant additional easements and rights -of -way to Grantor as may reasonably be required to develop its property adjacent to the Conveyed Property which is more particularly described as follows (the "PUD Property): EXHIBIT A TO SPECIAL WARRANTY DEED FROM COUNTRY CLUB FARMS, LLC TO THE CITY OF FORT COLLINS, COLORADO That portion of the West Half of Section 5, Township 7 North, Range 68 West of the 6th P.M., County of Larimer, State of Colorado described as follows. Considering the West line of the Southwest Quarter of said Section 5 as bearing North 00125155" East and with all bearings contained herein relative thereto. Beginning at the Southwest corner of said Section 5; thence along said West line of the Southwest Quarter North 00025155" East 1241.77 feet; thence South 89034105" East 56.00 feet to the True Point of Beginning; thence South 89034105" East 282.82 feet; thence South 36012'35" East 73.53 feet; thence South 67040141" East 214.09 feet; thence South 3100212411 East 402.12 feet; thence North 89033'59" West 714.60 feet to the beginning of a non - tangent curve concave to the Northeast having a central angle of 11029'12" and a radius of 1033.00, the chord of which bears North 05018'4l" West for 206.75 feet; thence Northerly along the arc of said curve 207.10 feet; thence tangent from said curve North 00025155" East 276.07 feet to the True Point of Beginning. Containing 6.124 acres more or less. floclfrded at o'clock Ilacopllon No. i M,-far EXHIBIT C Hook ___Faye recorder cam. peclal `Warrailty `Deed TIIIS DEED lia conveyance of llte rent properly described below. Including any improvements find other nppurtenonlres pile "properly') Iron Isle Indivldualgl, rorporntlonIs), partnership(s), or other enlily(ies) named below as OfIANTOn to the Individual Is) or enlllyfles) named below as GrlAN I EE. Ihn onANtron hmaby soils fret conveys the Inoperly to Iho OIIAN IEF, find the (IIIAN I On warrants life title ngnhlsl 11111 persons rlalining under lion oIIAN toll, except for only palliculnr millers described below under "Additional warranty Finlepnnns," P a ics- copl left any of Ihn fnllowlnq mnllers eslnhlished by the anANI On and evideliccd by recorded documenl: enseraenls, ripple ol- way, mineral grants, minerol Innses, find protective convenatils and restrictions. I he OIIANI On does loot warrant ayfiinsl the lien 01 the gnneral properly Ifiees for Ille, year of this [teed. The Specific Terms or This Deed Are: Qronlor: Inive name(q) and pfacels► of residence: if the spouse of Iho owner -grantor Is joining In this Deed to release homestead rights. Identify grantors as hushand and wife.) CounL'ry Clod) ['arms, I1iC, a Colorado limited liability company c/o Colorado I.Kind Source Ltd. 8101 r.. Prentice Avenue, Suite M1B0 FI1fII(1wr cxl, C0 11011.1 Giants*: logy@ namem and addressfesl. statement or address. Includinq avaunbie road or street munher. Is required.) 'I'll(! Lily of rorl: Collins, Colorado, a mu)icipal corporation 300 Jal.xrrt-e Avenue rorL Collins, C() 00521 Form Ol Co -Ownership: (I1 their ere two fir nmre grantern mmalrd, they will be considered to taste an truants In common unless the words "In Joint let+ancy" or words of the some meaning mr added in Ifs spnce. below) properly Description: (include county Rod slate.) See Exhibit "A" attached hereto and incorporated herein by reference property Address: Undeveloped property Consideration: I Ihp slMemenl nl a dollar mnnunl is oplinnal: ndrqunlr rnnsideratitrn Ior llds drrd willbe presumed unless Ildsconveyance Is Identified as a gill: in any case fits conveyance Is ebsolule. final slid atcondllimiel.) neservellons-neslricllons: Ill file DflAN l fin lnlrntls to ratter vn any inlaresl h+ the pr oprr ly fir to rrinvey less than be owns. or if the DMN 1 11 D Is restricting the (inANIEF'S right In the I,,,Perry. "Inks app,uponte Intimation 1 Ib 41 l vat inns and eascnlents described on Exhibit "B" attached hereto alxl incorporated hcrr.ln by reference and reservations and restrictions of record described under " lklc.11Lional. Warranty Exceptions" below. Additional Werranly EltCepllOne: (Include. deeds of hush brrhrg assumed end other masers not coveted abowr.l EXCept10OS Of ref( 11 xcn)i.nd r�yulatiOns aril similar restrictions imposed by the governmental body(ies) over. the Property; 2) the lien of general taxes for the year ofrotective )) all reservations, easemi-Its, exceptions and rights -of -way of record; 4) p (,ov(,nnnt-s; 5) those rights, if any, of third parties in the Property not shown by Pub. r(,(,nrds. le 97 Eaecirtpd by the nranlm on - ParMenhlp or Association: Clause for Indlvlduells): Slenshes Claw@ la C 'lla"@Ilen, Country Cl.uh rarms, LLC, a Colorado limited 1=1it�c°I�arl Grantor Name of Grantor: Corporation. Pattnership or Assoconlai 6r@none fir James R. M(-Cory, Manager -- ny Orantot Anesl SIAIE or GOLDnnno ss. I997 cotimy OF day of life Iaegmnq instrument was acknowledged before me this �C. nr • James R. M Cory, Manager, Country Club Farms, wit tir!f. my hand and official seal. Notary PuMk fey eemralsolen @aPboo' 9IAIF or 1 as, Ig (-,DUN IV OF ) day of lhp Impelling millumeni was acknowledged before me this fry • president and secretary or 1•nameInd+vMuat DranMrq)firII OranlrnNCmpmallnn,rrtnershlpor As!odeliff" thenIrMnllly signers n!presidentor vicep assrstanl lately of eorporslksn: or as parinarlsl of partnership; of as suthorlted operable ls) of association.) see Wr}rlf 49 my rieury refine head and olflel@1 la s1. d: th is EXHIBIT B TO ESCROW AGREEMENT BETWEEN COUNTRY CLUB FARMS, LLC AND THE CITY OF FORT COLLINS, COLORADO That portion of the West Half of Section 5, Township 7 North, Range 68 West of the 6th P.M., County of Larimer, State of Colorado described as follows. Considering the West line of the Southwest Quarter of said Section 5 as bearing North 00025'55" East and with all bearings contained herein relative thereto. Beginning at the Southwest corner of said Section 5; thence along said West line of the Southwest Quarter North 00025'55" East 1241.77 feet; thence South 89034'05" East 56.00 feet to the True Point of Beginning; thence South 89034105" East 282.82 feet; thence South 36012135" East 73.53 feet; thence South 67040'41" East 214.09 feet; thence South 31002'24" East 402.12 feet; thence North 89033159" West 714.60 feet to the beginning of a non - tangent curve concave to the Northeast having a central angle of 110291121, and a radius of 1033.00, the chord of which bears North 05118'41" West for 206.75 feet; thence Northerly along the arc of said curve 207.10 feet; thence tangent from said curve North 00025155" East 276.07 feet to the True Point of Beginning. Containing 6.124 acres more or less. to the East line of said Southwest Quarter of Section 5; thence along said East line South 00000'54" East 1666.00 feet to a point 300.00 feet North of said South Quarter corner of Section 5; thence parallel with said South line of the Southwest Quarter of Section 5 North 8901112611 West 300.00 feet; thence parallel with said East line of the Southwest Quarter of Section 5 South 0000015411 East 300.00 feet to the True Point of Beginning. Containing 140.094 acres more or less. EXHIBIT A TO ESCROW AGREEMENT BETWEEN COUNTRY CLUB FARMS, LLC AND THE CITY OF FORT COLLINS, COLORADO That portion of the West Half of Section 5, Township 7 North, Range 68 West of the 6th P.M., Larimer County, Colorado, described as follows: Considering the South line of the Southwest Quarter of said Section 5 as bearing North 89011126" West and with all bearings contained herein relative thereto. Commencing at the South Quarter corner of said Section 5; thence along said South line of the Southwest Quarter North 89011'26" West 300.00 feet to the True Point of Beginning; thence continuing along said South line North 89011126" West 470.00 feet; thence North 00048134" East 596.71 feet; thence North 89011126" West 146.00 feet; thence South 00048134" West 82.22 feet; thence North 89011126" West 254.00 feet; thence South 00044101" West 514.49 feet to said South line of the Southwest Quarter; thence along said South line North 89011'26" West 1424.94 feet; thence North 00025'55" East 176.34 feet; thence North 89034132" West 50.67 feet to the West line of said West Half of Section 5; thence along said West line North 00025155" East 2957.41 feet to the centerline of the Larimer and Weld Canal; thence said centerline the following 11 courses and distances: 1) South 52037'49" East 492.00 feet; 2) South 61145'49" East 418.00 feet; 3) South 70034149" East 260.00 feet; 4) South 60104'49" East 389.00 feet; 5) South 53049149" East 176.30 feet; 6) South 55057132" East 234.78 feet; 7) South 63035157" East 117.81 feet; 8) South 83027154" East 187.84 feet; 9) North 87045111" East 295.91 feet; 10) North 84033109" East 153.85 feet; 11) North 74026145" East 133.23 feet to the West line of that certain parcel of land as described at Reception No. 87068478, records of said County; thence along said West line the following four courses and distances: 1) South 00000154" East 54.54 feet; 2) South 80000154" East 23.00 feet; 3) South 00000154" East 72.00 feet; 4) South 45000154" East 70.71 feet 4. This Escrow Agreement shall inure to the benefit of, and be binding upon, the successors and assigns of the parties hereto. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties have executed this Escrow Agreement as of the date written above. By: COUNTRY CLUB FARMS, L.L.C., a Colorado limited liability company, James R. McCory, Manager CITY OF FORT COLLINS, COLORADO, a municipal corporation By: John Fischbach, City Manager APPROVED AS TO FORM: Carrie Mineart Daggett, Assistant City Attorney ATTEST: Wanda Krajicek, City Clerk 97 1. Concurrently with the execution of this Escrow Agreement, Country Club shall deliver to the City the original, fully -executed Dedication Deed to the City Clerk. 2. The City Clerk shall hold the Dedication Deed in escrow until notified in writing by Country Club the occurrence of one of the following events: a. In the event that Country Club does not receive preliminary approval of the Waterfield P.U.D. and after all appeal and referendum periods have expired with no appeal or referendum having been filed by Country Club, the City Clerk shall return the Dedication Deed to Country Club and this Escrow Agreement shall be terminated. b. In the event that Country Club obtains preliminary approval of the Waterfield P.U.D. and final approval of at least one phase of the Waterfield P.U.D. and after all appeal and referendum periods have expired with .no appeal or referendum having been filed or, if timely filed, has resulted in upholding such approval, then the City Clerk shall deliver the Dedication Deed to the Office of the Clerk and Recorder of Larimer County, Colorado for recording in the real property records. 3. All notices or other communications given the parties to this Escrow Agreement shall be personally delivered to or sent by express or overnight mail, or by first-class postage prepaid or by facsimile to the parties at the following addresses, or to any change of address given in writing by one party to the other: TO COUNTRY CLUB: James R. McCory, Manager 8101 E. Prentice Ave., Suite M180 Englewood, CO 80111 Telephone: (303) 290-9009 Facsimile: (303) 290-9097 WITH COPY TO: Lucia A. Liley, Esq. March & Myatt, P.C. 110 East Oak St., Suite 200 Fort Collins, CO 80524 Telephone: (970) 482-4322 Facsimile: (970) 482-3038 TO THE CITY: Stephen J. Roy, Esq. City Attorney 300 Laporte Ave. Fort Collins, CO 80521 Telephone: (970) 221-6520 Facsimile: (970) 221-6327 N ESCROW AGREEMENT THIS ESCROW AGREEMENT is made and entered into this day of , 1997, by and between Country Club Farms, L.L.C., a Colorado limited liability company, whose address is c/o Colorado Land Source Ltd., 8101 E. Prentice Avenue, Suite M180, Englewood, Colorado 80111 ("Country Club"), and the City of Fort Collins, Colorado, a municipal corporation, having its principal offices at 300 Laporte Avenue, Fort Collins, Colorado 80521 (the "City"). WITNESSETH: WHEREAS, Country Club is the owner of a 140.09-acre parcel of property located in north Fort Collins, more particularly described on Exhibit "A" attached hereto and incorporated herein by reference (the "Property"); and WHEREAS, Country Club has submitted to the City an application for preliminary approval of the Waterfield P.U.D., a mixed -use development of the Property; and WHEREAS, Country Club has agreed to dedicate a 6.124-acre parcel within the Waterfield P.U.D., described more particularly on Exhibit "B" attached hereto and incorporated herein by reference, to the City for public use as a neighborhood park (the "Park. Site"); and WHEREAS, on January 22, 1997, the City's Parks and Recreation Board unanimously recommended acceptance of the Park Site by the City for use as a neighborhood park; and WHEREAS, the City Attorney for the City has reviewed the title and Phase I environmental study for the Park Site and is satisfied that the condition of the property is acceptable to the City for use as a neighborhood park; and WHEREAS, the City Attorney has reviewed and approved the form of the deed dedicating the Park Site to the City (the "Dedication Deed"), a copy of which is attached hereto and incorporated herein by reference as Exhibit "C", and the City has agreed to accept deposit of the Dedication Deed into an irrevocable escrow with the City Clerk as set forth below. NOW, THEREFORE, by and in consideration of the above premises and the within terms and conditions, the parties hereto agree as follows: ARTHUR E. MARCH, JR. RAMSEY D. MYATT ROBERT W. BRANDES, JR. RICHARD S. OAST LUCIA A. ULEY J. BRADFORD MARCH LINDA S. MILLER JEFFREY J. JOHNSON MATTHEW J. DOUGLAS Carrie Min City Attor City of Fo 300 Laport Fort Colli RE: MARCH & MYATT, P.C. ATTORNEYS AND COUNSELORS AT LAW 110 E. OAK STREET FORT COLLINS, COLORADO 80524.28W (970) 482-4322 FAX (970) 482.3038 May 7, 1997 a t-Daggett, Esq. e 's Office Collins Avenue s, Colorado ARTHUR E. MARCH 1908-1981 MAILING ADDRESS: P.O. BOX 469 FORT COLLINS, CO 80522.049E VIA HAND DELIVERY Waterfield PUD Escrow Agreement and Deed for Park Site Dear Carrie: We appreciate you and Ron Mills reviewing the ALTA survey and title exceptions so quickly. Because final revisions to the Waterfield P.U.D. site plan were made by City Engineering just yesterday, it has taken us until now to obtain the legal descriptions for the park site and the utility easement. The legal description for the park site is an exhibit to the Special Warranty Deed, which Deed is Exhibit C to the Escrow Agreement. Also, the utility easement and map are part of a second exhibit to that Deed. Since you and Ron Mills have concluded that the title exceptions to which the park site is subject are acceptable and also because our client is not purchasing title insurance, we have revised the Warranty Exceptions provision of the Deed. Exhibit C has been eliminated altogether. Enclosed are two originals of the Escrow Agreement. Provided that all of the above is acceptable, I understand that you will try to obtain the necessary City signatures on the Escrow Agreement by Friday morning. We can then arrange to have them picked up, signed by Jim McCory and returned to you with the executed Deed for deposit into escrow with the City Clerk. Please call if you have any questions. By: LA /�pk Enc� osures CC. \\\ Mike Ludwig Jim McCory Sincerely, FT.COLLINS CITY ATTY. TEL: 12216327 May 12 9— 15:31 No.004 P.02 City Attorney May 12,1997 Lucia A. Liley, Esquire MARCH & MYATT, P.C. 110 E. Oak Street Fort Collins, CO 80524-2880 Re: Acceptance of Waterfield PUD Escrow Agreement and Deed for Park Site Dear Lucia: The original Escrow Agreement and Deed of Dedication for the above -referenced park site property, which your elimit, Country Club Farms, LLC, is dedicating to the City, havo been accepted and are now fully executed. I have provided the original deed to the City Clerk, who has agreed to act as Escrow Agent, along with a copy of the Escrow Agreement. 1 have also provided the City's original of the Escrow Agreement to the Clerk for filing. In addition, J have had a copy of the fully executed documents made, for your use, and will hold that copy here with your original until 1 receive fluther instructions from you. Please advise me as to whether you would like to have someone pick up a set, or if we should mail them to you. Thank you for your cooperation in completing this arrangement, We appreciate the efforts ofboth you and your assistant, Janelle, in responding to our suggestions and requests in finalizing these documents and the structuring the conveyance. Please contact me if we new to tape any further action at this time. Sinowly, 1 r A Carrie Mineart Daggett-.-3 Assistant City Attorney CMD:med pc: Mike Ludwig, City planner Ron Mills, Right of Way Agent Marty FdefPeman, Assistant to the Director of CLRS 3(X) LaPorte Avenue • P.O. Box 580 0 Fort Collins, CO 80522.0580 • (970) 221-6520 • FAX (970) 221-6327 MAY-12-97 MON 03:26 PM ► _ P,04/04 Tax-exempt financing is a difficult process and requires financial strength and a fairly sophisticated management team. In tax-exempt private activity bonds, the city acts as the tax- exempt sponsor of the project subject to the public policy guidelines. In return for the lower cost (due to the fact that interest on the bonds are subject to federal or state income tax) the housing project meets the City's affordable housing guidelines. The guidelines require that the project provide reduced rate rents for a specified period of time. The project needs to demonstrate that it will generate sufficient money at the reduced rental rates to pay for the tax-exempt bonds. In order to meet all of these requirements, the project developers need to strike a balance between the future tenants ability to pay and the cost of the project. usually, this means that tax- exempt financing only works for projects that are large enough to meet certain economies of scale, yet not too large to be unmanageable. The process of getting an inducement from the City for tax-exempt bonds takes about eight weeks. The city's annual private activity bond allocation (about $2.5 million) is not enough to do a complete -project. Applicants may seek additional allocation from the State. Securing additional issuing authority from the State also requires an application and six weeks to three months of time. once all funding capacity for the project is in place, the bonds can be issued. The actual issuance of the bonds for the tax-exempt financing takes about three months. Projects also have to be coordinated with the land use and development procedures used by the city. While the City has adopted a policy that calls for quick processing of affordable housing projects, the process also takes several months of time. This is just a.general discussion of the process, but one can see that there are many difficulties in doing affordable housing through the private activity bond financing process. Development companies have to have the ability to manage the processes and this means managing risk. City staff believes that the Brisben companies have the financial strength and management capacity to complete the tax-exempt financing process. In the application process, staff reviewed Brisben's financial statements and track record in other communities. In reaching a positive recommendation on the Bull Run project, staff ascertained that the probabilities for success were better than any other multi -family project that has been reviewed. Should the members of the Planning and Zoning Board have any questions about this memo, please contact me, Alan Krcmarik, at the Finance Department number, 221-6788 or through the internet at akromarik@ci.fort-collins.co.us. MAY-12-97 MON 03:25 PM - P.03/04 Administrative Services ;;a;.• > Finance Administration City of Tort Collins In MEMORANDUM DATE: May 12, 1997 TO: Members of the Planning and Zoning Board FROM: Alan J. grcmarik, Financial Officer Ate_ SUBJECT: Private Activity Bonds for Affordable Housing ACTION REQUESTED: None. This memo is intended for Board Members' information. if you have questions or comments, please send them along. SUMMARY: while there have been several projects that have sought to use the city's ability to provide tax-exempt private activity bond financing for affordable housing, none of the projects have yet been successfully completed. The Brisben CompaniesO Bull Run project has the financial strength and management capability to become the first affordable housing project to meet the City's. affordable housing guidelines and actually complete a project using tax-exempt private activity bonds. BACKGROUND The availability and quality of affordable housing has been a policy concern of the City of Fort Collins for many years. In 1984, Council adopted Resolution 84-179 which established policy guidelines and criteria for the use of tax-exempt bond financing for affordable housing projects. Since the policy was adopted, several companies have approached the City with projects that met the adopted policies, yet none of the projects have been completed. Below is a listing of multi -family projects that we have on file that requested tax-exempt financing, but were not competed: Drake Landing Multi -family Project Foothills Apartments Project Courtney Park Rehabilitation Project Robinson-Piersol Multi -family Project Stone Creek Apartments Oak Brook Apartments Rehabilitation Project These projects reached the stage of formal application to the City. Other projects intended to use tax-exempt financing, but did not reach the completed application stage. 300 LaPorte Avenue • PO. Box 380 • Fort Collins, CO 80522-0580 • (970) 221-6788 . FAX (970) 221-6782 APR-09-97 WED 10:09 ' �'LDLAND. CONSULTANTS 3036352436 P.07 7.0 References Churcher, P.B. and J.H. Lawton. 1989. Beware of Well -Fed Felines. Natural History, July:40-47. Clarion Associates of Colorado, LLC and Colorado Division of Wildlife. 1996. Managing Development for People and Wildlife. Colorado Division of Wildlife, Denver, CO. 149pp. Gammonly, J. 1997, Waterfowl Biologist, Colorado Division of Wildlife, Fort Collins, Colorado. Personal Communication With E. Berg, Wildland Consultants, Inc. Ringelman, J.K. 1991. Evaluating and Managing Waterfowl Habitat. Division Report No. 16. Colorado Division of Wildlife, Fort Collins, CO.46pp. Riverside Technology, Inc. Jurisdictional Wetlands Delineation Survey for the Country Club Farms L.L.C. Larimer County, Colorado. Rodgers, J.A., and H.T. Smith. 1995. Set -back Distances to Protect Nesting Bird Colonies from Human Disturbance. Conservation Biology. 9:99-99. Wilkinson, R. 1997. City of Fort Collins, Natural Resources Department. Personal Communication With F. Berg, Wildland Consultants, Inc. April, 1997. APR-09-97 WED 10:08 W ILDLAND. CONSULTANTS 3036352436 P.06 except to control noxious weeds. The native grassland of the buffer should provide nesting and foraging habitat to some grassland adapted birds and also potential nesting habitat to waterfowl. a A trail will be built along the outside edge of the buffer zone. The trail will serve to channel human traffic off of the wetland area and off of native vegetation. Signs will be posted along the trail identifying the area as a wildlife habitat, restricting human use off of the trail, and asking that all pets be walked with a leash. It may be desirable to change the trail so that it runs along the southern edge of the wetland buffer only. The trail along the eastern edge of the wetland brings people into close contact with the wetland and pond. Pedestrian traffic along the eastern segment could be routed onto the sidewalk along the street, *Approximately 14A acres associated with the detention pond in the southwest corner and the Larimer and Weld Canal in the northwest corner of the development will be left as permanent open space. The site in the northwest corner supports a small area of native grassland (with introduced plants present). This area will be enhanced with additional native grass, forb, and shrub plantings. The detention pond will be seeded with a native grass/forb mix, with native shrub plantings along the edges (see the Preliminary Landscape Plan), A wildife corridor linking the wetland area and the detention pond will be seeded with a native grass/forb mix. No annual mowing or maintenance of these areas will occur except for the control of noxious weeds. These sites will provide small habitat zones for grassland/agriculture adapted wildlife species. * The presence of the wetlands area and detention pond open space near the elementary school will provide invaluable opportunities for environmental education. The wetlands area and other natural open space will be made available for use by the local school for nature study. 6.0 Conclusions No developments adjacent to natural areas are possible without impacts to wildlife. Construction of the Waterfield P.U.D. will result in some degree of loss of waterfowl, waterbird, and other wildlife use of the wetlands area. Species sensitive to human disturbance will use the area with less frequency. Other species not sensitive to human disturbance will continue to use the area. It is impossible to quantify this loss except to say that the lake will no longer be used by the same diversity of migratory waterfowl and waterbird species- Increased predation of wildlife will result from an increased population of pets (cats and dogs) in the area. Mitigation and enhancement measures outlined in section 5.0 will help to reduce impacts to wildlife. These measures include: dedicating a 22.1 acre open space wetland and wetland buffer area; dedicating 14A additional acres of natural open space; completing habitat enhancements including plantings of native grasses, £orbs, and shrubs; and providing a wetland area for nature study available to the local elementary school. APR-09-97 WED 10:08 WI LDLAND. CONSULTANTS P.05 approximately 25 to 225 feet (see the Preliminary Landscape Plan). Species like the mallard, Canada goose, and American widgeon appear to have high tolerance for human's and human disturbances (Gammonly 1997). Other species like the great blue heron, most other waterbirds, teal, and most diving ducks (canvasback, redhead, scaup, and others) appear to have low tolerances for human's and human disturbances. The great blue heron (a species that uses the wetlands on the site) has been shown to flush an average of 105 feet away from human disturbance near a nesting site (Rodgers and Smith 1995). Feeding herons are likely to have similar flushing distances from human disturbance. Vegetation cover can help screen human disturbances and may reduce flushing distances of sensitive animals. Limited human disturbances (duing spring planting, fall harvesting) already occur around the wetland. Human disturbance on the site after development will result from humans and pets walking on the trail and other areas around the wetland; and human and pets in the backyards of homes on the east and west sides of the wetlands. human disturbance will be long terns and fairly constant through the year. Increased human presence is likely to result in some level of reduced use of the wetlands area by waterfowl and waterbirds that are sensitive to human disturbances. Species like the mallard, American widgeon, and Canada goose are likely to continue to use the area. It is not possible to quantify the level of reduced use by sensitive species. Predation and disturbance of wildlife near developments by cats and dogs has been shown to have a significant impact on local wildlife populations (Clarion Associates and Colorado Division of Wildlife 1996, Churcher and Lawton 1987). Predation by pets already occurs on the site to some degree. However, predation is likely to increase with higher house cat densities associated with development. The City of Fort Collins Leash Law prohibits free roaming cats and dogs. Enforcing the law (especially for house cats) could reduce predation levels. Some level of reduction in the populations of nesting and wintering passerine birds; and resident small mammals, reptiles and amphibians is likely to occur in the wetlands area as a result of increased predation by pets. 5.0 Proposed MitigatlowEnhancement Measures : The entire 11.5 acre wetland area and surrounding 10.6 acre buffer area will remain as permanent open space. The western and eastern wetlands fringes will be planted with riparian adapted native shrub species (willow, dogwood, wild rose, and other species) to help screcn human disturbance from the wetland and also to create nesting and foraging habitat for passerine birds (see the Preliminary Landscape Plan). The buffer area between the wetland and the development will be planted with a native grass/forb seed mix and scattered native shrub plantings. This native grassland area will not be mowed or maintained alter establishment, APR-09-97 WED 10:07 W TLDLRND.CONSULTANTS P.04 There have been no detailed wildlife studies completed on the wetland area. For this study 2 field visits were completed during the spring migration period. The following wildlife species (or sign of these species) were observed on the site during field reconnaissance completed on 4/4/97 and 4/8/97: mallard, Canada goose, American widgeon, redhead, green -winged teal, Northern shoveler, cinnamon teal, killdeer, great blue heron, American avocet, spotted sandpiper, tree sparrow, red -winged blackbird, white -crowned sparrow, marsh wren, black -billed magpie, American kestrel, northern harrier, raccoon, red -fox, and coyote. The number of species using the pond through the year is likely much greater than those listed above. Highest use by waterfowl and waterbirds is likely to occur during spring and fall migration periods. The shallow pond and abundance of aquatic vegetation provides an abundant feeding area for resident and migrant waterfowl (Ringeltnan 1991). The shallow shoreline areas and mudflats attract feeding waterbirds. The pond attracts an abundance of migratory waterfowl and waterbirds because of the available food supply and lack of human disturbance. The small pond and wetland appears to attract a large diversity of migrating waterfowl and waterbird species. Most of the waterfowl and waterbird species using the site in the spring and fall migrations are unlikely to use the area for nesting (Andrews and Righter 1992, Gammonly 1997). No studies have been completed to determine nesting species on the site. However, the mallard and Canada goose are the most likely nesting waterfowl on the site (Andrews and Righter 1992). Killdeer are the most likely nesting waterbird on the site. Red -winged blackbirds are probably the most common nesting bird species on the site. The narrow fringe of wetlands vegetation surrounding the site provides relatively limited nesting habitat to waterfowl. 4.0 Project Impacts No part of the wetland area will be directly impacted by project construction. The entire area will be set aside as permanent open space. Indirect impact to the site will result from increased human use and presence, and possible changing of the hydrologic characteristics of the wetland. (Note: a wetlands hydrology study is now in progress for the site to determine if development will change the water regime of the wetland area. An addendum to the Wildlife Impact Evaluation will be prepared when the hydrology study is completed to determine if changes to the water flow into the wetland area will impact wildlife). Wildlife species have varying tolerances to human use and disturbances (Clarion Associates and Colorado Division of Wildlife 1996). One species may be able to tolerate high levels of human use and another species may discontinue to use an area with high human presence. Creating buffer zones between valuable wildlife habitats and developments is a common way to reduce impacts to wildlife. Determining widths of buffer zones to protect wildlife is a difficult task. The proposed buffer zone around the wetlands area of the Waterfield project varies from APR-09-97 WED 10:07 "TLDLAND. CONSULTANTS 3036352436 P.03 Wildlife Impact Evaluation - Waterfield P.U.D. 1.0 Introduction This wildlife impact evaluation is designed to address City of Port Collins, Natural Resources Department comments on the Waterfield P.U.D. project. The Natural Resources Department is concerned about the project impacts to waterfowl and waterbirds from increased human presence and the proximity of development to the wetland area (Wilkinson 1997). This wildlife impact evaluation considers project impacts to the wetlands area only. Information for the report was based on field reconnaissance of the site, appropriate literature, and the professional opinions of Wildland Consultants, Inc. wildlife biologists. 2.0 Project Description The Waterfield P.U.D. is approximately 140 acres in size. The development will consist of a variety of housing types and uses including multi -family, single family, an elementary school, and a developed park. An 11.5 acre wetland area is present on the site. This wetland area and surrounding open space make up approximately 22.1 acres. Other open space on the site occurs along the Larimer and Weld Canal and in a large detention pond in the southwest corner (14.4 total acres). A trail is proposed along the southern and eastern boundaries of the wetland open space area. The Preliminary Landscape Plan details the location of housing, wetland, open space, and landscaping. A buffer (between the wetlands and housing) ranging from 25 feet to 225 feet surrounds the wetlands boundary. 3.0 Affected Environment The majority of the project area is currently used for agriculture. Small areas of native grassland occur along the Larimer and Weld Canal. An 11.5 acre wetland is located in the west center of the site (see the Preliminary Landscape Plan). The wetland is located in a depression surrounded by agricultural fields. This wetland includes a shallow pond with a fringe of wetland vegetation ranging from 50 to 150 feet wide. A jurisdictional wetlands delineation has been completed for the site (Riverside Technology, Inc. 1996). Dominant plant species in the wetland area include: cattail, Onley's threesquare, reed canary grass, fox -tail barley, curley dock, western wheatgrass, smooth brume, Canada thistle, and other species. The only trees in the wetlands area are three Russian olives. The shallow pond supports an abundance of aquatic plants, Exposed mudilats occur along portions of the shoreline. APR-09-97 WED 10:06 I'TLDLAND. CONSULTANTS 3036352436 P.02 Table of Contents 1.0 Introduction 1 2.0 Project Description 1 3.0 Affected Environment 1 4.0 Project Impacts 2 5.0 Proposed Mitigation/Enhancement Measures 3 6.0 Conclusions 4 7.0 References 5 APR-09-97 WED 10:06 WILDLAND.CONSULTANTS 3036352436 P.01 WILDLIFE IMPACT EVALUATION WATERFIELD PUD Prepared for: Country Club Farms, LLC 8101 East Prentice Avenue, Suite M-180 Denver, CO 80111 Prepared by: Wildland Consultants, Inc. 622 East 8th Street Loveland, CO 80537 Addendum - Wildlife Impact Evaluation Waterfield PUD Prepared by: Wildland Consultants Inc. 622 East 8th Street Loveland, CO 80537 Hydrologic Changes to Wetlands Area and Comment on the Revised Site Plan The wetlands area appears to be fed by a variety of ground water sources. This ground water may be related to the Latimer and Weld Canals, tile drains, and natural ground water flow. Project construction may alter ground water flow into the wetlands area. If the ongoing ground water study determines that water depletions will occur into the wetlands area, the developer has committed to provide supplemental surface water to maintain the pond at the current water level. No long term changes to wetland hydrology are expected to occur with project construction. The wetlands area will serve as a natural storm water retention and filtering area. Grassy storm water pretreatment areas will be constructed in the open space area. Stone water will enter these pretreatment areas for natural settling and filtering before entering the wetland. A drain will be installed into the southern portion of the pond. The drain will be located approximately 1 foot above normal pond water levels. This drain will allow the pond to collect storm water runoff in the event of a large stone event and then drain so that the pond returns to its normal water elevation. The drain should prevent the pond from accumulating water and permanently flooding adjoining wetland areas. As a result of consultation with the City of Fort Collins the site plan for the development has been changed to allow a larger buffer zone around the wetlands area. The buffer zone now ranges from 56 to 217 feet in width. The larger buffer zone will help reduce human disturbance - impacts on wildlife using the wetlands area. Wildlife species sensitive to human disturbance should be able to continue to utilize the wetlands. The larger buffer will also allow for creation of additional grassland habitat. Enhancement and mitigation measures proposed in Section 5.0 of the Wildlife Impact Evaluation have been committed to by the developer. These measures are designed to minimize impacts to wildlife and enhance the wildlife habitats on the site. WATERFIELD P.U.D., PRELIMINARY Wetland Impact Mitigation Measures • Creation of buffer areas 56' to 271' wide between the wetland and development • Elimination of farming in the wetland and buffer areas • Route pedestrian trails to the streets and away from the wetland, except along the south buffer near the school and park • Install a split rail fence near the trail to separate the trail from the wetland area and plant additional tree and shrub plantings to screen human movement • Post signs along the trails to: (i) identify wildlife habitat areas and signficant wetland features, (ii) prohibit pedestrians and bicycles off -trail, and (iii) warn of leash law requirements. • Augment the natural vegatative screening with additional plantings where the buffer is narrower • Require rear lot line fencing for lots adjacent to the wetland buffer • Creation of a wildlife corridor from the detention area in the southwest part of the site, through the school site, and north through the wetlands and buffer • Creation of habitat enhancement zones in the wetland buffer, detention pond and wildlife corridor to be planted with native grasses, forbs and shrubs • Require compliance with the City of Fort Collins leash laws through a covenant provision • Protection of wetland water quality by constructing on -site grassy pretreatment areas or other structural measures to filter storm drainage • Provide opportunities for environmental educational for the community and school children • Creation of a new wildlife habitat in the northwest part of the site to be enhanced with plantings of native grasses, forbs and shrubs • Supplement any lost ground water to the wetland to maintain wetland and pond at current size and level 4985.000 4980.000 4975.000 4970.000 4965.000 C O .n m 4960.000 w 4955.000 4950.000 4945.000 4940.000 0.000 200.000 400.000 600.000 800.000 1000.000 1200.000 1400.000 1600.000 Distance (it) . Legend SLC- Sandy Lean Clay SS • Silty Sand Notes: SG -Sand and Gravel 1. Boring lithology from Earth Engineering Consultants (Sept. 1996). 7 2. Groundwater table information is Interpreted based on preliminary and limited information. --- —�- Interpreted Ground Water Table ORiverside Technology, inc. Figure 6 Interpreted Cross Section 4 t 4985.000 4980.000 4975.000 4970.000 4965.000 0 a m 4960.000 w 4955.000 4950'000 4945.000 4940.000 �Larimer and Weld Canal Looking East ? ? Piezometer B5 Existing Ground Surface AZ Ground Water Table SLC.............. i 0.000 200.000 400.000 600.000 Buu.uvu IVUV.wu Distance (ft) _ Legend SLC- Sandy Lean Clay Notes: SG - Sand and Gravel 1. Boring 2. Groundlthology water table nEarth information is interp a ed bitants ased on prel m nary and limited information. --- � --— Interpreted Ground Water Table 000 Riverside Technology, inc. Figure 5 Interpreted Cross Section 3 4985.000 4980.000 4975.000 — - Looking East 4970.000— '• 7 4965.000 ? - - 7 Piezometer 86 -q 4960.000 - > -' Ground Water Table - - w Piezometer B9 4955.000 Existing Ground Surface SLC •, 7 /Welland Area 4950.000 - SCS _ _ _ •.-- r-� SLC _ ---...-.-..-.--" n_ 4945.000— SG______ _ ..-....-. _________________________________________ --.-...-.-- ---_—___._—___— SCS SG 4940.000 — 4935.000 0.000 . 250.000 500.000 750.000 1000.000 1250.000 1500.000 1750.000 2000.000 2250.000 2500.000 2750.000 - Distance (ft) - Legend Riverside Technology, inc. SLC -Sandy Lean Clay i� SCS--Sandy Clayey Silt Notes: SG - Sand and Gravel Figure 4 1. Boring lithology from Earth Engineering Consultants (Sept. 1996)' - 2. Ground water table information is interpreted based on preliminary and limited information. ----=----- Interpreted Ground Water Table Interpreted _ Cross Section 2 4990.000 4980.000 4970.000 4960.000 75 4950.000 4940.000 4930.000 ! Larimer and Weld Canal - Looking East I Piezometer B7 _ Lc � : • -. , - Piezometer BB Existing Ground Surface ..� ...... SLC o Si _ 4 Ground Water Table SG -••? .............. ? ........... 0.000 250.000 500.000 750.000 1000.000 1250.000 1500.000 1750.000 2000.000 2250.000 2500.000 Distance (ft) Legend SLC- Sandy Lean Clay. SS - Silty Sand Notes: SG - Sand and Gravel 1. Boring lithology from Earth Engineering Consultants (Sept. 1996). ? 2. Ground water table information isinterpreted based on preliminary and limited information. ---------V Interpreted Ground Water Table Riverside Technology, inc. Figure 3 Interpreted Cross Section 1 --_-_ m - m m m m m m m mm m m m 1 I \ I' --- #1 q � m o w D :3 W O -n 0 m h 3 CD CD m N :13. ZO n j l7 #2 #3 oaf* Gage �I (esasi. •� `t �i . County Road 45 East Vine Drive Legend IV Cross Section Lines /v Water Table Contours Surface Contours Is.o� Piezometer with Average Depth to Groundwater • Staff Gage with Pond Surface Elevation Wetland Area Groundwater Gradient ;'. W #4 I S E N 200 0 200 400 600 800 1000 Feet Note: Potentlometrlc surface based on average ground water elevations 9-96 to 4-97 r• far Inver 000 �QWli7g ""kF\\ �B5 \ •1 Possible �l Tile Drains E 4955.000rn n' w 131 ri County Road 48 East Vine Drive II N Legend �`n r O N Surface Contours W E CD p 21 = :3 cD CCD o Piezometer S - ` '0 :w o • Staff Gage 200 0 200 400 600 800 1000 c Wetland Area Feet T APPENDIX A Figures 1 RESOURCES Earth Engineering Consultants, Inc. (1996). Preliminary Subsurface Exploration Report, Country Club Farms, Vine Drive and Summitview, Latimer County, Colorado. Landstar Surveying. (1997). Map of Piezometers and Staff Gage Locations. Fort Collins, Colorado. Riverside Technology, inc. (1996). Jurisdictional Wetlands Delineation Survey for the Country Club Farms L.L.C. Fort Collins, Colorado. Northern Engineering, Inc. (1997). Map of the site boundaries and topography. Fort Collins, Colorado. U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA), Soil Conservation Service. (1993). Larimer County Area, Colorado: Comprehensive Hydric Soils List. ------ (1963 and 1978). Aerial photographs of the Waterfield P.U.D. site. USDA, Soil Conservation Service and Forest Service, in cooperation with the Colorado Agricultural Experiment Station. (1980). Soil Survey of Larimer County Area, Colorado. U.S. Department of the Interior, Geological Survey. (1960). 7.5-Minute Series Topographic Map for Fort Collins, Colorado, Quadrangle. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. (1975). National Wetlands Inventory Map for the Fort Collins, Colorado, Quadrangle. a4251swro1.ea oeai v7 5 function; however excessive amounts of sediment, oil and grease, or herbicides could be detrimental to the wetlands vegetation and wildlife. If stonriwater runoff is diverted into the wetlands area, Best Management Practices (BMPs) should be implemented to reduce the amount of pollutants that reach the wetlands. BMPs could include using a grass -vegetated swale or depression that would provide a zone where the pollutants could adsorb onto the vegetation or settle out. ADDITIONAL STUDIES As project plans become more defined, it may be beneficial to obtain additional water level data and hydrogeological information. There are no ground water elevation data near the south or north side of the Larimer and Weld Canal. Additional piezometers and short-term aquifer tests (slug tests) in the vicinity of the canal or immediately downgradient from the canal would provide information to better define (1) interconnection between the canal and the water table and (2) the amount of seepage - from the canal. Additional piezometers located north of the canal (upgradient) could be used to obtain a better understanding of the regional ground water system. However this may not be possible since this area is under a different ownership. If additional information is collected to provide an understanding of (1) the existing hydrostratigraphic conditions, (2) ground water level data, (3) hydraulic conductivity of defined geologic units, and (4) construction design (utility trenches, subdrain and foundation layouts, etc.), it would be possible to implement a ground water model, such as MODFLOW, to predict or estimate how the water table will respond to site development plans. The model could also be used as a tool to evaluate the efficiency of subdrains and to estimate discharge rates. As mentioned previously, there is a ground water discharge area on the north side of the wetlands area with a flow of approximately 19 gallons per minute. This discharge may be an outlet for an underdrain system; however, there are no data to support this. If a drain system is encountered in this area, additional studies may be necessary to determine the source of the water and if any impacts to the wetlands area may occur by disturbing the drain system. a115/Swnn1.doc MIN7 4 1 lAssumptions: • The ground water system below the project site is a component of the regional ground water system and includes seepage from the Larimer and Weld Canal. There is no ground water information available for the area near the canal or to the north (upgradient ) of the canal. • Ground water at borings B2 and B9 was encountered at a depth of 6 feet during drilling. No piezometers were installed at these sites, so a depth to ground water was assigned an elevation that corresponded to the 6-foot depth recorded during the time of drilling. • The potentiometric surface was based on average ground water elevations collected from September, 1996, to April, 1997. The wetlands pond is the result of a topographic low area that extends below the ground water surface (Figure 4 - Appendix A). The existing data indicate that ground water flows to the southwest beneath the site (Figure 2 - Appendix A). The ground water gradient was determined to be approximately 0.03 ft./ft. from piezometers B6 and B7 to the pond surface. The Larimer and Weld Canal, which borders the north boundary of the site, appears to have the capacity to convey a considerable amount of water. During April, 1997, the water depth in the canal was approximately 2 feet. The canal banks are composed of a silty clay covered with varying amounts of broken concrete. The canal width is approximately 100 feet at the top of bank and 50 feet at the bottom. If there is considerable seepage from the canal, the ground water gradient between the canal and the wetlands pond may become steeper as flows increase in the canal DISCUSSION The existing data indicate that the water level in the wetlands/pond area is maintained primarily by ground water discharge. As indicated on the cross sections in Appendix A, the source of the ground water may be from the regional ground water system, the Larimer and Weld Canal, or a combination of both sources. Lowering the ground water table is an option that has been considered to allow for the construction of basements. However, if the ground water table in the immediate vicinity of the pond is lowered below 4,949 feet, the wetlands area will most likely begin to dry up. If the ground water table is lowered but still retains a positive flow toward the wetlands pond, a reduction in the wetland size may still occur due to the flattening of the ground water gradient. A flatter gradient could reduce the rate of ground water discharge to the wetlands area. An option to maintain sufficient ground water flow to the wetlands area while still lowering the ground water system would be to place the underdrain outfall in the wetlands area. Another option to consider is using canal or well water to supplement in flow to the wetlands area. The current owner of the property has indicated that an adjudicated water right to canal water exists, as well as an adjudicated well. In addition, it might be possible to direct stormwater runoff from the development into the wetlands area to supplement the water source to the wetlands. Typically wetlands purify water by taking up nutrients and filtering sediment. The wetlands at the Waterfield site would provide this purifying a425/gwewl.dac 0eaiA7 3 HYDROGEOLOGY EEC observed the presence of and depth to ground water while drilling and after completing each of the borings. Field piezometers were installed at six of the boring locations (B 1,4,5,6,7, and 8) to allow for longer term monitoring of ground water levels. The piezometers consisted of 2-inch polyvinyl chloride pipe with slots in the bottom 5 feet. It does not appear that a gravel -pack back fill or surface seal was used to construct the piezometers. The locations of the piezometers are shown in Figures 1 and 2 in Appendix A. At the time of drilling, ground water depth was observed ranging from 5 to 7 feet below the present ground surface. Ground water levels were recorded at each of the piezometers during September, October, and November, 1996, and March and April, 1997. These data are summarized in Table 1. TABLE 1 Ground Water Elevations (Waterfield P.U.D.) Piezometer Number Ground Surface Elevation (feet) Ground. Water Elevation (feet) 09/17/96 09/27/96 10/11/96 11/11/96 03/04/97 04/03/97 B1 4957.19 4950.09 4949.66 4949.19 Dry Dry Dry* B2 4961.00 4955.00 -- -- -- -- -- B4 4961.05 4956.87 4956.57 4956.17 4955.47 4955.07 4955.06 135' 4955.94 4951.34 4951.07 4950.67 4949.92 4950.87 4949.28 B6 4959.45 4956.20 4956.6 4956.5 4956.25 4956.0 4956.03 B7 4965.41 4960.57 4959.97 4959.77 4959.13 4959.68 1 4959.45 11 B8 4952.92 4947.78 1 4946.98 4946.18 Dry DryD B9 4947.00 4941.00 -- I -- -- -- *Piezometers were silted in: B I to 4947.75 feet; B8 to 4945.93 feet Notes: Borings B3 and B10 did not encounter any ground water. Boring depths extend approximately 15 feet below ground surface. Piezometers were not installed in borings B2 and B9. Water levels were only recorded at the time of drilling. A staff gage was installed in the wetlands pond in April of 1997 to correlated the pond surface elevation with the existing ground water elevation (Figure 2 - Appendix A). The pond surface elevation was surveyed at 4,948 feet in April of 1997. Ground water seepage was observed flowing into a ditch that extends along the north and east side of the wetlands and then into the ponded area (Figure 1 - Appendix A). A flow measurement was taken in the ditch on April 14, 1997, using a portable flume. The flow was estimated at 0.04 cubic foot per second (cfs) or approximately 19 gallons per minute. The water level data, along with the assumptions listed below, were used to develop a potentiometric surface map and cross sections for the site (Figures 2-6 - Appendix A) and to analyze potential impacts to the wetlands area. a423/SwrwLdrx 0412rv7 2 INTRODUCTION This report presents the results of Riverside Technology inc.'s (RTi's) preliminary evaluation of the ground water system at the Waterfield P.U.D. site located in the City of Fort Collins northwest of the intersection of Summit View and East Vine Drive. RTi understands that the site is under consideration for single and multi -family residential development. The purpose of this review is to evaluate the ground water system and determine if development activities may impact the wetlands area or require corrective measures. RTi's scope of work was limited to (1) compiling and analyzing existing data on the site, along with preliminary development plans provided by Northern Engineering Inc.; (2) installing a staff gage in the wetland pond to allow for a correlation between ground water elevations, flow in the canal, and pond surface elevation; and (3) presenting a summary of the ground water system at the site and any potential impacts that the project plans may have on the system, including the wetlands. SITE DESCRIPTION The majority of the Waterfield site consists of upland agricultural development. The terrain slopes gently to the south, with elevations ranging from approximately 4,950 to 4,980 feet. The Larimer and Weld Canal traverses the northern boundary of the property. A naturally occurring topographic low area has developed into a cattail marsh with ponded water that is 1 foot deep on average (Figure 1.- Appendix A). Excavations on the south side of the wetlands area appear to be in locations that, at one time, contained a tile drain system. Broken remnants of the tile drains were evident in the excavated areas. Mr. Bob Rudolf, who is currently farming the site, was contacted to obtain information on any drain systems that may have been installed. He was not aware of any existing drain systems, but felt that there was a high probability that some subsurface drains had been previously installed because of the shallow ground water system and the property's proximity to the Larimer and Weld Canal. SOILS AND SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS Ten soil borings extending to depths of 15 feet below present site grade were advanced by Earth Engineering Consultants Inc. (EEC). The subsurface exploration results are presented in the report entitled Preliminary Subsurface Exploration Report, Country Club Farms, Vine Drive and Summitview, Larimer County, Colorado (1996). A summary of EEC's observations of the subsurface conditions is provided below: Four to 6 inches of vegetation and/or topsoil was encountered at the surface of the boring locations. The topsoil/vegetation was underlain by brown and light brown sandy lean clay with varying amounts of silt. These soils extended to depths ranging from approximately 4 to 14 feet. The sandy lean clay was underlain by predominantly silt soils containing varying amounts of sand and clay or silty fine sands and ranged in depth from 9 to 14 feet. The fine grained sands and silts were underlain by granular soils, including varying amounts of sand and gravel. The granular soils extended to the bottom of the borings at depths of approximately 15 feet. The lithology of each boring is presented in Figures 3 through 7 - Appendix A. o115/gx'ew1.dw 04/11A7 1 TABLE OF CONTENTS Section Paae Introduction..............................................................................................................................................1 SiteDescription.......................................................................................................................................1 Soils and Subsurface Conditions............................................................................................................1 Hydrogeology..........................................................................................................................................2 Discussion...............................................................................................................................................3 AdditionalStudies....................................................................................................................................4 Resources...............................................................................................................................................5 APPENDIX A - Figures Figure 1 Water Field Site Location Map Figure 2 Potentiometric Surface Figure 3 Interpreted Cross Section 1 Figure 4 Interpreted Cross Section 2 Figure 5 Interpreted Cross Section 3 Figure 6 Interpreted Cross Section 4 List of Tables Table Paae 1 Ground Water Elevations...........................................................................................................2 If Preliminary Evaluation of the Ground Water System at the Waterfield P.U.D. Site submitted to City of Fort Collins and Northern Engineering Inc. by Riverside Technology, inc. 2290 East Prospect Road, Suite 1 Fort Collins, Colorado April 1997 APR-07-1997 22:51 ITTHEW DELICH PE 3036695034 P.04 lanes may be implemented when improvements occur related to this and other developments. I would not argue against implementation of the left -turn lanes at this intersection. 2. I agree that left -turn lanes are needed on Vine at Merganser Drive and Wood Drive. The need for right -turn lanes at these streets will not occur until the longer range future. If there are further concerns or questions pertaining to these responses, please contact me. TOTAL P.04 APR-07-1997 22:51 "9TTHEW DELICH PE 1, 3036695034 P.03 the City Structure Plan, a reasonable interpretation would indicate that the extension of Conifer between Merganser Drive and CR9E occurs north of the irrigation ditch. This would require a single structure over that ditch. This could be accomplished by turning Conifer slightly to the north and continuing to CR9E, or providing off set intersections along Merganser Drive. In my judgment, an alignment north of the irrigation ditch is more appropriate. Another consideration should be the nebulous design of the "Mixed - use District" shown on the Fort Collins City Plan. Until more definition is given to this area, perhaps this leg of Conifer should be subject to further review. 9. No comment 4. The primary direction of travel be to the west along Vine Drive. future (Mixed -Use District, importance of Vine Drive will development. 5. No comment in the 'short range future will As other things occur in the Timberline Extension), the moderate with regard to this 6. As per a number of meetings in March, a preliminary design is underway. I have provided traffic forecasts for the Vine/CR9E intersection to Northern Engineering Services. Northern Engineering services will determine the right-of-way needs. Transportation Planning 1. Pedestrian walkways at the ends of cul-de-sacs are relevant if there is someplace to walk to. These walkways are appropriate to access another street that is beyond the bulb of a cul-de-sac or a park, open space, school, etc. that can be accessed through such a facility. 2. Bike lanes are included in the standard crops section for these streets. 3. Frank Vaught and I discussed the possibility of vehicular access or a drop-off area east of the school. Care must be taken not to provide through access that would encourage non - school traffic to go right passed the school. 4. No comment Traffic operations 1. There is no doubt that left -turn lanes on all legs of the Vine/Lemay intersection will improve the operation at this intersection. However, using the short range forecasts, I demonstrated that acceptable operation could -be achieved without implementation of left -turn lanes. These left -turn APR-07-1997 22:50 Lql ITTHEW DELICH PE 3036695034 P.02 W a C 7 P CD rn co co rn LL rZ cc 0 a rc 0 W F all 4x H i� PUMRAPDUM Jim McCory, Colorado Land Source Fort Collins Staff . FROM: Matt De1icb DATE: April 7. 1997 SUBJECT; waterfield PUD - Response to comments related to traffic study (File: 9644MEM1) This memorandum responds to comments regarding traffic and transportation aspects of the waterfield PUD. The comments were made by Engineering (Mike Herzig), Transportation Planning (Kathleen Reavis), and Traffic Operations (Fred Jones). The following response addresses each numbered comment from each department. A "no comment" indicates that a traffic response is deemed to be not appropriate. Engineering 1. No comment 2. The forecasted volumes on Merganser Drive indicate that it could be classified as either a collector street (without parking) or a minor arterial street, The only functional difference between these two streets is provision of a continuous median lane on a minor arterial. The necessary turn lanes can be incorporated into the street design at appropriate locations if the collector street classification is selected. The minor arterial street classification would ensure that there would be adequate pavement throughout. its length regardless of where intersections might occur. Classification of this street is the City's call. The forecasts on Wood Duck Drive just north of Vine Drive are collector street volumes. These volumes will dissipate as Wood Duck Drive penetrates the site. This street will function as a collector street even though there may be segments that do not have collector level traffic volumes. while it was always understood that Conifer would eventually -"be built from Lemay to Merganser (CR11), it was not clear if Coni£er.would proceed through this site or be north of this site. The current site plan clearly does not have. Conifer going through this site. In reviewing both the Fort Collins Master Street Plan and i Planning and May 8, 1997 Page 4 Zoning Board accommodate the City's long range transportation plans to widen Vine Street and Summitview Road and extend Conifer Street; (v) the location of higher density residential along arterials to support future transit needs; and (vi) the promotion of well -planned growth .in North Fort Collins. In conclusion, the developer believes that the strict application of the solar orientation ordinance would render the Waterfield P.U.D. practically unfeasible because it would be either unacceptable to the City or without sufficient points to merit approval. We request, therefore, for all the reasons cited above that a variance from the requirements of All Development Criteria A-1.1 be granted. Sincerely, MARCH & MYATT, P.C. c` By: Lltii!iy A. Lile LAL/jpk pc: Jim McCory, Manager Country Club Farms, L.L.C. Planning and Zoning Board May 8, 1997 Page 3 Equal To or Better Than [§29-526(K)(3)] The proposed Waterfield P.U.D. site plan is better than a plan that would strictly comply with the solar orientation criterion. The only way this developer sees to achieve 65% solar -oriented lots, while still complying with the City's street standards, right-of-way requirements, storm drainage and natural resources requirements, is to replace or reduce one or more of the project features with additional north -south oriented single-family lots. The result of compromising any of the project's features would be more detrimental to the project than having 16% fewer solar - oriented lots than the criterion requires. . For example, the City has made the provision of affordable housing for its citizens a priority. A reduction in the size of either affordable project in Waterfield P.U.D. would jeopardize the availability of their tax credit financing and contracts with the purchasers and developers. The Senior Cottages and the Bull Run Apartments must be approved as proposed, or there will be no affordable component to Waterfield P.U.D., contrary to the City's stated goals. The small business services center within Waterfield P.U.D., which is envisioned to include at least a convenience store, a daycare facility and a retail use, will conveniently meet several needs of the Waterfield community and reduce vehicle trips to and from the project for such needs. The school site meets a short term need of the Poudre R-1 District, provides a neighborhood school for the Waterfield community, and assists the school district in its long-range plan to accommodate growth in the northeast, which the City has promoted for years. Finally, the neighborhood park location complements the school site and will likely be a well -utilized facility, similar to Troutman Park. The loss or reduction of any of these components of Waterfield P.U.D. would result in a less desirable project to the developer, the Waterfield community,,the City, the Poudre R-1 School District and the citizens at large. Substantial Benefit to the City [§29-526(K) W T The City will benefit substantially from approving the Waterfield P.U.D., as proposed, with a variance from the solar orientation requirements, because the project includes several features which help satisfy defined community needs: (i) preservation of wetlands and wildlife habitats; (ii) provision of long-term affordable housing for families and senior citizens; (iii) provision of a neighborhood park site and an elementary school site in close proximity to residential areas and preserved natural areas; (iv) sufficient right-of-way dedications to Planning and Zoning Board May 8, 1997 Page 2 the site which limit the design include a 75-foot wide power line easement traversing the northwest part of the site, the existence of a maintenance road adjacent to the Larimer and Weld Irrigation Ditch, the construction of a majority of County Road 11 on the site and the significant amount of road right-of-way that has been required for the City's future extension of Conifer Street and the City's future improvements to Vine Street and Summitview Drive. Finally, a zoning condition was imposed upon the Waterfield property which requires the developer to achieve a density of at least six dwelling units per net developable acre. The limitations imposed by these conditions, when coupled with the most effective placement of several project features (school, park, business services and affordable housing) have prevented the developer from providing more east -west streets, and thus a higher percentage of solar -oriented lots. Neither is it an option, because of the density restriction, for the developer to reduce the number of single family lots so that fewer lots would satisfy the solar orientation requirement. To require strict application of the technical solar requirement, the developer would be forced to accommodate the peculiar conditions in a less desirable way or reduce the density, neither of which are desirable or even permissible. Exceptional Difficulties Reaardincr Solar Orientation [§29- 526 (K) (2) ] After determining the optimal locations within the Waterfield P.U.D. for the school, park, business services and affordable housing and, considering the site constraints outlined in the previous paragraphs, it was not possible to design the remaining property with more east -west streets for solar -oriented single family lots. The narrow areas east and west of the wetland and buffer are north -south oriented and unable to accommodate additional east -west streets. The area north of the Conifer Street right-of-way and the. power line easement is not useable for residential lots because of its irregularity and access constraints. Finally, the area between the Larimer and Weld Irrigation Ditch and the Senior Cottages portion of the site is too narrow for parallel east -west streets without either violating the mandatory street design standards or creating numerous very shallow lots. In any event, this option would net too few solar -oriented lots to meet the solar requirement. The exceptional difficulties of this site make compliance with the solar orientation requirements a hardship. MARCH & MYATT, P.C. ARTHUR E. MARCH, JR. ATTORNEYS AND COUNSELORS AT LAW RAMSEY D. MYATT 110 EAST OAK STREET ROBERT W. BRANDIES, JR. FORT COLLINS, COLORADO 80524-2880 RICHARD S. GAST (970) 482-4322 LUCIA A. LILEY TELECOPIER (970) 482-3038 J. BRADFORD MARCH LINDA S. MILLER JEFFREY J. JOHNSON MATTHEW J. DOUGLAS May 8, 1997 Planning and Zoning Board City of Fort Collins 300 Laporte Avenue Fort Collins, CO 80521 Re: Waterfield P.U.D., Preliminary Request for Solar Orientation Variance Dear Planning and Zoning Board Members: ARTHUR E. MARCH 1908-1981 MAILING ADDRESS: P.O. BOX 469 FORT COLLINS, CO 80522-0469 This firm represents Country Club Farms, L.L.C., the owner and developer of the Waterfield P.U.D. We request, pursuant to L.D.G.S. §29-526(K)(1) through (4), that Waterfield P.U.D. be granted a variance from the strict application of the solar orientation requirement of L.D.G.S. Criteria A-1.1, which would require that at least 65% of the applicable lots in the development be solar -oriented., The total gross acreage of the Waterfield project is 140.09 acres. Of the total, approximately 40% is reserved for wetlands preservation, open space, a neighborhood park site, a public school site, utility easements, buffer areas, on -site detention and road rights -of -way. The remainding acreage includes a small business service center and 296 units of affordable housing, which are not subject to the solar orientation requirement, and finally, 187 single family lots to which the criterion applies. Ninety-two (92) or 496 of the single family lots conform to the definition of solar -oriented lot. Although the site plan has been designed to achieve the maximum number of solar -oriented lots, we have less than 65% and therefore, request that the Planning and Zoning Board grant a variance of this requirement for the reasons cited below: Exceptional Conditions Peculiar to the Site [§29-526(K)(1)1 The site of the Waterfield P.U.D. includes several natural conditions which affect the design of the site plan, including a significant wetland and buffer area, a City park, a Poudre R-1 school site, the Larimer and Weld Irrigation Ditch, and natural drainage patterns that make it necessary to provide detention areas in the southwest portion of the site. Other conditions peculiar to Planning and Zoning Board Members May 8, 1997 Page 3 bike lanes. Waterfield PUD includes sidewalks along all streets, connections between the single-family, multi -family and business service center and off-street pedestrian walkways across the south end of the wetland buffer and north to the new wetland area. The Waterfield PUD includes a neighborhood park site which has been dedicated to the City for public use, an elementary school site which has been dedicated to the Poudre R-1 School District and a small business service center with a convenience store, a daycare facility and retail services, all available to the public. Finally, Country Club will be working cooperatively with the developer of the Waterglen project to provide jitney bus service from the two developments to other employment, shopping and recreational areas in the City until public transit is available to the residents. In conclusion, Country Club has provided sufficient open space, recreational areas, parking and public facilities to serve the occupants of the entire Waterfield P.U.D., including the 4- bedroom units in Bull Run Apartments, without having an adverse effect on the adjacent neighborhoods. We request, therefore, that you find that the criteria of §29-526 (E) (6) have been satisfied and approve the inclusion of the 4-bedroom units in the project. Thank you for your consideration. LAL/glr pc: Country Club The Brisben Sincerely, 16-a Farms, L.L.C. Companies Planning and Zoning Board Members May 8, 1997 Page 2 provided. However, given the income restrictions enforcing the affordibility of the units, it will be very difficult for four unrelated persons to fit under the resident income restrictions. We request, therefore, that you consider the following evidence and approve the eighteen (18) 4-bedroom units proposed for inclusion in the Bull Run Apartments. Open Space The Waterfield PUD includes a significant wetland and buffer area, covering approximately 25 acres or 1801 of the entire development. The wetland and buffer will be preserved as an open area for wildlife feeding and habitats, with some protected trails along the south end of the wetland to provide viewing and educational opportunities to the residents of Waterfield. The developer also proposes to create a new wildlife habitat in the acreage at the northwest corner of the site where no building will occur. Finally, the Bull Run Apartments site itself provides additional open space around the clubhouse and pool facilities and long corridors of open space behind and between the buildings, which average approximately 75 feet wide. Recreational Areas . Prior to the approval of Waterfield, Country Club will place into an irrevocable escrow the deed to a 6.124-acre site to the City of Fort Collins for development as a neighborhood park. The developer has provided additional opportunities for recreation with the Bull Run Apartments clubhouse, community room, Tot -Lot with playground equipment, Sport Court, pool, sundeck, barbeque areas and surrounding park -like open space in addition to sidewalk connections for pedestrians throughout the project. Parking Country Club has designed the layout of the Bull Run Apartments to provide adequate parking for all units. The number of handicapped spaces and the ratio of parking spaces to dwelling units meets the City's parking standards for multi -family development. Public Facilities Country Club will make significant road improvements to East Vine Street, Summitview Drive and County Road 11 in connection with this development in .order to provide safe and adequate public access. All of these public streets will also include dedicated ARTHUR E. MARCH, JR. RAMSEY D. MYATT ROBERT W. BRANDIES, JR. RICHARD S. GAST LUCIA A. LILEY J. BRADFORD MARCH LINDA S. MILLER JEFFREY J. JOHNSON MATTHEW J. DOUGLAS Board Members Planning and City of Fort MARCH & MYATT, P.C. ATTORNEYS AND COUNSELORS AT LAW 110 E. OAK STREET FORT COLLINS, COLORADO 80524-2880 (970) 482-4322 FAX (970) 482-3038 Zoning Board Collins 300 Laporte Avenue Fort Collins, Colorado May 9, 1997 ARTHUR E. MARCH 1908-1981 , MAILING ADDRESS: P.O. BOX 469 FORT COLLINS, CO 80522-0469 VIA HAND DELIVERY Re: Waterfield P.U.D., Preliminary Request for Special Review of 4-Bedroom Dwelling Units Dear Planning and Zoning Board Members: On behalf of the developer, Country Club Farms, L.L.C. ("Country Club"), we request that the Board approve this request for special review pursuant to §29-526 (E) (6) of the LDGS. Under such section, the Planning and Zoning Board is permitted to approve 4-bedroom units in a multi -family project even though they do not conform to the strict definition of "family" as established in §29- 1 of the City Code. Country Club is requesting preliminary approval of the Waterfield P.U.D. Waterfield P.U.D. is a mixed -use development containing a neighborhood park site, an elementary school site, preserved wetlands and buffer areas, a convenience store, a daycare facility, retail uses, single-family residential, affordable housing for senior citizens and affordable townhomes for rent. The affordable townhome component of Waterfield, Bull Run Apartments, consists of a total of 176 dwelling units and a clubhouse facility and pool for tenant use. Of the total number of units, there are eighty (80) 2-bedroom units, seventy-eight (78) 3- bedroom units and only eighteen (18) 4-bedroom units. The Brisben Companies, the ultimate developer of the Bull Run Apartments, can provide data to support the fact that a very high percentage of their affordable housing, including 4-bedroom units, is rented to traditional families related by blood or marriage. Four -bedroom units, however, do not conform to all definitions of "family" under the City Code in that Federal regulations applicable to the project do not permit discrimination based on the existence of a family relationship among the renters. Thus, it is possible for four unrelated persons to reside together when four bedrooms are MAY-13-97 TUE 04:28 PM P.04/04 Planning and Zoning Board May 13, 1997 Page 3 that the mixed use nature of the project would meet a stated purpose of its Low Density, Mixed -Use Neighborhood zoning, which is to combine housing with "complementary and supporting land uses that serve a neighborhood". In addition to satisfying City policy goals, Country Club believes that is makes good planning sense to provide neighborhood I ervices within the neighborhood. waterfield P.U.D. will include 176 units of affordable housing designed for families; this segment of the waterfield community could benefit significantly from a daycare facility and a convenience store. In fact, all of the residents and the City at large will benefit from the reduction of vehicle miles travelled if the waterfield community can access some of the necessary services within blocks of their home. For all of the reasons cited above, County Club requests that the Planning and Zoning Board grant a variance from the requirements of Criteria 2, Activity J, Neighborhood Convenience Shopping Center, on the basis that the plan proposed for Waterfield P.U.D. is equal to or better than a plan in compliance with the criteria, pursuant to §29-526(K)(3) Thank you for your consideration. Sincerely, MARCH & MYATT. P.C. LAL/jpk PC: Jim McCory Cathy Mathis MAY-13-97 TUE 04:28 PM P.03/04 Planning and Zoning Board May 13, 1997 Page 2 maximum applicable points on Point Chart "J". Points were earned for a majority of the categories, including being located at the intersection of an arterial and collector street with primary access taken off the collector; containing two or more different uses; being located on at least three gross acres of land; being located at least 3/4 mile from another center; and being located in "north" Fort Collins. The Waterfield Center was not permitted to take points for Criterion f. Because Country Club is creating a new Center in order to provide necessary services to its residential development, it cannot meet the strict technical interpretation of the language of Criterion f., which requires the Center to be "continguous to and functionally part of an existing or approved neighborhood shopping center". Points were also not awarded to the Waterfield Center under Criterion i., which permits neighborhood convenience shopping centers to earn points for implementing energy conservation methods in the buildings of the center under one of two methodologies. However, with the recent adoption of the City's new Model Energy Code, the requirements have become so stringent that it is very difficult, if not impossible, to achieve all or a part of the points available in this category. The staff is considering a Code change to eliminate this category, but until, that occurs these possible points must be included in the total percentage required. Additional points, awarded under either Criterion f. or Criterion i., would give the Waterfield Center a total of either 42 points (69%) or 40 points (65%), respectively, clearly satisfying Criteria 2. In an alternative analysis, deleting both categories from the number of maximum applicable points would give the Center 32 of 44 points, or 73%, again exceeding the minimum of 65% Since, however, it has been the City's practice to abide by the strict interpretation of these criterion, the granting of a variance is necessary_ Mixed Use it is a long-standing policy goal of the City to promote the creation of mixed use neighborhoods where residents have business services available in the close vicinity. Both the former Goals and objectives and the Land Use Policies Plan, in addition to the newly adopted City Plan Principles and Policies, emphasize the desirability of having neighborhoods which include support services which meet some of the needs of daily life. More specifically, both the City Structure Plan and the Zoning Map adopted in March of this year designate the Waterfield site as a Low Density, Mixed -Use Neighborhood. Although the Waterfield P.U.D. is not being proce:3sed under City Plan requirements, it is interesting to note MAY-13-97 TUE 04:28 PM P. 02/04 ARTHUR E. MARCH. JR. RAMSEY 0. MYATT ROB£RT W. SkANDES, JR. RICHARO S. GAST LUCIA A. LILEY J. BRAOFORD MARCH LINDA S. MILLER JEFFREY J. JOHNSON MATTHEW J. DOUGLAS MARCH & MYATT, P.C. ATTORNEYS AND COUNSELORS AT LAW 110 EAST OAK STREET FONT COLLINS, COLORADO 8052a 2880 (870) 482-4322 TELFCOPIER 1970) "2.3036 May 13, 1997 Board Members Planning and Zoning Board City of Fort Collins 300 Laporte Avenue Fort Collins, Colorado Re: Waterfield P.U.D., Preliminary Request for Point Chart Variance Dear Planning and Zoning Board Members: ARTHUR E. MARCH Igoe-1981 MAILINU ADDRESS: P.O. BOX 469 FORT COLLINS, CO 80522-0089 VIA FACSIMILE TO: 416-2020 On behalf of the developer, Country Club Farms, L.L.C. ("Country Club"), we request that the Board approve this request for a variance from Criteria 2 for Activity J, Neighborhood Convenience Shopping Center, which reads as follows: Does the project earn at least sixty-five (65t) percent of the maximum points as calculated on Point Chart IIJII for the following criteria? As grounds for this request, Country Club asserts that granting the variance would neither be detrimental to the public good nor impair the intent and purposes of the L.D.G.S. and, that the plan submitted for Waterfield P.U.D. is equal to or better than a plan which would meet the criterion pursuant to §29-526 W (3). Waterfield P.U-D. is being processed under the L.D.G.S. pursuant to Section 6, Ordinance No. 161, 1996 (the "Transition Ordinance"). Country Club offers the following evidence in support of its request.for a variance: Point Chart "17" The Waterfield P.U.D. contains a neighborhood convenience shopping center (the "Center") adjacent to East Vine Street which will include a convenience store, a daycare facility and a building for retail uses. The Center earns 32 points, or 51.65s of the continue to operate acceptably. The recommended geometry is shown in Figure 12. In the long range future, all area roadways and intersections are expected to operate acceptably. New street links and mixed use districts, as described in the City Plan, will moderate traffic volumes on various street segments. Transit facilities, as described in the City Plan, and bicycle facilities, as shown on Fort Collins Street Design Standards, will provide alternative modes of transportation to residents of Waterfield PUD, as well as, other developments in the area. 7 A& N NO SCALE LONG RANGE DAILY LINK VOLUMES Figure 14 I a n � N CONIFER `y t� Mixed -Use I District w QOP � i 'T QONIFER t %7/T/7%%7/T/7%%T/7/7 W GARGENEY �1 c5 v Site 11 J �lyJA C 3 VINE _,/ DRIVE '`+• Grade Separated Grade Separated Interchange Interchange TIMBERLINE EXTENSION LONG RANGE GEOMETRY Figure 13 related to the mixed use activity center near the CR50/CR9E intersection is a function of the City Plan and future development. Specifics concerning operation in this area cannot be analyzed at this time. With the enhanced road system in this area, operation at the analyzed intersections will be acceptable. City Plan documents show transit corridors in this area on the Timberline Extension, Conifer Street, Lemay Avenue, and Vine Drive. These, along with bicycle facilities that are a part of the collector and arterial roadway system, will provide the opportunity for alternative means of transportation for the residents of Waterfield PUD and other proposed/future developments in this area of Fort Collins. Figure 13 shows a schematic .of the long range geometry at key intersections and along selected'roadways. Figure 14 shows long range daily traffic forecasts on interior streets and the external adjacent streets. These forecasts are provided so that various street segments can be compared to criteria contained in the new street design standards of the City of Fort Collins. It is expected that streets within the Waterfield PUD will meet local street volume criteria. A short segment of Wood Duck Drive, north of Vine Drive, will exceed local street volume criteria. However, this is due to the commercial land uses in this area. It is expected that volumes will meet local street criteria just north of the access to the apartment area. It is expected that Merganser Drive will function as a collector street when/if the street network is completed as described earlier. Both Vine Drive and the Timberline Extension have volumes that fall into the arterial street category. V This study assessed the the Waterfield PUD on the s (year 2015) street system development. As a result concluded: CONCLUSIONS traffic impacts of the development of hort range (year 2003) and long range in the vicinity of the proposed of this analysis, the following is - ' Waterfield PUD is a mixed use residential development, comprised of 488 dwelling units, a small commercial center, a city park, a day care facility, and an elementary school. This development is expected to generate approximately 6130 daily vehicle trip ends, 590 morning peak hour trip• ends, and 550 afternoon peak hour trip ends. Based upon current traffic volumes and existing geometry/control, all key intersections operate acceptably. - In the short range, with development of the initial phase of the `Waterfield PUD,• all key intersections are expected to 2 TABLE 4 Long Range Peak Hour Operation Level of Service Intersection AM PM Vine/Merganser (stop sign). SB LT C C SB RT A A EB LT A A Vine/Wood Duck (stop sign) SB LT B C SB RT A A EB LT A A Vine/Apartment Access (stop sign) SB LT/RT B B EB. LT A A CR9E/Senior Cottages Access (stop sign) EB LT/RT B B NB LT A A CR9E/Garganey (stop sign) EB LT/RT B B NB LT A A Lemay/Conifer. (stop sign) EB LT/T C F EB RT A A WB LT/T F F WB RT A A NB LT A A SB LT A A Lemay/Conifer (signal) B B Conifer/New Road (stop sign) EB LT B C EB RT A A NB LT A A SHORT RANGE GEOMETRY Figure 12 TABLE 3 Short Range Peak Hour Operation Level of Service Intersection AM PM CR50/CR9E (stop sign) NB LT B B NB RT A A WB LT A A Vine/CR9E (all way stop) NB A B SB B A EB B B WB A A Overall A B Vine/Lemay (signal) C D Vine/Merganser (stop sign) SB LT B B SB RT A A EB LT A A Vine/Wood Duck (stop sign) SB LT B B SB RT A A EB LT A A Vine/Apartment Access (stop sign) SB LT/RT B B EB LT A A CR9E/Senior Cottages Access (stop sign) EB LT/RT A A NB LT A A CR9E/Garganey (stop sign) EB LT/RT A A NB LT A A morning and afternoon peak hour traffic in the long range future (2015). IV. TRAFFIC IMPACTS AND ANALYSIS Signal Warrants As a matter of policy, traffic signals are not installed at any location unless warrants are met according to the Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices. Based upon the forecasted traffic volumes, it appears that the Lemay/Conifer intersection may meet peak hour signal warrants in the long range future. It is on the threshold of meeting warrants, so both a signalized and unsignalized analysis were conducted for the long range future conditions. Operation Analysis Capacity analyses were performed on the key intersections in the vicinity of the Waterfield PUD for both short range (year 2003) future and long range (year 2015) future traffic conditions. Using the traffic volumes shown in Figure 10, the key intersections operate in the short range future, with the initial phase of the Waterfield PUD, as indicated in Table 3. Calculation forms for these analyses are provided in Appendix C. These analyses assumed that the existing system and control continued to be in place. With the additional traffic from the 392 dwelling units and the commercial area in the initial phase of development, all of the key intersections will operate acceptably, based upon Fort Collins level of service criteria. It is recommended that some geometric improvements be made at selected intersections. Figure 12 shows the recommended lane geometry at the key intersections. The CR9E/CR50 intersection should have separate lanes for all movements. This is not due to the Waterfield PUD, but rather the lanes are needed with the existing volumes. Future developments, such as Richard's Lake PUD and Waterfield PUD, only serve to reenforce the need for these lanes. Using the traffic volumes shown in Figure 11, the key intersections operate in the long range future (year 2015) as indicated in Table 4. Calculation forms are provided in.Appendix D. Seven key intersections are analyzed in the long range future. The analyzed intersections are expected to operate acceptably. Two intersections along Vine Drive are expected to be grade separated by the year 2015. General designs are not available at this time and are beyond the scope of this traffic study. The enhanced road system will be designed to function acceptably. The. traffic system 5 1 AM/PM i Rounded to the Nearest 5 Vehicles. 0 50/75 � 100/110 r-140/110 68 1 g � / N - W N 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 Mixed -Use i District 1 I 1 1 1 1 i � 1 1, . . . . . . . . . r N n :Z n 1265/90 6 O ✓ GARGEN� EY, /J 30/20 �A 20/15 Q z Site � Y W U Ln�GlL1 0011L1/1/ �� 0 3 0� c. � � = 157 355) •� 120 325-� VINE 50 10- \� 225/325 --� 235�10 Grade Separated Interchange LONG RANGE TOTAL PEAK HOUR TRAFFIC 15/10 5/5 3 o — Yjiv , —340/360 365/420 !# RIVE 10/20_,/ • 275 345 -+ Grade Separated Interchange TIMBERLINE EXTENSION Figure 11 N AM/PM Rounded to the Nearest 5 Vehicles. -- 60/135 C.R. 50 jr— 110/125 ' J llT/%77%lTTGARGENEY)10/10- 710/10--y Ln a % w Site �" >- z F/ L J 5/10 0 Ln C :!/l1 o!LfLI/1/ / LO o W)o h 60/75 c w 3 0 0 o n 5/10 tc 'n s— 95/110 n � W cI ` nII `Iv — m in � 75/95 r-70/65 f _ 5/5 300 1' y f 25/3255/� `� v - 5/15270 I + � % 10/10 10/35� } 15-Y VINE 35/65—/ DRIVE 10/30—/ 35/65-1 } 65 125 n 190 275 160/215 — 175 22065 80 Lnan o 85/50 95/85 C, SHORT RANGE TOTAL PEAK HOUR TRAFFIC Figure 10 AM / PM FULL DEVELOPMENT PEAK HOUR SITE GENERATED TRAFFIC Figure 9 AM/PM C.R. 50 N 12/30 W r/,'x7/7//77/77�7/7,l7� I GARGENEY t� f 19/6 / -� v Site I z Y J W 88 w :ULI oLn !L/Ll/1/ / v*--3/3 m� n� 30/24 M L / - 47/37 23/38 4/15 + — i/2 15/37--` 3/11-/ VINE 31/61-/ DRIVE 9/26-/ 13/22� f 1/2 "C n 26 20 N 3 W 51 SHORT RANGE PEAK HOUR SITE GENERATED TRAFFIC Figure 8 A& N 0%-5% 15%-20% H ■ am _\14P� SHORT RANGE TRIP DISTRIBUTION Figure 6 -- - — -- ----- ----... — ...... ----- ss - ci ----------- N o c� 07=5% 10r�► CORD. 50 1)<" Mixed -Use w Center • J CONIFER 10%-15 I VINE Lo Lo N 1 0 N LONG RANGE TRIP DISTRIBUTION k N LU k ;Site " � NOM. _ to to M I A 0 M Figure 7 to calculate the trip generation. Non-residential land use codes from Trip Generation, 5th Edition were as follows: Elementary School (520), City Park (411), Gas/Convenience Store (845), Specialty Retail Center (814), and Day Care (565). Table 2 shows the daily and peak hour traffic from the Waterfield PUD. A vehicle trip is defined as a one-way vehicle movement from a point of origin to a point of destination. Trip Distribution Directional distributions were determined for the land uses considered in this study. These distributions considered trip attractions in the Fort Collins area, and existing travel patterns in'the area. The short range trip distribution used in subsequent analyses is shown in Figure 6. The long range trip distribution is shown in Figure 7. Background Traffic ' Background traffic is defined as the traffic that is and/or will be on the area streets that is not related to the proposed development. Future analysis years were 2003+ (short range) and 2015 (long range). This is a developing area of Fort Collins and, as such, the traffic increases are largely dependent upon land development. Background traffic was increased incrementally by 2.0 percent per year to estimate short and long range background traffic. This growth rate was determined by reviewing various transportation planning documents and the estimated increases.in housing and employment for traffic zones in this area. Consideration was also given to other known developments, such as the Hearthfire PUD and the Richard's Lake PUD. In order to present a conservative analysis, site related traffic was, considered supplemental to the increase in background traffic. Traffic studies for other future developments may change traffic forecasts slightly; however, the forecasts used are the best available at this time. Trip Assignment Trip assignment is how the generated and distributed trips are expected to be loaded on the street system. The assigned trips are the resultant of the trip distribution process. Figure 6 shows the assignment of the generated trips from the initial phase of the Waterfield PUD. The Figure 8 assignment, assumes the existing street system. Figure 9 assumes that the future road system, shown in Figure 3, is in place and aspects of the "City Plan" are underway. Figure 9 is the full development site generated traffic assignment. Figure 10 shows total morning and afternoon peak hour traffic in the year 2003 short range future. Figure 11 shows total 4 A& N NO SCALE WATERFIELD PUD SITE PLAN Figure 5 TABLE 1 1996 Peak Hour Operation Intersection CR50/CR9E (stop sign) NB LT/RT WB LT Vine/CR9E (all way stop) NB SB EB WB Overall Vine/Lemay (signal) TABLE 2 Trip Generation Level of Service AM PM A A A A A A- A A A A A A A A B C Daily A.M. Peak P.M. Peak Land Use Trips Trips Trips Trips Trips in out in out Single Family Residential 1830 36 106 127 67 - 192 DU Apartments - 176 DU 1110 19 58 55 32 Senior Cottages - 120 DU 340 10 11 19 14 Elementary School - 600 650 108 72 Nom Nom students City Park - 6.46 Acres 20 Nom Nom 1 1 Gas/C-store - 8 pumps 1300 40 40 54 54 Neighborhood Commercial 410 6_ 3 20 20 - 10.0 KSF Day Care - 100 Students 470 43 38 40 45 TOTAL 6130 262 328 316 233 Existing Operation Using the traffic volumes shown in Figure 4 and the existing control and geometry, the key intersections operate as indicated in Table 1. Calculation forms for these analyses are provided in Appendix B. As shown on Table 1, all intersections currently operate acceptably. For evaluation purposes, acceptable level of service is defined as level of service D or better during peak hour conditions. Current levels of service in the area of the site typically are B or better. III. PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT The Waterfield PUD is a mixed use residential development, proposed north of Vine Drive and west of CR9E in Fort Collins. As currently planned, it will have 488 residential units, a small neighborhood commercial center, a city park, a day care facility, and an elementary school. The commercial center is of a size that is not expected to attract significant trips from outside this development, except for passby traffic on Vine Drive. Actually, some trips for convenience items may be captured within this development. Figure 5 shows the site plan of the Waterfield PUD. Site access is planned via Vine Drive and CR9E. Three accesses are proposed to Vine Drive and two accesses are proposed to CR9E. In the long range future, Merganser Drive will potentially become part of the new north/south road mentioned earlier. For analysis purposes, the initial phase of development of the Waterfield PUD consists of the apartment area (176 D.U.), the senior cottages (120 D.U.), half of the single family detached area (96 D.U.), and the commercial center. This phase is intended to begin in 1997. Actual development is a function of market conditions; however, for traffic analysis purposes, completion of the initial phase was assumed to occur between the years 2000-2005. The initial phase traffic analysis assumed that the road system shown in Figure 3 was not in place. Trip Generation Trip generation is important in considering the impact of a development such as this upon the existing and proposed street system. A compilation of trip generation information was prepared by the Institute of Transportation Engineers and is presented in Trip Generation, 5th Edition and the February 1995 Update. This document was used to estimate the daily and peak hour vehicle trips generated by the Waterfield PUD. Three. residential land use codes from Trip Generation, 5th Edition, Single -Family Detached Housing (210), Apartment (220), and Retirement Community (250) were used I ll0001996 a n 52/63 N�� n �- 58 7 +-19/23 4s/23 �mcnm ') r 75/46 - � l i��1 N VINE + 55761 E4 14/ 1 1996 — 43/80 50 % 82/60 W W Q V 1996 N n� �h �- 2 9 + 66 83 l� l� (N 18/39 -0( ) } I 57/69 -� 'o ao 62/58� n o m n AM / PM 4 N RECENT PEAK HOUR TRAFFIC Figure 4 m ,To Roads The primary streets near the Waterfield PUD are Vine Drive, County Road 9E (CR9E), Summit View Drive, and County Road 50 (CR50). Vine Drive is adjacent to the Waterfield PUD on the south. It is an east -west street designated as an arterial street on the Fort Collins Master Street Plan. Its existing cross section, in this area, has one lane in each direction. There are some existing residences along the north side of Vine Drive. There is a railroad switching yard on the south side of Vine Drive. County Road 9E is a north -south roadway extending from CR50 to the Vine Drive intersection. To the south of Vine Drive, it becomes Summit View Drive. The "Northeast Area Transportation Study" and.the Fort Collins Master Street Plan show CR9E and Summit View as arterial streets. These roads have a paved two lane cross section. These roads are intended to become part of the Timberline Extension in the future. County Road 50 is an east -west road designated as an arterial on the Fort Collins Master Street Plan. CR50 is under the administrative control of Larimer County to the east of CR11. It has a two lane cross section with minimal shoulders. Other roads of significance in the area are Lemay Avenue and CR11. Figure 2 shows the street system in this general area. Most of these roads have two lane cross sections. Neighborhood meetings and staff meetings indicated that the existing road system will be deficient in handling future traffic volumes. To address this, the Fort Collins Master Street Plan and the Fort Collins City Plan have designated improvements to various streets. Figure 3 indicates the improved and/or new road facilities in this area. Due to constraints on CR11, discussions with City staff indicated that a potential parallel road to the east of CR11 could better serve this area. This road would provide access to the "mixed use district" (per City Plan) located at the CR50/CR9E intersection and a connection to CR11 (north of Vine Drive). The existing alignment of CR11 would provide local access to private properties and existing developments such as Adriel Hills. This road system would also provide attractive routes so that traffic volumes on CR50E would not increase significantly as other developments occurred. Existing Traffic Morning and afternoon peak hour traffic data were obtained as part of this study or obtained from recent traffic studies in the area. This information is presented in Figure 4. Raw traffic data is presented in Appendix A. 2 No Text I. INTRODUCTION This traffic impact study addresses the capacity, geometric, and control requirements at and near a proposed mixed use residential development known hereinafter as the Waterfield PUD. It is proposed to be located west of County Road 9E and north of Vine Drive in Fort Collins, Colorado. During the course of the analysis, numerous contacts were made with the project planning consultant (VF Ripley Associates), the Fort Collins Planning Department, and the Fort Collins Transportation Department. This study conforms with typical traffic impact study guidelines. The study involved the following steps: Collect physical, traffic, and development data. Perform trip generation, trip distribution, and trip assignment. - Determine peak hour traffic volumes. Conduct capacity and operational level of service analyses on key intersections. Determine roadway improvements as deemed appropriate. Traffic studies and current planning efforts for the Richard's Lake PUD Site Access Study, the Hearthfire PUD Site Access Study, the "Northeast Area Transportation Study," and the "North Front Range Regional Transportation Plan" were reviewed as part of the analysis. The City also provided transportation model data related to the Timberline Extension. II. EXISTING CONDITIONS The location of the Waterfield PUD site is shown in Figure 1. Since the impact in the short range, as well as, the long range is of concern, it is important that a thorough understanding of the existing conditions be presented. Land Use The Waterfield PUD site is located in the northern area of Fort Collins. The area surrounding the site is primarily undeveloped with some residential developments lying primarily to the northwest and south of the site. These existing residential areas are not within the city limits of Fort Collins. 1 WATERFIELD PUD SITE ACCESS STUDY FORT COLLINS, COLORADO JANUARY 1997 Prepared for: Colorado Land Source, Ltd. 8101 East Prentice Avenue, Suite M180 Englewood, CO 80111 Prepared by: MATTHEW J. DELICH, P.E. 2272 Glen Haven Drive Loveland, CO 80538 Phone: 970-669-2061 FAX: 970-669-5034 t� Proposal: Description: Density: General Population: SCHOOL PROJECTIONS #7-95B Waterfield P.U.D. - Preliminary Mixed -use development (192 single family residential lots and 296 multi -family units) on 145 acres. 3.37 du/ac (gross) 296 (multi -family units) x 2.3*(person/unit) = 681 192 (single family units) x 3.2#(persons/unit) = 614 School Age Population: Elementary: 296 (units) x .104 (pupils/unit) = 31 192 (units) x .396 (pupils/unit) = 76 Junior High: 296 (units) x .050 (pupils/unit) = 15 192 (units) x .185 (pupils/unit) = 36 Senior High: 296 (units) x .046 (pupils/unit) = 14 192 (units) x .166 (pupils/unit) = 32 TOTAL = 204 #Figure assumes 2 bedroom multi -family residential units. *Figures assume a mixture of 2 and 3 bedroom single family residential units. NEIGHBORHOOD- CONVENIENCE SHOPPING CENTER POINT CHART J For All Criteria Applicable Criteria Only Criterion the Criterion Applicable Yes No I II III IV Circle Correct Score Muitipuer Points Corned Ixll Moxlmum Appllcoble Points a. Transit. Route X JXJ 2 CO 1 C 2 b. At Collector/Arterial X X 0 0 5 10 10 c.. Mixed -Use Development X X O2 0 2 L 4. d. Three Acres -or More X X 2 0 4 $ g e. From Convenience Center X X ©0 4 8 g f. - Part of Planned Center X X 2 01 5 10 g. Contiguity X Ix 2 0 5 10 h. "North" Fort Collins X X 0 1 2 2 i. Energy Conservation X 1 2 31t 2 0 g 1 1 1 2 1 0 k. 1 2 0 L 1 2 0 Totals 32 (AZ v vi Percentage Eamed of Maximum Applicable Points V/VI = VII vu Land Development Guidance System for Planned Unit Developments The City of Fort Collins, Colorado, Revised March 1994 -86- Neighborhood Convenience Shopping Center (continued) f. Is the center contiguous to and functionally a part of an existing or approved neighborhood shopping center, an office or industrial park, or a muld-family development? g..Is the center located with at least one -sixth (1/6) of.its property boundary contiguous to existing development? h.. Is the center located within "north" Fort Collins? i. Does the activity reduce non-renewable energy usage through the application of alternative energy systems or through energy conservation measures beyond those normally required by the Model Energy Code as adopted by the City? Refer to Appendix E for Energy Conservadon Methods to use for calculating energy conservation points. 9 Land Development Guidance System for Planned Unit Developments The City of Fort Collins, Colorado, Revised March 1994 -85= WELC, PUZ _ F2E1.�Ml� ACTIVITY; Neighborhood Convenience Shopping Center DEFINITION; A shopping and service center situated on seven (7) or fewer acres with four.(4) or more business establishmenis located in a complex which is planned, developed, and managed as a unit, and located within and intended to primarily serve the consumer demands of adjacent residential neighborhoods. Neighborhood convenience shopping center criteria shall apply only to those areas of the City that are zoned R-L, R-L-P, R-L-M, R-H, R-P, R-M-P, M-L, M-M, B-L, or B-P, or any other areas of the City if such areas are subject to the zoning condition that no development be approved unless processed as a Planned Unit Development, provided, however, that said criteria shall under no circumstances apply to development in the H-B zone. The principal uses permitted include retail services, personal services, convenience grocery stores (with accessory gas -pumps), standard or fast-food restaurants (without drive -up windows), liquor sales (for on- or off -premises consumption), beauty or barber shops, dry cleaning outlets, equipment rental (not including outdoor storage), and uses of similar character as determined by the . Planning and Zoning Board. Secondary uses may include professional offices, limited banking services such as automated teller machines, multi -family dwellings, medical offices and clinics, small animal veterinary clinics, and child care centers. CRITERIA; Each of the following applicable criteria must be answered "yes" and implemented within the development plan. Yet, No 1. Have steps been taken, to minimize any environmental hazards, f ❑ particularly those associated with underground fuel storage tanks, and if the proposed development is located in or near an environmentally - sensitive. area, have all applicable state and local environmental standards been met? 2. DOES THE PROJECT EARN AT LEAST SIXTY-FIVE (65%) ❑ (� PERCENT OF THE MAXIMUM POINT'S AS CALCULATED ON POINT CHART "J" FOR THE FOLLOWING CRITERIA? a. Is the center contiguous to an existing transit'route? b. Is the center located at the intersection of a neighborhood collector and arterial street with primary access taken off the collector? c.. Does the center contain two (2) or more different uses? d. Is the center on at least three (3) gross acres of land? N/A e. Is the center located at least three-quarters (314) of a mile from any existing or approved Neighborhood Convenience Shopping Center or convenience grocery store? (For the purposes of this criterion, the term "approved' shall be defined as having current preliminary or final Planned Unit Development approval.) Land Development Guidance System for Planned Unit Developments The City of Fort Collins, Colorado, Revised March 1994 Wit can be demonstrated that the project will redim noo-raiewable energy usage either through the application of alternative energy systems or through committed energy consw ation measures beyond those normally required by City Code, a 5% bonus may be earned for every 5% reduction in energy use. m Calculate a 1% bonus for every 50 acres included in the project 1.2 Il Calculate the parentage of the total aces in the project that are devoted to recreational use. &rter'h of that percentage as a bonus. O 1 If the applicant commits to preserving pemwxTG off -site open space that meets the City's minimum requirements. calculate the percentage of this open space acreage to the total development acreage and enter this percentage as a bonus. I Ifpart ofthe total development budget is to be spent on neighborhood public transit facilities which are not required by City Code, p enter a 2% bonus for every $100 per dwelling unit invested. !t I Ifpart oftbe total devdbpnrrt budget's to be spent on neighborhood facilities and servion which are not otherwise required by City Y Code, edcr a I% bonus for every S 100 per dwelling unit invested. Ifthe project contains dwelling units set aside for individuals earning 800/6 or less of the median income of City residents, as adjusted I for family size, and paying less than 300/9 of their gross income for housing, including utilities ("Affordable Dwelling Units ) calculate the penoerdage of Affordable Dwelling Units to the total number of dwelling units in the projed and Bata that percentage '� as a bonus, up to a'maxim um of 15% (Ifthe project is proposed to be constructed in multiple phases, the Affordable Dwelling Units mutt be constructed as a pert ofthe plisse for which approval is sought.) In order to insure that the Affordable Dwelling Unit& remain affordable for a period of not less than 25 years, the developer shall record such protective covenaNs as may be required by the City under Sec. 29-526(Jx4). Ifs commitment t is being made to develop a spxiSed percentage of the total number of dwelling units for Type "A" and Type "$" handicapped haling as defined by the City of Fort Collins, calculate the bonus as follows: S I Type "A" .5 x Tvoe "A" Units Total Units In no case shall the combined bonus be greater than 30% Type "B" 1.0 x Type "B" Units Total Units If the site or adjacent property contains a historic building or place, a bonus may be earned for the following: t 3% For preventing or mitigating outside influences adverse to its preservation (e.g. envirorhmental, land use, aesthetic, economic and social fsdmY, 3% For assuring did new structures will be in keeping with the character of the building or place, while avoiding total units; 3% For proposing adaptive use of the building or place that will lead to its continuance, preservation and improvement in an appropriate manner I Ifa portion or all ofthe required parking in the multiple family project is provided uodergrownd, within the building, or in an elevated u parking struct3uo as an accessory use to the primary structure, a bonus may be earned as follows: 9% For providing 75% or more of the parking in a structure; 6% For providing 50 - 74% of the parking in a structre; 3% For providing 25 - 496A of the parking in a structure. V I Ifs eonmitrnat is being made to provide approved automatic fire extinguishing systems for the dwelling units, enter a bonus of 10% W IIfthe apphcart commits to providing adequate, safe and convenient pedestrian and bicycle connections between the project and any I of the destination points describerl below, calculate the bonus as follows: 5% For oormeding to the nearest exiting City sidewalk and bicycle path/law, 5% Formmmling to any existing public sc ool, park and transit top within the distances as defined in this Density Chart; 5% For conmectine to an exisine Citv bicycle trail which is adiacern to or traverses the nroiect TOTAL 1 (001 Is.DENSITY CHART.H Maximum Famed Criterion - Credit Credit 2000 fed of an existing rc+ghborbood service center, or a neighborhood service center to be constructed as a pact . 20% a ofhere project (If the project is proposed to be constructed in multiple phases wch neighborhood sefvice «der must be constructed as a pat of the phase for which approval is sought.) 650 feel of an existing transit stop (applicable only to projects having a density of at least six [6] dwelling units 20% per ace on a gross acreage basis) 4000 feet of omru n existing eomnity/regional shopping ceder, or a community/regional shopping center to be 10% C constructed as a part of the project. (If the project is proposed to be constructed in multiple phases, such community/regional shopping ceder must be constructed as a pat of the phase for which approvals sought) 3500 fed ofan enisti g neW berbood a oo mamdy park, or a community facility (EXCEPT GOLF COURSESr 20% or d 3500 fed of a publicly owned, but not developed, neighborhood or community park, or community facility 100/0 ' O (EXCEPT GOLF COURSES) or A3500 feet of a publicly owned golf course, whether developed or not 10°h . e 2500 fed of an existing school, meeting all requirements of the State of Colorado compulsory education laws 10°/s f 3000 fed of an existing major employment center, or a major employment center to be constructed as a pet of 20°/s - the P'ojeCL (If the project is proposed to be constructed in multiple phases, such major employment centermust :::: be constructed as a pat of the phase for which approval is sought) No building, office or business park, or shopping center which has served as the basis for the claiming of credit under any other "base" citeria of this Density Chart can also be used as the basis for claiming credit under this citerioa. a 1000 fed of an existing child cue ceder, or a child care cerea to be constructed as a part of the project. (If the 5% b project is proposed to be constructed in multiple phases such child care center must be oastructed as a put of One phase for which approval is sought) North Fort Colliers" 20% 2© E: h ` .....: i 1 The Central Business District 20% A project whose boundary is contiguous to existing urban development. Credit may be eamed as follows: 300/6 0% For projects whose property boundary has 0 - 10% contiguity, 10 - 15% For projects whose property boundary has 10 - 20%contiguity-, 15 - 20% For projects whose property boundary has 20 - 300/6 contiguity, 20 - 25% For projects whose property boundary has 30 - 40% contiguity, 25 - 30°k For projects whose property boundary has 40 - 50°h contiguity. If the project contains dwelling units set aside for individuals earning 800/6 or less of the median income of City 15% residents, as adjusted for family aiu and paying leas One 30°/a of their grass income for housing including k . utilities ("Affordable Dwelling ihxm"), calculate the percentage of Affordable Dwelling units to the total number ofdwelling units in One project and enter Oat percentage, up to a maximum of 15°/s (If the project is proposed . to be oocstructod in multiple phases, the Affordable Dwelling Units must be constructed as a put of the phase for which approval is sought) In order to insure that the Affordable Dwelling Units remain affordable for a period afnot lea than 25 years, the developer shall rancid such protective covenants as may be required by the City u�a Sec. 29-526(Jx4). WIaE' 1Fl� PUD pw1;utAmpay I lk IWORS8 CTIVITY: ,sidential Uses DEFINITION:, All residential uses. Uses would include single family attached dwellings, townhomes, duple: mobile homes, and multiple family dwellings; group homes; boarding and rooming hou fraternity and sorority houses; nursing homes; public and private schools; public and non -pi quasi -public recreational uses as a principal use; uses providing meeting places and places public assembly with incidental office space; and child care centers. CRITERIA: The following applicable criteria must be answered "yes" and implemented within the development plan. Yes o N/A 1. DOES THE PROJECT EARN THE MINRViUM PERCENTAGE POINTS AS CALCULATED ON THE FOLLOWING "DENSITY CHART IT'FOR THE PROPOSED DENSITY OF THE RESIDENTIAL PROJECT? The required earned credit for a residential project shall be based on the following: 60 percentage points = 6 or fewer dwelling units per acre 60 - 70 percentage points = 6-7 dwelling units per acre 70 - 80 percentage points = 7-8 dwelling units per acre 80 - 90 percentage points = 8-9 dwelling units per acre 90 -100 percentage points = 9-10 dwelling units per acre 100 or more percentage points = 10 or more dwelling units per acre 2. DOES THE PROJECT EARN AT LEAST 40 Yes ❑o N/A PERCENTAGE POINTS AS CALCULATED Eff ON THE FOLLOWING "DENSITY CHART H" FROM BASE POINTS? Land Development Guidance System for Planned Unit Developments. The City of Fort Collins, Colorado. Revised as per Ordinance No. 2, 1996. VyATER� D ,, et.IM� , i1F 1-9 B Activity A: ALL DEVELOPMENT CRITERIA ALL CRITERIA 1 APPLICAEL_= CRITE=,IA ONLY CRI i E.'ION cenon Is :he � act%11cae10 =. WN oe erio I be satisfied? If no, please exclain s 3<IYes INo All. COMMUNITY -WIDE CRITERIA. 1. i Solar Oner.t_tion I I I I I IYAMWA Q I 1.2 Comprehensive Plan Ile I I I 1.3 Wildlife Habitat IV101 I I ✓ I 1.4 Mineral Deocsit I I I✓ I 1.5—cofociczlly Sensitive Areas I reserved 1.e L_nds cf Agricultural Imoorancs I reserved I I I i I 1.7 r-nercv Conservation I� T I Vr I I i .8 Air Quality 1 .0 wafer cuallty i0 �2`,vace anc Wastes 1 11 \N2•arConservation I ej I 1.12 ResidentialDensity I11001T,I It000rl I NECG'r,EOP,HOOD COMP.,T IEILITY C.RITERIAI I I 2.1 Ve�ticciar. Pecesman. Bike T ransocr,_tien I I I I I 2 Euiicinc Placement and Orient=tier, ✓� I I� I I 2= \Iatural r"e_turs I l l I I 2= Venicular Circuiation anc Parking I I I I I 2.5- Emergency =,cc=ss 2.� Pecestrian Circ:--ration I I I 2.; Arc:,itec:ure I I I I I 2 2' wilding Heicnt and Views I I I I I .2.:: Shading I I I I 2.4, SclarAczass 111007 11. 1 I 2.1 i Historic Rescurzes 1 i I 2.12 SettCacks _ 2.13 L andscace I010T I I I I 2.1: Sicns I IwooI 2.1.5- Site Lighting i✓ 11 gei 2.16 Noise and Vibration 1601 I LI I 2.17 Giare or Heat I L I 2.1.8 Hazardous Materials I I :. 3. ENGINEERING CRITERIA - 3.1 Utility Capacity I 3.2 Design Standards I IV0q I 3.3 Water Hazards 3.4 Geologic Hazards Land Development. Guidance System for Planned Unit Developments The Ciry of Fort Collins. Colorado. Revised . h 1994 -61- v rmi s I SENIOR COTTAGE li <<<<'��i illil�llll11 No Text No Text No Text -nb6 �_ � � 1 � '• V tl0u5E wu sm �..nm wmu _ - `v t , L__________________L____ L ---- 1———---- __--- L ------ __ L______________ ______J wl sVn IM. .xn 0i !T - �N IIFI w, I ELEVATION 1 A KEY PLAN .: 2 ELEVATION 2 ___________-___——L��__1_____________1_____1___________L__—__ 1______------- 1____ 3 ELEVATION 3 ��� GENERAL NOTES 1) AYPCOR ROOF VENT RV—$1: USE t VENTS PER 1000 5RF1 M ROOF AREA E BEDROOM UNIJ 09 1 SRFI= MIN A ROOF VIEWS PER UNIT S SCORPIO. UNIT — 'NJ SRF1= MIN 5 ROOF VENTS PER UNIT COMMUNITY CENTER- 1054 SRFI= MIN S ROOF VENTS FER UNIT 4 ELEVATION 4 _L____________J_______ I — _ ---+i u r mP or sEM Nu. WATERFIULD P.U.D. FORT COLLM COLORAM Senior Cottage,, of America LLC JVP b5.. �ll FRANK REESE ARCHITECTS I.... J..—.i1. PRELIMINARY ELEVATIONS 8 ., 8 TYPICAL C-STORE ELEVATION TYPICAL RETAIL ELEVATION TYPICAL DAY CARE ELEVATION WATERFIEi_n P.U.D. L vr�imo iJfe Y�ry PRELIMINARY EIPYATIMNE �14L %e 8 g ei"AMR 111 Ill I!1 1!1 Ill 111 lll Ill men�r„mr. eoE ¢EVA*ION s�_¢ErnmN TYPICAL ELEVATIONS TYPICAL ELEVATIONS 1 1 1 11 i t 11 1 1�Illrl!1"1 WATERFIELD P.U.D. TYPICAL ELEVATIONS PREWMMARY ELEVATIONS 6d a No Text Ili\�6 Iliii■t Ili R III i .��_�b?— �eM—tea �- �■� 11P aoi ■ ili `jai ��{���glo�r•-raR®yy� ,�� "IRS\K.� � �\ate..\ 'wY �JI�■A.� O � a ®�� e� � �� ��e, ®I®®�f1�Q �_ of u,rli�:� f �: oar • --- i-. IN rl ►�1 7 �� �i> / ���11`I� rlij Id1 U�r�yy� v'■, r Loy�v�,. l�ry q v,�� I�:PI fN'r��► 7R�7r;l�JT���}��I� is EM �� e>• nee ACCESS ROAD \\x q LARIMER & WELD CANAL 6] 63 i I } y� '1 4] I I II48I � ` NS7 I S I w I zZ 63 I Wetlands " ` I - I o nnTCNLIIaE=E= -] l — - I y, �i[_r17p1 71C:: INE 9MEET K & M Company Vacant Zoned t ------ ________________ M AVr� IiiiGT�l vim PME E & MLIV � i s k L PRELIMINARY SITE PLAN ;38 No Text WETLAND ILIPACT .en.i xu� V�wb. ca�m� ow v ...nrnr R Y Y CaOJ..r ftu IaW t OWNER'S CERTIFICATION PLANNING AND ZONING LEGAL DESCRIPTION LAND USE BREAKDOWN VICINITY MAP � y Ba Run yr wear �' Apartments I. m Y'^�^•• _ _ WATERFMLD P.U.D. E+rsa PR81lYINARY PORT C011.WS CDLORADO •--�• 3R8 PUNpw wawa p F.Onulan 81..4 v.�YYw 'r, rc r.0 Q -� TYPICAL BNGLE FAMILY LOT F I I:I ..�. erne, r . xmer .Ye 1-8 VICINITY MAP N #7-95B Waterfield P.U.D. Preliminary 1"=1000' r�Elu I,•=- Senior Cottages: The senior cottages are predominantly 1-story, with a maximum height of approximately 21 feet and are grouped in 12-unit clusters. Building materials include vinyl siding, wood shutters, and high -profile heavy dimensional asphalt shingles. Staff will continue to review all architectural elevations with any Final PUD application (s)." Planning and Enviironmenjovices Current Planning City of Fort Collins MEMORANDUM Date: May 19, 1997 To: Planning and Zoning Board Members From: Michael Ludwig, City Planner NJ. RE: Waterfield PUD, Preliminary, #7-95B. The following architectural analysis should be inserted into Section 4(C), page 10 of the May 19, 1997 Staff Report for the Waterfield PUD, Preliminary, #7-95B: "C. Architecture Character elevations of the Bull Run Apartments, convenience -store, retail / office building, day-care center, and Senior Cottages are provided on Sheets 6, 7 and 8 of the plan set. Bull Run Apartments: The Bull Run Apartment buildings are predominantly 2-story and have a maximum height of approximately 28 feet. Building materials include brick, wood siding, wood shutters, and high -profile heavy dimensional asphalt shingles. Each dwelling unit has a ground floor entry. C-Store, Retail/Office, Day Care Center.• The retail/office and day care center buildings are predominantly 1-story and have a maximum height of approximately 24 feet. Building materials include concrete masonry units, synthetic stucco, and high -profile heavy dimensional asphalt shingles. The convenience store is a 1-story building with a maximum height of approximately 18 feet. The gas canopy is approximately 19 feet in height. C- store building materials include fluted split face masonry block, masonry block accents, and high -profile heavy dimensional asphalt shingles. The canopy will have brick wrapped columns and 4-foot metal fascia. 281 North College Avenue • PO. Box 580 • Fort Collins, CO 80522-0580 • (970) 221-6750 • FAX (970) 416-2020 Waterfield PUD, Preliminary, #7-95B May 19, 1997 P & Z Meeting Page 13 10. The Waterfield PUD, Preliminary, #7-95B provides additional open space, recreational areas, parking areas, and public facilities as are necessary to adequately serve the occupants of the development and to protect the adjacent neighborhood in regards to the 18, 4-bedroom units which are proposed as a part of the Bull Run Apartments. 11. The Waterfield PUD, Preliminary, #7-95B is consistent with the City's Transportation Policies. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends: • Approval of a variance to Criteria 2 of Point Chart J for the Waterfield PUD, Preliminary, #7-95B. • Approval of a variance to All -Development Criteria A-1.1 "Solar Orientation" for the Waterfield PUD, Preliminary, #7-95B. • Approval of a request for 18 four -bedroom multi -family dwelling units as a part of the Bull Run Apartments portion of the Waterfield PUD, Preliminary, #7-95B. • Approval of the Waterfield PUD, Preliminary, #7-95B Waterfield PUD, Preliminary, #7-95B May 19, 1997 P & Z Meeting Page 12 FINDINGS OF FACT/CONCLUSION: 1. The Waterfield PUD, Preliminary, #7-95B earns 67% of the maximum applicable points on the Residential Uses Point Chart of the LDGS, exceeding the minimum required 60% for an overall average residential density of 3.95 dwelling units per acre. 2. The Waterfield PUD, Preliminary, #7-95B earns 52% (32 out of 62) of the maximum applicable points on the Neighborhood Convenience Shopping Center Point Chart of the LDGS, failing to exceed the minimum required 65%. 3. The Waterfield PUD, Preliminary, #7-95B can be granted a variance to the Neighborhood Convenience Shopping Center Point Chart of the LDGS on the basis that granting the variance would neither be detrimental to the public good nor impair the intent and purposes of the LDGS and that the plan as submitted is equal to or better than such plan which achieves the minimum required 65%. 4. The Waterfield PUD, Preliminary, #7-95B meets the applicable All Development Criteria of the Land Development Guidance System, except for All -Development Criteria A-1.1 "Solar Orientation". 5. The Waterfield PUD, Preliminary, #7-95B can be granted a variance to All - Development Criteria A-1.1 "Solar Orientation" on the basis that granting the variance would neither be detrimental to the public good nor impair the intent and purposes of the LDGS and that the plan submitted is equal to or better than such plan which meets All -Development Criteria A-1.1 "Solar Orientation. 6. The Waterfield PUD, Preliminary, #7-95B is in compliance with Ordinance No. 52, 1996 which rezoned the southern 60 acres of the property I-L, Light Industrial with a PUD condition and the northern 80 acres of the property R-L-P, Low Density Planned Residential with a PUD condition. In addition Ordinance No. 52, 1996 rezoned the property with a condition that any residential development of the property be at a density of at least 6 dwelling units per net developable acre (as defined in Ordinance No. 52). 7. The Waterfield PUD, Preliminary, #7-95B is compatible with the surrounding neighborhood. 8. The Waterfield PUD, Preliminary, #7-95B preserves approximately 25 acres of wetlands, buffer and associated wildlife habitat. 9. The Waterfield PUD, Preliminary, #7-95B provides 36.4% of the total number of dwelling units (176 Bull Run Apartments) as "affordable" units for a period of at least 25 years. Waterfield PUD, Preliminary, #7-95B May 19, 1997 P & Z Meeting Page 11 The applicant and the Natural Resources Department will continue discussions of design of the natural area through the review of the Final PUD application(s). 6. Transportation: The property is bounded by County Road 9E (major arterial beyond year 2015) on the east, Vine Drive (arterial) on the south, County Road 11 (minor arterial to be constructed by the developer) on the west and the Larimer and Weld Irrigation ditch to the north. Neighborhood collector street access is provided from Vine Drive and County Road 9E. The applicant is responsible for constructing Vine Drive and County Road 9E to arterial standards adjacent to the property. E. Vine Drive must be widened to at least 36 feet of pavement (two travel lanes, a center turn lane, and two, 6 foot wide bike lanes) from County Road 9E to Lemay Avenue. The existing right -of way is adequate for the widening of Vine Drive. No off -site easements are necessary. The applicant is required to construct County Road 11 (a new road) along the entire length of the west property line to a 36 foot width. The applicant has accommodated for the extension of Conifer Street across their property in the future and will be obligated to pay for a portion of that construction. The traffic study indicates that at full buildout, the proposed development will generate approximately 6,130 average daily vehicle trips. The majority of these trips being generated by the single-family residential (1830 adt), Bull Run Apartments (1110 adt), and Convenience store/gas station (1300 adt). With the above stated improvements, all intersections will operate at acceptable levels of service. 7. Stormwater: The Preliminary stormwater design consists of detention in the wetlands and in a proposed pond prior to release into the Lake Canal ditch. Prior to detention in the wetlands, runoff will be pre-treated in order to minimize any impact on the wetland area. Pre-treatment measures shall be specified at time of final design, and may include the use of sand filters, grass buffer strips or other structural treatment alternatives. The release of stormwater into the wetland will help sustain the viability of the wetland. Currently, the wetland is fed by underground water that appears to come from the Larimer and Weld Irrigation Ditch. If the Larimer and Weld Irrigation Ditch ceases to operate in the future, the wetland could dry -up without the stormwater runoff being released into it. During the review of the Final PUD application(s), Staff will continue to evaluate the potential need to limit the construction of basements in certain areas of the property due to high levels of ground -water. Waterfield PUD, Preliminary, #7-95B May 19, 1997 P & Z Meeting Page 10 4. Design: A. Layout The property is bounded by County Road 9E (arterial) on the east, Vine Drive (arterial) on the south, County Road 11 (minor arterial to be constructed by the developer) on the west and the Larimer and Weld Irrigation ditch to the north. Neighborhood collector street access is provided from Vine Drive and County Road 9E. The Bull Run Apartments and Senior Cottage multi -family projects are on the southern and western edge of the property. The neighborhood convenience center, school site and park site are on the southern one-third of the property. The wetlands and buffer are in the middle of the eastern one-half of the property. Single-family residences are located in the center and northern one-third of the property. All streets comply with the new City Street Design Standards B. Landscaping Street trees will be planted in parkway strips between the back of curb and the sidewalk. A mix of evergreen and deciduous trees and shrubs will be planted around the multi -family, and commercial portions of the development. Landscape plans will be reviewed in detail during at the time of Final PUD application(s). C. Architecture (I gave the applicant my redlines..... will need to write this on Monday). 5. Wetland and Buffer: As previously stated, there is an 11.5 acre wetland in the middle of the site. This wetland serves as a significant habitat for waterfowl and wading birds. Attached are copies of the wetland and wildlife consultants report on the status of the wetland and the impacts of this development. The applicant has worked extensively with the Natural Resources Department to modify the site layout to better accommodate the wetland. Nearly 14 acres of buffer zone ranging from a minimum of 56 feet to 271 feet in width is provided. 14 notes have been added to the Site Plan regarding protective measures for the wetland/water fowl habitat. These include fencing around the buffer area, signage regarding restricted access, leashing of pets, wetland enhancement, and water quality measures for stormwater runoff. Waterfield PUD, Preliminary, #7-95B May 19, 1997 P & Z Meeting Page 9 As shown on the Preliminary Site Plan, the project includes a clubhouse/pool, child care center, convenience store, business service uses, future school site, future neighborhood park site, and approximately 25 acres of wetlands, buffer, and associated wildlife habitat. The Waterfield PUD provides a total 341 parking spaces for the Bull Run Apartments portion of the PUD which fully accommodates the bedroom per unit mix which is proposed as per All -Development Criteria A-2.4, "Vehicular Circulation and Parking". Staff feels that the requested increase of the number of unrelated persons who may reside in individual dwelling units from three to four for each of the 18, four -bedroom units is justified. The mix of land uses and amenities provided by this PUD will "adequately serve the occupants of the development" and "protect the adjacent neighborhood". 3. Neighborhood Compatibility: A neighborhood meeting was held on November 19, 1996. Minutes of this meeting are attached. Concerns expressed were generally related to density, the existing wetland and associated wildlife, and traffic. The overall average density of this project is 3.95 dwelling units per acre (6.07 dwelling units per net developable acre as defined in Ordinance 52, 1996). A minimum of three dwelling units per acre is required by the LDGS. If the property were developed under the CityPlan, the LMN zoning would require a minimum overall average density of 5 dwelling units per net developable acre as defined in the Land Use Code (not exactly the same as Ordinance No. 52, 1996 as the Land Use Code does not allow as much property to be netted out). Although it was submitted as a PUD, the proposed density is very much in line with the minimum density allowed under CityPlan. County farmland exists to the west and north. Future arterial streets are to the east and south. A railroad switching yard is on the south side of Vine Drive. As per direction from the Natural Resources Department, the 11.5 acre wetland is buffered by nearly 14 acres of open space/transition zone with setbacks to rear property lines ranging from a minimum of 56 feet to 271 feet. The applicant is required to widen E. Vine Drive to at least 36 feet of pavement (two travel lanes, a center turn lane, and two, 6 foot wide bike lanes) from County Road 9E to Lemay Avenue. In addition the applicant is required to construct County Road 11 (a new road) along the entire length of the west property line to a 36 foot width. The applicant has accommodated for the extension of Conifer Street across their property in the future and will be obligated to pay for a portion of that construction. Staff recommends that the proposed PUD is compatible with surrounding land uses Waterfield PUD, Preliminary, #7-95B May 19, 1997 P & Z Meeting Page 8 which will provide larger commercial uses. Without the neighborhood convenience shopping center, the applicant would simply propose more single-family residential units. A neighborhood convenience shopping center is more appropriate at this location. F. 4 Bedroom Units The Bull Run Apartments portion of this Preliminary PUD request includes 18, four - bedroom units. Section 29-1 of the Code of the City of Fort Collins defines family as follows: "An individual living alone or either of the following groups living together as a single housekeeping unit and sharing common living, sleeping, cooking and eating facilities: (1) Any number of persons related by blood, marriage, adoption, guardianship or other duly authorized custodial relationship; or (2) Any unrelated group of persons consisting of: a. Not more than three persons; or b. Not more than two (2) unrelated adults and their related children, if any." Section 29-526 E(6) of the LDGS states: "All residential developments approved pursuant to this section shall conform to the definition of "family" as established in Section 29-1 of the Code, provided however, that with respect to multiple -family dwellings only, the Planning and Zoning Board may, upon receipt of written request of the developer and upon finding that all applicable criteria of this section have been satisfied, increase the number of unrelated persons who may reside in individual dwelling units. Further, the Planning and Zoning Board shall not increase said number unless it is satisfied that the developer has provided such additional open space, recreational areas, parking areas, and public facilities as are necessary to adequately serve the occupants of the development and to protect the adjacent neighborhood." A letter dated May 9, 1997 from Lucia Liley is attached to support the applicant's request for the Planning and Zoning Board to authorize the increase of the number of unrelated persons who may reside in individual dwelling units from three to four for each of the 18, four bedroom units. Waterfield PUD, Preliminary, #7-9513 May 19, 1997 P & Z Meeting Page 7 (3) That the plan as submitted is equal to or better than such plan incorporating the provision for which a variance is requested, or (4) The granting of a variance from the strict application of any provision would result in a substantial benefit to the City by reason of the fact that the proposed project would help satisfy a defined community need (such as affordable housing or historic preservation) or would alleviate an existing problem (such as traffic congestion or urban blight), and the strict application of such a provision would render the project practically unfeasible." A letter dated May 8, 1997 from Lucia Liley is attached which supports the applicant's request for a variance to All -Development Criteria A-1.1 "Solar Orientation". A letter dated May 13, 1997 from Lucia Liley is attached which supports the applicant's request for a variance to Criteria 2 of the Neighborhood Convenience Shopping Center Point Chart (Activity J). Staff Analysis: Staff has reviewed both of Ms. Liley's letters. Staff supports the applicant's request for a variance to All -Development Criteria A-1.1 "Solar Orientation" on the basis that granting the variance would neither be detrimental to the public good nor impair the intent and purposes of the LDGS and that the plan submitted is equal to or better than such plan which meets All -Development Criteria A-1.1 "Solar Orientation. In order to achieve more than 49% solar oriented lots, the applicant would either have to eliminate elements of mixed use development such as the convenience store or school site, or reduce the size of the multi -family projects. Both multi -family components are qualified affordable housing projects. A reduction in their size would jeopardize their funding sources (tax credits, bonds, etc.). The mixed -use elements are equally important to this development as they provide amenities and everyday services to the future residents of this development. The plan proposed is equal to or better than a plan which achieves 65% solar oriented lots. Staff also supports the applicant's request for a variance to Criteria 2 of Point Chart J on the basis that granting the variance would neither be detrimental to the public good nor impair the intent and purposes of the LDGS and that the plan as submitted is equal to or better than such plan which achieves the minimum required 65%. The proposed Neighborhood Convenience Shopping Center contributes to the mix of uses proposed within this development. City policies encourage the location of these centers to provide basic services at a neighborhood level. An activity center is shown on the Structure Plan, one mile to the north of the E. Vine Drive/County Road 9E intersection Waterfield PUD, Preliminary, #7-95B May 19, 1997 P & Z Meeting Page 6 e. being located at least three-quarters (314) of a mile from any existing or approved Neighborhood Convenience Shopping Center or convenience grocery store - 8 points. There are no existing or approved Neighborhood Convenience Shopping Centers or convenience grocery stores within 3/4 mile. h. being located within "north" Fort Collins - 2 points. The entire site is located north of Laurel Street extended and east of Overland Trail. D. All -Development Criteria This meets the applicable All Development Criteria of the Land Development Guidance System, except for All -Development Criteria A-1.1 "Solar Orientation". All development Criteria A-1.1 requires at least 65% of the lots less than fifteen thousand (15,000) square feet in area in single- and two-family residential developments to conform to the definition of a "solar oriented lot" in order to preserve the potential solar energy usage. Only 49% of the lots (92 out of 187) within the proposed PUD meet the definition of solar oriented lots. The applicant has requested a variance to this criteria. E. Variances Requested: Section K, Variance Procedures, of the LDGS states: 'The Planning and Zoning Board is empowered to grant variances to the provisions of this section (the LDGS). The decision of the Planning and Zoning Board on any application for a variance shall be set forth in writing in the minutes of the meeting of the Board. Variance requests may be granted if the Board determines that the granting of the variance would neither be detrimental to the public good nor impair the intent and purposes of this section and if the applicant demonstrates: (1) That by reason of exceptional topographical, soil or other subsurface conditions or other conditions peculiar to the site, undue hardship would be caused to a subdivider by the strict application of any provisions of this section, or (2) That by reason of exceptional conditions or difficulties with regard to solar orientation or access, undue hardship would be caused to a subdivider by the strict application of any provisions of this section, or Waterfield PUD, Preliminary, #7-95B May 19, 1997 P & Z Meeting Page 5 k. providing affordable housing - 15 points. The entire Bull Run Apartments portion of this Preliminary PUD is a qualified affordable housing project. 176 out of 483 total units is equal to 36.4% of the total dwelling units. 15 base points and 15 bonus points are gained for providing affordable housing for a period of at least 25 years. BONUS M. 1 % bonus for every 50 acres in the project - 2 points. The Waterfield PUD consists of a total of 140.9 acres. r. providing affordable housing - 15 points. The entire Bull Run Apartments portion of this Preliminary PUD is a qualified affordable housing project. 176 out of 483 total units is equal to 36.4% of the total dwelling units. 15 base points and 15 bonus points are gained for providing affordable housing for a period of at least 25 years. C. Neighborhood Convenience Shopping Center Point Chart (Activity J) This request was evaluated against the Neighborhood Convenience Shopping Center Point Chart of the Land Development Guidance System and earns 52% (32 out of 62) of the maximum applicable points, failing to exceed the minimum required 65%. Please refer to Section 2E "Variances Requested". Points are awarded for the following criterion: b. being located at the intersection of a neighborhood collector and arterial street with primary access taken off the collector - 10 points. The convenience shopping center is located at the northwest corner of E. Vine Drive (arterial) and Merganser Drive (neighborhood collector). C. containing two or more different uses - 4 points. The center contains a convenience store and business service uses and a child care center. d. being located on at least 3 gross acres of land - 8 points. The convenience center is located on approximately 3.08 acres of land. Waterfield PUD, Preliminary, #7-95B May 19, 1997 P & Z Meeting Page 4 R-L-P, Low Density Planned Residential with a PUD condition. In addition Ordinance No. 52, 1996 rezoned the property with a condition that any residential development of the property be at a density of at least 6 dwelling units per net developable acre (as defined in Ordinance No. 52). A copy of Ordinance No. 52, 1996 is attached. The development was submitted as a Planned Unit Development. The overall average density of 3.95 dwelling units per acre is equivalent to a density of 6.07 dwelling units per net developable acre (as defined in Ordinance No. 52). This PUD request complies with the requirements of Ordinance No. 52, 1996 B. Residential Uses Point Chart (Activity H) This request was evaluated against the Residential Uses Point Chart of the Land Development Guidance System and earns 67% of the maximum applicable points (50 "base" and 17 "bonus"), exceeding the minimum required 60% for an overall average residential density of 3.95 dwelling units per acre, and exceeding the minimum required 40 base points. Points are awarded for the following criterion: BASE (LOCATIONAL) d. being located within 3,500 feet of a publicly owned but not developed, neighborhood or community park, or community facility (except golf courses) - 10 points. The applicant proposes to dedicate an approximately 6.12 acre park site to the City of Fort Collins at no cost for a neighborhood park. Please refer to the attached memorandum from Mike Powers, Director of Cultural, Library, and Recreational Services (CLRS) regarding the Parks and Recreation Boards recommendation and City's willingness to accept this dedication. In addition, copies of the parkland dedication escrow documents are attached. g. being located within 1,000 feet of an existing child care center, or a child care center to be constructed as a part of the project - 5 points. A 6,000 square foot day care facility is a part of this Preliminary PUD request. h. being located in "North Fort Collins" - 20 points. The entire site is located north of Laurel Street extended and east of Overland Trail. Waterfield PUD, Preliminary, #7-95B May 19, 1997 P & Z Meeting Page 3 COMMENTS Background: The surrounding zoning and land uses are as follows: N: LMN, MMN, CC; undeveloped. S. I, Industrial (County); industrial uses, railroad yard. O, Open (County); existing mobile home park (Collins Aire Mobile Home Park). LMN; undeveloped (pending mobile home park). E: FA-1 (County); Plummer School, farming, undeveloped. W: FA-1(County); farming, undeveloped. T(City); undeveloped. This property was annexed into the City as part of the East Vine Drive 6th Annexation on August 2, 1983 and the East Vine Drive 7th Annexation on August 16, 1983 and was placed in the T, Transition zoning district. On May 21, 1996 the City Council adopted Ordinance No. 52, 1996 which rezoned the southern 60 acres of the property I-L, Light Industrial with a PUD condition and the northern 80 acres of the property R-L-P, Low Density Planned Residential with a PUD condition. In addition Ordinance No. 52, 1996 rezoned the property with a condition that any residential development of the property be at a density of at least 6 dwelling units per net developable acre (as defined in Ordinance No. 52). This request for Preliminary PUD was submitted on February 27, 1997, in accordance with the provisions of Section 6 of Ordinance No. 161, 1996 and prior to the effective date of the CityPlan Land Use Code. Therefore, this application has been processed according to the requirements of the LDGS. 2. Land Use: This is a request for Preliminary PUD for a total of 483 dwelling units (187 single-family lots, 120 Senior Cottages, and 176 Bull Run Apartments); a 5,000 square foot convenience store/gas station; a 10,000 square foot business services/office building; and a 6,000 square foot day care center. In addition, a 10 acre school site and 6.12 acre neighborhood park site are included for platting purposes only. The entire property is 140.09 acres. The overall average density is 3.95 dwelling units per acre (483 units/122.26 acres). A. Ordinance No. 52, 1996 As previously stated, Ordinance No. 52, 1996 rezoned the southern 60 acres of the property I-L, Light Industrial with a PUD condition and the northern 80 acres of the property Waterfield PUD, Preliminary, #7-95B May 19, 1997 P & Z Meeting Page 2 • earns 67% of the maximum applicable points on the Residential Uses Point Chart of the LDGS, exceeding the minimum required 60% for an overall average residential density of 3.95 dwelling units per acre. earns 52% (32 out of 62) of the maximum applicable points on the Neighborhood Convenience Shopping Center Point Chart of the LDGS, failing to exceed the minimum required 65%. • can be granted a variance to the Neighborhood Convenience Shopping Center Point Chart of the LDGS on the basis that granting the variance would neither be detrimental to the public good nor impair the intent and purposes of the LDGS and that the plan as submitted is equal to or better than such plan which achieves the minimum required 65%. meets the applicable All Development Criteria of the Land Development Guidance System, except for All -Development Criteria A-1.1 "Solar Orientation". • can be granted a variance to All -Development Criteria A-1.1 "Solar Orientation" on the basis that granting the variance would neither be detrimental to the public good nor impair the intent and purposes of the LDGS and that the plan submitted is equal to or better than such plan which meets All -Development Criteria A-1.1 "Solar Orientation. is in compliance with Ordinance No. 52, 1996 which rezoned the southern 60 acres of the property I-L, Light Industrial with a PUD condition and the northern 80 acres of the property R-L-P, Low Density Planned Residential with a PUD condition. In addition Ordinance No. 52, 1996 rezoned the property with a condition that any residential development of the property be at a density of at least 6 dwelling units per net developable acre (as defined in Ordinance No. 52). • is compatible with the surrounding neighborhood. • preserves approximately 25 acres of wetlands, buffer and associated wildlife habitat. • provides 36.4% of the total number of dwelling units (176 Bull Run Apartments) as "affordable" units for a period of at least 25 years. • provides additional open space, recreational areas, parking areas, and public facilities as are necessary to adequately serve the occupants of the development and to protect the adjacent neighborhood in regards to the 18, 4-bedroom units which are proposed as a part of the Bull Run Apartments. • is consistent with the City's Transportation Policies. r ITEM NO. 8 MEETING DATE 5 / 1 9 /97 STAFF_ Mike Ludwig City of Fort Collins PLANNING AND ZONING BOARD STAFF REPORT PROJECT: Waterfield PUD, Preliminary, #7-95B. APPLICANT: VF Ripley Associates 1113 Stoney Hill Drive Fort Collins, CO 80525 OWNER: Country Club Farms, L.L.C. 8108 E. Prentice Avenue, Suite M180 Englewood, CO 80111 PROJECT DESCRIPTION: This is a request for Preliminary PUD for a total of 483 dwelling units (187 single-family lots, 120 Senior Cottages, and 176 Bull Run Apartments); a 5,000 square foot convenience store/gas station; a 10,000 square foot business services/office building; and a 6,000 square feet day care center. In addition, a 10 acre school site and 6.12 acre neighborhood park site are included for platting purposes only. The entire property is 140.09 acres. The overall average density is 3.95 dwelling units per acre (483 units/122.26 acres). The property is located at the northwest corner of E. Vine Drive and County Road 9E (Timberline Road extended) is zoned LMN, Low Density Mixed Use Neighborhood on the new CityPlan Zoning Map. RECOMMENDATION: • Approval of a variance to Criteria 2 of Point Chart J. • Approval of a variance to All -Development Criteria A-1.1 "Solar Orientation". • Approval of a request for 18 four -bedroom multi -family dwelling units as a part of the Bull Run Apartments. • Approval of the Preliminary PUD request. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY: This request for Preliminary PUD approval: was submitted on February 27, 1997, in accordance with the provisions of Section 6 of Ordinance No. 161, 1996 and prior to the effective date of the CityPlan Land Use Code. Therefore, this application has been processed according to the requirements of the LDGS. COMMUNITY PLANNING AND ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES 281 N. College Ave P.O. Box 580 Fort Collins, CO 80522-0580 (970) 221-6750 PLANNING DEPARTMENT