Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutWINDTRAIL ON SPRING CREEK PUD PHASE TWO PRELIMINARY - 66 93B - MINUTES/NOTES - CORRESPONDENCE-NEIGHBORHOOD MEETINGNEIGHBORHOOD III_ ORMATION MEETIN —T Dld You Receive Written Notification of this meeting? Correct Address. Name Address Zip Yes No Yes No Kt �•l � (sOS S fret Cp< 51( �05 2l ✓ tc I'SO4 v q&,y , ,\ cl 97)E;)L >r S T I NEIGHBORHOOD IN, ORMQQATION IVIEETE\.J t'U I ti;DT P. P) L /� C _ C� �C) 3 Receive D;d n No ification of this meeting? Correct Addre s. Name Address Zip Yes No Yes No OC—PT �`�cr GQ� lii 4 «Lu Cep t — J!2 ,i Ro ,' wa/W e, ✓ fie aVj 053 — � >70c /3 06 'va Jelle ' o o�- / o `i LL oth 41W�7 C)�7'©Dcq /O M-t /Q'Lt /C2[�O / �T �l/a ���a btu ✓�'. T T 0 21. Will fill dirt be brought in like last summer? RESPONSE: No, there is enough fill on the property now. The fill dirt will be spread around. 22. Can construction traffic use CSURF property on a temporary basis rather than our streets? RESPONSE: We will work with CSURF on this. 23. The problem with development is that the public improvements seem to lag behind the impact of the new construction. We need improvements to the Hill Pond/Shields intersection .before the impact of the new residents is felt. The added traffic burden must be handled to accommodate the new impacts prior to the residents moving in. 24. If there is to be a trade with CSURF, then there should be an amended master plan on Tract J and an amended master plan on Wind Trail. This should be done with the full public process. 25. Will the develper consider a maximum height on the north of 30 feet? RESPONSE: We will consider this in the context of today's market. 26. What are the estimated costs of the lots and houses? RESPONSE: The lots will range from $30,000 to $35,000. The houses will likely range from $150,000 to $200,000. 27. Will the access path that connects the trail to the homes be public? RESPONSE: It will be considered by the residents and neighbors to be a public path. The path will be owned, however, not by the City of Fort Collins, but by the homeowner's association. Or, the path may be within a drainage easement that is dedicated for drainage and access purposes to the City but with underlying ownership remaining in common with the association. This is not resolved yet. 28. My recommendation is against side lot access to the trail. This tends to have a negative impact on the two adjacent lot owners who will feel compelled to build six foot privacy fences. Access to the trail should be out in the open, not hidden between two side lot lines. RESPONSE: This is a good comment. 9 12. The timing is awkward. The approval of Wind Trail Townhomes was smooth and non -controversial due to the implied "promise" of open space being brought into the neighborhood. Now, the open space is not on the table. This has the appearance of bad faith. RESPONSE: During the deliberations regarding Wind Trail Townhomes, the developer consistently represented that if the deal with the City fell through, then the area would be considered for single family development. 13. What are the unanticipated costs associated with the sewer? RESPONSE: The sewer depth on Shire Court is too shallow. This results in bringing in sewer from the east which is a greater distance requiring more pipe, manholes, trenching, etc. 14. The source of the sewer should have been known to you prior to negotiations with the Department of Natural Resources. 15. What about a lift station to satisfy the sewer depth problem? RESPONSE: Lift stations were considered but are cost prohibitive. 16. The developer •is cautioned that it is pure conjecture to assume that there will be a local street connection across CSURF Tract J to a signal at Rolland Moore Park and Shields. Decisions regarding CSURF property cannot be made by the developer. At this time, the possibility seems remote. Unless a local street connection is in writing, it is conjecture. 17. The developer's consultant is cautioned to not color up areas on the renderings as open space that are not under the developer's control. 18. If "Armageddon" (the project up the road known as Spring Creek Village) gets approved, the traffic on Shields will become impossible. 19. How will the developer enforce the preservation of the open space on the platted lot and the installation of the split rail fence 15 feet inside the north property line? RESPONSE: It is our intention to place the 15 feet outside the split rail fence as a landscape easement within the platted lots. 20. Based on our experience in Wallenberg, this concept will not work. The fence location is appropriate but this should be a property line, not an easement line. The 15 foot landscaped area should be dedicated to the homeowner's association and held in common, not contained within individually platted lots. A possible compromise would be to adjust the difference so that the yard area increases by 7.5 feet and the common open space decreases by 7.5 feet. Otherwise, fencing restrictions within platted lots do not work. 3 at the easterly line of Sundering Townhomes and extends west to Shields. Discussions are ongoing and final resolution must be approved by the State Board of Agriculture. 6. Will the homes be two-story or one-story? The cross-section on the plans shows a one-story home. RESPONSE: It is likely that the homes will be two story structures. 7. Will there be a height limitation on the homes? One-story units would have less impact on the Spring Creek Trail. RESPONSE: We are looking at perhaps a height limitation of 35 feet. 8. The developer needs to be very specific, height limitations can be rigged depending on where you establish grade as the basis of the measurement. 9. The height issue could be mitigated if the City and F.E.M.A. (Federal Emergency Management Agency) would work to resolve the discrepency between the latest improvements to Spring Creek and the outdated F.E.M.A. floodplain maps. If the area were removed from the floodplain maps, then the City would not require the homes to be elevated a minimum distance above grade. Also, another benefit would be that the homeowners would not be required to purchase flood insurance. RESPONSE: We are aware of the issues between what the City has done to the floodplain and the lag time in changing the F.E.M.A. maps. These are good comments. Please keep in mind that many of the existing homes in the area are two story. We do not want to restrict the height of homes on certain lots to one story as this would be considered overly restrictive in today's marketplace. 10. If the homes had a passive solar character, this would be desirable. RESPONSE: The orientation of the proposed layout is north -south which allows for southern exposures. The opportunity exists for both passive and active solar. 11. What happened to the open space that was being considered for acquisition by the City's Department of Natural Resources? RESPONSE: When first approached, the City was not interested. Then, later, the City became interested. As we researched our land development costs, it became apparent that we face unanticipated costs for installing a sanitary sewer system. This raised the price of the open space which made it difficult for the City to acquire. Part of the equation is that the City was being asked to purchase land that has development potential versus a floodplain or floodway or wetland area that is not developable. NEIGHBORHOOD MEETING MINUTES PROJECT: Wind Trail, Phase Two: Single Family DATE: December 8, 1993 DEVELOPER: John McCoy CONSULTANT: Kay Force, Jim Sell Design CITY PLANNER: Ted Shepard The meeting began with a description of the project. The request is for 37 single family lots on 15 acres. The site is directly south of Spring Creek and the Spring Creek Trail, and east of Hill Pond Townhomes. The project is north of Wind Trail, Phase One which is a townhome development adjacent to Sundering Townhomes. QUESTIONS, CONCERNS, COMMENTS 1. What is the timing of the signal at Shields and Rolland Moore intersection? RESPONSE: Not sure at this time what the schedule is. 2. Do you have written permission from CSURF to cross Tract J of the C.A.T. master plan for construction traffic or for tieing in a local street connection to the future signal at Shields and Rolland Moore? RESPONSE: We are discussing a variety of issues with CSURF but we have not resolved the issue of crossing Tract J yet. 3. The existing intersection of Shields and Hill Pond Road needs improvements. Right now, there are sight distance problems and no left turn exit lane for heading onto southbound Shields. 4. Why signalize the Rolland Moore intersection and not the Hill Pond Road intersection? RESPONSE: A signal at Rolland Moore will serve the traffic at the park during the summer and future development on CSURF's Tract J. A local street connection will allow Hill Pond residents to gain access to this signal. 5. What is the proposed trade between the developer and CSURF? RESPONSE: We are proposing to trade the eastern portion of our Overall Development Plan (about 15 acres) for an equal amount of land on the western portion of Tract J. The area on Tract J begins