The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutMIDLAND GREENS PUD MASTER PLAN - COUNTY REFERRAL - 7-88A - CORRESPONDENCE - FINDINGS, CONCLUSIONS & DECISIONCITY OF LOVELAND DEPARTMENT OF PLANNING, ENGINEERING AND BUILDING Civic Center • 500 East Third • Loveland, Colorado 80537 (303) 667-6130 August 2, 1988 Board of County Commissioners P.O. Box 1190 Fort Collins, CO 80522 RE: Midland Greens PUD Master Plan Dear Members of the Board: The Loveland Planning Commission considered the PUD master plan for Midland Greens on July, 26, 1988. On July 27 a letter containing the recommendations of the Loveland Planning Commission was hand delivered to the County planning office and made available to the Larimer County Planning Commission prior to their meeting on the 27th. A copy of the letter is attached for your information. It is my understanding that a letter containing the recommendations of the Fort Collins Planning and Zoning Board was also made available to the County Planning Commission prior to the meeting. Based upon a conversation that the Loveland Planning Division staff had with the County planning staff on July 28, it appears that the Larimer County Planning Com- mission may not have taken into consideration the recommendations of both cities when making a decision on the PUD master plan. This matter is of some concern to the City of Loveland given the amount of time that your staff, the planning staffs of the two cities and representatives of the property owner have spent attempting to design a project that respects the corridor concept between the two communities, while allowing the development of a viable residential subdivision. While the property owners have expressed their willingness to work with the various entities to address the remaining issues in conjunction with future phase plans, it is my feeiing that some of these items need to be auz'd essed iii greater detail prior to � N- proval of the PUD master plan. I would respectfully request that the Board of County Commissioners give thoughtful consideration to the recommendations made by the Loveland Planning Commission. If you find that the recommendations have merit, I would respectfully request that the Board of County Commissioners delay considera- tion of the PUD master plan until the items have been addressed. Sincerely, Dave Lingle Chairman, Loveland Planning Commission DL:Ig _ j • CITY OF LOVELAND DEPARTMENT OF PLANNING, ENGINEERING AND BUILDING Civic Center • 500 East Third • Loveland. Colorado 80537 (303) 667-6130 July 27, 1988 Larimer County Planning Commission P.O. Box 1190 Fort Collins, CO 80522 RE: Midland Greens PUD year Me rnbers of It A' ie Piann;in. g vvm ni ssion: The Loveland Planning Commission considered the Midland Greens PUD on Tues- day, July 26, 1988. At the meeting, attorney Dave Ringenberg, who resides within and represents the Bruns subdivision, raised several issues that the Loveland Planning Commission feels have not been fully addressed. The Loveland Planning Commis- sion was informed that the residents of the Bruns subdivision have not been actively involved in the review of the Midland Greens PUD until now. The concerns as ex- pressed by Mr. Ringenberg are as follows: Open space a. The Midland Greens property owners have been willing to pursue the pro- posal for the acquisition of additional open space as recommended by the City of Fort Collins. One component of the Fort Collins proposal is the ex- change of 4 acres of land for the waiver of parkland fees. Instead of establishing the 4 acres at the southwest corner of the project, it was recom- mended that the 4 acres be set aside further north near the entrance to the PUD. There are two reasons for this. First, the land the County would es- sentially be purchasing may not be desirable due to swampy conditions created by a nearby irrigation pond. Second, locating the 4 acre open space further north would help to visually link the open space along U.S. 287 with the open space a!ong the drainageway. b. If a public entity is able to purchase the 31 additional acres of open space as depicted in the Fort Collins proposal, there is a concern about how the pub- lic and adjacent private open space would interface. It may be reasonable to assume that the private open space would be deeded to to the county. However, it was pointed out that tract "F", which is an open space area west of Allot Avenue that ties into the Colland Center Subdivision, would need to remain private because of its relationship to the Colland Center Subdivision and the fact that it is needed for drainage purposes. C. It was represented to those who purchased lots within the Bruns Subdivision that the adjacent property (at that time Estates West) would develop at a density similar to that of the Bruns Subdivision, and that certain portions of Estates West would remain as open space. What was represented at the time of purchase has been changed as a result of the Midland Greens PUD master plan. Mr. Ringenberg stated that no lots should be developed imme- diately north of Turman Drive for two reasons. First the land is swampy and is not ideally suited for development. Second, it was represented to the homeowners that the area would remain in open space as per the Estates West plat. d. The Bruns Homeowner's Association is concerned about the interface of the potential public open space within Midland Greens, and their own open space; some of which has been set aside exclusively for wildlife habitat. 2. Traffic Circulation a. If a public entity is successful in purchasing the 31 acres of additional open space, there would no longer be any residential development within the Es- tates West portion of the project. Hence, there would not be a need for a road within the PUD to link the north and south portions of the project. Two issues need to be addressed. First , whether there is a need for a road to link Colland Center with the subdivisions south of Midland Greens. Second, how to provide access to the proposed lots in the southeast corner of the project, just north of The Bruns Subdivision. 3. Business Rezoning a. There are concerns regarding the compatibility of the Alpine Autobahn with existing and proposed adjacent residential development. Mr. Ringenberg stated that the degree of incompatibility should not be increased by allowing the Alpine Autobahn to expand to the south into the Midland Greens PUD by virtue of the rezoning request. 4. _ Density a. The Bruns Homeowner's Association is particularly concerned with the in- crease in density within the south portion of the project as compared to the approved Estates West preliminary plat. Mr. Ringenberg requested that there be a density transition within the Midland Greens PUD. Smaller lots that are similar in size to the Colland Center subdivision should be located in the north end of the project, with larger ioLs iocated in the south and ease portions of the PUD that are similar in size to the Highland Park and Bruns subdivisions. 5. Views a. Mr. Ringenberg was concerned that the higher density of the Midland Greens PUD would exclude mountain views that the homeowners within the Bruns Subdivision now enjoy. Development at a lower density would possi- bly help to retain view corridors. Dave Shupe with Landmark Engineering, the applicant's representative, is willing to work with the Bruns Homeowner's Association to identify building envelopes on each lot so that important views will be retained. Based upon these concerns, some of which were brought to light for the first time on July 26, the Loveland Planning Commission would urge the Larimer County Planning Commission to delay making a decision on the Midland Greens PUD until the County has investigated the concerns and, where necessary, interested parties have had an opportunity to work together to address the concerns. Also, the Loveland Planning Commission endorses, in part, the Fort Collins proposal with the following changes in wording: 1. The developer agrees to deed the open space along Highway 287 to Larimer County as permanent open space. The open space is 250 feet wide along the entire property frontage. 2. The developer provides a landscape plan for the 250 foot strip along Highway 287. The plan should be a naturalistic design concept that builds upon the ripar- ian landscape already established along the canal. The developer agrees to construct the approved plan and maintain the plant material for a two year estab- lishment period, after which time maintenance would be the responsibility of Larimer County. 3. The developer provides a set of design guidelines which address fencing and landscaping of private development adjacent to all open space, both private and public. 4. The developer deeds to the public an additional plus or minus 4 acres of land delineated on Exhibit B in exchange for a waiver of park land fees. Due to other funding priorities for the acquisition of parks and open space within the Loveland Urban Growth Area, the Planning Commission is not able to endorse part 5 of the Fort Collins proposal. Based upon the fact that some of the issues have .not been fully addressed, the Love- land Planning Commission determined that it could not make a well informed decision on the Midland Greens PUD. The Loveland Planning Commission respectfully re- quests that the Larimer County Planning Commission table this item for the reasons stated above. Sincerely, Dave Lingle Chairman, Loveland Planning Commission we