The URL can be used to link to this page

Browse Search

Home My WebLink About20083823.tiff Page 1 of 2 Brad Mueller From: Nathan Gerrard [ngerrard@gerrardinc.com] Sent: Thursday, August 07, 2008 4:24 PM To: Brad Mueller Subject: RE: Gerrard Excavating Brad, Thanks for the info on getting a partial release, I'll get a request in after we finish up the front. I don't believe there are any issues with the neighbor to the north, that house will be screened completely by the trees along the front entrance. If I remember correctly for some reason the City of Greeley was concerned that you could actually see the property while driving 65mph on Hwy 34, 'A of a mile away and would be somehow offended. None of the easements were in place when the USR was submitted and were actually dictated by the utilities during installation except for the farm access which was noted. Unfortunately we overlooked the security and weed control issues. Regardless, I realize the trees are on the plan and that is why I am asking if there is anything we can do. I don't have any drawings of relocating the trees as I wanted to run this by you first. We could definitely put something together if needed. I would like to meet you on site so I can better show you the issue and we could talk about solutions. If nothing else I'd love to just give you a quick tour. Would sometime Thursday morning work for you? Thanks again for your help. Nathan Gerrard ngerrard(cgerrardinc.com 1739 S. County Rd 13C/Loveland, CO 80537 office 970.669.1463/fax 970.669.0593 From: Brad Mueller [mailto:bmueller@co.weld.co.us] Sent: Thursday, August 07, 2008 2:30 PM To: ngerrard@gerrardinc.com Cc: Brad Mueller Subject: RE: Gerrard Excavating Nathan, I'm sorry to be slow with my response; I've been out of the office a bit and tied up with hearings. I've been past the site a couple times in the last month or so, and it is looking very nice. I think you've got a very nice facility on your hands. We can do a partial release of the collateral, so that if you've completed some of the improvements, have had them inspected, and are complete, then those items can be released. I would need a letter from you requesting as much; the letter should refer to the exhibit in the Improvements Agreement and indicate which line items are complete. Usually the building and the parking lot(i.e., the"private," or main, improvements on the lot)are not included as part of the Improvements Agreement, but if they are, they can be noted in your letter. The tree re-location might be a bit of a challenge. Those trees were designed to provide a buffer to the homeowner to the north. My memory is a bit foggy, but I seem to recall the owners calling at one point (maybe they are absentee owners?)to see what kind of screening would take place. We reported that the design called for the trees, and they were satisfied. 08/26/2008 2 -3813 PI IK72 Page 2 of 2 Ideally, the conflicts that you are indicating should have been resolved during the review; by properly showing all easements on the drawings (utility, farm access, etc.), we would have noted the conflict and asked for a revision. Of course, that's water under the bridge, and we do want to work with you to find a resolution. If you have a revised drawing that shows where you propose to relocate them, that would be useful for discussion purposes;we'd also use that to add to the file when there is resolution, to finalize whatever gets agreed upon. We can also meet, if you like, and if you don't have any drawings; I am available after next Wednesday. If you'd like to discuss this, please feel free to call. I appreciate that you are bringing this to our attention now(versus waiting until we inspect)—we certainly will be happy to work with you to find some sort of resolution. Brad From: Nathan Gerrard [mailto:ngerrard@gerrardinc.com] Sent: Thursday, July 31, 2008 2:58 PM To: Brad Mueller Subject: Gerrard Excavating Hello Brad, It has been quite a while since I spoke with you last, hope all is going well. We are finally getting to the landscaping activities at the new facility and a couple of questions have come up. As you probably know, we have constructed everything on our master plan except for the office and parking lot that goes with it. With the slow economy, these items are temporarily on hold. We are in the process of installing the curb and gutter along the entrance, the irrigation system, and planting the trees. I have two questions. The first is;when we get done with the entrance and landscaping do you think the County will consider releasing our bond even though the office building and supporting parking lot are not constructed? The second has to do with the location of trees. The plan shows trees on the north side of the fence along the north property line both on the east and west side of the truck parking structure, it also shows trees along the north entrance and some along CR3 west of the parking lot. The ones on the west side and north of the entrance drive have been purchased and as soon as we get the irrigation in will be installed. Other than a minor reconfiguration due to the dry utility easements these should all work great. The issue is with the ones along the north fence line. There are a couple of problems, the first being that planting trees right outside the fence creates a security issue. As soon as the trees begin to mature, someone could easily climb the tree and jump over the fence. The second is that there is an access road that runs along the north property line to allow access to farming the back part of the property and the trees will likely interfere with the farm equipment passing through here. I've considered planting the trees inside the fence line but they would not likely live there since it is road based and is sprayed for weeds on a regular basis. In fact, in order to maintain a nice looking north property line we are spraying for weeds all the way to the irrigation ditch along the north property line which would kill any trees planted in that area. My suggestion is that we plant these trees on the west portion of the property near CR3, after all, that is where the screening would be most effective. I would be happy to meet you out on site any time so you can better see what I'm talking about. I'd also like to give you a tour of the facility as I think it turned out quite nice. Thanks for your time. Wathian Gerrard gerrard Excavating, Inc. ngerrardc gerrardinc.com 1739 S. County Rd 13C/Loveland, CO 80537 office 970.669.1463/fax 970.669.0593 08/26/2008 Page 1 of 1 Brad Mueller From: Brad Mueller Sent: Friday, April 13, 2007 7:53 AM To: Donald Carroll Cc: David Bauer; Scot Lewis; Brad Mueller Subject: Gerrard -- off-site road Don, Thanks for your memo on the Gerrard USR-1584 and the discussions about CR 13. In addition to the logistics conversation that you're having with them, I think that we need to have a discussion in- house about how much of that road is their responsibility. They have indicated that they will be asking for a waiver/reduction of their transportation impact fees, and for all of us to determine whether that is appropriate,we have to first know how much was their responsibility to begin with. If, for example, they were responsible for the whole section up to Hwy 34, then they would get no rebate. However, if they were responsible for no improvements on the road at all, then they'd get 100% rebate on the roadwork that they pay for. I assume that their traffic study shows some improvements would be required at the entrance to the site; this would be their"fair-share" responsibility, which they would be responsible for constructing regardless of any work on CR 13. Maybe the traffic study shows that some other direct impacts are their responsibility. Any work above and beyond this "fair-share" (direct impact responsibilities)would be what the Transportation Impact Fee is for. If they build/pay for as much or more than what the impact fee would be, then they would be entitled to 100%waiver. Do you all agree with that analysis? I only ask because they've said that they would be bringing the waiver request when they submit the next revised USR exhibit, so I thought we might as well start discussing it now, before it becomes urgent. Thanks, Brad 04/23/2007 Hello