HomeMy WebLinkAbout952023.tiffmEmoRAnuum
Todd Hodges
To Weld County Planning
From
Date May 30, 1995
Trevor Jiricek, Supervisor, Environmental Protection Service,
Subject:
Case Number: S-370 Name: McStain Enterprises, Inc.
SW4 of Section 05, Township 02 North, Range 68 West
Environmental Protection Services has reviewed this proposal; the following
conditions are recommended to be part of any approval:
1. All liquid and solid wastes shall be stored and removed for final disposal
in a manner that protects against surface and groundwater contamination.
2. No permanent disposal of wastes shall be permitted at this site.
3. Waste materials shall be handled, stored, and disposed in a manner that
controls fugitive dust, blowing debris, and other potential nuisance
conditions.
4. Fugitive dust shall be controlled on this site.
5. The maximum permissible noise level shall not exceed the [industrial limit
of 80 dB(A), light industrial limit of 70 db(A), commercial limit of 60
db(A), residential limit of 55 db(A)] as measured according to 25-12-102,
Colorado Revised Statutes.
6. All construction activities that disturb more than five (5) acres will be
required to obtain a stormwater discharge permit from the Colorado
Department of Health, Water Quality Control Division.
TJ/cs-840
WELD COUNTY PLANNING
MAY 3 1 1995
I ECEIVE
952023
St. Vrain Valley St.iool District RE -1J
Dr. Thelma Bishopp
Asst. Superintendent for Human Resources
Thomas A. Garcia
Director of Human Resources & Planning
395 South Pratt Parkway • Longmont • CO • 80501-6499
303-776-6200/449-7343 •FAX 303-682-7343
April 20, 1995
Todd Hodges
Current Planner
Department of Planning Services
Weld County Administrative Offices
1400 N. 17th Avenue
Greeley, CO 80631
RE: Long View Final Site Plan
Dear Todd:
The projected student impact upon the St. Vrain Valley School District, based upon the development of
approximately 401 modular homes on 80 acres is a total of 169 students. Students living in this
subdivision would attend Mead Elementary School, Mead Middle School, and Skyline High School under
the present school boundaries. Bus transportation would be required.
CAPACITY ENROLLMENT # STUDENTS STUDENT OVER
PROJECTED IMPACT CAPACITY
ELEMENTARY: 456 448 104 553 Yes
MIDDLE SCHOOL: 3 4 9 2 9 4 28 322 No
HIGH SCHOOL: 1 3 2 3 9 7 5 eft 1011 No
169
While this development may occur over an undetermined period of time there are also other
developments in these attendance areas that have already been approved which will have an impact on
these schools. This development alone will create capacity concerns at the elementary school level.
The District is on record as not opposing growth, so long as the growth is planned and is manageable
from a student enrollment stand point.
As the volume of development increases in the Mead attendance area with no alleviation of the existing
overcrowded conditions, the ability to provide the same quality education for these new students that
is provided students in other areas becomes increasingly difficult.
Therefore, the District cannot support this development because it will create overcrowding in the
Mead feeder system. The District would like to continue discussions with the developer to discuss the
possibility of land dedication or cash -in -lieu to mitigate the student impacts that are created by this
development.
Sincerely,
Thomas A. Garcia
Director of Human Resources & Planning
WELD COM' PLANNING
APR 251995
ECEIVE
"Excellence - Our Only Option"
952023
MOUNTAIN VIEW FIRE PRO i CCTION DISTRICT
Administrative Office:
9119 County Line Road • Longmont, CO 80501
(303) 772-0710 Metro (303) 666-4404 FAX (303) 651-7702
April21, 1995
Mr. Todd Hodges
Weld County Department of Planning Services
1400 N. 17th Avenue
Greeley, CO 80631
RE: Case Number: S-378
LongView Subdivision
Highway 119 and WCR 3.5
Dear Mr. Hodges:
I have reviewed the submitted materials for compliance with the adopted
codes and standards of the Fire District. The proposed subdivision is within
the boundaries of the Fire District, and will be served by the District. If the
subdivision meets the requirements of the Fire District, then the District has
no objections to the subdivision. Based on my review, I have the following
comments:
1. All streets within the subdivision will need to support 60,000 pounds
of imposed load. (Fire Protection Development Standards Section 3.01-
1)
2. Submit at least two copies of the final plat showing streets and roads
to the Fire District for approval. (Uniform Fire Code Section 10.202)
3. The minimum required fire flow for the subdivision residential areas is
1,000 gallons per minute at 20 pounds per square inch. However, the
community lodge may have a higher required fire flow based on the
floor area, type of construction and built-in fire protection. (Fire
Protection Development Standards Section 5.02-1)
4. Fire hydrant locations will be required to meet the standards of the
Fire District. Submit at least two copies of the subdivision plan,
showing fire hydrant locations and water main sizes and location to
the Fire District for approval, prior to beginning construction. (Fire
Protection Development Standards Section 6.04-1)
Station 1
9119 Cnty Line Rd.
Longmont, CO
80501
Station 2
10971 WCR 13
Longmont, CO
80504
Station 3 Station 4 Station 5
P.O.B z ]5 P. O. Bo 1 10911 Dobbin Run
J e ,ie r Subdivisnari t erral Resp wsto
Mead, CO 60542 Ni1o1-!t[Y90544 60026
Station 6
P.O. Box 666
600 Briggs
Erie. CO 80516
Station 7
P.O. Box 40
100 So. Forest St.
Dacono, CO 80514
952023
5. Street signs, dearly showing street names, and if necessary, address
range shall be installed throughout the subdivision. The Fire District
will be glad to work with you on the street sign system, if there is a
question about a particular street marking scheme. (Uniform Fire
Code Section 10.206)
6. Individual residences will need to be marked with dearly visible
addresses. (Fire Protection Development Standards Chapter 4)
If you have any questions, please contact me.
Sincerely,
Charles E. Boyes
Fire Prevention Specialist
CC: William N. Bailey, Deputy Chief, Fire Prevention
Kent Hogan, McStain Enterprises, Inc.
LongView Subdivision - Referral Response
2of2
952023
DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT
PLANNING DIVISION
Civic Center Complex / Longmont, CO 80501
(303) 651-8330 / FAX # (303) 651-8696
May 3, 1995
Mr. Todd A. Hodges, Current Planner
Weld County Department of Planning Services
1400 N. 17th Avenue
Greeley, CO 80631
RE: CASE NUMBER: S-378
Dear Todd:
Thank you very much for sending the LongView PUD final plan application to the City of
Longmont for our review and comment. The proposed manufactured housing development is
located at the northwest corner of 5H119 and WCR3'h. Several of the City's comments on this
final plan are the same as comments the City made on the referral of the sketch plan.
The City supports efforts to provide affordable housing options to people in the area. Longmont
also supports the fact that this PUD does not propose any direct access to SH119.
The application says that there will be berms, fencing, and signage. However, the application
provides no details about these aspects of the development. The City assumes Weld County will
require the applicant to detail this information at the appropriate stage of the review process.
Improving the visual image along SH 119, an important travel corridor for both our jurisdictions,
is important to the City of Longmont.
In our comments on the Weld County Comprehensive Plan update, the City has talked about the
value of planning school sites, park sites, collector streets, and other public facilities in advance
of development. We respectfully suggest that Weld County may want to first locate such
facilities in this area to accommodate this and other potential development.
I trust that Weld County will find these comments useful in your review. If you have any
questions about this referral response, please call Froda Greenberg at 651-8330. Thank you again
for the opportunity to comment on this application.
WELD COUNT( PLANNING
gkiEcinv.F
MAY 51996 lUi
Sincerely,
4NelA(
Brad Schol
Planning Director
xc: Phil DelVecchio, Community Development Director
File: #2050-5c4
952023
L7cfc124ons
(303) 776-9570
c -St. (14ain cSanitation �i�,ttiat
(cSaint cSan)
April 26, 1995
Mr. Todd Hodges, Current Planner
Department of Planning Services
Weld County Administrative Offices
1400 N. 17th Avenue
Greeley, Colorado 80631
Re: Case Number S-378, Longview Estates
Dear Mr. Hodges:
515 Kimbark Street
Suite 109
xxxxgia x3dcaen
±on9mont, CD 80501
WM courtFUMING
APR 2 8 1995
ECEIvE
151
I have reviewed the material provided for this project, and it does comply
with our Master Plan. This District concurs with the development as
proposed, subject to the following:
1. Granting of a 20 -foot sewer easement along the south side of
this project for the extension of the District's 12 -inch trunk
line by the Developer. As shown on the Sanitary Sewer Plan,
sheet 10 of 23, it is located within the south 50 -foot
setback. It is not shown on the Filing Plat.
2. Dedicating the 12 -inch sewer line, to be constructed by the
Developer, to the District for continued operation and
maintenance pursuant to District standards. The District will
agree to an oversize (over 8 inch) rebate provision.
3. All 8 -inch laterals into the District's 12 -inch trunk line
shall connect at a manhole. This requires either a respacing
of manholes or one additional manhole. The east and west
8 -inch laterals connect at manholes as designed. The 6 -inch
lateral taps are acceptable.
are
4. Internal collection lines, the majority of which wee 6 -inch,
remain the property of the Developer, who will be responsible
for their continued operation and maintenance.
5. The developer grants to the District the unused capacity in
the east and west 8 -inch laterals; however, capacity will be
reserved in the west 8 -inch lateral for development immedi-
ately to the West. The District will utilize this unused
capacity for future development to the North, and the
Developer must agree to carry said wastewater through its
private lines within Longview Estates, free of charge and
without liability recourse, subeject to upgradient loading and
design being to accepted engin A ing practice.
952023
Mr. Todd Hodges Current Planner
April 26, 1995
Page 2
6. Re Sanitary Sewer Plan, sheet 8 of 23, the northern segment of
the East 8 -inch Trunk Line is shown at 0.07% grade. This is
clearly in error, both in respect to the contours (8 feet) and
the minimum allowable grade of 0.4%
7. While not a requirement, I urge that all internal system
cleanouts be located on lot lines or within setbacks so they
remain accessible. Most are so located.
By copy, the Developer is hereby requested to affirm in writing to this
District and to the Department of Planning Services, prior to County
approval, that these conditions are acceptable.
Very truly yours.
ST. VRAIN SANITAT LON DISTRICT
By
L. D. Lawson, P.E.
Manager
LDL:mcj
cc: McStain
Attn: Stephen R. Hanson
Nelson Engineers
Attn: Vern Nelson
952023
Town of Mead
P.O. Box 626
Mead, Colorado 80542
(303) 535-4477
April 20, 1995
Todd Hodges, Current Planner
Department of Planning Services
Weld County Administrative Offices
1400 N 17th Ave.
Greeley, CO 80631
RE: McStain Enterprises, Inc., Planned Unit Development Sketch Plan S-378
Dear Todd:
Thank you for the opportunity to review the additional information for the requested "PUD Sketch
Plan" for McStain Enterprises, Inc.
I remain concerned with the proposed PUD that it is the wrong use for the property and will require
extra ordinary services from the County. High density development is not appropriate in the rural
areas of the county. The development would be more appropriately located within an existing
municipality that can provide the services necessary for this concentration of residents. If it is
developed in the County, it is highly unlikely that it will ever be incorporated into a surrounding
municipality and remain a drain upon the County's limited resources. Finally, the proposal is
contrary to the provisions of our comprehensive plan. Our comprehensive plan suggests that low
density residential development is more appropriate as a buffer to the single family developments
that will radiate from Longmont. I suggest that the Board of Commissioners give serious
consideration to the down -zoning of this property and the entire Del Camino MUD.
That said, I will attempt to offer some constructive comments on the plan. Illustrations # 3 and #4 are
obvious attempts to show a lower quality, older mobile home park as contrasted to illustration #5.
Although illustration #5 depicts what will probably develop, it is not what the text of the application
suggests will be the lot arrangements and building orientation. These are narrow lots, averaging
about 50', although a few are as wide as 80'. The homes illustrated in the proposal are 40' to 78' in
length (front door orientation). These homes will not fit on the lots with the front door facing the
street. I question the honesty of the proposal when it contains these obviously misleading statements
and graphics.
I am concerned with the lack of parking. I believe that even in the market range set for these units,
there will likely be two or more cars per lot. Narrow lots with double-wides means that there will only
be single wide parking. Although there may be space for two cars on the single wide parking strip,
that means shuffling the cars before the innermost car can leave. The "concept plan" (and not
changed in the "current plan") calls for three off-street parking spots per homesite. The "covenants"
indicates there will be only two off-street parking spots. This is again inconsistent and misleading.
I applaud the intent to restrict buildings to multi -section homes with pitched roofs and site -built style
siding. I would feel more comfortable if the units were required to be modulars as opposed to
mobiles and required to be placed on permanent perimeter foundations. The covenants state that the
,o23
entrance must face the street, however all drawings of lots and homes on the lots contained in the
submittal, indicate a narrow end to the street orientation. I am disturbed by this apparent
inconsistency in their statements and their design. Also, there are a number of easements depicted
on the maps. The 50' gas line easement appears to cut through the middle of several lots. In
addition, the 20' easements between many of the lots will restrict the location of homes on the lots.
These factors indicated to me that this "mobile home park" will not be developed precisely as is
being represented to the Commission. What other misrepresentations are they making to the staff
and Commission
For the above stated concerns, the Town continues to object to a granting of the proposed Planned
Unit Development. It would be more appropriately developed within the City of Longmont where they
have local control over the development. Thank you for the opportunity to comment on the proposed
division. If there are any questions, I may be contacted at (303) 532-3248.
Sincerel /'
�/
Gaiy/WO t
Circuit ider City %tanager
952023
mEmoRAnDum
Wile.
COLORADO
Todd Hodges, Current Planner May 8, 1995
To Date
From
Subject:
Don Carroll, Administrative Coordinator
S-378, McStain Enterprises
telt
I have reviewed the application and have the following comments:
It appears that the emergency entrance could handle at least 1/2 of the traffic volume from the
subdivision. Would this be used as an access point or block off? The applicant is indicating that
this emergency entrance would be 20' wide. If this is an entrance, it needs to be widened to at
least to 24' wide. If this is an entrance, it needs to be widened to at lease to 24' wide with
adequate shoulders and drainage to accommodate the volume of this access.
The applicant needs to place on the mylar a typical cross-section of both WCR 3.5 and the
interior road section showing width of right-of-way, width and depth of pavement, base and
shoulders.
The applicant is indicating as improvements for Phase I of the PUD that the developer agrees to
pave two lanes of WCR 3.5 from the PUD development's southern access to St. Hwy 119,
approximately 400'. In addition, a paved auxiliary lane should be provided on WCR 3.5 between
the primary access to Longview and St. Hwy 119 to separate right and left turn lanes.
On the improvement for Phase II, the developer agrees to pave two lanes of the portion of WCR
3.5 extending south from the Northernmost property line of the PUD to the improvements (at the
south access entrance mentioned in Phase I) approximately 2000' and complete the paved
eastbound left turn lane on St. Hwy. 119 west of the intersection at WCR 3.5.
I have reviewed the drainage report for Longview PUD from Nelson Engineers of Greeley and
find no conflict with the reports or calculations.
cc: Commissioner Webster
S-378, McStain Enterprises
plan6.fc
952023
STATE OF COLORADO
COLORADO GEOLOGICAL SURVEY
Division of Minerals and Geology
Department of Natural Resources
1313 Sherman Street, Room 715
Denver, Colorado 80203
Phone (303) 866-2611
FAX (303) 866-2461
May 16, 1995
Mr. Todd Hodges
Department of Planning Services
1400 N 17th Avenue
Greeley, CO 80631
Dear Mr. Hodges:
WELD COUNTY PLANNING
p MAY 1 9 1995
EMU
Re: Long View Planned Residential Community
WE -95-0021
DEPARTMENT OF
NATURAL
RESOURCES
Roy Romer
Governor
lames S. Lochhead
Executive Director
Michael B. Long
Division Director
Vicki Cowart
State Geologist
and Director
We have reviewed the materials submitted in support of the above referenced proposal as
well as the general and engineering geology of the site.
There appear to be no geology -related problems associated with this site which would
preclude successful development as proposed so long as appropriate civil engineering is
performed. Accordingly, we have no objection to the approval of this application.
Yours very truly,
(4,
Jeffrey L. H jmes
Senior Engineering Geologist
JH:B:\ldt
952023
STATE OF COLORADO
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
Region 4
1420 2nd Street
P.O. Box 850
Greeley, Colorado 80632-0850
(303) 353-1232
Weld County, SH 119
McStain Enterprises PUD
Final Plan (Longview Development)
N.W. Corner SH 119/WCR 3.5
West of Del Camino
May 31, 1995
Todd Hodges - Current Planner
Department of Planning Services
Weld County Colorado
Weld County Administrative Offices
1400 N. 17th Ave.
Greeley, CO 80631
Dear Todd:
WELD COUNTY P! ".ft,'""
JUN 21996
IUUUn}UUU ECE0U
We have reviewed the McStain Enterprises PUD Final Plan and offer
the following comments:
ACCESS Our office received a set of plans directly from Nelson
Engineers on March 30, 1995 which details access
improvements to Weld County Road 3.5 and to State Highway
(SH) 119. We are working with Mr. Art Uhrich regarding the
details of access. An access permit will be issued for all
necessary improvements. A temporary access permit has been
requested to authorize work in the county road access in
order to install a culvert to drain the property prior to
further work on the site.
Nelson Engineer's submittal also provided a letter of
explanation from Eugene Coppola addressing traffic study
questions which I had posed to Mr. Uhrich. Mr. Coppola's
explanation is sufficient and accepted. The 70' storage
length which is included in the left deceleration lane
(eastbound to northbound) is adequate for this development
at full build -out and to accommodate the existing traffic to
the county road.
The County should note that as other properties develop
north of SH 119 which will use this left turn lane,
additional length will be required for storage. The traffic
study projected a future volume of 270 left turns in the
p.m. peak hour for an average peak hour of 178 left turns.
952023
Mr. Todd Hodges
May 31, 1995
Page 2
McStain Enterprises
It may be possible to reduce the ultimate left storage
length if a signal is warranted in the future.
The County and the applicant should note that the Department
will not participate in any costs incurred for a future
signal at such time as signal warrants are met and a signal
is required.
The Department of Transportation has plans for an overlay
along SH 119 in this area during the spring of 1996. Even
though no widening of the highway is planned at that time, I
will work wit the applicant and the Department's
engineering u it in order to coordinate the timing and costs
of final asph It paving. It would be beneficial to both
parties to co rdinate the completion of the final lift along
SH 119 to include the widening for this access improvement.
The Departmen will not participate in costs incurred to
complete dirt work or other widening features, nor will the
Department co er the costs of the final lift of pavement for
those widenin s; however, it would make sense to coordinate
the two highw y efforts.
DRAINAGE The Drai,
states that B
borrow ditch.
contain discr
pipe for drai
of 8". The P
be clarified.
rate of drain
right-of-way
of drainage t
development i
take correcti
The pipe drai
beyond the pr
Any outlet st
private prope
age Study indicates three drainage basins and
sin C will flow directly into the highway
The drainage plan and the drainage study
pancies in the orifice opening size of the
age of Basin C. The Study states a pipe size
an shows 16" and 18". This discrepancy must
Confirmation is required that the historic
ge of this property to the state highway
ROW) will not be increased. If any increase
the state highway ROW results from this
the future the applicant will be required to
e action.
ing detention Basin C is shown to extend
vate property and into the state highway ROW.
ucture must be fully maintainable within the
ty.
952023
Mr. Todd Hodges
May 31, 1995
Page 3
McStain Enterprises
Our comments are based upon the submittal as received April 19,
1995. I apologize for not meeting your May 2 deadline, and hope
that the timing of these comments has not posed a problem for
your planning process.
Thank you for the opportunity to review the McStain Enterprises
PUD Final Plan.
Sincerely,
Ter r G. Jones
Region Develo y�-nt/Access Coordinator
TGJ:gthi
cc: M. Fanning
G. Hice-Idler
file
023
06/19/1995 15:24 30393P'447
THISTLEHOUSING
PAGE 01
te- THISTLE
COMMUNITY
HOUSING'
June 19, 1995
"
Weld County Commissioners
Weld County Planning Commission
e!o Dale Hall, County Commission Chairman
Fax: (970) 352-0242
anon
JUN 19 '95 15:19
Dear Commissioners:
As director of a nonprofit agency providing subsidized rental housing for more than 100
moderate -income families, and as a Boulder County native and a longtime advocate for
affordable housing, I'm writing to comment on the McStain proposal for developing the
LongView land lease community near Longmont.
Although I applaud efforts to provide affordable housing, I'm concerned that home buyers -
typically young first-time buyers and retired households -- will buy into this project without
realizing they will not own the land on which their "affordable homes" sit, and will have no
guarantees or control over the land lease terms or costs, now or in the future.
This is the situation at Arapahoe West Condos in Boulder. Residents there report that their land
leases leaped 47.7% in one year, based on escalation clauses in their contacts allowing land
fees to escalate with the current assessed market value of the land without the buildings, Some
residents are now paying more for their land lease fee than for their mortgage. Home owners like
these, and like mobile home park residents, can find themselves at the mercy of landowners
whose only motives are profit.
The Community Land Trust model is one way to preserve affordability over time and to ensure
resident participation in decisions affecting the land. Another way to preserve affordability over
time might be to retain public control over land lease terms and costs (e.g., require pining
board or commission approval of any increases) so at least the residents would have recourse. At
a minimum, the land lease should be subject to public review and scrutiny PRIOR to approval of
the project, with a purpose of preserving affordabilti over time. Also, there should be disclosure
requirements at the time of sale requiring prospective buyers to review the lease with an attorney
PRIOR to purchase.
4593 N. Broadway, D-120 Boulder, Colorado 80 4 303-442-8418 FAX: 303-938-9447
xhhb/1D
3039309447 PAGE .001
952.023
06/19/1995 15:24 30393r-'47
THISTLEHOUSING
PAGE 02
LongView, June 19, 1995, Page 2
Taking the cost of the land out of the initial total housing price can be a good approach to
providing the entry-level affordable housing so desperately needed in this area. But if the land
lease costs are not limited and/or controlled by somebody other than private parties interested
only in profit, unwary LongView residents could be held hostage to longterm profiteering on
ever -escalating land leases.
So I urge you, when you discuss this development at your June 21, 1995, hearing, please
safeguard the longterm good of the community and of these prospective home buyers, and
require some guarantee to preserve affordability over time.
Peggy Wrenn
Executive Director
Thistle Community Housing
cc: Boulder Camera
Longmont Times -Call
Greeley Tribune
John Ferule, McStain
Enclosures
JUN 19 '95 15:20
3039389447 PAGE.002
952023
06/19/1995 15:24 30393E^447
THISTLEHOUSING PAGE 03
JUN 19 '95 15:20
Sc
■ Fo
seat:
Rays
tires
rd00l
build.
By ALAN
Camara 1
Celebr
this ye
Comeba
bicycle r
The h
banana,
10-speec
played
ters in
reminde
tan ruler
Now
facts sh:
new pe
mance is
tired C.
bikes. 7
that hale
from ba
brink or
when an
to hit Sr
"We're
said Or
marked'
made tt
can hay
.Miele
had tura
Schwinn
October
ufacturet
blcyks
mountau
and Spa
$25 ntiui
bankrupt
million d
Bute s
bon ayt
300,000 it
Scott t
' bought 1•
in Janu
In search of an $80
■ Boulder builder
explores market for
affordable housing
with land lease
community.
By BRIAN METZLER
For the Camera "The key benefits are that i
With the idea of filling the af- takes a lower down payment be
fordable housing void between cause you aren't buying tn'
mobile homes and costly site- land, and you have the amenities
built houses, McStain Enter- that you wouldn't have in a typi
prises is developing a land lease cal low -end, entrydevel subdlvl
community east of Longmont. sion," Fernie said. "The lam
If plans are approved 6y the lease enables you to get people
Weld Coun. : •• of Com*fe` into homes in a square footage
• sinners in late June, e Bout- that they really want, but in c
der -based -- ' • der will fully developed entry-level subdi
spend the summer converting a vision that developers normal':
300 -acre farm field along Colo, can't afford to built"
119 into LongView, a comp unity LongView, located three mile:
• of 401 factorybuilt, single-family r east of Longmont in unincorpo
homes. rated Weld County, wW haw
Much like a condominium or Pty strict covenants regal -dig
townhouse community, home• home maintenance and comma
owners won't own the property nity activities, Penile said. Prop
on which their borne sits. In- erty maintenance will be ban
stead, the tots, which will aver- died by the community'
age rough131 4ZQQ•squarrait in management, in which Mcstab
size, will be teased from the will continue to have a role.
community's ownership group. Because of the lower down
The pre -manufactured homes
will range in size from •1.200.mPaYment and mortgage PO
.2,1Qp-,square feet, and ,vvaarryy in mentsmen's required to own a home
price from'$4S,000 ooloo;o0bIt in LongView, young couples.anc
addition to monthly ' mortgage retirees are expected to be the
paymenfs„homeowners will pay demographic segments likely U
roughly,;,{300' a: month lei T land ylive in LongView, Fernie said.
I lgase payments. '•.: se Although the advantages
The LongView community
which will include parks, a corn
munity center, swimming poo
and 15 acres of open space, wil
provide low-income families :
home ownership alternative b
rental homes and mobile homes
said John Ferule, McStain's ape
cial project manager.
Low down payments
Ultrasonic Blind Cleaning
Residential & Commercial
FQa is;Chet
47-1
Free Estimates
JOEL MORELAND
Owner
786-9456
24 Hour Water Damage
FROM T
A VOL
LOi
3039399447 PAGE .003
¢, r •.:123
30393r '47
THISTLEHOUSING
PAGE 04
06/19/1995 15:24
JUN 1 '95
REAL ESTATE
monthly moltgage payment
DAVID a JENauca / Fat et Cams
NEW APPROACH: It's more than just field. East of Longmont, McStain's John Fantle plans a
NY.type d affordable housing project, where land is leased and houses are manufactured.
•
ft be many, there are also
ntial drawbacks, said Payton
*Nye licensed Realtor with
Boulder -based real estate con-
SPIong 6nn' Point West Proper.
Milk, Most condominium as-
sodaltats and land -lease
oOmmubities have lengthy leases
td provide security to the own -
en, but there are usually no
guarantees once the lease ex-
*tentlal drawbacks-
..
:**The &advantage is that the
properly has value now, but
when you get into the latter part
of the land lease — say the last
23 year. — it will devalue the
E SIDE,
0 850
KS
UELY
15:22
property because, of the un-
knowns," Smith said. "You don't
know if the owners am going to
renew the lease or increase the
monthly fees. Youown your own
home, but you are at the mercy
of whatever plans are proposed
far the land."
Homeowners in land lease
communities are also at a disad-
vantage because they never own
the land. The value of a residen-
tial lot for a single family home
typically plays a big role in de-
termining the purchase price of
a home, said Kent Madsen, bro-
ker associate with RE/MAX of
Boulder. A general industry rule
of thumb is thaw-timenttbRk
land value equals.the.,cotpbjled
prictotthe ,6Qtne..and lot, MFG!•
son said.
"The age old rule is that
they're not making any more
land," Madson said. "And unless
the philosophy and the attitude
of the area reverses the direc-
tion it has been headed in the
last 20 years. there's going to be
less land available as time goes
on. And that would tend to make
the land you have more valu-
able."
The project is scheduled to be
discussed by the Weld County
Planning Commission on d_py�sp
If plans are approved Brifie
county board at its June 21
meeting, construction and pre-
setting of homes will begin short-
ly thereafter, Ferule said.
McStain is working with two
builders of manufactured homes
to develop several semi -custom
two- and three -bedroom floor
plans. Longview was designed
with the help of Michigan devel-
oper Don Westphal, a planner
who has worked on numerous
manufactured home projects
across the U.S. The company
has also retained Boulder archi-
tect Phil Pokorny to design
LongView's loco -square -foot
r l
303938944`1 PRGE.004
u 23
[ I Nnr
S00'398d LPP66E6£0£
G ^
I- "C
U a•+
0 n3
0
et c :9,
O 41
'+
O4
C
C
:3 e
^ 3 O
itU " • Q
may w
s
27 4)
b .111
§ ...
.„, w
U nn
U "O
4 <x
O
«
G
.y
6J
v
'I
Q
C
C
C
"C
0
3
v
v
V C
T
u
C
td)
L C
A '�
y O
U o
E la
v
E O
U A
t% 4
g e
, 5 H
G
�v 5
-8 o
'
as
gt
'u 3 S.• `� E m 9
•� s ] R
s C Is,
>& C 7 e r i'a ,J ' G r
r_� a�Ir-
.. vl g-Ei
.* . I.: i g c a: 8
a + �• e
�ro
64 5 'di
1.1;
u E- a m 3 -:L U E V a .
C. .0,—
.C •4 aV u c oz. u r_ H E
bo v a C C G cj u «' T 't ^ i•-.E
v+ -
'C aai 3 n a�-' u - . ' P T .
�Al- --_ � u n r» g 5- E I E
N
X 'O L+ w C C. G C a t G.
Xa1 E 6 C ^.C, �' .j t' '� yC u a t-
g
r v ? uVsc.,.
P E L'
u `«�' < Li u C w F•e
y _ C ^
V
3 t u
y a o c O - / -2
7
.. s
w - N
C a .9.g c 9
^ a� a c y c
fb9 G _c, e u
r
O > .� V c' . U y.. .�
Vg. o c o 'o 8 4t t2,_.
'' 4-4 o A U u O ^ H 6t 1 N D0 (V 16
a "1rC
C
d 8 0 o a
.2
^
FMS en
r
8 0 J?
1
RtAlis
S0 39Vd 9NISn0H3'115IHI
Lb. -dE620E bL:5T 9661/61/90
Important Features of a CLT
d
0
U
U
a
Li C 0
4 a
Y
S
S
Sa
c o
s
ca C
c`
• Y
of
90 39Cd
"vet
Lam' 2r`uF
%�c h
A��
J
U
E• - ST=
cu
p rb` c u a Y y
U v 0 �`0 C — •y -
°�ESoa�
✓ ' a g v
h.
• gm c —
Y u a+
Pi ice m G .�-1 lc n a+ ° c...p [. p v = = "S .j a _
a •••-d ...) O E 5 7 ..T, „a I., _ 4; (Jr) -7; .i. „Ir- ..--, If: 71 I
°U Y v
a 6dJ2-UIy-g Y$ vcc3n- ".»L.vk y a =xy,,.L
k e •
R_ Y 3 y a
x z d
F ^ rj 5 V
_- to Ju F...f J ,flQ -
a.J
- — k .
IF
< �~ - _ •1f-7_ c 7.2
—X.. LC:a
- J U ,% .-•
^' z=2...
-U y 1 3;-Vr - .y
.C F^ y j 4 ._. V Y y` v
ui
G, a U u L v r .i .E T.P. .a -coL 3 r AT �y' -.C., �>, .Y.
G' 7 �t - 6,t c F J G w
i t 4 `. YI P 7 ' ;. J �. P. : m C cr.-9. f k= Y
ZL K ci L, 7 J - y r in G Y C n G
• C...,r R E L i L L
Z .: 7. _L C.
p y a. j 14. a - - �x
o u'
U 'Jc Le Y cc 4 _
3W "z s
` Z - r
9NISIlOHY1SIHl LV._JE6EOE DZ:GI 966i/6I/90
MOUNTAIN VIEW FIRE PROTECTION DISTRICT
Administrative Office:
9119 County Line Road • Longmont, CO 80501
(303) 772-0710 Metro (303) 666-4404 FAX (303) 651-7702
RECEIVED MAR 2 2 1995
Mr. Art Uhrich
Nelson Engineers
822 7th Street
Greeley, CO 80631
RE: Five Villages
Dear Mr. Uhrich:
VetA-7
/vim('
March 21, 1995
This letter is to confirm our telephone conversation on March 16, 1995
regarding the proposed hammerheads for this subdivision. The configuration
of the hammerhead as show in the drawing attached to your faxed letter,
dated March 14, 1995 is acceptable to the Fire District. I have attached a
copy of that drawing to this letter.
The subdivision plan should be updated showing this new configuration,
then should be routed to the Fire District for approval.
If you have any questions, please contact me.
Sincerely,
Charles E. Boyes
Fire Prevention Specialist
CC: William N. Bailey, Deputy Chief, Fire Prevention
Station 1
9119 City Line Rd.
Longmont, CO
60501
#K /r yam, c'h
Station 2
10971 WCR 13
Longmont. CO
80504
Station 3
P.O. Box 575
299 Peaner Ave.
Mead, CO 80542
Station 4
P.O. Box 11
8500 NNwot Road
Mwot, CO 80544
Station 5
10911 DOEEn Run
Lafayette, CO
80026
Station 6
P.O. Box 666
600 Briggs
Erie, CO 80516
Station 7
P.O. Box 40
100 So. Forest St.
acano, CO 80514
Hello