Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutINDIAN HILLS VILLAGE FINAL PUD ..... MAY 23 AND JUNE 6 1994 P AND Z BOARD HEARINGS - 81 93A - REPORTS - CITIZEN COMMUNICATIONV OI co W a Q co Z o S S. `f : `� « �o '• l rN I w�i n e r0- A d t 08 Mco a n a s �► L.!.tr. 2524 S. F SAO q i F If 80 481680 S_F X70.00' N 7000' sad ; n .. N301%f 24.00,t /N00" 07 30 E /•� O iS7 - t106°00 0C #1 t L 70 0 j25� { - •� 'p$ NCdgjp NC<° tAt A n 4 132C SF O g 73°09 t9^w 3 E _ p 00 00' 1 ° O N ,r.- • ' „ c' '� e • 1 O h"1 Ni91' 0 N06 B.T E nd4° �,.w C 126.1 m - S N SSUJ •% w 4wr4' W M 1 �' a a S06°00' m, W rb Ot0 os 1A +* qi WI f.' A //� S94^0!+•QO•[ o' ` CO�O7 30 lY j y 6 m 24.IJ 24.14 t5 N00" 24 �.E 1t3!' R52 Y�/AY OpU ® � �%�r Ot�: ylp 00 24 10U. C. 0 q m 4.10 • { - fir, P2 �P 00 3G0°07'3d'W 4.89 W 1P r,°i •• o iv H _. 41. ! Y'L ,. { 24.00 % 5.00 3.64 \ b.► L4 ! .. - 20.0 NOp•07�30'E v _ ; 4 N oQ ► b -;.. i 8 a of �. �: j4 N0000730"E 3 \.. _ a ry �- -� S Q '�.eD 5' c� •,� AlTO. n.. 24J0 20.00 24i00'� itr �S °O ZQi' ���' •� -'OJO, /_Z� O e - ^• n; C ip ; n ✓.� W �' �� O I OW ti 0bw bO' ` O. O� m mO O O n O.. it-O A d� '" �� W� W 1 1 •• _ 4� e1 o r•' o- o z 2r.00 - _ ,g� - .7�. •--,�/t. z z 88 87 m a o e ! p N ^ O m( n� ,�; m. M NGO°OT'30"E r. 2 V/ O '•4" 86 e m m a o d mi �I m:� g N y.94' • 55.00 Spy 4.00 e n - 240U, :4 pp,' °� = 5 84 m p '° rt': :6 o f W g O g SOO "oo a 4.t a 24.0ty 1320 sF N ; .. e � �: - - N00e07'3o E - + 24.V 2400' o'uul+ z4.00' 2400 y a 9o• t' EesemM �� `.. �� 3 S1b°O T'SO•W TRACT- 'I84' SOO°0T30"M N d qm 1560 S.F. (D'v aO soo' soo°oT'so w « - N'��`./24M' 24.� - 24.00 e (0.5131 ACRES - � es = W o $ to _ 23• ! -/.-/ o E _ }0.000'E Nnnero ti.,^e } SOO'J7 30 w o N o -U � J a � n ul�$ Noo°©4'cp"w �" ; p65 6b 67 W s O s sca° 0o 'E rye. /� = o d' . rc �I rc5 $ 0 6 3 69 p z 6.44'W .. - .. 0.. j w m .n; m'• ~ 8 c 8 n O _ e d St ® N60 .A GO"w a 04. L - t 24.Od 2 4.Od 2400 N OT 30 [' 2400' _ - S06e00.0o 24.00 24.00 24.?) 70 71 72 O a o f r: �•1 uil 00� 24.00' 24.00 24.00' nvOp'00"E S06°Oc'OdW u o0 8&00 ' 2400' 2'j•00' m 1360 S. F W N -�.-.; 1\ O oOO Y W o s n O 73 74 O •W 3 p ; o 2 C S T$ o H� C O 0 � N S60' n q R O 4 e .i and p v o -SLF e N �j Qpq f /r l �C Ci: •:- g - 10.00' • �- 500 °C 7'30`.W I ..9Q e' \C •..�.. tr. OB°00'CO"W .41•. 2.600• 24.00• ,/ 6..00' N N840C A N06000'00"E ...3� • a�/ 506 0000 w 00'OO"W H O C T ` ` � A / 1483' 70.00 ;'e 1-. S0O-W-00.W S84°00.0 a N84q.00 "W S06g0o'0o•W /� 10 utit,tT E°tem"t c e •54.79' '0.00' W 22.00: 1 f Q 16 r0 3. F.. 8 $ m.. 1 " S00°OT30' W , '4 z 79.00 984000'00"E W t _ N ejj 1540 S. F a NOO°o7'30"E ( 1D iY m• 101T . 007 so'w TQ 00' 5.00 T m n •O 16d0 SF v ry g 1680 :. F. `^ SAO• 0.00 b i I q N N 1 O s O o !'.4J s. F O " O W N N; .0 a 1680 S_E i[1 N a J N W a p V q N mm + t0 168v 5 F v e iu O l!1 o N o °i 1 j " le s 1i---5.� e.0 . s O sz -TRACT A I .40 $. F 4 ? N N 01 N 168O S. F ON z ' TRACT "A' sa N -" z w z To. Jo' ( 5.1956 ACRE S 1 po ♦ 1320 S_ �. -b g i680 F. p ,• 5.00 K +_40 S. F � S. « 7G.00' P1 ♦ 1680 3. F. O e • $00°07'30 W .• 'S..j$ N Tot0' G S00°07 30 M 45.00' IN65.Oi N 1 NCp":T 3C'•f �' NOC°OT 30"E 10 I t Q 30, thirty (30) days after the plans and been submitted and duly received by approval will be deemed to have been Section 4. SUBMISSION. specifications have the Committee, such given. Any person desiring to erect any structure in the Subdivision shall submit the plans and specifications to the Association. The Association shall forthwith forward any such materials submitted to the Chairman of the Architectural Standards Committee for consideration by the Committee. The Association shall.maintain a record of all materials submitted for consideration by the Architectural Standards Committee which .shall reflect the date such materials were forwarded to the Committee and the action ultimately taken by the Committee thereon.' Section 5._ STANDARDS AND RULES. The Architectural Standards Committee -shall adopt standards and rules governing the type of buildings to be permitted in the Subdivision, permitted construction materials, and the like. Such standards and rules shall be as determined from time to time by'the Committee. The following standards shall apply to all buildings constructed in the Subdivision: Buildings shall be predominately wooden structures, the total area enclosed within a townhouse structure, including garage, shall not exceed 90% of the area of the lot or lots upon which such building is constructed; no building shall 1_excedd..%25=''-€eft- in height above the ground elevation; wooden shingles or comparable from both an aesthetic and maintenance standpoint shall be required on all roofs of townhouse units, and all fencing shall compliment and be in harmony with the exterior design and materials of adjoining townhouse units.' Section.6. COMPENSATION. Members of the.Architectural Standards Committee shall not be entitled to any compensation for services performed. They shall be compensated for any expenses incurred by them in performing the duties required by their membership on the Committee., ARTICLE VIII PARTY WALLS Section 1. PARTY WALL. The term "party wall" as used herein shall mean and refer to the entire wall from front to rear, all or any portion of which is used for support or for fire wall protec- tion between each adjoining townhouse, intended to be situated On t! = bc;:rdary 1 .lie 'u� i YicCil adjoining townhouses. The owner shall possess in fee simple that portion of the party wall lying within his lot. Each owner of a townhouse having a party wall is hereby granted a mutual reciprocal'easement for repair or replacement of such party wall.' -No owner shall commit or omit any act, the result of which is an infringement of the adjoining owner's rights in the party wall, absent written agreement between such owners. No owner shall make any, structural changes to any party wall without the written consent of all other owners having rights in such party wall. June 2, 1994 City of Fort Collins Planning and Zoning Board 281 N. College Ave. Fort Collins, Co. 80521 RE: Indian Hills Village PUD Since I will not be able to attend the P&Z meeting June 6, 1994 I'am writing this letter for your consideration. I was at the May 23, 1994 meeting but the Indian Hills Village item did not may the time limit. I own the home at 1804 Busch Ct. (corner of Busch Ct. & E. Stuart St.). The major concerns I have are the height of .the homes and the set back of the homes from my rear property line. The original plat which is Indian Hills West PUD had an height limit of 24 feet .(P. 11, Item 6 of protective covenants) and a setback from Busch Ct. properties rear lot lines of 40 feet. The Indian Hills Village PUD has a proposed height limit of 35 feet and set back from rear properties of only 15 feet. My home has a large lot but a narrow lot therefore the rear of my home is only 15 feet+- from the rear lot line;therefore reducing the set back to 15 feet and increasing the height limit in Indian Hills Village will have a negative impact on my property value in my opinion. I'am a licensed real estate appraiser and licensed real estate broker (24 years) in Fort Collins,-'.. A normal 2 story home is 22 feet to 24:.:feet in height and a normal ranch style home is 14 feet to 16 feet in height. The ranch style harnes in Indian Hills Village will be 26 feet high (higher than a normal 2 story) and the 2 story homes will be 28 feet to 30 feet high or even.up to 35 feet?. The 2 story homes proposed will be more like a 3 story building. These homes are.not compatible with any homes.in the neighborhood (Indian Hills, Busch Ct.. or Indian Hills West).1 as the highest homes I'am aware of in the surrounding areas are a maximm height of 22 to 24 feet. I would rather have the higher density of .the Indian Hills West PUD.than the reduced set back and height increase of Indian Hills Village PUD. I request that you consider the height limit of 24 feet and keeping the set back of 40 feet from the rear of my property. (Attached part of covenants Indian Hills West PUD & part of plat Indian Hills West PUD) Sincerely, Keith M. Wear . Ph: 303-493-3800 901 Stover Street 'ort Collins, CO 80525 :ay 19, 1994 Ms. Kirsten Whetstone, AICP Planning Department, Community Planning & Environmental Services City of Fort Collins P.O. Box 580 Fort Collins, CO 80522-0580 Dear Ms. Whetstone: This note is in response to notification of Indian Hills Village PUD #81-93A. Perhaps you are not old enough to remember a popular song of the late 1940"s early 50's which ridiculed the "ticky-tacky" housing developments that mushroomed in southern California during the WWII days. Perhaps it would be worth digging out a record to hear again or for the first time. The PUD #81-93A is an attempt to inflict a "ticky-tacky" California housing concept that was ridiculed nearly 50 years ago in the area of its birth and pass it off on the Citizens of Fort Collins as a great new concept. The City should not let this happen. ,A less dense development would be much more in keeping with the neighborhood character. Sincerely, Edward B., and Phyllis E. Reed 4. Additional questions about the calculations of the size of the drainage. ditch, provided by Lugunitas. If the width is narrows then flow velocity also has to increase for the same ora greater amount of water flow through the narrowest parts of the drainage ditch. Actually, a larger volume of water must be calculated since the additional drainage -area has added about 2.4 cfs of water into the channel between Stations 5+00 and 3+50. 5. It appears that the side of one of the houses is serving as part of the drainage channel at point 3+50? 6. Considering the vertical elevation drop, considerable water velocity should be planned for as the drainage channel approaches Stuart St. However, the ditch is shown turning nearly a "right angle next to Stuart. If sufficient velocity results, then the momentum of the water would carry it out of its channel, and possibly onto Stuart at that point. 7 Finally, considering the total size of the project and the amount of water that must be drained, are two 24 inch culverts, placed under Stuart, large enough? Sincerely yours, vC_O" Q cc: Jonathan Prouty May 16, 1994 Commun. Ping. & Envrmmntl Srvs. P.O. Box 580 235 Mathews Street Fort Collins,--CO Dear Sirs, The purpose of this letter is to express concern that off -site impacts of drainage water from the proposed Indian Hills Village PUD (IHV-PUD) along Busch Ct. (Drainage Basin E) have still not been properly considered for the following reasons: 1. Currently, the Busch Ct. Neighborhood Group has been unable to ascertain whether there is any agreement with Indian Hills West that the drainage discharge that they contribute to the IHV-PUD will not increase. Currently, the proposed designs show that, for a 100 yr storm, Indian Hills West would contribute 23.9'of the total 28.2 cubic feet second (cfs) of surface drainage water that must discharged through Basin E to eventually cross Stuart Street and,flow into Spring Creek. A written and legally binding agreement that this discharge will not be increased appears necessary to assure that the planned drainage capacity along the boundary of IHV-PUD and the Busch Ct. Neighbors is not exceeded. 2. The land -surface elevation of South side of Indian Hills West (along the Arthur Ditch) is 4990 ft. Water is then discharged off of Indian Hills West onto Basin E of the IHV-PUD from a land -surface elevation of about 4980 ft and discharges at Stuart Street at an elevation of about 4966 ft. The vertical drop from the Arthur Ditch to Stuart Street is about 24 feet over a total distance of about 970 ft. The vertical drop from the top of Basin E to Stuart Street is about 14 ft over a distance of about 570 ft. 3. The calculations provided to us by the Lagunitas Company of the size of the ditch required to accomodate storm drainage along their west boundary need to be questioned because they show the flow velocity of the water decreasing with distance along the drainage ditch, even through the land elevation has dropped dramatically (see Item 2 above). This needs to be carefully considered since the effect of gravity on water velocity appears to need, to be considered. I E' -STO A'$PACE V i V .+� 1) While the layout appears well planned, I believe that consideration should be given to storage. Empty nesters and retirees are not without adult "toys" and sporting items such as fishing gear, skis, bicycles, golf clubs, etc. Especially given the make-up of the current and upcoming generations of seniors, we can expect them to stay more active for much longer. So they must be provided some form of storage. The inside units, themselves, do not appear to accommodate that. That would probably not be an issue if there were room for -- - storage in the garages. But if the garages are at the minimum width of 201, then it would appear that storage would not be possible in the garages. Storage must also ba accessible and not require hanging from or storing on —=---------- - -- rafters or at heights. 2) This also seems like a very narrow width for parking two cars. Again, even as we hope to remain more active into later years, our perceptions and our manual dexterity is still usually affected with the increasing years. .This could make parking difficult, especially if a close turn is required before entering the garage. Again, this appears to be a much needed type of development and I commend the designers on their attempts. I would ask, however, that you seriously consider the above in making final determinations as to variances involved in this project. A response would be appreciated. Sincerely, 4Xay Rios Chair Fort Collins Senior.Advisory Board 160 Circle Drive Fort Collins, CO 80524 (303) 482-0753 May 17, 1994 City Planning and Zoning Board Community Planning and Environmental Services 281 North College Fort Collins, CO 80522 RE: Indian Hills Village As the current chairperson of the Fort Collins Senior Advisory Board, I would like to comment on the proposed Indian Hills Village. Our Board is appointed by City Council to address issues of concern to Senior Citizens in the Fort Collins area. It is with that responsibility in mind that I offer the following comments. I find the concept of the Village to be intriguing and innovative and one which, I'm sure, will address the needs of a number of citizens of all ages. Since the anticipated tenants include "empty nesters and retired people," I would ask, however, that you consider the following concerns: PARKING: 1) As the Field Supervisor for the Colorado State University Office of Parking Management for the past 11 years, I consider myself somewhat of a "parking professional." Given that experience, I believe that a parking stall width of 7' is quite small. In fact, the Institutional and Municipal Parking Congress recommends 8 to 8 1/2 feet width for any low -use or residential areas. In addition to that, consideration needs to be given to the changing needs of a mature body. Getting out of a car, for a more mature person, usually requires that the door be opened to its full span. So this width would seem to be extremely. limiting and could cause serious future implications. 2) Handicap accessibility should be of utmost concern. The number of stalls provided should not correspond to the overall parking numbers, but rather based on each individual setting. For instance, in a lot that has 41 stalls, one or two handicap spaces may be sufficient. But if those stalls are broken up into several different areas around the development, then more handicap spaces factor. Indian Hills Village PUD May 17, 1994 ---------------- - — and Zoning Board, the Cheyenne Drive entrance was vacated. Currently East Stuart Street is shown as the only access to residents of Indian Hills Village PUD. In fact East Stuart Street -is designated as a collector street. But it is not a standard collector, despite "average" traffic count shown in a 1992 survey. Narrower than the city standard (only partially offset by the proposed new markings), East Stuart Street contains no standard cross streets for its distance from Remington Street to Lemay Avenue, one block short of a mile. From Stover Street to Lemay Avenue, or fully two-thirds of the distance, there is no through street to Prospect Road. Already East Stuart Street is the sole feeder for single-family homes, PUD's, and neighborhood care facilities to the north. Traffic from Whedbee south and Stover north and south, and from Mountain Gymnastics and the Spring Park ball diamonds at Busch Court all converge within a single 1 1/2 block segment. The Indian Hills Village PUD will add further parking and traffic congestion in an area already narrowly defined. 6. Homeowners Association While homeowner associations are not usually a city consideration, HOA's give assurance that an area will receive due care and maintenance. With its private drives and lack of yard space in contrast to areas surrounding, Indian Hills Village PUD may benefit from an HOA. Area residents would appreciate knowing the plan for maintenance and its mandates under such an organization. Overall, drainage and compatibility issues remain a primary concern. One solution may be designation of the two home sites closest to Busch Court as green space. With that, there would be enough land to resolve drainage concerns and to accommodate trees and landscaping at the boundary with Busch Court. Further, a decision not to build at the southwest corner would allow pedestrian access to the community in a green space highly visible. The Stuart Street facing would be enhanced as well. cyan � cc: Jonathan J. Prouty Kerrie Ashbe` Tim Buchanan Busch Court neighbors Indian Hills Village PUD - - ---- May 17, 1994 agertwo-u -three- -- lines will remain to buffer and screen this use from the existing single family houses on Stover Street and Busch Court.... Staff finds that due to the innovative sensitive design and well landscaped buffer areas, the proposed land use is compatible with the surrounding land uses." 3. Height of Units Standard for two-story dwellings is a site building height of 22.' Indian Hills West PUD covenants restrict building height to 241. In contrast, Lagunitas Company has secured a site maximum building height of 351. According to its elevation submittal for Indian Hills Village PUD, ranch elevation may exceed 22, and two-story elevation will approach 35.' Only the steeple on nearby Trinity Lutheran Church boasts a similar 35, height. Busch Court neighbors request that the site maximum height be renegotiated with the city and the community. It is their hope that Indian Hills Village PUD units may be compatible to existing neighborhoods without compromise to the aesthetic of the homes within and surrounding. 4. Green Space Standard PUD's usually have.planned, open green space, added before city approval is given. While green space may not be a city requirement for a single-family PUD, area residents believe green space an important consideration in this instance. With all properties accessible on front and back to vehicle traffic, and only a 3' buffer side and back and 14.5' front area, Indian Hills Village PUD will take its character from concrete and asphalt surfaces. Traditional single- family lots have 20, front, 15' back and 5' side buffers. Neighborhoods surrounding the PUD follow this pattern, with Indian Hills West in particular making creative use of its non -housing areas to maximize green space. Non -paved areas are essential to the aesthetic quality of the development overall. Green space eases run-off as well. 5. Transportation In an earlier plan, there were two Village PUD, one from East Stuart S Drive. On January 24, 1994, at the entrances slated for treet and the other Preliminary Hearing Indian Hills of the Planning May 17, 1994 TO: kirsten Whetstone. Project Planner �t3or,.;�e Lae6er", rYW FROM: Busch Court Neighborhood Group RE: Indian Hills Village PUD On May 11. 1994, Mr. Jonathan J. Prouty, President, Lagunitas Company, met Busch Court neighbors a second time on the Indian Hills Village PUD. Following are concerns unresolved: 1. Drainage City officials and residents of Busch Court continue to review drainage concerns. Recent adaptations to the site plan show a swail expanded to.meet the minimal flood standard. Projected to accommodate run-off for Indian Hills West and Indian Hills Village PUD, the swail follows the western boundary of the property to the north, to East Stuart Street. Still, the area sufficient to carry the run-off would absorb any buffer zone between Indian Hills Village PUD and Busch Court. Reduction to the site plan as a result may not have been sufficiently addressed. In the meantime, changes are required in grading on the Indian Hills West property trade to the south. As yet there are no plans for these changes, certain to impact drainage. In fact elevations decrease as groundwater moves from Indian Hills West and Indian Hills Village PUD along natural drainage contours to Busch Court and the northwest. Residents in the drainage plain foresee a higher water table with impact to subsurface areas and yards. Neighbors would like to see a comprehensive plan for grading well in place with signed agreements and easements prior to confirmation of drainage, site, and landscape plans, and final PUD approval. 2. Neighborhood Compatibility Trees and a means to ensure their place in the site plan are also a concern. Typically the city requires trees along property lines within a PUD. Yet in the most current plan for Indian Hills Village PUD, there are no trees designated for the periphery. While there are vestiges of old hedgerow trees within some of the Busch Court properties, there is no tree buffer of any kind behind two of the six properties adjacent. In addressing neighborhood compatibility, the Staff Report for the Indian Hills Village PUD, Preliminary, 081-93, section 5e, appears "The existing dense tree plantings along the east and west property of the surface has been made impermeable because of the high -density housing plan that you have. Can you guarantee that such high -intensity (yet not uncommon) rainfall events will not over -top the drainage ditch that you are proposing to place along our East property boundary? If it does, it will come onto my and my neighbor's property to potentially flood under or into our houses. What precautions are the city of Fort Collins planning staffs and zoning boards taking in their approval process to safeguard your neighbors from the undesirable impacts that you may create for us, as neighbors to your project?? How concerned is the city of Fort Collins about either on -site storage or alternatively, their being able to move these relatively large amounts of rapidly moving water across Stewart Street and into Spring Creek? With as many houses as you want to put in as small of an area as possible, and without an adequate plan and design for handling drainage, you will impact your neighbors along Busch Court. In addition, Stewart Street itself will likely be impacted because of the large amount of water that must discharge from your site and be moved North across Stewart Street into Spring Creek. Because of my concern, I am forwarding this letter to the City of Fort Collins Community Planning and Environmental Services with the request that it or the concerns expressed be provided to the City Staff responsible for storm -water issues. In addition I am also requesting that a copy of my letter be included in the package of material prepared for the Planning and Zoning Board. Sincerely yours, Ronald F. Follett City of Fort Collins Community Planning and Environmental Services Staff. • Now, since I have been unable to ascertain whether you have certain information concerning water volumes, I hope that the following information may be of some use to you and to the Planning and Zoning Board: 1. The area of your property that is adjacent (i.e. Basin E) to the property owners on Busch Court and that must be drained along our East property line (according to your plans) is. perhaps 1.4 acres. However, for purposes of discussion, I will speak only in terms of one acre. It is then easy to recognize that one inch of rainfall on an acre of land amounts to one acre -inch of water or 1/12 of an acre-foot of water. Since an acre is 43,560 square feet, then an acre -inch of water if the same as 43,560-ft times 1/12 ft, or 3,630 cubic feet (ft ) of water. The factor (67th Ed of the Handbook of Chemistry and Physics) for converting cubic feet to gallons is 7.48 gal/cu foot. Therefore, an inch of rainfall amounts to 27,044 gallons of water. Since the entire on -site area proposed for your housing development is about 6 acres then the total amount would be 6 times the above amount of water. In addition, any water draining from adjacent, up -slope land (on the South or East of your land) would contribute additional water that must eventually be drained across your site. 2. Currently, the land area in question has a grass cover and most of the water from precipitation infiltrates readily into the soil and is stored in the soil and utilized by the vegetation to grow during part of the year. However, as stated above and on rare occasions, I still experience some water running onto and ponding in my yard during the most intense storms. My neighbors will have to speak for themselves concerning their own experience. However, going back to the numbers given above; if you cover some percentage of the soil with asphalt, cement or rooftops, then water falling on those impermeable surfaces must runoff. If 80% of the area is covered with impermeable surface, you cannot expect the remaining 20% of uncovered soil to soak up all of .the water. It would in fact be reasonable, for planning purposes, to expect 80% times 27,044, or 21,635 gallons, to runoff for each acre -inch of rainfall on each acre of land under, or that currently drains onto, your housing development. 3. Precipitation records for Fort Collins (NOAA Climatological Data for 1992) show that most of our rain occurs in April, May, and June; followed by July and August. These are also months when existing vegetation on your site is actively growing and utilizing water from precipitation, thus helping prevent runoff. In June of 1992, 5.78 inches of precipitation were recorded. Using my numbers above that would amount to 156,300 gallons of water falling on each acre. Some of the 1992 precipitation came during intense periods of rain meaning that any drainage discharge or storage system would need to be large enough to accommodate very rapid runoff; especially when most May 4, 1994 Mr. Jonathan Prouty, President Lagunitas Company 3307 S. College Ave. Suite 200, Fort Collins, CO 80525 Dear Mr. Prouty; The purpose of this letter is to again express my concern about drainage of runoff water from your proposed Indian Hills Village onto the property of home owners located to the West of Indian Hills Village. I have expressed this concern to you verbally, at least two times. I have heard your assurances that you have carefully looked into the issue, and I have now seen what you apparently consider as an adequate topographic survey. I do not agree that you have carefully looked into this situation, that the City Planning Boards are adequately informed, or that your assurances are at all valid. What you show and what I visually see do not agree. What you present, I find totally inadequate even for your purposes. I must state that I am very disappointed in the type of cursory information that you propose should be totally believable, especially when it does not agree with what can be seen visually nor with my experience. Therefore, I have done a preliminary survey along the West edge of your property and along 2 lines to a distance of about 60 feet beyond the East property line of the property owners who live on the East Side of Busch Court. That preliminary survey does confirm what I visually see and it also confirms my experience of seeing part of my yard flood with water run-on from your property during certain storm events. No, I am not a licensed engineer. However, I have worked on survey crews as a young man and I have received training in survey, and certainly other topics as well, by the U.S. Army while serving as an artillery officer during my two years of active duty and approximately 12 additional years as an army reservist. Secondly, I have sought advice from 2 engineers about what should be reasonably expected from you by your neighbors in terms of a usable survey of the property that you propose to build upon. Their recommendation is that, especially along your west property line, you should be able to provide us, as neighbors, as well as the City Planning Board a topographic map with a one foot, or less, contour interval. In addition, considering the roughness and steepness of parts of the terrain, the contour map should likely be based upon survey points taken using a 50 foot grid that extends at least 100 or more feet from our property line into your property.