HomeMy WebLinkAboutLINDIMER SUBDIVISION PRELIMINARY - 26 93 - CORRESPONDENCE - RESPONSE TO CITIZEN (3)Charlie Tidd and Suzanne Bassinger
June 21, 1993
Page 4
be very concerned about this, because you have been surrounded by
Rossborough and Wagonwheel Subdivisions and Horsetooth Road for a long
time and apparently gotten along fine with just barbed wire that any loose
dog can penetrate.
Building Setbacks - We have only 3.6 usable acres to deal with after
dedicating part of our property to the City for a trail easement. We
cannot establish a 150' setback and still meet the required density in the
city. We have changed our site plan layout from what we originally
proposed to eliminate the western cul-de-sac and put the largest and
deepest lots along our common boundary to achieve as much setback for you
as possible. This also reduces by one the number of houses whose rear
yards will back up to your property and turns one lot so that the side of
the house faces your property, not the rear.
Temporary Liability - We will maintain adequate liability insurance for
our development and homebuilding operations and suggest that you do the
same for your business. Our insurance agent has advised us not to name
you as additional insured on our coverages because it will only dilute our
(yours and ours) total coverage in the event of a claim. It is better
that we each maintain our own insurance. I would suggest you work your
"green" horses inside your arena area, which is confined and has a soft
surface rather than in the pasture area adjacent to where we will be
building. We will try to minimize the spooking of your horses if at all
possible.
I am sorry that our friendly acquaintance during the failed negotiations
to purchase your property has turned into your resolute opposition to our
project. I realize that you are unhappy about the "affordable starter home"
nature of our proposed homes and would prefer larger custom homes. I feel we
have made sincere efforts to address your legitimate concerns and to mitigate
any conflicts between our project and your business. We will attempt to
minimize disruptions to you and to the Rossborough and Wagonwheel neighborhood
during our construction period if our project receives the necessary approvals
and try our best to be good neighbors.
Please call me if you wish to discuss any of these issues further. I will
send you a proposed draft of a new property owner disclosure for your input.
Very truly yours,
A/Z `t,�
Mark Linder
cc: Ted Shepard,
Ft. Collins Planning Dept.
Charlie Tidd and Suzanne Bassinger
June 21, 1993
Page 3
practically no exposure to traffic on Horsetooth. Under the City's
restrictive sign code, we cannot utilize an off -site sign for marketing
purposes. Constructing this fence at the start, before our homes are
built, greatly reduces our marketing exposure and makes an already
difficult marketing job much tougher. However, we realize your need for
an immediate buffer and are willing to build the fence entirely at our
expense before any site work begins.
Physical Separation - Your wire fence is set 2' inside of your property
line on our common border. We have agreed to set our fence 2' inside of
our property lot lines to provide the 4' separation you request. We
request that you tighten your wire fence to prevent your horses from
damaging our fence.
New Property Owner Disclosure - We will have all new homeowners sign at
closing a disclosure statement such as you request, that acknowledges your
land use and rights of operation and addresses the arena lights and other
things that we discussed. I think that you have some responsibilities too
and that you should not expect this to totally terminate any and all
surrounding homeowner complaints. I understand from conversations with
the City Zoning Administrator, that the stable use was in place when your
property was annexed into the City and therefore is "grandfathered in" and
really is not subject to any zoning restrictions because of this. I do
not feel that just because you fall through a zoning loophole that this
absolves you from all responsibilities that a business owner has to the
surrounding neighborhood and community at large. Most city businesses are
subject to some constraints on appearance, drainage, landscaping, and
waste (manure) control. If you want to minimize neighborhood complaints,
why don't you try putting a coat of paint on something, mowing your weeds,
do some form of drainage improvements to improve your pen areas, and not
stack all the manure on your property line? Put yourself into the shoes
of a new homeowner in Kingston Woods or Lindimer and imagine what you
would think of your operation? Owners of new homes take pride in their
property's appearance and make landscape improvements, maybe you should do
the same. Apparently, there are no limits as to how many horses you can
pack onto your site, perhaps there should be.
We will agree to separate our project from yours as much as possible, and
we will make a disclosure in writing to all new purchasers of our homes,
and we will try to minimize these complaints for you, but I don't think
this will totally solve the problem for you. I think you must make some
attempt to be compatible also and not take the attitude that since you
were there first and the houses moved in on you that whatever you do or
don't do is ok.
Animal Control - We will include information and language in our covenants
to address this and provide the solid wood fence barrier. As we
discussed, perhaps you should run a woven wire fence from the east end of
our wood fence to your house to keep out neighborhood dogs. You must not
Charlie Tidd and Suzanne Bassinger
June 21, 1993
Page 2
your property will have to develop at an even higher density. Our
proposed density is supported and encouraged by existing City
policies.
4. Our site is small. It was for sale by CSURF, the previous owner, for
eight years. If you had wanted it to expand your livestock use, you
had ample opportunity to purchase it, which you acknowledged at the
neighborhood meeting. As you told me when I was negotiating with you
for purchase of your property, you thought it was not developable and
you could "control" it . Well, our site is developable, has all of
the necessary infrastructure connections, and our proposal is a "use
by right" under the present zoning.
In response to your April 27th letter asking that various conditions be
incorporated into our development plan, I offer the following responses to each
numbered point:
1. As we discussed in our May 4th meeting on this cost sharing issue with Ted
Shepard and Mike Herzig, your request for us to share in your Horsetooth
Road costs has no basis whatsoever under current City policies. It would
be less expensive for us to do a shorter street with a cul-de-sac end on
it and pick up an extra lot than to extend Birmingham to your property
line as we are proposing. We are doing so because it is in accord with
sound planning principles to provide for a future through street
connection. In addition, this provides your property with a second point
of access which it will need when it develops. Each of our homes will pay
a street over -sizing fee towards arterial street improvements such as will
be required on Horsetooth Road. You, as property owners, will only have
to pay for the local street portion of Horsetooth Road adjacent to your
property anyway, at the time you develop. Suzanne, you in your work as a
civil engineer for TST Inc. Consulting Engineers must certainly be aware
of these city reimbursement policies. Our new homes will pay their fair
share towards your piece of Horsetooth Road as will yours and all others
being built in the City. We will not escrow additional funds for your
benefit.
2. We will attempt to make our project as compatible with your property as we
can.
Visual Separation - We have agreed to construct at the commencement of
development activities, a 6' high (8' is in violation of city codes) solid
wood fence along our common property boundary. We will put on the plat
and in our covenants language that requires that it remain in place at
least until the adjacent land use changes (your property develops). We
have also agreed to plant trees every 40' along that border to provide a
landscape buffer. We feel that constructing this fence at the
commencement of site development work for your benefit is a significant
concession on our part. As you are aware, ours is an infill site with
,Linder
Real Estate
June 21, 1993
Charlie Tidd and Suzanne Bassinger
1506 West Horsetooth Road
Ft. Collins, CO 80526
Dear Charlie and Suzanne:
This letter is to address the various points raised in your April 27th
letters delivered to Ted Shepard at the Lindimer Subdivision neighborhood
meeting. With regards to the letter asking that the City deny our application,
after consulting with our project engineer, James Stewart and Associates, I
offer the following response to each numbered point:
1 & 2. Our property does have access to sewer facilities. The wastewater
department is satisfied with our plan to build a duel system at our
expense and temporarily route our flows along with Rossborough's to
the north until the Warren trunk is built. This is not an unusual
situation in that sewer flows are often directed temporarily in one
direction until these larger trunk lines are in place. There will be
no increased operation or maintenance costs because of the duel
system because the effluent is always in one system or the other.
The switch over and abandonment of our temporary 8" line will be at
our expense. There is easily sufficient capacity in the Rossborough
lines to handle our project. It is a shame to have to build several
hundred feet of sewer main that at some point will be abandoned, but
you are the cause of this, not us. When Kingston Woods developed
adjacent to your property on the east, you made a big fuss and
demanded that they extend an 8" main to your property, which they
did, so that your property could develop "out of sequence" and not
have to wait for the Warren trunk line like you are claiming we are
doing. It seems ironic to me that you feel you should be able to do
something, but others should not be able to do the same thing. You
then denied our request for an easement across your property to
utilize the Kingston Woods main. So this sewer situation that we
have is perhaps a little unusual, but it is workable according to our
engineer and the City Wastewater Department, and is not a valid
reason for denying our development project.
3. Our proposed density is compatible with the Rossborough and
Wagonwheel Subdivision densities, and in my judgment, with the
density your property will eventually develop at. When you were
negotiating to sell your property to Bill Neal to expand his Kingston
Woods project, you must have felt that this level of density was all
right. If you ever find a developer to pay you your asking price,
Specializing in Development Properties
309 W. Harmony Road i Fort Collins, Colorado 80526 (303) 229-0544