HomeMy WebLinkAboutMIDLAND GREENS PUD MASTER PLAN - COUNTY REFERRAL - 7-88A - CORRESPONDENCE - APPLICANT COMMUNICATIONUndmurh
ENGINEERING Ltd.
July 12, 1988
Project No. 3936-DE6D-01-564
Ms. Linda Ripley, Planner
City of Fort Collins
300 LaPorte Ave.
Fort Collins, CO 80521
RE: Midland Greens
Dear Linda:
P[9@(90WF=[7i�_ 1-3 W
I have discussed with my client the terms of your proposal
for City endorsement of this County subdivision request. I
will try to summarize his verbal responses in this letter.
For clarity, I will keep these responses in the same order
as your conditions.
1. He has agreed to the deeding of open space shown
along Highway 287.
2. The indication he has given is that he is to provide
the landscape design, and agrees to do so. However,
the County has indicated it would do the planting.
3. The requested design guidelines can be incorporated as
part of the final plans for the P.U.D.
4. This condition is difficult in that the land being
asked for all belongs to Estates West, and the proposed
benefits would accrue primarily (77%) to my client.
That part could be worked out between them. However,
the owner of Estates West would have to set the value
of his land. Also, if the fifth condition were to be
implemented, there would not be a total of 100 lots for
which to receive credit. Thus, some additional alter-
native financing would need to be identified. A sim-
pler way might be to buy the four acres outright now at
an agreed -upon price. It should be noted, however,
that the agreement under consideration between the two
owners does make provision for the implementation of
this condition.
Main Office
2300 West Eisenhower Blvd.
Loveland, Colorado 80537
Dale D. Olhausen, P.E. & L.S.
President
ENGINEERS / ARCHITECTS / PLANNERS / SURVEYORS
Greeley (303) 356-6286 Denver (303) 629-7124
Od4
Loveland (303) 667-6286
City of Fort Collins
Project No. 3936-DEED-01-465
July 12, 1988
Page 2
5. The owner has expressed his reluctance to grant such an
option without any financial compensation. The exer-
cising of such a purchase does create two notable
problems internal to the Master Plan. There would be
no need to build the extension of Bruns Drive North to
Allott Avenue, as no lots would be served thereby. This
would then both deprive the residents of the Bruns
P.U.D. of an internal access to County Road 32, and
require the proposed detention facility to be provided
in some other fashion than is now shown. As an alter-
native to your proposed option, Al Kadera of Larimer
County has suggested a "first right -of -refusal" agree-
ment instead. This would simply mean that at any time
prior to development the owner had a bona fide offer on
the property, the City -County group could purchase the
land instead for the offered price. When the owner
feels the development of Phase 3 is imminent from his
own perspective, the City -County group would have the
right to make a "fair market" offer also. This would
insure the group's opportunity to purchase the property
without taking it completely out of circulation. The
proposed phasing could be altered to fit the proposal.
It should be understood, however, that in the event the
small parcel in the Northwest corner is rezoned
B-Business for an expansion of the recreational facili-
ty, the 5 lots designated in that area would not be
included in the purchase agreement. As noted above, if
these lots are purchased, some means of compensation
other than park fee credits would have to be found for
the 4 acres noted in condition 4, as only 83 lots would
remain.
I trust this summary of my client's reactions to these
proposed conditions will be of assistance to you. The owner
of the Estates West land is writing his comments to you as
well. We look forward to further discussion with you.
Very truly yours,
Lan ark`, Engineer
David Shupe
Colo. P.E. 5 14
DBS/ej
Sig td . I
g r�t�Ii
5 C) A � � .
j 0 F CO�;,�`'�