Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2.0 Staff Report PC 1.14.98t,a o PROJECT INFORMATION AND STAFF COMMENTS REOUEST: APPLICANTS: LOCATION: SITE DATA: WATER: SEWER: ACCESS: PC Ut4l98 Sketch Plan review of the Clinetop Ranch Subdivision. Ralph, Connie, Gary & Doris Hubbell A tract of land located within Sections 35 and 36, T4S, R91W of the 6ft P.M.; located approximately six (6) miles northwest ofNew Castle, along County Road 243. 24.76 Acres */- Individual wells Individual Sewage Disposal Systems (ISDS) County Road 243; easement EXISTING ZONING: ADJACENT ZONING:North/South: A/R/RD East/IVest: O/S L RELATIONSHIP TO THE COMPREHENSTYE PLAN The subject tract is located in District C - Rural AreasAvlinor Environmental Constraints, as designated by the Garfield County Comprehensive Plan's Management Districts Map (1981; 1984 Plans). tr. DESCRIPTION OF THE PROPOSAL Site Description: The subject tract is 24.76 acres in size, located approximately six (6) miles northwest ofNew Castle, on the east side of County Road 243. The westerly boundary of the tract is defined by the county road and the easterly boundary is defined by Main Elk Creek. The majority of vegetation consists of annual and perennial grasses, with cottonwood trees along the creek. The surficial geology is an alluvial fan, which has been truncated by the Creek, with an average slope across the A/RiRD A. a2 /e a o tract of approximately 7.5%. Currently, there are no residential structures on the property. Adjacent Land Uses: Land uses adjacent to and in the vicinity of the tract are generally agricultural and residential. The United States Forest Service administers sizable tracts of land in the vicinity. See vicinity map, page .5 . Development Proposal: The subject tract was originally created as Lot 3 of the Rigoli subdivision exemption. The applicants propose to further subdivide the 24.76 acre tract into three (3) parcels of 4.60, 4.52 and 14.86 acres, with 0.77 acres for road right-of-way. See site plan. Each lot would be developed with a single family residence and one of the lots would also be allowed a guest house. Itr. REVIEW AGENCY/PUBLIC COMMENTS Book Cliff Soil Conservation District: Has submitted a letter detailing concerns for erosion, revegetating cut slopes using weed-free seed, animal control, irrigation ditches_ and water rights, wetlands, drainage, and water quality. See letter, pagesb.1 TV B. Division of Water Resources: Has reviewed the sketch plan and states that due to the lack of an approved augmentation plarU this subdivision would cause injury to decreed water rights and is inadequate. See letter, page . 7 o MAJOR ISSUES AND CONCERNS A. Zorung The subject tract is located within the A/R/RD zone district and all lots are in excess of the two (2.0) acre minimum lot size requirement. Water Supply: The water supply would be derived from individual wells that would serve the individual lots. Although well permits have not been issued at this time, application has been made for these permits. According to the Division of Water Resources, due to the absence of a court-approved augmentation plan, the Division advises there would be material injury to decreed water rights. A preliminary plan application must contain additional information regarding the legal and physical water supply, consistent with Section 4.91of the Subdivision Regulations. Sewer/Soils: The method of wastewater treatment is proposed to be individual sewage disposal systems (ISDS), which are proposed to be engineered systems. According to the Soil Conservation Service, there are two (2) classifications of soil, the Ascalon-Pena complex and Torrifluvents. When utilized for building site development and the location of ISD systems, the Ascalon-Pena soil is considered to have moderate to severe constraints due to slope and the presence of large stones. The Torrifluvent soils are not classified due to their location within the floodplain of Main Elk Creek. Based on these classifications, it appears likely that ISD systems B C A B C ?4 - a would be required to be engineered. A preliminary plan application must contain the elements required by Section 4:92 of the Subdivision Regulations. Natural Hazards. It appears that the most significant, physical impediment to development is the floodplain of Main Elk Creek. The floodplain is not contained in the Federal Emergency Management Agency mapping; however, the applicants have consulted geologists regarding the flood hazard. Based on proposed building envelopes, apparently these geologists have made statements that there would be no danger to homes in the event of a flood. No written statements have been included in this application and staffsuggests they be included in a preliminary plan submittal. Additionally, the contemplated building envelopes should likewise be identified within a preliminary plan submittal. The subject tract consists of approximately 1200 feet of river frontage, which, due to historic runoffconditions, has eroded the banks. The Army Corps of Engineers has evaluated the property and hag;ruthorized the applicants to stabilize the banks and streambeo. See,euer, pages ?-l O Access: Lots I and 2 are proposed to be accessed from County Road 243, along an internal cul-de-sac, 700 feet in lengtll terminating in a bulb with a 50 foot radius (100 foot diameter). Lot 3 is proposed to be accessed from either the cul-de-sac or the County Road, directly. Staffrecommends that all lots be accessed from the cul-de-sac directly, which would assist in limiting the number of intersections with the county road. If all access is from the cul-de-sac, then this roadway would be required to be built to semi-primitive roadway standards including a 40 foot right-of-way, two (2) eight foot travel lanes, with a maximum grade of l0o/o. Although the roadway is identified on the mapping as an "access easement," this roadway should be a dedicated righrof-way and conveyed to the subdivision's homeowners association at time of final plat. Fire Protection: The application suggests that fire protection could be assisted by utilizing the existing pond as a water source. Cul-de-sacs greater than 600 feet in length may be approved so long as fire protection and emergency ingress and egress are provided. This information should be addressed within a preliminary plan application, utilizing coordination with the appropriate fire protection district. Wildlife Mitigation Plan. The application contains a wildlife mitigation plan that substantially addresses environmental and wildlife issues. This plan includes stabilizing the streambanks and streambed; improving the riparian habitat, dredging and stocking the existing pond with greenback cutthroat trout; livestock fencing and avoiding wetland areas. Comprehensive Plan: The application addresses comprehensive planning issues related to agriculture, housing, recreation and open space, water and sewer, transportation, o D E F G H O 3 ,D a environment and community services. Although staffgenerally concurs with these statements, the following items should be noted: Agriculture; Increased residential development affects agricultural activity due to reducing "critical mass" of actively cultivated areas; increased property taxes on the new residential parcels and additional traffic in the agricultural area. Recreation/Open Space: Ifthe property is to be utilized for guided fishing trips, there would be a commensurate increase in traffic to the site. Transportation: The Garfield County Board of Commissioners has recently adopted a mechanism for assessing and collecting road impact fees. These fees would be applicable to this subdivision. The Sketch Plan process is purely informational. Completion of the Sketch Plan process does not constitute any form of approval or denial of the proposed plan. The Sketch Plan comments shall be valid for a period not to exceed one (1) year from the date of the Planning Commission review. If a Preliminary Plan for the proposed subdivision is not presented to the Garfield County Planning Commission within this period, the applicant shall submit an updated Sketch Plan application to the Planning Department for review and comparison with the original application. o ,t - I r-- % ii< !5r :.- ,.. tl- ..1. .o I 4r000,o FEEr 7n (NEW CASTLE) 1t..3 tt SE scALE 1.240@ 0 s am R.9l W lm ,M FEEI 30" r82 R 9. 10m .38'CILS 2n 35', l@ o COI{TOUR IXTERVAL 40 FEET 6@ I XILOXEIER I HILE NEW CASILE 4 o BOOK CLIFF SOIL CONSERVATION DISTRIST P.O. BOX 1302 GLETW{OOD SPRINGS, CO 81502 o j r:h December 29, L997 --G.tifiELD CCX.JNI-y Mark BeanGarfield County Planning Department 1o9 8th Street, Suite 303 Glenwood Springs, CO 81601 Dear Sir, At the regular nonthly meeti.ng of the Book cliff Soil Conse:rration District, the Board reviewed the application and plan for the ClLaetop Baach StrDdivisLoa and have the following conments and concerns about the project. Any cuts for roads or construction should be revegetated to prevent erosion. Weed free seed and mulch should be used for any reseeding of tlre area. trtonitoring of all seedingr should be done to see ii tne grass is establishing or if weeds are becoming a problem. Reseeding or weed control practices should be implemented if a problem is noticed. The board is always concerned about aninal control in an area where there is the potential for conflict between wildlife or domestic livestock Lnd dogs from the subdivision. Dogs running in packs of two or more can maim or kiII domestic livestock and witatite. The District recommends animal control regrulations be adopted in the covenants for the subdivision and that they be enforced. Of prine concern to the Board, is the Proper maintenance and prolectj-on of any irrigation ditch which is on the site. New landowners should be infomed that the ditch owners have right of vray easement to maintain the irrigation system, that they will be cleaning and working on the ditch, and that this work may be in their yards. The district would like to know what the inpact will be on the Wetlands in this area? All Wetlands should be protected and remain in as pristine condition as possible. The Board recommends that any irrigation water rights be used by the landowners so they are maintained. In order to use these rights, a raw water delivery system could be used for landscape, fiie protection, oPen spacel eLc. If at all possible, this-system snoulh be incorporitea into the infa-structure of the subdivision plans as it would be more cost efficient at this tine. Their Loncern is always for soil and water conse!:vation and preseraration and plans should consider these concerns. isf,fl ttc 5 J leeT -\ -t e b e o Drainage has the potential to be a probleu Ln the area and engineering recommendations for control of drainage should be closely followed by the bullder andr/or houeowner. With increased conceraE about Water Quality, the District is concerned about uonitoring chemical appllcation for fertilizer, veed control, and other pest management reasons. Their concerrr is the chemicals that will be used to fertilize grasses and control weeds in the area. They feel that the chemicals should be closely monitored in this area due to the possibility that the chemicals will soak into the EoilE and nrn off into the creeks. The District suggests drilling of wells to monitor ground waterpollution, and that this e:(pense and future e:(Penses should be bore by the developer. Sincerely, o C/a,,{o b ,1^^&rl/^.2 Charles Ryden, President Book cliff Soil Consetryation Dis trict e 7 - JRN-A5-1998 14:53 I^IRTER RESOURCESo o 3A3 865 3589 P.A2/O2 ST{rE OF OFFICE OF TI{E STATE ENGINEER Division of WaEr Resources Depanment of Natural Resources 1313 Shcrman Strect, Room 816 Denver, Colorado E0201 Phone (303) E6635S1 FAx (303) 666-1s09 Roy Romer C,oremor lemcr S. Lochherd txtcuriw Dheorr Hel O. liimprort Stilc tngineg Mark Bean Garfielcl County Builcting and Planning 109 8th St Ste 303 Glenwood Springs CO 81601 Re: Clinetop Ranch, Hubbel Family Subdivision Secs. 35 & 36, T4S, R91W, 6TH PM W. Division 5, W. Districl39 Dear Mr. Bean We have reviewed the above referenced proposalto subdivide e parcel of 24.76 acres into three lots, wfiich will contain three residences and one guesthouse. Therefore, a total of four singt+family drreltings are ProPosed. Also, a horse bam and equapment shed are proposd to be constructed. Water is to be provided through three individual on-lot wells, pursuant to an augmentetion plan thatwas ftled on December 10, 1997. Sewage is to be through individual septic and leach field systems. Due to the lack of a water court approved augmentation plan, the State Engineer finds pursuant to Section 30-2&136(1XhXl), C.R.S., that the proposed water supply will cause material injury to decreed water rights and is inadequate. lf you or lhe applicant has any questions conceming this matter, please contact Craig Lis of this office for assistance. Sincerely Steve Lautenschlager Assistant State Engineer SPUCMUgaTfi eld clinetop ranch sub.doc cc: Orlyn Bell, Division Engineer Jim Lemon, Water Commissioner, District 3g January2,1998 8 -TOTRL P.A2 o ?',';' REPLY TO ATTENTlON OF DEPARTMENT OF TI.{E ARMY U.S. ARMY ENGINEEFI DISTRICT. SACRAMENTO CORPS OF ENGINEERS 1325 J STREET SACBAMEI.JTO. CALIFORNIA 95814.2922 December 10, t.997 ,ti6;l1-l& uii+GLD @UNj y (b Mr. GarY and Mr. RalPh Hubbell 3E Stagecoach Ci::cle Carbondale, Colorado 8L623 Dear Dtessrs. Hubbell : i am responCing to your request for a Depart'Tgnt of the Army per;.rit. to per?or* =It.rmbank st;iniLtzaLion a1-ong five sections of Main El-k Creek. A large spring runof f .has resr'rIted in numerous eroded banlis, new chaniel [ii 5ti"ntat.ions, and debris and saag piles throughout' L,2oo feet_of yo,'-riverfront' property. The p::oject site is located approximately elSht^1i1:: -n:rth of Nlevr casrre wirhin the NE t/4 i.i'E L/4 of_sicti6n 35, I'ownship 4 south, R.ange gl West, Garf ie1d. County, Colorado ' TheCorpsofEngineers,Sa.,ramentoDistrict,hasissued regional general perilit numbers 37 and q5 to auchorize certai;l l-j.n:ired aischai;";-;i areageJ or fill material associated with strearr,bank and ICreanl:ed. sEabil Lzation and minor excavation prolects. susan Nall- of tl-rj"s of f ice inspected the sir'e wlth rrou on October 6, 1-gg7. Your proposed proje-ct involves a combination of bank ."stopiig ana-stabil ,Zuxj.on-wiLh rock, cobble' and fal1en trees; and nar eicavations to increase channel capacity' Eroded streanrbanks vr111 also be revegetated. with native trees and shrubs. I,Je have determined tfiat your project will-not affect' threatened or end.angereO tnecj.es proteltea Uy the Endangered Species Acts-. Based on our revier.v of the information submitted' Lilu-pr"lecc j-s authorized, by these regional permits subject to the enclosed permit conCitions arrC the following special Regul-at.orY B::anch ,199775450) co::.di tions: L. Provice notifieation to this office at least 24 hours prior to Projeet start-uP. 2. Submit ohotographs of each completed work area al'ong with a signeC cc pliance certification (.opy enclosed) within 30 dairs af ter Prcject comPlet'ion' - q - ,/ o o- -2- This authorizatlon is val.id until December 13, 2000. we have assigned. nuntber L99775450 to your projec!. P1ease refer to this numb6r in any correspondence with Lhis office. If your plan io-rorf. requires i modi-f ilatlon or extends beyond December 13, 2000, you musE contact this office. We also understand that' add.itllnal work, including improvements to an off-channel pond, *"V U. phased in at a later dafe depending upon outcome of this frLp"="-d work. If you have any questions concerning these i"iil1it= and. for notification purposes, please contac: Ms' I'IaI1 at (970) 243-LL99, exLension 15. SincerelY, Grady L. McNure Chief, Northwestern ColoraCo RegulaLorY Office 402 Rood Avenue, R.oom 142 Grand Junction, Colorado 8150L-2563 Enclosures Ccpies Furnished: Mr. Bill C1ark, Colorado Division of llildlife, 7LL Independent Avenue, Grand Junction, Colorado 81501 Ms. Sarah Fowler, u.s. Environmental Protection Agency, SEPR-EP, 9g9 i8th streeL, suite 500, Denver, Coloraoo 80202-2166 t{r. Paul- von Guer:ard, subdistrict chief , u.s . Geological Survey, 764 }iorizon Dri.re, suite L25, Grand Junction, cOlOradc Bl-506 Mr. Mark Bean, Garf j-eId county, 109 Bth Street, suite 303, Glenwood SPrings, Colorado 81501 Dr. and Mrs. neniis Eicher, 4824 Countlz Road 243, New CasEle, Colorado 8L647 Ms. Ann Inwcod, 4500 County Road 243, New Castle, Colorado 8L647 Ms. Lillian Reed, 4110 County Road 243, New Castle, Colorado 81-647Dr. and Mrs. Robert Thorsen, 4412 county Road 243, New Castle, Colorado 8L647 o /o- Clinetop SP 1/14198 - Planning Commission Report The tract is 24 .7 6 acres in size, located along the east side of county road 243 , approximately six miles northwest ofNew castle. The tract is situated on a truncated alluvial fan, between the county road and main elk creek, with average slope of approx' 7 '5%' Adjacent land uses are residential and agricultural, with a significant amount of national forest service land located in the vicinitY. The subjec t tractwas created as a lot within a previously approved subdivision exemption and the applicants propose to further subdMde the lot inti three put""lt varying in size between 4'5 and 14'8 acres. Each lot would likely be developed with a single family dwelling and one of the lots is proposed to be allowed a guest house. l] To date, we have received comments from the book cliffsoil conservation district, who states concern for erosion, revegetation of disturbed areas, animal controlwater rights, irrigation ditches and water qualitY. 2] The division of water resources has reviewed the water supply information and states that due to the lack of an augmentation plan, this subdivision would cause injury to decreed water rights. The tract is zoned A/R/RD and a[ proposed lots are in excess of the minimum, lot size requirement' The water supply is proposed to be from individual wells, serving the individual lots. No well permits have been issued to date; however, the applicants have apparently filed a water augmentation plan' This plan has not yet been approved, therefore the division olwater resources has opined there would be injury to decreed water rights. A preliminary plan application must include all the information required by section 4:91 of the subdivision regia-tions, including a copy of the augmentation plan filed with the state and well pump tests' Wastewater would be treated by individual sewage disposal systems, which apparently are proposed to be engineered. The soil ctnservation ,"*[. has analyzed the on-site soils to be within two different classifications. The Ascalon-Pena soils are considered to have moderate to severe constraints and the Torrifluvent soil has not been evaluated due to its floodplain location' A preliminary plan must include percolation test results indicating the feasibility of on-site wastewater disposal. In terms of natural hazards, at this stage it appears the floodplain of main elk creek is the main impediment to development. This portioriof main elt is not included in the various floodplain reports available to the county for review. At least two geologists have assessed the site and reviewed areas proposed for development and have apparent-ly "on_.tuded that the building sites are outside the floodplain and would be unaffected by the 1oO-year flood. I would suggest that a preliminary plan contain written and graphic information that substantiates these verbal statements' The tract has approximately 1200 feet of creek frontage, which has eroded and degraded over time' The army "o.p, of enginlers has evaluated this erosion and has authorized bank and streambed stabilization. The access to lots I and 2 is proposed to be from an internal cul-de-sac, 700 feet in length' Lot 3 would be accessed either from the cul-de-sac or the county road, directly. In an effort to reduce driveway intersections with the county road and maintain the efficiency of the road, I recommend that all lots be accessed internally. If ttris is the case, then the roadway would be required to be built to semi-primitive standards, whilh includes a 40 foot right-of-way and 2 eight foot travel lanes. After discussing the roadway with DeFord, it may be an easement; however, the easement should not be apart of the platted lots. In terms of fire protection, cul-de-sacs in excess of 600 feet length may only be permitted if fire protection is ensured. An on-site pond is proposed to assist in fire protection needs and staff suggests ihat fi.e protection for the subdivision bL coordinated with the appropriate fire protection district' The application addresses wildlife and environmental issues through a proposed mitigation plan' The pUn inltuAes creek stabilization, improvements to the riparian habitat, as well as other measures' The applicants have also addressed comprehensive planning issues concerning agriculture, housing, open space, water and sewer, transportation and other issues. I generally concur with the analysis, with some dissent, specffically, that any development in agricultural areas will have negative impacts to the continuing airicutturJ uses, the proviiion of guided fishing trips would necessarily increase vehicular traffic andihe applicants shouid be aware that the road impact fee would be applicable to this subdivision. I have esiimated this fee to be approximately $1040, per lot' t,,r/o* o. Nhc /4r,",0 Ane,A'u Lo 6-vfs I fr^ L. /.,1 y fl oP G D{-{nc Vt -o D,or^aYAac( 6 Zes4^ot t tlo*"o ?uun* A,,(^^u^, oJ /\l 0 Gtu f st^e f f srA({. Co*€ Grrti oP ft V,rnet',<V rlru fr^ t/o,"rl' Lurt^ loA,'Pfino (,u E"<c{ap4 \ - /,,-e ff Nt,u".Vt,?. o ( C*,',-.. J 6,r,- {n() ilr,roicvt)Tz'A1(o /h4 f,,r B<st9 So^uo /)oo*{ss IA 3*, D,g6assCD rr/o Q €st rt € 'F Pl. Drrucs fu"6st*6r.r/ I Qil toronc vb /1,*€ 6o.D"oO.t V J oo-(/^ o, Lo-t("r yl^o€ FS G AJo,'(o (rtnre e>