Staff Report 5-26-2016, Foxfield Town Ce[...]
Transcription
Staff Report 5-26-2016, Foxfield Town Ce[...]
STAFF REPORT Date: May 20, 2016 To: Town of Foxfield Board of Trustees Public Hearing Date: Continued Hearing Date: February 24, 2016 May 26, 2016 Prepared by: Brea Pafford & Chris Snyder Applicant: Clifton P. Schroeder 85 E. Oak Hills Drive Castle Rock, CO 80108 Project Consultants: Planner: Mark Nemger, Plan Mark Design, LLC Engineer: Mace Pemberton, Mace, LLC Traffic Engineer: Mike Rocha, SM Rocha, LLC Property Owner: Foxfield Town Center Partners, LLC 13877 Chenango Dr. Aurora, CO 80015 Application Description: Amendment to the Foxfield Master Plan and proposed Official Development Plan (ODP) for a Planned Development (PD Rezoning) FEBRUARY 24, 2016 HEARING SUMMARY: The applicant is requesting approval of two (2) separate land use applications: an Official Development Plan (PD Zoning) and a Master Plan Amendment. A public hearing for this development was initially held on February 24, 2016 where both the applicant and Town staff presented evidence pertaining to the proposed land use applications. In general, staff found that the applicant met the minimum criteria required for the proposed Master Plan Amendment, however, the analysis of the ‘PD Standard’s for Approval’ identified several key issues that staff determined warranted additional direction from the Town Board, as follows: Permitted Principal Use Building Height and View Corridors Building Coverage, Floor Area Ratios and Open Space Pedestrian Circulation/Connectivity between Planning Areas Parking and Loading Area Standards Utilities Development Phasing Higher Quality Development Following the presentation of evidence by the applicant and Town staff, the Board opened the floor to hear evidence from the public in attendance. Sixteen members of the Foxfield community spoke publicly regarding concerns about the proposed development. The Board then asked specific questions of the applicant and staff before confirming that more information was necessary. The Board directed the applicant to address the conditions and key issues identified in the staff report. The evening concluded with the Board moving to continue the public hearing to April 21, 2016 at 6:30 pm. This hearing was later continued until May 26, 2016 at 6:30 pm. On May 2, 2016 the applicant submitted a revised ODP, project narrative and a point-by-point response letter to address the key issues and draft conditions of approval. A. Proposed Master Plan Amendment PURPOSE OF THE FOXFIELD MASTER PLAN: The purpose of the Master Plan (also referred to as the Comprehensive Plan) is to provide a guide for public officials, residents and others who are involved with planning land use and development within the Town of Foxfield. The future land uses, goals and policies contained within the Plan articulate a vision for future growth and development. Together, these key components help decision makers evaluate rezoning proposals to ensure that development is consistent with the community character and vision. The Master Plan is a dynamic document that may be updated as needed to accommodate changes in Foxfield’s character and surrounding area. Staff Comment: Section 5 of the Foxfield Master Plan designates six land use categories. These categories are also graphically depicted on the Foxfield Land Use Plan Map. Descriptions for these land use categories are as follows: Rural Residential with a minimum lot size approximately 2 to 2.5 acres in size. Planned Residential allowing suburban type lots with densities of one unit per acre. Planned Commercial allowing retail and office commercial uses. Public related to the public right of way required for the Parker/Arapahoe Road interchange. Institutional for uses including churches, nursing homes, private educational facilities, etc. Open Space/Landscape ROW for parks, natural areas or landscape areas maintained by the Town or other public entities. The Master Plan recognizes that a seventh category of Planned Mixed-Use may be incorporated to accommodate a combination of the Planned Residential and Planned Commercial on the same site. The process to add a new land use designation to the Master Plan and/or modify the Land Use Plan Map is a Master Plan Amendment. The applicant is requesting approval of PD Zoning and Official Development Plan. Approval criteria for a PD requires an amendment to the Master Plan if the proposed residential density is higher than one (1) dwelling unit per acre. The proposed amendment would establish a Planned Mixed Use land use category and revise the Land Use Plan Map to depict this land use within the Foxfield Town Center development boundary. The applicant has provided the following description for the new category: The Planned Mixed Use category will allow for development that provides a combination of retail, offices, services, cultural facilities, civic uses and higher density housing that is typically constructed in multi-story buildings. Office and residential uses are encouraged to locate above ground floor retail and services. The overall density should not exceed 20 DU/AC. Floor Area Ratios (F.A.R.) for commercial development would typically be within the range of 0.75:1 to 1.0:1.0. Parking for shared uses should be carefully assessed so that spaces are provided but to avoid the presence of large fields of unused parking. Page 2 The proposed amendment to add the Planned Mixed-Use designation and revised Land Use Plan Map is required with an approval of the proposed PD Zoning. The land use description is consistent with the proposed land uses and development standards provided in the Foxfield Town Center ODP. II. AMENDMENT CRITERIA: Section 6 of the adopted Master Plan sets forth the general criteria for the consideration of proposed amendments. 1. Statutory Requirements—any amendment to the text or map of this plan must conform to the notification and public hearing requirements as specified in Colorado Statutes. Staff Comment: The notification and public hearing requirements for the proposed Master Plan amendment was provided as required by Colorado Statutes and the Town of Foxfield notice requirements. 2. Amendments to the Land Use Plan Map—any person proposing an amendment to the Land Use Plan Map must meet the following criteria prior to submitting a formal application to Foxfield. a. The proposed amendment will be shown on a plan that illustrates the proposed land use, general location of buildings and other improvements, general alignment of streets, location of parking areas and illustrative landscaping. The plan must be sufficient in detail to allow adjacent property owners and interested public to visualize the development. Staff Comment: The applicant has provided an amended Comprehensive Plan Land Use Map that depicts the location of the proposed Planned Mixed-Use land use category. The applicant has also included a Development Concept Plan as part of the ODP to illustrate one possible arrangement of the buildings, parking areas, landscaping, plazas and open space. In addition, the applicant has submitted 3D model views of the conceptual layout. However, the first note on sheet 5 of the ODP clearly states that the conceptual site plan does not represent the final design for the development. Although the Land Use Plan Map and Development Concept Plan meet the minimum requirements to allow the property owner and the public to visualize a possible concept, staff would like to stress that the proposed ODP permits development of this site that may not be consistent with the conceptual information submitted. b. The applicant will hold a meeting to present the proposed conceptual plan. All property owners within 750 feet of the site will be notified of the place time and purpose of the meeting. Staff Comment: A neighborhood meeting was held on June 10, 2015 where the applicant presented a proposed development consisting of 60 senior housing dwelling units within PA-2 and 90 dwelling units with 75,657 square feet of retail use and 8,750 square feet of restaurant use in PA-1. The development concept presented during the neighborhood meeting is consistent with the building, parking, access and open space arrangement depicted on sheet 5 of the ODP. However, the proposed ODP permitted many more principal uses than those that were initially presented to the community during the neighborhood meeting. The applicant has since made revisions to the ODP so that it now reserves a minimum of 70% of the ground floor level for retail uses, which generate sales tax revenue. The proposed Hotel use in PA-1 also offers another opportunity for the Town to generate additional tax revenue. Page 3 POTENTIAL MOTIONS FOR THE BOARD’S CONSIDERATION: Below are the possible motions regarding the Master Plan Amendment. These motions may be amended by the Board as necessary. Note: If the amendment to the Master Plan is denied by the Board, then no further action is required, as the proposed PD would not comply with the residential density Standard for Approval pursuant to section 16-2-70(d)(2). 1. Master Plan Amendment a. The Town Board finds that the proposed amendment to the Town of Foxfield Master Plan and Land Use Plan Map substantially meet the minimum criteria and moves to APPROVE the proposed application. Staff shall prepare the required resolution for Board approval. b. The Town Board moves to DENY the proposed application. B. PD Zoning and Official Development Plan STANDARDS FOR APPROVAL: Staff provided a detailed analysis of how these standards are addressed in the proposed development (refer to pages 17-23 of the February 17, 2016 staff report). The following is a brief summary of the standards that shall be utilized by the Planning Commission and the Board of Trustees in evaluating any plan for Planned Development: Standard Open space Residential density Per Section 16-2-70(d): Standard requires a minimum amount of open space. Standard limits to 1DU/AC, unless amended in the comp plan. Building Gross Floor Area Standard allows the Board to place limits on total GFA for a specific use. Architecture Standard requires building facades to have clearly defined & highly visible pedestrian entrance. Street Circulation Standard requires the development to provide adequate site circulation that can be accessed by emergency services. Also requires the development to have provisions for using and maintaining circulation facilities. Standard requires conformance with the Town’s minimum parking standards. Intent Statement: preserve natural features, where possible. Parking Natural Features Status of Proposed ODP The ODP complies by requiring a minimum of 25% open space. The ODP proposes 12 DU/AC (93 Units) in PA-1 and 20 DU/AC (62 Units) in PA-2. The ODP does not comply without an amendment to the Master Plan. The ODP identifies the proposed maximum GFA permitted for each use. It was revised to state that 70% of the 1st floor must be reserved for uses that generate sales tax revenue. Individual retail tenants may not exceed 50,000 SF. Uses that do not generate sales tax revenue are limited to 85,000 SF maximum for PA-1. The ODP identifies architecture standards that state compliance with this standard. ODP was revised to include additional architecture standards beyond minimum required. This could be considered as something that will contribute to the overall development quality. The ODP provides adequate site circulation, and currently only allows access off of S. Lewiston Way. However, the proposed access to PA-2 is unresolved and pending CDOT review and approval. The ODP states that parking will be provided per the Town’s current requirements. The ODP does not identify any natural features that will be preserved. This standard could be considered not applicable to this particular site. Page 4 Standard Housing Variety Per Section 16-2-70(d): Standard requires the development to provide for a variety in housing types and densities, other facilities and common open space. Dwelling Privacy Standard requires the development to provide privacy between dwelling units. Pedestrian Circulation Standard requires the development to provide pedestrian ways adequate in terms of safety, separation, convenience and access to points of destination. Public Utilities Standard requires the development to be served with public water and sanitary sewer. Building Heights Standard permits the building heights in the development to be increased or decreased above maximum permits for like buildings in other zone districts based on the relationship of 7 characteristics. Status of Proposed ODP The ODP proposes multi-family residential in PA-1 and Sr. Housing in PA-2. The ODP also requires a minimum 25% open space. The ODP was revised to require a minimum 5% of open space to be plaza areas. The ODP also requires the construction of a public trail facility. The ODP does not stipulate privacy between dwelling units as multi-family is proposed; however, privacy will be provided from within the buildings. The ODP does require a 25-foot use separation buffer between PA-2 and the existing residential uses. The ODP was revised to require a minimum 32 SF of private outdoor balcony or terrace space for each dwelling unit. The ODP was revised to require connectivity between planning areas and internal pedestrian facilities within each planning area. The ODP also addresses pedestrian connectivity to offsite facilities (i.e., between the existing park and the Arapahoe/Parker intersection). The ODP was revised to depict the locations of existing and proposed water, storm and sanitary utility lines. ACWWA has provided a will serve letter based on the demands for the proposed densities and uses. The ODP proposes building heights of 70 feet. This is taller than the existing zoning allows in PA-1. The building heights in PA-2 are consistent with what the existing zoning allows in PA-2. The building height issue has still not been resolved. STATUS OF DRAFT CONDITIONS: The February 17, 2016 staff report included a list of possible approval conditions based on the key issues that were identified and discussed by staff during the public hearing. Out of the 26 original conditions, staff has identified only 4 of the original conditions that currently remain unresolved, as follows: 1. Medical/Dental Offices or Clinics shall be removed from the permitted principal uses list in PA. These uses may be listed as an accessory use in PA-2. Staff Comment: The applicant has stated that removing Medical/Dental Offices from the permitted uses in PA2 will limit the flexibility that may be needed to address future changes in market conditions and still provide a quality development for the Town of Foxfield. Therefore, the applicant is requesting Board approval of the ODP with this remaining as a permitted use in PA-2. The applicant has also pointed out that Laboratories have been removed from the permitted uses list within PA-1. Note: staff has not included this as a condition of approval, however the Board may include this, as needed. Page 5 2. Provide limits on permitted number of stories, and/or building elevations demonstrating the proposed bulk/mass requirements of this ODP. Maximum building heights within PA-1 should be reduced to be no more than _______ feet. Staff Comment: The ODP permits a maximum building height of 70 feet within PA-1; the current zoning restricts buildings to 25 feet. The ODP does not address a maximum building height elevation nor does it set a maximum number of stories above grade. In response to this condition, the applicant has provided a detailed written explanation in the Revised Project Narrative (pages 3-4) to reiterate why the proposed building heights are necessary for this mixed-use development concept. Included in this narrative are references to other existing mixed-use developments that were researched by the development team. The applicant has also made a case that 1) a majority of the parking will need to be located underground to maximize the commercial retail component of the project; and 2) this type of parking arrangement is only financially feasible with the proposed residential density of 12 DU/Ac. A breakdown of floor heights for similar mixed-use developments is also provided by the applicant in the narrative (page 4, paragraph 4). If the Board finds that 15-foot floor heights are reflective of a higher quality mixed-use development, then it may be appropriate to also limit the maximum number of stories (above grade) in addition to the maximum building height. As noted in earlier staff reports, cross-sections/elevations were not provided in the ODP to demonstrate the appearance of the proposed building heights for the mixed-use development. Although the applicant provided 3D model views, these provide no real guarantee that PA-1 will be developed as depicted. Further, there is no guarantee that foundations or finished floor elevations would be set at an elevation below existing grade. Vertically stacked uses could result in more efficient use of open space, but there is no guarantee that this will occur. In terms of building coverage, FAR, and open space, the ODP would permit a single story and/or a single use building at 75% building coverage. To maximize open space and encourage vertical mixed use, the building coverage should be less than the maximum permitted FAR. Staff has thus recommended as a condition of approval that the ODP define in respect to permitted building heights a not-to-exceed fixed elevation plane, a maximum building height, or a fixed number of floors (whichever is less). 3. Include a comprehensive narrative on utilities and state that sanitary sewer will require a main line extension across Parker Road. The following shall be depicted and clearly labeled on Sheet 2: 1) All existing and proposed water, sanitary sewer and storm sewer lines and easements. Staff Comment: Staff requested but did not receive a revised drainage report. The preliminary drainage design concept was determined to be acceptable but there were additional comments for the plan and report that remained to be addressed. Based on the written response to staff comments, it appears the comments have been addressed. However, without a copy of the most recent drainage report and drainage plan sheet, staff is unable to verify this and thus requires submission of this revised drainage report as a condition of approval. 4. The applicant shall enter into an Improvement Agreement to ensure the provision and construction of public improvements, off-site infrastructure, and on-site amenities. Staff Comment: An Improvement Agreement is required at the time of final subdivision plat, as per Section 60-2-80(c)(2). A narrative related to this topic is provided in the ODP under Public Improvements, including the statement that the agreement “will be executed at the time that the Final Development Plan is approved.” The applicant maintains they are unable to revise this time sequence, indicating “the appropriate time to enter into Page 6 an Improvement Agreement is at the time the Final Development Plan is approved.” This is inconsistent with the code requirement. Staff has thus recommended as a condition of approval the correction of language used in the Public Improvements section of the ODP to accurately reflect that the Improvement Agreement needs to be executed at the time of final subdivision plat. ODP REVIEW CRITERIA: Any official development plan shall be reviewed to ensure that the general public health, safety and welfare are safeguarded and for substantial conformance to the following applicable review criteria. Please note the applicant submitted a point-by-point memo, “Foxfield Town Center ODP: Conformance with Foxfield Municipal Code Section 16-2-80” that also addresses the criteria below. 1. The official development plan is consistent with the Town's Comprehensive Plan and other adopted plans. Staff Comment: The applicant has stated in the Revised Project Narrative (May 2, 2016) and Criteria Conformance Memo (May 16, 2016) that the proposed ODP will help achieve the Goals of the Comprehensive Plan by: Providing an alternative to single family development that would be heavily impacted by Parker Road. Raising sales tax revenue for the Town to address infrastructure improvements and property tax relief. Creating a development buffer for the interior single-family lots along Parker Road. Providing a trail link between Norfolk Court to the Arapahoe/Parker Road intersection. Staff previously identified and provided detailed comments related to four Master Plan policies relevant to the proposed PD (refer to page 11-12 of the initial staff report) including: Land Use, Roads/Transportation, Views and Trails/Open Space. Based on the initial analysis and the revisions that the applicant has made to the ODP, staff submits the following comments: The proposed development is located in an area that is identified by the Master Plan as a prime location for commercial and other uses. The applicant has made revisions to the ODP that now reserves a minimum of 70% of the ground floor level for retail uses, which generate sales tax revenue. The proposed Hotel use in PA-1 also offers another opportunity for the Town to generate additional tax revenue. Although the Town does not currently have a Lodging Tax, this is something that could be considered by the community to maximize the financial benefit of this development. The revised ODP now requires pedestrian connectivity between planning areas and internally within each planning area. Note that the proposed trail connection to the existing trail facilities located in the Town’s open space and the CDOT detention facility is now shown as a proposed 10foot trail rather than the 12-foot connection shown in prior ODPs. Traffic impacts to residential neighborhoods are being mitigated by restricting site access to S. Lewiston Way. As part of the PD Zoning approval, the applicant has submitted a proposed amendment to the Master Plan Land Use Map to designate the two parcels as Planned Mixed-Use. Impacts to existing western vistas are still likely. It is possible for views to be impacted by any building within this development, even buildings that are limited to 25 feet or 35 feet in height pursuant to the existing zoning. Finally, the applicant maintains that this development concept is based on the results that came out of the Economic Development Forum where participants identified a mixed-use development as an economic development opportunity that should be pursued in Foxfield. Page 7 2. The official development plan achieves the stated objectives of the Planned Development District, by allowing for the mixture of uses and greater diversity of building types, promoting environmental protection, limiting sprawl, improving design quality and a higher quality living environment, encouraging innovative design and a variety of housing types and managing the increase in demand for public amenities. Staff Comment: Staff analysis suggests that the ODP allows for the mixture of uses, a diversity of building types, and a housing type that is not currently available within the Town of Foxfield. In the applicant’s response to how this development achieves innovation in development that meets the growing demands of the area population, it states that the development concept has purposely not offered a development plan that separates uses with the hope of creating a true ‘Town Center’ and new neighborhood within Foxfield (refer to page 2, item #2, Revised Project Narrative). A complete analysis of the stated objectives for the PD Zone district was provided in the initial staff report (refer to pages 6-8.) To address some of the concerns that staff previously identified, the applicant has revised the architectural design standards to address screening and locational requirements for loading areas and trash enclosures. These standards now include a list of exterior building materials that are permitted or prohibited that will contribute to the overall design quality of the development. Per staff’s suggestion, a minimum requirement for private outdoor space in the form of a balcony or terrace is now required for each multi-family residential unit. Staff also believes the proposed development will provide an important public amenity in the new trail connection and proposed plaza areas. The ODP also now requires quantifiable amenities like benches, bike racks, trash receptacles and landscape planters. 3. The proposed land uses are compatible with other land uses in the development and with surrounding land uses in the area and the type, density and location of proposed land uses are appropriate based on the findings of any required report or analysis. Staff Comment: The ODP depicts the required 25-foot separation buffer between residential uses and nonresidential development as required by Section 16-3-130(a). The development concept plan also depicts the required landscaping within the use buffer area as required pursuant to Section 16-3-90. The proposed building heights within PA-2 of 35 feet are compatible with the permitted building height for principal structures. Note that these heights are currently already permitted on the site. The applicant is proposing significantly taller building heights on PA-1 with a maximum height of 70-feet. However, the Conceptual Drainage Plan depicts proposed site grading that would lower the existing high point elevation by approximately 10 feet. The applicant notes in the Criteria Conformance Memo that the proposed land uses are compatible with each other within the development, with the aim to create an urban neighborhood where neighborhood retail and services are supported by local residents and visitors. The applicant maintains the proposed commercial land uses are compatible with the adjacent Foxfield Village Center commercial development and other commercial developments in the area. The applicant further states that all proposed uses meet market demand based on market analysis. Several of the public comments from February 24, 2016 included a general concern over the proposed densities and multi-family type housing within both planning areas. The applicant has stated that the proposed residential density is a required financial component in order to maximize the commercial retail uses within of this development and ensure a successful mixed-use development (refer to page 4 ‘Building Height’, Revised Project Narrative). Page 8 4. The street design and circulation system are adequate to support the anticipated traffic and the proposed land uses do not generate traffic volumes which exceed the capacity of existing transportation systems or that adequate measures have been developed to effectively mitigate such impacts. Staff Comment: The applicant has stated that the ODP provides a number of traffic/circulation improvements over the existing PDP, as the existing zoning necessitated access to PA-2 from the existing residential neighborhood (refer to page 2, item #3, Revised Project Narrative). A traffic study was submitted with the PD Zoning application and is based on the proposed development program presented by the applicant on February 24, 2016. Based on this study, the existing street design and capacity seems adequate to support the anticipated traffic. The applicant has also stated that the access permit and access control line (A-line) applications have been submitted and are currently under review by CDOT. As previously stated this process could take up to a year to complete. Prior to recordation, the following note shall be included on the ODP: “No building permits shall be issued on PA-2 until CDOT has approved access from S. Lewiston Way.” Staff has recommended this as a condition of approval. 5. The official development plan adequately mitigates off-site impacts to public utilities facilities and the large lot residential development, which is the predominant land use within the Town. Staff Comment: The applicant has revised the ODP to provide staff with a general understanding of the utility infrastructure required to serve the proposed development. The Development Schedule note on sheet 1 of the ODP states that utilities will be extended to both planning areas within the development prior to the issuance of any building permits by the Town. Staff believes that the proposed extension of the sanitary sewer across Parker Road is an important public improvement that will also benefit future development opportunities within the Town. In an effort to mitigate off-site impacts to existing residential development, the applicant met with adjacent property owners to assess their existing views and work to identify primary concerns related to the proposed development. The applicant also developed a 3D model of the conceptual development and submitted photo simulations to provide the Town Board with an understanding of the proposed buildings and architectural detail. The applicant notes that the ODP mitigates off-site impacts by prohibiting development traffic from connecting directly into the residential neighborhood by way of Costilla Avenue and by providing a 25-foot wide landscape buffer along the east property boundary (Criteria Conformance Memo). The applicant states as well that land uses closest to existing large lot residential properties are limited in the ODP to senior housing or office with building heights matching authorized residential heights. The applicant notes the additional architectural standards that will provide a high quality development. The Town Engineer states that based on information provided, current layout and will serve letters are generally sufficient for this ODP submittal. Staff will expect to see all proposed utility connections, and subsequent impacts to neighboring properties, Town Right of Way, drainage facilities, etc., in the FDP submittal. Staff requested but did not receive a revised drainage report. As per the February 17, 2016 staff report: “Staff finds that conceptual drainage design presented by the applicant in the Phase I Drainage Report and Phase I Conceptual Drainage Plan is acceptable. The preliminary design of the drainage and water quality structures and the capture of stormwater is consistent with sound engineering design. However, staff finds that the applicant should revise the drainage report and the drainage plan to address the February 15, 2016 engineering comments and map redlines attached with this staff report.” Thus, the drainage design concept was determined to be acceptable but there were additional comments for the plan and report that remained to be addressed. Based on the written response to staff comments, it appears the comments have been Page 9 addressed. However, without a copy of the most recent drainage report and drainage plan sheet, staff is unable to verify this and thus requires submission of this revised drainage report as a condition of approval. 6. The fiscal impacts have been satisfactorily addressed and the Town or special district will be able to provide adequate levels of service for police and fire protection, street maintenance, snow removal and other public services or that adequate measures have been developed to effectively mitigate such impacts. Staff Comment: The Public Improvements section on sheet 4 of the ODP requires the applicant to enter into an Improvement Agreement that will ensure the construction of all public improvements, off-site infrastructure, on-site amenities and maintenance of common areas. On page 6 of the Revised Project Narrative, the applicant provides general information on the typical purpose of a metropolitan district in a mixed-use development project like Foxfield Town Center. Both the ODP and the narrative state that the applicant will address the issue of the metro district and the details of the infrastructure, services and amenities at the time of the Final Development Plan. However, the Improvement Agreement will actually be required as part of the Subdivision application process; it must be executed at the time of the final subdivision plat as per Section 60-2-80(c)(2). Staff has thus recommended this as a condition of approval. The ODP generally states a clear process of when and where these issues will be addressed by the applicant and the Town. It also provides a general understanding of the public improvements that will be required of this development. The applicant has also provided an updated sale tax table on page 6 of the Revised Project Narrative. This was revised from a previous version of this table to address a more realistic number for the potential sales tax revenue that might be generated if the proposed use and floor area requirements are applied to the buildings depicted in the Development Concept Plan, sheet 5 of the ODP. 7. Higher levels of amenities, including open spaces, parks, recreational areas and trails, will be provided to serve the projected population. Staff Comment: The ODP addresses a range of required development amenities (e.g., plazas, landscaping, site furnishings, etc.), open space, pedestrian connectivity and trails. The ODP provides a minimum of 25% open space, with a minimum 5% of open space to be plaza areas. It also requires the construction of a public trail facility. The ODP was revised to require a minimum 32 SF of private outdoor balcony or terrace space for each dwelling unit. The ODP was also revised to require connectivity between planning areas and internal pedestrian facilities within each planning area. The ODP addresses pedestrian connectivity to offsite facilities (i.e., between the existing park and the Arapahoe/Parker intersection). 8. The official development plan preserves significant natural features and incorporates these features into parks and open space areas. Staff Comment: The ODP does not identify any significant natural features that currently exist on this site. The Revised Project Narrative states that the site has experienced complete physical disturbance from the ramp construction for the Parker/Arapahoe Interchange. Staff believes that this criterion is not applicable to this particular PD Zoning Application. 9. There are special physical conditions or objectives of development that the proposal will satisfy to warrant a departure from the standard regulation requirements. Staff Comment: Section 16-2-70(a) requires the Planned Development to demonstrate that one or more of the listed purposes can be achieved from the proposed development. The applicant has provided a thorough response to each of the listed purposes in the Revised Project Narrative. The applicant has reasonably demonstrated how this development can achieve the following objectives: Page 10 Provision of necessary commercial facilities that are conveniently located to housing. The proposed revisions to the ODP ensure commercial facilities will be provided within PA-1, as residential uses are required to be located above the first floor of all buildings. The ODP reserves at least 70% of the first floor for retail uses that will generate needed revenue for the Town. Innovation in residential and commercial development so that the growing demands of the area population may be met by greater variety in type, design and layout of buildings and more efficient use of open space. The Foxfield Town Center mixed use development has the ability to accommodate multiple uses within the same building, which will result in more efficient use of open space. To maximize the open space within the development, the ODP will permit parking to be accommodated via a below grade parking structure. The proposed PD aims to meet the growing demands of the area population by providing a multi-family housing option that is not currently available within the Foxfield community. The applicant has also stated that optimizing open space by placing parking below grade is only financially feasible if the costs can be offset via the residential component of this development. A better distribution of induced traffic. The ODP prohibits vehicular access from E. Costilla Avenue except for limited emergency access, as needed. The applicant has also stated that the proposed access points on S. Lewiston Way are an improvement over the existing PDP, which permits access to PA-2 from S. Lewiston Way. 10. The applicant adequately demonstrates that the proposal is feasible and complies with all adopted development standards set forth in the official development plan and other requirements of this Chapter. In cases of conflicting provisions, the more restrictive shall apply. Staff Comment: Staff generally sees evidence that the applicant has demonstrated that the proposal is feasible and complies with applicable development standards. Where appropriate, the ODP includes references to various sections of the development standards with which the Foxfield Town Center will also comply (refer to the Design Standards on sheet 4 of the ODP). The applicant notes in the Criteria Conformance Memo that the applicant sought to create new land use and development standards for a mixed-use development that would be successful and competitive in the marketplace. ODP requirements are intended to ensure development of a project that has the ability to adapt to changing market conditions. However, the ODP does not comply with building height standards, principle permitted uses, the requirement to enter into an Improvement Agreement at the time of final subdivision plat, or the submission of a revised drainage plan. The ODP permits a maximum building height of 70 feet within PA-1; the current zoning restricts buildings to 25 feet. Medical/Dental Offices remain on the list of permitted uses in PA-2. Note that the ODP does include the requirement for an Improvement Agreement, however the time indicated is “at the time the Final Development Plan is approved” rather than at the final subdivision plat. Page 11 C. Board Action POTENTIAL MOTIONS FOR THE BOARD’S CONSIDERATION: Below are the possible motions regarding the PD Zoning/Official Development Plan application. These motions may be amended by the Board as necessary. a. The Town Board finds that the proposed PD Zoning and Official Development Plan is in substantial conformance with the applicable review criteria and APPROVES the application as submitted. Town staff shall prepare the required ordinance for Board approval. b. The Town Board finds that the PD Zoning and Official Development Plan is in substantial conformance with the applicable review criteria and moves to APPROVE the application subject to the following conditions: (The Board may modify, remove or add conditions as needed) 1) The ODP shall define all of the following stipulations in respect to the permitted building heights: Building heights in PA-1 shall not exceed an elevation plane of ________ feet, a maximum building height of 70 feet, or four stories above finished grade (whichever is less). Building heights in PA-2 shall not exceed an elevation plane of ________ feet, a maximum building height of 35 feet, or two stories above finished grade (whichever is less). 2) Permit and access control line (A-line) applications have been submitted and are currently under review by CDOT; final approval of CDOT permit must be obtained. 3) The Official Development Plan along with any additional plans, studies or reports shall be modified to address the following: a. Prior to recordation, the following note shall be included on the ODP: “No building permits shall be issued on PA-2 until CDOT has approved access from S. Lewiston Way.” b. The Public Improvements section of the ODP shall be amended in the first paragraph to read that the Improvement Agreement shall be executed at the time of final subdivision plat. c. All staff redlines shall be addressed. This shall include new redlines that are required as a result of revised or new information. 4) The applicant shall submit a copy of the most recent drainage report and drainage plan sheet. c. The Town Board finds that the proposed PD Zoning and Official Development Plan is not in substantial conformance with the applicable review criteria and moves to DENY the proposed Foxfield Town Center PD Application. ATTACHMENTS: Revised ODP Set Anadarko Letter RE: Conditional Withdrawal of Objection Revised Project Narrative Applicant Response to Remaining Issues ODP Criteria Conformance Memo Revised Conditions Status Table Page 12 5-20-16 Staff Report Status Table RE: Conditions of Approval Staff Report Section Reference Condition Status C.I.2.b.i The property owner shall resolve all issues with Anadarko Petroleum Corporation and submit a letter in writing from Anadarko stating resolution of the objection to the Master Plan Amendment and Official Development Plan approval. Addressed on May 2, 2016 C.I.2.b.ii The applicant shall enter into an Improvement Agreement to ensure the provision and construction of public improvements, off-site infrastructure, and on-site amenities. Unresolved C.I.2.b.iii The Official Development Plan along with any additional plans, studies or reports shall be modified to address: Staff Comment On April 14, 2016 Anadarko provided a letter withdrawing their initial objection to the current land use application. However, this withdrawal is conditional on a notification of future development applications. Unfortunately the Town code does not require notification of mineral rights owners during the subdivision or final development plan applications. Therefore, the applicant added a statement to the cover sheet of the ODP that will require notification of all mineral estate owners. A public improvements agreement shall be executed prior to the recordation of the required final subdivision plat. A narrative related to this topic is provided in the ODP under Public Improvements. However, the ODP states that this agreement shall be executed at the time of the final development plan rather than at the time of final subdivision plat as is required. C.I.2.b.iii.a The provision of safe pedestrian connectivity between PA-1 and PA-2. The ODP shall clearly state that safe and convenient pedestrian access between planning areas shall be provided. Addressed on 4/1/16 C.I.2.b.iii.b State that any reduction credits to the required minimum open space shall only be for facilities that are open to the general public or semi-public (i.e., for the residents of the development). Addressed on 4/1/16 See note #4 under the Development Stipulations Chart on sheet 3. C.I.2.b.iii.c The design standards shall specifically state that vehicular access shall not be permitted between E. Costilla Ave and the development except to allow limited emergency services access between the Addressed on 4/1/16 See note #5 under Site Circulation on sheet 4. 1 See note #7 under Site Circulation on sheet 4. Staff Report Section Reference Condition Status Staff Comment development and S. Lewiston way, as needed. C.I.2.b.iii.d To include a comprehensive narrative on utilizes and shall state that sanitary sewer will require a main line extension across Parker Road. The following shall be depicted and clearly labeled on Sheet 2: All existing and proposed water, sanitary sewer Unresolved and storm sewer lines and easements. The general proposed alignment of the sanitary sewer lines and the widths of the easements per ACWWA requirements. The applicant has added a new utility sheet with the above information; however, there are minor redline revisions requested by the Town Engineer. A revised drainage plan and report must be submitted so redline revisions can be confirmed. The location of the wastewater extension line and the existing lateral line on the west side of Parker Road. Addressed on 4/1/16 C.I.2.b.iii.e Resolve all conflicts between existing and proposed easements and the apparent callout discrepancy (sheet 6) for the sanitary sewer that is pointing to what appears to be a waterline. Addressed on 4/1/16 Sheet 5 of the ODP depicts and calls out the 8” sanitary sewer line. A note has also been included to state this utility line will be bored under Parker Road and will connect to the existing manhole (MH) at Cornerstar. Resolved—refer to ODP sheets 5 and 7. C.I.2.b.iii.f With respect to development phasing the ODP shall: State that utilities will need to be extended to the development, across PA-1 and to PA-2 prior to any building permits being issued by the Town Addressed on 4/1/16 Address the infrastructure improvements related to the agreement with the Jehovah’s Church and Foxfield Village Center. Addressed on 4/1/16 Clarification statement is provided in 4/13/16 ‘Applicant Response to suggested Staff Report Approval Conditions (page 3)’ Require construction of the proposed trail with the first development phase (regardless of the planning area). Addressed on 5/2/16 The statement provided in the ODP does not clearly state that the trail will be constructed as part of Phase 1. The applicant states they are unable to commit in this ODP that the public trail shall be constructed as part of the first phase of development, as it would be untimely. 2 Staff Report Section Reference Condition Status State that sidewalks along S. Lewiston Way, parking areas, open space, landscaping, and pedestrian connectivity may be permitted to be constructed in phases, as long as the minimum requirements correlate to the needs of the specific planning area as determined by Town staff at the time of the Final Development Plan Application. In the event that phasing occurs within an individual planning area an equal portion of the above listed items shall be developed for each phase. Addressed on 4/1/16 See note #6 under Site Circulation on sheet 4. C.I.2.b.iii.g Medical/Dental Offices or Clinics shall be removed from the permitted principal uses list in PA. These uses may be listed as an accessory use in PA-2. Unresolved C.I.2.b.iii.h The ODP shall require a revised and/or updated traffic study with the Final Development Plan application. Addressed on 4/1/16 The applicant has stated that removing Medical/Dental Offices from the permitted uses in PA-2 will not provide the flexibility that may be needed to address future changes in market conditions and still provide a quality development for the Town of Foxfield. Therefore, the applicant is requesting that the Board consider approval of the ODP with this remaining as a permitted use in PA-2. The applicant has also pointed out that Laboratories have been removed from the permitted uses list within PA-1. A detailed study of the traffic impacts is required as part of an FDP application. C.I.2.b.iii.i Revise the Site Circulation Design Standards (parking design) section of the ODP to reference Section 16-3-50 and state that surface parking is permitted. Addressed on 4/1/16 See note #3 under Architecture on sheet 4. C.I.2.b.iii.j The ODP shall establish standards regarding the permitted locations and architectural requirements for loading areas and refuse enclosures. Screening methods and permitted locations for mechanical equipment and other outdoor storage areas also needs to be defined. Addressed on 4/1/16 See note #6 under Architecture on sheet 4. 3 Staff Comment Staff Report Section Reference Condition Status Staff Comment C.I.2.b.iii.k Addressed Ensure that a portion of the development will be reserved for those uses that generate sales tax for on 5/2/16 the Town. The ODP shall be revised to ensure that the ground floor (or the following percentage of the ground floor _____) is reserved for uses that generate sales tax. Each use shall state the floor level where it is permitted (i.e. ground floor or any floor above the ground/plaza level.) C.I.2.b.iii.l Maximum square footage limits for an individual retail tenant shall be added to the ODP. Addressed on 4/1/16 The ODP also states under the PA-1 Principal Uses that the total square footage permitted for any individual retail tenant will be limited to 50,000 SF. C.I.2.b.iii.m Architectural standards shall list out the materials that are considered durable, low maintenance and project high quality. Addressed on 4/1/16 See note #2 under Architecture on sheet 4. C.I.2.b.iii.n Architectural standards shall be modified to require more than just the minimum code requirements and/or shall be indicative of the buildings depicted within the 3D Model Views. Standards shall include glazing/window transparency/display windows, variety of materials and colors, distinctive roof forms, change in vertical plane, and architectural elements (i.e. canopies, porticos, arches). Addressed on 4/1/16 The architectural standards in the ODP have been revised from the previous version and now require a minimum of 60% window transparency along ground floor facades and changes in materials/colors. The FDP will also be required to address the minimum architectural design elements located in Section 16-3-130. C.I.2.b.iii.o Require a minimum amount of plaza space to be provided (particularly in PA-1) with minimum standards for items like benches, trees/landscaped areas, bike racks, trash receptacles, etc. within required plaza areas. Addressed 5/2/16 The applicant revised the ODP to require that at least 5% of the development open space will be plaza areas for the use of residents and visitors to this development, if residential and hotel uses are constructed. C.I.2.b.iii.p Provide minimum requirements for private outdoor space (i.e. balconies, patios, or similar) for each multi-family dwelling unit. Addressed on 4/1/16 See note #3 under Open Space on Sheet 3. 4 The ODP states under the PA-1 Principal Uses that 70% of the ground floor area shall be reserved for retail, restaurant, drinking establishment/bars or similar sales tax generating uses. Staff Report Section Reference Condition Status Staff Comment C.I.2.b.iii.q Provide a minimum standard width for all sidewalks within the development, not just those within S. Lewiston Way. Addressed on 4/1/16 C.I.2.b.iii.r Provide limits on permitted number of stories, and/or building elevations demonstrating the proposed bulk/mass requirements of this ODP. Maximum building heights within PA-1 should be reduced to be no more than _______ feet. Unresolved C.I.2.b.iii.s Provide a narrative regarding the proposed organizational structure for ownership and maintenance of proposed common elements. Addressed on 4/1/16 C.I.2.b.iii.t Revise the trail alignment and provide a dedicated trail easement outside of the existing ACWWA easement. Addressed on 4/1/16 See note #4 under Site Circulation on sheet 4. Please note that the applicant has also revised the ODP to state that the 5-foot wide sidewalk along S. Lewiston Way will only be constructed if the pedestrian bridge is constructed. The applicant has provided a detailed written explanation in Revised Project Narrative (pages 3-4) to reiterate why the proposed building heights are necessary for this mixed-use development concept. Included in this narrative are references to other existing mixed-use developments that were researched by the development team. The applicant has also made a case that a majority of the parking will need to be located underground to maximize the commercial retail component of the project; and that structured parking is only financially feasible with the proposed residential density of 12 DU/Ac. The applicant provides an approximate breakdown of floor heights for a mixed-use building (refer to paragraph 4). The ODP does not address a maximum building height elevation nor does it set a maximum number of stories above grade. The applicant has revised the language under Public Improvements on sheet 4 of the ODP stating that the applicant will enter into an Improvement Agreement to ensure the maintenance of common areas. The written narrative also discusses how a metropolitan district can finance construction improvements and maintenance of common areas, pedestrian facilities, and internal roads as well as the proposed trail. Both the ODP and narrative stop short of stating that a Metro District is the proposed organizational structure for ownership and maintenance. The ODP states that the Improvement Agreement will set forth responsibility for trail construction and maintenance. The proposed alignment of the trail within the ACWWA easement should only remain as a concern if the Town is responsible for maintenance. C.I.2.b.iii.u All redlines shall be addressed. This shall include new redlines that are required as a result of revised or new information. Ongoing 5 May 2, 2016 Carrie McCool, Principal McCool Development Solutions, LLC 4383 Tennyson Street, Unit 1-D Denver, CO 80212 Foxfield Town Center-Project Narrative The Foxfield Town Center Partners LLC) is requesting Planned Development zoning to allow flexibility not possible under standard zone districts of Large Lot Rural Residential or Village Commercial. This higher quality development will demonstrate the purposes listed in Town Municipal Code, Section 16-2-70a: 1) The provision of necessary commercial facilities conveniently located to housing; 2) The encouragement of innovations in residential, commercial development so that the growing demands of the area population may be met by greater variety in type, design and layout of buildings and by the conservation and more efficient use of open space ancillary to said buildings; 3) A better distribution of induced traffic on the streets and highways; 4) Conservation of the value of the land 5) Preservation of the site’s natural characteristics. 1. The provision of necessary commercial facilities conveniently located to housing. The property is bisected by South Lewiston Way which has limited the ability to attract certain developers and/or builders or anchor tenants from locating at this site. The owner of this property is committed to advancing the development of the property and providing the Town of Foxfield with an opportunity to substantially increase its commercial and property tax base, by providing a commercial retail, residential and senior housing mixed use, currently unavailable within the Town. A positive potential for this multi-use development consisting of the commercial and residential uses is integrated into the Town via the Town’s trail system. One conceptual plan layout illustrates the potential for a pedestrian bridge over South Lewiston Way as one method to provide access to the retail and restaurant establishments in PA-1 from PA-2 as well as to a proposed pedestrian trail. Pedestrians would be able to utilize the commercial establishments within PA-1 from PA-2 without necessarily having to drive onto Arapahoe and Parker Roads to do so as well as have direct access to the trail. Another method to provide access to the retail and restaurant establishments in PA-1 from PA-2 as well as to the pedestrian trail contemplates the construction of a minimum 5’ paved walk that connects PA-2 to the trail that in turn connects to PA-1 through an underpass below S. Lewiston Way (which Foxfield Town Center Partners LLC will agree to do with conditions.) “Safe and convenient PLANMARK DESIGN LLC/ P.O. Box 202411, Denver, CO 80220/ 720.232.5081 May 2, 2016 Page 2 access” will need to be addressed at the FDP level and will vary depending on the final layout and approved uses. 2. The encouragement of innovations in residential, commercial development so that the growing demands of the area population may be met by greater variety in type, design and layout of buildings and by the conservation and more efficient use of open space ancillary to said buildings. The Foxfield Town Center ODP provides the opportunity to develop up to 170,000 SF of retail uses (sales tax generating space) and a maximum of 12 dwelling units per acre in Planning Area 1 (PA-1). Besides providing neighborhood convenience retail, some of this space could be used to provide recreational uses (such as a small fitness center for the residents) or educational uses as well as space for Town administration and public gatherings. The Foxfield Town Center ODP provides the opportunity to develop residential uses such as (senior housing) up to 20 dwelling units per acre in Planning Area 2 (PA-2). The senior housing component provides a compatible transitional use that will buffer the existing rural community from the residential and commercial uses planned to the west of South Lewiston Way. The Town’s Economic Forum identified senior housing as a desirable use and the applicant’s independent market study for this property confirmed a demand for this type of housing. The concept plan illustrates one scenario for this use based on research from similar type built projects in the metro area by developers such as Sunrise, Brookdale, Cranbrook and Morningstar where centers built on approximately 3 acre sites ranged in size from 60 units to 125 units. The concept plan for this ODP has purposely not offered a typical plan that separates uses into individual commercial pads or caters strictly to traffic on the nearby major roads. Instead, the goal is to provide a truly mixed use development that offers residential uses within the same buildings as retail, office and restaurants. With the hope of creating a true Town Center for Foxfield, it was important that this new neighborhood provided housing types that are not currently available in Foxfield including senior living in a site layout that provided sidewalks, outdoor plazas and water features as the highest and best use of the open space on the site. Placing the majority of parking under the buildings allows for more useful open space for residents and visitors. 3. A better distribution of induced traffic on the streets and highways. This ODP provides a number of improvements over the existing zoning related to traffic. Past plans necessitated access to portions of the site from the existing residential neighborhood. The Foxfield Town Center ODP designates all public access points from S. Lewiston Way. This will require a full turn intersection on S. Lewiston Street further improving the traffic circulation from the development by allowing residents and visitors to access both parcels from two directions without cutting through existing residential neighborhoods. PLANMARK DESIGN LLC/ P.O. Box 202411, Denver, CO 80220/ 720.232.5081 May 2, 2016 Page 3 4. Conservation of the value of the land. The value of the land is in its high visibility location adjacent to existing retail development and the residents of Foxfield. The highest and best use of the land contemplates a development that provides revenue to the Town of Foxfield as well as public benefits to the residents through trail connections, gathering places, and convenient neighborhood services. 5. Preservation of the site’s natural characteristics. The site has experienced complete physical disturbance from the construction of the ramps associated with the Parker/Arapahoe Interchange. While no natural characteristics remain, the opportunity exists to construct the site to create the most beneficial development for the Town of Foxfield. The proposed development will help achieve the Goals and Policies identified within the Comprehensive Plan. The Foxfield Town Center ODP falls within the Parker Road Sub-Area that was subject to the Town Master Plan Amendment #2 approved in 2008. The goals and policies related to the subarea consist of providing an alternative to single family development that would be heavily impacted by Parker Road, raise sales tax revenues for the Town for purposes of infrastructure improvements and property tax relief, and create a development buffer for interior single family lots along South Parker Road. All of these goals are achieved through the Foxfield Town Center ODP. In addition, this Amendment achieves the Town’s stated objective to obtain a trail link between Norfolk Court to the Arapahoe Road and Parker Road intersection. The Foxfield Town Center ODP commits to providing this trail link with conditions at an appropriate time. Other community wide planning policies include the land use policy of recognizing the Arapahoe/Parker intersection as a prime area to provide adjacent residential properties, not allowing cut through traffic to the neighborhood and to encourage creative and flexible planning for remaining undeveloped land. The Foxfield Town Center ODP responds positively to these policies. Additional Information related to specific issues: Building Height Successful mixed use development (a goal of the applicant and Town Economic Development Forum) is only achieved in multi-story structures that mix retail, office and residential uses. Market analysis performed for the Foxfield Town Center location indicates a demand for additional retail, office and residential uses including senior housing. PLANMARK DESIGN LLC/ P.O. Box 202411, Denver, CO 80220/ 720.232.5081 May 2, 2016 Page 4 A “concept plan” was prepared internally by the applicant to serve as a tool to inform the content of an ODP zoning document to allow for a true mixed use development. The “concept”, typically not part of a zoning document, represents only one possible scenario that illustrates the highest and best use of the property by creating the flexibility to respond to the demands of the real estate market. The concept plan is based on studies of other successful mixed use developments within the metropolitan area. While the exact mix of the amount of each use may vary for each project and its location, there are often certain minimums of each use that are required in order to create a feasible development. One goal for Foxfield Town Center was to maximize the commercial retail component of the project in order to generate the sales tax revenue for the Town of Foxfield. To achieve this, the “concept plan” maximizes the limited amount of area of Planning Area 1 (PA-1) for commercial use, by placing the majority of parking underground which only becomes financially feasible if residential units are maximized as well. For PA-1, this resulted in allowing a density of 12 du/ac and a building height of 70’. This height was determined by researching the current industry standards for high quality development of retail, office, and residential uses. Similar built projects in the metropolitan area were researched. The mixed use project at Dry Creek Road and I-25, called Vallagio most clearly resembles the high quality development contemplated. Vallagio is a mixed use project with loft style residential use and underground parking. The mixed use building has the approximate breakdown for floor heights: retail commercial levels vary from 12’-24’ based on grading, three residential floors at 11’ (including mechanical and structural floor elements) with an 11’ high residential style pitched roof for a total maximum height of 69.5’. Zoning permits a maximum height of 100’. Other mixed use projects at I-25 and Hampden (60’- flat roof) and in Boulder (64’flat roof) were examined, but were considered undesirable in light of the high quality development envisioned. This scenario has been illustrated in a 3D model that placed the finished grade for PA-1 buildings at 8’ – 10’ below the existing grade and the finished grade for PA-2 buildings at 16’ – 18’ below existing grade, though the ultimate final grades for both PA-1 and PA-2 buildings will have to be determined during the Final Development Plan approval process. Viewpoints were established from two locations within the public right-of-way of S. Norfolk St. per the Town’s Master Plan. Two adjacent property owners also identified the locations for each of their viewpoints. One property owner had views of the property that were already obstructed by her own as well as adjacent property owner landscaping. The other property owner had a view of the property which was also obstructed by his/her own existing landscaping in addition to a view of the property which is temporarily unobstructed until such time as additional pine trees planted on his/her western boundary grow to full potential. He/she additionally have a garage on their property on their western boundary which obstructs their southwesterly views. Pedestrian Access Under the heading of Site Circulation in the ODP, we have added the statement that: “Safe and convenient pedestrian connection between planning areas would be provided should residential uses be constructed on both planning areas at the proposed densities. This PLANMARK DESIGN LLC/ P.O. Box 202411, Denver, CO 80220/ 720.232.5081 May 2, 2016 Page 5 is defined as a pedestrian route that is continuously paved and clearly marked to indicate the location to cross S. Lewiston Way. Connection of the proposed sidewalk to the trail that passes under S. Lewiston Way will require the Town to grant right-of-way use permits, or temporary construction easements, as needed, to complete the construction of the trail or sidewalks on Town Center property. The trail as shown on the plans is mainly located on the Foxfield Town Center property. Necessary easements and permits related to the trail and connections will be evaluated during the FDP process once exact locations have been determined. The final design would be illustrated on the Final Development Plan.” Vehicular Access Complying with the Town’s desire to prohibit vehicular access to PA-2 from E. Costilla Avenue and provision of additional site access for emergency (fire department) response requires the ODP to indicate the location of two access points on PA-2 along S. Lewiston Way. PA-2 access is described as right-in/right-out (the additional access per fire department requirement located on north side of PA-2) and full-movement access (located across from the full-movement access established for PA-1). Access along S. Lewiston Way is controlled by the Colorado Department of Transportation (CDOT) and PA-2 access is the subject of an access permit and access control line (a-line) modification application currently being reviewed by CDOT. The applicant’s team is aware of access application requirements and has met with CDOT’s access engineer several times over the past year to discuss proposed site access including access design requirements. These discussions have included CDOT procedures for permitting of site access and modification to the established a-line located along the west side of PA-2. Every indication, either verbal or written, is that CDOT has no objection to site access being proposed for PA-2. It is understood that the only item needing resolution at this time in order for CDOT to process site access permit applications is approval of the requested a-line modification. CDOT has described how approval of such an a-line modification needs review and approval by all of CDOT specialty units, CDOT management and the Transportation Commission. CDOT also describes how the a-line modification is lengthy and could take up to a year to complete. Through recent conversation with the applicant’s team, CDOT has requested submittal of the a-line modification request to continue the review and approval process, which a-line modification request has been submitted by applicant. Utilities The applicant has initiated multiple meetings with ACWWA prior to the Cornerstar development and the CDOT interchange construction. Agreements exist with ACWWA which dictate that once sanitary service is available to the east side of Parker Road properties in addition to this project will be connected to the new system. These discussions will continue with ACWWA and will be described in further detail as this proposal is advanced. The applicant has continued to plan the extension of the sanitary sewer bored under Parker Road in a similar manner as the water line was bored for the CDOT interchange. The existing water lines (along the perimeter of this project) were upgraded as a result of the CDOT interchange. Off-site detention (within the loop ramp infield) in addition to the box culvert was designed and constructed which incorporated the imperviousness planned for this site and the upstream tributary basin. PLANMARK DESIGN LLC/ P.O. Box 202411, Denver, CO 80220/ 720.232.5081 May 2, 2016 Page 6 Metropolitan District Typical of mixed use development projects is the creation of a metropolitan district. These are special purpose districts that finance improvements and which provide two or more governmental functions or services, which can include maintenance of common areas, a pedestrian overpass, trails, street and road construction, maintenance and repair; signalization; and park and recreation services including trail maintenance. The final development plan for Foxfield Town Center will be the phase of the development process where the Improvement Agreement between the Town and developer will be detailed along with the provisions for a metropolitan district. The metropolitan district is governed by an entirely separate Board of Directors consisting of five property owners or persons residing within the district. The metropolitan district will hold separate elections from the elections for Town offices. The formation of a metropolitan district would provide flexibility in the provision of governmental services, which could be done in a number of ways including intergovernmental agreements between the Town and the metropolitan district. Tax Revenue The applicant retained Economic Planning Systems to analyze the concept plan and provide an estimate for sales tax revenues that could potentially be generated by the development. Here are the tables for Sales Tax projections: Foxfield Town Center Projected Sale Tax Revenue Description Retail Sq. Ft. Sales per Sq. Ft. Gross Sales % Taxable* Taxable Sales Sales Tax Revenue* 44,070 $250 $11,017,500 90% $9,915,750 $371,841 Restaurant Total 12,000 $350 $4,200,000 100% $4,200,000 $157,500 56,070 $15,217,500 $14,115,750 $529,341 *Sales Tax Rate 3.75% *90% taxable for retail assumes some non-retail uses PLANMARK DESIGN LLC/ P.O. Box 202411, Denver, CO 80220/ 720.232.5081 May 2, 2016 Page 7 Lodging Tax Projection Maximum Hotel Rooms Average Rate* Occupancy Rate * Total Lodging Tax (Arapahoe County) Portion to Town Projected Annual Revenue 120 rooms $135 68.3% 12.25% 8.00% $323,244 *State of Colorado Hotel Statistics Report 2014 This narrative summarizes the ODP application’s compliance with code policies, master plan policies and provides discussions on specific issues identified by the Town Board requiring more detailed information. Yours truly, PLANMARK DESIGN LLC Mark E. Nemger, AICP Principal PLANMARK DESIGN LLC/ P.O. Box 202411, Denver, CO 80220/ 720.232.5081 May 2, 2016 Carrie McCool Town Planner, Town of Foxfield, Colorado 4383 Tennyson Street Unit 1-D Denver, CO 80212 RE Remaining Issues: Foxfield Town Center ODP Dear Carrie, In our discussions with Brea Pafford and Cheryl Kuechenmeister on April 12, 2016, we were able to identify certain remaining issues about which the Town had a concern. We reviewed those concerns and responded with our letters of April 13 and 14, 2016. Additionally, we received from Brea a copy of the 2-17-16 Staff Report Status Table RE: Conditions of Approval and proposed redlined revisions to the ODP, and the SEH Engineering Review for Foxfield Town Center 04-08-2016 with proposed ODP redlines, Phase I Drainage Report and Project Narrative Revisions. This is in response to the issues raised as well as to the submittals by the Town. 1. Anadarko Letter Regarding the request for a revised letter from Anadarko, the revised Letter from Anadarko dated April 14, 2016 to Brea Pafford, Town Planner, is attached. 2. Minimum Plaza Area Requirement Typically open space requirements limit the amount of impervious surfaces, however, to accommodate the Town’s request for a minimum of hardscaped plaza areas, we propose: A minimum of 5% of the open space area must be plaza areas for use by the residents and guests if residential or hotel uses are constructed. This note has been added to the ODP. 3. Pedestrian Connectivity You acknowledged that we offered options for connectivity based on our ODP. We clarified that a section of sidewalk shown on the west side of S. Lewiston Way in PA-1 would only be constructed in the event that a pedestrian bridge was built over Lewiston Way. For further clarification, connections to the public trail will be provided through the internal sidewalk system in PA-1 or PA-2. PLANMARK DESIGN LLC/ P.O. Box 202411, Denver, CO 80220/ 720.232.5081 May 2, 2016 Page 2 One scenario for PA-1 is depicted in the Concept Plan on Sheet 2 of 7. One scenario for PA2 is depicted in the Concept Plan on Sheet 2 of 7. The new descriptive phrase on Sheet 2 of 7 of the ODP now reads for the potential trail and PA-1 connection as follows: “Potential Pedestrian Connection to Public Trail and PA-1. This trail connection may be replaced with a suitable alternative as approved with the Final Development Plan.” And this note added on Sheet 5 of 7: “Potential Pedestrian Bridge Connection to Public Trail and PA-1. This trail connection may be replaced with a suitable alternative as approved with the Final Development Plan.” 4. Building Height The Town prefers that this ODP establish a maximum elevation above sea level for all structures rather than a maximum building height in feet. Upon further review of grading issues regarding the development, however, and in an effort to build in flexibility to obtain a high quality development which is commercially feasible, building heights in the ODP remain at 70 Feet in PA 1 and 35 Feet in PA 2 based upon final grading, drainage, building architecture and proximity to adjacent roadways and access locations. The Building Height Narrative in the Revised Foxfield Town Center – Project Narrative dated May 2, 2016, addresses this issue. 5. Tax Revenue- Lodging Tax In addition to retail sales tax revenue, the hotel use permitted in PA-1 would generate lodging tax revenue. This projection is now provided in the Project Narrative. The ODP use permitted in PA-1 is 120 rooms. 6. Tax Revenue-Property Tax Property Tax Projections have been removed from the Project Narrative per Town Planner request. 7. Tax Revenue- 70% of ground floor space The EPS calculation for retail and restaurant revenue is based on our concept plan; however, we have adjusted the calculation to assume a minimum of 70% of the first floor is generating sales tax revenue from retail and restaurant use. We have deleted the proposed redlined language under Paragraph B. Planning Area Land Uses; Planning Area 1 (PA-1) Principal Permitted Uses; on Sheet 3 of 7 which reads as follows: PLANMARK DESIGN LLC/ P.O. Box 202411, Denver, CO 80220/ 720.232.5081 May 2, 2016 Page 3 “A minimum of 70% of all ground floor area in habitable structures shall be used for generation of sales tax revenue.” We have inserted the following proposed redline language in its place as requested: “A minimum of 70% of all habitable ground floor/plaza level shall be reserved for retail, restaurant, drinking establishment/bars or similar sales tax generating uses.” The proposed redlined revision adding the word “uses” under the Development Stipulation Chart on Sheet 3 of 7 has been added to the ODP. 8. Metro District Language regarding discussion of new residents generated by this development has been removed from the Project Narrative per Town Planner request. 9. Access Language for ODP We have added the following note to the ODP: “The Official Development Plan shows two access points to PA-2 from South Lewiston Way; the precise location of each access point will be determined through the final development plan process. (See sheets 2 and 5 of the Foxfield Town Center ODP). These access points will require two breaks in the controlled access line (“A-Line”) originally approved by the Colorado Department of Transportation (“CDOT”) because South Lewiston Way provides access from South Parker Road. Approval of the breaks in the A-Line by CDOT and the Federal Highway Administration will be required and is expected by the applicant.” 10. Mineral Estate Holder Language for ODP We have deleted Item #2 under Specific Notes on Sheet 1 of 7 of the ODP per the proposed redline revision and have added the following paragraph under Development Schedule on ODP Sheet 1 of 7 and not the proposed redline revision. MINERAL RIGHT OWNER NOTIFICATION “No less than thirty days prior to the date scheduled for the first public hearing on the application for approval of a Final Development Plan or Subdivision Plat, Applicant shall provide notice to mineral estate holders as required in section 24-65.5-103, C.R.S. Any development objections submitted to the Town from mineral estate holders shall be resolved by the Applicant prior to final approval.” 11. Improvements Agreement Language for ODP We have deleted the phrase “developers agreement” in the second paragraph under Public Improvements and inserted the phrase “Improvement Agreement”. PLANMARK DESIGN LLC/ P.O. Box 202411, Denver, CO 80220/ 720.232.5081 May 2, 2016 Page 4 We have added the following paragraph after the last paragraph under Public Improvements: “All expenditures called for by the Improvement Agreement are for “Public or Public Related Purposes” as defined by Section 4-5-30 of the Town Code or its successor provisions including without limitation all expenditures for pedestrian bridges and that portion of the trail system dedicated for public use within the area subject to the Improvement Agreement. These expenditures for Public or Public Related Purposes pursuant to the Improvement Agreement shall be eligible for incentives from the Town on an equal basis as any similarly situated development within the Town of Foxfield; such incentives shall include but not be limited to the “Enhanced Sales Tax Incentive Program” (ESTIP”) established under Section 4-5-10 of the Town Code or its successor provisions.” We were unable to adopt the proposed redline revision to the first paragraph under Public Improvements on ODP Sheet 4 of 7 in that the appropriate time to enter into an Improvement Agreement is at the time the Final Development Plan is approved. 12. Construction of the Proposed Trail - Language for ODP The paragraph under Development Schedule on ODP Sheet 1 of 1 has been deleted in its entirety and the following paragraph has been substituted in its place: “Phases for development will be depicted in the Final Development Plan. Utilities shall be extended to the development across PA-1 and to PA-2 prior to any building permits being issued by the Town. The trail location will be identified on the approved FDP of PA-1. The construction of the trail will commence after the utilities, buildings and improvements in PA1 are in place.” Our Team has concluded that we are unable to commit in this ODP that the public trail shall be constructed as part of the first phase of development after all utilities have been installed; consequently, we are unable to adopt the proposed relined revisions on Sheet 1 of 1 of the ODP which pertains to this issue. Our Team has further concluded that we must first address the constraints associated with the Foxfield Town Center Development within PA-1 before designing the trail, including but not limited to the final grading, trail location and required retaining walls as well as the trail’s proximity to buildings, fences, walls, drainage facilities and utilities. We must also ensure the completion of the infrastructure improvements, building construction, and wall/fence construction as contemplated in the ODP and not place at risk, in any way, the planned location, size, density, and configuration of the development because of the trail. Constructing the trail at the time utilities are extended but before buildings and improvements are in place puts the cart before the horse and allows the tail to wag the dog. 13. Attached is our Project Narrative, Response to SEH Engineering Review for Foxfield Town Center 04-08-2016 and ODP. PLANMARK DESIGN LLC/ P.O. Box 202411, Denver, CO 80220/ 720.232.5081 May 2, 2016 Page 5 We will also send to you within the next few days an ODP Criteria Sheet with Applicant support for compliance. Yours truly, PLANMARK DESIGN LLC Mark E. Nemger, AICP Principal PLANMARK DESIGN LLC/ P.O. Box 202411, Denver, CO 80220/ 720.232.5081 Foxfield Town Center ODP Conformance with Foxfield Municipal Code Section 16-2-80 The following ten items are those review criteria listed in the Town Code used by the Board of Trustees in evaluating and approving Official Development Plan (ODP) applications. Any Official Development Plan shall be reviewed to ensure that the general public health, safety and welfare are safeguarded by substantial conformance to the following applicable review criteria: (1) The Official Development Plan is consistent with the Town's Comprehensive Plan and other adopted plans. Accompanying this ODP Application is an Application for an Amendment to the Town’s Comprehensive Master Plan which would allow Mixed Use Development Zoning if approved. The Town’s Economic Forum identified a desire for Mixed Use Zoning as well as the need to increase tax revenue for the Town. A more detailed report in support of the conformance of both the Application for Amendment to the Town’s Comprehensive Master Plan and the ODP Application to the overall goals and criteria identified in Foxfield Municipal Code Section 16-2-80 can be found in the Applicant’s Project Narrative dated May 2, 2016. Some of the most relevant arguments found in that Narrative in support of conformance are set forth below: The Foxfield Town Center ODP falls within the Parker Road Sub-Area that was subject to the Town Master Plan Amendment #2 approved in 2008. The goals and policies related to the sub-area consist of providing an alternative to single family development that would be heavily impacted by Parker Road, raise sales tax revenues for the Town for purposes of infrastructure improvements and property tax relief, and create a development buffer for interior single family lots along South Parker Road. All of these goals are achieved through the Foxfield Town Center ODP. In addition, the Comprehensive Plan Amendment achieves the Town’s stated objective to obtain a trail link between Norfolk Court to the Arapahoe Road and Parker Road intersection. The Foxfield Town Center ODP commits to providing this trail link with conditions at the appropriate time. Other community wide planning policies include the land use policy which recognizes the Arapahoe/Parker intersection as a prime area to provide commercial uses that are adjacent to existing residential properties but does not allow cut through traffic to the neighborhood. The land use policy also encourages creative and flexible planning for remaining undeveloped land. The Foxfield Town Center ODP achieves these policy objectives. For these reasons as well as for those additional reasons set forth in the Applicant’s Project Narrative dated May 2, 2016, the Official Development Plan is both consistent with and substantially conforms to the Town’s Comprehensive Plan and other adopted plans. (2) The Official Development Plan achieves the stated objectives of the Planned Development District by allowing for the mixture of uses and greater diversity of building types promoting environmental protection, limiting sprawl, improving design quality and a higher quality living environment, encouraging innovative design involving a variety of housing types and managing the increase in demand for public amenities. The Applicant’s Project Narrative dated May 2, 2016, discusses each of these stated objectives of the Planned Development District in detail. In summary: This ODP allows for a mixture of uses and diversity of building types which is the main goal of a Planned Development District. Sprawl and environmental impacts are naturally limited, and environmental protection promoted, by the increased density, compact site design and energy efficiency that the ODP promotes. Quality design and a higher quality living environment will be achieved through the creation of a true Mixed Use Town Center which encourages innovative design involving a variety of housing types with set requirements for architectural massing and materials and treatment of open spaces. The ODP specifies ratios for providing site amenities such as benches, bike racks, trees and plaza areas that both addresses the increase in demand for public amenities and results in a high quality environment for both residents and visitors. Internal pedestrian connections will link to the completion of the public trail segment through this property. For these reasons, the Official Development Plan achieves and substantially conforms to the stated objectives of the Planned Development District as set forth above. (3) The proposed land uses are compatible with other land uses in the development and with surrounding land uses in the area and the type, density and location of proposed land uses are appropriate based on the findings of any required report or analysis. The proposed land uses are compatible with each other within the development because the concept is to create an urban neighborhood where neighborhood retail and services are supported by the residents living in the units above the commercial uses, by residents and visitors of the senior center and by hotel guests should this use be constructed. Additionally, the proposed commercial land uses are compatible with the adjacent Foxfield Village Center commercial development as well as the surrounding existing commercial developments on all the other quadrants of the Arapahoe Road and Parker Road intersection and are of a type, density and location which are appropriate and necessary to ensure a successful mixed use development. Proposed residential uses are at a density higher than existing Foxfield rural residential uses but are at a level that is also appropriate and necessary to ensure a successful mixed use development. Proposed senior housing also provides a transitional use and buffer between the existing low density residential uses and mixed use commercial uses. All the proposed uses meet market demand based on market analysis. Architectural and site planning standards specified in the ODP will ensure that compatibility is visually maintained through site design, architectural materials and landscaping. The ODP proposed land uses comply with and substantially conform to this requirement. (4) The street design and circulation system are adequate to support the anticipated traffic and the proposed land uses do not generate traffic volumes which exceed the capacity of existing transportation systems or that adequate measures have been developed to effectively mitigate such impacts. The Traffic Impact Study submitted with this Application provides detailed information on the existing and background traffic volumes (projected traffic increases without proposed development traffic) that is then compared and analyzed with the projected traffic impacts based on the proposed development and general projected traffic increases. The existing street design, network, and circulation system are adequate to support the anticipated traffic volume and have the capacity to safely handle all additional traffic volume with projected numbers extending to the year 2036. Additionally, adequate measures have been developed to effectively mitigate any potential adverse traffic impacts to the Town by basing this Traffic Impact Study on a proposed design which accesses the two planning areas (PA-1 and PA-2) from South Lewiston Way only, foreclosing any possible connection through the existing adjacent residential neighborhood from Costilla Avenue. The Traffic Impact Study confirms that the proposed land uses on PA-1 and PA-2 do not generate traffic volumes which exceed the capacity of existing transportation systems. The ODP and Traffic Impact Study submitted with this Application substantially comply with and conform to this requirement. (5) The official development plan adequately mitigates off-site impacts to public utilities facilities and the large lot residential development, which is the predominant land use within the Town. The extension of utilities to this site as the project is constructed will allow the adjacent Foxfield Village Center commercial development to the north and the existing Jehovah Witness Church to the south to tie into a new sanitary sewer system as well as increase overall capacities. No off-site impacts to public utilities are anticipated and the improved connections will result in a more efficient system. The extension of the sanitary sewer system will also allow the Jehovah Witness Church to the south to transition from an existing septic system to a new conventional sanitary sewer system; a safeguard in the interest of the public health, safety, and welfare of the Town. The Foxfield Town Center ODP property is not suitable for large lot residential development but is uniquely situated to provide the Town with a mixed use development due to its visibility and access to the Parker/Arapahoe intersection. This ODP mitigates off-site impacts by prohibiting development traffic from connecting directly into the residential neighborhood by way of Costilla Avenue and by providing a 25’ wide landscape buffer along the east property boundary adjacent to two existing large lot residential properties. In addition, the ODP limits land uses closest to two existing large lot residential properties to senior housing or office with building heights matching authorized residential heights. It is important to note in this regard that one adjacent property owner (Patterson) had potential views of the ODP property that were already obstructed by her own as well as her adjacent property owner’s landscaping while the other property owner (Hopkins) had a potential view of the ODP property which was also obstructed by his/her own existing landscaping. The view that the Hopkins do have of the ODP property are depicted in a viewshed on Sheet 6 of 7 of the ODP which will eventually also be obstructed as additional pine trees already planted on his/her western boundary in the viewshed grow to full potential. He/she additionally have a garage on their property on their western boundary which already obstructs their southwesterly views. The ODP also sets more stringent architectural standards that specify building forms and materials that will provide a high quality development. Developing these parcels to their highest and best use is a benefit to the Town of Foxfield through increased tax revenue, convenience retail and public amenities including the possible completion of a public trail segment with conditions. For these reasons, the ODP adequately mitigates off-site impacts to public utilities facilities and the large lot residential development land use within the Town and substantially conforms to this requirement. (6) The fiscal impacts have been satisfactorily addressed and the Town or special district will be able to provide adequate levels of service for police and fire protection, street maintenance, snow removal and other public services or that adequate measures have been developed to effectively mitigate such impacts. Mixed use development projects often go hand in hand with the formation of a Metropolitan District to provide adequate levels of service for police and fire protection, street maintenance, snow removal and other public services, to all common areas and public amenities constructed, in order to effectively mitigate any possible fiscal impacts to the Town or Municipality involved. The creation of a Metropolitan District is discussed in greater detail in Applicant’s Public Narrative dated May 2, 2016. Applicant contemplates the creation of a Metropolitan District for this purpose at the appropriate time. The proposed Mixed Use Development will also generate a significant amount of sales tax, property tax and potential lodging tax revenue to the Town. The ODP and Applicant’s Public Narrative dated May 2, 2016 satisfactorily address any potential fiscal impact to the Town, how adequate levels of public service will be provided, and the benefits to the Town of increased sales tax revenue and substantially conforms to this requirement. (7) Higher levels of amenities, including open spaces, parks, recreational areas and trails, will be provided to serve the projected population. The ODP provides for the possibility of the construction of a public trail connection to the larger community trail network should the ODP be approved by the Town without limiting the height and density requirements as set forth on the Development Stipulation Chart on page 3 of 7 of the ODP. The ODP provides the required amount of public plaza space and amenities which include open space. Very significantly, the Concept Plan proposed by the Applicant contemplates 54% of the property as open space. Landscape requirements are also specified for all open space areas including the buffering of existing residential uses. The internal pedestrian sidewalk network will connect residents and visitors to the public trail network. Residents will also have a minimum requirement for private outdoor space. The ODP provides a higher level of amenities which includes open spaces, recreational areas and trails to serve the projected population and substantially conforms to this requirement. (8) The official development plan preserves significant natural features and incorporates these features into parks and open space areas. Due to the construction of South Lewiston Way and the ramp connecting Arapahoe Road to northbound Parker Road, the site has been completely disturbed through regrading; therefore no natural features remain to be preserved. Existing circumstances render this criteria inapplicable. (9) There are special physical conditions or objectives of development that the proposal will satisfy to warrant a departure from the standard regulation requirements. Standard regulations do not meet the Town’s special objectives to provide a Mixed Use Development for the citizens of Foxfield and maximize the opportunities to increase sale tax revenues because current zoning promotes a suburban commercial model catering to the adjacent automobile traffic and regional character of the Parker /Arapahoe intersection. However, the limitations of the physical site and its configuration require a departure from standard regulations so that a vertical mix of commercial and residential uses can be constructed along with underground parking and urban amenities. The Foxfield Town Center ODP specifies the new regulations and standards by which the mix of proposed uses is constructed and promotes the Town’s objectives by requiring that a minimum of 70% of all first level commercial space be reserved for uses that generate sale tax revenue. The ODP substantially conforms to this requirement. (10) The applicant adequately demonstrates that the proposal is feasible and complies with all adopted development standards set forth in the official development plan and other requirements of this Chapter. In cases of conflicting provisions, the more restrictive shall apply. The ODP provides land use and development standards based on a feasible Concept Plan that the Applicant has created with the assistance of real estate development professionals, planners, engineers, and market analysts. It is important to note in this regard that the Town had no land use and development standards for a Mixed Use Development at the time its Economic Forum identified the need for Mixed Use Development within the Town; consequently it was incumbent upon the Applicant to create new land use and development standards for a Mixed Use Development which would be successful and competitive in the marketplace. Where new standards have not been specified, the requirements of the Town Code will apply. It is also important to note that the ODP requirements allow for the appropriate and necessary flexibility to ensure the ability to develop a project for the Town that has the ability to adapt to changing market conditions. The ODP substantially conforms to this requirement. A NADARKO P ETROLEUM C ORPORATION M AIN (720) 929-6000 1099 18 T H S TREET, S UITE 1800 • D ENVER , C OLORADO 80202 April 14, 2016 VIA E-MAIL Brea Pafford, Town Planner 4383 Tennyson Street, Unit 1D Denver, CO 80212 brea@mccooldevelopment.com ANADARKO LAND CORP. CONDITIONAL OBJECTION WITHDRAWAL Re: Foxfield Master Plan and Official Development Plan Township 5 South, Range 66 West Section 29 (“Property”) Arapahoe County, Colorado Ms. Pafford: Anadarko Land Corp. (“Anadarko”) filed an objection letter dated February 18, 2016, with the Town of Foxfield (“Town”). Anadarko is the owner of certain mineral resources underlying all or parts of Section 29, Township 5 South, Range 66 West (“Property”), for which the Town is reviewing a proposed amendment to the Foxfield Master Plan and an Official Development Plan. Since submitting the letter, Anadarko has had the opportunity to discuss the matter with the Applicant; therefore, Anadarko is willing to withdraw the objection under the condition that Anadarko receives future notification/s of a Final Development Plan application. Because no agreement has been reached between Anadarko and the Developer (together the “Parties”) that covers the Property, upon the Town’s receipt of an application for a Final Development Plan of the Property, Anadarko requests that the Town make any approval of said plan conditioned upon an agreement among the Parties. Please contact me at 832-636-2726 if you have any questions or comments about this matter. Sincerely, ANADARKO PETROLEUM CORPORATION Don Ballard Minerals Land Manager cc: Jeff Fiske, Lead Counsel Paul Ratliff Cliff Schroeder (cpspcms@aol.com)