Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutKING SOOPERS FUELING STATION (CEDARWOOD PLAZA) - PDP - 40-07 - CORRESPONDENCE - (38)Steve Olt - Re: King Soopers Fueling Cer' Taft & Elizebeth Page 1 From: Sheri Langenberger To: Basil Hamdan; Helen Migchelbrink; Randy Maizland; Steve bit; Ward Stanford Date: 1 /11 /2008 11:12:33 AM Subject: Re: King Soopers Fueling Center - Taft & Elizebeth As much as it would be nice to get this corner looking a bit better - I don't see how we can waive the requirement for them to dedicate the row to the constrained arterial standard. As it is the travel and turn lanes at this corner are some of the narrowest that we have in town, and the bike lanes drop off well before the intersection. This is a location where when redevelopment occurs we need to get the row for these streets so we will have the opportunity in the future to improve and widen this intersection. The LUC is also pretty clear that they need to dedicate the row that is needed per the standards, Master Street Plan, and as necessary to increase the roadway to the min width required (see Sections 3.3.1(C)(1) and 3.6.2(E)). They were told of the row dedication requirement at the conceptual review meeting and although we meet and talked about the access points several times the row dedication requirement was never discussed. If they want to redevelop this site, we need the additional row Sheri Sheri Langenberger Development Review Manager City of Fort Collins, Engineering Dept 970-221-6605 >>> Randy Maizland 01/11/08 10:49 AM >>> Hello, I recieved a call from the King Sooper Fueling Center applicant this morning and it is their position that the site cannot be redeveloped into a new updated King Sooper station if they are required to dedicate the standard ROW on both Taft Hill and Elizebeth. He says it simply won't fit. I attended and provided comments at the conceptual review meeting and I have sat in on almost all of the pre -submittal meetings for this project and I do not recall at anytime that the City had aggreed to allow this site to redevelop without dedicating ROW to the current standard. All of the meetings I attended were to discuss access locations and circulation and those issues were resolved. At this point I need your feedback on allowing this project to move forward without requiring them to dedicate ROW. It is my understanding that if we do not waive this requirement, this development proposal will be dead and they will instead do a face lift on the existing building and reopen it as an existing use without going through the development review process. Thanks, Randy Steve Olt - Re: King Soopers Fueling Cer` -- - Taft & Elizebeth Page 1 From: Ward Stanford To: Basil Hamdan; Helen Migchelbrink; Randy Maizland; Sheri Langenberger; Steve Olt Date: 1/11/2008 12:37:05 PM Subject: Re: King Soopers Fueling Center - Taft & Elizebeth My input is that area is roadway constrained to below our desired lane widths and as such not in favor of giving acceptance to a small project that will lock our future road improvement possibilities for another many years. Taft needs its possibility for widening. Elizabeth may be debatable but I would need to review the area and traffic expectations before having any view different from above. Work load is not going to allow that review too soon. In general, I'm not in favor of giving away ROW here. W S. >>> Randy Maizland 1/11/2008 10:49 AM >>> Hello, I recieved a call from the King Sooper Fueling Center applicant this morning and it is their position that the site cannot be redeveloped into a new updated King Sooper station if they are required to dedicate the standard ROW on both Taft Hill and Elizebeth. He says it simply won't fit. I attended and provided comments at the conceptual review meeting and I have sat in on almost all of the pre -submittal meetings for this project and I do not recall at anytime that the City had aggreed to allow this site to redevelop without dedicating ROW to the current standard. All of the meetings I attended were to discuss access locations and circulation and those issues were resolved. At this point I need your feedback on allowing this project to move forward without requiring them to dedicate ROW. It is my understanding that if we do not waive this requirement, this development proposal will be dead and they will instead do a face lift on the existing building and reopen it as an existing use without going through the development review process. Thanks, Randy