HomeMy WebLinkAbout3.0 BOCC Staff Report 06.03.1991REQUEST:
OWNER:
LOCATION:
SITE DATA:
BOCC 6/3/91
PROJECT INFORMATION AND STAFF COMMENTS
Christeleit Subdivision
Preliminary Plan
Peter and Linda Christeleit
A tract of land situated in
Sections 19 and 30, T6S, R88W,
6th P.M.; located approximately
2.5 miles east of Highway 82
off County Road 119.
The site consists of 89 acres.
WATER: Approximately
wells.
SEWER:
ACCESS:
EXISTING ZONING:
6 individual
Individual sewage
systems (I.S.D.S.)
disposal
Access from C.R. 119 to lots
via existing private driveway.
A/R/RD
ADJACENT ZONING: A/R/RD
I. RELATIONSHIP TO THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN
The subject property is located in District D, Rural Areas
with Moderate Environmental Constraints on the Garfield County
Comprehensive Plan Management Districts Map.
II. DESCRIPTION OF THE PROPOSAL
A. Site Description: The subject property is located at the
northwest end of Spring Valley in an area of single
family residences and ranches. The subject property
consists primarily of hill slopes, a portion of a
basaltic ridge which forms the west side of the valley.
Slopes vary 0 to 50%. A portion of the property is
currently being cultivated in wheat. Vegetation consists
of oak, sagebrush and grasses.
B. Project Description: The applicants are proposing to
subdivide the 89 acre parcel into six parcels. Five of
the parcels will be 10 acres in size with the sixth
parcel being 39 acres in size. Average lot size is 15
acres.
III. REVIEW AGENCY COMMENTS
A. Mount Sopris Soil Conservation District: Identified
soils limitations, including slope, shrink -swell and
erosion, as potential problems. Mentioned need for
animal control to protect livestock and wildlife.
B. Colorado Geological Survey: Shrinks well potential of
soils necessitate site specific engineering. Building
locations should avoid drainage courses. Steep slopes
should be avoided as building sites.
• •
C. RE -1 School District: Buses will only travel County
roads. Adequate turnarounds are required.
D. Planning Commmission: Draft minutes from their May 8,
1991 meeting.
IV. MAJOR ISSUES AND CONCERNS
1. Red Canyon Road: During previous discussions of the
Christeleit Subdivision with both the Planning Commission
and the Board, the issue of Resolution 81-175 and Red
Canyon Road surfaced. This Resolution, approved in 1981,
stated that further subdivision activity in the Spring
Valley area, which impacts Red Canyon Road, is premature
unless it could be demonstrated that the proposed
subdivision would not add traffic to the roadway. The
Board noted that additional development would place
burdens on services and facilities beyond the County's
scope of maintenance and financial ability. The Board
cited Section 5.01 of the 1972 Subdivision Regulations as
their authority to approve the Resolution (see pageS9 ).
The County Attorney has stated that it is necessary for
the current board to rescind the Resolution as a
prerequisite of preliminary plan approval. In addition,
the County Attorney has gone on record stating the road
is a public safety threat and the placement of additional
traffic on the roadway is unwise.
If the Commission is inclined to recommend approval of
the preliminary plan, then the recision of Resolution 81-
175 should also be recommended.
2. Roadways: Access to the proposed subdivision will be
provided over an access easement/private road which
straddles the western property boundary. Thirty feet of
the 60 foot wide easement is on the applicant's property.
The remaining 30 feet is on the adjacent parcels. Since
the easement is not entirely within the applicant's
property, the applicant must demonstrate that the
easement is suitably dedicated for the expanded use and
that the roadway may be physically expanded. The
applicant has provided staff with an attorney's opinion
to support the proposed expansion (see page IpO ). If
the easement is not expandable, then the roadway would
need to be relocated entirely within the subject
property.
The existing roadway does not currently meet Minimum
County Standards in terms of road surface, horizontal
geometry and slopes. The current standard requires a 28
foot road surface within a 50 foot roadway. The
applicants have stated in their application the final
design will conform to the County road standards in force
at the time of the final plat.
3. Water: The applicants are proposing to serve the
subdivision with individual wells. The applicants have
a contract in place with the Basalt Water Conservancy
District to provide water for each lot (see page &Co ).
Wells will need to be drilled to a projected depth of 180
to 300 feet depending on surface elevation (see map and
chart on page (y 7 ). No community water facilities are
being proposed.
There is no irrigation water on the property. Irrigation
with well water will be limited by the Basalt Water
Conservancy District contract and the well permits.
4. Sewer: The applicants are proposing the use of
individual sewage disposal systems for each residence.
Percolation tests conducted on the property indicated
� g •
• •
rates in accordance with County standards. Certain
portions of the property may have limitations due to the
location of bedrock and/or slope.
5. Utilities: Electric and telephone service will be
provided to each lot. All lines should be placed
underground.
6. Fire Protection: The subject property is not located
within the boundaries of a fire protection district.
Therefore, no response is guaranteed in event of an
emergency by either Carbondale or Glenwood Springs rural
districts. Subdivision regulations do not specifically
mandate inclusion into a fire district. Section 9:73
states that "where there is no central water system, a
centrally located fire protection tank shall be designed
to meet the fire protection needs of the subdivision..."
No such facilities have been proposed.
7. Homeowner's Association: No Homeowner's Association has
been proposed. A Homeowner's Association is required by
the water district as a legal entity to oversee the
proposed water contract. In addition, an entity is
necessary to oversee the road, maintenance and other
community owned facilities. Without a Homeowner's
Association, no legal entity is responsible for
overseeing these functions.
V. SUGGESTED FINDINGS
A. The proper publication, public notice and posting were
provided as required by law for the hearing before the
Planning Commission; and
B. That the hearing before the Planning Commission was
extensive and complete, that all pertinent facts, matters
and issues were submitted and that all interested parties
were heard at that hearing; and
C. That the proposed subdivision of land is in general
compliance with the recommendations set forth in the
Comprehensive Plan for the unincorporated area of the
County; and
D. That the proposed subdivision of land conforms to the
Garfield County Zoning Resolution; and
E. That all data, surveys, analyses, studies, plans and
designs as are required by the State of Colorado and
Garfield County have been submitted and, in addition,
have been found to meet all requirements of the Garfield
County Subdivision Regulations.
VI RECOMMENDATION
At their meeting on May 8, 1991, the Planning Commission
unanimously recommended APPROVAL to the Commissioners of the
application, subject to the following conditions:
1. All representations of the applicant, either within the
application or stated at the Public Hearing before the
Planning Commission shall be considered conditions of
approval unless otherwise stated by the Planning
Commission.
2. The applicants shall establish a Homeowner's Association
and shall be incorporated in accordance with the
requirements of Colorado Revised Statutes. The
Homeowner's Association shall be responsible for the
Basalt Water Conservancy District water contract and for
road maintenance. The articles of incorporation and
restrictive covenants shall be reviewed by County Staff
prior to the approval of the Final Plat.
1 •
3. The applicants shall prepare and submit a subdivision
improvements agreement, addressing all on and off-site
improvements, prior to the approval of a Final Plat.
4. The applicants shall submit improvement plans for all
road, drainage and utility improvements prior tot he
approval of a Final Plat.
5. All utilities shall be placed underground.
6. All cut slopes created during construction shall be
revegetated with native grasses using certified weed -free
seed.
7. The applicant shall demonstrate that procedures are
established for the maintenance of all roadways,
including snow removal, through the Homeowner's
Association, prior to the approval of the Final Plat.
8. The applicants shall pay $200 per lot in School Impact
Fees prior to the approval of the Final Plat.
9. All required permits from the Road and Bridge Department
shall be obtained prior to the approval of the Final
Plat.
10. All roadways shall be designed and constructed in
conformance with design standards set forth in the County
Subdivision Regulations and in place at the time of
submittal of the Final Plat.
11. The following plat notes shall be included on the Final
Plat:
A) U.S.F.S. and State Forestry wildfire prevention
guidelines should be incorporated into residential
site planning and design.
B) A site specific soils report shall be conducted for
each residence prepared by a registered
professional engineer.
C) Engineered foundations and wastewater systems may
be required by the Building Official.
D) This subdivision is not located within a fire
protection district.
E) Lot buyers shall enter into a pre -annexation
agreement with the Carbondale Fire Department.
12. The plat shall depict those areas identified in the
geology report as too steep for construction on the Final
Plat.
13. The Commissioners shall address the issue of Red Canyon
Road and either rescind the resolution or reiterate the
resolution.
14. Prior to the approval of the Final Plat, the applicants
shall seed the property in permanent grasses or the
property shall remain in cultivation until all lots are
sold.
.' O •
•
PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING
MINUTES
May 8, 1991
ELIM1NAUY
DRAFT
MEMBERS PRESENT COUNTY STAFF PRESENT
Stephanie Beerman Don DeFord, County
Pat Fitzgerald Attorney
Peter Nichols Mark Bean, Director
Harold Shaeffer Regulatory Offices &
Dick Stephenson Personnel
Philip Vaughan Andrew McGregor,
Gregg Velasquez Planner
The meeting was called to order. Roll Call was taken with all
members present. The minutes of April 10, 1991, were approved with
a unanimous vote.
Continued Public Hearing for Goose Creek Subdivision Preliminary
Plan - Kent Jones, Priscilla Prohl and Vince Gulino.
Don DeFord determined proper noticing.
Andrew McGregor summarized the discussions between staff, Mr.
Hartert and Mr. Kerst regarding the access issue since the last
meeting. Also discussed was the memo from Don DeFord.
Gerry Hartert, representative for the applicants, asked that the
Planning Commission approve the application subject to the
conditions of approval set forth in the staff report including
those having to do with the road access.
Stephanie Beerman questioned that there was no problem with any of
the conditions. Mr. Hartert answered that they would deal with
them, because they would have to deal with them anyway.
Dan Kerst, representative of the neighbors, asked if the only
change since the last meeting was the one additional condition of
approval. Mr. McGregor answered yes.
Mr. Kerst feels that the Planning Commission should deny the
request based on the lack of showing of access. He believes that
a court resolution is probably the only way to come to a final
answer on the access issue.
CLOSE OF THE PUBLIC HEARING
Harold Shaeffer feels that the word internal should be included in
condition #15.
Mr. DeFord suggested language "for the benefit of owners in the
subdivision".
Mr. Shaeffer questioned if the underground utilities were a problem
with the high water table. One of the neighbors replied that it
did not bother her utilities.
Peter Nichols what the current use of the land is. Mr. McGregor
responded with one single family residence. Mr. Nichols asked how
close is the residence to the nearest publically operated sewage
treatment system. Andrew answered that it is 3/4 of a mile away.
Mr. Hartert said that the standards for an exemption from
subdivision included a requirement that there be adequate access to
public roads. On several occasions this issue has come before the
Planning Commission and the Board of County Commissioners and in
each case that road was found to be adequate access. Mr. Hartert
asked, for the benefit of the doubt, that the road be found as
adequate access again. .6II�
1r i�Yo�����iBidr'�► .,
• 'DRAFT'
Mr. Nichols asked if the subdivision is within the Carbondale Urban
Area of Influence. Mr. McGregor responded "yes". Mr. Nichols
asked if Carbondale took any other position or just the concern
about the sewage disposal system and their well field. Mr.
McGregor answered that the sewage disposal system and their well
field are their exclusive areas of concern. Mr. Nichols asked how
close the subdivision is to the Carbondale Town Limits. Mr. Jones
answered that it is about 3/4 mile away from the town limits.
MOTION
Dick Stephenson moved to recommend Approval of the Goose Creek
Subdivision Preliminary Plan including all of the Staff Comments
and Suggested Findings and include in #15 the addition for the
owners in the subdivision. Mr. Stephenson feels that #17 should be
struck entirely. Harold Shaeffer seconded the motion.
Mr. Nichols feels that it is unfair to shift the burden onto the
surrounding property owners, it should be the applicants
responsibility because he is proposing to make the change. Mr.
Velasquez asked who should bear the burden. Mr. DeFord answered
that the applicant bears the burden of meeting the subdivision
regulations. The regulations say that the applicant has to produce
evidence.
Stephanie Beerman Yes
Pat Fitzgerald Yes
Peter Nichols No
Harold Shaeffer Yes
Dick Stephenson Yes
Philip Vaughan Yes
Gregg Velasquez Yes
Motion carries.
Christeleit Subdivision Preliminary Plan - Peter and Linda
Christeleit.
Andrew McGregor summarized the project, which was to subdivide an
89 acre parcel into six parcels. Five of the parcels will be 10
acres in size with the sixth parcel being 39 acres in size.
Average lot size is 15 acres.
Pat Fitzgerald, Gregg Velasquez, Dick Stephenson, Harold Shaeffer
and Andrew McGregor went on a site visit prior to the hearing, on
Wednesday, May 8,. 1991.
Don DeFord determined proper noticing.
Peter Christeleit talked to the Fire Chief and he said that it was
up to the Sheriff to decide whether to call the Carbondale Fire
District or the Glenwood Springs Fire District. Linda Christeleit
talked with Jack at the Glenwood Fire Department and he said that
if they installed a sprinkler system in a house it would be less
likely that it will burn down. Mrs. Christeleit passed around a
map concerned with the water depths and availability on surrounding
wells. The surrounding well depths range from 15 feet to 420 feet.
Mr. Christeleit asked if they can phase the utilities in as the
lots are sold. Mr. McGregor answered that it can be arranged with
a bond, but a bond may only be used for the whole project not just
a portion of the project.
Mr. Stephenson asked Mr. DeFord what the County's liability is on
the Red Canyon Road, is it a safety problem. Mr. DeFord responded
that there really isn't any liability when dealing with the
subdivision process.
Mr. Shaeffer asked how much acreage is presently being farmed.
Mrs. Christeleit responded that 49 acres are presently being
farmed. Mr. Shaeffer said that farming will become harder once
they start selling the lots, and asked what they intended to do
with the weed control and maintenance of the property until someone
buys the land and takes over. Mr. Christeleit said that they will
continue to take care of the land and plant some type of a grass or
a dry land combination. Mr. Shaeffer asked if condition #10 meant
that all roadways will have to be built before any lots are sold.
Mr. McGregor answered that it will be part of the Subdivision
Improvements Agreement if it is not completed.
1 1
rncLuivi �I1fn1
• 1 DRAFT'
Mr. Velasquez asked Mr. DeFord if Resolution 81-175 have to be
rescinded by the Board of County Commissioners before the approval
of Final Plat. Mr. DeFord said it is a statement of policy.
Ms. Beerman asked if they plan to strongly suggest to the
homeowners that they put a sprinkler system in their homes. Mr.
Christeleit said that they haven't made any definite plans for that
yet. Carbondale hopes to include Spring Valley in about 1 - 2
years in the fire district.
Sandra Anderson, resident on C.R. 119, asked if the County will
maintain the road up to the CMC road. Mr. Stephenson said that it
is County policy to plow to year round residents, if they are on a
County Road. One of the public asked who is responsible for the
upgrading of C.R. 119. Mr. DeFord said that he doesn't think there
is any set method by which the Commissioners determine when to
upgrade roads.
Calvin Cox is concerned that if a road is maintained it will be
easier to approve a subdivision.
CLOSE OF THE PUBLIC HEARING
Mr. Nichols noted that Resolution 81-175 clearly states that County
policy says not to approve subdivisions in Spring Valley.
MOTION
Mr. Velasquez moved for Approval of the Christeleit Subdivision
Preliminary Plan and include #11E Buyer must join the fire district
when available. Add #13 The Commissioners shall address the issue
of Red Canyon Road and either rescind the resolution or reiterate
the resolution. Mr. Shaeffer would like to add to the motion #14
That all cultivated land shall be placed in permanent cover or
continue in cultivation. Ms. Beerman suggested to strike #12. Mr.
Nichols seconded the motion.
Motion carried with a unanimous vote.
Other Business
The Joint Planning Commission Meetings' Summary Notes were
distributed and there was a brief discussion on the passed
meetings.
There was a brief discussion about the future Comprehensive Plan
Meetings. The Planning Commission decided to meet Tuesday, May 14,
1991, at the Glenwood International Airport at 6:00 a.m. to view
the County from above. They also planned a Work Session on May 22,
1991, from 8:00 p.m. to 10:00 p.m.
Mark Bean discussed briefly with the Planning Commission about
obsolete subdivisions and PUD's.
Respectfully submitted,
Harold B. Shaeffer
Secretary
HBS/rlb
N44„,,,,,,
P.O. 80X 1302 GLENWOOD SPRINGS, COLORS 81601
April 11, 1991
Garfield County
Regulatory Offices
109 8th Street, Suite 303
Glenwood Springs, CO 81601
Dear Andrew:
-...d!PRY,W.PL---
lifil
APR 121991
C_; ,ce
(af,ri ILLU COUNTY
At the regular monthly meeting of the Mount Sopris Soil Conservation District the
Board reviewed the Christeleit Subdivision Preliminary Plan.
In viewing the maps and soils information presented, it should be noted that
several of the soils types are unsuited for homesite development. However, with
the large tracts of land proposed for each lot, by careful selection of the
location for the homesite, this concern should be able to be overcome.
Some of the land in the site which is presently leased for agricultural use,
falls within the definition of Highly Erodible Land (HEL) and as such has
been reseeded to grass. The Board feels it is important to note the erosion
problems that can arise on parts of this subdivision, and would encourage the
retention of as much grass and vegetation as possible, to prevent further
erosion. Drainage will also be very important to control erosion. Disturbed
areas for roads and homesites should be properly reseeded and monitored for
weeds.
The District is always concerned about animal control in areas where there
is the potential for wildlife or domestic livestock and recommends animal
control within the subdivision.
Slope steepness and shrink -swell soils should be acknowledged and dealt with
with according to engineering recommendations, with access roads designed
to provide adequate cut -slope grades and drainage. The soils information
provided by the Soil Conservation Service addresses these concerns, which
need to be dealt with.
Sincerely,
,cyc,,Mc,c�'
Dee Blue, President
Mount Sopris Soil Conservation Service
CONSERVATION - DEVELOPMENT • SELF-GOVERNMENT
•
Bo'' R..ROMER
GOVERNOR
0
COLORADO GEOLOGICAL SURVEY
DEPARTMENT OF NATURAL RESOURCES
715 STATE
DENVERNCOLOFl DO 60203 PIIONE (303) 866-2N
6-TENNIAL BUILDING - 1313 SHERMA2 1S1BEET
April 12, 1991
Andrew McGregor
Garfield County Planner
109 Slh Street, #303
Glenwood Springs, CO. 81601
RE: CIIIZIS'I'ELEI'1' SUBDIVIS10N
All( 13 IJ91 J4I
U/1Kf ILLD COUIVit w. BOLD
DIf1ECTOR
GA -91-0008
Dear Sir:
'We have reviewed the preliminary plan, geologic report and drainage plan for this
proposal. Geologic conditions affecting the site include: swelling soils, low runoff drainage
areas, steep slopes, and the potential for radon gas hazards.
Site geology consists of clayey -silty soils of a relatively shallow depth overlying Tertiary
basaltic lava flows. This formation outcrops in Ole northern portion of the properly. The
red Maroon Formation underlies the basalt at an undetermined depth. The surficial soils
of Morval loans located on the property have a moderately high swelling soil potential. As
outlined by the consultant geologist Nicholas Lanpiris, we recommend site-specific soils
investigations for each building excavation to determine the slit ink -swell potential.
Building locations should also avoid the low-lying drainage areas. These drainage areas
do not pose a flood hazard in terms of water volume. The permeability of the surface soils
is very slow and ponding of water in these areas is possible. A sight reconnaissance in April
1991 established water in these low spots.
The geologic report also outlines critical areas of steep slope. Due to the nature of the
basaltic soils these locations nay be very hazardous to building instability. Slope stability
problems for minor subdivisions are usually mitigated by avoidance.
GEOLOGY
STORY OF THE PAST... KEY TO THE FUTURE
• •
Andrew McGregnr:,
April 12, 1991
Page 2
A radiation y
surve from the Colorado Department of Ilealth was not provided with this
may be
f
r this
package. We realize that the potential for such
irve should bescond►cledO All oa► c�malcxes
1lowever, a radon and uranium mill tailings y
readings should be mitigated either with removal of contaminants or, in the case of radon,
have radon -reduction building techniques implemented.
If all the above suggestions are met, as well as those of the consultant geologist, then
we have no objection to the approval of this preliminary plan.
Sincerely,
ei
af
Christopher J. Carroll
Engineering Geologist
Roaring Fork School District RE -1
. pox '8'26 •
_
Glenw6Od 85rIii Cololiedo 81602-0820
Telephone (303) 945-6558
Mark Bean, Planner
Garfield County
109 8th Street
Glenwood Springs, CO 81601
kiuUN TY
L. tiAME.1. Superintendent
ROBEriTi A. coLLEttA APSISIdill Superintendent
flICIIMAD 11 1-1AYi•f1ssiMant Superiniendent
• •
4.47,9
•
April 29 , 1991
Dear Mark:
We have reviewed the following project being considered:
Christeleit Subdivision Preliminary Plan
Peter J. and Linda L. Christeleit
In the event bus service would be requested in the future,
applicants need to be aware of the following conditions:
As a general rule, school buses will only travel
federal, state, and county maintained roads. There
needs to be an adequate and well maintained
turnaround.
We would respectfully request any Impact Fees that are available.
Respectfully,
James L. Bader
Superintendent
JLB/jct
1
At a regular meeting of the 11oard of County Cetlonets for OW10 unty, Colored°,
1'41.1 et the Co"et Moult In Glenwood pang, p tIQShc1X , the 2nd
day Or
Jt11n0
v A. D.319.��� �S�rh11 .we,, present!
travon t yy
..... ri y l{ ' 1 ^'••• ('•••••• , Colnlnl4tlonst Chairman
;ugeno Jxnt i1irl.nl<i1ouso
Cominl'rloner
ftrthUl• A. ill?Itlnllaip, Jr. r Comndrdonet
(Tieryl ,I.�Koss, UciiiEy County Attorney
, Clerk of the board
when the following proceeding', among entrees were had and done, lo•wltt
• RESOLU E I ON No. 111 -175
itESOLUTION CONCERNED WITH 1IIE DETERMINATION THAT FURTIIER SUBDIVISIOi) IN THE SPRING VALLE/
AREA Or GARFIELD CODUIY Wf1cII Ii1PACTS. PORLIONS Or GAREIELU COUNTY ROAD 115 1S PREMA1URE.1
WHEREAS, the Board of County Comma ssioners,of Garfleld County is authorized by the
provisions of Section 5.01 of the Garfield 'County Subdivision Regulations to detenuIne
that lands in Garfield County which are the subject of subdivision proposals are prema-'
lure fur subdivision when growth patterns are or such form and physical shape that
governmental inefficiencies, duplication of facilitiesand unnecessary public costs and
financial burdelis result from providing the extension of public services. ant public •suppi
facilities which cannon be accompllstied'in a planned, 'ordered or efficient manner; and '
•
WHEREAS, this hoard of County Commissioners Inas individually viewed the Spring Valli
area and observed the condition of the County Road System which serves the Spring Valley
area, including that portion of Garfield.County' Road 115, which is sometimes known as illi
'-'Red Canyon Road", and Inas concluded that additional- growth in the Spring Valley area Is
likely to be of such form and physical shape that governmental inefficiencies and npnecel
sary public costs and financial burdens will result from providing for the extension of,'
public services and public support facilities .in a manner which cannot be acocmplished •
in a planned, ordered or efficient mannerdue t� the limitations of the Garfleld County
Road Systemerving the area, and'speclfically the "Red Canyon Road"; and
1'11IEREAS, this Board of County commissioners has determined that further growth in
the Spring Valley area of Garfield County will be of such form and physical shape that
governmental Inefficiencies and unnecessary publlo costs and financial burdens will resin
from providing for the extensive' of pubiic services and public support facilities, speck
f ical ly, improvement of the County,Road System serving the Spring. Val ley area; and
WHEREAS, the Uoard of County Conanissloners of Garfleld County desires to advise any
persons. interested in the subdivision of tile- lands lir the Spring Valley area 'of Garfield
County that the Board Inas Blade the prelimiliary detet`in.ination that division of land in tI'
area, other than those projects already having County approval, will create impacts viols:
Alm or. the foregoing criteria established by the.Garfield County Subdivision Regulations,
HOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, by the -Board of County Commissioners of Garfield
County, Colorado, that any ,persons proposing. the division of land in the .Spring Valley
area of Garfield County be advised by the.Garfleld County Planning Department that the
subdivision of such lands, whether by subdivision exemption or by.subdlvlslon process,
has been determined to be premature, unless such person or persons are able to demonstrat
to the satlsfacEion of the Hoard that such division will not add traffic to that portion
of County Road 115 known as the "Red Canyon Road", or otherwise impact the Garfleld Couni
Road System -in the Spring Valley area.
Ai1EST: BOARD OF COUNTY COi111SSIONERS
GARF I ELD COUNTY, COLORADO
(.iia 1'Ulan i'ro Ted.,"
Deputy Cletk of- 66- Uoard
Upon motion duly nnde erid seconded the loregoh'g ltesalulIon was adopted by the following vole!
iIaven J. Cerise •
t:ulene "Jim"trrinldiouse nye
Ale
• Aye
- STAIC or COLOi'.alb7
County of Carlhdd
i• r1
Commluloners
1. . County Cllr:; and ex oificio Clerk of the floatd of Courtly Commissioners
In and tot the County and State aforetald do hereby certify that the annexed arid fort going Girder b truly corded horn the Records of
the Proceedings of the Board of County Conunittioners tot said Car(icld County, now In illy (dike.
111 1'!I11IC55 t711r, nror, 1 have hereunto sot my band and afll>icd 111e seal of told County, at Glenwood Springs,
hull day of
1). 19 .
•
County Clerk end ex•ollncnn CI, Os of the !laud of County Corm"Issleneu,
- e
r
•
fir' •. i . r' _.. .
.L.
ROBERT P. CHAFF
ATTORNEY AT LAW
811 COLORADO AVENUE
P. 0. 110X ons
GLE NWOOD SPRINGS, COLORADO 81801
RHONE ISOSI 045-5474
May 3, 1991
Garfield County Planning Dept.
Court House
Glenwood Springs, Colorado 81601
RE: CHRISTELEIT SUBDIVISION
Gentlemen:
I have reviewed the history of the 60 foot road access and
utility easement for the property owned by Peter J. Christeleit
and Linda L. Christeleit which property is described in the
Warranty Deed recorded in Book 555 at Page 67 a copy of which is
attached hereto and marked Exhibit A.
The easement was established at the time of the transfer in
the above described Deed being 30 feet off of the adjoining
property to the west owned by William George Ould and 30 feet off
of the property transferred to the Christeleits. An agreement
was entered into by the Christeleits and Mr. Ould, a copy of
which is attached hereto marked Exhibit B for the construction,
maintenance and upkeep of said easement. Paragraph 2 of the
agreement states that the easement is for road access and utility
purposes in connection with properties owned by them and served
by said easement.
The property to the west that was then owned by Mr. Ould and
served by the easement was thereafter split into additional
separate parcels of land with said parcels using the easement
road. Mr. Ould also granted in Book 595 at Page 25 a right to
use said easement for the Kindall property.
It therefore seems clear to me that when one reviews how the
easement was established jointly out of the Christeleit property
and the Ould property and the language of the easement agreement
indicating it was for the benefit of their properties and that
the use has already been expanded to additional parcels on the
Ould and Kindall property that the proposed subdivision of the
Christeleit property and use by those parcels is a permitted
expansion of the use of the easement.
Very truly yours,
7obert F. Ct�a fin
RFC/tmc
enc.
Reception N 1 1('t.l J t
•
4 46, .
Art ?)n»/d Yeral
•
KNOW ALL MEN BY THESE PRESENTS THAT
WILLIAM GEORGE OULD
First Party
tLurth_19ZQ Barker Road
P.O. Box or Street Address
Greenacres, WA
City State
99016
Zip
der.
RECrlllUEll
SEP—'lto,t
1.,... _ l.:1ff n.
(, IM1 r
e 131 individually
0 tingle person ,1'
O • Colorado Corporation
b a partnership; 1: s,
❑ a Limited Partnership t•
l'
for and in consideration of ten dollars and other valuable con;iderallon. In hand pMd hereby sells and Conveys to
,lrh�t' ,` ,?
,, �iY I fs ilr I ,tt I l }:
ALVIN R CHRISTELEIT, DORIS R. CtIRTSTEI.EIt. ' d `i rl: ryt,l 2,
PETER J. CHRISTELEIT nnrl T.TNnA L. HOOPS;
• IJtndivldually,fl1.;4 i<
1• ,. CI joint tenancy ''':.1..
IQ tenancy Irl inn -when .t
i,' :0 a Colorado Ebiporshon I
l,?
• ,.O a limited Pittnlrshlp i, ) ti:N,i}t;i I :j� 1
the following described property In the County of and State of Colorado: „la;i:4 ;
j;
1 ••
1
'd;.; t..r.r.
t!?..
S QonJ3o%r, 681 J. Christeleit
P.O. Box or Street Address
Glenwood Springs, CO 81601
City
Stale ,Zip.
(nrflo1.i
T. 6. S., R. 88 W., 6th P.M.
44.
Section 19: All that part of Lot 8 lying southerly of County..Roed.119,
•
Section 30: All of Lot 10, and all that pact of Leta 4, 51 and d iying,.ril�5t`.'
t h
southerly of County Road 119, ' :;is ,1 .. .,.r
Together with nod subject to n Nun -exclusive Easement, 60 feet in width, for told...
access and utility purposes for the present and future•t•.ae and •benefit' oE the.pht!lee .h
hereto and their heirs and nsaig:as, the Center Line. of which is,degcribed ant lollowe1.71.,
fit.. 1•
':),1 (see (see reverse aide) '7:;
with all its atrriurlenances and warrants title to the same, o'ctill t and subject to general property taxes fur thb�• ,
current year, U.S. patent reservations end exceptions, any ;wrl all easements and rights of way of a public or
private nature and planning. znninri and other governmental rules and regulations, the of feet of inclu-
sion in general or spec! flc water conservancy, fire protection, soil conservation or•
other such dlstrlet or improvement area of any klnd,exlsting lease for forming during
the crop growing year of 1980, prior oil, gni and other mineral teservntione and ex-
oe tions of record, if :Inv, and First Party reserves, for himself, his heirs and ns -
SIGNED this __AUL_ ay pt digit Ann t A D lq P.3 signs, an easement and right
of way over, across and under the. aforesaid Nor. -exclusive Easement for purponee
hereinabove set forth. •
/,
•
STATE OF !i(1SItINUT09(
COUNTY OF tIlrujm
ss.
/..
William George Ould !
The Inre.toinq instrument was acknowledged h••lore me this
tg_i},0__by William George Ould.
1•WUh IIh�an1y Itlryl and nl1icial coal.
i ' �a'� exp., r5: c'ch. , 1^87.
• .. ,let.
NOTE: •
• M• 1, •pptavrra• cause Mita e.
eln .I.r shell Include plur•I .. tontnl requires.
7111 day ul
July
y -a
Notary Public •;t.:.•. of Lon'r
,.r..l 11.11'
PM. TON - Farm I
N. 00°448'58" W. point on the southerly line Ok u....
Bond 119, the mint of Beginning; thence S. 00°48'58"
the Northwest Cor. r of said Section 30; thence S.'00°48''SR'
1,266.60 feet; thence S. 26°21'32 E. 112.47 feet; then
ce
' S. 70°07'46" W. 100.52 feet; thence S. 14'40'48" E. 169.99 feet;
thence S. 39°05'41" E. 110.23 feet; thence S. 20°31'19" E.'536.94
feet; thence S. 56°34'26" E. 111.53 feet: thence S:32.50'51" E.
.: 92.07 feet; thence S. 89°14'49" E. 546.96 feet; thence S. 00°45'13" k.
30.00 feet. IYj • ' Til, �1 .
r• iT Ti
frl °,
! K i
O
H
STATE OF COLORADO,
•.1
•
•
i
ti lalg
3 3
€ a
g
2
L 4n
5 Y' 8
E p
O
3 E 111b
O
I
t — E
8 yob
u ti
Rec.rcl^<1 n'
Reception No. ,!O r:9{LMILDRED i•L':DORF, R CCRL.E1 .;
AGREEMENT
.V) pia 11
THIS AGREEMENT, made and entered into this 7� day',o°er��T
hT
1980, by and between NILLIAM GEORGE OULD,•Whose address in „North��` 4 '
1929 Barker Road, Greenacres, WA 99016, hereinafter referred to`a8"+`i
"first party", and PETER J. CIIRISTELEIT, LINDA L: HOO>i8 11 A►1 N1l
CHRISTELEIT and DORIS R. CHRISTELEIT, whose address ii b%a,�Peter;.'
AC,
Christeleit, P.O. Box 681, Glenwood Springs, CO 81601, hereintl to
7 .r
)-,-1.;• rr .fit �r'S� , �t4t•?
referred to as `"second parties; WITNESSETII: r':1.!..Y J-• 4., 5ti �rifl,an�',
WHEREAS, the parties hereto own certain' real p•roperty ei�U•�lieii >fl}'�� �;'
in the County of Garfield and State of Colorado,ttnd t r!
4.,,i•
r �w.
A+ , t
r ' , .. WHEREAS, each party hereto is the owner, of or, hae,.intrbs€
r. ,. - c 1 tt.,�. •y6 i �M ��l. f �', �ti�' 111 ,; ,i
�'s''. �.-:,_ W Non -Exclusive Easement hereinafter described;` Wh}id
that certain Non-Excl +
d,' i• easement is,depicted as a 60 foot wide access .easement ons h�yi�.1t{j�j}e
taiA plat recorded in the office of the Clerk :and Reco ddi
rCounty Colorado, as Rec. No. 305875, and w ; , ,•
WHEREAS, the parties hereto, their heirs,• succeakibra i+nd h
r
,ic.will be using said easement for access and utility purposed, and' i''
r�
p.'4,'•,-, F!
h Cee
hereto desire to provido for the Banat.,,,
WHEREAS, the parties
• +';,w: ' ,{,;��'�`•�:a:!ti
tion, maintenance and upkeep of said easement,
NOW, THERE -ORE, for and in consideration of the premises and q4
the mutual agreements herein set forth, the sufficiency of which
hereby acknowledged by the parties hereto, the parties hereto here -c
x ,,.
by agree as follows:
1. That the Non -Exclusive Easement to which this Agreement
pertains is described as:
STATE OF COLORADO - COUNTY OF CARFIELD
T. 6 S., R. 88 W., 6th P.M.
A Non -Exclusive Easement, 60 feet in width, the
Center Line of which is described as follows:
Beginning at the Northwest Corner of said Section 30;
thence N. 00°48'S8" W. to a point on the southerly
line of said County Road 119, the True Point of Begin-
ning; thence S. 00°48'58" E. to the Northwest Corner
of said Section 30; thence 5. 00°48'58" E. 1266.60 feet
thence S. 26°21'32" E. 112.47 feet; thence S. 70°07'46" W.
-1-
(03
, el ry i5 FACE , '73 !
et i
F' r: "
100.52 feet; thence S. 14°40'48" E 16� 99 feat; ,�� ,''ir:
T; , thence S. 39°05' 41" E. 11.0.23 feet; thence e i '-1 �`t'� �
`S. 20°37'19" E. 536.94__ feet; thence S.•56 34 it EA' .
111.53 feet; thence S. 32°50'51".,E. 92107 .feet; 1± ; 1 1.11
thence S. 89°14'49" E. 546.96 '�eet; „thence V/M 14r.); 1':'i,
S. 00°45' 13" E. 30.00 feet •,s' `, ! ,tt� ^,M, �:*,,re �' piky-4 �e
'the'Se`of..the~,paftieS. i'cnk
2.: That said basement shall be for Ny p
hereto, their heirs,."successors and assigns; for,xoad access art ..,,J1'
t1n1.1 , t 4
utility purposes in connection with properties;bwried by them and:'
`,`-'',;e4,,,)' l ' 14, ., (IliFS
served by said easement; t y� ` �` c i
; , .4t,r.,{�
"`
3. That first party shall cause a "doter-finished",road,with!y
•,at least 20 feet of roadbed, to be constructed along 3A1t? ea�M ement
t -. 4. •h i A f i11
on or before November 1, 1981;c.ti
4. That after construction,•the p.art1es;shal1 reasonably
cooperate in properly~ and sufficiently repair�,ng and maintaining A
aP /.. /A, �....r e/ oer M41.r«...//s; ilet*,,1 r7
awever- hat either-par�Y
‘ the roadbed of said easement provided r -h r -t .4 4,` '3 „ i .1
L pa =r s
pu.s
MAT undertake-ihe�-reasanable�exJense of repairing and mai taining„ j`, '
0 -3 ' the roadAupern-gim-issg-35--days_-gr,ior'-wr thereel -A y, j
I' r•
other, and the party undertaking such expense shall be rem
ibursed �;y ., •
by the other party for that party's share of such expense withih,'r,,
not more than 60 days after receipt of a statement or copy of.a;� ;fit
statement for such expense; ►�'i;i
,•.rcr.
5. That this agreement shall not be deemed or construed
r,.
granting either party hereto any other or further rights in and .:
to the property of the other party;
6. That all terms and conditions hereof shall inure to the
benefit of and be binding upon the parties hereto, their heirs,
devisees, successors and assigns.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF the parties hereto have hereunto set their
hands and seals the day and year first above written.
/. ///ih��.
Alvin R. Chqsteleit- 2nd Part W/ la
Do 's R. Christeleit- 2nd Party
�• r .1 P t " J • elect - Secon: Party
•a . Hoops Second Party
STATE OF WASDIAGTOT1 )
1,oNT,hm ) ss.
COUNTY OF SpOUNE )
The foregoing instrument was subscribed and sworn to before me
•i =•!
-2-
t�,.,
,;31.
''13.5 rlut..`''i4•
ki. tri.,
In-
AUU LT ' w } r i ,
this 7TN day of , 1980 by oiilliam Georg•e 9.,u •,L„,„ �d a .;r
,i V�t.�'
t , Witness my hand and official seal , � 1 •fi rt)t�t{ .Crrr:,�(P}
.t ` 1 :�t' ' t 4l rY�'•� t,a i��•. l i"r
11......... (commission expires: Feb. 27, i982 e.1.6 ("*�y +�a ,r g ,:
�{ t ��'
Notary
u• c.. or State of I1,1%y
Residing at Mieeoui i'. w.
"t3i� , �. anFk• i . p
••C _ ��'+}'. •1fa'rR}F`::. -k " rL���•'.va'���*J3•:
STATE OF COLORADO )
ss.
'COUNTY OF GARFIELD )
The foregoing instrume:.t was subscribed and sworn to .befti're tnb'
this __Ird__ day of September . 1980 by Peter J. Ctrietbleit, Lindd•,.
Hoops. y,4=i+gip , Yf ,iZ �1K 'i t'„
�`- Witness my hand and official seal. ►2
j.
')(4'4,
I\rte �• 7�h.1Q�'�
i My commission expires: fly Commis.icn czp rs July 5,1983-'.0.: ` 4, + t{t
Notary Public , 'ti J+, ,.' 01
r a a t x,`14
+"+ i•' h
STATE OF NEW ,JERSEY ) )
COUNTY OF BERGEN) :..04;;;;;Ilt°The foregoing instrument wnq subscrthed and sworn to before me this yN dny- ''ti%t+ ,, + 1t fidof /r,, ��.� 19B0 by A1vL, R. Christeleit and Doris R. Christeleit, ty,: �{a'0
\ M. a • . t, , � a +�i.
`''0 'a [nese my hand and official seal. 1r` .. 1 ` tii • "' 4p'Y"
�
• rte, ; .
NOT', 3'f 1"J!'lIC OF r1:1,71ERSE1 C i.,,ck:. t :t.l..+ tk `
Ny Commission Expires: Mr w ;a„_,at tx,...' :um 2. 1.98.1 ( ,,
Notary Public tj . r {.
PirA1314RES4UHL..;
ley'
rIRnMPIE N G I N E E R I N G INC.
May 7, 1991
Mr. Mark Bean
Garfield County Planning Director
109 Eighth Street, Suite 303
Glenwood Springs, Colorado 81601
RE: Christeleit Subdivision Water Supply
Dear Mark:
Resource Engineering, Inc. provides engineering services to the Basalt Water
Conservancy District and administers their Ruedi Reservoir water allotment program.
In this capacity we are familiar with the Christeleit Subdivision.
The Christeleit Subdivision Homeowner's Association has obtained a water allotment
contract for 3.7 acre feet of water from Ruedi Reservoir from the District. This
amount of water is adequate to meet the needs of six residences, each with 6,000
square feet of lawns and gardens and up to five horses.
The Christeleit Subdivision is located in Area "A" of the Basalt Water Conservancy
District. Area "A" is defined as that area that can generally be served by replacement
water from Ruedi Reservoir without causing injury to vested water rights that lie
between the proposed point of use and the Roaring Fork River. On this basis it is
highly probable that wells for the individual lots can be obtained. However, ultimate
responsibility for issuance of well permits is vested in the Colorado Division of Water
Resources and they have the authority to grant, or deny well permits subject to their
promulgated rules and regulations.
Should you have any questions regarding the Christeleit Subdivision water allotment
contract, please do not hesitate to call.
Sincerely,
RESOURCE ENGINEERING, INC.
_P1
John M. Currier, P.E.
Water Resources Engineer
JMC/mmm
349-1.0 mbcsws
Attachment (Water Allotment Contract)
Consulting Engineers and Hydrologists
802 Grand Avenue, Suite 302 II Glenwood Springs, CO 81601 PI (303) 945-6777 ■ Fax 945-1137
u
1•G
UI
951
C.7-
- P..vtn»ii-� -,t1 ire 93y
Nb) e�'5E ey ..Clad
•
p = 1 80
� = l 'A girt
11
81)
_ GJ;,pc63z p,QA,r,,:t 41- /aaos62
SW ell NE Oec. as
9% 81 g1 6� in)
5 -Gm
swL. = 15-7
- C ex, P�.ar,# 1 19550
N W c9� N � 151�4-cJ 30
o
--515-) FA
E= a -5o
Y= 15 -am
swk.= gg'
6Ar auya, -IL -25735 -F
mui 51A) 061 ,A1) -C., a 9
6M/ 33
D= 330'
Y G ant
moi _
Ng 1 WO
or SW ,,Qac
g/e7187
tD = 15
�= IS- C-411
b
„.,1 4L 114503
S w 0-6 s W� .a.e� a 9
700' 6
goo
y G.K.
swL= 300
7 - 140 -tot-- Wrurnn;*
E ,dn
s E, c. ay
D= /35'
'/ 1sgM_
Swk= qD
-eQJUIu # /56 7&)41
� e sw was
(-MLo JAmitt qg •
.//,0/40
butat)