HomeMy WebLinkAboutWOODLAND STATION PUD - PRELIMINARY ..... SECOND NEIGHBORHOOD MEETING - 18-94B - MINUTES/NOTES - CORRESPONDENCE-NEIGHBORHOOD MEETINGn
TYPE 01: MEETING: _/UE/GlI,C311,c Nyav y„l ry�_r�il �io.J
DATE:
NAME
AUUI►ESS
1p �fl'IE�ARD
l r_= Tffv.���t S vro�i s e
D4-!3e lelcl
010 Yev of ofIVI
WItITTE.N
NOTIFICATION o�
AAC Yip Aa iev
YES/NU OWNER It EN
Y�L
y
k40--
r4
2nd Neighborhood Meeting Minutes
Woodland Station PUD
Page 7
City to explore a cost reduction. The commitment to purchase
approximately 13 acres of open space and dedicate to the City is to
achieve 60 points on the Residential Uses Point Chart of the
L.D.G.S. If this requirement could be waived, then this would help
the economics of doing 2.00 d.u./acre.
26. It appears as if progress has been made. Poudre Ridge
homeowners will meet to see if we can reach a consensus regarding
accepting 70 half -acre lots at 2.00 d.u./acre. We appreciate your
conducting a new pro -forma analysis and paying Cityscape to design
a land plan for Option D. We will touch base on Monday morning by
telephone and coordinate with the Planning Department accordingly.
We all recognize that the City is player and stakeholder in that a
variance to City policy is required. This is a risk that is
acknowledged but the compromise is worth pursuing through the
City's review process.
2nd Neighborhood Meeting Minutes
Woodland Station PUD
Page 6
21. Would 70 lots be economically viable?
RESPONSE: I am not sure at this time. I would have to run the
variables through my pro -forma. Also, I would have to ask
Cityscape to come up with a land plan. Since these tasks take
time, I cannot answer yes or no.
22. We ask that you perform the pro -forma analysis and come up
with a land plan. This seems to be a middle ground and there seems
to be potential for a compromise.
RESPONSE: I will perform the analysis and pay Cityscape for an
Option D that indicates 70 lots. I feel I must ask for a
commitment from Poudre Ridge that the compromise would be
acceptable and that you would not appeal a P.U.D. that features
2.00 d.u./acre to the City Council (assuming, of course, that it is
approved by P & Z). I would anticipate that a petition of support
would be needed to be presented to the P & Z Board.
23. Since not all families are here tonight, we must go back and
meet as group. We feel positive about the direction of the
compromise. After we meet, we will contact you by telephone.
RESPONSE: I will also meet with my attorney to gauge the
feasibility of a P.U.D. given the land use policies of the City.
We need a reality check. However, I feel we are moving in the
right direction. The questions remain as to whether we are "way
out there" and whether City policies can be flexible.
24. What is the downside of 2.00 d.u./acre?
RESPONSE: Economically, 2.80 works better than 2.00. Therefore,
I cannot totally commit to the compromise but I will commit to
running the numbers. I anticipate that selling 70 one-half acre
lots will result in less gross revenue than selling 98 lots. Half -
acre lots may.have to sell for $70,000 resulting in a house that
would have to sell in the range of $350,000 to $400,000. The
absorption rate for homes in this price range is slower than in
lower price ranges. A slower absorption rate results in longer
carrying cost at a given interest rate. This is known as "interest
carry" and affects profit..
25. What about negotiating with the City to reduce land
development costs?
RESPONSE: This is unlikely given the "growth pays its own way"
philosophy. Repays that are due on existing utilities are not
negotiable. There is one area, however, that I may approach the
2nd Neighborhood Meeting Minutes
Woodland Station PUD
Page 5
16. We are worried about trespassing. Our ponds will become an
attractive play area. We have ditches, horses, and large
properties.
RESPONSE: I agree. A playground will help minimize this.
17. The City's plans assume that employees from H-P will live here
and that this will reduce traffic and congestion. On the other
hand, Linton is full so kids will be bussed, to other schools
further away with available capacity. The transporting of kids to
school and recreational activities will more than offset any gains
of H-P employees living near their place of work.
18. I am concerned about the choice of living styles being stifled
in Fort Collins. With the minimum density requirements, we can
never have neighborhoods like Indian Hills, Parkwood, or Prospect
Estates. These neighborhoods are considered very desirable.
RESPONSE: The City's land use planning must account for the fiscal
provision of City services. There is a significant benefit for all
tax payers if City services can be delivered efficiently. It has
been proven over time that a minimum level of urban density is
required to achieve an efficient delivery of City services. The
County cannot provide urban services. Historically, the demand for
increased services rises over the long term. Also, a minimum level
of density is needed if we ever hope to have a viable public
transit system that will attract ridership. Public transit will be
required over the long term to promote air quality and reduce
traffic congestion.
19. An. imaginative plan would put density on the arterial, and
estate lots toward the east.
RESPONSE: Again, as a developer, my experience is that the upper-
end home buyers would be concerned about their property values by
being so closely located with homes/townhomes priced around
$125,000. The mix may not work on a parcel of only 35 acres. It
would be better to have a blanket layout of 2.00 d.u./acre rather
than. mix housing types and lot sizes on 35 acres.
20. We would support a P.U.D. that had 70 lots at 2.00 d.u./acre.
RESPONSE: This is a significant breakthrough. Up until now, the
demand has been for one acre lots or larger.
2nd Neighborhood Meeting Minutes
Woodland Station PUD
Page 4
10. The County approved our lots at 2.29 acres. The City requires
three d.u./acre. Where is the allowance for transition? The land
use regulatory system between the County and City has failed us.
This is very frustrating for County residents.
11. I read in the paper recently where City Council member Gina
Janett indicated that certain properties in the City could be de -
annexed. Why can't these properties be de -annexed and the land
developed in the County on acreage -sized lots that are compatible
to our area?
RESPONSE: The County has different development standards now than
in years past. You will recall that the 2.29 acre lot size was
based on the health requirement for on -site septic systems. Lots
on these 35 acres, however, would likely be required by the County
to hook up to water and sewer. County street standards in the
U.G.A. are similar to the City's. Right-of-way would still have to
be dedicated for C.R.#9 for an urban arterial street. Finally, the
acquisition costs are not affected by City or County jurisdiction.
These factors indicate that de -annexation into the County would not
result in the kind of development that you are envisioning.
12. Will you ask for a variance for acreage -sized lots?
RESPONSE: We are already asking for a variance to go from 3.00 to
2.80 d.u./acre. This will allow for estate lots to be located on
the eastern fringe of the P.U.D.
13. Would you consider 2.00 d.u./acre?
RESPONSE: This would have to be looked at very closely to see if it
made economic sense. Also, 2.00 d.u./acre is politically tenuous
in the current climate of Fort Collins.
14. The P & Z Board felt they were stuck on this issue. You are
encouraged to be creative and flexible.
15. We are still concerned that there is no play area for
children. Kids need a place to go.
RESPONSE: I am willing to provide a playground area that would be
turned over to the homeowner's association so it does not become a
burden on City services. This playground could be fenced for
safety.
2nd.Neighborhood Meeting Minutes
Woodland Station PUD
Page 3
7. All three options look so generic. There seems to be a lack
of inventiveness and creativity. Why does it look so typical? You
should put your density along C.R.#9 and transition back to the
east with acreage -sized lots,.
RESPONSE:
A. The layout of streets and lots is constrained by the
access points on C.R.#9. These streets can only be located in
certain locations given the requirements of the City's
Engineering and Transportation Departments. Another
constraint is the desire to preserve as much existing
vegetation as possible. Finally, there is a requirement to
dedicate additional right-of-way along C.R.#9 for street
widening.
B. Please keep in mind that the site is only 35 acres. The
kind of housing mix that you suggest usually requires much
larger parcels. Miramont is an example. With 35 acres, there
is only so much flexibility available. There is also the
concern that the acreage -sized lots may have to sell for
around $70,000 and feature homes ranging from $350,000 to
$400,000. These homes would be very close to homes/townhomes
at much lower prices. This kind of mixing might be perceived
by the upper end market as undesirable.
C. In previous discussions, the neighborhood expressed an
unwillingness to have multi -family (townhomes) within the
project.
8. The P & Z Board expressed the need for a "Plan" for this'area
or for "Policies" that addressed the urban -rural conflict. Based
on this, you should ask the Board for a variance to allow acreage
lots.
RESPONSE: Again, we are constrained by fixed acquisition and
development costs. We are also constrained by the political
climate in Fort Collins with a City Council that is very concerned
about density. The arguments for density are that the site is
located along an arterial street and next to a major employer. Our
three options, at 2.80 d.u./acre, could be perceived as a
transition area between urban development and your estate lots.
9. The L.D.G.S. says that development proposals must be sensitive
to and maintain the character of existing neighborhoods. The three
options do not provide enough transition. The plan is not
aesthetic or unique. The plan does not respect our ecology.
2nd Neighborhood Meeting Minutes
Woodland Station PUD
Page 2
QUESTIONS, CONCERNS, COMMENTS:
1. Looking at Options A,•B, and C, it must be asked, is this the
best you could do?
RESPONSE: The options .represent a balance between conflicting
objectives. On the one hand, there is an absolute criterion in the
L.D.G.S. that says residential P.U.D.'s must be at 3.00 d.u./acre.
These options, with 98 lots, achieve a density of 2.80 and thus
require a variance from the P & Z Board. On the other hand, the
Options include "'estate lots" (from the urban perspective) on the
eastern fringe. Economically, there are fixed land costs and
development costs that must be factored in or the project is not
viable.
2. As you are aware., our position is that we prefer acreage lots
to protect our existing rural character. This is why we moved here
and invested in our homes and properties.
RESPONSE: Acreage lots would be economically viable if the land
acquisition costs were lower. However, given the market price of
the land, a certain amount of density is required, otherwise the
project is a losing proposition.
3. There is a project further south, in the County and outside
the U.G.A., that is selling acreage lots ranging from $98,000 to
$147,000. This appears to be very economically viable.
RESPONSE: I can only comment on my land costs and land development
costs. My guess is that the project you reference had lower land
cost and does not have to construct urban -style improvements.
4. Your economic costs do not matter to us. We live here. Your
project is not compatible.
RESPONSE: Please keep in mind that,homes on the estate lots could
easily range from $200,000 to $300,000.
5. These economic factors do not account for the natural beauty
of our area. There is an ecology in our area, with our ponds,
etc., that promotes wildlife and rural atmosphere.
6. The development of these 35 acres affect all of Poudre Ridge,
not just the immediate abutting owners.
SECOND NEIGHBORHOOD MEETING MINUTES
PROJECT: Woodland -Station Preliminary P.U.D.
DATE: November 10, 1994
APPLICANT: Brad Bennett, Chateau Custom Homes
CONSULTANT: Eldon Ward, Cityscape Urban Design
PLANNER: Ted Shepard, City of Fort Collins
The meeting began with a review of the existing plan, a review of
three optional plans, and a discussion regarding the direction from
the Planning and Zoning Board. The lots colored in a dark beige
represent the only lots that are under 10,000 square feet in size.
Under all three options, the lots next to the Thomas property are
15,000 - 18,000 square feet in size.
SUMMARY
The meeting resulted in a commitment from the Poudre Ridge
homeowners and Brad Bennett to investigate the feasibility of a
P.U..D. that featured 70 half -acre lots at 2.00 d.u./acre. Mr.
Bennett needs to run a pro -forma analysis and obtain advice from
his attorney on the political reality of dropping below 3.00
d.u./acre. The Poudre Ridge group will meet separately to try to
arrive at a consensus that 2.00 is acceptable, and, if so, offer a
petition of support to the P & Z Board. If Mr. Bennett's analysis
indicates that 2.00 d.u./acre is not viable, or if the Poudre Ridge
group feels they cannot support 2.00, then Option C will be
presented to the P & Z Board.