HomeMy WebLinkAboutPOTTS PUD PRELIMINARY - 6 92 - MINUTES/NOTES - CORRESPONDENCE-NEIGHBORHOOD MEETINGMinutes for a
;HBORHOOD MEETING
Date: January 22, 1992
Project: POTTS P.U.D. (formerly Matador Apartments, Phase IV)
Applicant: Ram International Inc.
Kevin Sheesley
Planner: Steve Olt, City Planner
Location: Westminster Presbyterian Church
This is a request for 26 multi -family dwelling units on 1.67 acres,
located south of West Elizabeth Street, west of the existing
Matador Apartments, and northeast of the Larimer County No. 2
Canal. The following questions, comments, and responses were
expressed at this meeting:
1. QUESTION: What about parking? This proposed development is at
our back door.
ANSWER: This development is required, by City Code, to
provide enough on -site parking to accommodate the
proposed number of dwelling units, depending on the
number of bedrooms per unit.
2. QUESTION: Will you have room for 52 cars on this site?
ANSWER: Yes, we will: That is required by the City.
3. QUESTION: Is this development to be managed by the Matador
Apartments or someone else?
ANSWER: The owners of C-B & POTTS Restaurant owns this
property and will be the developer/manager.
4. COMMENT: These will be up -scale apartments and some of them
will have garages.
5. QUESTION: Will there be a fence along the irrigation ditch?
ANSWER: There could be, depending on the circumstances.
6. COMMENT: My experience with this development, and in the
whole area, is that there is not enough parking for
all the businesses.
7. COMMENT: I think a stop light should be put up at the
intersection of West Elizabeth Street and the
private street with this development.
8. COMMENT: This land should be developed, but should it be
developed strictly for financial gain?
9. COMMENT: The primary access (ingress/egress) to this site
will be from West Elizabeth Street.
10. COMMENT: There is too much traffic already on West Elizabeth
Street from all the existing uses in the area.
11. QUESTION: How does this project fit into the overall
transportation scheme for this area?
ANSWER: The traffic study that will be required for this
request will identify the current traffic impacts
and make projections for the amount of increased
traffic that will be generated in the area based on
the proposed use on this site.
12. QUESTION: What is this street through to the Matador
Apartments that is identified as a "fire lane"?
ANSWER: That is proposed to be a secondary emergency access
for fire vehicles, in the event that the primary
access is blocked.
13. QUESTION:
Is Diamond Shamrock aware of this proposed.
development and do they approve of it?
ANSWER:
They are aware of this proposal, having received a
notification letter and responded by telephone, and
they do not have significant concerns at this time.
14. QUESTION:
What about landscaping?
ANSWER:
The landscaping will be thoroughly reviewed by the
City when preliminary documents are submitted and
will have to conform to at least the minimum city
requirements.
15. COMMENT:
There are real concerns about the noise and
disruption from the residents in the Matador
Apartments.
RESPONSE:
We can use landscaping and berming to help create a
noise buffer.
16. QUESTION:
Is this development to be primarily student
housing?
ANSWER:
This development is planned to be an up -scale,
graduate student or married student apartment
.complex.
17. QUESTION: Will there be a resident manager?
ANSWER: Probably, yes.
18. QUESTION: Can this project be adequately served with sanitary
sewer and water? What about the site drainage?
ANSWER: These questions will be more adequately answered
with the formal submittal of preliminary plans to
the City for detailed review by all departments and
outside reviewing agencies.
19. COMMENT: The way this plan sits now, it is probably low at
the south end of the project. I haven't heard
anything concrete yet in terms of engineering for
buildings and utilities.
RESPONSE: An engineer has not yet been retained to do the
work. We plan to submit plans to the City on
February 3 for preliminary P.U.D. review.
20. COMMENT: I have real drainage concerns about this site.
21. QUESTION: The purpose of these neighborhood meetings, is it
to continue nudging the densities upward with a
series of concessions?
22. COMMENT: The City should look at the overall concept in that
CSU is beginning to look like CU/Boulder and
similar to California concepts.
RESPONSE: CSU has come to the realization that they have to
work with the City on the overall transportation
plan. They are no longer a landlocked, independent
entity.
23. COMMENT: This area has become very congested with multi-
family housing.
24. QUESTION: Is the Solar Orientation Ordinance in effect for
new development?
ANSWER: Yes, it was adopted in January, 1992, but it does
not apply to multi -family housing projects. It is
for single family lots and two-family units only.
25. QUESTION: Will the fireplaces be wood or gas fueled?
ANSWER: We are not that far into the thought process yet.
PROJECT:
t
TYPE OF MEETING:
DATE:
NAD1E ADDRESS
WRITTEN
NOTIFICATION
YES/NO
0kl'NER
RENTC
�/SISK-�- S�'e�ittf ova % Zot�p,�/,J7� %vTlo •✓
Zli
x
/JA I N�
V/n.l psi, � � • l� `{- \ v l �
I �u -S
/v!�-
"ri-
��4tCN! i`t4rrlSoi� /A/!— ( hA Loop a 131?
6 /J