HomeMy WebLinkAbout3.0 BOCC Staff Report 11.15.2004• Exhibits for Jenks Exemption
BOCC Public Hearing held on 11/15/04 (continued from 10/4/04)
Exhibit Letter
(A to Z)
Exhibit
A
Mail Receipts
B
Proof of Publication
C
Garfield County Zoning Regulations of 1978, as amended
D
Garfield County Subdivision Regulations of 1984, as amended
E
Garfield County Comprehensive Plan of 2000
F
Application materials
G
Staff Memorandum
H
Review Memo: Burning Mountain Fire District
I
Review Memo: US Corps of Engineers
J
Review Memo: Garfield County Vegetation
K
Letter: High Country Engineering, November 8, 2004
1JeAP
L
Driveway Permit: Garfield County Road and Bridge De .
M (-71'
'( '
N
/
/
Jenks — Exemption from the Definition of Subdivision
11/15/04, Continued 10/4/04
•
•
BOCC 11/15/04 — JH
(continued to meeting above) BOCC 10/4/04 — JH
PROJECT INFORMATION AND STAFF COMMENTS
REQUEST Exemption from the Definition of Subdivision
APPLICANT Timothy Jenks
ACCESS & LOCATION County Road 245 for the eastern Parcel #2 and
Elk Ridge Dr for the western parcel #1, AKA as
Parcel 3, West Elk Creek Ranches, Mountain
Parcels, SW 1/4 of the NW 1/4 of Section 12,
Township 4 South, Range 92 West, 6th Prime
Meridian, to Garfield County
SITE DATA 36.52 acres
WATER Well (shared)
SEWER ISDS - Individual Sewage Disposal System
EXISTING ZONING ARRD
ADJACENT ZONING ARRD / Open Space (USDA Forest Service)
PARCEL 2 WEST 110 RANCHES
08 42 Atre4
N 80'56'44' 4 1812.08
PARCEL. 3 WEST ELF RA NCR EN
14644 Acre,
PARCEL
31 72 Acre;
12
4fl E 18:14
N 00400'41 E
174'1'
80 00
383 70'
404 21'
}
14:105:i' N 80'5ft'4B'
it \` li4 812
Figure 1. Proposed exemption parcels 1 and 2 shown with CR 245 traversing north to south.
1
Jenks — Exemption from the Definition of Subdivision
11/15/04, Continued 10/4/04
• •
• I. PROPOSAL BACKGROUND
On October 4, 2004 the Applicant was present at the Board of County Commissioners
for a public hearing for a request for an exemption to the definition of subdivision. It
was decided that the applicant was deficient in several areas as noted below and
requested a 30 -day continuance to generate new information. Staff requested this new
information to be submitted in advance of the meeting for review and for consideration
within this staff report.
Onber : " r� % is �plicant submitted new information in narrative and
drawing or r (Exhibit K) hich attempts to argue the points of the Staff
recomm- • s ati• • items as noted below:
The inability to make a finding that County Road 245 prevents joint use of
Parcel #2 from the parent parcel.
Parcel #2 has no identified building envelope of one contiguous acre with
slopes less than 40%.
Parcel #2 does not have an identified area of less than 30% slope for ISDS.
No design for a water system demonstrating service capability of Parcel #2 for
the well on the Parcel #1 has been shown.
Le al access from County Road 245 has not been demonstrated.
14.4104"jt, arr�-2 ,4vD_t924tr/
Please note that items 2-5 have been satisfied with the neW information submitted,
however, item 1 is still outstanding and the Applicant has not adequately demonstrated
that County Road 245 prevents joint use of the proposed tracts.
II. DESCRIPTION OF THE PROPOSAL
The Site:
The parcel is on CR 245 approximately miles northwest of New Castle land is divided
across the eastern portion of the property -7'y County Road 245 and is bordered by USDA
Forest Service land on the east and private lands on all other sides. The lot was created as part
of the West Elk Creek Ranches tubdivision which created a total of34lots of 35+ acres.
The Applicant is in the process of building a s ` le -family dwelling (BP # 9169, 6/25/04) on
the far western portion of land while there are no improvements on the portion to be divided
east of the road. Both parcels contain moderate to severe steep hillsides and are predominately
covered by aspen, gamble oak, grasses, and other native vegetative typically found above
8,000 feet in elevation.
The Proposal:
The Applicant proposes to split the 36.52 acre property into two lots (parcel 1— 31.72 acres to
Jenks — Exemption from the Definition of Subdivision
11/15/04, Continued 10/4/04
2
•
the west and parcel 2 — 4.72 acres to the east) and has suggested that CR 245, which bisects the
property, prevents joint use.
,UFORD-NEW CASTLE ROAD
Figure 2: from the high point of the lot at the west, and site of the new home.
Domestic water source for the two lots would be shared from a proposed well on parcel #1, as
noted in th Col ado Division of Water Resources' Permit #255360 submitted with the
applicatio .ISDS ill be in place for sewage disposal purposes (SP # 3971, 6/25/04) and the
same servi es ar proposed for the eastern parcel. Th Applicant proposes access to the
eastern parcel from County Road 245 and has obtained a eway permit (#81, 11/8/04) from
the Garfield County Road and Bridge Department.
III. REFERRAL COMMENTS
Staff referred the application to the following agencie
review and comment. Comments received are attached
memorandum where applicable:
• Town of New Castle
• Burning Mountain Fire District
• US Corps of Engineers
• Garfield County Vegetation
• USDA Forest Service (WRNF)
• Garfield County Road and Bridge Dept.
3
and County Departments for their
s exhibits and incorporated into the
No Comment Received
Exhibit H
Exhibit I
Exhibit J
No Comment Received
Exhibit K
Jenks — Exemption from the Definition of Subdivision
11/15/04, Continued 10/4/04
•
IV. RELATIONSHIP TO THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN
The subject property is located
with a 2 acre lot size minimum'
Kan.
nd is designated as "Outlying Residential
d land use district map of the omprehensive
V. MAJOR ISSUES AND CONCERNS
411111.1111111 Subdivisign: Section 8.52 j the Garfield County Subdivision Regulations states
that
•
•
"No more than a total of four (4) lots, parcels, interests or dwelling units
will be created from any parcel, as that parcel was described in the
records of the Garfield County Clerk and Recorder's Office on January 1,
1973. In order to qualify for exemption, the parcel as it existed on
January 1, 1973, must have been larger than thirty five (35) acres in size
at that time and not a part of a recorded subdivision; however, any
p ito be divided by exemption that is split by a public right-of-way
(State or Federal highway, County road or railroad), preventing joint use
of the proposed tracj and the division occurs along the public right-of-
way, such parcels thereb created ma , in the discretion o the Board s t
!be considered to have been created by exemption with re to the four
(4) lot, parcel, interest or dwelling unit limitation otherwise applicable.
For the purposes of definition, all tracts of land thirty five (35) acres or
greater in size, created after January 1, 1973, will count as parcels of
land created by exemption since January 1, 1973."
Staff Comment: The Applicant asserts the two proposed parcels as shown
in the included Figures are bisected by County Road 245 which renders the
property unusable as a whole lot. They further suggest that the County
Road was built after the creation of the lot in question when in fact the road
was first cut nearly 100 years ago. Secondly, the applicant feels that the
amount of fill placed on the downhill side of the road that accesses the
western parcel would result in a driveway in excess of the allowed 14%
slope. Essentially the Applicant is just now making improvements to the
parcel for the first time and has no history of "prevented joint use".
a
Evidence within the application submitted demonstrates that prior to
January 1, 1973 the property was approximately 1,500+ acres in size and
was subsequently split into 34 - 35+ acre parcels as shown in the site plan
of the West Elk Creek Ranches Mountain Parcels included in the
application materials after the date above.
The Garfield County Road and Bridge Department has indicated the road
Jenks — Exemption from the Definition of Subdivision
11/15/04, Continued 10/4/04
r
clearly preceded the creation of the lot, thus a case for hardship is not
demonstrated and it is incorrect to assume that joint use is prevented.
Figure 3: Cross Section of the proposed lots west to east, looking from south to north. (not to scale)
¢( OA bigger question is posed by this proposal. This lot and five more like it
in the est Elk Creek Ranches were designed over the existing county
road. as the intent of Section 8.52 to approve a exemption for any parcel
divid d by a public right-of-way in addition to the four (4) lots allowed?
Wffire—ileen intended, the opportunity to split the lot
while fit truly meeting the intent of the exemption definition should be
e. ned. And should there be an additional exemtip on allowed to the
stan.Anitexe $ 1. n of the lots that have alred bee created by statute .
(IF
I, 55 -3
Add'�ally, Section 8.10 of the same regulation identifies that the
OCC
has discretionary power to exempt a division of land from the definition of
bdivision, in part,--,44146,4-det. ermine that the proposed division i
trimental to . e general public wel are. t could be argued that if all 6
lots in the imme 1a into this category are allowe
access permits the impact of all new traffic on the county road will put a
strain on a road which was initially developed only to access Forest Land.
164 pPfitj
ic((9 /
Therefore, it is the determination and posi io
not be the cause for separation and that the d
West Elk Creek subdivision
f staff that this road could
the or ' 'nal 35 acre
Staff feels that the Applicant has not demonstrated a successful argument
for prevented joint use.
5
Jenks — Exemption from the Definition of Subdivision
11/15/04, Continued 10/4/04
•
• •
B. All Garfield County zoning requirements will be met.
Staff Comment: See zoning comments in Section B below.
C. All lots created will have legal access to a public right-of-way and any
necessary access easements have been obtained or are in the process of being
obtained;
Figure 2: Driveway access, distance within hatched area has a grade of 16.7%.
Staff Comment: Discussions between the Garfield County Road and
Bridge Department and the U.S. Forest Service have determined that
although the road is USFS property oug a County seasonally
maintains the road by official agreement.
The Applicant has obtained a driveway permit from County Road 245 to
the eastern lot as shown in the attached permit and approval from the
County Road & Bridge Department. But upon review of this access point
based on the supplemental information from the Applicant's engineer, the
proposed access appears to be well in excess of the allowed 14% grade
slope as seems. above. Section 5.04.02, which discusses development
limitations based on l_p_l_s_Mc-3Fifft-e-cfh-iffor'0 lots, driveways, access ways
and access easements within the development and on the property of
developer shall have a maximum grade of fourteen percent (14%). (A. 94-
046)
6
Jenks — Exemption from the Definition of Subdivision
11/15/04, Continued 10/4/04
•
• •
Finally, there is adequate access for the western parcel #1 from Elk Ridge
Drive for the single family dwelling unit currently under construction.
D. Provision has been made for an adequate source of water in terms of both the
legal and physical quality, quantity and dependability, and a suitable type of
sewage disposal to serve each proposed lot;
Staff Comment: The Applicant has provided
details how water will be shared with Parcel
easements_onThethe proposed waterline.
water service plan hich
om Par - - through
R . d cut or bore permits will'be necessary for a required water connection
an 11 be necessary as part of the preparation of documents for the final
plat.
E. All state and local environmental health and safety requirements have been
met or are in the process of being met;
Staff Comment: Proposed Parcel #2 has slopes in excess of 30%-40%.
Colorado State Board of Health's "Guidelines on Individual Sewage
Disposal Systems (Revised 2000) require that no ISDS can be permitted on
slopes of greater that 30% unless designed by a registered professional
engineer and approved by the local board of health."
The Applicant has provided information which highlights analysis
graphically and in a narrative statement which demonstrates that there are
two (2) areas of less than 30% slope. The first • 7,144 sq. ft. and a second
area of 4,770 sq. ft. which the Applican
accommodate an engineered ISDS" as
minimum area needed.
area of 1,700 sq.
stated "could
. would be the
fry .t/k. G/1401
F. Provision has been made for any required road or storm drainage
improvements;
Staff Comment: The Applicant has not demonstrated that a road of less
than 14% grade can be constructed to minimize the impacts of storm
drainage.
H. Any necessary drainage, irrigation or utility easements have been obtained or
are in the process of being obtained;
Staff Comment: All valid water utility easements and drainage easements
will be shown on the final plat as part of the preparation of documents for
the final plat.
7
Jenks — Exemption from the Definition of Subdivision
11/15/04, Continued 10/4/04
r
B. Zoning:
Staff Comment: The proposal meets the criteria of a two (2) acrehiinimum lot
size as required by the A/R/RD zone district. It appe e12 has slopes in
excess of 40%. The applicant has not presented information necessary to meet the
requirements for development on lot slopes which is discussed below or show that
it is not applicable:
5.04.02 Development Limitations Based on Lot Slope:
(2) Lot Size 1 Acre or Greater: Such lots shall have a minimum building envelope
of 1 acre in an area that has less than forty percent (40%) slopes; however, a
smaller building envelope may be approved by the Board after review of the
following which shall be submitted by the applicant:
Staff Comment: This information has been delivered to the County which
satisfies this requirement.
C. Water:
Staff Comment: Domestic water for the property is provided by a domestic
well— asnotedLm tl a catioi under Colorado Division of Water Resources
ermit #255360, issued 2/23hi ws for the use of ground water from
his well which shall-belii to fire protection, orAin4y household purposes
inside not more than thr a (3) single family dwellings, t 'irrigation of not more
than one (1) acre of ho dens an watering of domestic
animals. The Applicant has indicated there are two water sources on the property
but have provided no documentation supporting this for both wells.
The Applicant has provided drill reports on a nearby well indicating adequate
supply is available. As a result, it appears the Applicant has provided adequate
proof of a legal water supply.
Initially, the provision of water was been in question because of three potential
issues;
1) the physical separation created by over 300 feet in elevation between
the two potential building sites,
2) the location of the future well and how water provisions will be
satisfied, and,
3) the physical separation of the road which will require a road cut or bore
permit and a US Army Corp of Engineers, Clean Waters Act, Section
404 permit to connect the water distribution network.
The Applicant shall be aware that these issues shall be discussed and planned for
8
Jenks — Exemption from the Definition of Subdivision
11/15/04, Continued 10/4/04
•
appropriately with corresponding permits prior to final plat approval
Re -.-.1 : adequate ph sical supply or the well permit as noted above and prior
o the signing o e p at, physical water supplies shall demonstrate the
following:
That a four (4) hour pump test be performed on the well to be used;
• A well completion report demonstrating the depth of the well, the
characteristics of the aquifer and the static water level;
c. The results of the four (4) hour pump test indicating the pumping rate
in gallons per minute and information showing drawdown and
recharge;
d. A written opinion of the person conducting the well test that this well
should be adequate to supply water to the number of proposed lots;
e. An assumption of an average or no less than 3.5 people per dwelling
unit, using 100 gallons of water per person, per day;
f. The water quality be tested by an approved testing laboratory and meet
State guidelines concerning bacteria, nitrates and suspended solids;
g. A water sharing agreement will be filed with the exemption plat that
defines the rights of the property owners to water from the well.
Concerning adequate physical supply, the Applicant proposes to share the water
from the well with the newly created parcel, therefore they would need to craft a
well sharing agreement, easements for the well and water lines before any plat
could be approved.
Also, the Applicant shall submit a well sharing agreement that defines what
entity (such as an HOA) owns, maintains, and governs the use of the well
including the supporting infrastructure such as the pumphouse, pump, waterlines,
etc. In addition, the agreement shall also determine who owns and administers
the water rights provided for in the above mentioned well permit. The agreement
shall include a reference to an easement which shall be depicted on the final
exemption plat. This easement shall be recorded in the County Clerk and
Recorder's Office and its book and page shall be noted on the final plat.
D. Sewer:
ISDS systems are proposed for all legally placed dwelling units. All structures
shall meet Sections 8:52 (D) and (E), which require a suitable type of sewage
disposal, in compliance with the applicable local and state environmental health
regulations prior to a final Certificate of Occupancy.
As discussed earlier, staff notes the proposed Parcel #2 appears to have slopes in
excess of 30% and the Colorado State Board of Health's "Guidelines on
Individual Sewage Disposal Systems (Revised 2000) require that no ISDS can be
9
Jenks — Exemption from the Definition of Subdivision
11/15/04, Continued 10/4/04
• •
1111 permitted on slopes of greater that 30% unless designed by a registered
professional engineer and approved by the local board of health."
The Applicant has provided information from a registered engineer which
demonstrates that there is adequate area for ISDS.
E. Drainage:
Staff Comment: Because the proposed subdivision is traversed by West Elk
Creek, the US Army Corps of Engineers was sent a referral request for review
and subsequently responded with a letter dated September 10, 2004 which
indicated that "In accordance with Section 404 of the Clean Water Act, a
Department of the Army permit is required for any discharge of dredged or fill
material in the water of the United States." Additionally they have assigned the
proposed parcel split with a project number, #200475432, for any work as noted
in the attached exhibit letter.
Also, the parcel to be created by exemption, in its natural state, does not appear
to be prone to flooding or other drainage problems, and all structures created
shall be at least 30 feet from normal high water.
F. Fire Protection:
Staff Comment: The Applicant included a letter detailing a "fire protection
plan" which was sent to the Burning Mountain Fire Protection District, dated
May 28, 2004, which acknowledges that the property is within the District
boundaries. The Fire Chief cited that the district encourages the inclusion of the
NFPA 13D residential sprinkler system for homes in this are, though not
required.
The District letter does not require any specific protection requirements though
the Applicant proposes several protection measures as seen in the application,
and in the attached exhibit supplied by the fire district, these items are listed
below:
1. Implementation of a 100 foot perimeter clearing around any structure of
low growing fuel sources
2. Removal of decaying fuel sources including downfalls around any
structure
3. Maintain 35 ft. definitive area around any structures
4. Removal of all ladder fuel sources
5. Ten (10) foot spacing from the crown of all trees
6. Provide and maintain access road of a minimum of twenty feet width
and have a gravel base
G. Vegetation Management:
10
Jenks — Exemption from the Definition of Subdivision
11/15/04, Continued 10/4/04
•
Staff Comment: The Vegetation Management Department has no concerns with
this proposal
H. Easements:
Staff Comment: Any required easements (drainage, access, utilities, etc.) will
be required to be shown on the exemption plat. This includes well and water line
easements for the shared well / water system to serve both lots. Either the
applicant must record conveyance documents at the time of final plat, if the
easements and water rights will be owned by an entity such as an HOA, or
conveyance documents must be created and signed when a lot is sold.
. School Impact Fees:
Staff Comment: The
be required to pay
prior to the approva
Soils:
in the Garfield RE -2 School District and shall
200.00 schoolsi a acquisition fee for the newly created lot,
plat.
Staff Comment: The soils of the smaller parcel #2 are exclusively Lamphier
loam, found on slopes of 15 to 50 percent. It is noted that permeability is
moderate, and available water capacity is high, surface runoff is slow and the
erosion hazard is slight. Most importantly, septic tank filter fields, community
development and roads are limited by steep slopes. Surface runoff can increase
erosion hazard on cuts and fills. Because of the steep slopes on site there is
sufficient evidence to indicate the soil classification may adversely impact the
construction of ISDS, an access road and general safety of lot inhabitants as well
as the users of the road. A site specific soils evaluation and the identification of
a suitable building envelope of at least one (1) acre would be necessary to
adequately determine whether this lot can be safely developed.
VI. STAFF RECOMMENDED FINDINGS
1. That proper posting and public notice was provided as required for the meeting
before the Board of County Commissioners.
2. That the meeting before the Board of County Commissioners was extensive and
complete, that all pertinent facts, matters and issues were submitted and that all
interested parties were heard at that meeting.
3. That for the above stated and other reasons throughout this staff report, the
11
Jenks — Exemption from the Definition of Subdivision
11/15/04, Continued 10/4/04
•
•
r
pos-' exemption ha ie: determined , " be in the best inte
ealth, fety, morals, onv fence, order ros t ty and welfare of the
of Garfi ld County.
That the application has NOT met the requireme is of Seon 8:52 (Exem
from the Defi ion of Subdivisi n) of the rfiel County Subdivision
Resolution of 84, as amended, ding that Count Road 245, also known as
Buford -New astle Road does not prevent joint use of proposed Parcels #1 and
#2 that co rise the Applicant's property.
VII. STAFF RECOMMENDATION
-r
Sta - fins that the application does not comply with Section 8:52 of t e Garfield County
Su divi on Regulations of 1984, as amended.
Therefore, Staff recommends the DENIAL of the application as proposed due to the following
2 reasons:
1. The Applicant has not demonstrated that the construction of the county road, which
occurred well before the creation of the parcel in question, has preened joint use_,
therefore the parcel does not qualify for an exemption.
Additionally, the propd ccess and internal driveway a
the mum allowed o grade. —
2.
t)-(AA,-ct./34 va/46 /10440#
fi
IUB
to be well in excess of
Pvio-/c c.Te-7;41
, S.4) cryret-f .44%.
Ae-r,c? L, GL -t
/.0 -re(
ra
atrz)viiv2p,e4/1e/e-- o_e/;„, A42.
%/h_e
E & e � alit) it) fbdi
J m on from the a motion o Subdivision
-41 Continued 10/4/U4
414/67
4
O Z,LA 7‘Z5111-€7.;.-=
_ 5a -A
Kciw
/Le
0;/.7Z •
7/14-7(- 71/-1'( -,t-(ze7e7 Z
Mit(
pLe): l
er- b-
u
keitAte
tiA4/1-T -t0
6-7A-2(A:(4,41-
vi
• •
4. That the application has met the requirements of Section 8:52 (Exemption from
the Definition of Subdivision) of the Garfield County Subdivision Resolution of
1984, as amended, finding that County Road 245, also known as Buford -New
Castle Road does not prevent joint use of proposed Parcels #1 and #2 that
comprise the Applicant's property.
VII. STAFF RECOMMENDATION
2 reasons:
occurred well before the creation of the parcel in question, has prevented joint use,
P
11/15/04, BOCC in a public hearing did not accept the above recommendation of denial
and has chosen to approve the exemption request with the following conditions:
1. All representations of the Applicant, either within the application or stated at the meeting
before the Board of County Commissioners, shall be considered conditions of approval.
2. The Applicant shall comply with the 1978 Garfield County Zoning Resolution and the
Colorado Department of Health standards.
3. Upon successful approval and recordation of this proposal, no further subdivision by
exemption will be allowed on any of the two (2) lots created.
4. A Final Exemption Plat shall be submitted, indicating the legal description of the
property, dimension and area of the proposed lots (to be labeled Lots #1 and #2), all
easements and any proposed easements, setbacks, building envelopes, and other
customary items which shall be presented within 120 days to the BOCC for signature
from the date of approval of the exemption.
5. Road cut or bore permits for a required water connection shall be obtained by the
applicant and shall be submitted to the Garfield County Road and Bridge Department
prior to Recordation of the Final Plat.
6. All Utility easements shall be placed on the final plat and submitted to the Garfield
Jenks — Exemption from the Definition of Subdivision
11/15/04, Continued 10/4/04
12
• •
County Road and Bridge Department for review prior Recordation of the Final Plat.
7. A driveway permit has been issued to the Applicant on 11/8/04 by the Garfield County
Road and Bridge Department. The Applicant shall abide by the requirements of said
permit and successfully execute the following items prior to issuance of the Special use
permit prior to issuance of a Building Permit;
a. construct the required pad (30'WX3O'LX4"D constructed of asphalt).
b. clear vegetation along the ROW of CR 245 in 350' in both directions.
c. construct pad with no more than a 3% slope away from CR 245.
d. install a 30'WX30"L culvert.
e. construct driveway to prevent drainage from accessing CR 245.
f. Driveway to be reviewed upon completion.
8. The Applicant shall adhere to the self described fire protection outlined below and
implement this plan for review approval prior to issuance ofthe Certificate ofOccupancy
of any structures erected on this lot.
a. Implementation of a 100 foot perimeter clearing around any structure of low
growing fuel sources.
b. Removal of decaying fuel sources including downfalls around any structure.
c. Maintain 35 ft. definitive area around any structures.
d. Removal of all ladder fuel sources.
e. Ten (10) foot spacing from the crown of all trees.
f. Provide and maintain access road of a minimum of twenty feet width and
have a gravel base.
9. Final Plat notes and covenants shall be added that states the following:
a. "Colorado is a "Right -to -Farm" State pursuant to C.R.S. 35-3-101, et seq.
Landowners, residents and visitors must be prepared to accept the activities,
sights, sounds and smells of Garfield County's agricultural operations as a
normal and necessary aspect of living in a County with a strong rural character
and a healthy ranching sector. All must be prepared to encounter noises, odor,
lights, mud, dust, smoke chemicals, machinery on public roads, livestock on
public roads, storage and disposal of manure, and the application by spraying or
otherwise of chemical fertilizers, soil amendments, herbicides, and pesticides,
any one or more of which may naturally occur as a part of a legal and non -
negligent agricultural operations."
b. "No open hearth solid -fuel fireplaces will be allowed anywhere within the
subdivision. One (1) new solid -fuel burning stove as defied by C.R.S. 25-7-
401, et. sew., and the regulations promulgated thereunder, will be allowed in
any dwelling unit. All dwelling units will be allowed an unrestricted number of
natural gas burning stoves and appliances."
Jenks — Exemption from the Definition of Subdivision
11/15/04, Continued 10/4/04
13
• •
c. "All owners of land, whether ranch or residence, have obligations under State
law and County regulations with regard to the maintenance of fences and
irrigation ditches, controlling weeds, keeping livestock and pets under control,
using property in accordance with zoning, and other aspects of using and
maintaining property. Residents and landowners are encouraged to learn about
these rights and responsibilities and act as good neighbors and citizens of the
County. A good introductory source for such information is "A Guide to Rural
Living & Small Scale Agriculture" put out by the Colorado State University
Extension Office in Garfield County."
d. "All exterior lighting will be the minimum amount necessary and all exterior
lighting will be directed inward and downward towards the interior of the
subdivision, except that provisions may be made to allow for safety lighting that
goes beyond the property boundaries."
e. "One (1) dog will be allowed for each residential unit and the dog shall be
required to be confined within the owner's property boundaries."
f. Final Plat notes and covenants shall be added that state the disclosure and
nature of mineral rights.
Jenks — Exemption from the Definition of Subdivision
11/15/04, Continued 10/4/04
14
May- 28--04 12 240P
• •
BURNING MOUNTAINS_;um PROTECTION DISTRICT
• C. McLin
Chief
•
611 Main St.
P.O. Box 2
Silt, CO. 81652
Phone: (970) 876-5738
Fax: (970) 876-2774
E M iL ehief800@of.net
28 May 2004
Garfield County Planning Department
Fire Protection Plan submitted by T. Jenks, West Ells Creek Ranches
P_ 01
EXHIBI
Attached please find a copy of the plan submitted by Mr. Jenks. It complies with
existing codes and standards for the area. White not required, T would encourage rhe
inclusion of an NFPA 13D residential sprinkler system for homes in this area.
Yours truly,
Brit C. McLin, Chief
Mayes -28 04 �12:42P
1
•
May 27, 2004
To: Chief of awning Mountain Firs Protection District
FIRE PROTECTION PLAN FOR PARCEL 3 WEST ELK CREEK RANCHES
51/2 NL + Section 12 T45R91 West bpm
Parcel 1 b 2 containing 36,44 acres
fie, clearing around any structure of low
��eetation of a hundred ft. pu'� fuel sources including downfalls, fuel sources and removal of any decaying
maintain 35 ft. definitive arta around a7 structures.
Rol of all udder fuel sources. Ten ft. spacing from crown of all trees
• Provide and maintain access road of a minimum of twenty ft. width and have a
grovel base.
Ply isaccessible by county road 243 Buford Rd.
Thanks for your help.
Respectfully Submitted,
J•r;a7•704,Se....(24----
imothy L Jenks
•
REPLY TO
ATTENTION OF
• •
DEPARTMENT OFTHE ARMY
U.S. ARMY ENGINEER DISTRICT, SACRAMENTO
CORPS OF ENGINEERS
1325 J STREET
SACRAMENTO, CALIFORNIA 95814-2922
September 10, 2004
Regulatory Branch (200475432)
Mr. Jim Hardcastle
Garfield County Building and Planning Department
108 8th Street, Suite 201
Glenwood Springs, Colorado 81601
Dear Mr. Hardcastle:
1-15- TTg.'
SEP 1 3 2004
:..
I am responding to your written request for comment on the
Jenks Exemption for land subdivision project. The project site
is located at West Elk Creek and Beef Draw within Sections 1, 11,
12, 13 and 14, Township 4 South, Range 92 West, Garfield County,
Colorado.
In accordance with Section 404 of the Clean Water Act, a
Department of the Army permit is required for any discharge
(including mechanized land clearing) of dredged or fill material
in waters of the United States. Within the context of Section
404, "waters of the United States" are defined as the territorial
seas; perennial and ephemeral streams; lakes, ponds,
impoundments; and wetlands. Federal law requires that any
individual or entity proposing to discharge into waters of the
United States obtain a Department of the Army permit prior to
commencing such work. To aid the applicant, I have enclosed a
list of wetland consultants who routinely perform wetland
delineations and are familiar with the Section 404 permit
process.
I have assigned number 200475432 to this project. Please
refer to this number if a Department of the Army permit is
required on this development project. If you have any questions,
please write to me at the address below, email Mark.A.Gilfillan
@usace.army.mil or telephone 970-243-1199, extension 15.
Sincerely,
m�
L
Mark Gilfilla1.
Regulatory Project Manager
Colorado/Gunnison Basin
Regulatory Office
400 Rood Avenue, Room 142
Grand Junction, Colorado 81501-2563
•
Enclosure
Copy Furnished
Mr. Mark Bean, Garfield County, 108 8th Street, Suite 201,
Glenwood Springs, Colorado 81601
•
•
•
•
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Sacramento District
Colorado/Gunnison Basin Regulatory Office
400 Rood Avenue, Room 142
Grand Junction, Colorado 81501-2563
June 2004
WETLANDS DELINEATION CONSULTANTS-u.dated biannual!
Increasingly, potential applicants for Department of the Army permits are hiring environmental
consultants to do wetlands determinations and delineations for them. In addition, because of Federal
budgetary and work force constraints, we are requesting that many potential applicants have wetlands
delineations done by consultants. Under existing constraints, the Corps of Engineers will field verify as
many wetlands delineations as possible. We recommend that wetlands delineations performed by consultants be
submitted for review and verification at least one month in advance of a submittal of a Department of the
Army permit application.
All wetlands delineations will be reviewed to insure compliance with the methodology contained in
the Corps of Engineers Wetlands Delineation Manual dated January 1987 and that sufficient information is
provided to justify the wetlands/upland boundaries as shown on the delineation map(s). To obtain a
jurisdictional determination letter from the Western Colorado Regulatory Office, all consultant- re ared
wetlands delineations shall contain:
1. A wetlands delineation map depicting a point-to-point survey of the wetlands boundary
as flagged by the consultant in the field. The consultant should review the survey for accuracy before
submittal to this office. We prefer topographic maps with contour intervals of one or two feet and at a
scale of 1 inch equals 100 feet. However, these specifications may vary depending upon the scope of the
delineation and the nature of the project. In certain situations, a point-to-point survey of the wetlands
boundary may not be required. However, the boundary must be reproducible in some manner. The consultant
should contact this office for approval before submitting a delineation without a point-to-point survey. In
all cases, the wetlands boundary must be marked with survey flagging
office will conduct a site inspection to verify the delineation. Theor flagskes or stakes mustdbeefore sequenthis
tially
numbered and those numbers shall appear on the survey for each point;
2.
e
e(s)
nds
resent,
should be shown on the delineate nfmap. The respective sizes in acres of as riparian t each wet meadow, houl marsh, etc.,
either on the map or in a report;type should be included
3. The location of all sample sites should be shown on the delineation map(s);
4. Wetlands delineation data forms, or similar data sheets, for each sample site, cross-
referen
ferincldstothe the
isi estshos uldrbehshown on thheedelineationhmap(s). The data for each sample site shall
determining whether the sample site is wetlands or upland. yThe numbernd ofshalsamplenclude sites willbvary dfor
epending
upon the size and shape of the wetlands, the degree of difficulty in differentiating wetlands and upland,
width of transition zones, etc.;
5. A
ite
the soite;iand map, preferably a 7.5 minute USGS quadrangle, shalt be included and any
other pertinent maps of
6. A brief written report shall be included with the submittal. This report should list
the property owner(s) and/or the developer(s) requesting the delineation. The report shall also describe
the nature of the proposed development, and when a permit application will be submitted for the project.
Your report should explain the basis for the wetlands boundary location and any problems or questionable
areas. The dates of the actual fieldwork should also be included in this narrative.
7. For potential isolated waters, including isolated wetlands, note in your delineation
report any observed and/or documented examples that substantiate the rationale for jurisdictional or non -
jurisdictional waters of the United States.
The Corps of Engineers will acknowledge wetlands delineations that are complete and accurate. In
the event that work force constraints preclude timely field verifications, this office may issue a qualified
approval. However, prior to definitive regulatory approvals, such as a letter of no Federal
nationwide general permit verification, individual permit issuance, etc., wetlands maps will usually be,
field verified by the Corps of Engineers.
1
• •
We have attached a field data sheet for photocopying and field use. This form should be used for
wetlands delineations subject to Corps of Engineers verification. If you and/or your consultants have
questions regarding wetlands delineation procedures, please contact the U. S. Army, Corps of Engineers,
Sacramento District in Grand Junction, Colorado at telephone number (970) 243-1199.
The following list of wetlands delineation consultants is arranged alphabetically and should not be
interpreted as preferential. This list shall be accepted and used by the recipient with the explicit
understanding that the U. S. Government shall not be under any liability at all to any person because
of any use made of this list. The following are categories of a consultant's claimed unique expertise
and/or competencies:
Wetland delineationl, stream restoration and channel stabilization2, wetland mitigation3, fish
habitat improvement4, professional licensed engineering5, Section 404 & Section 10 violation
resolution/compliance6 and EA/EIS preparation7.
Andrew Antipas Ecological &
Environmental Consulting, LLC
0285 Crystal Circle
Carbondale, Colorado 81623
(970) 963-8297
Attn: Mr. Andrew Antipas
Competencies: 1,3,6,7
Basin Hydrology, Inc
PO Box 1076
Steamboat Springs, CO 80477
(970) 879-2922
Attn: Mark Oliver
Competencies: 1,2,3,6
Beach Environmental, LLC.
715 West Main Street
Aspen, Colorado 81611
(970) 925-3475
Attn: Mr. Gary Beach
Competencies: 1,2,3,5,6
Bio -Environs, Inc.
114 N. Boulevard, Suite 202
Gunnison, Colorado 81230
(970) 641-8749
Attn: Ms. Lynn Cudlip
Competencies: 1,3,7
BIO -Logic Environmental
635 East Main Street, Suite 100
Montrose, Colorado 81401
(970) 240-4374
Attn: Ms. Lynn Connaughton
Competencies: 1,2,3,4,7
BKS Environmental Associates, Inc.
Post Office Box 3467
Gillette, Wyoming 82717
(307) 686-0800
Attn: Ms. Brenda K. Schladweiler
Competencies: 1,3,7
2
Black Creek Hydrology, LLC
10701 Melody Drive, Suite 320
Northglenn, Colorado 80234
(303) 920-2664
Attn: Mr. Steven Belz
Competencies: 1,2,3,4,6,7
Cedar Creek Associates, Inc.
916 Wiltshire Avenue
Fort Collins, Colorado 80521
(970) 493-4394
Attn: Mr. Stephen G. Long
Competencies: 1,2,3,6,7
Cirrus Ecological Solutions, LC
965 South 100 West, Suite 200
Logan, Utah 84321
(435) 787-1490
Attn: Dr. Neal Artz
Competencies: 1,2,3,4,7
Claffey Ecological Consulting, Inc.
1371 17 Road
Fruita, Colorado 81521-9215
(970) 858-1670
Attn: Mr. Michael Claffey
Competencies: 1,2,3,4,6,7
Cordilleran Compliance Services, Inc.
826 21 'h Road
Grand Junction, Colorado 81505
(970) 263-7800
Attn: Mr. Dion Plsek
Competencies: 1,5,6,7
Dr. Allen B. Crockett
1060 Cottonwood Circle
Golden, Colorado 80401
(303) 443-3282
Competencies: 1,3,4,6,7
Earth Resource Investigations, Inc.
1700 County Road 103
Carbondale, Colorado 81623
(970) 963-1356
Attn: Mr. William N. Johnson
Competencies: 1,2,3,4,6
1
•
•
Ecological Resource Consultants, Inc.
5672 Juhls Drive
Boulder, Colorado 80301
(720) 564-0788
Attn: Mr. David J. Blauch
Competencies: 1,2,3,4,5,6,7
Environmental Solutions
600 County Road 216
Rifle, Colorado, 81650
(970) 618-6841
Attn: Mr. Steve D. Dahmer
Competencies: 1,2,3,4,6,7
ERO Resources Corporation
1842 Clarkson Street
Denver, Colorado 80218
(303) 830-1188
Attn: Mr. Steve Dougherty
Competencies: 1,2,3,6,7
ESCO Associates, Inc.
Post Office Box 18775
Boulder, Colorado 80308
(303) 447-2999
Attn: Dr. David L. Buckner
Competencies: 1,3
Global Wetlands, Ltd.
2069 Fairfax Street
Denver, Colorado 80207
(303) 329-0978
Attn: Mr. Mark Rudolph
Greystone Environmental Consultants, Inc.
5231 South Quebec Street
Greenwood Village, Colorado 80111
(303) 850-0930
Attn: Mr. Paul Avant
Competencies: 1,2,3,4,5,6,7
Habitat Management, Inc.
14 Inverness Drive East, Suite G-228
Englewood, Colorado 80122
(303) 770-9788
Attn: Mr. Wayne Erickson or David Wileden
Competencies: 1,2,3,4,5,6,7
Huffman & Carpenter, Inc.
700 Smithridge Drive, Suite 102A
Reno, Nevada 89502
(775) 828-1991
Attn: Ms. Lori Carpenter
Competencies:1,2,3,4,5,6,7
Intermountain Ecosystems
270 East 1230 North
Springville, Utah 84663
(801) 489-4590
Attn: Mr. Ron Kass
Competencies: none reported
Montane Environmental Solutions Limited
Post Office Box 281
Silverthorne, Colorado 80498
(970) 468-0450
Attn: Ms. Anna Higgins or Nicola Ripley
Competencies: 1,3,6,7
Mountain Cross Engineering, Inc.
826 'h Grand Avenue
Glenwood Springs, Colorado 81601
Attn: Mr. Chris Hale
Competencies: 5
Nature Tech Consultant Services Corp.
2452 Patterson Road, Suite 302
Grand Junction, Colorado 81505
(970) 255-6508
Attn: Mr. Michael J. Villa
Competencies: 1,2,3,4,5,6,7
Natural Resource Services, Inc.
Post Office Box 19332
Boulder, Colorado 80308-2332
800-242-9466
Attn: Mr. Steve C. Johnson
Competencies: 1,2,3,4,6,7
Parsons
1700 Broadway, Suite 900
Denver, Colorado 80290
(303) 831-8100
Attn: Mr. Bruce Snyder
Competencies: 1,2,3,4,5,6,7
Pioneer Environmental Services
980 West 1800 South
Logan, Utah 84321
(435) 753-0033
Attn: Dr. Roy D. Hugie
Competencies: 1,2,3,4,6,7
Queen of the River Consultants
13810 North 115th Street
Longmont, Colorado 80504
(303) 651-2514
Attn: Mr. Michael J. Mitchell
Competencies: 1,2,3,4
Rangeland Resources
0049 Pinon Drive
Glenwood Springs, Colorado 81601
(970) 947-1855
Attn: Mr. Larry Robinson
Competencies: 1,3,6,7
Rare Earth Science, LLC
844 Grand Avenue
Grand Junction, Colorado 81501
(970) 241-1762
Attn: James C. Armstrong
Competencies: 1,2,3,4,6,7
Rare Earth Science, LLC
Post Office Box 1245
Paonia, Colorado 81428
(970) 527-8445
Attn: Ms. Dawn Reeder
Competencies: 1,2,3,4,6,7
Savage and Savage
464 West Sumac Court
Louisville, Colorado 80027-2227
(303) 666-7372
Attn: Mr. Michael Savage
Competencies: 1,2,3,6,7
Smith Environmgntal, Inc.
1001 West 120 Avenue, Suite 210
Westminster, Colorado 80234
(720) 887-4928
Attn: Mr. Peter L. Smith
Competencies: 1,2,3,4,5,6,7
Steigers Corporation
1510 West Canal Court, Suite 1000
Littleton, Colorado 80120-5639
(303) 799-3633
Attn: Mr. Hal Copeland or Jonathon Chesser
Competencies: 1,2,3,4,6,7
SWCA
295 Interlocken Blvd. Suite 300
Broomfield, Colorado 80021
(303) 487-1183
Attn: Mr. Larry Semo
Competencies: none identified
Thomas & Thomas
614 North Tejon Street
Colorado Springs, Colorado
(719) 578-8777
Attn: Mr. Robert Gray
Competencies: 1,2,3,7
West Water Engineering
2516 Foresight Circle, #1
Grand Junction, Colorado 81505
(970) 241-7076
Attn: Mr. Michael Klish
Competencies: 1,2,3,4,5,6,7
Wright Water Engineers, Inc.
2490 West 26th Avenue, Suite 100A
Denver, Colorado 80211
(303) 480-1700
Attn: Mr. David B. Mehan
Competencies: 1,2,3,4,5,6,7
Wright Water Engineers, Inc.
818 Colorado Avenue
Glenwood Springs, Colorado 81602
(970) 945-7755
Attn: Mr. Jonathan Kelly
Competencies: 1,2,3,4,5,6,7
Wright Water Engineers, Inc.
80903 1666 North Main Avenue, Suite C
Durango, Colorado 81301
(970) 259-7411
Attn: Mr. Ryan Unterreiner
Competencies: 1,2,3,4,5,6,7
Walsh Environmental Scientists &
Engineers, LLC
4888 Pearl East Circle, Suite 108
Boulder, Colorado 80301-2475
(303) 443-3282
Attn: Mr. Grant Gurnee'
Competencies: 1,2,3,4,5,6,7
Water Resource Consultants, LLC
244 Hutton Avenue
Rifle, Colorado 81650
(970) 625-5433
Attn: Mr. Paul C. Currier
Competencies: 2,5
Watershed Environmental Consultants, Inc.
Post Office Box 3722
Eagle, Colorado 81631
(970) 328-4364
Attn: Ms. Daiva Katieb
Competencies: 1,2,3,4,7
Western Bionomics, LLC
Natural Resource Mgmt. Services
348 River Road
Steamboat Springs, Colorado 80487
(970) 870-9031 or 879-8545
Attn: Mr. Kelly Colfer or Bob Magnuson
Competencies: 1,2,3,4,6,7
Western Ecological Resource, Inc.
711 Walnut Street
Boulder, Colorado 80302
(303) 449-9009
Attn: Mr. David Johnson
Competencies: 1,2,3,6,7
4
•
Wetland Hydrology Indicators:
Primary Indicators:
Inundated
_ Saturated in Upper 12 Inches
Water Marks
Drift Lines
Sediment Deposits
_ Drainage Patterns in Wetlands
Secondary Indicators (2 or more required):
_ Oxidized Root Channels in Upper 12 Inches
_ Water -Stained Leaves
_ Local Soil Survey Data
_ FAC -Neutral Test
_ Other (Explain in Remarks)
DATA FORM
OUTINE WETLAND DETERMINATION
(1937 COE Wetlands Delineation Manual)
Project/Site:
Applicant/Owner:
Investigator:
Do Normal Circumstances exist on the site?
Is the site significantly disturbed (Atypical Situation)?
Is the area a potential Problem Area?
(If needed, explain on reverse.)
VEGETATION
Dominant Plant Species
2.
3.
4.
S.
6.
7.
Stratum Indicator
Percent of Dominant Species that are OBL, FACW or FAC
(excluding FAC-).
Yes No
Yes No
Yes No
Dominant Plant Species
Date:
County:
State:
Community ID:
Transect ID:
Plot ID:
9.
Stratum Indicator
Remarks:
HYDROLOGY
_ Recorded Data (Describe in Remarks):
Stream, Lake, or Tide Gauge
Aerial Photographs
Other
No Recorded Data Available
Field Observations:
Depth of Surface Water:
Depth to Free Water in Pit:
Depth to Saturated Soil:
Remarks:
SOILS
Map Unit Name
(Seines and Phase):
Drainage Class:
Taxonomy (Subgroup):
Feld Observations
Confirm Mapped Type? Yes No
Profile Description:
Mottle Colors Mottle Texture, Concretions,
(Munsell Moist) Abundance/Contrast Structure, etc.
Depth Matrix Color
(inches) Horizon (Munsell Moist)
Hydric Soil Indicators:
_ Histosol
— Histic Epipedon
_ Sulfidic Odor
_ Aquic Moisture Regime
_ Reducing Conditions
Gleyed or Low-Chroma Colors
_ Concretions
— High Organic Content in Surface Layer in Sandy Soils
_ Organic Streaking in Sandy Soils •
i Listed on Local Hydric Soils List
_ Listed on National Hydric Soils List
— Other (Explain in Remarks)
Remarks:
WETLAND DETERMINATION
Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Yes No (Circle)
Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes No
Hydric Soils Present? Yes No
(Circle)
Is this Sampling Point Within a Wetland? Yes No
Remarks:
Approved by HQUSACE 3/92
•
•
•
• •
Jim Hardcastle
From: Steve Anthony
Sent: Thursday, September 16, 2004 5:30 PM
To: Jim Hardcastle
Subject: Jenks Exemption
Jim
F don't have any concerns with this one.
Steve
9/17/2004
Page 1 of 1
EXHI
i1/3/22D4 3:42 6258627
•
ROAD AND BRIDGE PAGE 02
• •
It -
Garfield County 1
Application for Driveway Permit
Application Date: 114/2004 Permit Number: 81
Termination Date:124/2004 County Road Number: 245
District: 2 Sub -Contractor:
Perrnitee: Timor Jen&e
Inspector: Ted Morgan
EXHIBIT
_tio_
hereby requests permission and authority from the Board of County Commissioners to construct a driveway approach (es)
on the right-of-way off of County Road, 24S, on CR 245, adjacent to Applicant's property located on the F,,atrt side of road
for the purpose of obtaining access to property.
Applicant submits herewith for the consideration and approval of the Board of County Commissioners, a sketch of the
proposed installation showing all the necessary specification detail including:
1. Frontage of lot along road.
2. Distance from centerline of road to property line.
3. Number of driveways requested
4. Width of proposed driveways and angk of approach_
5. Distance from driveway to road intersection, if any.
6. Size and shape of area separating driveways if more than one approach.
7. Setback distance of building(s) and other structure improvements.
8. No unloading of equipment on county road, any damage caused to county road will be repaired at subdivision
410
9.
•
Responsible for two years from the date of complet:ion.
General Provbivel
1) The applicant represents all parties in interest, and affirms that the driveway approach (es) is to be constructed by
him for the bona fide purpose of securing access to his property and not for the purpose of doing business or
servicing vehicles on the road right of way.
2) The applicant shall furnish ail labor and materials, perform all work, and pay all costs in connection with the
construction of the driveway(s). All work shall be completed within thirty (30) days of the permit date.
3) The type of construction shall be as designated and/or approved by the Board of County Commissioners or their
representative and all materials used shall be of satisfactory quality and subject to inspection and approval of the
Board of County Commissioners or their representative.
4) The traveling public shall be protected during the installation with proper warning signs and signals and the Board
of County Commissioners and their duly appointed agents and employee shall be held harmless against any action
for personal injury or property damage sustained by any reason of the exercise of the Permit.
5) The Applicant shall assume responsibility for the removal or clearance of snow, ice, or sleet upon any portion of
the driveway approach (es) even though deposited on the driveway(s) in the course of the County snow removal
operations.
11/69/2004 23:42 6253627
•
ROAD AND BRIDGE PAGE 03
•
6) In the event it becomes necessary to remove any right-of-way fence, the posts on either side of the entrance shall
be surely braced before the fence is cut to prevent any slacking of the remaining fence and all posts and wire
removed shall be turned over to the District Road Supervisor of the Board of County Commissioners.
•7)
No revisions or additions shall be made to the driveway(s) cc its appurtenances on the right-of-way without written
permission of the Board of County Commissioners.
8) Provisions and specifications outlined herein shall apply on all roads under the jurisdiction of the Board of County
Commissioners of Garfield County, Colorado, and the Specifications, set forth on the attached hereof and
incorporated herein as conditions hereof.
$Dtclal Conditionai
1. Construct a 30' wide driveway vritb 30' of 30" culvert.
2. Pad sine is to be 30' wide X 30' deep X 4" thick asphalt.
3. Site visability needs to be cleared 350' in both directions.
4. No more than a 3% slope away from the County Road so no drainage accesses the County road.
5. This permit has been issued after High Country Engineering did a survey and made sure it would comply
with County stipulations.
In signing this application and upon receiving authorization and permission to install the driveway approach (es)
described herein the Applicant signifies that he has read, understands and accepts the foregoing provisions and conditions
and agrees to construct the driveways) in accordance with the accompanying specification plan reviewed and approved
by the Board of County Cosmnissioners.
.Sj.ed:
Address:
Tim Jenke
Telephone Number.
Permit granted 11/8/2004, subject to the provisions, specifications and conditions stipulated herein.
•
For Board of County Commissioners' of Garfield County, Colorado:
/652-v1414
Representative of Garfield County Road and Bridge Signature
11/09/2064 23:42 6253627
•
•
•
ROAD AND BRIDGE PAGE 04
• •
Specifications
A driveway approach is understood to be that portion of the county road right -of way betty cen the pavement edge
and the property line that is designed and used for the interchange of traffic between the roadway and abutting
2. At any intersection, a driveway shall be restricted for a sufficient distance from the intersection to preserve the
normal and safe movement of traffic_ (It is recommended for rural residence entrances that a minimum
intersection clearance of 50 feet be provided and far rural commercial entrances a minimum of 100 feet be
provided.)
3. All entrances and exits shall be so located and constructed that vehicles approaching or using them will be able to
obtain adequate sight distance in both directions along the county road in order to maneuver safely and without
interfering with county road traffic.
4. The Applicant shall not be permitted to erect any sign or display material, either fixed or movable, on or
extending over any portion of the county road right-of-way.
5. Generally, no more than one approach shall be allowed any parcel or property the frontage of which is leas than
one hundred (100) feet. Additional entrances or emits for parcels having a frontage in excess of one hundred 100)
fees shall be permitted only after showing of actual convenience and necessity.
6. All driveways shall be so located that the flared portion adjacent to the traveled way will not encroach upon
adjoining property.
7. No commercial driveway shall have a width greater than thirty (30) feet measured at right angles to the centerline
of the driveway except as increased by permissible radii. No noncommercial driveway shall have a width greater
than twenty (20) fent measured at right angles to the centerline of the driveway, except as increased by
permissible radii.
8. The axis of an approach to the road may be at a right angle to the centerline of the county road and of any angle
between ninety (90) degrees and sixty (60) degrees but shall not be less than sixty (60) degrees. Adjustment will
be made according to the type of traffic to be saved and other physical conditions.
9. The construction of parking or servicing areas on the county road right-of-way is specifically prohibited.
Commercial establishments for customer vehicles should provide off the -road parking facilities.
10. Tie grade of entrance and exit shall slope downward and away from the road surface at the same rate as the
normal shoulder sloe and for a distance equal to the width of the shoulder but in no case less than twenty (20)
feet from the pavement edge. Approach grades are restricted to not more than ten percent (10%).
11. All driveways and approaches shall be so constructed that they shall not interfere with the drainage system of the
street or county road. The Applicant will be required to provide, at his own expense, drainage structures at
entrances and exits, which will become an integral part of the existing drainage system. The Board of County
Commissioners or their representative, prior to installation, must approve the dimensions and types of all drainage
structures.
Note: This permit shall be made available at the site where and when work r being dose. A work sketch or
drawing of the proposed driveway(s) must accompany application. No permit will be based without drawing,
blueprint, or sketch.
11/09/2004 23:42 6258627
11!00/04 TUE 21:43 FAX 540 9733
11/09/:004 0th:53 62518627
ROAD AND BRIDGE
VS Custom Hones
ROAD 4441) 8RI[+
•
PAGE 05
1.1 I/1
PM* 04
6) la lb* sweet k Irsooeors ssoeosay to sswer►s why ri #wap *OM i posts es say alae d lbs eram r
>bsseemly lowed before the *ate is tat is pima my slaokinp di teltsilling hew mod all feast tad wire
reaswsd sitar M email over to dos Dinrime Riad Seders d 11ea bawd of Cornu► C.miiailairb.
'» Ns radrrers sr alettlim doll be rode tri Ablessaget sr is sslrsomer as err villou tww
paJss Otis Naiad *Mawr Cessobskasta
•
Novi ions and bpyoQiosbices aadtht" Was sra apply ea ell rands soder Urea of the lloatddCamay
Cep■ aiaiossrs oftbefidd Coaaef. camas. wills splt ingsbia■r„ ea ford os the elliodiell boyar and
beorpssod Mals as ea Hoists Moat
L Ce weir's► a 3e" wide drirwwgy add 3V ad31" aelratt
2. Pad ries bi • M Se wok 7C lw' deer Z r *kik *Oak
3. Oa «lash st
► ab M by dsered Mrla lath deaseassa
4. Se rises Ura a 3% slips ewer OMB OW Cis■r► Rist ss ser *WOW asoma OW Ma7 read•
th irr parent kat basis damn/ Air NO Corry iiteirmesi did• sssilw awl Mole gm M Wadi way*
*ilk Comity jjpeLrllsu
le awing this op*liostioa sad urea sesdriep all*Miasisa said remission to Wadi the *tansy swim* (as)
dm:4W lona tle Applin al drift= dear be be read. nadaswsds sod mosso' the f rspoi provisionswad sandiness
ad apo b arseYrvat the d'iussay(e) is ateardra arbrie ars aoas—ipaaria` apaeiito Pin rovirtse d sad appeared
blriDard of Casty
(14thifeassiti---
• Addrae.LFT` 'iiu r t 11d V 2.‘t
?dsprwe Straws 4r4, 7 3 7 th
Pena gmesd 11finat rsbjest to i Noeisie 1. sraidilsodem lad e+adiklsr sthparaid YtMS.
Par board of Camay C ' etasrtbid Cream. Colorado:
dcrpnsaeariMw a(Oerdsid Coater reed sed fridge Sumer e
•
11/09/2004 23:42 6253627 ROAD AND BRIDGE PAGE 36
or
•
•
1. Permit Owner:
2. Address:
3. Phone No:
•
Driveway Permit Form
-f1r�
712AcT 443 pArtce/ ea
0-4/O ^437-3'15Z l
4. County Rd. No.
Fax No:
L.:544/U g4,G zs.
5. Location of driveway:
45--` / / /ts ® - C o z s-
6. Side ofroad: N❑EES❑W❑
7. Width of driveway: 30 -foot 51 40 -foot ❑ other
8. Culvert rewired: Yes () No ❑
9. Size of advert required: 12 -inch [] 15 -inch ❑ 18 -inch 0
other E70
10. Length of culvert required: 30 -foot 14 40 -foot ❑ other
11. Asphalt or concrete pad required: yes ❑ No (Z
12. Size of pad: 30 -foot wide X 14 -foot long X 4 -inches thick: Yes 0
13. Size of pad: 40 -foot wide X 10 -foot long X 4 -inches thick: Yes ❑
34.
If
14. Size of Pad: other
„30,;` ,lit/ 30 '.2J /E/1 9g00(/
15. Gravel portion required: Yes ® No 0
16. Length of gravel portion: 40 -foot ❑ 50 -foot ❑ 100 -foot 0
17. Trees, brush or fence removed for visibility: Yes (n No 0
18. Distance and direction from driveway to be removedi,'� ) l
D1r-7_L4ccVN
(11i No more tun 3% slope away from County Rd:
veway must be constructed so no drainage accesses County Rd.
from driveway:
11/09/2004 23:42 6258627
•
ROAD AND BRIDGE
•
20. Inspection of driveway will be required upon completion and must
be approved by person, issuing permit or representative of person
issuing permit.
21. Person issuing permit: I r-4 M e f 1,0
22. District permit issued in: 1 0 2 lc 3 ❑ Date:
PAGE 07
iAIS sI2 1 .5$(1 �C C3 F
r ,
111, 4- C.6 . k N fiL E.4-3? ro C fc. Gam•
rco. i(l ,"P��
1/t.pi,.lc fr ix3.1.
•
•
CIVIL ENGINEERING
NOVEMBER 8, 2004
An Employee -Owned Cir
JIM HARDCASTLE
GARFIELD COUNTY PLANNING
108 8TH STREET
GLENWOOD SPRINGS, CO 81 601
Re: JENKS EXEMPTION SUBMITTAL
HCE Project Number: 2041037.00
Dear JIM:
•
LAND SU
EXHIBIT
a
High Country Engineering is proud to present you with plans for the resubmittal of the Jenks
Subdivision Exemption as previously reviewed and denied by Garfield County Planning. In
review of your project letter we have the following:
Staffs review of the Exemption section of the Zoning Resolution Section 8.00 et. esq. finds the
request from the Applicant has not adequately demonstrated that the county road has
prevented joint use.
Since the time of submittal and original review, High Country Engineering has surveyed the
parcel and has reviewed the parcels with this new topography in accordance to the criteria of
"joint use" with respect to the county road that divides the property. The County Road was
constructed through the easterly portion of the property which did subdivide the parcels into
two separate lots. The county road was constructed in a manner to balance the cut and fill
equally to both sides of the road. This has resulted in a an average depth of cut of 10 -feet and
an average depth of fill to toe of slope of 16 -feet. This represents an average vertical
separation of over 26 -feet between the two parcels. To create a driveway that would meet the
Countys Maximum slope of 14% would require a distance of over 185 -feet. This is
improbable with the natural topography of the site and would create excessive fill situations.
This separation between the two parcels due to the county road does not appear to allow for
feasible joint use.
All lots created will have legal access to a public right-of-way and any necessary access
easements have been obtained or are in the process of being obtained;
It is our understanding the Client has been in contact with Garfield County Road and Bridge,
including an onsite meeting to discuss site distance, and an approved driveway permit should
be arriving forthwith from Road and Bridge granting the permit. This will allow for legal
access to this proposed lot.
1517 BLAKE AVENUE, SUITE 101
GLENWOOD SPRINGS, CO 81 601
970-945-8676 • PHONE
970-945-2555 • FAX
WWW.HCENG.COM
14 INVERNESS DRIVE EAST, SUITE F-120
ENGLEWOOD, CO 80112
303-925-0544 • PHONE
303-925-0547 •FAX
•
Mr. Jim Hardcastle•
November 8, 2004
Page 2
•
Provision has been made for an adequate source of water in terms of both the legal and
physical quality, quantity and dependability, and a suitable type of sewage disposal to serve
each proposed lot;
Two options for water distribution are available for the new parcel. HCE has attached a
waterline exhibit map that shows a water line in a 15 -foot easement that traverses across the
property from the well location, north of the excisting house, easterly along the existing swale
and crossing the county road to serve the proposed parcel. A Road Cut permit will be required
through Garfield County prior to construction of the waterline. A second alternative for the
installation of a Cistern is being investigated separately including provided documentation for
shared well agreement between the parcels.
Provision has been made for any required road or storm drainage improvements;
High Country Engineering has prepared a site plan and grading plan for submittal to Garfield
County to review. The plan has also been provided to Garfield County Road and Bridge for
their review in the approval of the Driveway Peinut. Stormdrainage facilities include the
installation of a 18" culvert beneath the driveway so that existing county road drainage is not
disturbed. HCE has also recommend several erosion control measures to protect the site
grading required to allow for the driveway installation.
Any necessary drainage, irrigation or utility easements have been obtained or are in the
process of being obtained;
Utility Easements have been shown for the proposed water line on the attached site plan. HCE
has also delineated the setback, building envelope and potential ISDS locations for Garfield
County review. Upon approval by Garfield County the easement locations and detail
information will be provided for the completion of the Final Plat.
Lot Size 1 Acre or Greater: Such lots shall have a minimum building envelope of 1 acre in an
area that has less than forty percent (40%) slopes; however, a smaller building envelope may
be approved by the Board after review of the following which shall be submitted by the
applicant:
High Country Engineering has provided a slope analysis map which shows areas greater than
40%, areas between 30-40% and areas less than 30%. The majority of the property is less than
40% and a building envelope of 2.27 acres has been defined.
Staff notes the proposed Parcel #2 appears to have slopes in excess of 30%. Colorado State
Board of Health's "Guidelines on Individual Sewage Disposal Systems (Revised 2000)
require that no ISDS can be permitted on slopes of greater that 30% unless designed by a
registered professional engineer and approved by the local board of health." The Applicant
shall provide this information which highlights analysis in a narrative statement and
graphically which ultimately indicates satisfaction of this requirement.
1517 Blake Avenue,
Glenwood Springs, CO 81601
Telephone (970) 945-8676 - Fax (970) 945-2555
• Page 2
14 Inverness Drive East Suite B-144
Englewood, CO 80112
Telephone (303) 925-0544 - Fax (303) 925-0547
•
•
•
•
Mr. Jim Hardcastle
November 8, 2004
Page 3
On the slope analysis provided, there are two distinctive areas 7,144 sf and 4,770 sf
respectfully that are less than 30% and could accommodate an engineered ISDS location. As a
basis, a 4 bedroom home with a percolation rate of 30 min per inch would require a bed size of
1700 sf using three rows of 11 infiltrator units in a trench serial configuration. Upon receiving
a site specific geotechnical report a site specific design will be generated and submitted to
Garfield County at the time of the building permit application.
Based on the five (5) reasons for denial, we believe we have shown, with further investigation
and supplied material, that there should be no reason for denial of this project. The county
road subdivides the parcel and creates a significant amount of cut and fill so that practical
access from one parcel to another is not feasible. The provided slope analysis shows that the
property in question does contain steep slopes but a building envelope of 1 acre in less than
40% slopes is available on over 2.27 acres of the property and provides ample locations less
than 30% slope for the installation of an ISDS system. The applicant is willing to show water
access, grant easements and furnish the required documentation to convey water usage to the
new parcel, and the Garfield County Road and Bridge has walked the property and is ready to
approve a driveway permit granting legal use of the County Road.
We appreciate you help and cooperation during the course of this project. If you have any
questions please feel free to contact me directly at (970) 945-8676.
Sincerely,
HIGH COUNT Y ENGI ERING, INC.
Gr- tP G. aner, P.E.
enior Project Manager
1517 Blake Avenue,
Glenwood Springs, CO 81601
Telephone (970) 945-8676 - Fax (970) 945-2555
• Page 3
14 Inverness Drive East Suite B -I44
Englewood, CO 80112
Telephone (303) 925-0544 - Fax (303) 925-0547
• •
• Potential Conditions of Approval
1. Road cut or bore permits for a required water connection shall be obtained by the
applicant and shall be submitted to the Garfield County Road and Bridge Department
prior Recordation of the Final Plat.
2. Utility easements shall be placed on the final plat and submitted to the Garfield County
Road and Bridge Department for review prior Recordation of the Final Plat.
3. A driveway permit has been issued to the Applicant on 11/8/04 by the Garfield County
Road and Bridge Department. The Applicant shall abide by the requirements of said
permit and successfully execute the following items prior to issuance of the Special use
permit;
a. construct the required pad (30'WX3O'LX4"D constructed of asphalt)
b. clear vegetation along the ROW of CR 245 in 350' in both directions
c. construct pad with no more than a 3% slope away from CR 245
d. install a 30'WX30"L culvert
e. construct driveway to prevent drainage from accessing CR 245
f. Driveway to be reviewed upon completion
4. The Applicant shall adhere to the self described fire protection outlined below and
implement this plan for review approval prior to issuance of the Certificate of
Occupancy of any structures erected on this lot.
a. Implementation of a 100 foot perimeter clearing around any structure of
low growing fuel sources
b. Removal of decaying fuel sources including downfalls around any
structure
c. Maintain 35 ft. definitive area around any structures
d. Removal of all ladder fuel sources
e. Ten (10) foot spacing from the crown of all trees
f. Provide and maintain access road of a minimum of twenty feet width
and have a gravel base
14
afr\f(
Jenks — Exemption from the Definition of Subdivision
11/15/04, Continued 10/4/04
R
g
o