Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1.0 Application June 2015 Submitted on Behalf of: Berkeley Family Limited Liability Limited Partnership 4001 County Road 114 Glenwood Springs, Colorado 81601 Prepared by: TG Malloy Consulting, LLC 402 Park Drive Glenwood Springs, Colorado 81601 Email: tim@tgmalloy.com P: 970.945.0832 LAKE SPRINGS RANCH Preliminary Plan/PUD Amendment Application Lake Springs Ranch Subdivision Preliminary Plan & PUD Amendment June 2015 LAKE SPRINGS RANCH   SUBDIVISION PRELIMINARY PLAN & PUD AMENDMENT         TABLE OF CONTENTS  LIST OF FIGURES | PAGE ii LIST OF EXHIBITS | PAGE ii INTRODUCTION/DESCRIPTION OF AMENDMENTS| PAGE 1 REQUESTED APPROVALS & SUBMISSION REQUIREMENTS | PAGE 5 REVIEW CRITERIA – PRELIMINARY PLAN AMENDMENT | PAGE 7 REVIEW CRITERIA – PUD AMENDMENT | PAGE 21 SUMMARY | PAGE 28                  ii Lake Springs Ranch Subdivision Preliminary Plan & PUD Amendment June 2015 LIST OF EXHIBITS Exhibit 1 | Vicinity Map Exhibit 2 | Approved Drainage Basin Map Exhibit 3 | Plan Showing Filing 2 Utility Rerouting Exhibit 4 | Approved Prelimianry Plan Maps Exhibit 5 | Proposed Preliminary Plan Maps Exhibit 6 | Proposed Phasing Plan Exhibit 7 | Approved Phasing Plan Exhibit 8 | Land Use Change Application Forms Exhibit 9 | Proof of Ownership Documentation Exhibit 10 | Statement of Authority Exhibit 11 | Payment Agreement Form Exhibit 12 | Pre‐application Conference Summary Exhibit 13 | Adjacent Property Owner/Mineral Rights Mailing List Exhibit 14 | Mineral Assessment Reports Exhibit 15 | Professional Qualifications (High Country Engineering) Exhibit 16 | Revised Preliminary Drainage Report (High Country Engineering) Exhibit 17 | Resolution 2012-80 Exhibit 18 | Deed of Conservation Easement Exhibit 19 | AVLT Letter of Support Exhibit 20 | Email Regarding CDPHE Standards Exhibit 21 | Approved PUD Guide Exhibit 22 | Proposed PUD Guide Exhibit 23 | Revised Affordable Housing Plan and Agreement Exhibit 24 | Revised CCR’s (w/Track Changes)     - 1 -    Lake Springs Ranch Subdivision Preliminary Plan & PUD Amendment Application INTRODUCTION/DESCRIPTION OF AMENDMENTS The Lake Springs Ranch property is located approximately 3.5 miles southeast of Glenwood Springs along County Road 114 (CR 114). The property, which contains approximately 459.4 acres, is divided by CR 114. Exhibit 1 is a vicinity map that shows the general location and configuration of the property. The Applicants have been conserving the property in phases over the past 11 years through a conservation easement which is held by AVLT. In 2012 the Board of County Commissioners granted Preliminary Plan/PUD Amendment approval for the property as memorialized in Resolution No. 2012-80 (Exhibit 17). Since that time, the Applicants have discovered several issues which need to be addressed before they can pursue final platting for Filing 2 of the subdivision. The amendments that are being sought with this application are listed below, and additional information for each of the amendments is provided in the paragraphs that follow. The following list is divided into items for which Preliminary Plan approval is being sought versus those for which PUD Amendment approval is requested. Note that the redesign of Lots 8,9,11 and 13 show up in both lists (A3 and B1) since this action requires both PUD and Preliminary Plan Amendment approvals. A) Preliminary Plan Amendment Items A1. Amend the drainage plan to utilize more of the valley floor for temporary stormwater storage in order to minimize impacts on conserved lands; Lake Springs Ranch | Subdivision Preliminary Plan & PUD Amendment             June, 2015  - 2 -  A2. Eliminate Condition 15 of Resolution 2012-80 since additional stormwater impoundment will not be necessary, according to the revised drainage analysis; A3. Redesign Lots 8,9,11 and 13 of Filing 2 to allow cul-de-sacs to be removed from conserved area; A4. Revised language in Condition 14 of Resolution 2012-80 to clarify that the central water system must be reviewed under the CDPHE regulations for “community” water systems. B) PUD Amendment Items B1. Redesign Lots 8,9,11 and 13 of Filing 2 to allow cul-de-sacs to be removed from conserved area; B2. Amend Phasing Plan to required County Road 114 improvements from Filing 2 to Filing 3 and to shift 9 lots from Filing 4 to Filing 3; B3. Decrease the required affordable housing from 15% to the current requirement specified in the Garfield County Land Use and Development Code (10%). Items A1 through A3 of the above list are changes that are being made in response to input from the Aspen Valley Land Trust (AVLT). AVLT holds the Deed of Conservation Easement (DOCE – Exhibit 18) which encumbers a portion of the property and they are responsible for ensuring that the provisions of the conservation easement are honored. The drainage plan, which was approved in 2012, shows a stormwater detention basin which is isolated in the southern portion of the valley floor (see Exhibit 2 – Approved Drainage Basin Map). The design of the approved detention basin would require significant grading and dredging in order to accommodate the projected runoff. This grading would impact existing wetlands, a portion of which extend into the area covered by the DOCE (conserved area). The DOCE prohibits dredging or other alterations of wetlands located within the conserved area (paragraph 6.2(E)). Based on a revised drainage study (Exhibit 16) High Country Engineering has determined that there will not be an increase in the runoff from the property during the 25-year, 24-hour storm event. As a result, there is no need to create addition stormwater detention capacity on the property. Essentially, the valley floor already provides adequate storage for the design event. It will be necessary to install a larger culvert to carry stormwater under CR 119 at the north end of the property so as to avoid inundating the road during the 25-year event. Runoff from the 100-year event will temporarily overtop CR 119 as it currently does. A larger culvert will also be needed to allow stormwater to pass under the ranch road that runs through the middle of the valley floor in the east/west direction on the property. This culvert allows surface water runoff to pass from Lake Springs Ranch | Subdivision Preliminary Plan & PUD Amendment             June, 2015  - 3 -  the south end of the valley floor to the north and into the irrigation pond located on the south side of CR 119. Most importantly, no grading or other disturbance will be required within the conserved area, other than as necessary to install the larger culverts. The elimination of condition number 15 is being requested since no additional impoundment will be needed under the current drainage strategy. The current drainage plan does not require any additional water impoundment in the existing pond on the east side of CR 114 (East Pond). To be clear, the approved drainage plan would not have required any additional water impoundment in the East Pond either since the detention area was located on the valley floor and not in the East Pond. Both the approved and proposed drainage strategies do require passing additional stormwater through the East Pond but no significant additional water would be detained in the pond. The outlet pipe for the East Pond has been sized to allow the stormwater runoff generated during peak storm events to pass through the pond at a rate appropriate to handle the increased runoff. In addition, the invert elevation of the outlet pipe will be set to the same level as the current outlet pipe. As a result, the proposed drainage improvements will maintain the current water level in the pond even with the increased runoff generated by the additional impervious surface associated with the proposed development on the east side of CR 114. AVLT also requested that the cul-de-sacs, located at the north ends of Lake Springs Drive and Rivendell Drive, be relocated outside of the conserved area. This required that the Applicants redesign the cul-de-sacs and reconfigure Lots 8, 9, 11and 13 of Filing 2 (see proposed Preliminary Plan Amendment Sheets 4 and 7 – Exhibit 5). While these changes have made these lots smaller, they all still exceed the minimum lot size (.5 acres) and width requirements for lots on a cul- de-sac (25 feet). The Applicants have reviewed the proposed changes to the cul-de-sacs with AVLT. An earlier drainage analysis, which required the addition of fill to top of the existing embankment in order to accommodate the necessary detention capacity, was also review with AVLT. As a result, the letter of support from AVLT (Exhibit 20) mentions “raising the dike by 1.5 feet.” High Country Engineering has since determined that the additional fill will not be necessary. However, the Applicant would like to reserve the option of adding some fill to the dike/embankment with the requested approvals to allow some flexibility in the final design of the drainage facilities on the property. The Applicants are also requesting to modify the phasing plan to shift the proposed improvements to County Road 114 from Filing 2 to Filing 3 and to shift 9 lots from Filing 4 to Filing 3 (see Exhibit 6). Filing 2 includes the remaining non- conserved portion of the sod fields that occupy the valley floor. This filing also includes 14 lots which occupy the area where the existing sod farm office and Lake Springs Ranch | Subdivision Preliminary Plan & PUD Amendment             June, 2015  - 4 -  storage facilities are located. There are several reasons for seeking this change to the phasing plan. The proposed improvements to CR 114 represent a substantial cost, largely due to the realignment of the County Road in the area of the East Pond. Filing 2 contains only 14 lots, the sale of which would not generate enough revenue to cover the cost of the CR 114 improvements in addition to the infrastructure required to develop the lots. Another factor affecting the cost of development for Filing 2 is that much of the domestic water system will need to be constructed in order to serve the Lots in Filing 2. The Applicants are requesting that the phasing plan be amended to shift the 9 lots, in the area of Tract A, from Filing 4 to Filing 3. Filing 3, as revised, would contain an additional 27 lots which will help offset the cost of the contemplated improvements to CR 114. Filing 3 also includes grading associated with the installation of Lakeside Lane and the establishment of the building pads for the lots adjacent to the pond. Since the contemplated realignment of CR 114 near the East Pond will require grading in this same area, it will be much more efficient to construct the CR 114 realignment as part of the Filing 3 construction work. Deferring the CR 114 improvements to Filing 3 should not significantly impact traffic flow on CR 114 since Filing 2 includes only 14 lots. Also, the intersection of Spring Valley Road and CR 114 can be constructed without having completed the planned CR 114 improvements since this intersection is located along a segment of the County Road where few changes are contemplated. One exception is that CR 114 will be slightly lowered in the area of the intersection with Spring Valley Road/Lake Springs Drive. As a result, a short segment of Spring Valley Road, immediately adjacent to the intersection with CR 114, would need to be lowered to provide the proper grade for the intersection approach when the improvements to CR 114 are constructed. However, some amount of disturbance at this intersection would occur during the construction of the east leg of the intersection (Lake Springs Drive) when Filing 3 is developed regardless. Perhaps the most beneficial aspect of deferring the CR 114 improvements to Filing 3 is that the improvements could be completed in a single construction season which would reduce construction impacts for traffic on CR 114. There are a few other minor adjustments that would need to be made to the project as a result of the requested phasing revision such as changing the alignment of a short segment of proposed gas, telephone and electric lines. Exhibit 3 shows the alignment of these utilities as currently contemplated. The revised alignment, which is on the west side of the realigned CR 114, is being proposed in order to minimize disturbance to the existing CR 114 travel lanes during installation. These are relatively minor revisions that would be addressed Lake Springs Ranch | Subdivision Preliminary Plan & PUD Amendment             June, 2015  - 5 -  at final plat for Filings 2 and 3 and again when permitting was sought for the installation of the utilities. The request to amend the language in Condition 14 of Resolution No. 2012-80 is the result of a clarification provided by the Garfield County Community Development Department staff who had included this condition in the resolution of approval in 2012. Shortly after Resolution 2012-80 was recorded, the Community Department informed the Applicants by email (Exhibit 20) that they had contacted the Colorado Department of Public Health & Environment (CDPHE) and been informed that the water system for the Lake Springs Ranch PUD would be classified as a “community system” as opposed to a “non- transient, non-community system” as is identified in Condition 14. The Applicants are simply seeking to formalize this correction. The final requested change is to reduce the affordable housing requirement from 15% to the standard currently identified in the Garfield County Land Use and Development Code (LUDC), which is 10%. REQUESTED APPROVALS & SUBMISSION REQUIREMENTS Application Submission Requirements The Applicant is seeking PUD and Preliminary Plan amendment approval for the Lake Springs Ranch PUD as outlined in the Pre-application Conference Summary provide in Exhibit 12. This application includes the maps and other documentation required for review of the requested amendments. The submittal requirements from the Pre-application Conference Summary are listed below along with the location in this application where each item can be found. The bold text indicates whether a particular item satisfies the submittal requirements for one or the other of the requested approvals (PUD Amendment or Preliminary Plan Amendment) or both. The regulatory documents and code sections containing the submission requirements and review criteria, as specified in the Pre-application Conference Summary, are addressed in the Review Criteria section of this application. A complete list of all maps and exhibits contained in this application is provided in the table of contents for this application. List of Application Submission Requirements  4-203.A & B General Application Materials: o Application Forms:  Preliminary Plan Amendment: Exhibit 8a (preliminary plan);  PUD Amendment: Exhibit 8b (PUD); Lake Springs Ranch | Subdivision Preliminary Plan & PUD Amendment             June, 2015  - 6 -  o Ownership Documentation: Exhibit 9 (both); o Statement of Authority: Exhibit 10 (both); o Fee Payment and Payment Agreement Forms: Exhibit 11 (both); o Pre-application Conference Summary : Exhibit 12 (both); o List of Property Owners within 200 feet: Exhibit 13 (both); o Name and Address of Mineral Owners: Exhibit 13 (both); o Project Description: See Introduction of this application (both); o Professional Qualifications: Exhibit 15 (both).  4-303.C Vicinity Map: Exhibit 1 (both);  4-203.D Site Plan: see Preliminary Plan Map  4-203.E Grading and Drainage Plan: Exhibit 16 (preliminary plan)  Previous Approval Resolutions & Relevant Documents: Exhibit 17 (both).  5-302.C Compliance with Article 7; Divisions 1, 2, 3 and 4: See Review Criteria section of this application (preliminary plan);  5-402.D Preliminary Plan Map: (preliminary plan) o Approved: Exhibit 4; o Proposed: Exhibit 5;  5-402.I Revised Code, Covenants, Restrictions: Exhibit 24 (preliminary plan)  6-302.A PUD Plan: (PUD) o Approved: Exhibit 21; o Proposed: Exhibit 22 (PUD Zoning Map is at the end of this exhibit);  6-401 PUD Development Standards: See Review Criteria section of this application (PUD);  8-201(A) Affordable Housing Plan and Agreement: See Review Criteria section of this application and Exhibit 23 (both); The proof of ownership documentation contained in Exhibit 9 is similar to the documentation provided in the prior Preliminary Plan/PUD Amendment application submitted in June of 2011. The only change in ownership that has occurred since 2011 is that the land swaps between the Berkeleys, CMC and the Nieslaniks, which were pending at the time of 2011 application, have been completed. As a result, Exhibit 9 contains an update Title Commitment, as well as the recorded boundary line adjustment affidavit and quit claim deeds for these transactions instead of the contract memorandums that were included in the 2011 application. Also, since the property does include federally held mineral rights, we have included an update regarding the current status of mineral rights (Exhibit 14c); and two mineral assessment reports (Exhibits 14a and 14b), which were included in the June 2011 application. These reports conclude that the probability of surface mining occurring on the property is so remote as to be negligible. Lake Springs Ranch | Subdivision Preliminary Plan & PUD Amendment             June, 2015  - 7 -  REVIEW CRITERIA – PRELIMINARY PLAN AMENDMENT The applicants are requesting the following amendments to the Preliminary Plan approvals as memorialized in Resolution No. 2012-80: A1. Amend the drainage plan to utilize more of the valley floor for temporary stormwater storage in order to minimize impacts on conserved lands; A2. Eliminate Condition 15 of Resolution 2012-80 since additional stormwater impoundment will not be necessary, according to the revised drainage analysis; A3. Redesign Lots 8,9,11 and 13 of Filing 2 to allow cul-de-sacs to be removed from conserved area; A4. Revised language in Condition 14 of Resolution 2012-80 to clarify that the central water system must be reviewed under the CDPHE regulations for “community” water systems. The regulatory provisions that are required to be addressed for the requested preliminary plan amendments are listed below and addressed in the paragraphs that follow.  List of Applicable Regulatory Provisions Preliminary Plan Amendment  Garfield County Comprehensive Plan 2030 (as amended 11/8/2013)  Section 4-106: Amendment to an Approved Land Use Change Permit  Section 5-302.C: Article 7; Divisions 1 through 4 (as applicable)  Section 5-304: Amended Preliminary Plan  Section 5-401: Application Submittal Requirements  8-201(A): Affordable Housing Plan and Agreement (see discussion under Review Criteria – PUD) Discussion regarding compliance with the Garfield County Comprehensive Plan is addressed beginning on the following page. This discussion is intended to apply to both the Preliminary Plan and PUD amendment requests. Sections 4-106 and 5-304 of the Land Use and Development Code (LUDC) describe the process for reviewing amendments to land use change permits and preliminary plans and provide the criteria for determining whether particular amendments qualify as minor or substantial. In this case, the Community Development Department has determined that the proposed amendments do not qualify as minor and must be reviewed pursuant to the standards for substantial modifications. The contents of this application have been prepared based on this direction. Section 5-401 contains the table which identifies the Lake Springs Ranch | Subdivision Preliminary Plan & PUD Amendment             June, 2015  - 8 -  submission requirements for various types of subdivision and subdivision amendment applications. However, Section 5-304.B.2.b.1 of the LUDC specifies that the Community Development Director has the authority to determine the submission requirements for preliminary plan amendment applications that have been determined to contain substantial modifications. In accordance with this section, the Community Development Department provided a list of submission requirements in the Pre-application Conference Summary (Exhibit 12). The submission requirements are also listed on pages 5 and 6 of this application for convenience. This application contains all of the maps, reports and other documents identified in Pre-application Conference Summary, including a revised PUD Guide (Exhibit 22) and revised Declaration of Covenants, Conditions and Restrictions (Exhibit 24). The revised Declaration of Convents, Conditions and Restrictions was done using Track Changes so that the proposed revisions can be easily identified. Section 5-302.C specifies the criteria for which compliance must be demonstrated in preliminary plan applications. The criteria that must be met are contained in Divisions 1 through 4 of the standards section of the LUDC (Article 7). Since the Applicants are seeking relatively minor amendments to the approved Preliminary Plan, only those standards that relate to the proposed amendments have been addressed in this application. For example, none of the requested amendments have any impact on any wildlife habitat, wildfire hazard areas, or geologic hazards so compliance with these criteria is not discussed in this section. For convenience, the actual text from the LUDC is provided and has been highlighted in bold and italics.  Compliance with Garfield County Comp Plan (both applications) The discussion in this section applies to both the preliminary plan and PUD amendment requests. The Lake Springs Ranch PUD was found to be in general conformance with the Garfield County Comprehensive Plan 2030 (Comp Plan) during the Preliminary Plan/PUD Amendment review which was conducted in 2012 (see Paragraph I(3) of Resolution No. 2012-80). The Comp Plan was amended in Novemebr of 2013. However, the Preliminary Plan and PUD amendments requested in this application woud not be affected by any of the changes made to the Comp Plan. The Comp Plan sets overarching policies related to growth, community character, environmental preservation and other broad policy issues. With the exception of the request to modify the number of required affordable housing units, the amendments requested in this application involve issues at a level of detail that the Comp Plan is not intended to address. Therefore, the amended Lake Springs Ranch PUD, as currently proposed, Lake Springs Ranch | Subdivision Preliminary Plan & PUD Amendment             June, 2015  - 9 -  continues to meet the standard of genral conformance with the goals and policies of the current Comp Plan. Regarding the Applicant’s request to amend the number of required affordable housing units, the current Land Use and Development Code was amended in 2013 to change the number of required affordable housing units for subdivisions located in the Roaring Fork Valley from 15% of the number of lots in the subdivision to 10%. That same year, the Comp Plan was also amended to include a reference to the 10% requirement in the Housing Element Section. No other significant changes have been made to the Housing Element of the Comp Plan. The current Comp Plan still supports the idea of requiring new development to contribute its fair share to providing affordable housing and it still recommends allowing required affordable housing to be constructed where urban services are available. In addition, Goal #1 of the Housing Element of the Comp Plan promotes the development of a range of housing types and price levels. The revised Affordable Housing Plan and Agreement for the Lake Springs Ranch PUD continues to include 1, 2 and 3 bedroom units that would be deed restricted to categories 1 through 3, which is consistent with this goal. Other than the number of units, all other aspects of the affordable housing component of the Lake Springs Ranch PUD will remain as described in the draft Affordable Housing Plan and Agreement that was reviewed by the County in 2012. A revised version of the Affordable Housing Plan and Agreement has been provided with this application (Exhibit 23) as required in Section 8-202 of the LUDC. The revised Affordable Housing Plan reflects the proposed changes to the number, unit type and category mix of the required affordable housing units based on the 10% standard contained in Section 8-301.A of the LUDC.  Compliance with Article 7: Standards (Divisions 1 through 4) 7-101 Compliance with Zone District Use Restrictions: The Land Use Change shall comply with Article 3, Zoning, including any applicable zone district use restrictions and regulations. Response: The underlying zoning in this case is the existing PUD which was last amended in 2012. No changes to the allowed density, allowed uses or any other aspect of the PUD zoning as described in the PUD Guide, which was approved in 2012 and recorded at Reception No. 842009, are proposed with this application. The recorded PUD Guide has been provided as Exhibit 21 of this application. A revised PUD Guide has also been provided with this application (Exhibit 22). Exhibit 22 includes the PUD Zoning Map which remains unchanged from the version approved in 2012. The changes in the revised PUD Guide deal with the proposed amendment to the number of affordable housing units and a request Lake Springs Ranch | Subdivision Preliminary Plan & PUD Amendment             June, 2015  - 10 -  to eliminate a provision which prohibits more than three (3) dwelling units within the R/CH District. The rationale for these changes to the PUD Guide are discussed later in this application. No other substantive changes are necessary. 7-102 Compliance with Comprehensive Plan and Intergovernmental Agreements: The Land Use Change is in general conformance with the Garfield County Comprehensive Plan and complies with any applicable intergovernmental agreement. Response: See Comprehensive Plan Compliance section above. 7-107 Access and Roadways: All roads shall be designed to provide for adequate and safe access and shall be reviewed by the County Engineer. D. Road Dedications. All rights-of-way shall be dedicated to the public and so designated on the Final Plat. They will not, however, be accepted as County roads unless the BOCC specifically designates and accepts them as such. E. Impacts Mitigated. Impacts to County roads associated with hauling, truck traffic, and equipment use shall be mitigated through roadway improvements or impact fees, or both. Response: The only change to the road system proposed at this time is the redesign of the cul-de-sacs at the ends of Spring Valley Road and Rivendell Road. Both of these cul-de-sacs have been designed in accordance with the road standards contained in Section 7-107 of the LUDC. The approved Preliminary Plan includes a set of improvements to CR 114 as mitigation for the road impacts associated with the project. These improvements include a significant realignment of CR 114 in the area of the East Pond as well as other minor adjustments to the road alignment through the Lake Springs Ranch property and a widening of the road and shoulders. In addition, the approved Preliminary Plan shows a new right-of-way for CR 114, which follows the new road alignment and widens the right-of-way from the current 60-foot width to 80-feet. The 80-foot width matches the right-of-way width identified on the preliminary plan for the adjacent Spring Valley Ranch project. The new right-of-way will be dedicated to the County at final plat for either Filing 2 or 3, whichever the County deems acceptable. Since the Applicants are requesting that the actual improvements to CR 114 be shifted to Filing 3 they are also requesting that the right-of-way be dedicated with the final plat for Filing 3. This has been proposed in order to simplify the final plat process for Filing 2, which the Applicants hope to complete in 2015. Lake Springs Ranch | Subdivision Preliminary Plan & PUD Amendment             June, 2015  - 11 -  Regardless of when the CR 114 right-of-way is dedicated, the request to shift the actual CR 114 improvements to Filing 3 results in the need to address a temporary condition associated with the location of the existing and future right-of-way boundaries relative to the existing CR 114 travel lanes. The drawings on the following pages show two options for addressing this temporary condition, both of which could be addressed in the Filing 2 final plat. Option A, which is preferred by the Applicants, involves dedicating the future CR 114 right-of-way at final plat for Filing 3. As shown on the Option A drawing, this results in a gap between the existing right-of-way line along the west side of CR 114 and the east property lines of the open space parcel and Lots 1 and 2 of Filing 2. The Applicants propose to address this issue by labelling this gap as an “out parcel/future right-of-way” on the Filing 2 final plat. Under this option, this gap would become part of the new right-of-way for CR 114 and would be dedicated to the public with the Filing 3 final plat. This option also requires the establishment of a temporary access easement to extend the public right of access from the end of the Spring Valley Road right-of-way, which will be dedicated at final plat for Filing 2, across the previously-described narrow out parcel to the existing CR 114 right-of-way (see Option B drawing below). The temporary easement would also be vacated when the new right-of-way for CR 114 is dedicated with the Filing 3 final plat. Option B involves dedicating the new right-of-way for CR 114 at the time of the final plat for Filing 2 but not making the improvements to CR 114 until the development of Filing 3. As shown on the Option B drawing, this approach would require the vacation of the existing CR 114 right-of-way and creation of a temporary access easement for the small segment of the existing CR 114 alignment that would remain outside of the new right-of-way. This easement would be drafted so that it would sunset when the realignment of CR 114 was completed. While the Applicant’s prefer Option A, we are seeking direction from the County as to the best approach for handling this interim condition. Lake Springs Ranch | Subdivision Preliminary Plan & PUD Amendment             June, 2015  - 12 -  Option A - Temporary R.O.W. Condition Source: High Country Engineering Lake Springs Ranch | Subdivision Preliminary Plan & PUD Amendment             June, 2015  - 13 -  Option B - Temporary R.O.W. Condition Source: High Country Engineering Lake Springs Ranch | Subdivision Preliminary Plan & PUD Amendment             June, 2015  - 14 -  7-201 Agricultural Lands: A. No Adverse Affect to Agricultural Operations - Land use changes on lands adjacent to or directly affecting agricultural operations shall not adversely affect, or otherwise limit the viability of existing agricultural operations. Proposed division and development of the land shall minimize the impacts of residential development on agricultural lands and agricultural operations, and maintain the opportunity for agricultural production. Response: The subject property includes the Rivendell Sod Farm, which produces sod for landscaping purposes. The sod fields and related facilities are located entirely on the west side of CR 114 and primarily occupy the valley floor and portions of the immediately adjacent slopes. In 2012, the County found that the Lake Springs Ranch Preliminary Plan and PUD amendment, which was being reviewed at that time, met the standards and criteria of the then-adopted Unified Land Use Resolution (ULUR), which included this same criteria (Section 7- 201.A). The only aspects of the currently-proposed amendments that affect the existing agricultural operations are relocation of the cul-de-sacs and redesign of the drainage plan. Both of these changes are being made to avoid impacts to lands that are encumbered by the existing conservation easement and to minimize impacts to agricultural lands and adjacent wetlands. In particular, the proposed change to the drainage plan will eliminate the need for significant grading of the valley floor to achieve the necessary storage volume for stormwater detention. This will leave the existing agricultural lands undisturbed except during the rare times when stormwater runoff is flowing through the valley floor. It should be noted that development of the lots in Filing 2 will require removal and reconstruction of many of the existing structures and facilities utilized in the sod farm operation. Removal of these facilities, while not directly impacting the agricultural lands, may raise some questions about the practical and economic realities of continuing the sod farm operation, at least as currently managed. However, these questions are the result of aspects of the subdivision which are not related to the amendments being proposed at this time. In fact, redesign of the drainage plan, as currently proposed, would increase the post development viability of the agricultural use of the property, since it will leave the existing sod fields on the valley floor undisturbed. 7-203. Protection of Waterbodies. A. Minimum Setback. 1. A setback of 35 feet measured horizontally from the Typical and Ordinary High Water Mark (TOHWM) on each side of a Waterbody is required. Lake Springs Ranch | Subdivision Preliminary Plan & PUD Amendment             June, 2015  - 15 -  2. In the case of entrenched or incised streams, where the vertical distance from the bank exceeds 25 feet, all activities, except for those referenced in section 7-203.A.3, will adhere to a setback of 2.5 times the distance between the TOHWMs or 35 feet, whichever is less. 3. A minimum setback of 100 feet measured horizontally from the TOHWM shall be required for any storage of hazardous materials and sand and salt for use on roads. B. Structures Permitted In Setback. Irrigation and water diversion facilities, flood control structures, culverts, bridges, pipelines, and other reasonable and necessary structures requiring some disturbance within the 35 foot setback may be permitted. C. Structures and Activity Prohibited in Setback. Unless otherwise permitted or approved, the following activities and development shall be prohibited in the 35 foot setback: 1. Removal of any existing native vegetation or conducting any activity which will cause any loss of riparian area unless it involves the approved removal of noxious weeds, nonnative species, or dead or diseased trees. 2. Disturbance of existing natural surface drainage characteristics, sedimentation patterns, flow patterns, or flood retention characteristics by any means, including without limitation grading and alteration of existing topography. Measures taken to restore existing topography to improve drainage, flow patterns, and flood control must be approved. D. Compliance with State and Federal Laws. Any development impacting a Waterbody shall comply with all applicable state and federal laws, including, but not limited to, CDPHE water quality control division regulations and the Army Corp of Engineers regulations and permitting for waters of the U.S. Response: The Applicants are proposing to replace an existing culvert, which runs under CR 119 near the north end of the property, with a larger culvert. The location of the culvert is within the 35-foot setback from the irrigation pond. Upsizing is also planned for the culvert that carries water under the ranch road near the middle of the property. However, Subsection B of this section allows flood control structures, irrigation water diversion facilities, culverts, and other reasonable and necessary structures to be constructed within the 35-foot setback. The proposed culverts are being added, as part of the revised drainage strategy, to allow passage of the stormwater runoff during the 25-year event and to avoid inundating CR 119. The revised drainage strategy eliminates Lake Springs Ranch | Subdivision Preliminary Plan & PUD Amendment             June, 2015  - 16 -  other, more injurious, impacts to the wetlands at the south end of the property, as contemplated in the approved drainage plan. We would also argue that the existing irrigation pond qualifies for exemption from the definition of a “waterbody” as described in Article 15 of the LUDC, which states: “Waterbody” does not include irrigation ditches used for the sole purpose of agriculture, and water impoundments. The existing pond is essentially a widening of the irrigation ditch and is the source of irrigation water for the adjacent sod fields on the Lake Springs Ranch. The Applicants will comply with all applicable State and Federal regulations necessary for the installation of the proposed culverts. 7-204 Drainage and Erosion. B. Drainage 1. Site Design to Facilitate Positive Drainage. Lots shall be laid out to provide positive drainage away from all buildings. 2. Coordination with Area Storm Drainage Pattern. Individual lot drainage shall be coordinated with the general storm drainage pattern for the area. a. Drainage ditches shall have a minimum Slope of no less than 0.75%. Energy dissipaters or retention ponds shall be installed in drainage ditches where flows are in excess of 5 feet per second. Ditches adjacent to roads shall have a maximum Slope of 3:1 on the inside and outside edges, except where there is a cut Slope on the outside edge, in which case the edge of the ditch shall be matched to the cut Slope. b. Subdrains shall be required for all foundations where possible and shall divert away from building foundations and daylight to proper drainage channels. c. Avoid Drainage to Adjacent Lots. Drainage shall be designed to avoid concentration of drainage from any lot to an adjacent lot. C. Stormwater Run-Off These standards shall apply to any new development within 100 feet of a Waterbody and to any other development creating 10,000 square feet or more of impervious surface area. 1. Avoid Direct Discharge to Streams or Other Waterbodies. Stormwater Runoff from project areas likely to contain pollutants shall be managed in a manner that provides for at least 1 of the following and is sufficient to Lake Springs Ranch | Subdivision Preliminary Plan & PUD Amendment             June, 2015  - 17 -  prevent water quality degradation, disturbance to adjoining property, and degradation of public roads. a. Runoff to Vegetated Areas. Direct run-off to stable, vegetated areas capable of maintaining Sheetflow for infiltration. Vegetated receiving areas should be resistant to erosion from a design storm of 0.5 inches in 24 hours. b. On-Site Treatment. On-site treatment of stormwater prior to discharge to any natural Waterbody by use of best management practices designed to detain or infiltrate the Runoff and approved as part of the stormwater quality control plan prior to discharge to any natural Waterbody. c. Discharge to Stormwater Conveyance Structure. Discharge to a stormwater conveyance structure designed to accommodate the projected additional flows from the proposed project, with treatment by a regional or other stormwater treatment facility. 2. Minimize Directly-Connected Impervious Areas. The site design shall minimize the extent of directly-connected impervious areas by including the following requirements: a. Drainage through Vegetated Pervious Buffer Strips. Runoff from developed impervious surfaces (rooftops, Parking Lots, sidewalks, etc.) shall drain over stable, vegetated pervious areas before reaching stormwater conveyance systems or discharging to Waterbodies. b. Techniques Used in Conjunction with Buffer Strip. The requirement that all impervious areas drain to vegetated pervious buffer strips may be reduced if the outflow from the vegetated pervious buffer strip is directed to other stormwater treatment methods. Examples of other potential techniques to be used in conjunction with vegetated pervious buffer strip are: infiltration devices, grass depressions, constructed Wetlands, sand filters, dry ponds, etc. c. Grass Buffer Strip Slope Design. When impervious surfaces drain onto grass buffer strips, a Slope of less than 10% is encouraged, unless an alternative design is approved by the County. 3. Detain and Treat Runoff. Permanent stormwater detention facilities are required to be designed to detain flows to historic peak discharge rates and to provide water quality benefits and maintained to ensure function. Design criteria for detention facilities include: a. Detention facilities shall ensure the post-development peak discharge rate does not exceed the pre-development peak discharge rate for the 2-year and 25-year return frequency, 24-hour duration storm. In determining Runoff rates, the entire area contributing Runoff shall be considered, including any existing off-site contribution. Lake Springs Ranch | Subdivision Preliminary Plan & PUD Amendment             June, 2015  - 18 -  b. To minimize the threat of major property damage or loss of life, all permanent stormwater detention facilities must demonstrate that there is a safe passage of the 100-year storm event without causing property damage. c. Channels downstream from the stormwater detention pond discharge shall be protected from increased channel scour, bank instability, and erosion and sedimentation from the 25-year return frequency, 24-hour design storm. d. Removal of pollutants shall be accomplished by sizing dry detention basins to incorporate a 40-hour emptying time for a design precipitation event of 0.5 inches in 24 hours, with no more than 50% of the water being released in 12 hours. If retention ponds are used, a 24-hour emptying time is required. For drainage from Parking Lots, vehicle maintenance facilities, or other areas with extensive vehicular use, a sand and oil grease trap or similar measures also may be required. To promote pollutant removal, detention basins length-to-width ratio should be not less than 2, with a ratio of 4 recommended where site constraints allow. A sedimentation “forebay” is recommended to promote long-term functioning of the structure. Access to both the forebay and pond by maintenance equipment is required. e. Culverts, drainage pipes, and bridges shall be designed and constructed in compliance with AASHTO recommendations for a water live load. Response: Exhibit 16 is the revised drainage plan prepared by High Country Engineering. The primary change to the drainage plan is that the temporary storage of stormwater runoff has been expanded to incorporate more of the valley floor within the Lake Springs Ranch property. This change eliminates the need for grading to accommodate the projected design-year stormwater runoff. The plan approved in 2012 required significant grading and excavation to create the detention capacity needed at the south end of the sod fields. The current plan requires only the installation of larger culverts to accommodate the 25-year storm flowrate. These and all other drainage facilities associated with the project have been designed in accordance with the standards and requirements of this section of the Garfield County LUDC. The proposed stormwater flows will be treated prior to discharging offsite and runoff from the proposed site will be kept to historic levels for both 25-year and 100-year storm events. The proposed drainage facilities are shown on the drawings contained in Exhibit 16. While the revised drainage plan requires a small amount of disturbance within the conserved area (for culvert installation), the proposed drainage strategy has been reviewed with AVLT and they have provided a letter of support (Exhibit 19). The Applicants will continue to work with AVLT as more detailed information regarding drainage improvements become available. All disturbance Lake Springs Ranch | Subdivision Preliminary Plan & PUD Amendment             June, 2015  - 19 -  associated with the proposed improvements to the existing embankment and drainage culverts will be revegetated in accordance with County standards. 7-402. Subdivision Lots. All lots in any Subdivision shall conform to the following specifications: A. Lots Conform to Code. Lot area, width, frontage, depth, shape, location, and orientation shall conform to the applicable zone district requirements and other appropriate provisions of this Code. 1. The Lot Size may be increased for lots developed in areas posing a potential hazard to health or safety due to soil conditions or geology. 2. Lot characteristics shall be appropriate for the location of the development and the type of use allowed. a. Depth and width of lots shall be adequate to provide for the required off-street parking and loading facilities required by the type of use and development contemplated. b. The width of residential corner lots shall be sufficient to accommodate the required building setback from both roads. B. Side Lot Line Alignment. Side Lot Lines shall be substantially at right angles or radial to road right-of- way lines. C. Lots Configuration, Cul-de-Sacs. Wedge-shaped lots or lots fronting on cul-de-sacs shall be a minimum of 25 feet in width at the front property line. D. Lot Division by Boundaries, Roads, or Easements Prohibited. No lots shall be divided by municipal boundaries, County roads or public rights-of-way. Response: The proposed revision to the cul-de-sacs at the ends of Springs Valley Road and Rivendell Road require the reconfiguration of lots 8, 9, 11 and 13 of Filing 2. The image below is an excerpt from the proposed Preliminary Plan Overall Map and shows these four lots and the related cul-de-sacs. Lake Springs Ranch | Subdivision Preliminary Plan & PUD Amendment             June, 2015  - 20 -  Source: High Country Engineering Lots 8 and 13 were minimally affected by the redesign of the cul-de-sacs. The changes to Lots 9 and 11 were more significant but these lots continue to comply with all of the standards contained in the approved PUD Guide as well as those listed above for this section of the LUDC. All four lots exceed the lot width requirement for lots located on a cul-de-sac as specified in Section 7-402.C of the LUDC. Lot 11 is the smallest of the four lots at .717 acres. The minimum lot size identified in the approved PUD Guide is .5 acres.  Compliance with Section 8-201(A) Affordable Housing Plan Discussion of compliance with this section is provided at the end of the Review Criteria – PUD Amendment section which follows. Lake Springs Ranch | Subdivision Preliminary Plan & PUD Amendment             June, 2015  - 21 -  REVIEW CRITERIA – PUD AMENDMENT The applicants are requesting the following amendments to the approved PUD as memorialized in Resolution No. 2012-80: B1. Redesign Lots 8,9,11 and 13 of Filing 2 to allow cul-de-sacs to be removed from conserved area; B2. Amend Phasing Plan to required County Road 114 improvements from Filing 2 to Filing 3 and to shift 9 lots from Filing 4 to Filing 3; B3. Decrease the required affordable housing from 15% to the current requirement specified in the Garfield County Land Use and Development Code (10%). The Pre-application Conference Summary lists the regulatory provisions that are required to be addressed for the requested PUD amendments (see list below).  List of Applicable Regulatory Provisions PUD Amendment  Garfield County Comprehensive Plan 2030 (as amended 11/8/2013)  LUDC Section 6-202: PUD Zoning  LUDC Section 6-203.B.1.b: PUD Amendment, Substantial Modification  LUDC Section 6-302: PUD Zoning  LUDC Section 6-401: PUD Development Standards  8-201(A): Affordable Housing Plan and Agreement Compliance with the Garfield County Comprehensive Plan was addressed in the Review Criteria - Preliminary Plan Amendment Section of this application. Section 6-203.B.1.b of the LUDC outlines the process for reviewing PUD amendments and provides the criteria for determining whether particular amendments qualify as minor or substantial. The Community Development Department has determined that the proposed amendments do not qualify for a minor review due to the fact that the requested amendments include a change in the approved phasing plan. Section 6-302 describes the drawings and other information which would ordinarily be required for a PUD or PUD amendment application. In this case, the Community Development Director has determined the application submission requirements, as permitted by the LUDC. The submission requirements are identified in the Pre-application Conference Summary and are included in the list of application submission requirements at the beginning of this application. Section 6-202.C of the ULUR contains the list of review criteria for PUD and PUD amendment applications. The primary review criteria are contained in Section 6-401, which is referenced in Section 6-202.C, Lake Springs Ranch | Subdivision Preliminary Plan & PUD Amendment             June, 2015  - 22 -  and in Section 8-201(A) for the requested decrease in the required affordable housing. The applicable criteria from these sections are addressed below.  Compliance with Section 6-401 PUD Development Standards 6-401 PUD Development Standards: At the time of zoning as a PUD, the Applicant may request that the BOCC modify the specifications, standards, and requirements to which the parcel(s) would be otherwise subject based on the zone district requirements set forth in Article 3. The BOCC may grant a modification if the Applicant demonstrates that the proposed specifications, standards, and requirements meet support the purpose of the PUD. In addition, the PUD Plan shall meet the following criteria: A. Permitted Uses. 1. Permitted uses within the PUD are all uses that are either permitted in the underlying zone district or are in general conformance with the Comprehensive Plan. 2. Upon approval, the uses that shall be permitted in any particular PUD shall be those permitted by the PUD Guide. B. Off-Street Parking. The PUD shall provide parking areas adequate in terms of location, area, circulation, safety, convenience, separation, and screening. C. Density. 1. Nonresidential Density. The density of nonresidential development allowed within a PUD shall comply with the Comprehensive Plan and shall not exceed the level that can be adequately served by public facilities. 2. Residential Density. a. Residential density shall be no greater than 2 dwelling units per gross acre within the PUD; provided, that the BOCC may allow an increase to a maximum of 15 dwelling units per gross acre in areas where public water and sewer systems, owned and operated by a municipal government or special district, pursuant to C.R.S. § 32-1-103(20) are readily available. b. Residential density shall be calculated by summing the number of residential dwelling units planned within the boundary of the PUD and dividing by the total gross area expressed in acres within the boundary of the PUD. Averaging and transferring of densities within the PUD shall be allowed upon a showing of conformance with the purposes of this section through appropriate design features within the PUD that will achieve high standards of design and livability. Lake Springs Ranch | Subdivision Preliminary Plan & PUD Amendment             June, 2015  - 23 -  D. Housing Types. For PUDs proposing residential uses: 1. The PUD shall provide for variety in housing types and densities; and 2. The PUD shall comply with Article 8, in regards to the provision of Affordable Housing. E. Transportation and Circulation System. The PUD shall provide a safe, convenient, and adequate circulation system designed to accommodate emergency vehicles and other vehicular, pedestrian, and bicycle traffic. F. Recreational Amenities. The PUD shall provide recreational opportunities and amenities to residents of the PUD, if applicable. G. Building Height. The maximum height of buildings may be increased above the maximum allowed in the zone district so long as the height does not result in unreasonable adverse effect on adjacent sites or other areas in the immediate vicinity in regard to shadows, loss of air circulation, or loss of view. H. Lots. 1. The minimum Lot Size, the minimum setback, and the maximum Lot Coverage may be modified from the zone district. 2. Each lot shall contain an acceptable building site, unless the lot is specifically reserved for use that does not allow for a structure. I. Phasing. Each phase within a PUD shall be planned and related to existing surrounding and available facilities and services so that failure to proceed to a subsequent phase will not have a substantially adverse impact on the prior and future phases of the PUD or its surroundings. Response: The proposed amendments do not affect most of these criteria. The permitted uses identified in the Approved PUD Guide (Exhibit 21) will remain unchanged. The allowed uses listed in the PUD Guide include single-family and multi-family residential, open space, trails, agriculture (including the existing sod farm and related landscape implement materials dealer), and wildlife preservation. All other dimensional requirements described in the approved PUD Guide, including the building heights, will also remain unchanged. None of the amendments requested in this application would have any effect on the amount Lake Springs Ranch | Subdivision Preliminary Plan & PUD Amendment             June, 2015  - 24 -  of off-street parking, housing types, the transportation and circulation system or the recreational amenities. A revised PUD Guide has been provided as Exhibit 22 of this application. It’s important to note that the requested PUD amendments do not include any changes to the approved PUD Zone Map, which is attached to the revised PUD Guide. None of the zone districts shown on the PUD Zone Map are altered in any way as a result of this application. The revisions contained in the Proposed PUD Guide address the requested change to the number of affordable housing units as well as the elimination of a provision in section VII(B)(1) which states that no more than three dwelling units may exist in the R/C.H. District. This provision was added by the Community Development Department Staff during the 2012 review process. It’s unclear why this provision was added since the R/C.H. District encompasses the entire Tract A which is the area of the PUD where the multi-family dwelling units are planned to be located. In fact, the R/C.H. District is the only zone district within the PUD where multi-family units are permitted. Tract A contains 7.74 acres which is ample room to comfortably accommodate all of the proposed affordable housing units and provide significant common area as well. Assuming the County approves the Applicants’ request to reduce the number of required affordable housing units to 12, the development density on Tract A would be .65 dwelling units per acre, which is well below the 2 dwelling units per acre permitted in Section 6-401.C.2a above. Given these factors, the Applicants request that this provision be eliminated and the Proposed PUD Guide shows this language in strikethrough text (Page 10). The Applicants are also requesting a change to the number of required affordable housing units consistent with the current standard in the LUDC as described in Section 6-204.D.2 above. As a result of the reduction in the affordable housing units, the overall density of the project would be slightly lower than was approved in 2012. The approved density for the project is .30 dwelling units per acre. The overall density of the project as currently proposed would be .28 dwelling units per acre. Further consideration of the requested reduction in the required number of affordable housing units is provided later in this application in the response to Section 8-201(A) of the LUDC. While lots 8, 9, 11 and 13 of Filing 2 have been reconfigured to accommodate the cul-de-sacs, which were pulled out of the conserved area, these lots continue to contain acceptable building envelopes and conform to all of the development standards identified in the PUD Guide, including the minimum lot size for the Residential Single-Family District. These lots also conform to the minimum lot width standard for lots on cul-de-sacs (25 feet) as required in Section 7-402(C) of the LUDC. Lake Springs Ranch | Subdivision Preliminary Plan & PUD Amendment             June, 2015  - 25 -  The Applicants are proposing to amend the Phasing Plan to shift the proposed improvements to CR 114 from Filing 2 to Filing 3. The Proposed Phasing Plan is depicted on Exhibit 6 and the Approved Phasing Plan is provided in Exhibit 7. The proposed amendment to the phasing plan affects only the improvements to CR 114 and the alignment of a short segment of the gas, telephone and electric utilities needed to serve the Lake Springs Ranch development. Shifting the proposed CR 114 improvements to Filing 3 will resolve significant construction inefficiencies that exist with the current phasing plan as is explained in the project description section of this application. The proposed phasing amendment would also have a temporary beneficial effect on the surroundings by limiting the impacts associated with construction of the proposed CR 114 improvements to a single construction season. The key question here is what would be the impact of the proposed change in phasing if the project failed to proceed to a subsequent phase. In this case, the revision involves a shift in road improvements from Filing 2 to Filing 3. As a result, the effect of the proposed revision is limited to the situation where the project fails to proceed beyond Filing 2. Once Filing 3 is developed, the road improvements would be constructed and there would be no further impacts on subsequent phases. If the project does not proceed beyond Filing 2 then the improvements to CR 114 would not be constructed, at least not as contemplated in the currently approved Lake Springs Ranch PUD. To be clear, the Applicants fully intend to proceed beyond Filing 2 and have no intent of avoiding any applicable road impact mitigation measures. However, for the purpose of addressing the intent of this criteria, we offer the following information in support of our contention that not proceeding beyond Filing 2 would result in little impact on future phases or the surrounding area. To begin, the required road improvements are determined based on the amount of traffic generated by the project. The development of Filing 2 alone would generate relatively little traffic on CR 114 as compared to the available road capacity, and the impact of the project-generated traffic could be mitigated through a road impact fee as provided for in the LUDC (Section 7-405.A). The traffic generated by the 14 lots in Filing 2 is estimated to be 134 ADT (based on the ITE standard for single-family dwellings [9.57 trips/day/unit]). According to the traffic impact study prepared for the Applicants by Schmueser Gordon Meyer in October of 20101, the existing traffic volume on CR 114, above the CMC Vet Tech facilty, was approxiamtley 384 vehicles per day, while the stated design capacity for the road is 6,850 vehicles per day (for its entire length). This means that the post-development traffic volume on CR 114 (existing traffic plus project-generated traffic) would be only 7.6% of the road’s design capacity. The calculation is as follows: 1 Lake Springs Ranch PUD Traffic Impact Study, Garfield County, Colorado; Schmueser Gordon Meyer (October 2010). Lake Springs Ranch | Subdivision Preliminary Plan & PUD Amendment             June, 2015  - 26 -  ሺ૜ૡ૝ ൅ ૚૜૝ ൌ ૞૚ૡሻ ൊ ૟,ૡ૞૙ ൌ.૙ૠ૞૟ ࢕࢘ ૠ.૟% We recognize that this analysis is based on traffic counts which are several years old. However, its unlikely that the traffic volumes in this area have changed much since there has been no significnat development in the surrounding area over the intervening years. Aslo, since the post-development traffic is less than one tenth the design capacity, some amount of error in the existing traffic volumes wouldn’t change the fact that CR 114 has ample excess capacity to handle the traffic generated by the 14 lots in Filing 2 without the improvements contemplated in the 2012 Preliminary Plan/PUD Amendment approvals. The analysis above assumes that the sod farm operation continues. However, development of the lots in Filing 2 would necessitate the removal and reconstruction of the existing office and storage facilities for the sod farm, which could potentially result in the closing of the sod farm operation. If this were to happen, the traffic associated with the lots in Filing 2 would be substantially offset by the elimination of the traffic associated with the sod farm. Shutting down the sod farm would also reduce the impacts associated with the heavier commercial vehicles used in the sod farm operations. It should also be noted that the County required improvements to CR 114 in association with the approvals granted for the Spring Valley Ranch PUD, which is located immediately to the north of Lake Springs Ranch. Therefore, if the Lake Springs Ranch project were to fail to proceed beyond Filing 2, CR 114 would still be improved if development of Spring Valley Ranch goes forward. In either case, traffic impacts would be addressed either through the construction of previously-approved road improvements or through payment of the appropriate traffic impact fee. The only other change to the phasing plan is the shift of nine (9) lots from Filing 4 to Filing 3. Lots 19 through 26 of Filing 3, as shown on the Proposed Phasing Plan (Figure 6), were shown as being included in Filing 4 in the Approved Phasing Plan (Figure 7). These lots are being shifted to Filing 3 in order to provide more saleable lots in that phase to help offset the cost of improvements to CR 114 which are planned to be constructed in conjunction with Filing 3. Including these lots in Filing 3 also involves the construction of Lake Springs Drive all the way to Tract A which will be necessary to provide access for the affordable housing units that will be required for all phases of the development. This change to the project phasing will have no adverse impacts on the prior or subsequent phases or on the surrounding area. Lake Springs Ranch | Subdivision Preliminary Plan & PUD Amendment             June, 2015  - 27 -   Compliance with Section 8-201(A) Affordable Housing Plan The Applicant shall submit an “Affordable Housing Plan” that includes the following provisions. 1. The proposed location of the Affordable Housing Units. 2. The proposed number and unit mix of Affordable Housing Units based upon the provisions of section 8-301, Number and Unit Mix. 3. The proposed schedule for construction and completion of the Affordable Housing Units in relation to the proposed construction and completion of the overall development. 4. The proposed breakdown of Affordable Housing Units by category, based on provisions of section 8-301.B., Unit Mix and Minimum Bedroom Requirement, including the proposed Lot Size and square footage size of each unit. 5. The proposed calculations for HOA dues as set forth in section 8-302.B.5. 6. The proposed form of Deed Restriction and any other documents necessary to comply with the requirements of this Article. 7. Any rental housing proposal will require the Applicant to propose additional guidelines not codified herein. Such guidelines at a minimum must address details for administration and on-going affordability. The proposed guidelines are subject to BOCC approval. 8. The proposed method of financial security to ensure construction of the Affordable Housing Units, such as: a. A bond or other security acceptable to the BOCC, in an amount acceptable to the BOCC to ensure the required number of Affordable Housing Units are constructed. b. Provisions in the adopted Affordable Housing Plan that require Building Permits for 10 free-market houses may only be issued after a Building Permit for 1 Affordable Housing Unit has been issued. c. Another method of securing construction of the Affordable Housing units acceptable to the BOCC. 9. If the Applicant proposes to locate some or all of the Affordable Housing Units off-site, the plan for off-site location and justification therefor. 10. The proposal for compliance with all provisions of the Affordable Housing Guidelines maintained by the Garfield County Housing Authority (GCHA) or other Approved Affordable Housing Entity (AAHE). Lake Springs Ranch | Subdivision Preliminary Plan & PUD Amendment             June, 2015  - 28 -  Response: Section 8-202 of the current LUDC requires that an affordable housing plan be approved at Preliminary Plan. While a draft affordable housing plan was provided as part of the 2012 Preliminary Plan/PUD Amendment application, the plan was not formally approved. In an effort to comply with the current LUDC, and since the Applicants are proposing a change to the number of affordable housing units, a revised Affordable Housing Plan and Agreement has been provided with this application (Exhibit 23). The revised plan complies with all of the standards of Section 8-201(A) of the LUDC listed above. The revised plan is very similar to the plan provided in 2012, but includes the revisions necessary to reflect the reduction in the number of units that would occur if the currently codified standard (10% of lots) was applied. Corresponding changes to the unit type and category mix were also made. Other, more minor revisions, such as using the current date and updating the name of the Garfield County Land Use and Development Code (from Unified Land Use Resolution) were also made. Section 8-301.A of the LUDC requires the number of affordable housing units to be equal to 10% of the lots in the development. Based on this standard, the number of required affordable units were calculated as follows: (118 single-family lots plus 1 multi-family tract x .10 = 11.9 or 12 units) The Applicants are proposing to provide these units in the form of 1, 2 and 3 bedroom townhomes to be constructed on Tract A of the Lake Springs Ranch PUD. However, the Applicants have also indicated that they are willing to study the option of meeting some of the affordable housing requirement with off-site units. The Applicants propose that the affordable housing units be provide in the following categories pursuant to Section 8-302.A of the LUDC:  Category #1: 2 - 1 Bedroom Townhomes;  Category #2: 3 - 2 Bedroom Townhomes & 2 - 1 Bedroom Townhomes;  Category #3: 4 - 2 Bedroom Townhomes & 1 - 3 Bedroom Townhome. Other details regarding phasing of the affordable housing units, form of security, and payment of HOA dues are described in the revised Affordable Housing Plan and Agreement (Exhibit 23). SUMMARY The Applicants are requesting approval for several modest amendments to the current Lake Springs Ranch PUD which was most-recently reviewed in 2012. Most of the requested amendments are intended to eliminate conflicts associated with the requirements of the existing conservation easement, resolve construction inefficiencies that arose from the approved phasing plan, or address changes that have occurred to the County’s land use code since the current approvals Lake Springs Ranch | Subdivision Preliminary Plan & PUD Amendment             June, 2015  - 29 -  were granted. With each of the requested amendments we have attempted to not only resolve the issue but to do so in a way that makes the project better and more consistent with the County’s current development regulations. In this application, we have demonstrated compliance with all applicable standards and criteria of the Garfield County Comprehensive Plan 2030 and the Land Use Development Code as identified in the Pre-application Conference Summary. We respectfully request that the County grant approval for the requested amendments and we look forward to reviewing this application with the staff, Planning Commission and Board of County Commissioners.