HomeMy WebLinkAboutEVERGREEN PARK REPLAT - Filed GC-GENERAL CORRESPONDENCE - 2003-07-31r.' r
r
yr � Engineers Architects Planners
2600 South Parer Road, Parker Face Four, Denver, Colorado 80232 (303) 751-9151
March 6, 1975 VTN 1471-003
Mr. Lloyd G. McLaughlin
Engineering Department
City of Fort Collins
P.O. Box 580
Fort Collins, Colorado 80521
RE: Replat (NO. 1) of Evergreen Park, City of Fort Collins,
Colorado.
Dear Lloyd:
As per our recent discussion with you and the Larimer County Clerk
and Recorder's Office, we are submitting an affidavit and drawing
indicating a correction to the area of Block 1 and the dimension
corrections to the water line easement in Block 1.
Enclosed is a check for a filing fee of two dollars payable to the
Larimer County Clerk and Recorder for the above affidavit.
Yours very truly,
Richard Torrey
Chief of Surveys
VTN Colorado inc.
RT/nm
Encl.
OWJ
September 24, 1998
Ms. Leanne Harter
City Planner
City of Fort Collins Current. Planning Department
281 North College Avenue
P.O. Box 580
Fort Collins, Colorado 8052 2-0580
RE: Lots 1-2, Block 5, Replat (No. 1) of Evergreen Park, Project #24-96
Modification Request for the Required 80' Landscape Buffer
(Land Use Code Article 4, Division 4.23, Section E.2.a.4)
Dear Leanne:
The applicant, Premier Custom Builders, Inc. is requesting a modification of the Industrial District development
standards of Article 4, Division 4.23, Section E.2.a.4 of the Land Use Code related to the Development
Standard in the i-Industrial District which states "An eighty (80) foot deep landscaped yard shall be provided
along any boundary line that adjoins a residential land use or a zone district (whether within or beyond the
City's jurisdictional boundary) that is predominately characterized by residential uses as permitted uses. This
residential buffer yard may be reduced to thirty (30) feet if the adjoining residential land use or zone district
(whether within or beyond the City's jurisdictional boundary) is separated by a public street." The requested
modification is to allow a reduction in the required eighty (80) foot landscaped yard to a thirty-two (32) foot
landscaped yard.
Article 2, Division 2.7 of the Land Use Code permits the Planning and Zoning Board to grant modifications to
the District Standards of Article 4 for overall development plans and project development plans which are
pending approval at the time that the request for modification is filed. A modification request may be granted if
the Planning and Zoning Board, as a Type 2 review, determines and finds that the granting of the modification
would neither be detrimental to the public good nor impair the intent and purposes of the Chapter, and if the
applicant demonstrates either:
(A) that the plan as submitted will advance or protect the public interests and purposes of the standard
for which the modification is requested equally well or better than would a plan which complies
with the standard for which a modification is requested; or
(B) that the granting of a modification from the strict application of any standard would result in a
substantial benefit to the city by reason of the fact that the proposed project would substantially
address an important community need specifically and expressly defined and described in the city's
Comprehensive Plan, adopted policy, ordinance of resolution (such as, by way of example only,
affordable housing or historic preservation) or would substantially alleviate an existing, defined and
described problem of city-wide concern (such as, by way of example only, traffic congestion or
P1rNNi�g & Desig" LLC
4225 Westshore Way Fort Collins, CO 80525
(970) 226-1655 • (970) 226-1635 fax
urban blight), and the strict application of such a standard would render the project practically
infeasible.
History
Evergreen Park was originally platted in April 1973 within the City of Fort Collins. Then in March of 1974, the
property was replatted as Evergreen Park Replat (No. 1). With this replat, lots 1 & 2/13lock 5 were platted with
the following widths and lengths:
Lot 1/Block 5 - 141.22' wide x 383.00' deep
Lot 2B1ock 5 - 100.00' wide x 383.00' deep
The platting of these lots in the early 1970's was prior the City's adoption of the Land Development Guidance
System. With the adoption of the LDGS and then the adoption of the Land Use Code in 1997, the 80'
landscaped yard buffer was imposed.
In June 1981 a building permit was issued in the City of Fort Collins to construct one commercial/office
building on lots 1 and 2 and a foundation was constructed on the site which straddled both lots 1 and 2. For
unknown reasons the structure was never completed.
In March of 1996 Premier Custom Builders purchased the two lots with the intention of removing the existing
foundation and constructing two commercial/warehouse buildings on the lots very similar to the buildings
located at 1312 and 1318 Blue Spruce Drive.
The North side of Lot 1 and the East side of both lots I and 2 are along the boundary line of a residential land
use currently zoned MMN. North of Lot 1 there exists multi -family apartment buildings which are setback
approximately 38 feet from the property line and are separated from Lot 1 by an existing drainage ditch which is
approximately 30 feet wide. To the East of both lots is constructed a regional detention pond. The plan as
submitted shows the buildvzg setback on the North side of Lot 1 at 32 feet; a reduction of 48 feet from the 80
foot standard but still 70 feet from the residential buildings. Both the buildings on Lots 1 and 2 are setback a
minimum of 80 feet from the East property line.
Again, the applicant is requesting a modification in the required landscaped yard setback on the North side of
Lot 1 to allow a reduction in the required eighty (80) foot landscaped yard to a thirty-two (32) foot landscaped
yard.
Proposed Uses and Tenants
The applicant is proposing to construct two separate buildings of 5,000 sf for the North building and 9,600sf for
the South building. An additional 6,550 sf is proposed as a future expansion of the North building as shown on
the Project Development Plan. Both of the buildings would be no greater than 14 feet tall and would have low
pitched, sloped roofs. The Northerly building will have one tenant and when the addition is added, possibility
two or three tenants. The South building will be comprised of six units each with. a front access and fenced
storage area in the rear of the building. Proposed tenants for the North building include an office/warehouse user
and the South building include offices and storage space for a general contractor, plumbing contractor and an
electrical contractor with fenced storage yards in the rear of each unit.
The proposed uses are all permitted in the I -Industrial District but all of the proposed uses are more closely
associated with commercial type uses and not industrial type uses.
Justification for the Modification
The applicant believes that the modification request is justified because by allowing the property to develop as
proposed on the Project Development Plan there would be neither detriment to the public good nor would it
impair the intent and purposes of the Land Use Code for the following reasons:
1. by allowing the development to proceed as proposed the applicant has met the following Provisions
as stated in Land Use Code:
a. 1.1.2 Purpose The purpose of the Land Use Code is to improve and protect the public
health, safety and welfare by:
(A) ensuring that all growth and development which occurs is consistent with this Land
Use Code, City Plan and its adopted components, including but not limited to the
Structure Plan, Principles and Policies and associated sub -area plans.
(B) encouraging innovations in land development and renewal.
(C) fostering the safe, efficient, and economic use of the land, the city's transportation
infrastructure, and other public facilities and services.
(D) facilitating and ensuring the provision of adequate public facilities and services such as
transportation (streets, bicycle routes, sidewalks, and mass transit), water, wastewater,
storm drainage, fire and emergency services, police, electricity, open space, recreation,
and public parks.
(F,) avoiding the inappropriate development of lands and providing for adequate drainage
and reduction of flood damage.
(F) encouraging patterns of land use which decrease trip length of automobile travel and
encourage trip consolidation.
(G) increasing public access to mass transit, sidewalks, trails, bicycle routes, and other
alternative modes of transportation
(I-1) reducing energy consumption and demand.
(I) minimizing the adverse environmental impacts of development.
(.) improving the design, quality, and character of new development.
(K) fostering a more rational pattern of relationship among residential, business, and
industrial uses for the mutual benefit of all.
(L) encouraging the development of vacant properties within established neighborhoods.
(M) ensuring that development proposals are sensitive to the character of existing
neighborhoods.
(N) ensuring that development proposals are sensitive to natural areas and features.
b. Section 3.2.1 Landscaping and Tree Protection
c. Section 3.2.2 Access, Circulation and Parking
d. Section 3.2.3 Solar Access, Orientation, Shading
e. Section 3.2.4 Site Lighting
f. Section 3.3.1 Plat Standards
g. Section 3.3.2 Development Standards
h. Section 3.3.3 Water Hazards
i. Section 3.3.4 Hazards - Non applicable
J. Section 3.3.5 Engineering Design Standards
k. Section 3.4.1 Natural Areas and Features
1. Section 3.4.2 Air Quality
m. Section 3.4.3 Water Quality
n. Section 3.4.4 Noise and Vibration
o. Section 3.4.5 Hazardous Materials
p. Section 3.4.6 Glare and Heat
q. Section 3.4.7 Historic and Cultural Resources - Non applicable
r. Section 3.5.1 Building and Project Compatibility
s. Section 3.7.1 General (Compact Urban Growth Standards)
t. Section 3.7.2 Contiguity
u. Section 3.7.3 Adequate Public Facilities
v. Section 3.8.7 Signs
w. Section 3.8.17 Building Height
2. The proposed development also meets or exceeds the stated Purpose and all of the standards of the
I -Industrial District as follows:
a. Purpose. The Industrial District is intended to provide a location for a variety of work
processes and work places such as manufacturing, warehousing and distribution, indoor
and outdoor storage, and a wide range of commercial and industrial operations. The
Industrial District also accommodates complementary and supporting uses such as
convenience shopping, child care centers and housing. While these Districts will be linked
to the city's transportation system for multiple modes of travel, some may emphasize
efficient commercial trucking and rail traffic as needed. Industrial and manufacturing
processes used in this District may, by necessity, be characteristically incompatible with
residential uses.
b. Permitted Uses
c. Prohibited Uses
d. Land Use Standards
(1) Dimensional Standards
(a) Maximum building height for all non-residential uses shall be four (4) stories.
Maximum building height for residential uses shall be three (3) stories.
(b) Non -applicable
(c) Non -applicable
e. Development Standards
(1) Building Design
(a) Orientation. Along arterial streets and any other streets that directly connect to
other districts, buildings shall be sited so that a building face abuts upon the
required thirty (30) foot minimum landscaped yard for at least thirty (30)
percent of the building frontage. Such a building face shall not consist of a
blank wall.
(b) Building character and color. New building color shades shall be neutral, with
a medium or dark color range, and not white, bright, or reflective.
(2) Site Design
(a) Screening.
1. Industrial and commercial activities shall not be located adjacent to a
residential area unless the activities and related storage are contained
within a building or otherwise completely screened from view from the
residential area.
2. A thirty (30) foot deep landscaped yard shall be provided along all
arterial streets.
3. A thirty (30) foot landscaped yard shall be provide along any district
boundary line that does not adjoin a residential land use.
(b) Storage and Operational Areas.
1. Storage, loading, and work operations shall be screened from view along
all district boundary lines.
4
2. Within internal District areas, buildings may be surrounded by paving for
vehicle use. To the extent reasonably feasible, side and rear yards in
internal block locations shall be used for vehicle operations and storage
areas, and front yards shall be used for less intensive automobile parking.
At District edges, side yards shall be used for vehicle operations and
storage areas, in order to allow for a finished, attractive rear building wall
and a landscaped rear yard.
Also the applicant believes that the Project Development Plan as submitted meets or exceeds many of the
visions, goals and/or policies of City Plan and a modification from the strict application of any standard would
result in a substantial benefit to the City by reason of the fact that the proposed project would substantially
address an important community need specifically and expressly defined and described in the City's
Comprehensive Plan, adopted policy, ordinance of resolution or would substantially alleviate an existing,
defined and described problem of city-wide concern, and the strict application of such a standard would render
the project practically infeasible for the following reasons:
1. by allowing the development to proceed as proposed the applicant has met the following Goals as
stated in City Plan -Community Visions and Goals:
a_ Our community will have a compact land use pattern within a well -defied boundary.
Lots l & 2 of Evergreen Park Replat are an infill development, contiguous to existing
development in an established residential/industriaUcommercial neighborhood. Lot size
limitations on Lot I may prohibit any development of this infill parcel because of the 80'
landscape buffer requirement rendering the project practically infeasible.
b. Existing, underutilized commercial and industrial areas will be provided opportunities
for mixed -use redevelopment, revitalization and economic growth, while improving upon
their unique and positive qualities.
By approving the modification request, an underutilized, infill industrial parcel will allow
for a rrrixed-use (commercial/business/industrial) development. Economic growth will be
enhanced adjacent to existing residential uses and transportation corridors.
c. Our community's transportation system will improve air quality, manage traffic
congestion, and support efficient land use.
The proposed development is located in a mixed -use area adjacent to residential uses and
along established public transit routes.
d. Our community's growth will be structured in a compact pattern that facilitates
pedestrian, bicycle, and transit travel.
Again, the proposed development is located in a mixed -use area adjacent to residential uses
and along established public transit routes. Also, the proposed development allows for
direct accessibility to the City's pedestrian network as well as allowing accessibility to
public transit.
e. The economic health of our community will be sustainable.
Our community will foster economic development opportunities that encourage private
investments within the community, facilitate the creation and maintenance of business
enterprises, and provide employment at livable wages.
By approving the development as proposed, economic development will occur on an infill
site which has remained vacant for over 20 years, with an unusable foundation, further
reducing urban blight.
f. Development will not be permitted where it cannot be adequately served by critical public
facilities and services.
The proposed infill, redevelopment project is located where adequate public facilities are in
place to serve the proposed uses.
5
g. The City °s land use regulation will be a primary mechanism for implementing the goals
and policies of City Plan.
The C ity's development regulations and standards will be sensitive to the needs of small
scale commercial redevelopment, expansion and infill projects.
2. the following key principle of the City Structure Plan has also been met:
a. Compact Development Pattern. Growth within the city will be focused to promote a
compact development pattern. By directly urban development to well-defined areas at
higher densities, growth can be accommodated without fostering urban sprawl. The
compact form of the city will also contribute to preserving environmentally sensitive areas
and rural lands, efficiently providing public spaces, and encouraging infill and
redevelopment of existing urban areas.
b. Direction of Growth. New growth in the northeast is encouraged and this project is
proposed as an infill development in the northeast.
3. the following principles and policies of the City Plan Principles & Policies have also been met:
Principle LU-1: Growth within the city will promote a compact development pattern within a
well-defined boundary.
Policy LU-1.1 Compact Urban Form. The desired urban form will be achieved by directing
future development to mixed -use neighborhoods and districts while reducing the potential for
dispersed growth not conducive to pedestrian and transit uses and cohesive community
development.
Policy LU-2.2 Urban Design. The design review process, supplemented by design standards
and guidelines, will be used to promote new construction and redevelopment contribute
positively to the type of neighborhoods, districts, corridors and edges described herein while
emphasizing the special identity of each area.
Policy T-1.1 Land Use Patterns. The City will implement land use patterns, parking policies,
and demand management plans that support effective transit, an efficient roadway system, and
alternative transportation modes. Appropriate residential densities and non-residential land uses
should be within walking distance of transit stops, permitting public transit to become a viable
alternative to the automobile.
Policy T-5.1 Land Use. The City will promote a mix of land uses and activities that will
maximize the potential for pedestrian mobility throughout the community.
Policy T-5.2.e Connections. Creating barriers which separate commercial developments from
residential areas and transit stops should be avoided. Lot patterns should be provide safe and
direct pedestrian connections from residential areas to schools, parks, transit, employment
centers, and other neighborhood uses.
Policy CARD-1.4 Street Tree Design. Street trees should be used in a formal architectural
fashion to reinforce, define and connect the spaces and corridors created by buildings and other
features along a street. Canopy shade trees shall constitute the majority of tree plantings, and a
mixture of tree types shall be included, arranged to establish partial urban tree canopy cover.
Existing trees shall be preserved to the maximum extent feasible.
Policy ECON-1.2 Economic Development Policy. The City will work with the business
community and various business organizations to develop specific plans, goals and objectives in
order to continue to encourage and support economic development and economic opportunities
which: provide primary employment; increase private investment within the community; and
improve the quality of life for Fort Collins' residents. Achievement of these goals will be
pursued by:
Creating a positive climate for both local and new business
6
Assisting small business for retention and expansion as appropriate
Principle GM-5: The provision of adequate public facilities and the phasing of infrastructure
improvements will be important considerations in the timing and location of development.
Policy GM-5.1 Phasing of Development. The provision of public facilities and services will be
utilized to direct development in desired locations, according to the following considerations:
Development will only be permitted where it can be adequately served by critical public
facilities and services such as water, sewer, police, transportation, schools, fire,
stormwater management, and parks.
Principle GM-6: Development will pay its "fair Share" of the cost of providing needed public
facilities and services.
Policy GM-6.1 Fees and Development Requirements. The City will have a efficient and fair
system of Fees and development requirements that assesses the costs and benefits of financing
public facilities and services, the need for which is generated by new development.
Principle GM-8: The City will promote compatible infill development in targeted areas within
the Community Growth Management Area boundary.
Principle ID-1: Industrial Districts will provide places for a wide range of industrial and
commercial uses that do not need or are not suited to highly public visibility.
Policy ID-1.1 Land Uses. Industrial land uses such as manufacturing, assembly plants,
primary metal and related industries, vehicle -related commercial uses such as auto repair,
maintenance and storage, other types of commercial operations, warehouses, outdoor storage
yards, and distribution facilities, are appropriate for an Industrial District. Industrial Districts
should include a variety of flexible sites for small, local, and startup businesses and industry, as
well as large national or regional enterprises. Generally, the characteristics that differentiate an
Industrial District from an Employment District are:
relatively smaller workforce than Employment Districts
emphasis on commercial truck or rail traffic
characteristics such as outdoor work and storage
Policy ID4.2 Supporting Uses. Supporting uses, such as restaurants, day care, convenience
retail, services and housing, will be located internally or immediately adjacent to and within
walking distances of Industrial Districts.
Policy ID-1.4 Design Character and Image. Buildings and site improvements in Industrial
Districts may be simple, practical, and more vehicle -oriented than in other districts and may
lack a uniform design theme or character. Development standards should allow for metal
buildings, tilt -up buildings, and similar large -span construction, and aprons of pavement for
work and storage. Parking lots and outside storage will be screened from streets and other
public spaces with fencing and/or landscaping. Outdoor spaces and amenities for pedestrians
may be relatively simple, to meet the practical needs of workers. However, perimeter
streetscape design standards will be consistent with those in other parts of the community.
Policy ID4.5 Transportation Improvements. Transportation improvements support the
efficient movement of commercial truck traffic from Industrial Districts to the arterial street
system via. an internal connector (or collector) street system. Transportation improvements may
include rail access in some districts.
Policy ID--1.6 Public and Multi -Modal Transit. Industrial Districts will be served by the
City's transit system and be accessible via bike routes. Businesses will be encouraged to have
employees carpool or vanpool, or work staggered hours in attempts to reduce traffic congestion.
Policy TC-4.4 Density of Development. A compact land use pattern will guide development of
Transportation Corridors by providing densities necessary to support alternative modes of
travel, such as transit, walking and bicycling -- as well as efficient automobile use.
Policy TC 4.5 Infill and Redevelopment. The City will encourage infill and redevelopment in
corridors that complement and support the efficiency of the Transportation Corridor.
Policy TC-5.1 Locating Enhanced Travel Corridors. Enhanced Travel Corridors include
7
Harmony Road, Mason Street and the Burlington Northern Railroad right-of-way, and the
College/Conifer Corridor (north and east of Downtown).
Policy TC 5.6 Economic Opportunity and Development. Enhanced Travel Corridors will
support expanded economic opportunity and development generally, and particularly on infill
sites and targeted redevelopment areas within the city.
In summary, the applicant believes that the proposed development is compatible to the neighborhood including
the existing residential, commercial, and industrial uses because the proposed uses and buildings are compatible
to the existing surrounding buildings in terms to scale, height, mass and bulk of the buildings. Pedestrian access
will be enhanced to the site and public transportation is currently available within several hundred feet of the
site. The developer is also proposing to increase the amount of required trees and landscaping on the north side
of the building were the reduced setback is requested (see attached landscape plan).
The proposed development meets or exceeds all of the development standards for the I -Industrial District with
the exception of the requested modification for the setback and will further redevelopment of an infill parcel
thereby promoting and integrating mixed -use neighborhoods in a compact urban form while not reducing the
quality of life for the affected residential community.
Because of the reasons and justification stated above, the applicant requests that the Planning and Zoning Board
look favorably at the modification request for the setback reduction and would like to thank you for your time
and consideration.
Sincerely,
PineCrest Planning and Design LLC
enclosures
cc: Brian Shear
Evergreen Park Submittal
8
1!rtECREST
November 12, 1998
Mr. Mike Ludwig
City Planner
City of Fort Collins Current Planning Department
281 North College Avenue
Fort Collins, Colorado 8052:2-0580
RE: Lots 1-2, Block 5, Replat (No. 1) of Evergreen Park, Project #24-96
Amended Modification Request for the Required 80' Landscape Buffer
(Land Use Code Article 4, Division 4.23, Section E.2.a.4)
Dear Mike:
The applicant, Premier Custom Builders, Inc. is requesting a modification of the Industrial District development
standards of Article 4, Division 4.23, Section E.2.a.4 of the Land Use Code related to the Development
Standard in the I -Industrial District which states "An eighty (80) foot deep landscaped yard shall be provided
along any boundary line that adjoins a residential land use or a zone district (whether within or beyond the
City's jurisdictional boundary) that is predominately characterized by residential uses as permitted uses. This
residential buffer yard may be reduced to thirty (30) feet if the adjoining residential land use or zone district
(whether within or beyond the City's jurisdictional boundary) is separated by a public street." The requested
modification is to allow a reduction in the required eighty (80) foot landscaped yard to a thirty-two (32) foot
landscaped yard.
Article 2, Division 2.7 of the Lana Use Code permits the Planning and Zoning Board to grant modifications to
the District Standards of Article 4 for overall development plans and project development plans which are
pending approval at the time that the request for modification is filed. A modification request may be granted if
the Planning and Zoning Board, as a Type 2 review, determines and finds that the granting of the modification
would neither be detrimental to the public good nor impair the intent and purposes of the Chapter, and if the
applicant demonstrates either:
(A) that the plan as submitted will advance or protect the public interests and purposes of the standard
for which the modification is requested equally well or better than would a plan which complies
with the standard for which a modification is requested; or
(B) that the granting of a modification from the strict application of any standard would result in a
substantial benefit to the city by reason of the fact that the proposed project would substantially
address an important community need specifically and expressly defined and described in the city's
Comprehensive Plan, adopted policy, ordinance of resolution (such as, by way of example only,
aftbrdable housing or historic preservation) or would substantially alleviate an existing, defined and
described problem of city-wide concern (such as, by way of example only, traffic congestion or
urban blight), and the strict application of such a standard would render the project practically
infeasible.
PIA""iftig & Dcsi5" LLC
4225 Westshore Way Fort Collins, CO 80525
(970) 226-1655 - (970) 226-1635 fax
Background
Evergreen Park was originally platted in April 1973 within the City of Fort Collins. Then in March of 1974, the
property was replatted as Evergreen Park Replat (No. 1). With this replat, lots 1 & 2/Block 5 were platted with
the following widths and lengths:
Lot I/Block 5 - 141.22' wide x 383.00' deep
Lot 2/Block 5 - 100.00' wide x 383.00' deep
The platting of these lots in the early 1970's was prior the City's adoption of the Land Development Guidance
System. With the adoption, of the LDGS and then the adoption of the Land Use Code in 1997, the 80'
landscaped yard buffer was imposed.
In June 1981 a building permit was issued in the City of Fort Collins to construct one commercial/office
building on lots 1 and 2 and a foundation was constructed on the site which straddled both lots 1 and 2. For
unknown reasons the structure was never completed.
In March of 1996 Premier Custom Builders purchased the two lots with the intention of removing the existing
foundation and constructing two commercial/warehouse buildings on the lots very similar to the buildings
located at 1312 and 1318 Blue Spruce Drive.
The North side of Lot 1 and the East side of both lots 1 and 2 are along the boundary line of a residential land
use currently zoned MMN. North of Lot 1 there exists multi -family apartment buildings which -are setback
approximately 38 feet from the property line and are separated from Lot 1 by an existing drainage ditch which is
approximately 30 feet wide. To the East of both lots is constructed a regional detention pond. The plan as
submitted shows the building setback on the North side of Lot 1 at 32 feet; a reduction of 48 feet from the 80
foot standard but still 70 feet from the residential buildings. Both the buildings on Lots 1 and 2 are setback a
minimum of 80 feet from the East property line.
Again, the applicant is requesting a modification in the required landscaped yard setback on the North side of
Lot I to allow a reduction in the required eighty (80) foot landscaped yard to a thirty-two (32) foot landscaped
yard.
Proposed Uses and Tenants
The applicant is proposing to construct two separate buildings of 5,000 sf for the North building and 9,600 sf
for the South building. An additional 6,550 sf is proposed as a future expansion of the North building as shown
on the Site Plan. Both of the buildings would be no greater than 14 feet tall and would have low pitched, sloped
roofs. The Northerly building will have one tenant and when the addition is added, possibility two or three
tenants. The South building will be comprised of six units each with a front access and fenced storage area in
the rear of the building. Proposed tenants for the North building include an office/warehouse user and the South
building include offices and storage space for a general contractor, plumbing contractor and an electrical
contractor with fenced storage yards in the rear of each unit.
The proposed uses are all permitted in the I -Industrial District but all of the proposed uses are more closely
associated with commercial type uses and not industrial type uses.
I -Industrial District -Purpose
2
s
CORRECTION AFFIDAVIT
I, Richard Torrey, a Registered Land Surveyor in the State of
Colorjtio herehy submit this affidavit in order to correct errors
in the. subdivision plat known as REPLAT (NO. 1) OF EVERGREEN PARK,
as recorded in Look 1597, Page 128, Office of the Clerk and Re-
corder, Larimer County, Colorado.
Tile corrections are described below and shown on the attached plat:
1. The net acreage for Block 1 should be 23.320 acres, not
23.4S9 acres.
2. The Greeley Water Line Easement that begins 248.79 feet south
of the northwest corner of Section 1 and crosses College
Avenue should be 51.66 feet, not 46.49 feet in length.
3. The distance along the east right-of-way line of College
Avenue from the point of curve near the northwest corner of
Block 1 to the Greeley Water Line Easement should be 196.69
feet, not 195.40 feet.
4. The distance along the east right-of-way line of College
Avenue from the Greeley Water Line Easement to the point of
curve near the southwest corner of Block 1 should be 1012.67
feet, not 1013.96 feet.
S. The first course of the Greeley Water Line Easement that begins
at the east right-of-way line of College Avenue, 196.69 feet
south of the point of curve near the northwest corner of Block 1
should be N ,So 27' 2211 W, 163.00 feet, not N 750 271 22" W,
168.1.7 feet.
Richard Torrey
Registered Colora o Land Surveyor
NO. 11010"
VTN Colorado Inc.
ACKNOWLEDGEMENT
STATE OF COLORADO)
) SS
COUNTY OF DENVER )
,'/�IYlllrrrrrrrr
0 To
01.0 -
• O
il"141111111",
The foregoinginstrument was acknowledged before me this�r�
day of A.U., 1975 by Richard Torrey, Color
Re«js E�r�d �11rv, r I 11 �l
7
My commission expires 1")
j Notary Public
Page 1 of 2
As stated in the City's Land Use Code, Division 4.23(A) the purpose of the I district is as follows: "The
Industrial District is intended to provide a location for a variety of work processes and work places such as
manufacturing, warehousim; and distributing, indoor and outdoor storage, and a wide range of commercial and
industrial operations. The Industrial District also accommodates complementary and supporting uses such as
convenience shopping, child care centers and housing. While these Districts will be linked to the city's
transportation system for multiple modes of travel, some may emphasize efficient commercial trucking and rail
traffic as needed. Industrial and manufacturing processes used in this District may, by necessity, be
characteristically incompatible with residential uses."
I -Industrial District Standards
The specific Development Standard in Division 4.23(E) under (2) Site Design (a) Screening (3) states: "A
minimum eighty -foot deep landscaped yard shall be provided along any boundary line that adjoins a residential
land use district (whether within or beyond the City's jurisdictional boundary) that is predominately
characterized by residential uses as permitted uses. This residential buffer yard may be reduced to thirty (30)
feet is the adjoining residential land use or zone district (whether within or beyond the City's jurisdictional
boundary is separated by a public street."
It is the applicants belief, based upon the above stated standard, that the purpose of the 80' setback requirement
is to provide landscape "Screening" between two land uses which may or may not be compatible.
Justification for the Modification
The applicant believes that the modification request (a reduction in the required 80' setback) is justified because
by allowing the property to develop as proposed on the Project Development Plan there would be neither
detriment to the public good nor would it impair the intent and purposes of the I -Industrial District and
Standards for the following reasons:
1. As stated in the Land Use Code the purpose of the 80' setback is to provide screening between two
land uses which may or may not be compatible. The Land Use Code requires "full tree stocking" in
all landscaped areas. By the definition of full tree stocking, the plan, with the 80' setback would
require only 8 trees between the building and the north property line (coniferous trees at a maximum
spacing of 30 feet along 230 feet of building face at a minimum height of 6 feet). The landscape
plan as proposed includes 18 coniferous trees at a spacing of approximately 12 to 15 feet with a
minimum height of 8 feet. These trees are located north of the proposed building were the reduced
setback is located. This increase in the number, size and spacing of the trees provides a very dense
landscape buffer for screening the proposed building both from a light and noise as well as from a
visual aspect.
2. The Land Use Code also requires foundation plantings of at least 5 feet in width placed directly
along at least 50 percent of the exterior wall. Again, the landscape plan greatly exceeds this
requirement and includes a 15 foot wide landscape bed with tall shrubs planted on 5 foot centers
along the entire length (100%) of the wall. This buffer of tall shrubs again adds additional buffering
of the proposed building from a light and noise reduction as well as and visual aspect from the
residential uses.
Summary
In summary, the applicant believes that the proposed development is compatible to the neighborhood including
the existing residential, commercial, and industrial uses because the proposed uses and buildings are compatible
to the existing surrounding buildings in terms to scale, height, mass and bulk of the buildings. Pedestrian access
will be enhanced to the site and public transportation is currently available within several hundred feet of the
3
site. The proposed increase the amount of required trees and landscaping on the north side of the building
provides additional visual screening were the reduced setback is requested achieving the same purpose as the
required standard. This additional landscaping helps buffer and screen the different land uses from light, noise
and visual appearance in manner which is equal to or possibly better than the 80' setback with the required
minimum amount of landscaping.
The proposed development meets or exceeds all of the development standards for the I -Industrial District with
the exception of the requested modification for the setback and will further redevelopment of an infill parcel
thereby promoting and integrating mixed -use neighborhoods in a compact urban form while not reducing the
quality of life for the affected residential community.
Because of the reasons and justification stated above, the applicant requests that the Planning and Zoning Board
look favorably at the modification request for the setback reduction and would like to thank you for your time
and consideration.
Sincerely,
PineCrest Planning and Design LLC
Princip
- enclosures
cc: Brian shear
Evergreen Paris Submittal
4
CITY OF FORT COLLINS
MEMORANDUM
October 13, 1998
TO: Cam McNair
FROM: Mark McCallum
RE: Variance for Evergreen Park; Block 5, Lots 1 & 2
A variance to reduce the parkway width for Evergreen Park, Block 5, Lots 1 & 2 has been formally
requested by Shear Engineering Corporation on behalf of the development. See figure l for a description
of the area. The street is classified as an industrial local street, requiring 33 feet of R.O.W. and 22 feet of
street width from centerline to property line. The requirements for the parkway and sidewalk for an
industrial local street are 6.5 feet and 4.5 feet, respectively. The development has 40 feet of R.O.W. and
30 feet of street width from centerline to property line. The conditions resulting from an existing
roadway and R.O.W. that have been proportioned larger than the instituted standard prohibit them for
allowing a parkway width of 6.5 feet. The variance request is proposing 4.5 feet of sidewalk and
approximately 5 feet.3 inches of parkway width. See figures 2 and 3.
The variance request in my opinion is valid in the sense that it does not place any future burden upon the
City in terms of R.O.W., roadway, and sidewalk width. The sidewalk will be detached as required by
City standards, setting a pr4dent for future development and redevelopment in this area. Furthermore,
the street should remain as designed as future development occurs. On the other hand, the City could
request an access easement into their property which will allow 6.5 feet of parkway width. This
easement could be incorporated into the 6-foot utility easement granted to the City along the frontage of
the development. See figures 2 or 3. In either scenario a question about the landscaping for the site has
come into question. For example, if the parkway width is reduced will there be adequate parkway width
to accomplish the desired landscape buffer between the development and the public street? Tim
Buchanan, City Forester, was concerned that a parkway width of 5 feet 3 inches would be narrow which
could cause potential problems to the roadway, curb and gutter in the future. However, he felt there was
enough parkway width to plant trees.
The second option to retain approximately 1.5 feet of access easement has conflicts as well. In the event
an access easement was dedicated to the City it would set a prc(Ndent, requiring the City to consider
dedication for the two undeveloped properties to the south, and for future redevelopment.
In any event, my opinion is welcome to either scenario. I think both will function with the public street
and allow for a transition into the development. If there are any questions about the development that
could provide aid to dour decision, 1 will gladly answer them.
Sincerely,
Mark McCallum
Transpc tion Services
Engineering Department
City of Fort Collins
TO: Mark: McCallum
FROM: Cam McNair
DATE: October 16, 1998
RE: Variance Request, Evergreen Park
The request to vary the parkway width along Blue Spruce Drive from 6.5 feet to 5.25 feet (minimum)
is approved. The developer and City Forester should be directed to select species of street trees for
the landscaping plan which would not cause buckling of the curb -and -gutter or sidewalks in the
future.
With regard to your question about variance request procedures, I would prefer to have a written
request like the one you provided, with explanations and a recommendation from you. This way I
can visit the site at my convenience, and I will prepare a written response so that we have a
documented decision in the file.
cc: Sheri Wamhoff
Dave Stringer
Tim Blandford
281 North CColleIe Avenue • PCB. Box �80 • Fort Collin,, CO 80522-018U • 07/0) 221-6605
Nov.25 198 11:29 FAX P. 1
Oats x °
Post -it'' Fax Note 7671 } } pages
To 1�4 LJ 1V gram y rY a
�9 33T
November 23. 1998 Ph°^Phone
e' l..
Fax # 1 6^Z.� FaX OF
Basil Hamdan l
O City of Fort Collins Stormwater Ut
P.O. Box 580
Ft. Collins, Colorado 80522
Re: Lots 1 8, 2, Block, 5, Replat (No. 1) of Evergreen Park; Fort Collins, Colorado
GROUP
ARGHIIECTURE Dear Basil,
he
ove
Representing Bayberry Development, 1 have review
ed the tty pCorpolans �aUon. abThe
referenced project which were prepared by Shear construction
Engineering just east
plans propose a storm sewer outfall requiring construction on the property
of this project. This property is owned by Bayberry Development. The evergreen
West regional detention pond is IncatBea inn thisproperty
Drainages Plan; Lia Part of dstone Lidstone th&
Amended Greenbriar-Evergreen
Anderson, Inc.; Project No COTST05.4; dated September 6, 1994.
After discussions with you, I understand that you have talked to Lidstone and
Anderson and have established that there will be insignificant this r project in the
1
regional detention pond water level due to contribution
from therefore approve the construction of the storm sewer outfall according to the plans
by Shear Engineering. There is currently a drainage easement defined for the
pond. No additional easements are required. Mr. Shear has indicated that we will
be contacted during installation of the storm sewer so we may have the opportunity
to view and provide input concerning the final look and treatment of the finished
product,
if you _have-vny�questions, please call at 493-4105.
Si
ZdeneO Partner; Bayberry Development
cc: Shear Engineering
2120 Soulh College
Fort Collins, Co 80525
970-493 -2393
December 3, 1999
Project No: 1466-14-96 I (I
SHEAR
Basil Harridan / Donnie Dustin ENGINEERING
CDRPDRATIDN
City of Ft. Collins Stormwater Utility
P.O. Box 580
Ft. Collins, Colorado 80524
Re: Lots 1 & 2, Block 5, Replat (No. 1) of Evergreen Park; Ft. Collins, Colorado
Dear Basil and Donnie,
This letter serves as the partial certification for Lots 1 & 2, Block 5, Replat (No. 1) of Evergreen
Park. The building on lot 2 has been completed along with the necessary parking and the access
drive on the south property line of Lot 2. Generally, All final grading is complete, functions
properly and meets the intent of the original subdivision grading and drainage design according
to the Final Utility Plans for Lots 1 & 2, Block 5, Replat (No. 1) of Evergreen Park by Shear
Engineering Corporation; Shear Project No: 1466-14-96; Director of Engineering approval date
02/08/99.
The drainage improvements including the pond and outfall have also been completed in
compliance with the approved plans prepared by this office. We noted that the orifice plate has
not been installed at this time. We informed our client that this has to be installed prior to final
certification. He informed us on Tuesday, November 30, 1999 that the orifice plate will be
attached by the end of the week. A copy of the grading plan with as -built spot elevations
included is attached. The as -built field data was provided by Intermill Land Surveying at the
direction of this office. Final major drainageway channel improvements on the north side of Lot
1, will be completed with the building on Lot 1.
This concludes partial certification for the utility plans for Lots 1 & 2, Block 5, Replat (No. 1) of
Evergreen Park. A final certification will be provided to your office when the building on Lot 1
is completed along with the channel improvements. The final certification will also verify that
the orifice plate has been installed in accordance with the approved plans. Please release the
certificate of occupancy for the building on Lot 2.
If you have further questions or comments, or if you require additional information, feel free to
contact us at 226-53134. 1
Sincerely,
'C t
Mark Oberschmidt,
Shear Engineering Corporation
Attachments
Brian W. Shear, P.t--/
Shear Engineering Corporation
cc: 4Dave Phillips; Premier Custom Builders
Mark McCullum; City of Fort Collins Engineering
4836 S. College, Suite 12 Ft. Collins, CO 80525 (970) 226-5334 FAX (970) 282-031 1
THE TOY SHED
1314 Redcedar Cir.
Fort Collins, Co.
Stephen Olt
City Planner
City of Ft. Collins
Date Oct. 29, 1998
RE: The Toy Shed Addition
Stephen,
This letter to request a modification to a standard in the Land Use Code in particular Sec.
3.5.1 (J)(1). This standard requires 20 ft. from public sidewalk for outdoor storage. WV.
are doing an addition to the existing facility which has 5 ft. of landscaping from the public
walk and then the fence on the property line. This was acceptable when we built in 1994.
The addition in 1996 was modified and accepted if a solid fence was provided along the
street. We would like to maintain this condition with the new addition to the north. We
would request that the standard for 20 ft. be reduced to 5 ft. for the following reasons:
1. The original building plan showed it this way and was approved.
2. This facility is in I (industrial) zone where this type of business is approved.
3. This project is located on a secondary street that is only two blocks long.
Not a major street with pedestrians/bike users. The only traffic is
local businesses (4ea.) and not used to get to other residential areas or a
short cut.
4. The area is being used for RV storage and not unsightly or dangerous items
(trash compaction or loading) that are not compatible with the area or
zoning. The solid fence would screen the storage area from the street.
5. RV storage is needed in Ft. Collins to provide alternate parking for residential
subdivisions that do not allow this type of parking/storage.
6. Granting of this request would result in a better looking facility. The overall
appearance would be compatible with the rest of the area
7. This facility is located in an industrial area and not in or near a high traffic
residential area so has no adverse visual impact on the community.
8. This area of the City is depressed and slow to develop and needs help to grow.
The proposed addition plan is equally well or better than one that complies with the
standard because :
THE TOY SHED
1314 Redcedar Cir.
Fort Collins, Co.
A solid 6' cedar fence at street frontage has been added to screen the facility
would be better than chain link fence providing no screening.
2. The fence would be stained and professionally maintained.
3. The number of plants per foot has been increased to improve the visual affect in
front of the wood fence.
4. The proposed plan is low maintenance therefore would be better maintained in
the future.
5. The cedar wood fence is more appealing than chain link fencing.
Our facility complies with the "purpose of the zone district which is to provide a location
for a variety of work processes and work places such as indoor and outdoor storage".
This type of facility is needed in the City because RV parking and storage is not allowed
on streets and most subdivisions.
Sincerely
Jerald Russell
THE TOY SHED
1314 Red Cedar Cir.
Fort Collins. CO. 80524
970-482-6624
March 29, 1999
City of Fort Collins
Engineering Dept.
283 N. College .Ave.
Fort Collins, Co.
RE; The Toy Shed - Addition
Mark McCallum,
This letter to confirm our conversation about the above project. I am in the process of
dedicating an additional 3 feet of R.O.W. along the west and north side of lot 1 and west
side of lot 2 , block 4 of Replat No. 1 of Evergreen Park with a 6 feet utility easement
also. Steward and Assoc. will handle these documents and will be completed within 15
days. They are also re -drafting the easements for the drainage on this project per your
corrections. if you have any questions please contact me accordingly.
Sincerely,
The Toy Shed
J0 Id H. Russell/ Owner
9
II
N.W. Coe-
Sec.I
W I LLOX
LAN I~
27•�- T - ��
� � Grtel¢.Y Wc3�ar La-,e.
In
Iwa
F5L0CK
23.32o Acres ,
Sd
Th',�
fhe Corr c ton es de 1
' .00
said a�{'� ' -}'.
�.c;�,•� - `f f °•
CORRECTION PLA'j
TO
;,, '• ,,y�
}Z EPLAT (NO.1) 0 F ''ENJF-R,GRU--EN PARV-
•., ;� (lam (.�, , • I
C)-7 C5 Scake : ►" = I oar
THE TOY SHED
1314 Red Cedar Circle
Fort Collins, CO 80524
303-482-6624
January 10, 1995
Glen Schlueter
City of Fort Collins Stortnwater Utility
P.O. Box 580
Ft. Collins, Colorado 80522
Re: Lot 6, Block 4, Replat (No. 1) of Evergreen Park; Fort Collins, Colorado
Dear Glen,
I have reviewed the Drainage and Erosion Control Plan for the initial site design for the above
referenced project, which was prepared by Shear Engineering Corporation. Grading and
detention design for the initial phase of Lot 6, Block 4 construction, results in the northerly seven
feet (approximately 0.027 acres) of Lot 6, Block 4 stortnwater contribution onto the property to
the north, Lot 5, Block 6, which I own. The reason for this, as I understand it, was the necessity
to design and construct a betin along our common property line to create the detention pond for
lot 6, Block 4. As there is a fence on my property, the berm could not be centered on the
property line without removing and replacing the fence. A berm centered on the common
properly line would have prevented stonnwater from lot 6, Block 4 from flowing onto my
property. I understand that future phases of Lot 6, Block 4 design, may result in storinwater
contribution from the entire northerly seven feet of Lot 6, Block 4 onto Lot 5, Block 4.
A signed copy of this letter indicates my acceptance of stortnwater runoff from the entire
northerly seven feet (approximately 0.048 acres) of Lot 6, Block 4, Replat (No. 1) of Evergreen
Park, providing that any potential drainage problems associated with the south line of Lot 5,
Block 4, be mutually corrected by the owners of Lot 5, Block 4 and Lot 6, Block 4.
Sincerely,
.1
JC ussell• Owner of Lot 5, Block 4, Replat (No. 1) of Evergreen Park
�Y P
cc: Dennis Smilie
Shear Engineering Corporation
MOORE, SMITH & WILLIAMS, P.C.
ATTORNEYS AT LAW
DAVID H. JOHNSON
425 WEST MULBERRY STREET, SUITE 112
MICHAEL D. LIGGETT FORT COLLINS, COLORADO 80521-2896
THOMAS H. MOORE
ERIC A. PETERSON
DAVID S. POWER
KELSEY J. SMITH
DAVE WILLIAMS
ZACHARY G. WILSON
January 19, 1995
Paul Eckman
Deputy City Attorney
City of Fort Collins
300 Laporte Avenue
P.O. Box 580
Fort Collins, Colorado 80522-0580
Re: Dennis M. Smilie/Easement
Dear Paul:
TELEPHONE
(303) 482-9770
FACSIMILE
(303) 482-0339
I was requested by Dennis Smilie to provide you with an
Attorney Certificate regarding his ownership of the property
described as Lot 6, Block 4, Evergreen Park Subdivision in
Laporte, Colorado. Mr. Smilie desires to dedicate a portion of
that property to the City of Fort Collins for a permanent easement
for drainage and access. Prior to accepting the dedication for
the City, you requested a Certificate certifying that Mr. Smilie
owned the property at the time the Deed was made on January 12,
1995.
Please find attached my
investigated the records of the
Larimer County. According to those
the investigation were updated
Smilie was the owner of the subject
questions, please feel free to call
pc: Dennis Smilie
Enclosure
sld
Certificate. I personally
Clerk and Recorder's Office of
records, which at the time of
through January 12, 1995, Mr.
property. Should you have any
me.
Sincerely,
Zachary. . Wilson
YtTL
Engineers Architects Planners
2600 South Parker Road, Parker Place Four, Deriver, Colorado 80232 (303) 751-9151
January 20, 1977
Mr. Roy Bingman
Community Development Director
City of Fort: Collins
P. 0. Box 580
Fort Collins, Colorado 80521
Dear Sir:
This letter is written to inform you of the acreage revision
of Block 1, Replolt (No. 1) of Evergreen Park.
The City of Fort Collins had originally requested a 45' R.O.W.
width for College Avenue. In March of 1974, after the plat had
been completed and drawn, the City changed their request from
45' of width to 50' width. We inadvertantly missed some dimen-
sional changes and the acreage change that occurred. In March
of 1975, th1s error was discovered and a correction affidavit
was filed with the Larimer County Clerk.
Mr. Lloyd G. McLaughlin of the Fort Collins Engineering
Department was notified of this by letter and affidavit (see
enclosed copies).
I hope this answers any questions you had.
Very truly yours,
VTN COLORADO, INC.
J
Richard Torrey
Chief of Surveys
RT/jl
PLANNING OBJECTIVES:
Lots 1-2, Block 5, Replat (No. 1) of Evergreen Park
Introduction
Lots 1-2, Block 5, Replat (No. 1) of Evergreen Park is an infill project on two (2) existing lots of the
industrial subdivision platted as Replat (No. 1) of Evergreen Park. The property was previously
designated with an IL zoning. Existing infrastructure is in place including Blue Spruce Drive, utilities in
Blue Spruce Drive and the Major Drainage Improvements of the Greenbriar-Evergreen Drainage Basin.
One building will be constructed on each lot and will have an office / warehouse use. The total site area
is 2.12 acres. A 9600 square foot building will be provided on Lot 1 which has approximately 54,087
square feet (1.24 acres). A 5000 square foot building will be provided on Lot 2 which has approximately
38,300 square feet (0.88 acres). Access will be from Blue Spruce Drive via a common drive centered on
the Lot 1 / Lot 2 common lot line. The proposed use and concept is similar to that of Lots 5-6, Block 5,
Replat (No. 1) of Evergreen Park which was reviewed by the City as an IL Site Plan in late 1995 / early
1996.
PLANNING OBJECTIVES:
i This plan generally achieves the intention of the City Plan Principles and Policies.
ii This site is situated adjacent to major drainage improvements of the Greenbriar-Evergreen
Drainage Basin as designated on the City of Fort Collins Stormwater Basin Map. A major
drainage channel is situated north of Lot 1. A regional detention pond is situated immediately east
of the pond. These facilities act as buffers to the north and east of this site.
Landscape buffering will be provided along the Blue Spruce Drive.
There are no wetlands or natural areas on the site.
iii No open space exists
iv Lot 1 will provide for 6 bays which may allow 6 businesses. It is estimated that each 1600 square
foot space will house up to three (3) employees. Lot 2 is currently planned for Warehouse use
only with no employees housed at the site. However, the building could ultimately house up to 10
employees for uses similar to the use proposed on Lot 1.
v All rationale for the design of this site are based on the Industrial zoning, the size of the existing
lots and the uses and site design currently existing within Replat (No. 1) of Evergreen Park.
vi No variances from the planning criteria is planned.
vii There will be no conflict between land uses and wetlands or natural areas. There will be no
disturbances to wetlands or natural areas.
viii No neighborhood meeting will be held.
ix This project was presented at conceptual review on Monday, July 22, 1996. It was presented as
Lots 1-2, Block 5, Replat (No. 1) of Evergreen Park.
SHEAR
ENGINEERING
CORPORATION
TRAFFIC STATEMENT
Lots 1 & 2, Block 5, Replat (No. 1) of Evergreen Park; Ft. Collins, Colorado
April 1, 1997
Project No: 1466-14-96
One building will be constructed on each lot and will have an office / warehouse or "light industrial"
use. A 9,600 square foot building will be provided on Lot 1. Lot 1 has a total area of approximately
54,087 square feet (1.24 acres). A 5,000 square foot building will be provided on Lot 2. Lot 2 has a
total area of approximately 38,300 square feet (0.88 acres).
For light industrial use,, there will be 6.97 trip ends for every 1,000 square feet of floor area. The total
anticipated trip generation would be 102 trips per day ((14,600/1000 x 6.97). Morning peak would be
94 trips using a factor of 0.92. Evening peak would be 100 trips using a factor of 0.98.
Source: Trip Generation 5th Edition; Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE)
Data provided by Matt Delich, P.E.; Traffic Engineer; Phone (970) 669-2061
4836 S. College, Suite 12 Ft. Collins, CO 80525 (970) 226-5334 FAX (970) 282-031 1
1220 S
Bayberry Development
a Limited Liability Company
College Avenue, Suite 200, Fort Collins, CO (970) 492-2393
January 5, 1996
Basil Harridan
City of Fort Collins Storm Water Utility
P.O. Box 580
Ft. Collins, CO 80522
FAX: (970) 221-9620
Re: Lots 5 & 6, Block 5, Replat (No.1) of Evergreen Park; Fort Collins, Colorado
Dear Basil,
Representing Bayberry Development, I have reviewed the utility plans for the above
referenced project which were prepared by Shear Engineering Corporation. The plans
propose a storm sewer outfall requiring construction on the property just east of this project.
This property is owned by Bayberry Development. The Evergreen West regional detention
pond is located on this property. The pond is a part of the Amended Greenbriar-Evergreen
Basin Master Drainage Plan; Lidstone & Anderson, Inc.; Project No. COTST05.4; dated
September 6, 1994.
After discussions with you, 1 understand that you have talked to Lidstone & Anderson and
have established that there will be insignificant increase in the regional detention pond water
level due to contribution from this project. I therefore approve the construction of the storm
sewer outfall according to the plans by Shear Engineering. There is currently a drainage
easement defined for the pond. No additional easements are required. Mr. Shear has
indicated that we will be contacted during installation of the storm sewer so we may have the
opportunity to view and provide input concerning the final look and treatment of the finished
product.
If you hav�n�-qu ins, please call me at 493-4105.
Since
Ed 4de44k,�,Wnager
Egta\�ler, Manager
cc: Shear Engineering Corporation
Sierra Builders
Greg Fisher