Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1.0 Application• • • • • CATTLE CREEK RANCH A PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT OWNER: CATTLE CREEK RANCH JOINT VENTURE ASPEN, COLORADO PLANNING AND PROJECT COORDINATION: LAND DESIGN PARTNERSHIP, INC. GLENWOOD SPRINGS, COLORADO CIVIL ENGINEERING: ELDORADO ENGINEERING GLENWOOD SPRINGS, COLORADO HYDROLOGY: WRIGHT WATER ENGINEERS, INC. GLENWOOD SPRINGS, COLORADO SOILS AND GEOLOGY: CHEN AND ASSOCIATES GLENWOOD SPRINGS, COLORADO DEVELOPMENT CONSULTANT: THE SIENNA COMPANY DENVER, COLORADO DATE: AUGUST 16, 1982 • TABLE OF CONTENTS • • • i M • • LETTER OF APPLICATION THE SITE REGIONAL MAP VICINITY MAP AREA ZONING MAP THE DESIGN CONCEPT AND F.U.D. OBJECTIVES HOME OWNERS ASSOCIATION - COVENANTS P.U.D. PHASING P.U.D. DEVELOPMENT GUIDE UTILITIES AND DRAINAGE WATER RIGHTS GEOLOGY AND SOILS SUPPLEMENTAL INFORMATION PROPERTY OWNERS WITHIN 300 FEET LEGAL DESCRIPTION TITLE INSURANCE Mr. Frank Lerner P.O. Box 9140 Aspen, CO 81611 August 16, 1982 Honorable Board of Commissioners of Garfield County Garfield County Courthouse P.O. Box 640 Glenwood Springs, CO 81602 RE: Cattle Creek Ranch P.U.D. Application Gentlemen: Contained herewith is an application for Planned Unit Development Zoning of approximately 960 acres of property in Township 7 South, Range 87 West, Sixth Principal Meridian, Garfield County, Colorado. The property was zoned in 1977 as a Planned Unit Development accommodating 131 single family re- sidences. The first phase of the P.U.D. is presently under construction. As the result of our redefinition of the development ob- jectives for the property, we are submitting to you and requesting your consideration and approval of the revised development concept presented by this application. As is evidenced by the construc- tion activities at the Ranch this past year, we are intent upon carrying the Cattle Creek Ranch P.U.D. to completion as a high quality residential environment. On behalf of myself and the Cattle Creek Ranch design team, I would offer our full cooperation and assistance in your timely review of this application. Please do not hesitate to give me or Ron Liston of Land Design Partnership, Inc. a call to assist you in any way in the review proceedings. Sincerely, Frafik Lerner FL/pck THE SITE • Cattle Creek Ranch is presently an inactive cattle operation located at the westerly end of Missouri Heights. Access to the Ranch exists over two primary routes. Prom the west it is • approximately 7 miles from Highway 82 and, via County Road 100, a distance of approximately 4 miles from the Catherine Store to the Ranch. Additionally, County Road 115 from Spring Valley and County Road 122 from El Jebel as well as the Cottonwood Pass Road all converge upon the Ranch site. Using the above described routes the Ranch is approximately 8 miles /► from Carbondale, 13 miles from Glenwood Springs and 8 miles from El Jebel. The Ranch site is composed of lush green alluvial plains along Cattle and Coulter Creeks which converge at the westerly edge of the Ranch and of higher mesas to the west, north and south • of the creeks. There are presently approximately 250 acres of irrigated pasture and hayground along Cattle Creek and on the mesa to the south. The ridges and steeper slopes on the mesa are characterized by mixed sage and oak brush. The high land west of Coulter Creek and north of Cattle Creek is a mixture of dry land wheat fields and rolling sage covered hills. • • • • • • Views from the high lands of the Ranch are characteristic of the Colorado Rockies with majestic vistas of the Maroon Bells, Mt. Sopris, Sunlight Mt., Lookout Mt., and Basalt Mt. as well as the overview of the pastoral ranch lands along Cattle and Coulter Creeks. The property is presently zoned for 131 single family dwellings as the Cattle Creek Ranch P.U.D. N 1? co w 1► N N rs N N N NORTH Vicinity Map co �lT 4 Cattle Creek Ranch P.U.D. 8 i • 18 A./R./RD. 17 Adjacent Zoning • • • • THE DESIGN CONCEPT & P.U.D. OBJECTIVES Cattle Creek P.U.D. is an equestrian oriented development of primary and secondary home sites. The concept is one of home sites clustered in a luxury ranch setting. Extensive equestrian facilities will be the center of recreation activity at the ranch. Additional recreational activities may include tennis, children's play facilities, par course, and pedestrian ways. The project is directed towards a market which demands extremely high quality building sites, mountain views and attractive recreation facilities. 1. The following objectives establish the broad parameters for the design and development of the Cattle Creek Ranch F.U.D.: 2. Respond to the market potential for a high quality primary and secondary residential environment supported by recreational facilities compatible with the luxury ranch concept. 3. Maximize the premium view qualities of the Cattle • Creek Ranch site. 4. Utiilize site development and architectural concepts sympathetic to the topographic and native vegetative character of the site. • 5. Promote water conserving site and landscape design concepts. • 6. Through the implementation of the above objectives and sensitive concern for design detail and the quality of the project implementation establish a true sense of "place" and "destination" at the Cattle Creek Ranch P.U.D. In character with the Cattle Creek luxury ranch concept, the old ranch homestead along side Cattle Creek will become the site of an active equestrian center. The center will include • stables, outdoor arena, polo field and club house with a light food and beverage service. A ranch manager residence and lodging for ranch employees may also be included. The entire lower valley along Cattle Creek will be retained in its present pasture character in support of the equestrian center. • Pedestrian ways will be located along irrigation ditches, in open space corridors and where necessary within road way right-of-ways. On the upper mesa the pedestrian ways will interconnect children's play facilities and the par course. • • • • • • • • • The Ranch will be characterized by two housing types as explained in the following zone district description: Residential/Cluster Housing: Tightly clustered single family duplex or three plex units will characterize this district. We have also provided that this area could accommodate central lodging facilities for a guest ranch type of activity. Detailed architectural and site development guide lines will be established to direct the character of the development including the preservation of views of each home site. Although architectural detailing may vary somewhat throughout the different areas of the ranch, the overall architectural concept will be low massing of all site structures including strong encouragement for earth sheltered homes. Control of the introduced landscape will also be significant to view conflicts and the maintenance of the present vegetative character of this site. Although many areas of the site will see the reintroduction of native plant materials, nonindigenous landscape materials selected for its compatibility of scale to the native vegetation will also be used for residential landscaping. Irrigated nonnatives wil be utilized only in the high intensity use areas of the cluster housing and recreational districts and in close proximity to the single family residents. The domestic water and waste water handling systems for the F.U.D. are discussed in the engineer's statement later in this application. • PHASING PHASE I 410 It is anticipated that within two years of the approval of the Cattle Creek Ranch P.U.D., at least 50% of the single family lots and both tracts of the cluster housing will be developed with all public service facilties. Phase I of the equestrian facilities is nearly completed at this time with the remodeling of the equestrian club house and two existing barns on the site as well as the completion of a 12 stall barn. A • polo field is under construction and show arenas are anticipated to be completed during the summer of 1983. Pedestrian ways, children's play facilities and other recreational features will be completed on a phase basis relative to the number of residential lots developed. • PSS I I Within four years of the approval of the Planned Unit Development, it is anticipated that all lots will have been fully developed with public services and final recreational facilities completed. • • • • GARFIELD COUNTY COMPREHENSIVE PLAN/CATTLE CREEK RANCH P.U.D. Location: As mentioned earlier, the project already lies within a Rural Serviceable Area. It is bounded on the south by another existing development, Panorama Ranchettes. The ranch is bounded on the east, north and northwest by private lands in agricultural production or sage and oak brush range land. To the southwest the ranch is bordered by Bureau of Land Management lands. Density: Cattle Creek is proposed to have density of .4 units per acre as compared to the Comp Plan recommended density of .5 units to the acre. The proposed density has been clustered to create the various housing types preferred by the targeted market. As a result of the clustering of the housing, the project is able to preserve large amounts of open space. Of the 313 acreas in the P.U.D.. 184 acres are proposed to be in open space and recreational facilities. The terrain character of the site and massive open space treatment allows for the preservation of an open agricultural feel along the existing county road system through the ranch. The residential areas of development are confined to the upper mesa on the ranch leaving the creek, valleys and existing county road corridors open. Technical Services: The central water system proposed for the original Cattle Creek Ranch P.U.D. will be of adequate capacity for domestic and fire flow services for the now proposed project. A central waste water treatment facility will also be constructed. Power to the project will be provided by Holy Cross Electric Association and telephone service by Mountain Bell, of course, at the cost of the developer. All lines will be buried within the project. Rocky Mountain Natural Gas service will be provided to the project, a utility seldom available to rural developments. • Community Services: Schools: A dedication of land or cash in lieu of fees • will be made to the RE -2 School District as per their policies. The project is presently under consideration by the school district. 1 would anticipate that the demands upon the school system will be somewhat less than normal for a project of this size because of the partial secondary housing nature of the project. • • Fire Protection: Cattle Creek Ranch has petitioned for inclusion in the Carbondale and Rural Fire Protection District. Police Protection,: The Cattle Creek project will be constructed with an electronics system connecting all re- sidences to a central computerized control console. This system will allow continuous monitoring of security, fire or medical emergencies in each home. Health Care: The electronic security system described • above can also include emergency medical call if the residents so choose. This would be directed to the central computer and if desired, could be relayed on directly to medical facilities in Glenwood. • • • • Roads -Access and Circulation: The existing county road system provides four routes of access to the Cattle Creek P.U.D. County Road 100 and County Road 113 will logically carry the vast majority of the traffic burden of the project. Environmental Constraints A soils and geologic report prepared by Chen and Associates did not reveal any significant environmental hazards. Since beginning construction on the Phase 1 of the original P.U.D., we have isolated some localized soil conditions that have re- quired special considerations regarding road construction and may require engineered foundations for some homes. Chen and Associates has been involved in additional studies in regard to these localized areas and included herewith are copies of their reports to date. • The proposed plan has been responsive to environmental concerns of steep slopes, vegetation and low land flood ways. All areas disturbed by development construction will be revegetated. There will be a strict architectural control committee which will have authority over site dis- turbance, revegetation and landscape treatment, preservation of view corridors as well as architectural character. It is the intent to establish an architectural character which restricts residences to a very low structural mass profile, particularly where a structure would infringe upon the visual horizon line. In regard to the goals, objectives and policies defined in the Comp Plan, the Cattle Creek project may be summarized as follows: Rousing: The Cattle Creek P.U.D. is serving a viable housing market within the Roaring Fork Valley. Eecreation/open Space: The equestrian facilities pro- vided within the project will serve project residents as well as users outside of the Cattle Creek P.U.D. Fifty eight (58) percent of the project is designated for open space and • recreation. Much of this open space is located to the visual benefit of not only the project residents,, but County residents who might drive through the area on the existing county road system. Agriculture: Open space land is being retained in ag- ricultural type activities such as the equestrian facilties and supportive pasture and hay lands, while the remaining open space will remain as undisturbed native vegetation. The remaining 650 acres in the ranch will remain in agricultural. use. # finical Sere; q ; The project will be providing central water and central waste water facilities within an area already designated as a Rural Serviceable Area. „EnMix,finMental: We lthe ahas been designed to meet the natural terraiinofthesite sand itheely 41 carrying capacity of the land. The open space re ratio of the project and the location of concentrated cdevelopmentnon the higher mesas combine to preserve the rural character of the area as one moves along the existing county road system. • • • • • THE CATTLE CREEK RANCH PLANNED UNIT DISTRICT DEVELOPMENT GUIDE AUGUST 1982 Preamble ARTICLE I Section I. Section II. ARTICLE II Section I. ARTICLE III Section I. Section 11. Section III. Section IV. Section V. Section VI. Section VII. Section VIII. Section IX. Section X. ARTICLE IV Section I. Section II. THE CATTLE CREEK RANCH PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT GUIDE TABLE OF CONTENTS PURPOSE AND AUTHORITY Purpose, Objectives, Content and Intent Authority COMMITMENTS AND ASSURANCES Commitments and Assurances P.U.D. ZONE REGULATIONS General Provisions Definitions P.U.D. Zone Districts Open Space District Recreational District Residential/Single Family District Residential/Cluster Housing District Residential Density Supplemental Land Use Provisions Off -Street Parking P.U.D. SUBDIVISION REGULATIONS General Provisions Definitions PAGE i I-1 I-3 IV -1 IV -2 • • • • • ARTICLE V DESIGN GUIDELINES PAGE Section I. Design Standards V-1 Section II. Traffic Control V-3 Section III. Safety, Security and Environmental V-4 Protection Figure 1 Collector V-7 Figure 2 Local Access Roads V-8 ARTICLE VI P.U.D. ZONE MAP LAND USE SUMMARY VI -1 • PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT GUIDE • FOR CATTLE CREEK RANCH, GARFIELD COUNTY • • • • • • • • • PREAMBLE This Development Guide sets forth land use and development standards for Cattle Creek Ranch, a planned community in the unincorporated area of the County of Garfield, State of Colo- rado; regulates the use of land and the use, bulk, maximum height, minimum lot area, minimum lot width, and minimum yard spaces of buildings; provides regulations for uses permitted therein and accessory buildings and uses; provides additional supplementary regulations; and defines certain terms used therein This Development Guide and the herein contained Cattle Creek Ranch Zone Regulations and Cattle Creek Ranch Subdivision Regulations is authorized under the power and authority of Section 4, Planned Unit Developments, Garfield County Zoning Resolution, adopted January 2, 1979. Cattle Creek Ranch is a large parcel of land under single development control, and is suitable for creation of a luxury ranch/ residential community. This large parcel of land is particularly well suited for long-range comprehensive planning, which, in turn, will aid in the protection of the environment, while at the same time facilitating the development of an aesthetically pleasing community. The Planned Unit Development Act of 1972 and the Board of Garfield County Commissioners permit adoption of a development guide within the context of the planned unit development zoning regulations applicable to such land in order to establish and implement such a long-range comprehensive plan. A long-range comprehensive plan has been formulated for Cattle Creek encompassing such beneficial features as a balance of residential, commercial, and recreational uses; enhancement of public safety; creation of an aesthetically pleasing living environment; and promotion of high standards of developmental quality by stringent site planning, landscaping controls and architectural design guidelines all for the benefit of the existing and future citizens of Garfield County. • • • • • • • • • ARTICLE I CATTLE CREEK RANCH P.U.D. DEVELOPMENT GUIDE PURPOSE AND AUTHORITY SECTION I. Purpose, Objectives, Content and Intent A. Purpose. The purpose of this Cattle Creek Ranch Development Guide (hereinafter sometimes referred to as "Development Guide") is to assure that Cattle Creek Ranch is developed as a comprehensively planned residential community with adequate provisions for the orderly development and improvement of the property and to assure provision of public services and on-going maintenance intent and to impose no burden upon the balance of Garfield County. The property to which this Development Guide is applicable (hereinafter sometimes referred to as "Cattle Creek Ranch") is described in Article XVIII. All Article and Section references, unless otherwise stated, are Articles and Sections in this Development Guide. B. Objectives. The community of Cattle Creek Ranch is intented to accommodate a mix of residential, commercial, recreational and nonurban land uses. This Development Guide allows opportunities for innovative community design while at the same time being responsive to changing community needs. C. Legislative Intent. It is also the intent of this Development Guide to be consistent with, and to assist in implementation of, the legislative declarations contained in the Planned Unit Development Act of 1972 of the State of Colorado to: 1. Provide for necessary commercial and recreational facilities conveniently located to residential areas; 2. Ensure that the provisions of the zoning laws which direct the uniform treatment of dwelling type, bulk, density and open space within each zoning district will not be applied to the improvement of land by other than lot -by -lot development in a manner which would distort the objectives of the zoning laws. I -I • • • • • 3. Encourage innovations in residential, commercial and recreational development so that the growing demands of the population may be met by greater variety in type, design and layout of buildings and by the conservation and more efficient use of open space ancillary to said buildings; 4. Encourage a more efficient use of land and public services, or private services in lieu thereof, and to reflect changes in the technology of land development so the resulting economies may enure to the benefit of homeowners. 5. Design streets in a manner which will maintain the theme of rural roads and lanes, preserve natural land forms, minimize the concentration of storm water runoff in order to prevent erosion and lessen the burden of traffic. 6. Encourage the building of a residential community incorporating the best features of design; 7. Conserve and enhance the value of the land; 8. Provide a procedure which can relate the type, design and layout of residential, commercial and recreational development to the particular site, thereby encouraging preservation of the site's natural characteristics; and • 9. Encourage integrated planning in order to achieve the above purposes. • • • 1-2 • i • • • • • • Section II. Authority A. Authority. The Authority for this Development Guide and the herein contained Cattle Creek Ranch Zone Regulations and Cattle Creek Ranch Subdivision Regulations is Section 4 (Planning Unit Developments) of the Garfield County Zoning Resolution adopted January 2, 1979. The Authority for Section 4 of the Garfield County Zoning Resolution is Article 67, Title 24 (Planned Unit Development Act of 1972), of the Colorado Revised Statutes, 1973, as amended. B. Adoption. The adoption of this Development Guide shall evidence the finding and decision of the Garfield County Board of County Commissioners that this Development Guide for Cattle Creek Ranch is authorized by the provisions of the Section 4 of the Garfield County Zoning Resolution; that such Section 4 and this Development Guide comply with the Planned Unit Development Act of 1972. C. Enforcement. The provisions of this Development Guide relating to the use of land and the location of open space shall run in favor of Garfield County without any limitation of any power or authority otherwise granted by law. All provisions of this Development Guide shall run in favor of the residents, occupants and owners of the land within Cattle Creek Ranch to the extent expressly provided in this Development Guide and in accordance with its terms and conditions. D. M4djficatiof. No provisions of this Development Guide may be substantially modified, removed, or released by Garfield County if such modification, removal or release: 1. Affects the rights of residents, occupants and owners established by this Development Guide to maintain and enforce the provisions of this Resolution; or 2. Is inconsistent with the efficient development and preservation of Cattle Creek Ranch in accordance with this Development Guide; or 3. Affects in a substantially adverse manner the enjoyment of the land bordering Cattle Creek Ranch; or 4. Imposes a financial burden for construction and/or maintenance of public facilities upon the County generally. • T-3 E. Modifications. Modifications, removals and releases of the provisions of this Development Guide may be made by the Garfield County Board of County Commissioners with the concurrence of the Cattle Creek Ranch Joint Venture upon application of an owner of the affected property when it is determined by the Board of County Commissioners that the modification, removal or release does not adversely affect substantial rights of occupants, residents and owners and is not inconsistent with this Section II and the purpose, objectives and intent of this Development Guide. F. Process for )mending Development Guide. The Cattle Creek Joint Venture shall make application to amend, alter, modify, delete or add to this Development Guide by making application to the Garfield County Planning Director following the procedures of Section IV (4.12.03) Garfield County Zoning Resolution adopted January 2, 1979. • ARTICLE II CATTLE CREEK RANCH P.U.D. DEVELOPMENT GUIDE COMMITMENTS AND ASSURANCES Section I. Commitments and Assurances • In order to implement the comprehensive plan, The Cattle Creek Joint Venture has offered certain assurances and. commitments which shall, after the approval of the Cattle Creek Ranch P.U.D. application and this Development Guide contained therein, be binding upon the Cattle Creek Joint Venture with respect to land within Cattle Creek Ranch • P.U.D., and binding upon its successors and assigns with respect to land within Cattle Creek Ranch it does not own. • • • • • • A. Services. As a condition to development of each phase of the project and use of any part of any planning area, Cattle Creek Ranch Joint Venture shall establish that all of the utility services are or will be available to serve the phase to be developed and the uses to be established in a manner which will impose no burden of maintenance and operation upon the residents of Garfield County outside of Cattle Creek Ranch. From the point of view of governmental services, it is the intention of Cattle Creek Ranch Joint Venture to provide for a development which will be self-sustaining and self-supporting in the matter of provision of governmental services, both in connection with assurance that the facilities will be in place in the first instance, and in connection with on-going maintenance and operating thereof. It is proposed that these commitments be achieved by the formation of a Home Owners Association or a Metropolitan District. B. Design Review Quidelines. The Cattle Creek Ranch Joint Venture has prepared a Design Review Guide for all lot purchasers. Said Design Review Guide is intended to supplement and complement this Development Guide and where any conflict may occur, the Development Guide shall govern. C. Development Phasing. Any project may be constructed in phases, provided that there is compliance with the development standards and requirements applicable to each such phase and any phases previously completed. D. Implementation of Water and Soil Conservation Measures. • The Cattle Creek Joint Venture shall: 1. Evaluate water supply and wastewater as an integrated water resource system. 2. Develop and implement a water and soil • conservation program including: • • a. Metered services. b. Instructing homeowners concerning water conservation techniques. c. Where practical, preservation of significant and valuable natural vegetation. d. Where practical, preservation of general alignments of significant drainage courses which exist within Cattle Creek Ranch. 3. Cooperate with the Colorado Department of Health to assure wastewater treatment and discharge which maintains the water quality of Cattle Creek and associated aquafers. E. Implementation of Ejirgy Conservation Programs. The Cattle Creek Joint Venture shall: • 1. Where practical, employ energy conservation measures in home construction including: a. Evaluation of structural designs to assure optimum practical insulation values. 4• b. Provision for an energy conservation program in all -electric homes. c. Installation of energy-efficient applicances. • d. Provision for dual glazed windows. 2. When practical, utilize solar energy by: • a. Providing in the siting of building envelopes, that provision of solar access by one of the criteria considered. • 11-2 • • • b. Providing windows in south walls to utilize winter sun energy. c. Providing for overhangs or other shading devices so that windows are shaded in summer. 3. Encourage and assist lot purchasers in utilizing solar design in the siting, design and construction of their homes. 4. Provision to monitor and implement advances in energy conservation techniques that may be applied to future development of Cattle Creek Ranch. F. Provision for Cost Effective Community Services. • The Cattle Creek Joint Venture shall: • • • • 1. Assure the provision of local governmental services including water and sanitation services, street maintenance and recreation services on a basis sufficient and adequate to serve each increment of the development as it is completed, without financial burden to other areas of Garfield County. 2. Provide for the initial construction of capital facilities necessary for adequate water and sewer services, streets, and storm drains. • 11-3 • • CATTLE CREEK RANCH P.U.D. P.U.D. ZONE REGULATIONS Section I. General Provisions • • • • • • A. (adopted_January 2, 1979) . The provisions of the Garfield County Zoning Resolution and the successors thereof, as now in effect and as hereafter amended, are by this reference incorporated herein as if set forth in full, to the extent not divergent from the provisions of the Cattle Creek Ranch Planned Unit Development Zone Regulations. B. Conflict. The provisions of the Zone Regulations shall prevail and govern the development of Cattle Creek Ranch provided, however, where the provisions of the Cattle Creek Ranch Zone Regulations do not clearly address a specific subject, the provisions of the Garfield County Zoning Resolution, or any other ordinances, resolutions or regulations of Garfield County shall prevail.. • • • • • • Section II. Definitions A. Purpose and s ntent. The purpose of this Section is to make certain the meanings of certain words, terms and phrases used in the Cattle Creek Ranch P.U.D. Zone Regulations. Any words, terms and phrases used in these Zone Regulations shall be defined and interpreted in accordance with the definitions contained in this Section, unless the context clearly indicates a different meaning was intended. If the context is not clear, the Cattle Creek Ranch Joint Venture shall provide its understanding of the meaning to the Garfield County Planning Department, and if uncertainty still remains, the matter will be referred to the Garfield County Board of Commissioners for final determination. B. Rules of Construction. The following rules of construction shall govern the interpretation of the provisions of this Zone Regulation. 1. All words, terms and phrases not defined herein but defined in other resolutions or codes of the County relative to land development or construction shall be construed as defined in such resolutions or codes, unless the context indicates a different meaning was intended. 2. All words, terms and phrases neither defined herein nor in such other resolutions or codes shall be given their usual customary meanings, unless the context clearly indicates a different meaning was intended. • 3. The text of this Zone Regulation shall be precedence over captions, titles and maps. • • • • 4. The word "shall" is mandatory and not permissive; the word "may" is permissive and not mandatory. 5. Words used in the singular include the plural, and words used in the plural include the singular, unless the context indicates the contrary. 6. Words used in the present tense include the future tense, and words used in the future tense include the present tense. 7. The phrase "used for" includes "arranged for", "designed for", "intended for", maintained for" and "occupied for". 8. The particular or specific controls over the general. III -2 • • • • • • C. Definitions. The following words, terms and phrases shall be defined as set forth hereinafter. 1. Abutting Land: A parcel of land which has a common property line with another parcel of land. 2. A subordinate building, the use of which is customarily incidental to that of the main building or to the main use of the land, and which is located on the same lot with the main building or use. 3. Accessory Use: A use naturally and normally incidental and subordinate to, and devoted exclusively to, the main use of the premises. 4. Area Pex DwellingDnit: The amount of land in square feet within the boundaries of a lot or project divided by the total number of dwelling units in such lot or project. 5. Basement: That part of a building partially or totally underground. 6. Board or Board of County Commissioners: Board of County Commissioners of Garfield County; the governing body of the County. 7. Borrow Sjte: An area used for the extraction of earthen materials such as sand, gravel or dirt which is outside the area of immediate development. 8. Building: Any permanent structure, or portion thereof, built for the shelter or enclosure of human beings, animals, chattels or property of any kind, but excluding therefrom advertising signboards and fences. 9. Building Coverage: Ratio of ground area that a building covers in a lot to the total area, expressed as a percentage. 10. Building, Principal or Main: A building, or buildings, in which is conducted one or more of the principal permitted uses of the lot or project in which it is situated. 11. Building Line: Imaginary lines on a lot delineating the closest points from lot lines, public streets, Planning Area or project area boundaries, or other applicable perimeter lines, where any main building may be constructed. 111-3 • • • • • • • • 12. Building_ He i_g: The vertical distance above a reference datum measured to the highest point of the coping of a flat roof or to the deck line of a mansard roof or to the average height of the highest gable of a pitched or hipped roof. The reference datum shall be the average finished grade at the exterior wall of a structure. 13. Business or Commerce: Activities involving the provision of services, purchases, sales or other transactions relating to the handling or disposition of any articles, substances, commodities or intangibles for profit or livelihood; the ownership or management of real estate; and the maintenance and use of offices by professions and trades rendering services. 14. Caretaker Apartment: A dwelling unit accessory to any building arranged, designed and intended for occupancy by a person or persons owning, employed in or dealing with, and responsible for security and maintenance of such building or the uses permitted therein. 15. Carport: A roofed structure, or a portion of a building, open on 2 or more sides, designed primarily for the parking of automobiles. 16. Child Care Center: A service commercial facility in which care is provided for children for periods of less than 24 hours at a time and is operated under the provisions of the Colorado Child Care Act. 17. Church: Any building arranged, designed and intended to be used as a place for religious worship and instruction. 18. Clinic, Medical: A facility licensed and used for the provision of medical, surgical or mental health care of the sick or injured, but excluding therefrom inpatient and overnight accommodations. 19. Common Area or common Element: The total area and structures within a project which are designed, designated and maintained for common use and enjoyment by the homeowners and their invitees, such as recreation areas and facilities, landscaped areas, open space areas, and natural areas. 20. Community Information Center: A temporary or permanent structure or facility, including associated parking areas, which is used principally for dissemination of community news and events, and information concerning real estate held for sale or lease during the development of Cattle Creek Ranch. • • • • • • • • • 21. Condominium: An individual air space dwelling unit together with the interest in the common elements appurtentant to such unit. 22. Condominium Project: A project divided into condominiums, including all structures and common areas and elements situated therein. 23. Construction: The actual placement and fastening of construction materials in a fixed position. If a basement is being excavated, such excavation shall be deemed to be actual construction. If demolition or removal of any exisiting building or structure has commenced preparatory to construction, such demolition, removal, or moving of a structure, shall be deemed to be actual construction. The term construction shall apply to buildings, roadways, utilities, other structures and landscaping. 24. ConvenienceCommercial: A retail or service commercial use which serves the area immediately surrounding the use by providing groceries, sundries and miscellaneous services which do not typically offer comparison shopping opportunities. 25. County: Garfield County, Colorado. 26. Covered Parking: Parking facilities which are protected by a roof or enclosed with a structure. 27. Density: The number of dwelling units per gross residential acre in a specific portion of land. 28. Design ,Review _Committee: A committee appointed in accordance with the covenants, conditions and restrictions applicable to Cattle Creek Ranch and charged with responsibility for reviewing and approving land use, plans and specifications for all construction, modification or alteration of improvements, the placement and maintenance of landscaping, the location of structures, any planned removals or vegetation and other matters with the power of approval or disapproval thereof. Initially, the members of the Design Review Committee shall be appointed by the Cattle Creek Ranch Joint Venture. 29. Design Review Guide: Restrictions, rules and regulations to be developed and enforced by the Design Review Committee as criteria for the development of architectural style and review of plans, specifications and details. 111 5 • 30. Development Guide: Sets forth land uses and development standards for Cattle Creek Ranch, a planned community in the unincorporated area of the County of Garfield, State of Colorado; regulates the use of land and the use, bulk, maximum height, minimum lot area, minimum lot width, and minimum yard spaces of buildings: provides regulations for uses permitted therein and accessory buildings and uses; provides addtional supplementary regulations; and defines certain terms used therein. 31. Developer: The developer is the Cattle Creek Ranch Joint Venture. 32. Garfield Count The Zoning Resolution regulating uses of land applicable in Garfield County. 33. Driveway: A private vehicular passageway for the exclusive use of the owners and occupants of one or more lot or project and their invitees. A driveway shall not be considered to be a street. 34. Dwelling: A building or portion thereof used exclusively for residential occupancy including one -family dwellings, two-family dwellings; multiple -family dwellings; but excluding therefrom hotels, motels, tents, seasonal vacation cabins and other structures designed or used primarily for temporary occupancy, provided, however, that nothing herein shall be deemed to prevent use of dwellings for transient occupancy in those areas of Cattle Creek Ranch where transient occupancy such as that associated with hotel or motel use is otherwise permitted. 35. DWaiiing.Iu_ltipl _ ami i A buildin , or tion thereof, designed for or occupied by three orpomorefamilies living independently of each other, but not including hotels or motels. 36. Dwelling. One -Family: A dwelling situated on 1 lot and arranged, designed and intended for occupancy by not more than 1 family, and which has no more than 1 primary kitchen and no less than 1 bedroom. 37. Dwe g_n One or more rooms and a kitchen arranged, designed and intended aslaaunit for occupancy by 1 family living independently of others, situated in a one -family, two-family or multiple -family dwelling. 38. Fast: An acquired right of use, interest or privilege in land owned by another. 39. Zanily: An individual, or 2 or more persons related by blood or marriage, or a groupof Snot more I11-6 • r • • than 5 persons (excluding servants) living together as a single housekeeping unit in a dwelling unit. 40. Floodplain: The area adjoining any river, stream, watercourse, lake or other body of standing water which is subject to inundation by a 100 -year flood. 41. Floor Area. Gross: The total inhabitable horizontal floor area of all floors in a building exclusive of basement, garage, storage and utility area. 42. Floor Area Ratio: The numerical value obtained by dividing the gross floor area of all buildings located upon a lot or parcel of land by the total area of such lot or parcel. 43. Garage, Private: A building, or portion thereof, used primarily for the parking of automobiles belonging to the occupants of the land upon which it is situated and their invitees. 44. Garage, Public: A building, or portion thereof, other than a private garage, used for the parking of automobiles. 45. Golf Club: A private club organized for the purposes of playing golf and maintaining the Cattle Creek Ranch Golf Course. 46. Grade. Average Finishers: At the exterior wall of a structure is the average elevation of the finished surface of the ground between the building and a line five feet from the building. 47. Grade. Ground Level: The elevation of the finished lot surface measured at any point along the perimeter of the building. 48. Home Occupation: Any business use which is • conducted principally within a dwelling by the occupants thereof and not others, is clearly incidental and secondary to the use of the dwelling for dwelling purposes, and does not change the character of the dwelling, excluding therefrom such uses as a medical clinic, hospital, barber shop, beauty parlor, tea room, tourist home, kennel, animal clinic or animal hospital, or any similar use generating mroe than occasional and minimal vehicular and pedestrian traffic. • • 111-7 • • • • • • • 49. Hotel,: Any building arranged, designed and intended as a temporary lodging place for human beings, with or without meals, in which there are 6 or more guest rooms or suites; and in which no provision is made for cooking in any individual room or suite. 50. Household Pets: Small animals in such numbers as not to constitute a nuisance customarily permitted to be kept in dwellings for company or pleasure, including but not limited to dogs, cats, rabbits, and common house birds, provided that such animals are not kept to supplement food supplies or for any commercial purpose other than the offering for sale of 1 litter, brood or offspring of a household pet domiciled on the premises, at any one time, that is less than 4 months old. 51. Joint Use of Parkina: The shared use of off-street parking facilities by more than one type of land use where the same parking spaces are taken into account in satisfaction of the parking requirements of each use. 52. Kennel: Any building, structure or open space, or portion thereof, used for the breeding, raising, boarding, or selling of 5 or more dogs that are more than 4 months old or of more than one litter. 53. Landscapina: Improvement of an area of land by the installation, removal or transplanting of vegetation or the installation of other materials or elements for the purposes of enhancement. 54. Lot Area: The total horizontal area within the lot lines of a lot. 55. Lot Line, Front: The property line dividing a lot from the street providing access thereto, provided that with respect to a corner lot, the front lot line shall be determined by the orientation of the building. 56. Lot Line, Rear: The property line opposite the • front lot line. • • 57. J. Liffe. Side: Any lot lines other than the front lot line and rear lot line. 111-8 58. Lot Width: The distance of an imaginary line on a lot parallel to the front lot line and measured between the side lot lines at the building line nearest the street providing access thereto. 59. Maintenance Facility: Any building or structure used for housing maintenance equipment and operations. 60. Mobile Office: A vehicle, with or without self motive power, designed and equipped for human occupancy for industrial, commercial or professional purposes, including but not limited to, temporary offices for the sale of homes and temporary construction management and supervisor trailers. 61. Open Space: Public or private land and aquatic areas which are acquired, regulated, or managed to protect the natural environment and significant cultural resources; provide recreational opportunities; shape the pattern of development; or any combination thereof, including yards, open space easements, common areas, common elements, and any building authorized for construction on open space. 62. Open Space Easement: Continuous area of land varying in dimension (encompassing public or private land and aquatic areas) for the purpose of open space use(s). 63. Open Space Management Plan: A plan which describes the management■ operation, maintenance and responsibility for the Cattle Creek Ranch Open Space. See Section XI of Zone Regulations. 64. Open Space. Community: Community open space is composed of privately owned land devoted to Cattle Creek Ranch recreational, community or open space uses, all of such lands being unoccupied with unobstructed space, open to the sky, except for trees, shrubbery, vegetation or improvements relating to community, recreational, or open space use. 65. Parking Space: A portion of land, other than a street, used for the parking of automobilies and available for general public use, either free or for remuneration (see Section XV).. 66. Planning Area: An area of land on the Master Plan, the boundaries of which are arterial street, nonurban areas and other lands set forth on the Master Plan. The specific uses in, and the corresponding development standards and requirements applicable to, any area of land are determined by the Planning Area within which such area is placed and the provisions of this Zone Regulations. 67. Planning Commission or Commission: The Garfield County Planning Commission. 68. planning Office: The Garfield County Planning Office. 69. Pre -Sited Zone: Areas within each lot which have been selected by the Cattle Creek Ranch Joint Venture for the location of buildings or structures. 70. Professional Office: A place of business for any of the following: accountants; architects; attorneys; bookkeeping services; brokers (of stocks, bonds, real estate); building designers; persons licensed by the State to practice any of the healing arts; corporate offices, drafting services, financial institutions, including banks, savings and loans associations; insurance companies, credit unions and credit-reporting agencies; development companies; engineers; surveyors and planners; insurance agencies and brokers; interior decorators and designers (no retail sales allowed on premises); laboratories; notaries public, public stenographers, typing and and secretarial services; and other similar businesses and professions. 71. Project: One or more lots planned, designed and developed as a unified entity such as a condominium development, cluster development, commercial development, industrial development, recreational development, etc. 72. Public Sewerage and Public Water F cilities: Facilities of a metropolitan district which are constructed, operated and maintained to provide water or sewerage service to Cattle Creek Ranch. 73. Public Utilities: Facilities of a public utility. 74. Public Utility: Every firm, partnership■ association, cooperative, company, corporation and governmental, agency, and the directors, trustees or receivers thereof, whether elected or appointed, which is engaged in providing bus, electric, rural electric, telephone, communications, gas, gas pipeline carrier, water, sewerage, pipeline, road maintenance, fire protection, and emergency medical facilities and services. 75. Rection Vehicle: A motor home, travel or camping trailer, boat, van or truck camper, with or without self -motive power. 76. Retail Commercial: A commercial use characterized by selling of tangible goods, wares, and merchandise directly to the consumer. 77. ,Riding Trails. Hiking Tails. and Biking Tratlg: A trail or passageway arranged, designed and intended for use by equestrians, pedestrians, and cyclists using nonmotorized bicycles. 78. Bight -of --Way or Passageway: An area or strip of land, either publicly or privately owned, over which a right of passage has been recorded for the use by vehicles, or pedestrians, or both. 79. Road, Private: See Section XVI, Road Standards. 80. Road. Collector: See Section XVI, Roadway Standards. 81. goad, Primary Local Access Street: See Section XVI, Roadway Standards. 82. Road. Secondary Loca L Access Street: See Section XVI■ Roadway Standards. 83. Road. Cul -de -Sac: See Section XVI, Roadway Standards. 84. Service. Commercial: A commercial use characterized by the selling of services and intangibles directly to the consumer. 85. Setback: The length of any required yard measured perpendicular to the lot line. • 86. Sian: Anything designed to inform or attract the attention of people, but excluding therefrom any flag, badge or insignia of any government or 40 governmental agency, or of any civic, charitable, religious, or fraternal organization. 87. Site_Development Plan: The procedures, requirements and standards for site development plans specified in the Cattle Creek Ranch Design Guide and 40 the Garfield County Zoning Resolution. 88. special Community Event: A temporary event, sponsored by a Cattle Creek Ranch service club, Cattle Creek Ranch Golf or Recreation Club, association, property owners association, other 40 community organization or the owner of a major portion of the land within Cattle Creek Ranch, such as golf tournaments, fireworks, parades, swim meets, community picnics, athletic events, nonmotorized vehicle races, rodeos, Christmas and holiday pageants, and other outdoor programs. 89. Stable. Public: A building, or portion thereof, and accessory structure used to shelter and feed horses which is operated under the direction of the Cattle Creek Ranch Joint Venture or Homeowners Association for the residents of Cattle Creek Ranch. 90. .Story: That portion of a building included between an upper surface of any floor and the upper surface of the floor next above, except that the top most story shall be that portion of a building included between the upper surface of the top most floor and +f the ceiling or roof above. If the finished floor level directly above a basement or unused under floor space is more than 6 feet above grade as defined herein for more than 50% of the total perimeter or is more than 12 feet above grade as defined herein at any point, such basement or unused under floor space 40 shall be considered as a story. 91. Street: A public or private right-of-way for motor vechicles other than an alley or driveway. 92. Structure: Anything constructed or erected in, • under, over or upon the land, or attached to something in, under, over, or upon the land, but excluding therefrom off-street parking areas, fences and walls used as fences 6 feet in height or less, and public utilities. • • • • • • • • 0 • • • 93. ,Structure, Permanent: A structure which is built of such materials, and in such a manner, that it would reasonably be expected to last and remain useful for more than 5 years. 94. Structure. Temporary: A structure which is not a permanent structure, or one which is constructed for a special purpose in contemplation of removal upon accomplishment of such purpose. The allowable life of the structure shall be based on the appropriate county permits. 95. Subdivision: A parcel of land divided into blocks, lots or plots for immediate or future use of sale, or for building developments; or the act of so dividing the land. 96. Temporary Contractor Storage Yard: A place for temporary storage of materials used for the construction of structures, roadways, public utilities or landscaping. 97. Use.: The purpose for which land, or portions thereof, or buildings are arranged, designed and intended, or the purpose for which either land or building, or portions thereof, are or may be occupied or maintained. 98. WateX Bodies: A channel, natural depression, stream, creek, pond■ ditch, reservoir, lake or any place where water is channeled or collected and stands and/or flows either as the result of man-made or natural impoundments. 99. Yard: The area on a lot unoccupied and unobstructed from the ground upward, except for certain items as otherwise provided in this Zone Regulations, such as landscaping, walkways and patios. 100. Yard. Front: A yard extending across a lot between the principal building nearest the public street providing access thereto and the edge of the curb nearest such building or, in absence thereof, the edge of the paved road surface. 101. Yard. Rear: A yard extending across the full width of a lot between the principal building on the lot nearest to the rear lot line■ and the rear lot line. • 102. Yard, Side: A yard extending from the front yard to the rear yard between the principal building nearest to the side lot line, and such side lot line. • 103. Zero Lot Line: A situation in which either: • • • • • • a. two adjoining structures or adjacent but separate properties share a common wall, or b. a structure is built up to its property line with no easement or setback requirement. • Section III. P.U.D. Zone Districts A. Zone Districts: To carry out the purposes and provisions of the Garfield County Zoning Resolution, Garfied County. 40 Colorado, and particularly, Section 4.00 of that title, as amended, the Cattle Creek Ranch Planned Unit Development Zoning District is further divided into the following Zone District Classifications: • • • • • • • • • - Open Space District - Residential District - Residential/Single Family District - Residential/Cluster Housing District B. Zone Map. The boundaries of these districts shall be located as shown on the Cattle Creek Ranch P.U.D. Zone Map. C. . Wherever a Zone District abuts a street as shown on the PUD Zone Map, the Zone District boundary is the abutting right-of-way line of such street. Wherever a Zone District does not so abut a street, the Zone District boundary shall be as shown on the FUD Zone Map. The size of any Zone District may increase or decrease by a maximum of 10% during the subdivision process without any amendment to the P.U.D. Zone Map. Section IV. Open Space District A. Uses. By Right. Park and Greenbelt Recreational uses including golf course, tennis courts, pedestrian/bike paths, ball fields, skeet shooting and other recreational facilties. Agricultural uses including farm, garden, nursery, orchards, ranch and custom area accessory uses including buildings for shelter or enclosure of animals or property employed in any of the above uses. Kennel and riding stable. Well sites, sewage treatment facilities, water treatment and storage facilities and other public and private utility facilities and buildings. B. Uses. Conditiotal. None C. Uses. Special. Water Impoundments D. Minimum Lot Area. 2 acres E. Maximum Lot Coverage. None F. Minimum Setback. From dedicated public right—of—way 20 feet From other property lines 5 feet G. 30 feet measured at the verticle to the grade at the center of the building. Section V. Recreational District A. Uses, By Right. All uses by right in the Open Space District (Section II of this Zoning Regulations). Athletic Club Riding Stable, equestrian club and veterinarian clinic Restaurant and retail commercial shops customary to the support of the recreational activities associated with this district (by example - equestrian tack shop). Offices for the management of faciltiies and activities associated with the Cattle Creek Ranch. Real Estate Sales and Property Management Office. Single and multiple family dwelling units for occupants directly employed in the operations of the recreational facilities. B. Uses. Conditional. None C. Uses. Special. Water Impoundments. D. Minimum Lot Area. 10,000 sq. ft. E. Maximum Lot Coverage. None F. Minimum Setback. From dedicated public right-of-way 20 feet From other property lines 5 feet G. Maximum Building Height. 30 feet measured at the verticle to the grade at the center of the building. Section VI. Residential/Single Family District A. Uses. By Right: Single family dwelling and customary accessory uses including buildings for shelter or enclosure of property accessory to the use of the lot for single family residential purposes and fences, hedges, gardens, wall and similar landscape features. Park, greenbelt and golf course. Domestic water storage tank. Live—in maids and caretakers quarters when attached to the primary dwelling unit and not exceeding 400 square feet in floor area. B. _Uses. Conditional: None C. Uses, Special: Water Impoundments D. .Minimum Lot Area: 20,000 square feet E. Maximum Lot Coverage: 40% F. Minimum Setback: Front Yard 25 feet Rear Yard 25 feet Side Yard 15 feet G. ,Maximum Building Height: 25 feet measured at the verticle to the grade at the center of the building. zit -18 • Section VII. Residential/Cluster Housing District A. Uses. _By Right. Single family, two family and three family dwelling and customary accessory uses +• including buildings for the shelter of property accessory to the use of lot for residential purposes and fences, hedges, gardens, walls and similar landscape features. • • • • • • • Condominium and row house. More than one principal structure per lot, with the uses by right, shall be permitted the total dwelling units do not exceed the district density. Park and open space. Lodge and guest ranch. B. Uses, Conditional. Day Nursery C. Uses. Special. None D. Minimum Lot Area. 1. 800 sq. ft. for townhouse, attached dwellings. 2. 3,200 sq. ft. for family dwellings. 3. 8,000 sq. ft. for family dwellings. complying as long as designated single family detached zero lot line single detached single family and two 4. 10,000 sq. ft. for three family dwellings. E. Maximum Lot Coverage.. 1. Detached single family and zero lot line single family and two family lots - 70%. 2. Townhouse and attached single family dwellings - 80% . 3. Minimum Setbacks. 1. Townhouse, attached single family dwellings Front yard - 25 feet from the front lot line, if there is a front facing garage; or not setback if there is a side facing garage or at least 25 feet of common space between the curb line and the lot line. Side yard - 10 feet. Rear yard - 10 feet. 2. Zero lot line detached single family dwellings Front yard - 25 feet. Side yard -- 10 feet on one lot line and no setback on the opposite line. No accessory building shall be permitted within the required side yard. Rear yard - 15 feet. 3. Single family, two family and three family dwellings Front yard - 25 feet Side yard - 10 feet Rear yard - 25 feet 4. Maximum Height of Buildings. 25 feet measured at the verticle to the grade at the center of the building. 5. Additional Requirements. 1. For zero lot line dwellings a minimum maintenance easement of 3 feet shall be provided on the side yard for the adjacent lot. 2. For zero lot line dwellings no windows or openings shall be allowed in a wall abutting a property line that faces into an adjoining lot. 1I1-20 Section VIII. Residential Density A. Density Stand rdz. The dwelling unit density permitted shall apply to the entire Cattle Creek Ranch and shall not be specifically applicable to any portion thereof. Density of any Residential Planning Area shall be computed by dividing the total number of dwelling units in the Planning Area by the total number of gross acres in the Planning Area. B. Density Variations. Any individual Residential Planning Area may contain up to 1.2 times the total number of allowable dwelling units set forth in the Development Plan for such Planning Area, as determined by the Cattle Creek Ranch Joint Venture. The increase in the number of allowable dwelling units within any such Planning Area will be accomplished through a transfer of allowable dwelling units from any other Residential Planning Area without any amendment of this Zone Regulation. The intent of this provision is to allow flexibility in planning to take into account varying conditions of terrain and other site characteristics. In no case shall the ultimate number of dwelling units in the Planned Unit Development exceed that established on the approved Master Plan. i • i i Section IX. Supplemental Land Use Provisions A. Agricultural Uses. Agricultural and ranch activities and uses, and all accessory structures and uses which are customarily incidental or appropriate to farming and ranching, shall be permitted within Cattle Creek Ranch. In those areas of Cattle Creek Ranch under development, an orderly transition to urban uses will be undertaken to assure that agricultural uses will not be detrimental to Cattle Creek Ranch. B. Borrow Sites. Within the prior approval of the Cattle Creek Ranch Design Review Committee, any area within Cattle Creek Ranch may be used as a borrow site, in accordance with the general erosion control plan, for construction materials provided, however, that such area shall be reseeded with appropriate plan materials subsequent to borrow operations. Material from the borrow site must be restricted to use within the Cattle Creek Ranch P.U.D. C. Setbacks. The following yard requirements shall be observed in all zone districts: 1. Through lots: on lots extending from one street to another paralleling street, both streets shall be considered as front streets for the purposes of calculating front yard setbacks unless a solid screening fence is provided for one yard only and then the yard adjacent to the fence shall be considered a rear yard of side yard. 2. Corner lots and reverse corner lots on residential lots bordered on two contiguous sides by streets, the required front yard setbacks shall be observed along both streets. 3. Two family dwellings: for purposes of setback calcuations, a two family dwelling shall be construed as one building occupying one lot. 4. Attached single family dwellings: for purpose of setback calculations only those attached single family dwellings which do not share a common wall with an adjacent attached dwelling need observe the required side yard setback for the district providing building code requirements for this type of structure are observed. 4111 111-22 • • • • • • • • • • • 5. Projections: every part of a required yard shall be unobstructed from ground level to the sky except for projection of architectural features as follows: cornices, sills and ornamental features - 12 inches; roof eves - 18 inches; uncovered porches, slabs and patios, walks, steps, fences, hedges and walls - no restriction; fire escapes and individual balconies not used as passageways may project 18 inches into any required side yard and 4 ft. into any required front or rear yard. III -23 Section X Off -Street Parking A. Purpose and Intent. The purpose of this Section is to establish development standards to satisfy the motor vehicle off-street parking needs generated by land uses in the Cattle Creek Ranch R.U.D. B. General Standards and Requirements. Off-street parking facilities are permitted and required in accordance with the following standards. 1. All required off-street parking facilities shall be designed, constructed and maintained so as to be usable and accessible at all times, and shall be conveniently located to the use or uses they serve in order not to discourage their utilization. 2. All off-street parking facilities shall be designed so that, where site lines are restricted or where traffic flow creates a hazardous situation, motorists are not encouraged or required to back directly from a parking space into a street, excluding therefrom such facilities serving single-family dwellings. 3. Common or joint uses of parking facilities may be permitted with a recorded agreement if traffic congestion, less than adequate parking for the uses involved or unnecessary expanses of paving are avoided thereby. 4. Except for required off-street parking facilities for single-family dwellings, such facilities do not have to be located on the same lot as the use or uses which generate the requirement, provided the total parking requirement for each use is satisfied and that no such parking area shall be located more than 300 feet from the use to be served. Parking structures ay be utilized to satisfy the parking requirements for any permitted use. 5. All parking spaces, driveways and maneuvering areas shall be paved with all weather gravel, asphaltic or concrete surfacing and shall be maintained. 6. All parking areas, other than those for single-family dwelling units, shall be designed as to allow for easy snow removal and to allow space for snow dump. 7. All lighting for illumination of parking areas and driveways shall be designed and located to direct light rays to the lot or project, will be designed to conserve energy, and will be subject to Design Review Committee approval. rTT-7t! • f • • • • • 1 8. Parking area signs, each not to exceed 2 square feet in surface area, and directional instructions lettered on the paved surface of driveways and parking areas are permitted for all parking facilties. Such signs and instructions may contain only the name of the owner or occupant of the use served, and such words and symbols that are directly related or essential to parking or the direction of vehicular traffic within the parking area and access driveways. All parking area signs shall be subject to Design Review Committee approval. 9. Wherever 2 or more different uses exist on the same lot or project, the total parking requirement therefore shall be the sum of the parking requirements for each such use. 10. Fractions resulting from calculations required by the provisions of this Section shall, be rounded off as follows: (a) fractions of 1/2 or more shall be rounded to the next higher whole number, and (b) fractions of less than 1/2 shall be rounded to the next lower whole number. 11. Wherever the use of any lot or project is changed, enlarged, expanded or intensified from that for which the existing parking facilities were provided, additional parking faciltiies to meet the requirements of this Section shall be provided for the changed, enlarged, expanded or intensified use. 12. Parking facilities shall not be used for the sale, repair, dismantling or service fof any vehicles, equipment, materials or supplies, nor for the storage of such equipment, materials or supplies. 13. Parking lot pavement standards will require a minimum of 2 inches of asphaltic pavement and 6 inches of base course with final construction standards based on site specific soil investigation. 14. Each required off-street parking space shall have a minimum unobstructed area of 9 feet in width. 20 feet in length. 15. Off-street parking spaces located parallel to and abutting an aisle may be reduced to 8 feet in width. C. Residential Requirements. The minimum number of off-street parking spaces required for each category of residential use shall be calculated in accordance with the following standards: III -.25 Single-family dwellings: 2 enclosed spaces and minimum 2 guest spaces for each dwelling unit: guest spaces may be on driveway apron. Total spaces shall be at least 1 space per 600 square feet of floor area for the first 3,600 square feet of floor area and 1 space per 1,000 square feet of floor area for the remaining residential floor area. 2. Cluster homes: 1 covered space and minimum 1.5 guest spaces for each dwelling unit. Enclosed spaces may be individual garages or in a group garage. Open guest spaces shall be grouped to a minimum of 4 spaces and shall be sunken, bermed or otherwise screened from the street or abutting residential dwellings. 3. Home occupation: 1 space for each home occupation in addition to the parking spaces otherwise required for dwelling unit. D. Nonresidential Standards and Requirements. Off-street parking facilities shall be provided for nonresidential uses, including those situated in Residential Zone Districts, in accordance with the following standards: 1. Setback requirements for parking areas: a. All parking areas or spaces shall be set back 10 feet from all property lines. b. All parking areas or parking spaces shall be set back 10 feet from exterior walls of buildings. 2. Landscaping Requirements. All parking areas must be landscaped with landscaping plans approved by the Design Review Committee. All unbroken paved areas will be limited to 10 cars. All nonresidential parking areas shall be screened from abutting residential areas or streets by berming, depressing the level, or by adequate planting. 3. Grading/Drainage. The maximum grade permitted in nonresidential parking areas is 5%. Service drives may exceed this grade. Drainage plans which include specific perimeter drainage channels to prevent collection of overflow from other areas must be submitted and approved by the Design Review Committee. 4. The minimum number of off-street parking spaces required for each category of nonresidential use shall be calculated in accordance with the following standards: TTT_")` • • • • • • • • • • a. Restaurant: 1 space for each 200 square feet of gross floor area. b. Handball, racquetball, squash and similar courts: 2 spaces for each court. c. Swimming pools: 1 space for each 100 square feet of water surface area but in no event less than 10 spaces. d. Tennis courts: 1 space for each court. e. Recreation centers: 1 space for each 200 square feet of gross floor area. 111-27 i • • • • • • • CATTLE CREEK RANCH P.U.D. DEVELOPMENT GUIDE SUBDIVISION REGULATIONS Section I. General Provisions A. Lifect of Subdivision Regulations of Garfield County. Colorado ladopted January_ 2, 1979). The provisions of the Subdivisions Regulations of Garfield County and the successors thereof, as now in effect and as hereafter amended, are by this reference incorporated herein as if set forth in full, to the extent not divergent from the provisions of the Cattle Creek Ranch Planned Unit Development Subdivision Regulations. B. Conflict. The provisions of the Cattle Creek Ranch Subdivision Regulations shall prevail and govern the development of Cattle Creek Ranch provided, however, where the provisions of the Cattle Creek Ranch Subdivision Regulations do not clearly address a specific subject, the provisions of the Subdivision Regulations of Garfield County, or any other ordinances, resolutions or regulations of Garfield County shall prevail. • Section II. Definitions The meanings of certain words, terms, and phrases as used in • the Cattle Creek Ranch P.U.D. Subdivision regulations shall be the same as those definitions contained in Article III, Section II Cattle Creek Ranch P.U.D. Zone Regulations. • • • • • • • IV -2 • • • M ARTICLE V CATTLE CREEK RANCH P.U.D. DEVELOPMENT GUIDE DESIGN GUIDELINES Section I. Design Standards A. Utility Standards. 1. Utility Connections. Connection to public water and public sewerage facilities shall be required for each principal building constructed in the future within Cattle Creek Ranch. Temporary water and sanitation facilities will be permitted until permanent facilities are available upon approval of the Board of County Commissioners of Garfield County. 2. Undergroundility Requirements. All electrical and communications distribution lines shall be places underground, unless specifically determined otherwise by the Planning Commission. B. Roadway Design and Construction. ! 1. The primary themes guiding the design or roadways in Cattle Creek Ranch are simplicity, safety and environmental sensitivity. To meet these goals, the following design criteria have been applied: 40 - Well-defined hierarchy of roadway types (Functional classes); i • • - Low travel speeds; - Minimize disturbance of vegetation; - Simple, infrequent street intersections; - Meets fire vehicle access requirements. 2. Functional Classes. In the Cattle Creek Ranch. P.U.D. four different functional classifications of roadways may exist: a. Major Collectors (existing County Roads) b. Collectors V-1 • • • • • c. Local access roads 1. Cul-de-sac/loop 2. Cul-de-sac/court 3. Design Standards. The following Figures (1-3) describe the engineering criteria which will guide the design and construction of the roadways in the Cattle Creek Ranch P.U.D. a. Pavement Design/RQa_dway Construction. The roadways constructed in Cattle Creek Ranch shall be high quality, minimum maintenance roads which will meet or exceed established Garfield County specifications with respect to pavement thickness, composition and base. b. Driveways. Cattle Creek Ranch homesites will be developed with no more than one access drive serving each lot. In some instances there may be one shared access drive serving two adjacent lots. Access drives will be constructed with properly designed culverts over roadside drainage ditches. Section II Traffic Control A. Traffic Control Devices. In Cattle Creek Ranch, the control and regulation of vehicular and pedestrian traffic will be augmented through the placement and enforcement of traffic control devices. These devices -- signs and pavement markings -- will conform to, and be installed in accordance with the provisions of the Uniform Manual on Traffic Control Devices (UMTCD) S. Speed Limit and Curve Warning _Signs. 1. Major Collector Stjeets. The Major Collector Street in Cattle Creek Ranch should have a maximum speed limit of 35 MPH. 2. Collector Street. The Collector Streets in Cattle Creek Ranch should have posted maximum speed limit of 20 and 25 MPH, which is consistent with their curvilinear nature and sight distance restrictions. A 20 MPH speed requires a minimum horizontal curve radius of 115 feet and a 25 MPH speed requires a minimum horizontal curve radius of 180 feet. 3. Local Access Street. These streets will have a maximum speed limit of 15 MPH. C. Pedestrian Crossings. Approaches to and actual pedestrian crossings of roads will be designated by signage and pavement markings. Section III. Safety, Security and Environmental Protection A. Contractors shall be required to provide flag men and/or erect or maintain all necessary barricades and shall take all necessary precautions for the security of the project, the projection of the work and the safety of the public. B. Roads, streets, driveways or excavations closed to traffic or in a stage of construction that could cause injury to the public, shall be protected by effective barricades and the obstruction shall be illuminated at night and all lights for this purpose shall be kept burning from sunset to sunrise. C. Extreme care and understanding will be exercised by all equipment operators to prevent damage to the fragile landscape. D. Off-road vehicles or other construction equipment will not be permitted to move off established roads or haul routes in order to prevent damage to vegetation, soils and appearance. E. During clearing operations, trees and debris should not be allowed to fall outside the clearing limits where such a fall would damage or injure trees and shrubs which are scheduled to remain. F. Ropes or cables will not be fastened to trees except to provide support and stablization of the trees. G. Burning of trash, brush, trees and other combustibles will not be allowed. Such material will be buried in a solid waste fill area. Employees of contractors are not allowed to build warm-up fires on cold mornings. H. Work plans and schedules will be planned as to minimize the need to have construction equipment frequently ford a water course. Equipment should not be used within live streams except for repairs of structures, making of ponds or similar operations. I. Construction operations usually involve a heavy use of water for various tasks. Such uses include concrete mixing, wash water, cooling water, irrigation and dust control. Because the quantities of water used often creates runoff problems, sediments, erosion and turbidity in water collection areas, control of such excess drainage will be effected. • • • J. Ponds (to be constructed) and/or drainages will receive special detailed care to prevent their becoming completely silted in. This will mean rip -rap along water courses, extensive drainage basin protective measures (check dams), aquatic plant establishment (artificially) and the creation of community awareness of the need for environmental quality maintenance. K. Fugitive dust will be controlled by biodegradable, nontoxic wetables (dust palliatives) on roads and disturbed areas. Placing a layer of wood chips on an area to receive vehicular or heavy equipment traffic can help protect the fragile top 1 inch of soil and ground cover. L. It will be necessary to maintain vigilance of all equipment that has gaseous exhausts to assure excessive pollution emissions do not occur. M. Items creating objectionable odors and fumes (engines, fuels, volatiles, chemicals, paints and other items found at construction sites) will be controlled to reduce safety and health hazards. N. Construction offices, supply yards, shops, trailers, workers' cars, etc. will be maintained in a way so as to minimize visual impact. 0. waste materials will be promptly removed from the construction site. Under no circumstance should waste materials of any kind by dumped or temporarily stored on slopes or in water courses. P. Measures will be taken by every member of the construction force as needed to eliminate or minimize any interference or disturbance to wildlife. Q. Because landscape defacement is most often a permanent alteration to the environment, maximum efforts will be made by construction personnel to avoid such defacement. When a tree is removed without cause, or when a new path is bucked through without careful prior planning, it takes many years for nature to restore the damage, and it may never be completely repaired. Therefore, such actions will be avoided and care taken that equipment is not operated outside the work area. Clearing operations will be sensitive to aesthetic values. To accomplish this, work areas will be carefully located and marked to reduce possible damage to a minimum. Protection measures using physical safeguards such as wire fences and steel posts will be used to protect environmental features adjacent to work areas. These protective measures will be installed at the time the work area is first established. R. Tree, bush and grass areas will be fertilized as necessary to insure best care and growth. S. Borrow pits in rectilinear forms are not compatible with much of the existing natural terrain or with present natural drainage patterns. Therefore, borrow areas will be designated. Such designated borrow areas will be designed, not for ease of use or measurement, but to fit the natural form of the land. During excavation, sediment laden water will not be permitted to flow from the pit into the watershed. Seeding and fertilizing of native grasses, trees or shrubs will be carried out on all disturbed and excavated surfaces as soon after excavation completion as is compatible with desirable growing conditions. T. Slopes of borrow areas will be graded and dressed to blend with the adjacent terrain. U. Whenever suitable topsoil exists at a borrow site, i will be removed, stockpiled and used later for reclamation of disturbed areas. V. Wherever possible, low pressure, rubber -tired construction equipment will be used. W. During field surveys, reconnaissance, or excavation, distinctive archaeological or historical items may be discovered. All personnel will be instructed to immediately report any findings and extreme care should be taken promptly to avoid unnecessary destruction of artifacts and features. X. After the job is finished in each work unit, the operations, administration, storage and repair areas will be cleaned up and restored as near to their original, native vegetative condition as possible. Y. All construction personnel will be instructed in fire protection and fire fighting techniques. Z. Concentrations of carbon monoxide and ozone can be detrimental to the Cattle Creek Ranch environment. Where practical, recommendations and guidelines prepared by the Colorado Health Department or Garfield County will be implemented. • • • 9 • • • • • a FIGURE 1 V-7 .o ARTICLE VI CATTLE CREEK RANCH F.U.D. P U.D. ZONE MAP LAND USE SUMMARY Dwelling Unita Acres %_of Total Open Space Distict 194 61% Recreation District *2 8 3% Residential/Single Family 93 100 31% Density .93 units/acre Residential/Cluster Housing Dist. 36 12 4% Density 3.0 units/acre 60' Road R.O.W. (within R.U.D. Boundary) 5 1% TOTAL 131 dwelling 319 acres 100% units Gross Density: 2.4 acres/dwelling unit .4 dwelling units/acre Note: Final engineering refinement of the plan at the time of subdivision platting may result in minor variations in the above acreages. *If these units are not constructed in the Recreational Services District they may be transfered to another residential zone district. CATTLE CREEK RANCH 40 PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT a' co The Cattle Creek Ranch PUD as proposed is a planned unit development comprising a mixture of approximately 131 single family and cluster m o housing units, situate on approximately 313 acres. The present plan N is a revision of the original PUD approved in August 1980. o z 5 The following statements are the results of conceptual investigations c, c(7, of the water distribution system, sanitary sewer system and storm drainage system. , nc cn o 40 a 57 Water Distribution C ' Water distribution within the PUD will be accomplished by means of z a central distribution system. The source of supply will be a series of wells along Cattle Creek. The availability of water, from both a 40 � legal and physical standpoint, is being investigated by Wright Water z Q Engineers, who are enclosing a separate statement with this application. LLJ Q z z A water storage tank will be provided in the southeast corner of the w proposed PUD and will be capable of storing both domestic demands and DO fire flow. The tank is projected to have a capacity of approximately 40 �, 300,000 gallons. D ta z m Sanitary Sewer System 2 Sanitary sewage within the subdivision will be collected by means of • a an on-site central collection system which will carry the sewage to a proposed plant location on Cattle Creek downstream from the proposed z well locations. cc> w w The plant will be capable of treating a maximum daily flow of approxi -- z mately 0.14 MGD. The treatment plant will be designed to discharge a 40 Z a very high quality effluent so as not to disturb the quality of water a N in Cattle Creek. Another reason the effluent will have a high quality is that some effluent may be used for land application on or around the a agricultural lands. A site application and discharge permit will be nQ obtained from the Colorado Department of Health, at which time the plant w will be designed to perform within or above the criteria required. • • • Storm Sewer Management Storm drainage within the proposed PUD will be disposed of by using the natural drainage ways where possible, aided by engineered channels and culverts to direct storm water away from residential areas and across • • • • the main irrigation channels. There are some areas where drainage does enter the irrigation ditches, but these areas are not disturbed by this PUD, therefore, only the historic run-off is entering the irrigation channels. In the cluster housing area, there may be a need of detention ponds for the increased drainage flow. These detention ponds, if warranted, will be designed for the 100 year/24 hour storm and a historic or a 25 year/24 hour release rate. The drainage will eventually be dis- posed of in Cattle Creek. It appears from the conceptual plan that only the sanitary sewage treat- ment plant will be in an area of potential stream flooding. The treat- ment facility will be located as required to avoid any potential flooding problems. Prepared by, Barney Fix, EIT Rev. by: JRH BF/dlw 4t4,N404i Il 11120%. i h • •. I. �+ ~ i 10049 •• tt f ��!•iir5 ii:i:�tiy 4D CATTLE CREEK RANCH PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT (o co0) in cc oct oThe Cattle Creek Ranch PUD as proposed is a planned unit development m comprising a mixture of approximately 131 single family and cluster m 0 housing units, situate on approximately 313 acres. The present plan 40 cg is a revision of the original PUD approved in August 1980. c,) JThe following statements are the results of conceptual investigations CI ca of the water distribution system, sanitary sewer system and storm Lii 0 drainage system. CC w CC • U) O L o Water Distribution 0 Water distribution within the PUD will be accomplished by means of m z a central distribution system. The source of supply will be a series zof wells along Cattle Creek. The availability of water, from both a legal and physical standpoint, is being investigated by Wright Water ! z o Engineers, who are enclosing a separate statement with this application.. w p CD z A water storage tank will be provided in the southeast corner of the 1= ijj proposed PUD and will be capable of storing both domestic demands and D (-9 fire flow. The tank is projected to have a capacity of approximately z 0 m 300,000 gallons. a z - m Sanitary Sewer System d Sanitary sewage within the subdivision will be collected by means of • 8 an on-site central collection system which will carry the sewage to a proposed plant location on Cattle Creek downstream from the proposed z w well locations. E 3 w w The plant will be capable of treating a maximum daily flow of approxi -- z x mately 0.14 MGD. The treatment plant will be designed to discharge a i z very high quality effluent so as not to disturb the quality of water w CO N in Cattle Creek. Another reason the effluent will have a high quality Q is that some effluent may be used for land application on or around the agricultural lands. A site application and discharge permit will be O obtained from the Colorado Department of Health, at which time the plant o W will be designed to perform within or above the criteria required. • • Storm Sewer Management Storm drainage within the proposed PUD will be disposed of by using the natural drainage ways where possible, aided by engineered channels and culverts to direct storm water away from residential areas and across the main irrigation channels. There are some areas where drainage does enter the irrigation ditches, but these areas are not disturbed by this PUD, therefore, only the historic run-off is entering the irrigation channels. In the cluster housing area, there may be a need of detention ponds for the increased drainage flow. These detention ponds, if warranted, will be designed for the 100 year/24 hour storm and a historic or a 25 year/24 hour release rate. The drainage will eventually be dis- posed of in Cattle Creek. It appears from the conceptual plan that only the sanitary sewage treat- ment plant will be in an area of potential stream flooding. The treat- ment facility will be located as required to avoid any potential flooding problems. Prepared by, 4<;7n Barney Fix, FIT Rev. by: JRH BF/jlw • • f i ASPEN OFFICE 0241 VENTHOR AVENUE ASPEN. COLORADO 81911 CHEYENNE OFFICE 3130 HENDERSON DRIVE CHEYENNE, WYOMING 82007 GLENWOOD SPRINGS OFFICE P.O. BOX 219 GLENW000 SPRINGS. COLORADO 81802 STEAMBOAT OFFICE P.O. BOX 5220 STEAMBOAT VILLAGE, COLORADO 80499 WRIGHT WATER ENGINEERS, INC. ENGINEERING CONSULTANTS 2420 ALCOTT STREET DENVER, COLORADO 80211 {3031 458-6201 Glenwood Springs P.O. Box 219 Tel. 945-7755 Ron Liston Land Design Partnership 403 W. 1st Glenwood Springs, CO 81601 Dear Ron: August 20, 1982 RE: Cattle Creek Ranch KENNETH R. WRIGHT WILLIAM L. LORAH RALPH L. TOREN RICHARD D. JOHNSON FRANK J.TRELEASE LEO M. EISEL MARILYN M. STOKES At your request we have made a brief review of the water requirements for the recently revised Cattle Creek Ranch P.U.D. We have compared these requirements with the existing Cattle Creek augmentation plan (Division 5 Water Court Case No. W-3496). It is our understanding that the proposed P.U.D. will have a muncipal water requirement that will not exceed the needs of 135 EQR (equivalent residential units). For this development it is assumed that each EQR will require 350 gallons per day for in-house use and will need water to irrigate • 6,500 square feet of lawn or open space. Each of the units in the P.U.D. will be served by a central waste water collection and treatment system. The consumptive use for the proposed central water system (to serve 135 EQR and a maximum of 20 acres of irrigation) is about 31 acre-feet. This amount is in excess of the consumptive use decreed to the central water system in Case W-3496. It is our opinion that there is adequate water in the existing Cattle Creek Ranch augmentation plan (W-3496) to meet the water needs of the currently proposed development. However, we recommend that you obtain an opinion from an attorney familiar with Colorado Water Law as to the "legal" adequacy of • the existing augmentation plan for this development. • • • WLL:ep cc: Frank Lerner 771-024.00WR be: John Dickson Very truly yours, WRIGHT WATER ENGINEERS, INC. By W (;6"112.44„ William L. Lorah i • - • • • • • then and associates, inc. CONSULTING ENGINEERS SOIL L FOUNDATION 96 S. ZUNI DENVER, COLORADO 80223 303/744-7105 ENGINEERING 1924 EAST FIRST STREET • CASPER, WYOMING 82601 • 307/234-2128 July 1, 1977 Subject: Preliminary Geotechnical investiga- tion for the Cattle Creek Ranch Development, Garfield County, Colorado. Job No. 14,701 Hr. Frank Lerner c/o Ron Liston Land Design Partnership Suite 208, Village Plaza Glenwood Springs, Colorado 80601 Gentlemen: We have completed our field and laboratory studies for the preliminary geotechnical investigation at the subject site. We are presently drafting the final report. Our investigation indicates that there are no serious problems associated with the site geology or soil conditions. It should be feasible to develop the property as a residential subdivision. We ex- pect to have our final report out within the next week. This report will describe the site geology and subsoil conditions and discuss their expected effect upon the proposed development. If we can provide you with additional information prior to the submittal of the final report, please let us know. RGM/med Sincerely, CHEN AND ASSOCIATES, INC. Byr alph Mock, En sneering Geologist then and associates CONSULTING, GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERS SOSO RD. 154 GL E N WOOD SPA NGS,COLORADO 81601 303.'945-7454 PRELIMINARY GEOTECENICAL INVESTIGPTION CATTLE CREEK PUNCH DEVELORMMT, GARFIELD COUNTY, COLORADO Prepared For: Mt. Frank Lerner c/o Eldorado Engineering P.O. Box 669 Glens Springs, Ca'81602 Job tb. 23;746 April 13, 1982 OFFICES' CASPER • COLORADO SPRINGS • DENVER • SALT LAKE CITY TABLE OF CONTENTS *CONCLUSIONS 1 SCOPE 2 • PREVIOUS STUDIES 2 PROPOSED DEVLUCPKEN'T 3 SITE CONDITIONS 3 • GEOLOGIC S11'2ING 4 SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS Engineering Properties 7 • GEOLOGIC CONDITIONS AFFECTING THE PROPOSED DEVEUDIMENT Slope Stability 8 Shallow Groundwater 9 Earthquake Potential 9 Flooding 10 • • • • • EXCAVATION AND SITE GRADING Construction Slopes 10 Slope Stabilization 12 Subgrade Stabilization 12 Drainage Considerations 13 PRELIMINARY FOUNDATION RECOMMENDATIONS 13 FLOOR SLABS 14 CORROSION 15 C LIMITATIONS 15 TABJ.F OF CONTENTS - (cont.) 'FIGURE 1 - LOGS OF EXPLORATORY HOLES FIGURE 2 - LOGS OF EXPLORATORY HOLES FIGURE 3 - LOGS OF EXPLORATORY HOLES, LEGEND & NOTES FIGURES 4-11 - SWF T J —CONSOLIDATION TEST RESULTS TABLE I -- SUMMARY OF LABORATORY TEST RESULTS TABLE II -- RESULTS OF CHEMICAL TESTS PLATE 1 - SURFICIAL GEOLOGY MAP AND LOCATION OF TEST HOLES PLATE II - CATTLE CREEK PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT AND POTENTIALLY UNSTABLE SLOPES • • • • • • • CONCLUSIONS (1) From a geotechnical engineering and geologic consideration, the site is suitable for development of the proposed residential subdivision. No conditions of a geologic nature occur at the site which would constitute a major hazard or render the proposed development infeasible; however, the design and construction of facilities should accomodate certain geologic and subsoil conditions. These conditions are described herein. (2) Soil conditions au uhe site are relatively complex and generally consist of fine-grained soils with scattered gravel deposits. The fine-grained soils are moderately susceptible to erosion and will require protection. (3) In general, spread footings and drilled pier foundation systems will be suitable for residential and other lightly loaded structures. Additional investigation should be conducted for individual building sites. (4) Areas of shallow ground water and soft subgrade conditions occur within some of the major drainages, and may require dewatering or ground stabilization. techniques. The extent of these areas is rather limited and generally confined to valley bottom areas and the golf course and dam sites. Other localized areas occur. (5) In general, grades steeper than 30% do not exist throughout the building sites, however, areas of slope instability associated with free ground water have been identified within some building sites below existing irrigation ditches. These areas should be studied on an individual basis. LIMITATIONS This report has been prepared in accordance with generally accepted geotechnical engineering practices in this area for the use by the client for design purposes. The conclusions and recommendations presented are based on the data obtained from the exploratory holes at the locations shown on Plate 1 and on data obtained from a geologic field reconnaissance of the area. The subsoil encountered during the exploratory investigation indicate a general condition across the site. Variations with respect to depth, type and engineering properties of the subsoils should be expected and may require re --evaluation of the recommendations contr fined herein. Site specific studies, on-site observation of excavations and testing of site grading operations by a representative of the soil engineer is recommended. • RJV/dc cc: Ron Liston • CHI AND ASSOCIATES, INC. . nald J. asquez, merit�ltl �a L. rker Engineering Geologist Reviewed By 5_--X-P4J4 Steven L. Pawlak, P.E. • • • • • • 5uncrilr of Con ract STEWART TITLE OF GLENWOOD SPRINGS To whom it may concern: \;7//.0 r 805 Colorado Avenue P.O. Box 430 Glenwood Springs, Colorado 81601 (303) 945-5434 July 20, 1982 We have searched the records of the Clerk and Recorders Office of Garfield County and have found the adjoining owners to the Cattle Creek Ranch. RLH/tc Sincerely, STEWART TITLE OF GLENWOOD SPRINGS, INC. 1. Gary K. McNulty Box 200 Carbondale, CO 81623 2. Mary Grace McNulty P. 0. Box 1847 Glenwood Springs, CO 81602 3. Colorado Country Panorama Est. P. O. Box X Basalt, CO 81621 4. Bernard D. Landau Factory Pond Road Locust Valley, N.Y. 11560 5. Edward B. & Michal A. Simpson Box 238 El Jebel, CI 81628 6. Frank Bishop Construction Co. P. O. Box 467 Basalt, CO 81621 7. Jack 0. & Doris A. O'Neill 416 Kresse Circle Hopkins, Minn 55343 8. W. Douglas & Alice Sjoberg Davis Box 1187 Carbondale, CO 81623 9. M/K Ranch Assoc. 601 E. Main Street Aspen, CO 81611 10. Tod A. & Denise Odette Kupka Box 504 Carbondale, CO 81623 11. Laurence, Merrill & Delores 11104 Co. Rd. 115 Carbondale, CO 81623 12. Upper Cattle Creek School House Assoc. 0114 Woods Road Woody Creek, CO 81056 13. Mary T. Squires 0720-121 Rd. Carbondale, CO 81623 14. Arthur Rothman RVA Winston Churchill#71 CAV Alerios 28700 Macae R. J. Brazil 15. United States of America American Land Title Association Commitment - Modified 10/73 4J' COMMITMENT FOR TITLE INSURANCE ISSUED BY STEWART TITLE es. GUARANTY COMPANY STEWART TITLE GUARANTY COMPANY, A Texas Corporation, herein called the Company, for valuable consideration, hereby commits to issue its policy or policies of title insurance, as identified in Schedule A, in favor of the proposed Insured named in Schedule A, as owner or mortgagee of the estate or interest covered hereby in the land described or referred to in Schedule A, upon payment of the premiums and charges therefor; all subject to the provisions of Schedules A and B and to the Conditions and Stipulations hereof. This Commitment shall be effective only when the identity of the proposed Insured and the amount of the policy or policies committed for have been inserted in Schedule A hereof by the Company, either at the time of the issuance of this Commitment or by subsequent endorsement. This Commitment is preliminary to the issuance of such policy or policies of title insurance and all liability and obligations hereunder shall cease and terminate six months after the effective date hereof or when the policy or policies committed for shall issue, whichever first occurs, provided that the failure to issue such policy or policies is not the fault of the Company. This Commitment shall not be valid or binding until countersigned by an authorized officer or agent. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the Company: has caused this Commitment to be signed and sealed, to become valid when countersigned by an authorized officer or; agent of the Company, all in accordance with its By -Laws. This Commitment is effective as of the date shown in Schedule A as "Effective Date." STEWART TITLE GUARANTY COMPANY ‘24/.01. 01710-R---0 Chairman of tie Board .,r`upRpaR�• 1908 -caNior cam. -.,- orttrart Serial No. CC 1 0802L1 President t Order Number. 3845 SCHEDULE A ,. Effectivedate: JULY 16, 1981 AT 8:00 O'CLOCK A.M. 2. Policy or Policies to be issued A. ALTA Owners Policy Proposed Insured: Commitment Number: CATTLE CREEK RANCH $. ALTA Loan Policy g Proposed Insured: Amount of Insurance Premium TO 8E DETERMINED 3. The estate or interest in the land described or referred to in this commitment and covered herein is Fee simple and title thereto is at the effective date hereof vested in: CATTLE CREEK RANCH 4- The land referred to in this commitment is described as follows: SNE4 and Lots 7, 8, 12, 13 and the West 29.7 acres of Lot 14, except a tract conveyed by deed recorded in Book 61 at page 553, in Section 5; SE4SE4 of Section 6; SE4NE4 of Section 7;. All of Section 8; All in Township 7 South, Range 87 West of the 6th Principal Meridian. EXCEPTING those parcels conveyed to John A. McNulty by deed recorded October 28, 1977 in Book 502 at Page 214 as Reception No. 281481. (Copy attached) 41 COUNTY OF GARFIELD STATE OF COLORADO • • NOTE: The tract conveyed by deed recorded in Book 61 at page 553 was the following: Beginning at the SW corner of Lot 8, Section 6, Township 7 South, Range 87 West; thence East along the South line of said Lot 8 about 1320 feet to a point on the line to Sections 6 and 5; thence Northerly along said line to said Sections 6 and 5, 115.75 feet to a point; thence East along the South line of Lot 11 in Section 5, 445 feet to a point on the Southerly line of the County road; thence with and along the Southerly line of said road, S. 460571 E. 43 feet to a point; thence with and along said last mentioned line, E. 52 feet to a point about 25 feet E. of the E. bank of Coulter Creek; thence South 180 feet to a point East of the East bank of said Creek; thence West about 1845 feet to a point; thence North 50 feet to the place of beginning. • Authorized Countersignatur Page 2 • 1652 ti'l"1;'WA 1'1'1,1: i; lr A H A N T y i' r I W 1' A !•i r SCHEDULE B -- Section 1 Order Number: 3845 • Requirements • • • Commitment Number. The following are the requirements to be compiled with: Item (a) Payment to or for the account of the grantors or mortgagors of the full consideration for the estate or interest to be insured. Item (b) Proper instrument(s) creating the estate or interest to be insured must be executed and duly filed for record, to -wit: ---NO REQUIREMENTS AT THIS TIME- * ie Pape 3 STEWA 1. T T'IT'LE SCHEDULE B — Section 2 Exceptions Order Number: 3845 Commitment Number: The policy or policies to be issued will contain exceptions to the following unless the same are disposed of to the satisfaction of the Company: 1. Rights or claims of parties in possession not shown by the public records. 2. Easements, or claims of easements, not shown by the public records. 3. Discrepancies, conflicts in boundary lines, shortage in area, encroachments, and any facts which a correct • survey and inspection of the premises would disclose and which are not shown by the public records. 4. Any lien, or right to a lien, for services, labor or material theretofore or hereafter furnished, imposed by law and not shown by the public records. 5. Defects, liens, encumbrances, adverse claims or other matters, if any, created, first appearing in the public records or attaching subsequent to the effective date hereof but prior to the date the proposed insured acquires of record for value the estate or interest or mortgage thereon covered by this Commitment. • 6, Any and all unpaid taxes and assessments. 7. Any law, ordinance or governmental regulation (including but not limited to building and zoning ordinance) restricting or regulating or prohibiting the occupancy, use or enjoyment of the land, or regulating the character, * dimensions, or location of any improvement now or hereafter erected on said land, or prohibiting a separation in ownership or a reduction in the dimensions or area of any lot or parcel of land. • • • r 8. The effect of inclusion in any general or specific water conservancy, fire protection, soil conservation or other district or inclusion in any water service or street improvement area. 9, Rights of way and easements of the Eureka Ditch No. 1, Somers Ditch, the Lewis Ditch, Swede's Ditch, Dutchman Ditch, and H.C.L. Ditch, insofar as the same may affect the subject property. 10. Right of way for road as described in Road Viewers Report recorded December 28, 1888, in Record Book No. 1, page 103, insofar as the same may affect the NE4NW4 of Section 8, Township 7 South, Range 88 West of the 6th P.M. 11. All existing roads, highways, ditches, pipelines, utilities, rights of way and easements therefor. 12. Fifty percent non -participating royalty in and to proceeds derived from sale of oil, gas and other minerals of whatsoever kind or description, produced and saved from subject property, as reserved to Austin F. Heuschkel and Doris B. Heuschkel by deed recorded October 8, 1968 in Book 397 at page 183, and any and all assignments thereof or interests therein. 13. Easement and right of way for pipeline purposes as granted to Rocky Mountain Natural Gas Company, Inc. by Austin F. Heuschkel and Doris B. Heuschkel in the instrument recorded April 29, 1969 in Book 401 at page 388 as Reception No. 243289, in which the specific location of the easement is not defined. CONTINUED ON PAGE 4-A Exceptions numbered are hereby omitted, ID Page 4 'i'l?WA1:7" `i"ITI,F CONTINUATION SHEET SCHEDULE B - Section 2 Order Number: 3845 Commitment Number: 14. Stock watering Easement as granted by document recorded October 28, 1977 in Book 502 at Page 211 as Reception No. 281479. (Copy attached) 15. Restrictions as contained in document recorded November 3, 1980 in Book 559 at Page 101 as Reception No. 308990. (Copy attached) 16. Amendment to Cattle Creek Ranch P.U.D. as recorded August 18, 1980 in Book 554 at Page 26 as Reception No. 306576. (Copy attached) 17. Subdivision Improvement Agreement recorded August 18, 1980 in Book 554 at Page 29 as Reception No. 306577. (Copy attached) 18. Articles of Incorporation of The Cattle Creek Ranch Homeowners Association recorded November 3, 1981 in Book 559 at Page 88 as Reception No. 308989. 19. Deed of Trust from Cottonwood Pass, a limited partnership, to the Public Trustee of Garfield County for the use of Jopesna, a Colorado limited partner- ship, to secure $319,607.78, dated September 24, 1976, recorded October 1, 1976 in Book 489 at Page 47 as Reception No. 274683. 20. Deed of Trust from Cattle Creek Ranch, a Joint Venture, to the Public Trustee of Garfield County for the use of Cottonwood Pass, a Colorado limited partnership, to secure $ dated September 6, 1977, recorded September 12, 1977 in Book 500 at Page 657 as Reception No. 280639. Page 4-a • CONDITIONS AND STIPULATIONS 1. The term mortgage, when used herein, shall include deed of trust, trust deed, or other security instrument. 2. If the proposed Insured has or acquires actual knowledge of any defect, lien, encumbrance, adverse claim or other matter affecting the estate or interest or mortgage thereon covered by this Commitment other than those shown in Schedule B hereof, and shall fail to disclose such knowledge to the Cornpany in writing, the Company,shall be relieved from liability for any loss or damage resulting from any act of reliance hereon to the extent the Company is prejudiced by failure to so disclose such knowledge. If the proposed Insured shall disclose such knowledge to the Company, or if the Company otherwise acquires actual knowledge of any such defect, lien, encumbrance, adverse claim or other matter, the Company at its option may amend Schedule B of this Commitment accordingly, but such amendment shall not relieve the Company from liability previously incurred pursuant to paragraph 3 of these Conditions and Stipulations. 3. Liability of the Company under this Commitment shall be only to the named proposed Insured and such parties included under the definition of Insured in the form of policy or policies committed for and only for actual loss incurred in reliance hereon in undertaking in good faith (a) to comply with the requirements hereof, or (b) to eliminate exceptions shown in Schedule B, or (c) to acquire or create the estate or interest or mortgage thereon covered by this Commitment In no event shall such liability exceed the amount stated in Schedule A for the policy or policies committed for and such liability is subject to the insuring provisions and the Conditions and Stipulations and the exclusions from coverage of the form of policy or policies committed for in favor of the proposed Insured which are hereby incorporated by reference and are made a part of this Commitment except as expressly modified herein. 4. Any claim of loss or damage, whether or not based on negligence, and which arises out of the status of the title to the estate or interest or the lien of the insured mortgage covered hereby or any action asserting such claim, shall be restricted to the provisions and Conditions and Stipulations of this Commitment. STEWAR T TITLE GUARANTY COMPANY Page 5 CATTLE CREEK RANCH TRAFFIC PROJECTIONS ON THE CATTLE CREEK AND CATHERINE STORE ROADS Prepared by: Eldorado Engineering Company 823 Blake Avenue - P.O. Box 669 Glenwood Springs, Colorado 81601 May 1982 INTRODUCTION! The Cattle Creek Ranch as proposed is a planned unit development comprising a mixture of approximately 786 single-family and cluster housing units, some commercial usage and a golf course. Traffic volumes on Cattle Creek Road (County Road #113) and Catherine Store Road (County Road #100) will increase appreciably. The existing conditions of these two roads are adequate for the current traffic flow, but are not adequate for the proposed planned unit development's traffic. This study is made only to supplement the report entitled "Cattle Creek Ranch Off -Site Improvements on the Cattle Creek and Catherine Store Roads" prepared by Eldorado Engineering in February 1982. Purpose The purpose of this study is to make future projections of traffic flow caused by the Cattle Creek Ranch Development on the Cattle Creek Road (County Road #113) and the Catherine Store Road (County Road #100). This study will also give insight as to the type and width of pavement to use and shoulder and right-of-way widths. Traffic Counts The areas that were used in this study are as follows: Name Period of Study Location of Counter 1. West Glenwood 5/11/72 thru 5/14/82 One counter by the intersection of Hwy. 6 and 24 and County Road #130 and one counter by the south stop sign at the intersection of County Road 130 and County Road 133. 2. Westbank Subdivision 5/11/72 thru 5/14/82 One counter at the entrance to the subdivision and counters at the Golf Club entrance and exit. 3. Red Table Acres 5/17/82 thru 5/19/82 One counter at the entrance of the subdi- vision. 4. Oak Meadows Sub- division 5. Midland Avenue 6. Snowmass Village 5/21/82 thru 5/14/82 One counter at both entrances to the sub- division. 5/11/82 thru 5/14/82 One counter placed across from the Racquet Club. 5/17/82 thru 5/19/82 One counter placed at the intersection of Brush Creek Road and Hwy. 82. 7. Cattle Creek Road (County Road #113) 5/17/82 thru 5/19/82 The results of which are given in Table 1. One counter placed approxi- mately one mile from Hwy. 82. SUMMARY OF COUNTS TABLE 1 Location Units ADT/24 hrs. ADT/Unit DVH % DVH to ADT/24 hrs. **West Glenwood 235 2831 12 189 6.68 **Westbank Subdi - vision 83 453 5.5 56 12.36 *Red Table Acres 65 900.5 14 **Oak Meadows 78 235 3 ***Midland Avenue 4167 268 6.t3 projected in winter it doubles to 8334 ADT ***Snowmass Village Road 3000 projected in winter it increases by 2.5 or 7500 ADT Cattle Creek Road 437 Westbank Golf Course 27 453 16.8 parking ADT/parking spaces spaces -ADT = Average Daily Traffic DHV = Design Hour Volume *tore of a recreation type road and, therefore, will be invalid by unit count. **Oak Meadows Subdivision, Westbank Subdivision and West Glenwood are more or less like the Cattle Creek Ranch PUD even though West Glenwood is closer to a town and because of this generated a little more traffic, but was still used as part of this study. It was determined from this study that an average unit will generate seven trips per day. ***Two roads (Midland Avenue and Snowmass Village Road) were used in this study to help show the county that a 24'wide chip & seal road with an average shoulder width of 2' (wider where possible) can handle at least 8000 ADT with only minor maintenance over a number of years. Projected Traffic The projected Average Daily Traffic (ADT) count was determined as follows: Type Units ADT/Unit ADT *35% Single Family (in work force) 275 **7 1925 *15% Cluster Residential 118 ***4 472 *15% Multi -Family PUD 118 ***5 590 *35% Retirement Community 275 **3 825 TOTAL 786 Avg. 4.9 trips/ 3812 ADT unit *percentages given by Ron Liston, Cattle Creek Ranch Development Co- ordinator. **Counts received by our study and generally backed by the Trip Generation Manual from the Institute of Transportation Engineers an Informational Report. ***Counts taken from the Trip Generation Manual from the Institute of Transportation Engineers an Informational Report. Also from traffic counts taken on the Westbank Golf Course, it was determined that on the average there are 16.8 ADT per parking space. Assuming that there will be 50 parking spaces at the Cattle Creek Golf Course and using the 16.8 ADT per parking space will produce a total of 840 ADT. Therefore, the total ADT of the planned unit development will be 4652. Results To project the traffic flow that will travel the Cattle Creek Road (County Road #113) versus the Catherine Store Road (County Road #10O), it was assumed that approximately 70% of the ADT will travel the Cattle Creek Road (County Road #113) and 30% of the ADT will travel the Catherine Store Road (County Road #100). The results are shown in Table 2. By the results of our study on other subdivisions, the Design Hour Volume was determined to be approximately 8.5% of the ADT. In this study it was noted that only 35% of the planned unit development is in the general work force and that only 5% of the rest of the planned unit development will be leaving or arriving during the Design Hour, therefore, the Design Hour Volume will be as shown in Table 2. In this study, it was found that a 24' wide chip & seal road with 2' wide shoulders (wider where possible) can handle all the traffic that will be generated from the Cattle Creek Ranch Planned Unit Development. Also, the Garfield County Regulations require a 60' right-of-way for all maintained roads (see Table 2). TABLE 2 Item Cattle Creek Road Catherine Store Road Average Daily Traffic 3256 1396 (ADT) Design Hour Volume 111 47 (DHV) Chip & Seal Road Width 24 24 Shoulder Width Minimum 2' wider where Minimum 2' Right -of -Way Width possible 60' Minimum 60' Minimum Conclusions and Recommendations It is evident that the Cattle Creek Ranch Planned Unit Development will generate a large traffic volume. This volume can be controlled to flow smoothly on the Cattle Creek Road (County Road #113) and Catherine Store Road (County Road #100) if the roads have a 24' wide mat of chip and seal and have a minimum of 2' shoulders (wider where possible). It is recommended, however, that the improvements listed by Eldorado Engineering in their report entitled "Cattle Creek Ranch Off -Site .Improvements on the Cattle Creek and Catherine Store Roads" prepared in February 1982 be followed. The intersections of both the Cattle Creek Road (County Road #113) and the Catherine Store Road (County Road #100) with Colorado State Highway No. 82 have an acceleration lane, deceleration lane and left hand turn lane. These lanes have also been thoroughly studied and should be able to accomodate the design hour volume with little or no interruption of Colorado State Highway No. 82. CATTLE CREEK RA(ICH R U O TRAFFIC IMPACT /TUDY • • • • • • • • • • • CATTLE CREEK RANCH PUD Traffic Impact Study October 1983 Matthew J. Iielich, P.E. 3413 Banyan Avenue Loveland, Colorado 80537 303-669-2061 i TABLE OF CONTENTS I. Introduction Page 1 II. Existing Conditions 2 Description of the Roads 3 Current Traffic Volumes 6 Current Operations 7 Accident History 9 III. Proposed Developments 10 Trip Generation 11 Trip Distribution and Assignment 11 IV. Traffic Impacts 11 Expected Operation 11 "Narrows Analysis 12 Safety Analysis 14 Other Impacts 15 V. Conclusions and Recommendations 17 Conclusions 17 Recommendations 17 Appendix A --Cost Estimates I. INTRODUCTION This transportation study addresses the operation and safety # concerns of Garfield County Roads 113, 103, and 100 between Colorado Highway 82 and the location of the proposed Cattle Creek Ranch PUD. During the course of the analysis, numerous contacts were made with the developer, planning consultant, Garfield County Road Supervisor, and the Garfield County Planning Department. • The Cattle Creek PUD is an approved development in rural Garfield County. In the approval process, Garfield County placed the following transportation related conditions on the Cattle Creek Ranch PUDI • That, prior to preliminary plat approval, the applicant shall demonstrate that it has made its best efforts to accomplish the following off-site road improvements on County Road 113, which, in any case, must be completed in accordance with Garfield County design standards, and to the satisfaction of the Garfield County Road Supervisor • prior to final plat approval, or provided for by a Sub- division Improvements Agreements a. At a point approximately 3.4 miles east of the intersection of Colorado State Highway 82 and County Road 113, the applicant shall reconstruct County Road 113 to Garfield County road standards, which work shall consist of pre -engineering evaluation, acquisition in right-of-way, and con- struction of a new section of County Road 113 for a distance of approximately one eighth (1/8) mile; b. At a point approximately 3.6 miles east of the i intersection of Colorado State Highway 82 and County Road 113, the applicant shall reconstruct the intersection of County Roads 112 and 113 so as to relocate that intersection approximately one hundred (100) feet to the east of its present location; c. At a point approximately 6.4 miles east of the intersection of Colorado State Highway 82 and County Road 113, the applicant shall install approximately six hundred (600) feet of guardrail on the south side of County Road 113; i d. At a point approximately 6.4 miles east of the intersection of Colorado State Highway 82 and County Road 113, the applicant shall install • # approximately three hundred (300) feet of binwall or Jersey barrier -type concrete barriers to contain rocks falling from the North side of County Road 113i and e. At a point approximately 7.0 miles east of the intersection o1' Colorado State Highway 82 and County Road 113, the applicant shall install proper signage at the intersection with County Road 100. The purpose of this report is to verify the priorities stated in these conditions or reorder the priorities from a capacity, safety, and practical point of view. The remainder of this report consists of the following format: - Existing conditions - Description of the roads - Current traffic volumes - Current operations - Accident history - Proposed developments - Listing of proposed developments - Trip generation - Trip distribution and assignment - Traffic impacts - Expected operations - "Narrows" analysis - Safety analysis - Other impacts - Conclusions and recommendations II. EXISTING CONDITIONS The Cattle Creek Ranch PUD is located near the confluence of Cattle Creek and Coulter Creek in Sections 5 and 8 of Township 7 South and Range 87 West in Garfield County, Colorado, as shown in Figure 1. The current use of the land is that of an equestrian center and agricultural activities, primarily hay operations. This area is primarily served by three Garfield County Roads (113, 103, and 100) as shown in Figure 2. This area is also served from Colorado Highway 82 by Garfield County Road 114 and 115, but these routes are more circuitous than 113, 103, or 100. It is also served by the Cottonwood Pass Road from Gypsum in Eagle County. However, this road is not open during the winter months and, as such, cannot be considered as reasonable, consistent access to Cattle Creek Ranch. -2-- • , ,;•-• 1 II 34 Al • 11 r• e • a " ' • r r Glenwood Springs I m 5763 ____.:. ,--.....-z.7.• j. _ •:,,,;',/ 1 .1,, 4 ,...... ta 1 i i ...----- 1. — . 1 \r'\ :)N 't ., I 1".. . i, \ 411,, 21 ''- -..•••• % • •• ' .)..,...-'r- .... —- ,...—.,.., \ \ /1 ..',j6- 11:0. .2•:<•-••-i .fra0, 1 G6w.cat,d ft 'a , -• . il ''‘.-,. • ->.••ir-•1.- 1 1 Ti,......__,,I.--1, 1----,._. .,▪ ,Pr'' - -I 1.14,P- ... 'Cj. • - \t'''n 13 ' ' • - 4-- .r'or -i-4 ...'"'•-• 1_ . Iiiiyhes Tei 1 ! \\ 1 — _.9.',..-/-11 ' ii. ..f '1' ice3ervoir ..-.,, ''----'--(-- '154 • 1 L„ 1 tsFrizzi 6034 ; 32 351._ L;P:1166 — - CP 1G a F1'14-14 5 ga.t ••7•).•'' I \ 9 Mori& 7'41'4 111:411)L._ iaVr .;%• C' I r". " 'ef ▪ u 7 A! I • n 1 •kr , • w all • • .4'. S C.40. GIAN'D MI to ' .1, - v.'• I / ti '3‘• • f ' Vitr.p3ders' - 1, • 2 i."41141.N4 ..7•01.• 3 3 73 21. 2,,r•wv., 75 I p Y'L-z--a••• 1.. Akx11-1,,L le. 7 „e • I ..1‘ 0 111 woe' I " hpaa,a5 .21 1 • • , ,Foe I f - - • \ - ,, —l— .'1 1, \ '•'• i 1 ' •••••\1 a., ip Ps a ao : 131 `13 tl ‘72I S1 2 „2..-.-.-^•!...• .1, )6. '..-krirl& I ''''p ''S • Z.T.-a.r —.r )•_ I ''14 I " fl%) ') . '` ,, \ ,•, 1 —ThC":',1 .2. •-v•-•"• . _ 1 \ 44 I • 2 .3 .1 24., • •"' ••• I 33 26 I t 51.1112 t 7,2,I 26 1,. 4 .a." • ••. 4 / I -'•^•-ra,‘ ,"‘ (12 MA Jae 23 1.2..1t.c. Re • , f 33 • '14.. 1 Ir.t.4 t '`"-)• III P- .4 • 3 L. • —+— — . .., —.-- -t-.- .•.... •C....A1t.T- T,LE-:CREEfiKe,—A•AN CIf 7, .," _ -1( . 1 <1 15 i7/1 p I . 1 2 • 7— • r••••.. ;.-• (c• 62 • 34 •i; -7. •• , 1 •••!7. 1" r 1 l• • •—••• ' CI -e / 1 I - .1 I -JL Cp.'''. 1..-.4•1113 .6 I .0" 1 ,Izz4 1 10 NO 4 CarebTsdal. " 4:71 6 •C i,-. 1.! _- ---- -/ 4' '''' I / 7 ,.•11 Ca / , t.. ^- • . j o + .7, ...,...1 4-' , rt"I' t• - ,../......._ 1 I Aim3rotroAv 4,.. , , t., I 7" / d '4' ' 4/ ; ' 3•j: —1_,,,).. LOCATION OF CATTLE CREEK PUD 4,1 ..2----\!! 3C,odfr''Lck"4:1.71.'1: 12 I e/ ;ee I FIGURE 1 • FIGURE 2 Description of the Roads The following description of each county road (113, 103, and 100) begins at the intersection of Colorado Highway 82 and each • respective road to the Cattle Creek Ranch PUD access point or where the road ends. The description, provided by milepost indications, shows changes in alignment, notable side friction, changes in width, changes in paving material, or other character- istics that could affect the capacity, driveability, or safety of the road. This description is provided so that the reader might better understand analyses, comments, conclusions, or recom- mendations provided later in this report. Garfield County Road 113 (G.C.R. 113) G.G.R. 113 is shown in Figure 3. The approximate location • of significant characteristics are also shown. G.C.R. 113 inter- sects Colorado Highway 82 (C.H. 82) approximately 8 miles south of Glenwood Springs (milepost 0.0). Just east of C.H. 82 is a four - leg intersection consisting of a frontage road, G.C.R. 110, and G.C.R. 113. The roads entering this intersection are at skewed angles. There is a school bus turn -around just east of the inter- section. At milepost 0.1, the road is 23-24 feet wide. A drop- off begins at this location on the south side of the road. The speed limit at this location is 40 MPH. The top of slope is 4-5 feet from the edge of the roadway and the drop-off is from 10-20 feet. The slope is vertical or very close to vertical. • The road proceeds to the east at 0-2 percent vertical climb. Numerous driveways intersect G.C.R. 113 on the south side of the road. Due to the drop-off on this side of the road, most drive- ways climb to G.C.R. 113 along the slope and intersect at skewed angles. Often sight distance is limited. From milepost 0.8 to 1.3, a number of driveways access on the north side of the road. • Most of these enter at a skewed angle and have sight distance problems to the east, primarily due to embankment. From milepost 0.0 to 3.1, the roadway varies from 21 to 24 feet in width and is paved (probably chip and seal). At milepost 3.1, the road narrows to 18-19 feet. A "Road • Narrows" sign is on the right for eastbound vehicles. At milepost 3.3, the section known as "the narrows" begins. The road narrows to 13 feet in width for approximately 100-200 feet in length. This section is lined with large (1-2 feet diameter) trees very close to the road. These trees provide a canopy over the road producing a tunnel effect. There is a notable darkening under the canopy. • This is especially noticeable when it is a bright, sunny day. Irrigation ditches line both sides of the road next to the trees. The road gradually widens to 18 feet in width just prior to milepost 3.4. A barn exists on the south side of the road at milepost 3.3+. This barn is very close to the road with a narrow (8-10 feet) drive- way access to G.C.R. 113. At milepost 3.4, G.C.R. 112 intersects • from the south at a skewed angle providing poor sight distance to the east. G.C.R. 112 is a gravel road. The pavement on G.G.R. 113 ends at milepost 3.4. COUNTY ROAD FIGURE 3 Intermittently for the next 1-2 miles, brush encroaches on the gravel road (G.C.R. 113) which limits sight distance and artifically narrows the effective width of the road. The width of the gravel road varies between 20 and 25 feet at a gradual (2-3 percent) climb to the east to milepost 4.6. The gravel surface from the end of pavement (milepost 3.4) to milepost 6.6 is very loose. Driving at the posted speed (35 MPH) gave a very uneasy feeling on this surface. Occasionally the rear end of the vehicle was felt to move horizontally. Transverse corrugations existed at numerous locations. At milepost 3.6, the roadway bank on the south side of the road appeared to be eroding toward a 20 foot drop-off. At milepost 4.1 a need for guard rail existed on the south side of the road for 600-700 feet. Along with brush control, some reduction in bank on the north side of the road would greatly improve the sight distance. Driveways intersect G.C.R. 113 an both sides of the road from milepost 3.6 to 4.6, with sight distance problems generally for driveways that intersect on the south side. At milepost 4.6 a 6 percent climb to the east exists for 0.8 miles. The road width varies between 20 and 24 feet. At milepost 5.0 a Garfield County Road intersects from the south. This road connects with G.C.R. 103 and has good sight distance at this intersection. From milepost 5.1 to 5.3 a potential need for guard rail exists due to a large drop-off very close to the road edge. At milepost 5.4 the vertical alignment returns to a 2-3 percent grade for approximately 2,000 feet. At approximately milepost 5.8 a grade of 4+ percent begins for 0.9 miles. Also at milepost 5.8 a need for guard rail exists on the south side of the road to milepost 6.1. The road width varies from 16 to 21 feet. From milepost 6.1 to 6.7 intermittent sections of guard rail are needed. The approximate length of guard rail required is 1,500 feet. A "falling rock" sign is on the right at milepost 6.3 for eastbound vehicles. There is a signi- ficant cut section from milepost 6.4 to 6.6 on the north side of the road. Some large (> 8 inches in diameter) rocks were observed near the edge of the road, but none were on the driving surface on the data collection day. At milepost 6.6 a blind curve exists which may require signage and/or speed reduction. At approximately milepost 7.0, the road changed to a more stable surface which made driving significantly more comfortable. From milepost 6.7 to 8.0 (Cattle Creek Ranch) the vertical grade on the road flattened to 0-2 percent climbing to the east. At approximately milepost 7.1, G.C.R. 100 intersected G.C.R. 113 on the south. The roadway width varied from 20-24 feet in this section. At approximately milepost 7.4, the road left the confines of the canyon and entered the large open area of Cattle Creek Ranch with meadows and gently rolling terrain. Garfield County Road 103 (G.C.R. 103) G.C.R. 103 is shown in Figure 4. The approximate location of significant characteristics are also shown. G.C.R. 103 intersects -4- FIGUR E 4 C.H. 82 approximately 13 miles south of Glenwood Springs. A few hundred feet north of this intersection, G.C.R. 103 begins a 5 percent climb to milepost 0.4. The paved roadway is approximately 20 feet wide. At milepost 0.4, the vertical alignment flattens to a 2 per- cent grade climbing to the north. G.C.R. 104 intersects on the east at milepost 0.7. The roadway width is approximately 20 feet in this section. At milepost 1.0, the vertical alignment increased to 4 percent to milepost 1.5. At milepost 1.3, G.C.R. 112 inter- / sects on the west. From milepost 1.5 to 1.9 the vertical alignment is at approx- imately 8 percent climbing to the north. The pavement width continues at approximately 20 feet. At milepost 1.9, the grade flattens somewhat to 6 percent to milepost 2.4. The pavement ends at milepost 2.4. From milepost 2.4 to 3.4 the road has a 24 foot gravel surface over gently rolling terrain with a vertical grade of generally 0-2 percent. At milepost 3.4, a 5 percent grade, climbing to the north, begins through an "S" turn, ending at milepost 3.8. The remainder of the road is generally straight at a grade of 0-2 percent to the intersection of G.C.R. 100 at milepost 4.2. This portion of of the gravel road varies between 16 and 20 feet in width. Garfield County Road 100 (G.C.R. 100) G.C.R. 100 is shown in Figure 5. The approximate location of significant characteristics are also shown. G.C.R. 100 inter- sects C.H. 82 approximately 15 miles south of Glenwood Springs. This intersection is a four -leg intersection with C.H. 82 having the right of way. The south leg of G.C.R. 100 goes to Carbondale. The north leg of G.C.R. 100 goes to Cattle Creek Ranch and to Cottonwood Pass. Auxilary lanes (right- and left -turn lanes and acceleration lanes) are provided on C.H. 82 at this intersection. The north leg of G.C.R. 100 proceeds for 0.2 miles at a 0 per- cent grade. The road is straight and paved to a width of 24 feet. At milepost 0.2 an 8 percent grade begins for 0.2 miles. At mile- post 0.2, three driveways intersect G.C.R. 100 at the start of this climbing grade. Guard rail is needed on the west side of G.C.R. 100 as the road climbs the hill. The length of guard rail needed is approximately 600 feet. The road is approximately 21 feet wide on this grade. At the top of the grade the road widens at a horizontal turn, but then returns to the 21 foot width. The grade of the road is 0-3 percent from milepost 0.4 to 1.1. There are frequent driveways on both sides of the road in this section. Some driveways may have sight distance problems in this section. The pavement width is 18-20 feet. At milepost 0.9, the first turn of a switch -back occurs. At milepost 1.1 the second turn of a switch -back occurs. Also, the driveway to the Carbondale landfill enters on the west side of G.C.R. 100 at milepost 1.1. • O INC CC H C.� W log CZ FIGURE 5 At milepost 1.1 a 7 percent grade begins climbing to the north. This grade continues to milepost 1.6. Guard rail is needed on the east side of the road from milepost 1.2 to 1.6. Approximately 110 feet of guard rail currently exists in this • section near the top of this grade. A large rock outcrop occurs on the west side of the road at milepost 1.5+. This outcropping is approximately 30 feet high. Elimination or partial elimination could reduce the road curvature and improve the sight distance at this location. The pavement width in this section varies from 18-22 feet. 111 From milepost 1.6 to 2.4, the grade flattens somewhat to 4 percent. The pavement width varies from 20-22 feet. There are a few driveways accessing ranches or other agricultural uses along this section. There appears to be no sight distance problems at any of these driveway locations. G.G.R. 102 intersects • G.C.R. 100 from the east at a channelized "T" intersection at milepost 2.4. G.C.R. 102 is a gravel road. Milepost 2.4 is also the location where G.C.R. 100 changes from a paved surface to a gravel surface.. G.C.R. 100 has a gravel surface from milepost 2.4 to the • intersection with G.C.R. 113 at milepost 4.7. The grade is gently rolling (0-2 percent) from milepost 2.4 to 3.8. The width of the gravel road varies between 16 and 18 feet. The posted speed in this area is 30 MPH. At milepost 3.8, G.C.R. 103 intersects on the west. • From milepost 3.8 to milepost 4.2 (the proposed access road to Cattle Creek Ranch PUD), G.C.R. 100 climbs a 6 percent g ade. The road width varies between 14 and 18 feet. i Current Traffic Volumes Inquiry at the Garfield County .Road Supervisor's Office indicated that no traffic count data was available for any of these county roads. Consequently, machine traffic counts were performed from August 23 through 26, 1983. The location of each machine count is shown on Figure 6. Counts taken were two-way volumes accumulated by hour of the day. Table 1 shows the hourly count on each road. The percentage of traffic on each road is: G.C.R. 113--321 VPD = 37% G.C.R. 103--200 VPD = 23% G.C.R. 100--352 VPD = 40% The combined hourly trip distribution is shown in Figure 7. The distribution is not unlike that of an urban area with noticeable morning and afternoon peaks, and the afternoon midday volumes higher than the morning midday volumes. This distribu- tion indicates that many of the current residents living above the counters travel to standard 8-5 jobs similar to that character- istic found in urban areas. • TRAFFIC GAUNT LOCATIONS TABLE 1 Traffic Counts Location Hour C.C.R. 113 G.C.R. 100 G.C.R. 10, 12-1 0 1 2 1-2 0 0 0 2-3 0 0 0 3-4 0 0 0 4-5 1 0 1 5-6 6 1 0 6-7 26 25 4 cc 7-8 25 41 10 8-9 19 15 12 9-10 23 14 12 10-11 20 17 15 11-12 18 15 14 _12-1 13 19 11 1-2 18 34 9 2-3 13 29 12 3-4 2. 24 23 4-5 30 17 16 5-6 18 37 24 6-7 22 15 12 w 7-8 �3 19 11 8-9 17 8 6 9-10 13 11 4 10-11 2 9 1 11-12 0 1 1 Daily 321 352 200 36.8% 40.3% 22.9% • • 70. 6C . 50. 40, U L 4 30. TWO- WAY 20. 10_ 0 12 1 8 9 1011 12 2 N HOUR OF ❑AY COMBINED HOURLY TRIP DISTRIBUTION 4 - 6 10 M FIGURE 7 From data provided by the Garfield County Planning Depart- ment and field observation, it was determined there were approx- imately 85 dwelling units above the traffic counters which had a reasonable probability of using one of these three roads on a given weekday. During the times of the traffic counts, consider- able time was spent on each of these roads checking the counters and gathering road characteristic data. It was observed that there appears to be no unusual traffic utilizing these roads. In order to verify the traffic distribution between the 4 three roads, a gravity model trip distribution was performed utilizing the communities of Glenwood Springs, Carbondale, Basalt, and Aspen as the attractive forces which would draw trips from this area for most employment or commercial purposes. This analysis yielded a distribution among these roads as follows: • G.C.R. 113 = 38.2% G.C.R. 103 = 21.8% G.C.R. 100 = 40.0% These percentages correlate very closely with the counted traffic. It was, therefore, concluded that a reasonable split for traffic on these roads is: G.C.R. 113 = 40% G.C.R. 103 = 20% G.C.R. 100 = 40% Current Operations Determination of current operation of each of these roads is essentially a capacity analysis. In order to better understand the analysis technique utilized, a discussion of "level of service" is presented. Traffic level of service is a qualitative measure of the effect of a number of factors, which include speed and travel time, traffic interruption, freedom to maneuver, safety, driving comfort and convenience. In practice, selected service levels are defined in terms of particular limiting value of some of these factors. A "service volume" is the highest number of vehicles that can pass over a given section of a roadway in both directions during a specified time period while operating conditions are maintained corresponding to a specific level of service. The concept of level of service that was developed in the early sixties and exists today suggests that roadways fall into one of six categories of levels of service, ranging from "A" to "F". Descriptiopq)of each level of service for rural highways are as follows: ll (1) Source: Highway Capacity Manual. HRB Special Report 87, 1965 p. 300. A - Level of Service "A" describes a condition of free flow, low volumes and high speeds. Operating speeds must 'be 60 MPH or higher. Volumes may reach 20 percent of capacity under ideal conditions. B - Level of Service "B" also represents good traffic flow conditions; however, most drivers are affected by other vehicles in the traffic stream. Operating speeds are about 50 MFH and volumes may reach 45 percent of capacity under ideal conditions. C - Level of Service "0" denotes a stable flow condition, with higher traffic volumes. Operating speeds are 40 MPH or above and volumes may reach 70 percent of capacity under ideal conditions. Typically, most rural roadways are designed for the maximum level of service "0" volume, although exceptions are allowed where significant design problems, cost, or other factors exist. This level of service is noted as the design service volume for rural highways in the Colorado Roadway Design Manual. D Level of Service "D" represents the start of a condition in which traffic flow is more sensitive to vehicles entering and exiting the roadway, roadway surface conditions, development activity and trucks. Operating speeds generally fall to 35 MPH and volumes carried may reach 85 percent of capacity. This level of service is recommended in the Colorado Roadway Design Manual for urban arterials. E - At Level of Service "E", or capacity, actual operating speeds will usually be in the neighborhood of 30 MPH, but may vary considerably. Volumes, under ideal conditions, will usually operate at 90 to 100 percent of capacity. F - Level of Service "F" represents clogged traffic flow with operating speeds less than 30 MPH and widely variable. Volumes carried are usually less than capacity, due to the flow restrictions from congestion. Expected levels of service designations must meet the speed and volume guidelines set forth in the Highway Capacity Manual. Service volumes for each level of service are influenced by factors such as number of lanes, grade, percentage trucks and buses, shoulder width and passing sight distances (for two-lane roads). Service volumes for two-lane roads are always given in terms of volume for both directions of travel (total highway) . On relatively flat highways, the operating speed of the vehicles is an important factor in determining the level of service of the roadway. On mountainous highways, operating speeds are limited by physical constraints, rather than traffic congestion; and, thus, operating speed is invalid to use as a factor. For this analysis, available passing sight distance rather than -8- • operating speed was used as a criteria for the level of service for each county road. Each road was divided into sections based upon grade and road surface. Analysis was conducted for the current roadway under ideal weather conditions. Service volumes at Level of Service C were determined for each section. Level of Service C is considered design level of service for rural roads.. Later in this report, projected volumes will be compared to these service volumes to determine if a capacity problem is likely to occur. • The results of this analysis are shown in Figure 8 for G.C.R. 113, Figure 9 for G.C.R. 103, and Figure 10 for G.C.R. 100. No service volume is provided for "the narrows" on G.C.R. 113, since this section requires special treatment and, as such, will be analyzed later in this report. It can be seen by comparing the service volumes in these figures with the counted traffic on • each of the county roads that none of the roads at the respective count locations exceed the hourly volume for Level of Service C. This indicates that all the facilities are within the design volumes under prevailing conditions. • Accident History In determining the priorities for road improvements related to the Cattle Creek Ranch PUD, consideration and analysis should be given to the traffic accidents that have occurred over the past few years. Data on the accident history from 1980 through July 1983 was obtained from the Colorado State Patrol and the Garfield County Road Supervisor. The breakdown of accidents from January 1980 through December 1982 are as follows: • Total accidents -- 14 Fatalities -- 2 Injury -- 4 Property Damage Only 8 Broadsides -- 1 Sideswipe -- 1 • Overturn -- 1 Ran Off Road -- 11 Day -- 10 Night -- 4 Snow/Ice -- 4 DWI -- 1 • • • • From January 1983 through July 1983 the following accidents were reported: _ Total accidents -- 16 Fatalities -- 0 Injury -- 4 Property Damage Only -- 12 LEVEL OF SERVICE C SERVICE VOLUME 1 2 3 MILEPOST 4 SERVICE VOLUMES FOR C.C.R. 113 5 6 7 FIGURE 8 LEVEL OF SERVICE C SERVICE VOLUME 330 742 430 223 281 445 174 ..1 742 t 328 742 132 445 149 445 1 2 3 MILEPOST 4 SERVICE VOLUMES FOR C.C.R. 113 5 6 7 FIGURE 8 LEVEL OF SERVICE C SERVICE VOLUME 330 742 430 223 281 445 174 445 2 MILEPOST SERVICE VOLUMES FOR G.C.R. 103 3 FIGURE 9 4 LEVEL OF SERVICE C SERVICE VOLUME 1 MILEPOST 2 SERVICE VOLUMES FOR G.C.R. 100 3 FIGURE 10 4 742 328 742 206 477 445 113 1 MILEPOST 2 SERVICE VOLUMES FOR G.C.R. 100 3 FIGURE 10 4 The causal factors cited by the investigating officer were: Inattentive Driving -- 3 Exceed Safe Speed -- 3 • Exceed Lawful Speed -- 2 DWI -- 1 Yield ROW -- 1 Wrong Side of Road -- 1 Others -- 4 • Analysis of the accidents indicates that a significant percentage of the accidents are those that could possibly be prevented by a stable road surface. The ability to determine a safe speed on a gravel road is difficult. Inability to determine that safe speed can cause vehicles to drive off the road, sideswipe, or overturn. • Also since many of the accidents are single car accidents leaving the road, guard rails at strategic locations can certainly lessen the severity of accidents. It is significant to note that in the past 3i years not a single accident has occurred at "the narrows". While "the narrows" • is a less than ideal situation on a two lane facility, there probably are very good reasons why no accidents have occurred: - There is good vertical and horizontal sight distance at both approaches to "the narrows". • • - There are warning signs on the approaches. - Most drivers who use G.C.R. 113 are familiar with. "the narrows" and take special care when approaching this area. III. PROPOSED DEVELOPMENTS In order to determine expected traffic impacts to each of the county roads, it is necessary to determine what the proposed / developments are in the trip influence area. Data was obtained from the Garfield County Planning Department regarding subdivisions in this area of the county. These included the developments shown in Table 2. Traffic expected from these developments must be added to / the traffic from the existing developments to determine the total traffic at full development. Evaluation will also be conducted utilizing just the Cattle Creek Ranch PUD traffic and the existing traffic. • -10- • TABLE 2 Proposed Developments in the Trip Influence Area Development Existing Proposed Dwelling Units Dwelling Units Cattle Creek Ranch PUD 1 131 Upper Cattle Creek 8 12 Hardy Hills 0 2 Baby Bean 0 7 Panorama Ranches / 9 53 Kings Row 21 43 Strang Ranch 0 60 Development TABLE 3 Trip Generation Peak Hour Daily A.M. F.M. Trips In Out In Out Cattle Creek Ranch PUD Residential 668 13 52 52 26 Equestrian Center 80 4 4 8 8 Upper Cattle Creek 36 1 2 2 2 Hardy Hills 18 1 1 1 1 Baby Bean 63 2 4 4 3 Panorama Ranches 378 13 25 25 17 Kings Row 198 7 13 13 9 Strang Ranch 540 18 36 36 24 Trip Generation Trip generation is important in considering the impact of developments on the road system. A compilation of trip generation • information was prepared by the Institute of Transportation Engineers in 1976, and updated periodically. This source was used to project trips that would be generated by the proposed developments in the trip influence area. Table 3 shows the expected trip generation pn a daily and peak hour basis. The analysis assumed that no trips would remain internal to the trip • influence area. Also, no adjustments were made to reflect potential transit use or car pooling. These assumptions created a worst case condition for this area. • Trip Distribution and Assignment The directional distribution of the trips generated by the proposed developments within the trip influence area was determined from their relative location to the three roads which serve the area and their relative distance from the various employment/ commercial/activity centers in the area. The trip distribution follows closely the trip split discussed earlier in this report. Trip assignment is how the generated and distributed trips are expected to be loaded on the road system. The assigned trips are the resultant of the trip distribution process. Figure 11 shows the expected daily traffic loadings on each of the county roads at full development of all of the above developments plus existing traffic. Figure 12 shows the expected daily traffic loadings for the Cattle Creek Ranch PUD plus existing traffic. Iy. TRAFFIC IMPACTS Evaluating the traffic impacts of the Cattle Creek Ranch PUD as well as other developments in the area involved: - Analyzing the expected operation of the existing roads in the area. - Conducting a special analysis of "the narrows" on G.C.R. 113. - Conducting a safety analysis based upon the accident history. Discussing other impacts which should be considered. Expected Operation Evaluating the expected operation of each of the county roads entails comparing the projected full development peak hour -11- 0 792 746 700 654 545 407 387 372 OCR 113 0 OCR 103 a m to 4 334 284 nt ca OCR 102 u, I0 FULL DEVELOPMENT DAILY. TRAFFIC PROJECTIONS f FIGURE 11 674 628 582 536 427 388 368 353 GCR 113 co co v 4 234 184 ti GCR 103 ti sCR102 o 1— CR 100 EXISTING + CATTLE CREEK PUD TRAFFIC PROJECTIONS FIGURE 12 traffic volumes at various locations along the roads with the service volumes calculated. The projected full development P.M. peak hour volumes by milepost increment are shown in Figure 13 for G.C.R. 113, Figure 14 for G.C.R. 103, and Figure 15 for G.C.R. 100. i Also shown on each of these figures are the Level of Service C service volumes as calculated for the prevailing roadway conditions. It can be seen that at full development of all the develop- ments considered in this analysis, the projected peak hour volumes never exceed the calculated service volumes. The low • service volume in the area on G.C.R. 100 (milepost 1 to milepost 2) is due to the grade and the pavement width at this location. Since the grade is a constraint that cannot be altered without exorbitant cost, the only way to increase the service volume is to widen the pavement and shoulder area. On G.C.R. 113 at milepost 5 and at milepost 6, the low service volume is due to both grade and road surface. Since it is not practicable to alter the grade, paving the road is the obvious solution to increasing the calculated service volume. Since there are no capacity related problems on any of these three roads at full build -out of the proposed developments /0 evaluated, it is not necessary to evaluate the operation utilizing Cattle Creek Ranch PUD and existing traffic. These volumes would be considerably less than the volumes at full development. • "Narrows" Analysis The analysis of "the narrows" is a special case for a number of reasons: - It is not simply analyzed using conventional capacity techniques used earlier in this report. • - It is a short one lane (bottleneck) section on a continuous two lane facility. - It has had no accidents reported in the past 3i years even though the situation is less than ideal from a safety point of view. • - Improvement to "the narrows" is currently under litigation by the adjacent landowners who are seeking to either stop or delay widening. The special analysis conducted on "the narrows" was a • probability analysis that two vehicles traveling in opposite directions on G.C.R. 113 would meet at the narrows. It was felt that if the probability was on the order of 40 percent (4 in 10 chances of meeting), then widening of "the narrows" should occur immediately. During the limited observation time on the traffic counting days and data collection days, no vehicles traveling in • opposite directions on G.C.R. 113 were seen to meet at "the narrows". -12_ • SERVICE VOLUME 0 95 1 82 2 78 3 74 4 62 55 PM PEAK HOUR TRAFFIC G.C.R. 113 PM PEAK HOUR TRAFFIC 53 52 FIGURE 13 8 330 t 742 65 SERVICE VOLUME 430 223 281 445 174 445 4 60 53 39 33 1 PM PEAK HOUR TRAFFIC G.C.R. 103 PM PEAK HOUR TRAFFIC FIGURE 14 SERVICE VOLUME 742 328 742 206 477 445 113 i - 1 184 1 181 2 176 PM PEAK HOUR TRAFFIC G.C.R. 10 0 PM PEAK HOUR TRAFFIC 64 60 67 64 FIGURE 15 742 NAR 742 132 445 149 445 0 95 1 82 2 78 3 74 4 62 55 PM PEAK HOUR TRAFFIC G.C.R. 113 PM PEAK HOUR TRAFFIC 53 52 FIGURE 13 8 330 t 742 65 SERVICE VOLUME 430 223 281 445 174 445 4 60 53 39 33 1 PM PEAK HOUR TRAFFIC G.C.R. 103 PM PEAK HOUR TRAFFIC FIGURE 14 SERVICE VOLUME 742 328 742 206 477 445 113 i - 1 184 1 181 2 176 PM PEAK HOUR TRAFFIC G.C.R. 10 0 PM PEAK HOUR TRAFFIC 64 60 67 64 FIGURE 15 The probability function selected for use in this analysis was a Poisson Distribution. This is a common function used by investigators predicting arrival rates and gap distributions of vehicles in a traffic stream. The formula for a Poisson Distri- • bution describes a random series of events as follows: - The location of each event (arrival of a vehicle) is independent of any other event. - Any two equal segments of the series have the same likelihood of containing any particular number of points. The Poisson Distribution does not apply to heavy or congested traffic flow. As documented by the current traffic counts and the operation analysis, traffic flow is not congested on G.C.R. 113. The equation describing the Poisson Distribution is as follows: • • • • • • • • P(X) Where: -m x e m x: P(X) = probability of the arrival of x vehicles at a point during a given length of time. m = mean number of vehicles arriving in the given length of time = t v 35.00 t = given time length of gap (seconds) v = volume (vehicles per hour) e = base of Naperian logarithms The time length (t) was determined to be 11 seconds or the time it takes a vehicle to travel through "the narrows" from a two lane section to a two lame section. The evening peak hour was determined to be the critical time period. It was assumed that during the evening peak hour, 60 percent of the vehicles traveled eastbound and 40 percent of the vehicles traveled westbound. Initially, analysis was performed on the existing condition. A conservative assumption using the evening peak hour count of 30 vehicles was used in this analysis. This assumption is con- servatively high since the traffic counter was approximately 2 miles west of "the narrows". The directional distribution was 18 vehicles eastbound and 12 vehicles westbound. An additional element of conservativeness was introduced into the analysis by assuming that of the peak hour traffic occurred in a peak 15 minute period of that hour. Using the Poisson Distribution analysis, the probability of two vehicles meeting at "the narrows" using current traffic is 17 percent. -13- Analysis of "the narrows" utilizing existing plus Cattle Creek Ranch PUD traffic indicated that during the evening peak hour 61 vehicles could be expected through "the narrows" with 37 eastbound and 24 westbound. The Poisson Distribution analysis • indicated that a probability of two vehicles meeting at "the Narrows" was 30 percent. Analysis utilizing full build -out of all the developments mentioned earlier in this report indicated that during the evening peak hour 74 vehicles could be expected to pass through • "the narrows" with 45 eastbound and 29 westbound. Using the Poisson Distribution analysis, the probability of two vehicles meeting at "the narrows" was 36 percent. This analysis indicates that the probability of two vehicles meeting at "the narrows" remains quite low even at full develop- • went of this area. Since full development only referred to those properties the Garfield County Planning Department indicated were being considered for development, this type evaluation should continue as development pressures increase and more land is considered for future development. In consideration of the above analysis and the potential for an accident at "the narrows" • the following actions should be considered: - Provide additional signing and, possibly, flashing lights which indicate a narrow road ahead. - Provide guard rail east of "the narrows" on the south side of the road. Remove some foliage from the trees which are growing in "the narrows". These trees canopy the road producing a tunnel effect to the motorist. - Remove all trees from "the narrows" that can be shown to be in the public right-of-way. Safety Analysis Based upon the historical accident information, if the roads remain the same as they currently exist, the number of accidents will increase at the same proportion that the traffic increases. Since some of the accidents were related to the gravel road, these accidents will increase also. Paving the gravel portions of the most -used county roads will provide a more stable and more predictable road surface, which will probably reduce the rate of the type of accidents which have occurred in the past. Installation of guard rail at key locations will certainly reduce the severity of the accidents. This is especially true for those single car accidents where the vehicle leaves the road in both good and adverse weather conditions. There are a number of roads which intersect G.C.R. 113 at skewed angles. Most of these are driveways over which Garfield -14- County has little control. However, one of the intersections involves G.C.R. 112. The Garfield County Road Supervisor has had plans to improve this intersection by reconstructing it as a 900 "T" intersection. This should be done as funds become available to the County. There have been no recent reported accidents at "the narrows", and there is no reason to believe that this will not continue. Implementation of the recommendations listed earlier will make this section of road safer than currently exists. It is further • recommended that Garfield County place widening this section on a capital improvement program, possibly tied to the level of development east of "the narrows". • Other Impacts This section presents some other considerations pertaining to gravel roads. They are offerred to provoke thought in making decisions regarding the transportation -related priorities. In deciding whether to pave or not pave a given road, the • following should be considered. A. Potential for fugitive dust complaints. The maximum allowable daily traffic count is 200 by EPA before a dust supression plan must be submitted. • B. Increased user costs. These costs are related to motor vehicles operating costs and include: 1. Increased fuel consumption and increased consumption of lubricating oil due to roughness of the surface, loose material • and dust problems. 2. Increased tire wear due to roughness of the surface. 3. Increased wear on the suspension system due to roughness of the surface. • 4. Increased depreciation due to increased general wear and tear on the vehicle. • • C. Increased maintenance costs. The upper limits of traffic volume for which untreated road surfaces are economical varies but is in the range of 100 vehicles per day. When these volumes are exceeded on unpaved roads, costs for both the user and the maintenance agency will increase. At higher traffic volumes, surface pitting, the formation of transverse corrugations, loss of surface materials eroded, blown or thrown by vehicles and dry weather dust problems all lead to higher main- tenance costs of unpaved roads over paved roads. -15- Transverse corrugations is an adverse roadway surface condition and is associated with higher volumes of traffic on unpaved roads. Frequent blading is re- quired (which in itself increases maintenance costs), but as material is lost due to erosion, dust, etc., this blading will do no good because there is not enough material to work out the corrugations and often the road surface is too hard to blade. At this point additional material must be brought in. In mountainous areas the cost of material is increased due to long truck hauls. Snow removal is also more of a problem on unpaved roads than on paved roads. Snow plows and blades cannot clean snow down to a smooth, firm surface on unpaved roads, resulting in a layer of snow remaining on the road surface --either to cause skidding problems during freeze -thaw cycles, or causing saturation of the roadway structure, thereby substantially weakening the load carrying capacity of the road. If the snow plow cuts too deep, material is lost, either thrown into the borrow ditches or even outside of the right- of-way. With a paved road, even if a "clear pavement" philosophy is not followed, at least the pavement surface will keep much of the melting snow and ice from penetrating through the pavement structure and causing subgrade failures. D. Another item to be considered is the safety problem. As vehicles start and stop abruptly, weave in and attempt to avoid rough areas, or reduce wheel hop, etc., the potential for a higher incidence of rearend and sideswipe type accident increases. E. A gravel road should not access onto a paved road. Vehicles using unpaved roads will pull gravel from these roads onto the paved roads. Presence of this material on the paved surface can lead to more rapid deterioration of the pavement and may increase the accident potential at this point due to possibility of skidding on loose gravel. If a gravel road accesses onto a paved road at a negative grade, runoff will cause deposition of gravel on the paved surface and the same problems exist as explained above. r -16- i V. CONCLUSIONS AND RECONNENDATIONS Conclusions Based upon the foregoing analysis, the following conclusions are drawn: While Cattle Creek Ranch PUD will increase the daily traffic load on Garfield County Roads 113, 103, and 100, the peak hour traffic load will not increase that significantly. This conclusion is drawn based upon both the nature of the development and the market program of the developers. - Utilizing full build -out of the approved developments in this area as obtained from the Garfield County Planning Department, the projected traffic loads at various analysis sections of Garfield County Roads 113, 103, and 100 do not exceed the service volume at level of service C. Level of service C is defined as stable traffic flow and is the design service volume for rural highways. - The section of Garfield County Road 113 known as "the narrows" (milepost 3.3) constitutes a bottle- neck which must be widened to improve both capacity and safety in this section. Litigation is pending regarding the widening of this section. The length of time necessary to reach a decision concerning this litigation is unknown. Suits of this nature can require a long period of time to be resolved. The litigation is essentially between Garfield County and the landowners adjacent to "the narrows". Accident reports on Garfield County Road 113 indicated no accidents at "the narrows" in the past 3i years. This is probably due to a combination of relatively low traffic volume and a familiarity of the road by the users. The familiarity probably brings with it a measure of extra care at "the narrows". - Over 85 percent of the reported accidents were those that probably could have been prevented or lessened in severity by either the installation of guard rail or improvement of the road itself (widening, provision of shoulders, more stable surface) . Recommendations Based upon the foregoing analysis and the above conclusions, • the following recommendations are made regarding road improvements to Garfield County Roads 113, 103, and 100: -17- • • 1. Guard rail should be installed at the locations noted in Figure 3 on Garfield County Road 113. 2. Guard rail should be installed at the locations noted in Figure 5 on Garfield County Road 100. 3. Pave Garfield County Road 113 from the existing end of pavement (milepost 3.4) to the entrance to the Cattle Creek Ranch PUD (milepost 8.0) (Garfield County Road 121). The.pavement should conform to the Garfield County Road Specification. This recommendation is made in consideration of the recent accident history on Garfield County Road 113. Paving the road can provide a more stable driving surface and improve visibility due to the reduction of dust. As mentioned earlier, the widening at "the narrows" is a necessary project whose need increases signi- ficantly as the traffic increases significantly. Paving of the gravel portion of Road 113, on the other hand, will reap some immediate benefits since it provides a safer driving surface at locations where accidents are known to have occurred. It is felt that given a finite amount of funds for the transportation improvements to roads in the area, paving the roads would bring an immediate benefit. Pave Garfield County Road 100 from the existing end of pavement (milepost 2.4) to the entrance to Cattle Creek Ranch PUD (milepost 4.2). The pavement should conform to the Garfield County Road Specifications. 5. The section known as "the narrows" on Garfield County Road 113 should be widened to accommodate two lanes of traffic. Widening to 2-12 foot lanes would require the acquisition of right-of-way from adjacent landowners, removal of trees, potential demolition of a barn, and relocation or other treat- ment of irrigation ditches. While the above treatment of "the narrows" will be necessary at some point in time, there is some question whether it must occur immediately. The recent accident history indicates no accidents at "the narrows". The Cattle Creek Ranch PUD does not add significant traffic loads to the peak hour traffic on Road 113. The time and expense of the litigation concerning "the narrows" gives reason to believe a more cost effective expendi- ture of the Cattle Creek Ranch PUD developer's money is more practical. This more effective investment involves paving the remainder of Garfield County Road 113 as explained in item 3 above. The recommendation to delay the widening of "the narrows" should not be construed to mean that widening should never occur, but rather it should occur at a point when traffic -18- on Garfield County Road 113 reaches a point when there is a 40 percent chance that vehicles traveling in opposite directions will meet each other at "the narrows". In the meantime, the following immediate treatments are necessary at "the narrows"3 - Provide additional signing and, possibly, flashing lights which indicate a narrow road ahead. - Provide guard rail east of "the narrows" on the south side of the road (approximately 350 feet). - Remove some foliage from the trees which canopy "the narrows" to lessen the tunnel effect. - Remove all trees from "the narrows" that can be shown to be in the public right-of-way. - Place widening of "the narrows" section of G.C.R. 113 on a capital improvement program possibly tied to the level of development east of "the narrows". 6. Provide safer geometries at the intersection of Garfield County Roads 113 and 112. This will involve providing a "T" intersection and a new crossing of Cattle Creek. 7. Brush and foliage should be kept trimmed along all roads so as to provide the maximum sight distance possible. 8. Concerted efforts should be made to keep all debris (falling rock) from all road surfaces. This is especially true on Road 113 from milepost 6.4 to milepost 6.6 and on Road 100 from milepost 1.1 to milepost 1.6. This may involve some additional cutting of steep slopes and providing a barrier on the cut -side of the road to stop falling rock. i -19- • lor mr-v-11••,•••••-•• CATTLE CREEK RANCH A PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT OWNER: CATTLE CREEK RANCH JOINT VENTURE ASPEN, COLORADO PLANNING AND PROJECT COORDINATION: LAND DESIGN PARTNERSHIP, INC. GLENWOOD SPRINGS, COLORADO CIVIL ENGINEERING: ELDORADO ENGINEERING GLENWOOD SPRINGS, COLORADO HYDROLOGY: WRIGHT WATER ENGINEERS, INC. GLENWOOD SPRINGS, COLORADO SOILS AND GEOLOGY: CHEN AND ASSOCIATES GLENWOOD SPRINGS, COLORADO DEVELOPMENT CONSULTANT: THE SIENNA COMPANY DENVER, COLORADO REVISED DATE: JUNE 2R, 1982 THE SITE Cattle Creek Ranch is presently an inactive cattle operation • located at the westerly end of Missouri Heights. Access to the Ranch exists over two primary routes. From the west it is approximately 7 miles from Highway 82 and, via County Road 100, a distance of approximately 4 miles from the Catherine Store to the Ranch. Additionally, County Road 115 from Spring Valley and County Road 122 from El Jebel as well as the Cotton- • wood Pass Road all converge upon the Ranch site. Using the above described routes the Ranch is approximately 8 miles from Carbondale, 13 miles from Glenwood Springs and 8 miles from El Jebel. The Ranch site is composed of lush green alluvial plains along • Cattle and Coulter Creeks which converge. at the westerly edge of the Ranch and of higher mesas to the west, north and south of the creeks. There are presently approximately 250 acres of irrigated pasture and hayground along Cattle Creek and on the mesa to the south. The ridges and steeper slopes on the mesa are characterized by mixed sage and oak brush. The high land •' west of Coulter Creek and north of Cattle Creek is a mixture of dry land wheat fields and rolling sage covered hills. Views from the high lands of the Ranch are characteristic of the Colorado Rockies with majestic vistas of the Maroon Bells, Mt. Sopris, Sunlight Mt., Lookout Mt., and Basalt Mt. as well • as the overview of the pastoral ranch lands along Cattle and Coulter Creeks. The property is presently zoned for 131 single family dwellings as the Cattle Creek Ranch P.U.D. Q vE �� a� W U) 3 elts f� i.` r' r 1 "1 ff r r 1 Catherine s 0 Ca rbondale NORTH Regional Map A1/R./ D. 6 - • • • • •.•.-..• • •... - •• - • • „if NNIZIF Cattle Creek Ranch P.U.D. /' 18 yj. 8 A./R./RD. 17 13] Adjacent Zoning 4 THE DESIGN CONCEPT & P.U.D. OBJECTIVES Cattle Creek P.U.D. is a recreation oriented development of primary and secondary home sites. The project is directed towards a market which demands extremely high quality site, views and facilities and a variety of housing types. This market is local, national and international. The Roaring Fork Valley has already established itself with its internationally renowned ski facilities, cultural activites and Rocky Mountain scenery as a desired housing location for this market. The Cattle Creek site possesses the outstanding mountain views and desirable terrain configuration required for the projected housing and recreational facilities. Additionally, its location in the lower reaches of the Roaring Fork Valley extends its recreational season one to two months beyond that which could be provided at sites closer to the Aspen/Snowmass ski complex. The following objectives establish the broad parameters for the design and development of the Cattle Creek Ranch P.U.D.: 1. Respond to the market potential for a high quality primary and secondary residential environment supported by a variety of re- creational amenities including an equestrian center and a championship 18 hole golf course. 2. Maximize the premium view qualities of the Cattle Creek Ranch site. 3. Utilize site development and architectural concepts sympathetic to the topographic and native vegetative character of the site. 4. Promote water conserving site and landscape design concepts. 5. Through the implementation of the above objectives and sensitive concern for design detail and the quality of the project implemen- tation establish a true sense of "place" and "destination" at the Cattle Creek Ranch P.U.D. 6. Mitigate potential impacts of the development on Garfield County services. The proposed Cattle Creek Ranch P.U.D. design concept is directly reflective of the above defined objectives. The upper mesa south of the Cattle Creek Valley is characterized by an 18 hole golf course designed by professional golfer and inter- nationally renowned course designer, Jack Nicklaus. The course is designed in the historic "Scottish" character which will maximize the use of native vegetation and concentrate irrigated turf only in tee, green and fairway landing areas. This design 40 concept will reduce irrigation water consumption by nearly 40%. Some holes lie snuggly in the valleys and swales of the site, some holes sweep across the broad open fields while other holes fringe the reservoirs proposed around the club house site. The golf course club house and athletic center will be f the recreational focus of the Cattle Creek Ranch P.U.D. it is beautifully sited in the lower basin of the upper mesa and surrounded by two small lakes. The club house will be dominated by an overpowering view of Mt. Sopris and will itself create a powerful sense of entry to the golf course from the south entry road into the P.U.D. A variety of 41 racket and exercise facilities will compliment the customary pool and locker rooms at the club house. A restaurant and. lounge may also be included in the later phases of the facility. Cattle Creek Ranch residents will have automatic social member- ships with a variety of fee memberships available to satisfy their particular recreational interests. The club house will also accommodate a tennis and golf pro shop, as well as the potential for a Real Estate Sales office and administrative office for the Cattle Creek homeowners organization. • • • • In character with the Cattle. Creek luxury ranch concept, the old ranch homestead alongside Cattle Creek will become the site of an active equestrian center. The center will include stables, outdoor arena, polo field, club house with a light food and beverage service. A ranch manager residence and lodging for ranch employees may also be included. The entire lower valley along Cattle Creek will be retained in its present pasture character in support of the equestrian center. Pedestrian ways will connect major recreational centers with each other and housing concentrations. Pathways will be located along irrigation ditches, in open space corridors and, where necessary, within roadway right-of-ways. Pedestrian ways will not be allowed to infringe on the privacy of the residen- tial units or to conflict with play on the golf course. The Ranch will contain a variety of residential options as explained in the following zone district descriptions: Residential/Single Family Estate Lots: Primarily located on the south mesa, these lots will be a minimum of one half acre in size. The lots are characterized by native stands of oak and sage. ▪ Residential/Single Family Golf Lots: Lots in this district either front on the golf course or have very close visual relationship to the golf course. Characteristically these lots will be 1/3 acre in size. e. ▪ Residential/Cluster Housing District: This district is located exclusively on the mesa north of the Cattle Creek Valley and is intended to allow the creation of a village concept wherein housing types including half acre single family, zero lot line patio single family, duplexes, three plexes and four plex townhomes and condominiums are intermixed throughout the entire district. Although residences of this district are eligible for membership in all other Cattle Creek Ranch recreational facilities, they will, in addition, have the option for less formalized recreational activities at a neighborhood park. Although the neighborhood park location will not be finalized until the village design is completed, it will contain a minimum of four acres. The park is anticipated to contain tennis courts, multi -use court, volleyball court, childrens play equipment, restroom facilities, activities shelter, exercise course, and an open play field. Residential/Multi-Family: This district may contain residential units ranging from tightly clustered single family patio homes to condominiums. The multi -family districts are located on the south mesa overlooking the golf club house with one multi -family tract being surrounded by the golf course on three sides. ▪ Commercial/Village Store: The Village Store proposed between Coulter Creek and County Road 113 near the lower main entry to the Ranch is intended to provide basic commerical services to the residents of the Ranch and the surrounding west Missouri Heights area. The facility is aniticpated to project a country store architectural character and will be somewhat screened from County Road 113 by earthen berms and landscaping. This site is also proposed as the location for a fire station facility probably in the form of a sub -station to the Carbondale Fire District. A limited number of residential multi- family units are allowed in this district if it becomes desirable for the housing of store keepers and ranch employees. Detailed architectural and site development guidelines will be established to direct the character of the development including the preservation of views from each home site. Although architectural detailing may vary somewhat throughout different areas of the ranch, the overall architectural con- cept will be low massing of all site structures including strong incouragement for earth sheltered homes. Control of the introduced landscape will also be signifi- cant to view conflicts and the maintenance of the present vegetative character of the site. Although many areas of the site will see the reintroduction of native plant materials, nonindigenous landscape material selected for its compatability of scale to the native vegetation will also be used for residentail landscaping. Irrigated nonnatives will be utilized only in the high intensity use areas of the multi- family and recreational districts and in close proximity to the single family residences. The domestic water and waste water handling systems for the P.U.D. are discussed in the engineers statements later in this application. Recognizing that a development of this size has impacts which extend beyond its boundaries, the following is proposed: 1. Roads: The developer proposes to make major improvements to the Cattle Creek Road (County Road 113) since this road will carry the majority of the traffic impact to the project. The proposed construction includes improving sight distances on curves where possible, as well as a new 24 foot wide chip and seal surface from Highway 82 to the Ranch. The Catherine Store Road (County Road 100) will receive a new 24 foot wide chip and seal surface from the end of the present paving to the Ranch. 2. Fire Protection: As noted earlier, a fire station is proposed in the commercial district of the project. It is proposed that the developer will provide this facility with a fire/rescue truck and basic fire fighting equipment. It is our hope that the station will be accepted as a sub -station to the Carbondale fire district. 13Appls a- the Car onda 7 Q. Rural Fire Protection District has been made. 3. Security: The entire P.U.D. project will be installed with electronic cable to connect all dwelling units and facilities to a central security control station. All residences then may be installed with an electronic security and medical system. • • • • • HOMEOWNERS ASSOCIATION A homeowners association shall be formed at the time of final platting of the first phase of the P.U.D. The purposes and powers of the association shall include: 1. To promote the health, safety, and welfare of owners of real property within the P.U.D. 2. To own, maintain, and manage common areas, easements, and domestic and irrigation water systems and waste water treatment systems. 3. To enforce all covenants. Covenants To further assure the development and continuation of the Cattle Creek Ranch P.U.D. as a high quality rural residential area, protective covenants shall be recorded along with the final plattings of the P.U.D. These covenants shall be included, but not be limited to the following topics: 1. Architectural Committee. - site and building design - minimum floor area - accessory structure design - modification of the existing landscape and new landscaping 2. Lot use restrictions. 3. Signs. 4. Animals. - type allowed - control 5. General site maintenance. 6. Noxious activities. 7. Underground utilities. 8. Vehicle control. 9. Easements. 10. Temporary structures. 11. Landscape/agricultural irrigation limitations. CATTLE CREEK RANCH P.U.D. DEVELOPMENT PHASING The proposed phasing represents the developer's best estimate of the build -out scenerio for the project. The definition of an accurate phasing for the project is very difficult with the present economic conditions in the country. Because of the concern for the economy, the first phase of the project is anticipated to be of a very small scale. This first phase will serve to build the image of the project as the economy strengthens over the next few years. The developer, as witnessed by a site visit, has invested tremendous amounts of capital in the Ranch. He is as anxious as anyone to proceed to recover these costs. However, prudence must dictate in conditions such as those we are now faced with. Therefore, a conservative phasing schedule is being proposed with the hope of being able to adjust to the times. Phase I 1982 -- 1985 1. Complete Phase I improvements to the equestrian center. (Remodel of barns, build new stable, outdoor arenas and fences and remodel ranch house for sales center and equestrian club.) 2 File the Final Plat for 20 single family dwelling units 24 months from the date of approval of the Planned Unit Development. 3. Complete roads and utilities to serve these units within two building seasons of the Final Plat approval. These units will be served by the central water system and individual septic tanks and leach fields. Phase II 1985 1988 1. Final plat approximately 100 dwelling units and construct First Phase waste water treat- ment facility. 2. Improvements to County Road 100 and 113 will be completed within 12 months of the issuance of 100 certificates of occupancy within Cattle Creek Ranch. 3. It is anticipated that cash payments will be made to the Carbondale Rural Fire Protection District by this time for a fire sub -station in the Cattle Creek Ranch vicinity. If this has not occurred, Cattle Creek Ranch P.U.D. will acquire its own fire rescue vehicle within twelve months of the issuance of 100 certificates of occupancy. This vehicle would be housed in an existing or temporary structure at the Ranch. Completion of a permanent structure and acquisition of an ambulance will occur in later phases. Phase III 1988 - 1990 1. Initiate construction of the first nine holes of golf. 2. Construct Phase I of the golf clubhouse and miscellaneous recreation facilities. 3. Final plat approximately 150 dwelling units. Phase IV 1990 - 1992 1. Initiate construction of the second nine holes of golf. 2. Additional construction of clubhouse and recreation facilities. 3. Final plat approximately 150 dwelling units. Phase V 1992 - 1. Projections of additional plattings and facility construction beyond this date would be very hypothetical. It is anticipated that the platting of the project could extend over a 15 year period with the completion of publ:.c service and recreation facilities maintaining a logical pace with the construction of horses. GARFIELD COUNTY COMPREHENSIVE PLAN/CATTLE CREEK RANCH P.U.D. Location: As mentioned earlier, the project already lies within a Rural Serviceable Area. It is bounded on the south by another existing development, Panorama Rar.1chettes. The ranch is bounded on the east, north and northwest by private lands in agricultural production or sage and oak brush range land. To the southwest the ranch is bordered by Bureau of Land Management lands. Density: 40 Cattle Creek is proposed to have density of .8 units per acre as compared to the Comp Plan recommended density of .5 units to the acre. This is somewhat higher than is preferred by the Comp Plan, but is considerably lower than the 3 units per acre that the Comprehensive Plan sets as the absolute maximum density for Rural Serviceable Areas. 40 The proposed density has been clustered to create the various housing types preferred by the targeted market. The total number of units proposed is what is necessary to support the extensive recreational facility and other costs associated with the quality of development required by this housing market. 41 As a result of the clustering of the housing, the project is able to preserve massive amounts of open space. Of the 963 acres in the ranch, 558 acres are proposed to be in open space and recreational facilities. The terrain character of the site and massive open space treatment allows for the 40 preservation of an open agricultural feel along the existing county road system through the ranch. The intense areas of development are confined to the upper mesa on the ranch leaving the creek, valleys and existing county road corridors open. 40 Technical Services: The central water system proposed for the original Cattle Creek Ranch P.D.D. will be expanded to be of adequate capacity for domestic and fire flow services for the now proposed project. A central waste water treatment facility 40 will also be constructed. Power to the project will be provided by Holy Cross Electric Association and telephone service by Mountain Bell, of course, at the cost of the developer. All lines will be buried within the project. Rocky Mountain Natural Gas +r service will be provided to the project, a utility seldom available to rural developments. • • • Community Services: Schools: A dedication of land or cash in lieu of fees will be made to the RE -2 School District as per their policies. The project is presently under consideration by the school district. 1 would anticipate that the demands upon the school system will be somewhat less than normal for a project of this size because of the partial secondary housing nature of the project. Fire Protection: The developer proposes to build and equip a fire station which will be located adjacent to County Road 113. It is desired that this fire facility would be included in and administered by the Carbondale Volunteer Fire District with manpower provided from volunteers in the immediate area. This fire protection facility will not only service the Cattle Creek Development but surrounding housing in the Missouri Heights area. Police Protection: The Cattle Creek project will be constructed with an electronics system connecting all residences to a central computerized control console. This system will allow continuous monitoring of security, fire or medical emergencies in each home. Health Care: The electronic security system described above can also include emergency medical call if the residents so choose. This would be directed to the central computer and if desired, could be relayed on directly to medical facilities in Glenwood. Additionally an ambulance is proposed for inclusion in the new fire station. Roads -Access and Circulation: The existing county road system provides four routes of access to the Cattle Creek P.U.D. County Road 100 and County Road 113 will logically carry the vast majority of the traffic burden of the project. Therefore, the developer has proposed to make extensive improvements to these two roads as is more completely defined by the plans prepared by Eldorado Engineering. The proposed improvements are intended to bring the road capacities up to a level which will accommodate the traffic generated by the project at its ultimate build out. (See the attached traffic projection summary). Environmental Constraints: A soils and geologic report prepared by Chen and Associates did not reveal any significant environmental hazards. Since beginning construction on the Phase 1 of the original P.U.D., we have isolated some localized soil conditions that have required special considerations regarding road construction and may require engineered foundations for some homes. Chen and Associates has been involved in additional studies in regard to these localized areas and included herewith are copies of their reports to date. The proposed plan has been responsive to environmental concerns of steep slopes, vegetation and low land flood ways. All areas disturbed by development construction will be revegetated. There will be a strict architectural control committee which will have authority over site dis- turbance, revegetation and landscape treatments, preservation of view corridors as well as architectural character. It is the intent to establish an architectural character which restricts residences to a very low structural mass profile, particularity where a structure would infringe upon the visual horizon line. The Comprehensive Plan also made reference that new development should pay its way and not be a burden upon existing county residents. We feel the Cattle Creek P.U.D. more than meets this criteria with the extensive efforts being made to mitigate direct and immediate impacts that might be created by the project and by the property tax revenues that this project will generate for the County. In regard to the goals, objectives and policies defined in the Comp Plan, the Cattle Creek project may be summarized as follows: Housing: The Cattle Creek P.U.D. is serving a viable housing market within the Roaring Fork Valley. Industrial/Commercial: The Cattle Creek P.U.D. supports and expands the recreation/tourism economic base of Garfield County. Because of the recreational nature of the project and the type of housing market that it is servicing, the Cattle Creek P.U.D. is as much a part of the recreation/ tourism industry which is such a key element to the Garfield County economic base as it is of the housing industry in the County. Recreation/Open Space: Extensive recreational facilities are provided within the project which will service project sidents as well as risers outside of the Cattle Creek P.U.D. Fifty eight percent of the project is designated for open space and recreation. Much of this open space is located to the visual benefit of not only the project residents, but County residents who might drive through the area on the existing county road system. 41 Agriculture: Some of the open space land is being retained in agricultural type activities such as the equestrian facilities and supportive pasture lands, while the remaining open space will be either undisturbed native vegetation or in the golf course facility which presents a visual character similar to agricultural lands. • Transporation: As described earlier, we intend to improve off-site county roads to deal with the impacts that might be created by this project. Technical Services: The project will be providing central water and central waste water facilities within an area already designated as a Rural Serviceable Area. Environmental: We feel the plan has been sensitively designed to meet the natural terrain of the site and the carrying capacity of the land. The open space configuration 41 of the project and the location of concentrated development on the higher mesas combine to preserve the rural character of the area as one moves along the existing county road system. Community Services: Measures have been proposed to mitigate any direct impacts this project might have on community services. a 411 JOHN A. MC NEEL JR. Shoriff ff ce of the §herifff GARF1ELD COUNTY GLENWOOD SPRINGS, COLORADO 81601 PHONE 945-9151 Date: June 24, 1982 To: Garfield. County rlanning Staff Ref: Cattle Creek P.U.D. Dear Staff: I have discussed this P.4.`)D. at legth with Ron Liston and have obtained information on future developement of that area. This includes the Cattle Creek '.U.D. and approved developement in the surrounding area. The Cattle Creek P.U.D. comprises of approximately 401 of the potential population in this area. Based on projected figures and need for protection, I have set up some figures on providing for that protection. Developement of this area will require at a very mininun 2 more Deputies and another patrol vehicle in addition o what the Sheriff's Department now has to patrol this area. Ron Liston has informe& rhe that Cattle Creek P.U.D. would do as much as possible to help provide for the service until the tax base is great enough to take uo the expense. They are also work- ing closely with us in providing security measures, emergency preparations and other needed services to help Law Enforcement and Emergency services in that area. Projected cost based on this years budget and anticipated cost increases, the cost of 2 Deputies, a patrol car and safety equip- ment would be approxiaately :'50,000.00. Based on 40of potential population of the area that would be Cattle Greek P.U.D., a fair figure for Cattle Creek F.U.D. would be ;„'20,000.00 for initial cost in provideing service. Ron and myself will be working together as developement takes place to coordinate efforts in provideing necessary services. If anyone has any questions, please feel free to call me. Thank you. Sincerely, ohn A. Mc? eel Jr. Sheriff, Garfield County ec. Ron Liston 1 the land design partnership June 23, 1982 Board of County Commissioners Garfield County Courthouse P.D. Box 640 Glenwood Springs, CO 81602 Dear Commission Members: This letter is in response to a request by your planning staff to supply them with marketing information in support of the Cattle Creek Ranch with a Jack Nicklaus golf course and 786 dwelling units. As we are sure you are aware, the absorption rate of any project is based upon the existing mortgage rats at any given time. Due to the current high level of :Lnterest. rates it is difficult to anticipate absorption rates for a housing market such as we have today. The proposed Cattle Creek Ranch project has, however, received favorable comments regarding the market desirability of the project from seve;y-al sources. Enclosed is a letter from Gruen Gruen & Associates, a top market research firm that specializes in high quality develop- ment projects throughout the county. In their opinion, a "top of the line" golf course project has a high probability of success. In addition, enclosed is a letter from Jack Nicklaus. We feel that Jack's obviously positive feelings about the Cattle Creek Ranch golf course and development are of great signifi- cance due to his exposure to courses and projects throughout the world. 403 We First Street Glenwood Springs Colorado 81601 (303) 945-2246 1 Board of County Commissioners June 23, 1982 Page 2 We have sought further market opinions from a local appraiser and a national development firm that has developed other similar projects in Colorado and throughout the country. These pro- fessionals have additionally indicated that the Cattle Creek concept is an extremely marketable one for the Roaring Fork Valley. Sincerely, (1:7 / Ronald Liston Land Design Partnership, Inc. RBL/pck enclosure • April 27, 1982 0 • • Mr. Frank Lerner 0202 Danielson Drive Aspen, CO 81611 Dear Prank. `to,: asked. that I summarize our opinion of the market for the Cc ttlecreek PUD for your presentation at: the forth- coming nlanr ung and zoning hearing. If only to main- tain the brevit-. you requested, I will begin with a summation of the locational .7dvantages of Cattlecreek and then present what we consider the, likely impact of the Jack Nicklaus World Class Golf Course. The Prospective Cattlecreek development is located be- tween the expanding Aspen and Snowmass markets and the oil shale induced growth communities of Glenwood Springs and Rifle. The Project's location, therefore, is in the desirous position of being able to capture many differing market segments. For example: o Retirees who wish to cash in on their Aspen homes and at the same time seek a more quiet location outside the hubub and traffic of Aspen. o Oil shale executives and technocrats seeking a location that is equidistant from the Aspen snow slopes and their workplace. o The primary family• seeking more house for the money than they are likely to obtain in either Aspen or Snowmass. o The primary family seeking more status than they could acquire from either a Glenwood Springs or. Carbondale location. Last, but by no means least, will be the primary and second- ary households that will be directly attracted by living • • • • • • f� Z Mr. Frank Lerner April 27, l�$2 Page - 2 - development that offers a "top of the line" Nicklaus a.t: course. An overview market analysis, conducted re - our firm, with a sample of developers of compar- aule jack Nicklaus golf course projects, indicates not c.nly an abiding satisfaction with Mr. Nicklaus' profession - :_.i but also in the ability of golf course lots to sell ror _a premium.. One such project claimed that they were .,lc to price their golf course lots at an average ?rice ')i $75,000 per lot while equivalent no.. -golf course lots .o priced at $40,000, despite the fact that the latter lncatec] in close proximity to other recreational -dvities like tennis courts and swimming pools. hags of greatest significance for future Cattlecreek is the fact that a world class golf facility tends attract the type of members that, because of their -:Isonal reputation and status, establish an image for .:xc! overall development that increases the general land __Lues of the Project. r I can provide any additional information please let e 'mow. N G/ tb CC: Chuck Dwight Richard Corriere Claude Gruen Sincerely, Nina Gruen Principal Sociologist • • ( 1/Airmetzgefirfr..---CC, JACK NICKLAUS .AND _ASSQ :IArIlE S, INC• 1208 U.S. HIGHWAY ai. NORTH PALM BEACH. FLORIDA 33408 • 1305) 626-3900 • TELEX 803473 Honorable Board of Commissioners of Garfield County Garfield County Courthouse Post Office Box 640 Glenwood Springs, Colorado 81602 Dear Commission Members: April 19, 1982 Approximately a year ago, Mr. Erpnl' Lnneer commissioned me to • design a golf facility for h' attle Creek oroiect lc our county. The studies we have made and the mutual effort between Mr. Lerner and my organization have proven to me without a doubt that the golf course will be outstanding and that the development itself will be superior and of benefit to the Rolling Fork Valley. • T have been involved with projects in many corners of the world. The setting, views and terrain at Cattle Creek should provide a golf course and development of which we can all be proud. • JWN :and • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • CATTLE CREEK RANCH PLANNED UN IT DEVELOPMENT P.M.D. Zone Map 0 100' - aU0' OPEN SPACE DIST. ats TT e0A0 A0a EA/E.E#T ER HOUSING DIST. OPEN SPACE DIST. OPEN SPACE DIST. OPEN PACE DIST. J PEN SPACE E� €SL • j 1: RES./SINGLE FAMILY ! ESTATE LOT DIST. ; 0.5. .5. OP ` N SPACE DIST Planning Land Cosign Partneraldp 0l.nwood Spring.,Co. Ctrl! Engineering Eiarnedo Engineering Co. Glenwood Syringe. Co Hignlogy %Orient Wafer Engln..ra, Inc. G*1w3cd SONS. Cd. Sod* end oology Chin and Associate., Me. Glenwood Springs, Co. � Td 5.F.ELA 0.S. PEN SPACE DIST. • • • • • • • • • CATTLE CREEK RANCH PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT Site Plan Craw, bra...: K enning L and Moly' Por Engraft Oief~bOdRpims. C. CPA Engine wimp D ew ads Ingissoring Cs. Celonesec4 keelnele.C. Hydrology WIWI Waist Ifteletemes. kw. abeellelPell goring% Co. loin end Ca•oiose Chem end Associates. Int. Oheeneeeel Swinge, Co. • .,, • L s. • • ' F.14 11.:SIVIOm . 17' COUNTRY sjoRE f Ce. R ..14;45ING I • • EOU STRI N CENTER °PEN IPALE ,..trorg; Gale "\.\ \ Itt$tria:11 rst,mtny: - • AR It +.\ 1 t•:"••- 0$ ... ".`Tei;e4 a"- • (—; ......... • amp 5104.4Gl • • • THE CATTLE CREEK RANCH PLANNED UNIT DISTRICT DEVELOPMENT GUIDE MAY 1982 • • Preamble ARTICLE I • • THE CATTLE CREEK RANCH PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT GUIDE TABLE OF CONTENTS PA E i PURPOSE AND AUTHORITY Section I. Purpose, Objectives, Content and Intent I--1 Section II. Authority 1-3 ARTICLE II COMMITMENTS AND ASSURANCES Section I. Commitments and Assurances Section I1. Annual Report ARTICLE III P.U.D. ZONE REGULATIONS 41 • Section I. General Provisions III -1 Section II. Definitions 111-2 Section III. P.U.D. Zone Districts 111-15 Section TV. Open Space District III -16 Section V. Recreational District 1I1-17 Section VI. Residential/Single Family Estates I11-18 41 Lot District 111-19 Section VII. Residential/Single Family Golf Lot District Section VIII. Residential/Cluster Housing District 11I-20 Section IX. Residential/Multi--Family District IIz-23 II1-23 Section X. Commercial/Village Store District 4, Section XI. Residential Density 111-27 7 Section XII. Supplemental Land Use Provisions 8 111-30 Section XIII. Signs 111-30 Section XIV. Off -Street Parking 111-39 Section XV. Garfield County Zoning Resolution Exclusions • • • ARTICLE IV P.U.D. SUBDIVISION REGULATIONS Section I. Section II. Section III. General Provisions Definitions Issuance of Permits IV -1 IV -2 IV -3 PAGE Section IV. Design Standards IV -4 Section V. Traffic Control IV -IV -6 Section VI. Safety, Security and Environmental 7 Protection Section VII. Garfield County Subdivision Regulations IV -10 Exclusions Figure 1 Major Collector IV -11 Figure 2 Collector IV -12 Figure 3 Subcollector IV -13 Figure 4 Local Access Roads IV -14 ARTICLE V P.U.D. ZONE MAP LAND USE SUMMARY V-1 • • • • PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT GUIDE FOR CATTLE CREEK RANCH, GARFIELD COUNTY PREAMBLE This Development Guide sets forth land use and development standards for Cattle Creek Ranch, a planned community in the unincorporated area of the County of Garfield, State of Colo- rado; regulates the use of land and the use, bulk, maximum height, minimum lot area, minimum lot width, and minimum yard spaces of buildings; provides regulations for uses permitted therein and accessory buildings and uses; provides additional supplementary regulations; and defines certain terms used there- in. This Development Guide and the herein contained Cattle Creek i Ranch Zone Regulations and Cattle Creek Ranch Subdivision Regula- tions is authorized under the power and authority of Section 4, Planned Unit Developments, Garfield County Zoning Resolution, adopted January 2, 1979. Cattle Creek Ranch is a large parcel of land under single devel- ■ opment control, and is suitable for creation of a recreational residential community with golf club and equestrian center. This large parcel of land is particularly well suited for long- range comprehensive planning, which, in turn, will aid in the protection of the environment, while at the same time facili- ■ tating the development of an aesthetically pleasing community. The Planned Unit Development Act of 1972 and the Board of Garfield County Commissioners permit adoption of a development guide with- in the context of the planned unit development zoning regulations applicable to such land in order to establish and implement such 41 a long-range comprehensive plan. A long-range comprehensive plan has been formulated for Cattle Creek encompassing such beneficial features as a balance of residential, commercial, and recreational uses; enhancement of public safety; creation of an aesthetically pleasing living environment; and promotion of high standards of developmental quality by stringent site planning, landscaping ■ controls and architectural design guidelines all for the benefit of the existing and future citizens of Garfield County. ■ i ■► ARTICLE I CATTLE CREEK RANCH P.U.D. DEVELOPMENT GUIDE PURPOSE AND AUTHORITY Section 1. Purpose, Objectives, Content and Intent A. Purpose. The purpose of this Cattle Creek. Ranch r Development Guide (hereinafter sometimes referred to as "Development Guide") is to assure that Cattle Creek Ranch is developed as a comprehensively planned residen- tial community with adequate provisions for the orderly development and improvement of the property and to assure provision of public services and on-going maintenance at. 40 a level of highest quality to carry out legislative in- tent and to impose no burden upon the balance of Carfield County. The property to which this Development Guide is applicable (hereinafter sometimes referred to as "Cattle Creek Ranch") is described in Article XVIII. All Article and Section references, unless otherwise stated, are 40 Articles and Sections in this Development Guide. B. Objectives. The community of Cattle Creek Ranch is in- tended to accommodate a mix of residential, commercial, recreational and nonurban land uses. This Development Guide allows opportunities for innovative communtiy de- l! sign while at the same time being responsive to changing community needs. C. Legislative Intent. It is also the intent of this Develop- ment Guide to be consistent with, and to assist in implemen- tation of, the legislative declarations contained in the * Planned Unit Development Act of 1972 of the State of Colo- rado to: 1. Provide for necessary commercial and recreational facilities conveniently located to residential areas; 40 2. Ensure that the provisions of the zoning laws which direct the uniform treatment of dwelling type, bulk, density and open space within each zoning district will not be applied to the improvement of land by other than lot -by -lot development in a manner which would distort the objectives of the zoning laws. • • I-1 3. Encourage innovations in residential, commercial and recreational development so that the growing demands of the population may be met by greater variety in type, design and layout of buildings and by the con- servation and more efficient use of open space ancil- lary to said buildings; 4. Encourage a more efficient use of land and public services, or private services in lieu thereof, and to reflect changes in the technology of land develop- ment so the resulting economies may enure to the ben- efit of homeowners. 5. Design streets in a manner which will maintain the theme of rural roads and lanes, preserve natural land forms, minimize the concentration of storm water run- off in order to prevent erosion and lessen the burden of traffic. 6. Encourage the building of a residential community incorporating the best features of design; 7. Conserve and enhance the value of the land; 8. Provide a procedure which can relate the type, design and layout of residential, commercial and recreational development to the particular site, thereby encouraging preservation of the site's natural characteristics; and 9. Encourage integrated planning in order to achieve the above purposes. • Section II. Authority A. Authority. The Authority for this Development Guide and the herein contained Cattle Creek Ranch Zone Regulations and Cattle Creek Ranch Subdivision Regulations is Section 4 (Planning Unit Developments) of the Garfield County Zoning Resolution adopted January 2, 1979. The Authority for Section 4 of the Garfield County Zoning Resolution is Article 67, Title 24 (Planned Unit Development Act of 1972), of the Colorado Revised Statutes, 1973, as amended. B. Adoption. The adoption of this Development Guide shall evidence the finding and decision of the Garfield County Board of County Commissioners that this Development Guide for Cattle Creek Ranch is authorized by the provisions of the Section 4 of the Garfield County Zoning Resolution; that such Section 4 and this Development Guide comply with the Planned Unit Development Act of 1972. C. Enforcement. The provisions of this Development Guide relating to the use of land and the location of open space shall run in favor of Garfield County without any limita- tion of any power or authority otherwise granted by law. All provisions of this Development. Guide shall run in favor of the residents, occupants and owners of the land within Cattle Creek Ranch to the extent expressly provided in this Development Guide and in accordance with its terms and conditions. D. Modification. No provisions of this Development Guide may be substantially modified, removed, or released by Garfield County if such modification, removal or release: 1. Affects the rights of residents, occupants and owners established by this Development Guide to maintain and enforce the provisions of this Resolution; or 2 Is inconsistent with the efficient development and preservation of Cattle Creek Ranch in accordance with this Development Guide; or 3 Affects in a substantially adverse manner the enjoyment of the land bordering Cattle Creek Ranch; or 4. Imposes a financial burden for construction and/or maintenance of public facilities upon the County gener- ally. E. Modifications: Modifications, removals and releases of the provisions of this Development Guide may be made by the Garfield County Board of County Commissioners with the concurrence of the Cattle. Creek Ranch Joint Venture upon I-3 F • 0 application of an owner of the affected property when it is determined by the Board of County Commissioners that the modification, removal or release does not adversely affect substantial rights of occupants, residents and owners and is not inconsistent with this Section II and the purpose, objectives and intent of this Development Guide. Process for Amending Development Guide. The Cattle Creek Joint Venture shall make application to amend, alter, modify, delete or add to this Development Guide by making applica- tion to the Garfield County Planning Director following the procedures of Section IV (4.12.03) Garfield County Zoning Resolution adopted January 2, 1979. 1-4 • ARTICLE II CATTLE CREEK RANCH P.U.D. DEVELOPMENT GUIDE COMMITMENTS AND ASSURANCES i r • • • • • Section I. Commitments and Assurances In order to implement the comprehensive plan, The Cattle Creek Joint Venture has offered certain assurances and commitments which shall, after the approval of the Cattle Creek Ranch F.U.D. application and this Development Guide contained therein, be binding upon the Cattle Creek Joint Venture with respect to land within Cattle Creek Ranch it owns, and binding upon its succes- sors and assigns with respect to land within Cattle Creek Ranch it does not own. A. Services. As a condition to development of each phase of the project and use of any part of any planning area, Cattle Creek Ranch Joint Venture shall establish that all of the utility services are or will be available to serve the phase to be developed and the uses to be established in a manner which will impose no burden of maintenance and operation upon the residents of Garfield County out- side of Cattle Creek Ranch. From the point of view of governmental services, it is the intention of Cattle Creek Ranch Joint Venture to provide for a development which will be self-sustaining and self-supporting in the matter of provision of governmental services, both in connection with assurance that the facilities will be in place in the first instance, and in connection with on --going maint+ nance and operating thereof. It is proposedrthme those commitments be achieved by the formation of a Metropolitan District. R. Design Review Guidelines. The Cattle Creek Ranch Joint Venture has prepared a Design Review Guide for all lot purchasers. Said Design Review Guide is intended to supplement and complement this Development Guide and where any conflict may occur, the Development Guide shall govern. C. Development Phasing. Any project may be constructed in phases, provided that there is compliance with the development standards and requirements applicable to each such phase and any phases previously completed. • D. Implementation of Water and Soil Conservation Measures. The Cattle Creek Joint Venture shall: 1. Evaluate water supply and wastewater as an integrated water resource system. • 2. Develop and implement a water and soil conservation program including: a. Metered services. b. Instructing homeowners concerning water conserva- tion techniques. c. Where practical, preservation of significant and valuable natural vegetation. d. Where practical, preservation of general align- ments of significant drainage courses which exist within Cattle Creek Ranch. 3. Cooperate with the Colorado Department of Health to assure wastewater treatment and discharge which main- tains the water quality of Cattle Creek and associated • aquafers. E. Implementation of Energy Conservation Programs. The Cattle Creek Joint Venture shall: • 1. Where practical, employ energy conservation measures in home construction including: a. Evaluation of structural designs to assure optimum practical insulation values: • b. Provision for an energy conservation program in all -electric homes. i • • c. Installation of energy-efficient appliances. d. Provision for dual glazed windows. 2. When practical, utilize solar energy by: a. Providing in the siting of building envelopes, that provision of solar access be one of the criteria considered. II -2 • i i i b. Providing windows in south walls to utilize winter sun energy. c. Providing for overhangs or other shading devices so that windows are shaded in summer. 3. Encourage and assist lot purchasers in utilizing solar design in the siting, design and construction of their homes. 4. Provision to monitor and implement advances in energy conservation techniques that may be applied to future development of Cattle Creek Ranch. F. Provision for Cost Effective Community Services. The Cattle Creek Joint Venture shall: 1. Assure the provision of local governmental services including security, fire protection, water and sani- tation services, street maintenance and emergency services, on a basis sufficient and adequate to serve each increment of the development as it is completed, without financial burden to other areas of Garfield County. A Metropolitan District is proposed for the P.U.D. 2. Provide for the initial construction of capital facilities necessary for adequate water and sewer services, streets, and storm drains. II -3 Section Tl. Annual Report 40 In order to assure the Board of County Commissioners and Planning Commission that development activities in Cattle Creek Ranch are in harmony with the purpose, objectives, and intent of this Development Guide and in order to be continually aware of The Cattle Creek Ranch Joint Venture's sensitivity to the desires and concerns of the citizens of Garfield County, the Cattle Creek 41 Ranch Joint Venture shall file a written report with, and appear before, both the Board and Planning Commission at least once each year subsequent to the approval of this Development Guide to advise the County of existing and proposed development in Cattle Creek Ranch. Said reports and appearances shall continue as long as development in Cattle Creek Ranch by The Cattle Creek Joint 41 Venture continues and are desired by either or both the Board and Planning Commission, and shall include such matters as general housing information, the status of all commercial development, the manner in which public services have been provided with assurances for future provision in a manner which will impose no financial burden on other areas of Garfield County, and the performance 4 and fulfillment by the Joint Venture of its assurances and com- mitments. Consideration shall be given at such meetings to the revision or amendment of the Development Guide. Adequate notice, as determined by Garfield County, shall be required for the yearly review meeting. • • • • • • 11-4 • ARTICLE III CATTLE CREEK RANCH P.U.A. DEVELOPMENT GUIDE P.U.D. ZONE REGULATIONS 40 Section 1. General Provisions A. Effect of Garfield County Zoning Resolution (adopted January 2, 1979). The provisions of the Garfield County Zoning Resolution and the successors thereof, as now in effect and as hereafter amended, are by this reference + incorporated herein as if set forth in full, to the extent not divergent from the provisions of the Cattle Creek Ranch Planned Unit Development Zone Regulations. S. Conflict. The provisions of the Zone Regulations shall prevail and govern the development of Cattle Creek Ranch provided, however, where the provisions of the Cattle Creek Ranch Zone Regulations do not clearly address a specific subject, the provisions of the Garfield County Zoning Resolution, or any other ordinances, resolutions or regulations of Garfield County shall prevail. f • • • • • Section II. Definitions A. Purpose and Intent. The purpose of this Section is to make certain the meanings of certain words, terms and phrases used in the Cattle Creek Ranch P.U.D. Zone Regulations. Any words, terms and phrases used in these Zone Regulations shall be defined and interpreted in accordance with the definitions contained in this Section, unless the context clearly indicates a differ- ent meaning was intended. If the context is not clear, the Cattle Creek Ranch Joint Venture shall provide its understanding of the meaning to the Garfield County Planning Department, and if uncertainty still remains, the matter will be referred to the Garfield County Board of Commissioners for final determination. B. Rules of Construction. The following rules of construction shall govern the interpretation of the provisions of this Zone Regulation. 1. All words, terms and phrases not defined herein but defined in other resolutions or codes of the County relative to land development or construction shall be construed as defined in such resolutions or codes, unless the context indicates a different meaning was intended. 2. All words, terms and phrases neither defined herein nor in such other resolutions or codes shall be given their usual and customary meanings, unless the context clearly indicates a different meaning was intended. 3. The text of this Zone Regulation shall have prece- dence over captions, titles and maps. 4. The word "shall" is mandatory and not permissive; the word "may" is permissive and not mandatory. 5. Words used in the singular include the plural, and words used in the plural include the singular, unless the context indicates the contrary. 6. Words used in the present tense include the future tense, and words used in the future tense include the present tense. 7. The phrase "used for" includes "arranged for", "designed for", "intended for", "maintained for" and "occupied for". 8. The particular or specific controls over the general. i C. Definitions. ,The following words, terms and phrases shall be defined as set forth hereinafter. 1. Abutting Land: A parcel of land which has a common property line with another parcel of land. 2. Accessory Building: A subordinate building, the use of which is customarily incidental to that of the main building or to the main use of the land, and which is located on the same lot with the main build- ing or use. 3. Accessory Use: A use naturally and normally incidental and subordinate to, and devoted exclusively to, the main use of the premises. 4. Area Per Dwelling Unit: The amount of land in square feet within the boundaries of a lot or project divided by the total number of dwelling units in such lot or project. 5. Basement: That part of a building partially or totally underground. 6 Board or Board of County Commissioners: Board of County Commissioners of Garfield County; the govern- ing body of the County. 7. Borrow Site: An area used for the extraction of earthen materials such as sand, gravel or dirt which is outside the area of immediate development. 8. Building: Any permanent structure, or portion there- of, built for the shelter or enclosure of human beings, animals, chattels or property of any kind, but exclud- ing therefrom advertising signboards and fences. 9. Building Coverage; Ratio of ground area that a build- ing covers in a lot to the total lot area, expressed as a percentage. 10. Building, Principal or Main: in which is conducted one or permitted uses of the lot or situated. 11. Building Line: Imaginary lines on a lot delineating the closest points from lot lines, public streets, Planning Area or project area boundaries, or other applicable perimeter lines, where any main building may be constructed. A building, or buildings, more of the principal project in which it is III -3 12. Building Height: The vertical distance above a refer- ence datum measured to the highest point of the coping of a flat roof or to the deck line of a mansard roof or to the average height of the highest gable ofa pitched or hipped roof. The reference datum shall be the average finished grade at the exterior wall of a structure. 13. Business or Commerce: Activities involving the pro- vision of services, purchases, sales or other trans- actions relating to the handling or disposition of any articles, substances, commodities or intangibles for profit or livelihood: the ownership or management of real estate; and the maintenance and use of offices by professions and trades rendering services. 14. Caretaker Apartment: A dwelling unit accessory to any building arranged, designed and intended for occupancy by a person or persons owning, employed in or dealing with, and responsible for security and maintenance of such building or the uses permitted therein. 15. Carport: A roofed structure, or a portion of a build- ing, open on 2 or more sides, designed primarily for the parking of automobiles. 16. Child Care Center: A service commercial facility in which care is provided for children for periods of less than 24 hours at a time and is operated under the provisions of the Colorado Child Care Act. 17. Church: Any building arranged, designed and intended to be used as a place for religious worship and in- struction. 18. Clinic, Medical: A facility licensed and used for the provision of medical, surgical or mental health care of the sick or injured, but excluding therefrom in- patient and overnight accommodations. 19. Common Area or Common Element: The total area and structures within a project which are designed, designated and maintained for common use and enjoy- ment by the homeowners and their invitees, such as recreation areas and facilities, landscaped areas, open space areas, and natural areas. 20. Community Information Center: A temporary or per- manent structure or facility, including associated parking areas, which is used principally for dis- semination of community news and events, and infor- mation concerning real estate held for sale or lease during the development of Cattle Creek Ranch. 21. Condominium: An individual air space dwelling unit together with the interest in the common elements appurtenant to such unit. 22. Condominium Project: A project divided into condo- miniums, including all structures and common areas and elements situated therein. 23. Construction: The actual placement and fastening of construction materials in a fixed position. If a basement is being excavated, such excavation shall be deemed to be actual construction. If demolition or removal of any existing building or structure has commenced preparatory to construction, such demolition, removal, or moving of a structure, shall be deemed to be actual construction. The term construction shall apply to buildings, roadways, utilities, other struc- tures and landscaping. 24. Convenience Commercial: A retail or service commercial use which serves the area immediately surrounding the. use by providing groceries, sundries and miscellaneous services which do not typically offer comparison shop- ping opportunities. 25. County: Garfield County, Colorado. 26. Covered Parking: Parking facilities which are pro- tected by a roof or enclosed with a structure. 27. Density: The number of dwelling units per gross residential acre in a specific portion of land. 28. Design Review Committee: A committee appointed in accordance with the covenants, conditions and re- strictions applicable to Cattle Creek Ranch and charged with responsibility for reviewing and approving land use, plans and specifications for all construction, modification or alteration of improvements, the place- ment and maintenance of landscaping, the location of structures, any planned removals or vegetation and other matters with the power of approval or disapproval thereof. Initially, the members of the Design Review Committee shall be appointed by the Cattle Creek Ranch Joint Venture. 29. Design Review Guide: Restrictions, rules and regula- tions to be developed and enforced by the Design Review Committee as criteria for the development of architec- tural style and review of -plans, specifications and details. I11-5 30. Development Guide: Sets forth land uses and develop- ment standards for Cattle Creek Ranch, a planned community in the unincorporated area of the County of Garfield, State of Colorado; regulates the use of land and the use, bulk, maximum height, minimum lot area, minimum lot width, and minimum yard spaces of buildings; provides regulations for uses permitted therein and accessory buildings and uses; provides additional supplementary regulations; and defines certain terms used therein. 31. Developer: The developer is the Cattle Creek Ranch Joint Venture. 32. Garfield County Zoning Resolution: The Zoning Re- solution regulating uses of land applicable in Garfield County. 33. Driveway: A private vehicular passageway for the exclusive use of the owners and occupants of one or more lot or project and their invitees. A driveway shall not be considered to be a street. 34. Dwelling: A building or portion thereof used exclu- sively for residential occupancy including one -family dwellings, two-family dwellings; multiple -family dwellings; but excluding therefrom hotels, motels, tents, seasonal vacation cabins and other structures designed or used primarily for temporary occupancy, provided, however, that nothing herein shall be deemed to prevent use of dwellings for transient occupancy in those areas of Cattle Creek Ranch where transient occupancy such as that associated with hotel or motel use is otherwise permitted. 35. Dwelling, Multiple Family: A building, or portion thereof, designed for or occupied by three or more families living independently of each other, but not including hotels or motels. 36. Dwelling, One -Family: A dwelling situated on 1 lot and arranged, designed and intended for occupancy by not more than 1 family, and which has no more than 1 primary kitchen and no less than 1 bedroom. 37. Dwelling Unit: One or more rooms and a primary kitchen arranged, designed and intended as a unit for occupancy by 1 family living independently of others, situated in a one -family, two-family or multiple -family dwelling. 38. Easement: An acquired right of use, interest or privilege in land owned by another. 39. Family: An individual, of 2 or more persons related by blood or marriage, or a group of not more than 5 persons (excluding servants) living together as a single housekeeping unit in a dwelling unit. 40. Floodplain: The area adjoining any river, stream, watercourse, lake or other body of standing water which is subject to inundation by a 100 -year flood. 41. Floor Area, Gross: The total inhabitable horizontal floor area of all floors in a building exclusive of basement, garage, storage and utility area. 42. Floor Area Ratio: The numerical value obtained by dividing the gross floor area of all buildings located upon a lot or parcel of land by the total area of such lot or parcel. 43. Garage, Private: A building, or portion thereof, used primarily for the parking of automobiles belong- ing to the occupants of the land upon which it is situated and their invitees. 44. Garage, Public: A building, or portion thereof, other than a private garage, used for the parking of automobiles. 45. Golf Club: A private club organized for the purposes of playing golf and maintaining the Cattle Creek Ranch Golf Course. 46. Grade, Average Finished: At the exterior wall of a structure is the average elevation of the finished surface of the ground between the building and a line five feet from the building. 47. Grade, Ground Level: The elevation of the finished lot surface measured at any point along the perimeter of the building. 48. Home Occupation: Any business use which is conducted principally within a dwelling by the occupants thereof and not others, is clearly incidental and secondary to the use of the dwelling for dwelling purposes, anddoes not change the character of the dwelling, exclu- ding therefrom such uses as a medical clinic, hospital, barber shop, beauty parlor, tea room, tourist home, kennel, animal clinic or animal hospital., or any similar use generating more than occasional and minimal vehicular and pedestrian traffic. • • 49. Hotel: Any building arranged, designed and intended as a temporary lodging place for human beings, with or without meals, in which there are 6 or more guest rooms or suites; and in which no provision is made for cooking in any individual room or suite. 50. Household Pets: Small animals in such numbers as not to constitute a nuisance customarily permitted to be kept in dwellings for company or pleasure, in- cluding but not limited to dogs, cats, rabbits, and common house birds, provided that such animals are not kept to supplement food supplies or for any commercial purpose other than the offering for sale of 1 litter, brood or offspring of a household pet domiciled on the premises, at any one time, that is less than 4 months old. 51. Joint Use of Parking: The shared use of off-street parking facilities by more than one type of land use where the same parking spaces are taken into account in satisfaction of the parking requirements of each use. 52. Kennel: Any building, structure or open space, or portion thereof, used for the breeding, raising, boarding, or selling of 5 or more dogs that are more than 4 months old or of more than one litter. 53. Landscaping: Improvement of an area of land by the installation, removal or transplanting of vegetation or the installation of other materials or elements for the purposes of enhancement. 54. Lot Area: The total horizontal area within the lot lines of a lot. 55. Lot Line, Front: The property line dividing a lot from the street providing access thereto, provided that with respect to a corner lot, the front lot line shall be determined by the orientation of the building. 56. Lot Line, Rear: The property line opposite the front lot line. 57. Lot Line, Side: Any lot lines other than the front lot line and rear lot line. 58. Lot Width: The distance of an imaginary line on a lot parallel to the front lot line and measured be- tween the side lot lines at the building line nearest the street providing access thereto. 59. Maintenance Facility: Any building or structure used for housing maintenance equipment and operations. 60. Mobile Office: A vehicle, with or without self motive power, designed and equipped for human occupancy for industrial, commercial or professional purposes, inclu- ding but not limited to, temporary offices for the sale of homes and temporary construction management and supervisor trailers. 61. Open Space: Public or private land and aquatic areas which are acquired, regulated, or managed to protect the natural environment and significant cultural re-- sources; e- sources; provide recreational opportunities; shape the pattern of development; or any combination thereof, including yards, open space easements, common areas, common elements, and any building authorized for con- struction on open space. 62. Open Space Easement: Continuous area of land varying in dimension (encompassing public or private land and aquatic areas) for the purpose of open space uses(s). 63. Open Space Management Plan: A plan which describes the management, operation, maintenance and responsi- bility for the Cattle Creek Ranch Open Space. See Section XI of Zone Regulations. 64. Open Space, Community: Community open space is com- posed of privately owned land devoted to Cattle Creek Ranch recreational, community or open space uses, all of such lands being unoccupied with unobstructed space, open to the sky, except for trees, shrubbery, vege- tation or improvements relating to community, recrea- tional, or open space use. 65. Parking Space: A portion of land, other than a street, used for the parking of automobiles and available for general public use, either free or for remuneration (see Section XV). 66. Planning Area: An area of land on the Master Plan, the boundaries of which are arterial street, nonurban areas and other lands set forth on the Master Plan. The specific uses in, and the corresponding develop- ment standards and requirements applicable. to, any area of land are determined by the Planning Area within which such area is placed and the provisions of this Zone Regulations. 67. Planning Commission or Commission: The Garfield County Planning Commission. 68. Planning Office: The Garfield County Planning Office. 69. Pre -Sited Zone: Areas within each lot which have been selected by the Cattle Creek Ranch Joint Venture for the location of buildings or structures. 70. Professional Office: A place of business for any of the following: accountants; architects; attorneys; bookkeeping services; brokers (of stocks, bonds, real estate); building designers; persons licensed by the State to practice any of the healing arts; corporate offices, drafting services, financial institutions, including banks, savings and loan associations; insur- ance companies, credit unions and credit-reporting agencies; development companies; engineers; surveyors and planners; insurance agencies and brokers; interior decorators and designers (no retail sales allowed on premises); laboratories, medical and dental; landscape architects; pharmacies; notaries public, public stenog- raphers, typing and secretarial services; and other similar businesses and professions. 71. Project: One or more lots planned, designed and developed as a unified entity such as a condominium development, cluster development, commercial develop- ment, industrial development, recreational development, etc. 72. Public Sewerage and Public Water Facilities: Facili- ties of a metropolitan district which are constructed, operated and maintained to provide water or sewerage service to Cattle Creek Ranch. 73. Public Utilities: Facilities of a public utility. 74. Public Utility: Every firm, partnership, associa- tion, cooperative, company, corporation and govern- mental agency, and the directors, trustees or receivers thereof, whether elected or appointed, which is engaged in providing bus, electric, rural electric, telephone, communications, gas, gas pipeline carrier, water, sewerage, pipeline, road maintenance, fire protection, and emergency medical facilities and services. 75. Recreation Vehicle: A motor home, travel or camping trailer, boat, van or truck camper, with or without self -motive power. 76. Retail Commercial: A commercial use characterized by selling of tangible goods, wares, and merchandise directly to the consumer. 77. Riding Trails, Hiking Trails, and Biking Trails: A trail or passageway arranged, designed and intended for use by equestrians, pedestrians, and cyclists using nonmotorized bicycles. 78. Right -of -Waw or Passageway: An area or strip of land, either publicly or privately owned, over which a right of passage has been recorded for the use by vehicles, or pedestrians, or both. 79. Road, Private: See Section XVI, Road Standards. 80. Road, Collector: See Section XVI, Roadway Standards. 81. Road, Primary Local Access Street: See Section XVI, Roadway Standards. 82. Road, Secondary Local Access Street: See Section XVI, Roadway Standards. 83. Road, Cul -de -Sac: See Section XVI, Roadway Standards. 84. Service, Commercial: A commercial use characterized by the selling of services and intangibles directly to the consumer. 85. Setback: The length of any required yard measured perpendicular to the lot line. • 86. Sign: Anything designed to inform or attract the attention of people, but excluding therefrom any flag, badge or insignia of any government or govern- mental agency, or of any civic, charitable, religious, or fraternal organiztion. 87. Site Development Plan: The procedures, requirements and standards for site development plans specified in the Cattle Creek Ranch Design Guide and the Garfield County Zoning Resolution. 88. Special Community Event: A temporary event, sponsored by a Cattle Creek Ranch service club, Cattle Creek Ranch Golf or Recreation Club, association, property owners association, other community organization or the owner of a major portion of the land within Cattle Creek Ranch, such as golf tournaments, fireworks, parades, swim meets, community picnics, athletic events, non - motorized vehicle races, rodeos, Christmas and holiday pageants, and other outdoor programs. 89. Stable, Public: A building, or portion thereof, and accessory structure used to shelter and feed horses which is operated under the direction of the Cattle Creek Ranch Joint Venture or Homeowners Association for the residents of Cattle Creek Ranch. 90. Story: That portion of a building included between an upper surface of any floor and the upper surface of the floor next above, except that the top most story shall be that portion of a building included between the upper surface of the top most floor and the ceiling or roof above. If the finished floor level directly above a basement or unused under floor space is more than 6 feet above grade as defined herein for more than 50% of the total perimeter or is more than 12 feet above grade as defined herein at any point, such basement or unused under floor space shall be considered as a story. 91. Street: A public or private right-of-way for motor vehicles other than an alley or driveway. 92. Structure: Anything constructed or erected in, under, over or upon the land, or attached to something in, under, over, or upon the land, but excluding therefrom off-street parking areas, fences and walls used as fences 6 feet in height or less, and public utilities. 40 III -12 93. Structure, Permanent: A structure which is built of such materials, and in such a manner, that it would reasonably be expected to last and remain useful for more than 5 years. 94. Structure, Temporary: A structure which is not a permanent structure, or one which is constructed for a special purpose in contemplation of removal upon accomplishment of such purpose. The allowable life of the structure shall be based on the appropriate county permits. 95. Subdivision: A parcel of land divided into blocks, lots or plots for immediate or future use of sale, or for building developments; or the act of so dividing the land. 96. Temporary Contractor Storage Yard: A place for temp- orary storage of materials used for the construction of structures, roadways, public utilities or land- scaping. 97. Use: The purpose for which land, or portions thereof, or buildings are arranged, designed and intended, or the purpose for which either land or building, or portions thereof, are or may be occupied or maintained. 98. Water Bodies: A channel, natural depression, stream, creek, pond, ditch, reservoir, lake or any place where water is channeled or collected and stands and/or flows either as the result of man-made or natural impoundments. 99. Yard: The area on a lot unoccupied and unobstructed from the ground upward, except for certain items as otherwise provided in this Zone Regulations, such as landscaping, walkways and patios. 100. Yard, Front: A yard extending across a lot between the principal building nearest the public street providing access thereto and the edge of the curb nearest such building or, in absence thereof, the edge of the paved road surface. 101. Yard, Rear. A yard extending across the full width of a lot between the principal building on the lot nearest to the rear lot line, and the rear lot line. 102. Yard, Side: A yard extending from the front yard to the rear yard between the principal building nearest to a side lot line, and such side lot line. 103. Zero Lot Line: A situation in which either: a. two adjoining structures or adjacent but separate properties share a common wall, or b. a structure is built up to its property line with no easement or setback requirement. Section III. P.U.D. Zone Districts A. Zone Districts. To carry out the purposes and provisions 0 of the Garfield County Zoning Resolution, Garfield County, Colorado and particularly, Section 4.00 of that title, as amended, the Cattle Creek Ranch Planned Unit Development Zoning District is further divided into the following Zone District Classifications: • • • • i • • • • -- Greenbelt District - Recreational Service District - Residential/Single Family Estate Lot District - Residential/Single Family Golf Lot District -- Residential/Cluster Housing District - Residential/Multi-Family - Commercial/Village Store District District B Zone Map. The boundaries of these districts shall be located as shown on the Cattle Creek Ranch P.U.D. Zone Map. C. Zone Dis rict Boundaries. Wherever a Zone District abuts a street as shown on the PLJD Zone Map, the Zone District boundary is the abutting right-of-way line of such street. Wherever a Zone District does not so abut a street, Zone District boundary shall be as shown on the PUD Map. The size of any Zone District may increase of by a maximum of 10% during the subdivision proess without any amendment to the P.U.D. Zone Map.100,4 i ' R the Zone decrease s Section IV. Greenbe}t P i t A. Uses, By Right. Park and Greenbelt Recreational uses including golf course, tennis courts, pedestrian/bike paths, ball fields,''keet shooting and other recreational facilities, Agricultural uses including farm, garden, nursery, orchards, ranch and custom area accessory uses including buildings for shelter or enclosure of animals or property employed in any of the above uses. Kennel and riding stable. Well sites, sewage treatment facilities, water treatment and storage facilities and other public and private utility facilities and buildings. Golf course maintenance facility. B. Uses, Conditional: None C. Uses, Special: Water Impoundments D. Minimum Lot. Area: None E. Maximum Lot Coverage: None F. Minimum Setback: From dedicated public right-of-way . . . . . . 20 feet From other property lines G. Maximum Building Height: 30 feet measured at the verticle to the grade at the center of the building. 5 feet i 40 III -16 Section V. Recreational Services District A. Uses, By Right: All uses by right in the Open Space District (Section 11 of this Zoning Re ulation C .( j Golf clubhouse including ce�gtomary cces tot recreati€nal and maintenance facilities. Health club, medical clinic and doctors offices. Riding stable, equestrian club and veterinarian clinic. Restaurant, bar and lounge and retail commercial shops customary to the support of the recreational activities associated with this district (by example - golf and tennis pro shop and equestrian tack shop). Offices for the management of facilities and activities associated wi the,, Cat1e Creepk, Ranch. `L r4 + r'►Management Office. Real Estate Sales and Property g Conference facilities. ( if,int 'a,� •..� Single and multiple family dwelling units for occupants directly em loved inhje opeationsof the recreational facilities �, 4e.t) ....•+S+•>4J�c i " f� ,�.'o a J Ace B. Uses, Condi iona�: Jj 7-4" fiCi r_s4 0%0 ,F; /tivijo e .6i. None .r se m.` ( } j, ! cJi� C. Uses Special. ��r�.17 Water Impoundments. D. Minimum Lot Area: None E. Maximum Lot Coverage: None F. Minimum Setback: From dedicated public right-of-way From other property lines Maximum Building Height: 30 feet measured at the verticle to the grade at the center of the building. G. 20 feet 5 feet Section VI. Residential/Single Family Estate. Lot District A. Uses, By Right: Single family dwelling and customary accessory uses including buildings for shelter or enclosure of property accessory to the use of the lot for single family residential purposes and fences, hedges, gardens, wall and similar landscape features. Park, greenbelt and golf course. Domestic water storage Li - ander ret _r`'a"rters when attached to the primary resident and not exceeding square feet in floor area. B. Uses, Conditional: None C. Uses, Special: Water Impoundments D. Minimum Lot Area: 20,000 square feet E Maximum. Lot Coverage: tie 1y 40% F. Minimum Setback: Front Yard Rear Yard Side Yard 25 feet 25 feet . 15 feet On corner lots, the side yard shall be 25 feet when automobile access is taken across the side yard; the side yard shall be 15 feet when no automobile access is taken across the side yard. G. Maximum Building Height: 25 feet measured at the verticle to the grade at the center of the building. • • • Section VII. Residential/Single Family Golf Lot District A. Uses, By Right: Single family dwelling and customary accessory uses including buildings for the enclosure of animals or property accessory to the use of the lot for residential purposes and fences, hedges, gardens, and walls and similar landscape features. Park, oven space and golf course. Domestic water storage tank. Live-in maids and caretakers quarters when attached to the primary residence and not exceeding'square feet in floor area. B. Uses, Conditional: None C. Uses, Special: Water Impoundments D. Minimum Lot Area: 12,000 square feet E. Maximum Lot Coverage: 60% F. Minimum Setback: Front Yard Rear Yard Side Yard 25 feet 20 feet 10 feet On corner lots, the side yard shall be 25 feet when automobile: accesnow is taken across the side yard; the side yard shall be 15 feet when no automobile access is taken across the side yard. G. Maximum Height of Buildings: 25 feet measured at the verticle to the grade at the center of the building. Section VIII. Residential/Cluster Housing District A. Uses, By Right: Single family, two family, three family and four family dwelling and customary accessory uses including buildings for the shelter of property accessory to the use of lot for residential purposes and fences, hedges, gardens, walls and similar landscape features. Condominium and row house (maximum four dwelling units per structure). ( More than one principal structure per lot, complying 1 with the uses by right, shall be permitted as long as the total dwelling units do not peexceed thegna desitted4 A. .� ` district density• checks/44,h-"c � • 4/►s r0 Park and open space (a minimum 4 acre park will be contained in the R/CH District). B. Uses, Conditional: Day Nursery C. Uses, Special: None D. Minimum Lot Area: 1. 800 sq. ft. for townhouse, attached single family dwellings.' 2. 2,000 sq. ft. per dwelling unit for multi -family lots. atie 1e 3. 3,200 sq. ft. for detached zero lot line single family dwellings. 4. 8,000 sq. ft. for detached single family and two _fzdajaLdwell4a2E. E. Maximum. Lot Coverage: .1r , /14 dw if)e' 1. Detached single family and zero lot line single family and two family lots - 70,c:,,,;, h, 2. Multi-famil d townhouse, attached single family dwellings - 80. • �t$* j 1II-20 F. Minimum Setbacks: 1. Multi -family dwellings Front yard 25 Ft. Side yard 10 Ft. Rear yard 10 Ft. 2. Townhouse, attached single family dwellings Front yard - 25 feet from the front lot line, if there is a front facing garage; or no setback if there is a side facing garage or at least 25 ft. of common open space between the curb line and the lot line. Side yard - 10 feet. On corner lots, the side yards shall be 25 ft. when automobile access is taken across the side yard; the side yard shall be 15 ft. when no automobile access is taken across the side yard. Rear yard - 10 feet. 3. Zero lot line detached single family dwellings Front yard - 25 feet. Side yard - 10 ft. on one lot line and no setback on the opposite line. No accessory building shall be permitted within the required side yard. Rear yard - 15 ft. 4. Two family and single family dwellings — ti)4 t etti,/,/t,„ Front yard 25 feet Side yard 10 feet Rear yard . . 25 feet G. Maximum Height of Buildings: 25 feet measured at the veritcle to the grade at the center of the building.. • • H. Additional Requirements: 1. For zero lot line dwellings a minimum maintenance easement of 3 feet shall be provided on the side yard for the adjacent lot. 2. For zero lot line dwellings no windows or openings shall be allowed in a wall abutting a property line that faces into an adjoining lot. 40 I1I-22 Section IX. Residential/Multi-Family District A. Uses, By Right: Single family, two family and multi- family dwelling and customary accessory uses including buildings for the shelter of property accessory to the use of lot for residential purposes and fences, hedges, gardens, walls and similar landscape features. Condominium, row hous„g and lodging uni." More than one structure or building per lot, complying with the uses by right, shall be permitted as long as the total dwelling upits do not exceed the designated district density. a4�xj"�I1 Health club and conference center. Park, open space and golf course. B. Uses, Conditional: Day Nursery C. Uses, Special: ! None D. Minimum Lot Area: 1. 800 sq. ft. for townhouse, attached single family dwellings. 40 2. 2,000 sq. ft. per dwelling unit for multi -family lots. 3. 3,200 sq. ft. for detached zero lot line single family dwellings. 40 4. 8,000 sq. ft. for detached single family and two family dwellings. E. Maximum Lot Coverage: 1. Detached single family and ze Jot line single 41 family and two family lots - 70 2. Multi-familyd townhouse, attached single family dwellings - • 0 II1-23 F. Minimum Setbacks: 1. Multi -family dwellings Front yard 25 Ft. Side yard 10 Ft. Rear yard 10 Ft. 2. Townhouse, attached single family dwellings Front yard - 25 feet from the front lot line, if there is a front facing garage; or no setback if there is a side facing garage or at least 25 ft. of common open space between the curb line and the lot line. Side yard - 10 feet. On corner lots, the side yards shall be 25 ft. when automobile access is taken across the side yard; the side yard shall be 15 ft. when no automobile access is taken across the side yard. Rear yard - 10 feet. 3. Zero lot line detached single family dwellings Front yard - 25 feet. Side yard - 10 ft. on one lot line and no setback on the opposite line. No accessory building shall be permitted within the required side yard. Rear yard - 15 ft. 4 Two family and single family dwellings • Front yard 25 feet Side yard 10 feet Rear yard 25 feet G. Maximum Height of Buildings: • 30 feet measured at the verticle to the grade at the center of the building. 11I-24 • H. Additional Requirements: 1. For zero lot line dwellings a minimum maintenance easement of 3 feet shall be provided on the side yard for the adjacent lot. 2 For zero lot line dwellings no windows or openings shall be allowed in a wall abutting a property line that faces into an adjoining lot. 1II-25 Section X. Commercial/Village Store District A. Uses, By Right: Neighborhood retail commercial and personal service outlets including;lt amine.._..service r i Liquor Store! Restaurant, bar and lounge Delicatessen and ice cream shop' Real estate office Public facilities including fire station, security patrol offices and homeowners association administrative offices. More than one structure or building per lot, complying with the uses, by right, shall be permitted.,2/ .., I,4,C,,. f,4 444 �A.• dna r t, o , r,,� v,an B. Uses, Conditional: Day Nursery C. Uses, Special: None D. Minimum Lot Area: None E. Maximum Lot Coverage: -(177(73AJ( F. Minimum Setback: Setback fromCounty Road 113 40 feet A,49f1n+o,4t st*Ilio.LAS Normo her-_setbac k shall be_r-equ±red_ with%nfii -di_. rrct. G. Maximum Height of Buildings: 30 feet measured at the verticle to the grade at the cif the building. 11I-26 Section XI. Residential Density A. Density Standards. The dwelling unit density permitted shall apply to the entire Cattle Creek Ranch and shall not be specifically applicable to any portion thereof. Density of any Residential Planning Area shall be computed by dividing the total number of dwelling units in the Planning Area by the total number of gross acres in .5a"` Planning Area. B. Density Variations. Any individual Residential Planning Area may contain up to 1.2 times the total number of allow- able dwelling units set forth in the Development Plan for such Planning Area, as determined by the Cattle Creek Ranch Joint. Venture. The increase in the number of allow- able dwelling units within any such Planning Area will be accomplished through a transfer of allowable dwelling units from any other Residential Planning Area without any amend- ment of this Zone Regulation. The intent of this provision is to allow flexibility in planning to take into account varying conditions of terrain and other site characteristics. In no case shall the ultimate number of dwelling units in the Planned Unit Development exceed that established on the approved Master Plan. 111-27 Section XII. Supplemental Land Use Provisions A. Agricultural Uses. Agricultural and ranch activities and uses, and all accessory structures and uses which are customarily incidental or appropriate to farming and ranching, shall be permitted within Cattle Creek Ranch. In those areas of Cattle Creek Ranch under development, an orderly transition to urban uses will be undertaken to assure that agricultural uses will not be detrimental to Cattle Creek Ranch. 40 B. Borrow Sites. Within the prior approval of the Cattle Creek Ranch Design Review Committee, any area within Cattle Creek Ranch may be used as a borrow site, in accordance with the general erosion control plan, for construction materials provided, however, that such area shall be reseeded with appropriate plant materials subsequent to borrow operations. Material from the borrow site must be restricted to use within the Cattle Creek Ranch P.U.D. i C. Setbacks. The following yard requirements shall be observed in all zone districts: 1. Through lots: on lots extending from one street to another paralleling street, both streets shall be considered as front streets for the purposes of calculating front yard setbacks unless a solid screening fence is provided for one yard only and then the yard adjacent to the fence shall be considered a rear yard of side yard. 2. Corner lots: on residential lots bordered on two contiguous sides by streets, the required front yard setbacks shall be observed along both streets when automobile access is taken from the side street. 3 Two family dwellings: for purposes of setback calculations, a two family dwelling shall be construed as one building occupying one lot. 4. Attached single family dwellings: for purposes of setback calculations only those attached single family dwellings which do not share a common wall with an adjacent attached dwelling need observe the required side yard setback for the district providing building code requirements for this type of structure are observed. III --28 5. Projections; every part of a required yard shall be unobstructed from ground level to the sky except for projection of architectural features as follows: cornices, sills and ornamental features - 12 inches; roof eves - 18 inches; uncovered porches, slabs and patios, walks, steps, fences, hedges and walls - no restriction; fire escapes and individual balconies not used as passageways may project 18 inches into any required side yard and 4 ft. into any required front or rear yard. • r • 111-29 • • Section XIII. Signs A. Purpose and Intent. The purpose of this Section is to establish standards for the erection and use of signs within Cattle Creek Ranch. . B. Sign Permit.. No sign exceeding 6 square feet in surface area shall be erected, constructed, or placed on any building, structure or lot unless a permit therefor has been issued. No such permit shall be issued unless the proposed sign complies with the standards of this Section and such further standards as may be adopted by the Board after recommendation by the Planning Commission with re- spect to structural safety, materials and design. The sign permit fee shall be established by the Board. C. Design Review Committee Approval. No sign permit shall be issued by Garfield County until the plans, specifications 4 and details have been reviewed and approved by the Design Review Committee and a certificate of approval executed by an officer of the Design Review Committee and affixed to the plans and specifications. and made a part of each sign permit application. # D. General Standards. The following standards shall apply to signs in all Planning Areas: 1. All signs erected in any public right-of-way by a public agency authorized to control or direct traffic shall be exempt from the provisions of this Section. 41 2 Signs located at highway intersections and entries identifying Cattle Creek Ranch which are integral parts of an entry treatment utilizing landscaping, masonry, or other materials to define and provide an aesthetic- ally pleasing entry are permitted, provided that no 40 such entry treatment shall hinder motorist visibility. The total surface area of all signs at such entry shall not exceed 200 square feet, the surface area of any one such sign shall not exceed 100 square feet, and no such sign shall project higher than 15 feet aboveground. 40 3. Directional signs for the aid of those traveling within Cattle Creek Ranch are permitted, provided such signs are consistent with each other in materials and design, do not exceed 20 square feet in surface area each nor project higher than 10 feet above ground level. • • 41 I11-30 4. Signs informing of special community events are permitted in each Zone District, provided such signs are erected or displayed no earlier than 6 weeks preceding the event and are removed no later than 2 days subsequent to the event. 5. Temporary signs informing prospective community residents of land uses being constructed or to be constructed in the future are permitted for up to 5 years after erection, provided that no such sign shall exceed 20 square feet in surface area nor shall project more than 10 feet above ground, and all such signs shall be uniform in color, size and materials throughout Cattle Creek Ranch and consistent with its architectural theme. 6 One temporary sign, lighted or unlighted, accessory to each temporary sales office, leasing office or model dwelling unit from which only new homes, re- sidential lots and new nonresidential properties are sold or leased, is permitted while such office is being used for such purposes, provided such sign shall be a low -silhouette sign, shall not project higher than 6 feet above ground, shall not exceed 36 square feet in surface area, and shall indicate only thename of the project or projects available for sale or lease. 7. The following signs are prohibited in Cattle Creek Ranch: 40 a. Any portable sign located on one or more wheels. b. Any revolving beacon, fountain, flashing, and rotating sign, and any other sign with any type of movement or intermittent lighting effect. 40 c. Any flag, banner or other device designed to wave, flap, rotate, or otherwise move with the wind, ex- cluding therefrom any flag or emblem of any govern- ment or governmental agency or of any civic, char- itable, religious or fraternal organization. r d. Any sign for purposes of advertising of products or services available elsewhere than on the lot or project where such sign is situated. e. Any sign attached to a building which: 40 (1) Projects perpendicular to the building. • • f (2) Is parallel with a wall of the building but projects more than 18 inches from such wall. (3) Extends above the roof line or above the top of the parapet of the front wall, whichever is higher. f. Any sign which hinders the visibility of traffic control devices or directional signs. g. Any sign painted upon the exterior of a building. 8. The surface area of any sign shall be calculated in accordance with the following standards: a. The structure and bracing of a sign shall be omitted from the calcualtion unless such structure or bracing is made part of the message or face of the sign. b. The surface area of any sign which has two or more display faces shall include the area of all faces. c The surface area of any sign with a backing or background that is part of the overall sign display shall be calculated by determining the sum of the areas of each square, rectangle, triangle, circle, and portion of a circle, or any combination thereof, which creates the smallest single continuous peri- meter enclosing the outer limits of the display surface of race of the sign, including all non- structural frames, backing, faceplates, trim and other component parts not used solely for structural safety. d. The surface area of any sign without backing or a background that is part of the overall sign display shall be calculated by determing the sum of the areas of each square, rectangle, triangle, circle, and portion of a circle, or any combination thereof, which creates the smallest single continuous peri- meter enclosing the outer limits of each word, figure, picture or other representation, including all nonstructural frames, faceplates, trim and other component parts not used solely for structural safety. 111-32 e. The surface area of any sign having parts both with and without backing or background shall be calculated by determining the sum total of the areas of each square, rectangle, triangle, circle and portion of a circle, or any combina- tion thereof, which creates the smallest single continuous perimeter enclosing the outer limits of the display surface or face of the sign, in- cluding all nonstructural frames, faceplates, trim and other component parts not used solely for structural safety, for parts thereof having no backing or background. 9. Signs and sign structures shall be maintained at all times in a state of reasonably good repair, with all braces, bolts, clips, supporting frame and fastenings reasonably free from -deterioration, insect infestation, rot, rust or loosening. Signs shall be able to safely withstand anticipated wind pressures for the area in which they are located. The County Building Inspector shall have the authority to order the repair, altera- tion, or removal of a sign or sign structure which constitutes a hazard to life or property, and in the event that such a sign has not been repaired, altered or removed to remedy such hazard within 30 days after written notification from such Inspector, the County shall have the authority to so repair, alter or remove such sign or sign structure at the expense of the owner of the lot upon which such sign is located. E. Residential Signs. In all Residential Planning Areas, the following signs are permitted subject to the following standards: 1. One sign identifying each dwelling unit is permitted, provided the surface area of such sign does not ex- ceed 3 square feet. 2. One FOR SALE or FOR RENT sign is permitted for each dwelling unit, provided such sign is unlighted and the surface area does not exceed 6 square feet. 3. One sign identifying each public or quasi -public use is permitted, provided the surface area of such sign does not exceed 10 square feet. 1 4. One sign identifying each residential project is permitted, provided the surface of such sign does not exceed 20 square feet. 5. Signs advertising the sale or rental of dwelling units under construction or to be constructed are permitted for up to 2 years, provided that not more than 1 such sign is located adjacent to each street abutting the subdivision, each sign is unlighted, and the surface area of each such sign does not exceed 20 square feet in surface area. 6. One sign identifying each home occupation is permitted, provided such sign shall be unlighted, shall be affixed to the front wall or placed in a front window of the principal building, and does not exceed 3 square feet in surface area. F Signs at Commercial/Village Store and Recreation Centers. The following signs are permitted subject to the following standards: 1. One sign identifying each principal use is permitted for each building face, provided it is attached paral- lel to and within 18 inches of the wall of the princi- pal building and does not exceed 200 square feet in surface area. 2. One additional sign identifying each principal use is permitted, provided such sign shall be unlighted; shall be affixed to the front wall or door, suspended from an overhang, or placed in a front window of the principal building; and does not exceed 6 square feet in surface area. 11I-34 • Section XIV. Off -Street Parking A. Purpose and Intent. The purpose of this Section is to establish development standards to satisfy the motor vehicle off-street parking needs generated by land uses in the Cattle Creek Ranch P.U.D. B. General Standards and Requirements. Off-street parking facilities are permitted and required in accordance with the following standards. 1. All required off-street parking facilities shall be designed, constructed and maintained so as to be usable and accessible at all times, and shall be conveniently located to the use or uses they serve in order not to discourage their utilization. 2. All off-street parking facilities shall be designed so that, where site lines are restricted or where traffic flow creates a hazardous situation, motorists are not encourage or required to back directly from a parking space into a street, excluding therefrom such facili- ties serving single-family dwellings. 3. Common or joint uses of parking facilities may be permitted with a recorded agreement if traffic conges- tion, less than adequate parking for the uses involved or unnecessary expanses of paving are avoided thereby. 4. Except for required off-street parking facilities for single-family dwellings, such facilities do not have to be located on the same lot as the use or uses which generate the requirement, provided the total parking requirement for each use is satisfied and that no such parking area shall be located more than 300 feet from the use to be served. Parking structures may be uti- lized to satisfy the parking requirements for any permitted use. 5. All parking spaces, driveways and maneuvering areas shall be paved with all weather surfacing, and shall be maintained. 6. All parking areas, other than those for single-family dwelling units, shall be designed as to allow for easy snow removal and to allow space for snow dump. 7. All lighting for illumination of parking areas and driveways shall be designed and located to direct light rays to the lot or project, will be designed to conserve energy, and will be subject to Design Review Committee approval. 111-35 8. Parking area signs, each not to exceed 2 square feet in surface area, and directional instructions lettered on the paved surface of driveways and parking areas are permitted for all parking facilities. Such signs and instructions may contain only the name of the owner or occupant of the use served, and such words and sym- bols that are directly related or essential to parking or the direction of vehicular traffic within the parking area and access driveways. All parking area signs shall be subject to Design Review Committee approval. 9. Wherever 2 or more different uses exist on the same lot or project, the total parking requirement there- fore shall be the sum of the parking requirements for each such use. 10. Fractions resulting from calculations required by the provisions of this Section shall be rounded off as follows. (a) fractions of 1/2 or more shall be rounded to the next higher whole number, and (b) fractions of less than 1/2 shall be rounded to the next lower whole number. 11. Wherever the use of any lot or project is changed, enlarged, expanded or intensified from that for which the existing parking facilities were provided, addi- tional parking facilities to meet the requirements of this Section shall be provided for the changed, en- larged, expanded or intensified use. 12. Parking facilities shall not be used for the sale, repair, dismantling or service of any vehicles, equip- ment, materials or supplies, nor for the storage of such equipment, materials or supplies. 13. Parking lot pavement standards will require a minimum of 2 inches of asphaltic pavement and 6 inches of base course with final construction standards based on site specific soil investigation. 14. Each required off-street parking space shall have a minimum unobstructed area of 9 feet in width, 20 feet in length. 15. Off-street parking spaces located parallel to and abutting an aisle may be reduced to 8 feet in width. C. Residential Requirements. The minimum number of off-street parking spaces required for each category of residential use shall be calculated in accordance with the following standards: 111-36 M 1 Single-family dwellings: 2 enclosed spaces and minimum 2 gurest spaces for each dwelling unit: guest spaces may be on driveway apron. Total spaces shall be a least 1 space per 600 square feet of floor area for the first 3,600 square feet of floor area and 1 space per 1,000 square feet of floor area for the remaining residential floor area. 2. Multiple -family dwellings: 1 covered space and minimum 1.5 guest spaces for each dwelling unit. Enclosed spaces may be individual garages or in a group garage. Open guest spaces shall be grouped to a minimum of 4 spaces and shall be sunken, bermed or otherwise screened from the street or abutting residential dwellings. 3. Home occupation: 1 space for each home occupation in addition to the parking spaces otherwise re- quired for dwelling unit. D. Nonresidential Standards and Requirements. Off-street parking facilities shall be provided for nonresidential uses, including those situated in Residential Zone Districts, in accordance with the following standards: 1. Setback requirements for parking areas: a. All parking areas or spaces shall be set back 10 feet from all property lines. b. All parking areas or parking spaces shall be set back 10 feet from exterior walls of buildings. 2. Landscaping Requirements. All parking areas must be landscaped with landscaping plans approved by the Design Review Committee. All unbroken paved areas will be limited to 30 cars. All nonresidential parking areas shall be screened from abutting residential areas or streets by berming, depressing the level, or by adequate planting. 3. Granding/Drainage. The maximum grade permitted in nonresidential parking areas is 5%. Service drives may exceed this grade. Drainage plans which include specific perimeter drainage channels to prevent col- lection of overflow from other areas must be sub- mitted and approved by the Design Review Committee. 4. The minimum number of off-street parking spaces quired for each category of nonresidential use be calculated in accordance with the following dards: 1II--37 re - shall stan- • • a. Commercial uses and offices: 1 space for each 300 square feet of gross floor area, except as otherwise specified below. b. Lodging: 2 spaces, plus 1 space for each rental unit. c. Cafes, cocktail lounges, taverns, and restaur- ants: 1 space for each 250 square feet of gross floor area. d. Golf courses: 4 spaces for each hole. e. Handball, racquetball, squash and similar courts. 2 spaces for each court. f. Swimming pools: 1 space for each 100 square feet of water surface area but in no event less than 10 spaces. g. Tennis courts: 1 space for each court. h. Recreation centers: 1 space for each 200 square feet of gross floor area. 1II-38 Section XV. Garfield County Zoning Resolution Exclusion Except as here and above provided and except for the following Sections of the Garfield County Zoning Resolution, all provi- sions of the Garfield County Zoning Resolution shall be applicable * to the Cattle Creek Ranch P.U.D. Zoning District. The Sections of the said District Zoning Resolution which shall have no ap- plicability are as follows: Section 3.00 through 3.010.004 Section 5.01.02 Section 5.05.03, paragraphs 4 and 8 Section 5.07.01 through 5.07.09 • • • • • • 111-39 ARTICLE IV CATTLE CREEK RANCH P,UPD, DEVELOPMENT GUIDE SUBDIVISION REGULATIONS Section I. General Provisions A. Effect of Subdivision Regulations of Garfield County, Colorado (adopted January 2, 1979). The provisions of the Subdivisions Regulations of Garfield County and the successors thereof, as now in effect and as hereafter amended, are by this reference incorporated herein as if set forth in full, to the extent not divergent from the rpovisions of the Cattle Creek Ranch Planned Unit Development Subdivision Regulations B. Conflict. The provisions of the Cattle Creek Ranch Subdivision Regulations shall prevail and govern the development of Cattle Creek Ranch provided, however, where the provisions of the Cattle Creek Ranch Sub- division Regulations do not clearly address a specific subject, the provisions of the Subdivision Regulations of Garfield County, or any other ordinances, resolutions or regulations of Garfield County shall prevail. Section II. Definitions The meanings of certain words, terms, and phrases as used in the Cattle Creek Ranch P.U.D. Subdivision Regulations shall be the same as those definitions contained in Article III, Section II • Cattle Creek Ranch P.U.D. Zone Regulations. • • • • IV -2 Section III. Issuance of Permits A. Issuance of Building Permits. No Building Permit for any construction, improvements or alterations at Cattle Creek Ranch shall be issued until the plans, specifications and r details have been reviewed and approved by the Design Review Committee as defined herein and a certificate of approval executed by an officer of the Design Review Committee shall be affixed to the plans and specifications made a part of each building permit application. B. Issuance of Certificate of Occupancy. No Certificate of Occupancy for any building at Cattle Creek Ranch shall be issued by Garfield County until a letter recommending such issuance is completed and forwarded to the County by the Design Review Committee Section IV. Design Standards A. Utility Standards. 1. Utility Connections. Connection to public water and public sewerage facilities shall be required for each principal building constructed in the future within Cattle Creek Ranch. Temporary water and sanitation facilities will be permitted until permanent facilities are available upon approval of the Board of County Commissioners of Garfield County. 2. Underground. Utility Requirements. All electrical and communications distribution lines shall be places underground, unless specifically determined otherwise by the Planning Commission. B. Roadway Design and Construction. 1. Planning Concept. The primary themes guiding the design or roadways in Cattle Creek Ranch are simplicity, safety and environmental sensitivity. To meet these goals, the following design criteria have been applied: - Well-defined hierarchy of roadway types (Func- tional classes); - Low travel speeds; - Minimize disturbance of vegetation; - Simple, infrequent street intersections, - Meets fire vehicle access requirements. 2 Functional Classes. In the Cattle Creek Ranch P.U.D. four different functional classifications of roadways may exist: a. Major Collectors (existing County Roads) b. Collectors c. Sub -collectors • IV -4 d. Local access roads 1) Cul-de-sac/loop 2) Cul-de-sac/court 3. Design Standards. The following Figures (1-4) de- scribe the engineering criteria which will guide the design and construction of the roadways in the Cattle Creek Ranch P.U.D. a. Pavement Design/Roadway Construction. The road- ways constructed in Cattle Creek Ranch shall be high quality, minimum maintenance roads which will meet or exceed established Garfield County spec- ifications with respect to pavement thickness, composition and base. b. Driveways. Cattle Creek RAnch homesites will be developed with no more than one access drive serv- ing each lot. In some instances there may be one shared access drive serving two adjacent lots. Access drives will be constructed with properly designed culverts over roadside drainage ditches. Iv --5 Section V. Traffic Control A. Traffic Control Devices. In Cattle Creek Ranch, the con- trol and regulation of vehicular and pedestrian traffic will be augmented through the placement and enforcement of traffic control devices. These devices -- signs and pavement markings -- will conform to, and be installed in accordance with the provisions of the Uniform Manual on Traffic Control Devices (UMTCD) B. Speed Limit and Curve Warning Signs. 1. Major Collector Streets. The Major Collector Street in Cattle Creek Ranch should have a maximum speed limit of 35 MPH. 2. Collector Street. The Collector Streets in Cattle Creek Ranch should have a posted maximum speed limit of 20 and 25 MPH, which is consistent with their cur- vilinear nature and sight distance restrictions. A 20 MPH speed requires a minimum horizontal curve radius of 115 feet and a 25 MPH speed requires a minimum hor- izontal curve radius of 180 feet. 3. Local Access Streets. These streets will have a maximum speed limit of 15 MPH. C. Pedestrian/Golf Cart Crossings. Approaches to and actual pedestrian/golf cart crossings of roads will be designated by signage and pavement markings. 40 Section VI. Safety, Security and Environmental Protection A. Contractors shall be required to provide flag men and/or erect or maintain all necessary barricades and shall take all necessary precautions for the security of the project, the projection of the work and the safety of the public. B. Roads, streets, driveways or excavations closed to traffic or in a stage of construction that could cause injury to the public, shall be protected by effective barricades and the obstruction shall be illuminated at night and all lights for this purpose shall be kept burning from sunset to sunrise. i • i • i • • C. Extreme care and understanding will be exercised by all equipment operators to prevent damage to the fragile land- scape. D. Off-road vehicles or other construction equipment will not be permitted to move off established roads or haul routes in order to prevent damage to vegetation, soils and appear- ance. E. During clearing operations, trees and debris should not be ,allowed to fall outside the clearing. limits where such a fall would damage or injure trees and shrubs which are scheduled to remain. F. Ropes or cables will not be fastened to trees except to provide support and stabilization of the trees. G. Burning of trash, brush, trees and other combustibles will not be allowed. Such material will be buried in a solid waste fill area. Employees of contractors are not allowed to build warm-up fires on cold mornings. H. Work plans and schedules will be planned as to minimize the need to have construction equipment frequently ford a water course. Equipment should not be used within live streams except for repairs of structures, making of ponds or similar operations. 1. Construction operations usually involve a heavy use of water for various tasks. Such uses include concrete mixing, wash water, cooling water, irrigation and dust control. Because the quantities of water used often creates runoff problems, sediments, erosion and tur- bidity in water collection areas, control of such ex- cess drainage will be effected. J Ponds (to be constructed) and/or drainages will receive special detailed care to prevent their becoming completely silted in. This will mean rip -rap along water courses, extensive drainage basin protective measures (check dams), aquatic plant establishment (artificially) and the creation of community awareness of the need for environmental quality maintenance. K. Fugitive dust will be controlled by biodegradable, non- toxic wetables (dust palliatives) on roads and disturbed areas. Placing a layer of wood chips on an area to re- ceive vehicular or heavy equipment traffic can help protect the fragile top 1 inch of sail and ground cover. L. It will be necessary to maintain vigilance of all equip- ment that has gaseous exhausts to assure excessive pol- lution emissions do not occur. M. Items creating objectionable odors and fumes (engines, fuels, volatiles, chemicals, paints and other items found at construction sites) will be controlled to reduce safety and health hazards. N. Construction offices, supply yards, shops, trailers, workers' cars, etc. will be maintained in a way so as to minimize visual impact. 0. Waste materials will be promptly removed from the con- struction site. Under no circumstance should waste ma- terials of any kind be dumped or temporarily stored on slopes or in water courses. P. Measures will be taken by every member of the construc- tion force as needed to eliminate or minimize any inter- ference or disturbance to wildlife. Q Because landscape defacement is most often a permanent alteration to the environment, maximum efforts will be made by construction personnel to avoid such defacement. When a tree is removed without cause, when rock forma- tions are defaced by tractor cleats, or when a new path is bucked through without careful prior planning, it takes many years for nature to restore the damage, and it may never be completely repaired. Therefore, such actions will be avoided and care taken that equipment is not operated outside the work area. Clearing operations will be sensitive to aesthetic values. To accomplish this, work areas will be carefully located and marked to reduce possible damage to a minimum. Protection measures using physical safeguards such as wire fences and steel posts will be used to protect environmental features ad- jacent to work areas. These protective measures will be installed at the time the work area is first established. • R. Tree, bush and grass areas will be fertilized as nec- essary to insure best care and growth. S. Borrow pits in rectilinear forms are not compatible. with much of the existing natural terrain or with present natural drainage patterns. Therefore, borrow areas will be designated. Such designated borrow areas will be de- signed, not for ease of use or measurement, but to fit the natural form of the land. During excavation, sedi- ment laden water will not be permitted to flow from the pit into the watershed. Seeding and fertilizing of native grasses, trees or shrubs will be carried out on all disturbed and excavated surfaces as soon after ex- cavation completion as is compatible with desirable growing conditions. T. Slopes of borrow areas will be graded and dressed to blend with the adjacent terrain. U Whenever suitable topsoil exists at a borrow site, it will be removed, stockpiled and used later for reclama- tion of disturbed areas. V. Wherever possible, low pressure, rubber -tired construction equipment will be used. W. During field surveys, reconnaissance, or excavation, dis- tinctive archaeological or historical items may be dis- covered. All personnel will be instructed to immediately report any findings and extreme care should be taken promptly to avoid unnecessary destriction of artifacts and features. X. After the job is finished in each work unit, the op- erations, administrative, storage and repair areas will be cleaned up and restored as near to their original, native vegetative condition as possible. Y. All construction personnel will be instructed in fire protection and fire fighting techniques. Z. Concentrations of carbon monoxide and ozone can be detrimental to the Cattle. Creek Ranch environment. Where practical, recommendations and guidelines pre- pared by the Colorado Health Department or Garfield County will be implemented. IV -9 Section VII. Garfield County Subdivision Regulations Exclusions Except for the following Sections of the Garfield County Subdivision Regulations, all provisions of the Garfield County Subdivision Regulations shall be applicable to the Cattle Creek • Ranch P.U.D. The Section of the said subdivision regulations which shall have no applicability is as follows: Section 5.09 • • • • • • • • IV -10 • fl� 43 INL FIGURE 1 T Ez FIGURE 2 IV -12 .a E s FIGURE 3 Iv -13 • • • • 0 • r ARTICLE V CATTLE CREEK RANCH P.U.D. DEVELOPMENT GUIDE P.U.D. ZONE MAP LAND USE SUMMARY Dwelling Units Acres % of Total PUD Open Space District 532.00 ac 55% Recreational District 6 23.00 2% 411 Residential/Single Family 90 133.00 14% • • 40 • • • Estate Lot Dist. Density .67 units/acre Residential/Single Family Golf Lot Dist. Density 1.38 units/acre Residential/Cluster Housing Density 1.74 Dist. units/acre 155 Residential/Multi-Family Dist. -345 Density 7.34 units/acre Commercial/Village Store Dist. TOTAL 112.00 12% 109.00 11% 47.00 5% 7.00 1% 786 dwelling 963 acres 100% units Gross Density .8 dwelling units/acre. Note: Final engineering refinement of the plan at the time of subdivision platting may result in minor variations in the above acreages. V--1 • co cc 0 >- w a Ain 00 0 z J 0 w O w 1- • 0) c w cc cc u w RIP z 71z w 0 z 1- J 0) Z 0 U >— z 2 • O U z O w • g z_ z w 0 0 J •w • 823 BLAKE AVENUE / P.O. BOX 669 / GLENWOOD SPRINGS, COLORADO 81 601 / 303-945-8596 CATTLE CREEK RANCH PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT The Cattle Creek Ranch PUD as proposed is a planned unit development comprising a mixture of approximately 786 single family and cluster housing units, some commercial usage and a golf course. The present plan is a revision and expansion of the original PUD approved in August 1930. The following statements are the results of conceptual investigations of the water distribution system, sanitary sewer system and storm drainage system. Water Distribution Water distribution within the PUD will be accomplished by means of a central distribution system. The source of supply will be a series of wells along.Cattle Creek. The availability of water, from both a legal and physical standpoint, is being investigated by Wright Water Engineers, who are enclosing a separate statement with. this application. A water storage tank will be provided in the southeast corner of the proposed PUO and will be capable of storing both domestic demands and fire flow. The tank is projected to have a capacity of approxi- mately 1 pillion gallons. Sanitary Sewer _'stem Sanitary sewage within the subdivision will be collected by means of an on-site central collection system which will carry the sewage to a proposed plant location on Cattle Creek downstream from the proposed well locations. The plant will be capable of treating an average daily flow of approxi- mately 0.3 MGD. The treatment plant will be designed to discharge a very high quality effluent so as not to disturb the quality of water in Cattle Creek. Another reason the effluent will have a high quality is that some effluent may be used for land application on or around the golf course. A site application and discharge permit will be obtained from the Colorado Department of Health, at which time the plant will be designed to perform within or above the criteria required. Stora Sewer Management Storm drainage within the proposed PUD will be disposed of by using the natural drainage ways where possible, aided by engineered channels and culverts to direct store water away from residential areas and across the main irrigation channels. There are some areas where r drainage does enter the irrigation ditches, but these areas are not disturbed by this PUD; therefore, only the historic run-off is entering the irrigation channels. In the multi -family area, there may be a need of detention ponds for the increased drainage flow. These detention ponds, if warranted, will be designed for the 100 year/24 hour storm and a historic or a 25 year/24 hour release rate. The drainage will 40 eventually be disposed of in Coulter Creek and Cattle Creek. It appears from the conceptual plan that only the sanitary sewage treatment plant will be in an area of potential stream flooding. The treatment facility will be located as required to avoid any potential flooding problems. • Prepared by, Barney Fix, FIT BF/jlw Reviewed by: JRU • • • `��_ S\:% t5 •' r.'-.C.I.1,v e �. • 10 t� t' g 5-' • p p ,�o rttCii� • • O COLORADO DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH f' s'rvF µals" Richard D. Lamm Governor May 3, 1982 Frank A. Traylor. M.D. 18 76 Executive Director 40 Barney Fix, EIT Eldorado Engineering F.O. Box 669 Glenwood Springs, Colorado 81601 RE: Cattle Creek Ranch Development, Garfield County • Dear Mr. Fix: In response to your request of April 14, 1982, I have preliminarily analyzed the effluent requirements for the proposed Cattle Creek Ranch Development in Garfield County. The inputs to this analysis were as follows: • Streamflow: Annual = 2.1 cfs Plant Flow: 0.3 MGD Stream Standards: NH3 = 0.02 mg/1 unionized residual chlorine = 0.0003 mg/1 Fecal Coliforms = 2000/100 ml • pH instream: 8.3 (one sample) Background NH3: 0.0 mg/1 Max. expected Temp: 15° The results of a simple mass balance indicates that advanced treatment for ammonia to approximately 2 mg/1 total NH3-N may be necessary to protect the • stream. In addition, dechlorination would be required if chlorine were the disinfectant of choice. The ammonia limits could be raised to about 5 mg/1 during the winter. Verification of instream pH should be performed since the limits are pH dependent. We will reanalyze the discharge limitation after a complete site application 40 is received, but these early conclusions should guide you in your discussions with your client and our district engineer. • • • rely Jon cherscTiligt of General Services Section WATER QUALITY CONTROL DIVISION xc: Permits Section, WQCD John Blair, D.E., WQCD JS/dkg 4210 EAST 11TH AVENUE DENVER,COLORADO 80220 PHONE (303) 320-8333 • i • • • • • S • f ELDORADO ENGINEERING COMPANY / CONSULTING ENGINEERS / REGISTERED LAND SURVEYORS 823 BLAKE AVENUE / P.O. BOX 669 / GLENWOOD SPRINGS, COLORADO 81601 / 303-945.8596 April 15, 1982 Garfield County Board of Commissioners Garfield County Building Glenwood Springs, Colorado RE: Cattle Creek Ranch: Off -Site Improvements Job #82004 Gentlemen: With the advent of the Cattle Creek Ranch P.U.D., traffic volumes on Cattle Creek Road and Catherine Store Road will increase appreciably. The existing conditions of these two roads are adequate for the current traffic flow but are potentially dangerous under future traffic conditions. To safely accomodate the increased traffic flow, several construction improvements are herein proposed that would significantly reduce and/or eliminate potentially hazardous conditions. Along both Cattle Creek Road (County Road 113) and Catherine Store Road (County Road 100), potentially hazardous areas have been identified. These areas are presented in Figure I. Accompanying Figure I in attach- ment A, is a summary of the existing conditions at each of these areas, and the recommended improvements for each site. The majority of the recommended improvements are required to meet a minimum sight distance of 275 feet based on State Highway standards for a 40 rnph design speed. In addition to these specific improvements, Cattle Creek and Catherine Store Roads will be widened to 24 feet as shown in the typical road section of Figure I. Cattle Creek Road, currently paved to mile 3.5, will require widening between miles 0.5 to 3.5. Beyond mile 3.5 to mile 7.2, the en- tire road will be paved. Catherine Store Road will be paved as per the typical section from mile 2.4 up to the Cattle Creek Ranch P.U.D. If you have any questions concerning the recommended improvements, please do not hesitate to call. Sincerely, Timo r Sullivan Design Engineer cc: Ron Liston 'ITIS/pck CATTLE CREEK RANCH OFF-SITE IMPROVEMENTS ON THE CATTLE CREEK AND 'KATHERINE STORE ROADS Prepared by: Eldorado Engineering Company 823 Blake Avenue - P.O. Box 669 Glenwood Springs, Colorado 81601 February 1982 CURVE "A" LOCATION Cattle Creek Road at mile 0.7 DESCRIPTION AND/OR PROBLEMS - Jutting out in the center of Curve "A" is a mineral outcrop- ping resembling gypsum. This "bulge", approximately 55 feet long and 17 feet high, restricts sight distance and should be removed. VITAL STATISTICS - Sight Distance: Vertical: Adequate (N/D)* Horizontal: Inadequate (N/D) -Road Width: 19'-6" - Side Slope: 1/2 - 1 -Shoulder Width: 27'-O" - Road Surface: Chip and Seal - Comments: Gypsum type soil RECOMMENDATIONS The outcropping should be removed to facilitate an adequate +• sight distance of 275 feet. In addition the inside shoulder should be widened to 4 feet. • • • • CURVE ""13" LOCATION Cattle Creek Road at mile 0.9 DESCRIPTION AND/OR PROBLEMS Curve "B" has limited sight distance due to a moderately short turning radius and a steeply sloped bank within three feet of the edge of the road. Hushes line the embankment also lim- its sight distance. Near the center of the curve, a driveway cuts up the slope on a near tangent to the curve. VITAL STATISTICS - Sight Distance: Vertical: Adequate (N/D) . Horizontal: 225 feet - Road Width: 20'-O" - Side Slope: 1 to 1 -Shoulder Width: 27'-0" - Road Surface: Chip and Seal - Comments: Hazardous access conditions; sand, gravel and cobble soils RECOMMENDATIONS The side slope should be cleaned back to provide a 275' min- imum sight distance. Care must be taken not to disturb the driveway. Two "blind access" warning signs should be installed to warn on -coming drivers. * N/D, not determined JOG "C" LOCATION Cattle Creek Road at mile 1.2 DESCRIPTION AND/OR PROBLEMS Jog "C" lies between two relatively straight sections of road. There is adequate sight distance, and in general, there are no apparent safety hazards associated with the jog. VITAL STATISTICS -Sight Distance: -Road Width: -Shoulder Width: -Comments: 20'-0" (N/D) None Vertical: Adequate (N/D) ▪ • Horizontal: Adequate (N/D) - Side Slope: (N/D) -- Road Surface: Asphalt RECOMMENDATIONS Sight distance is adequate and therefore no improvements are necessary. CURVE "D" LOCATION Cattle Creek Road at mile 2.2 DESCRIPTION AND/OR PROBLEMS 41 The embankment at Curve "D" is exceedingly steep and high; the slope cut for the road reaches 30 feet in height. A power pole is 30 feet above the slope cut, approximately 65 horizontal" feet from the center line. Sight distance is adequate. • VITAL STATISTICS - Sight. Distance: Vertical: Adequate (N/D) Horizontal: 280 feet -Road Width: 20'--0" - Side Slope: 1/2 - 1 - Shoulder Width: (N/D) - Road Surface: Chip and Seal • -Comments: Power pole in curve RECOMMENDATIONS • Sight distance is adequate, and although curve improvements would be beneficial, they are not necessary and are not recom- mended at this time. AREA "E." IP LOCATION Cattle Creek Road between mile 3.1 and 3.5 DESCRIPTION AND/OR PROBLEMS The road width and row in Area "E" is extremely narrow; at one point, the road measures 14 feet across and 20 feet between • trees. A farm house, barn, trees, and fences lie extremely close to the road. Although very scenic, 11 large trees must be remov- ed and 2,100 feet of fencing must be replaced to widen the road. VITAL STATISTICS • - Sight Distance: Vertical: Adequate (N/D) Horizontal: Adequate (N/D) -Road Width: 14'- 22' -- Side Slope: 1.25 to 1 -Shoulder Width: 16 - -- Road Surface: Gravel - Comments: Road and Right of way extremely narrow • 1110 • ■ RECOMMENDATIONS It is recommended that an adequate right of way be procured to widen road to 24 feet. Also the fences must be replaced and the driveways matched to the future road. CURVE "F" LOCATION Cattle Creek Road at mile 4.2 DESCRIPTION ANDD OR PROBLEMS Curve "F" is a short radius curve with a sight distance of 195'. A power pole is located approximately 69 horizontal feet from the centerline from the slope. VITAL STATISTICS -Sight Distance: Vertical: Adequate (N/D) Horizontal: 195 feet -Road Width: 20'-0" -- Side Slope: 1.5 to 1 -Shoulder Width: 38'-O" - Road Surface: Chip and Seal -Comments: Power pole on slope, sand, gravel, and cobble soils 4, RECOMMENDATIONS Remove embankment at center of curve to permit a 275' sight distance. Condition final slope 1 to 1. The power pole will not require relocation. • JOG "G" LOCATION Cattle Creek Road at mile 4.3 ■ DESCRIPTION AND/OR PROBLEMS Jog "G" extends out into an otherwise straight road and causes the roadway to narrow down to 17 feet. • VITAL STATISTICS -Sight Distance: • 411 • • -Road Width: -Shoulder Width:. -Comments: 17' -0" 26'-0" None Vertical: Adequate (N/D) Horizontal: Adequate (N/D) - Side Slopes: N/D - Road Surface: Gravel RECOMMENDATIONS Remove the jog and reshape the slope to match adjacent slopes. CURVE "H" LOCATION Cattle Creek Road at mile 4.6 DESCRIPTION AND/OR PROBLEMS Curve "H" is a fairly sharp curve with only 190 feet of sight distance. VITAL STATISTICS -Sight Distance: ........ -Road Width: N/D -Shoulder Width: N/D -Comments: None Vertical: Adequate (N/D) Horizontal: 190 feet - Side Slopes: N/D -- Road Surface: Gravel RECOMMENDATIONS 411 The embankment should be removed to straighten the road and to provide 275 feet minimum sight distance. • f 9 CURVE "I" LOCATION Cattle Creek Road at mile 6.3 DESCRIPTION AND/OR PROBLEMS The steep side slope at to 225 feet. Sight distance feet. VITAL STATISTICS -Sight Distance: ✓ -Road Width: N/D shoulder Width: N/D -Comments: None • Curve "I" reduces the should be improved to Vertical: Adequate (N/D) Horizontal: 225 feet - Side Slopes: N/D -- Road Surface: Gravel sight distance at least 275 RECOMMENDATIONS Trim side slope back to provide a minimum of 275 feet for sight distance. CURVE "J" LOCATION Cattle Creek Road at mile 6.6 DESCRIPTION AND/OR PROBLEMS Curve "J" extends around a massive ridge and has a sight distance of only 155 feet. VITAL STATISTICS Sight Distance: ........ -Road Width: 25'-0" - Shoulder Width: 36'-0" - Comments: Ridge is Vertical: Adequate (N/D) Horizontal: 155 feet - Side Slopes: 1/2 to 1 -- Road Surface: Gravel fractured rock RECOMMENDATIONS Drilling and blasting ridge to permit adequate sight dis- tance would be extremely expensive (in excess of $100,000). It is recommended that the road be posted for 25 mph including ade- quate warning signs. In addition the road should be widened to 30 feet around the curve and a guard rail installed. CURVE "K" LOCATION Cattle Creek Road at mile 7.0 DESCRIPTION AND/OR PROBLEMS Curve "K" is a sharply turned curve with a sight distance of approximately 200'. w VITAL STATISTICS -Sight Distance: Vertical: Adequate (N/D) Horizontal: 200 feet -Road Width: 20'_0" - Side Slopes: 1.5 to 1 -Shoulder Width: 29'-0" - Road Surface: Gravel • -Comments: Sand, gravel, and cobble slope soils • RECOMMENDAT IONS The embankment should be removed to provide a sight distance of 275'. The slope should be reshaped to a 1 to 1 slope. CURVE "L" LOCATION Catherine Store Road at mile 0.3 DESCRIPTION AND/OR PROBLEMS Curve "L" is a long uniform curve with a 300 foot sight dis- tance. Side slope is minimal and a power pole is located within the curve. VITAL STATISTICS -Sight Distance: Vertical: Adequate (N/D) Horizontal: 300 feet -Road Width: N/D - Side Slopes: N/D -Shoulder Width: N/D - Road Surface: Gravel -Comments: Power pole 0 RECOMMENDATIONS Sight distance is adequate and it is recommended that the curve remain as existing. • AREA "M" LOCATION Catherine Store Road at mile 0.4 DESCRIPTION AND/OR PROBLEMS A small stream passes through pipe. VITAL STATISTICS -Sight Distance: -Road Width: N/D 41 -Shoulder Width: 23'F-0" -Comments: None a 5' diameter corregated Vertical: Adequate (N/D) Horizontal: Adequate (N/D) - Side Slopes: (N/D) -- Road Surface: Gravel RECOMMENDATIONS i The culvert should be extended 10 feet filled with a suitable aggregate to provide 4' shoulders. metal on each side and a 24 foot road with 41 AREA "N" LOCATION Catherine Store Road at mile 0.5 • DESCRIPTION AND/OR PROBLEMS A drainage ditch passes through a culvert under the road. VITAL STATISTICS - Sight Distance: - Road Width: 24' -Shoulder Width: 26' - Comments: None Vertical: Adequate (N/D) Horizontal: Adequate (N/D) -- Side slopes: N/I) - Road Surface: Gravel RECOMMENDATIONS As with Area "M", the culvert should be extended 10 feet and the ditch should be filled with suitable aggregate to permit a 24 foot road with 4 foot shoulders. • • AREA "0" LOCATION Catherine Store Road between mile 0.8 and 1.1 DESCRIPTION AND/OR PROBLEMS This area, like area "E", is very narrow in spots and should be widened. In addition, a sharp curve in this area should be straightened. VITAL STATISTICS -Sight Distance: -Road Width: -Shoulder Width: -Comments; Vertical: Adequate (N/D) Horizontal: Inadequate (N/D) 16"-20' - Side Slopes: N/D N/D -- Road surface: Gravel Very narrow right of way RECOMMENDATIONS It is recommended that adequate right of way be procured to widen the road to 24 feet. The sharp iccurve rveeshould also be straightened to permit a sight CURVE "P" LOCATION Catherine Store Road at mile 1.4 DESCRIPTION AND/OR PROBLEMS Curve "P" is very sharp of way is very narrow. VITAL STATISTICS -Sight Distance: -Road Width: N/D -Shoulder Width: N/D -Comments: None and should be straighted. Vertical: Adequate (N/D) Horizontal: Adequate (N/D) -- Side Slopes: 6 to 1 - Road Surface: Gravel The right RECOMMENDATIONS Right of way must be procured and the curve radius lengthen- ed. Fill is required at this curve. CURVE "Q" LOCATION Catherine Store Road at mile 2.3 DESCRIPTION AND/OR PROBLEMS Curve "Q" has a fairly short radius with a sight only 190 feet. Right of way appears adequate. VITAL STATISTICS - Sight Distance: -Road Width: 20' -0" -Shoulder Width: N/D - Comments: None Vertical: Adequate (N/D) Horizontal: 190 feet - Side Slopes: 25 to 1 -- Road Surface: Gravel distance of RECOMMENDATIONS Curve "Q" should be straightened to permit a 275' sight dis- tance. CURVE "R" LOCATION Catherine Store Road at mile 2.4 DESCRIPTION AND/OR PROBLEMS Curve "R" is located at the Road and County Road 102. Sight power pole is located within the intersection of Catherine Store distance is only 180 feet and a curve. VITAL STATISTICS -Sight Distance: Vertical: Adequate (N/D) Horizontal: 180 feet • -Road Width: 20' - Side Slopes: 4 to 1 --Shoulder Width: N/D - Road Surface: Gravel -Comments: Power pole located in curve. RECOMMENDATIONS Catherine Store Road should be straightened to permit 275' sight distance. The power pole must be relocated. • f • CATTLE CREEK RANCH TRAFFIC PROJECTIONS ON THE CATTLE CREEK AND CATHERINE STORE ROADS Prepared by: Eldorado Engineering Company 823 Blake Avenue -- P.O. Box 669 Glenwood Springs, Colorado 81601 May 1982 Ir1TRODUCTION • The Cattle Creek Ranch as proposed is a planned unit development comprising a mixture of approximately 786 single-family and cluster housing units, some commercial usage and a golf course. Traffic volumes on Cattle Creek Road (County Road 1113) and Catherine Store Road (County Road #100) will increase appreciably. The existing • conditions of these two roads are adequate for the current traffic flow, but are not adequate for the proposed planned unit development's traffic. This study is made only to supplement the report entitled "Cattle Creek Ranch Off -Site Improvements on the Cattle Creek and Catherine Store Roads" prepared by Eldorado Engineering in February 1982. • Purpose The purpose of this study is to make future projections of traffic flow caused by the Cattle Creek Ranch Development on the Cattle Creek • Road (County Road #113) and the Catherine Store Road (County Road #100). This study will also give insight as to the type and width of pavement to use and shoulder and right-of-way widths. • • • • Traffic Counts The areas that were used in this study are as follows: Name Period of Study Location of Counter 1. West Glenwood 5/11/72 thru 5/14/82 One counter by the intersection of Hwy. 6 and 24 and County Road #130 and one counter by the south stop sign at the intersection of County Road 130 and County Road 133. 2. Westbank Subdivision 5/11/72 thru 5/14/82 One counter at the entrance to the subdivision and counters at the Golf Club entrance and exit. 3. Red Table Acres 5/17/82 thru 5/19/82 One counter at the entrance of the subdi- vision.. 4. Oak Meadows Sub- division 5/21/82 thru 5/14/82 One counter at both entrances to -the sub- ! division. 5. Midland Avenue 5/11/82 thru 5/14/82 One counter placed across from the Racquet Club. • 6. Snowmass Village 5/17/82 thru 5/19/82 One counter placed at the intersection of Brush Creek Road and Hwy. 82. • 7. Cattle Creek Road (County Road #113) 5/17/82 thru 5/19/82 The results of which are given in Table 1. One counter placed approxi- mately one mile from Hwy. 82. • SUMMARY OF COUNTS TABLE 1 Location Units ADT/24 hrs. ADT/Unit DVH % DVH to ADT/24 hrs. •' **West Glenwood 235 2831 12 189 6.68 **Westbank Subdi- vision 83 453 5.5 56 12.36 40*Red Table Acres 65 900.5 14 • **Oak Meadows 78 235 3 ***Midland Avenue - -- 4167 268 6.43 projected in winter it doubles to 8334 ADT ***Snowmass Village Road 3000 projected in winter it increases by 2.5 or 7500 ADT Cattle Creek Road 437 • Westbank Golf Course 27 453 16.8 parking ADT/parking spaces spaces • ADT = Average Daily Traffic DHV = Design Hour Volume • *More of a recreation type road and, therefore, will be invalid by unit count. **Oak Meadows Subdivision, Westbank Subdivision and West Glenwood are more or less like the Cattle Creek Ranch PUD even though West Glenwood is closer to a town and because of this generated a little more traffic, but was still used as part of this study. It was determined from this study that an average unit will generate seven trips per day. ***Two roads (Midland Avenue and Snowmass Village Road) were used in this study to help show the county that a 24'wide chip & seal road with an average shoulder width of 2' (wider where possible) can handle at least 8000 ADT with only minor maintenance over a number of years. Projected Traffic The projected Average Daily Traffic (ADT) count was determined as follows: Type Units ADT/Unit ADT *35% Single Family (in work force) 275 **7 1925 *15% Cluster Residential 118 ***4 472 *15% Multi -Family PUD 118 ***5 590 *35% Retirement Community 275 *k3 825 TOTAL 786 Avg. 4.9 trips/ 3812 ADT unit *percentages given by Ron Liston, Cattle Creek Ranch Development Co- ordinator. **Counts received by our study and generally backed by the Trip Generation Manual from the Institute of Transportation Engineers an Informational Report. ***Counts taken from the Trip Generation Manual from the Institute of Transportation Engineers an Informational Report. Also from traffic counts taken on the Westbank Golf Course, it was determined that on the average there are 16.8 ADT per parking space. Assuming that there will be 50 parking spaces at the Cattle Creek Golf Course and using the 16.8 ADT per parking space will produce a total of 840 ADT. Therefore, the total ADT of the planned unit development will be 4652. • Results To project the traffic flow that will travel the Cattle Creek Road • (County Road #113) versus the Catherine Store Road (County Road #100), it was assumed that approximately 70% of the ADT will travel the Cattle Creek Road (County Road #113) and 30% of the AWT will travel the Catherine Store Road (County Road #100). The results are shown in Table 2. By the results of our study on other subdivisions, the Design Hour • Volume was determined to be approximately 8.5% of the ADT. In this study it was noted that only 35% of the planned unit development is in the general work force and that only 5% of the rest of the planned unit development will be leaving or arriving during the Design Hour, therefore, the Design Hour Volume will be as shown in Table 2. • In this study, it was found that a 24' wide chip & seal road with 2' wide shoulders (wider where possible) can handle all the traffic that will be generated from the Cattle Creek Ranch Planned Unit Development. • TABLE 2 Item Cattle Creek Road Catherine Store Road Average Daily Traffic 3256 1396 • (ADT) Design Hour Volume 111 47 (DHV) Chip & Seal Road Width 24 24 • • • • • Shoulder Width Minimum 2' wider where Minimum 2' possible Conclusions and Recommendations It is evident that the Cattle Creek Ranch Planned Unit Development will generate a large traffic volume. This volume can be controlled to flow smoothly on the Cattle Creek Road (County Road #113) and Catherine Store Road (County Road #100) if the roads have a 24' wide mat of chip and seal and have a minimum of 2' shoulders (wider where possible). It is recommended, however, that the improvements listed by Eldorado Engineering in their report entitled "Cattle Creek Ranch Off -Site .Improvements on the Cattle Creek and Catherine Store Roads" prepared in February 1982 be followed. The intersections of both the Cattle Creek Road (County Road W113) and the Catherine Store Road (County Road #100) with Colorado State Highway No. 82 have an acceleration lane, deceleration lane and left hand turn lane. These lanes have also been thoroughly studied and should be able to accomodate the design hour volume with little or no interruption of Colorado State Highway No. 82. • • • • • IP w m co June 28, 1982 oli # 0 Land Design Partnership o , 403 W. 1st Street a ' Glenwood Springs, CO 81601 00 CC 0 ATTfl: Ron Liston # 01 -RE: Cattle Creek Ranch PUD - Off -Site Road Structural Sections CD c c- Dear Ron: i z As per your request, I have performed some research work to determine w a a structural section for the Cattle Creek Road (County Road #113) and # z 0 for the Catherine Store Road (County Road P100). Our recommendations z o are as follows: (1) Minimum base thickness shall be 6" as per Section w o 5.02.07 of the Garfield County Subdivision Regulations, (2) Pavement co • _ kind shall be chip and seal, (3) The application rate of the seal will • w be 0.30 gallons per square yard, (4) The aggregate or chips shall have D ca nominal size of 0.135" to 0.5" and be applied at a rate of 20 pounds # z a, per square yard. The above recommendations shall be verified by soils o co test prior to construction. o "performed by Engineering z°m As was reported in the traffic study Eldoradoldorado En i2wide Q in May 1982, a chip and seal road 24' wide with app shoulders can handle traffic volume of 7000 - 8000 ADT. The above • o w proposed surfacing improvements will adequately serve existing as well oo z as projected traffic volumes in the Cattle Creek and Catherine Store z w road areas. 5=a w u If you have any questions or require additional information, please # a ¢ feel free to contact Roger Hocking or myself. z w co Sincerely, a " o Barney Fix, EIT BF/jlw xc: Roger Hocking 40 OFFICES: GLENWO©D SPRINGS • RIFLE • DURANGO ASPEN OFFICE 0241 VENTNOR AVENUE ASPEN, COLORADO 81611 CHEYENNE OFFICE 3130 HENDERSON DRIVE. CHEYENNE, WYOMING 82001 GLENWOOD SPRINGS OFFICE P.O. BOX 219 GLENWOOD SPRINGS. COLORADO 81602 STEAMBOAT OFFICE P.O. BOX 5220 STEAMBOAT VILLAGE, COLORADO 80499 WRIGHT WATER ENGINEERS, INC. ENGINEERING CONSULTANTS 2420 ALCOTT STREET DENVER. COLORADO 80211 (303) 458-6201 Glenwood Springs P.O. Box 219 Tel. 945-7755 April 5, 1982 Ron Liston 403 W. 1st Glenwood Springs, CO 81601 RE: Water Resources Cattle Creek Ranch Dear Ron: KENNETH R. WRIGHT WILLIAM L. LORAN RALPH L. TOREN R}CHARD D. JOHNSON FRANK J. TRELEASE LEO M. EISEL MARILYN M. STOKES We have reveiwed the water requirements for the ultimate Cattle Creek Ranch development and have studied the water resources (physical IM and legal) available to the development. This letter presents a summary of our conclusions. The ultimate development will include a central municipal water supply that will be able to serve the needs of approximately 860 equivalent residential units. This total includes water necessary to meet the commercial and retail needs of the development. In addition, Cattle Creek Ranch will have a golf course that will need irrigation water for 75 acres. There is some limited irrigation for open spaces and water will be needed to fill and maintain one or more reservoirs on the property. Cattle Creek Ranch currently has a water resource plan and appropriate Water Court decrees to meet the needs for 150 EQRs, 14 acres of irrigated land and a small reservoir. The water resources for this portion of the development are defined in a Division 5 Water Court decree, Case No. W-3496. We recommend that this augmentation plan remain intact and not be modified. The development, for the additional 710 EQR, golf course, etc., will require approximately 500 acre-feet of water per year - about half for the central potable water supply system. The potable water system is expected to receive its water from wells drilled into the Cattle Creek alluvium on the ranch. Water for the reservoir and irrigation can come from several sources including the Eureka Ditch, Cattle Creek wells, and water pumped directly from Cattle Creek. Besides the water rights transferred in Case W-3496, the development ownes 20% of the water rights in the Monarch Ditch and 57.6% of the water in the Eureka Ditch. These ditches normally yield over 600 acre-feet annually to the ranch. Ron Liston -2- April 5, 1982 • From an engineering point of view, we believe that the historic consumptive use of these rights on the ranch exceed the annual future ultimate consumptive use requirements for the development. Historically, most of the use has been in May and June. If the development converts and uses these rights then the development must develop about 250 acre-feet of reservoir • storage. This reservoir would store water in May and June for use later in the year for direct use or for augmentation of diversions that are called out by senior rights. Besides transferring the Monarch and Eureka water, the development has several real opportunities to acquire additional water that was not historic- ally appurtenant to the ranch. These options, if exercised, would reduce the amount of storage necessary to adequately operate and maintain a viable water supply system. It is our opinion that Cattle Creek Ranch currently owns water rights (when transferred by the Water Court to new points of diversion and type of use) that are adequate, with sufficient storage, to meet the ultimate water needs of the development. Further, it is our opinion that the ranch can develop an adequate physical supply to meet its potable, irrigation and other water needs. • • • • • • If you need additional details at this time, please do not hesitate to call. WLL:ep cc: Frank Lerner John Dickson 771-024.00WR Very truly yours, WRIGHT WATER ENGINEERS, INC. BY VV /061/4 -0A4 - William L. Lorah chen and associates, Inc. CONSULTING ENGINEERS SOIL L FOUNDATION 96 S. ZUNI • DENVER, COLORADO 80223 • 303/744.7105 ENG IN EERING 1924 EAST FIRST STREET • CASPER, WYOMING 82601 • 307/234-2126 July 1, 1977 Subject: Preliminary Geotechnical Investiga- tion for the Cattle Creek Ranch Development, Garfield County, Colorado. Job No. 14,701 Mr. Frank Lerner c/o Ron Liston Land Design Partnership r Suite 208, Village Plaza Glenwood Springs, Colorado 80601 Gentlemen: We have completed our field and laboratory studies for the preliminary / geotechnical investigation at the subject site. We are presently drafting the final report. Our investigation indicates that there are no serious problems associated with the site geology or soil conditions. It should be feasible to develop the property as a residential subdivision. We ex- pect to have our final report out within the next week. This report will describe the site geology and subsoil conditions and discuss their expected 40 effect upon the proposed development. if we can provide you with additional information prior to the submittal of the final report, please let us know. • RGM/med r • Sincerely, CHEN AND ASSOCIATES, INC. By alph Mock, En sneering Geologist cher and associates CONSULTING GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERS 5O80 RD. 154 GLENWOOD SPR1NGS,COLORADO x1801 303.'945-7451 PRELIMINARY CrrOT -ILNICAL INVESTIGATION CATTLE CREEK RANCH NCH DEVELOP? N"T, GARFIELD COUNTY, COLORADO Prepared For: Mr. Frank Lerner c/o Eldorado Engineering P.O. Box 669 Glenwood Springs, CO'816O2 Job Pb. 23,746 April 13, 1982 OFFICES: CASPER a COLORADO SPRINGS • DENVER • SALT LAKE CITY i *CONCLUSIONS SCOPE PREVIOUS STUDIES PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT SITE CONDITIONS GBOLOGIC SLICING TABLE OF CONTENTS 1 2 7 3 3 4 SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS Engineering Properties 7 # GEOLOGIC CONDITIONS AFFECTING THE PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT Slope Stability 8 Shallow Groundwater 9 Earthquake Potential 9 Flooding 10 • EXCAVATION AND SITE GRADING Construction Slopes 10 Slope Stabilization 12 Subgrade Stabilization 12 Drainage Considerations 13 PRELIMINARY FOUNDATION RECOMMENDATIONS 13 FLOOR SLABS 14 CORROSION 15 =3R LIMITATIONS 15 TABLE OP CONTENTS - (cont.) 'FIGURE 1 - LOGS OF EXPLORATORY HOLES FIGURE 2 - LOGS OF EXPLORATORY HOT,FS =RE RE i - LOOS OF EXPLORATORY HOLES, LEGEND & NOTES FIGURES 4-11 -- Siti'ELL-CONSOLIDATION TEST RESULTS TABLE I - SL NARY OF LABORATORY TEST RESULTS TABLE II - RESULTS OF CHEMICAL TESTS PLATE I - SURFICIAL GEOLOGY MAP AND LOCATION OF TEST HOLES PLATE II - CATTLE CREEK PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT "I" AND POTENTIALLY UNSTABLE SLOPES CONCLUSIONS (1) From a geotechnical engineering and geologic consideration, the site is suitable for cevelopm'nt of the proposed residential subdivision. No conditions of a geologic nature occur at the site which would constitute a major hazard or render the proposed development infeasible; however, the design and construction of facilities should accomodate certain geologic and subsoil conditions. These conditions are described herein. (2) Soil conditions a . the site are relatively complex and generally consist of fine-grained soils with scattered gravel deposits. The fine-grained soils are moderately susceptible to erosion and will require protection. (3) In general, spread footings and drilled pier foundation systems will be suitable for residential and other lightly loaded structures. Additional investigation should be conducted for individual building sites. (4) Areas of shallow ground water and soft subgrade conditions occur within some of the major drainages, and may require dewatering or ground stabilization. techniques. The extent of these areas is rather limited and generally confined to valley bottom areas and the golf course and dam sites. Other localized areas occur. (5) In general, grades steeper than 30% do not exist throughout the building sites, however, areas of slope instability associated with free ground water have been identified within some building sites below existing irrigation ditches. These areas should be studied on an individual basis. LIMITATIONS This report has been prepared in accordance with generally acceped geotechnical engineering practices in this area for the use by the 4 client for design poses. The conclusions and recommendations presented are based on the data obtained from the exploratory holes at the locations shown on Plate I and on data obtained from a geologic field reconnaissance • of the area. The subsoil encountered during the exploratory investigation indicate a general condition across the site. Variations with respect to depth, type and engineering properties of the subsoils should be expected 411 and may require re-evaluatiQn of the recomendations contzined herein. Site specific studies, on-site observation of excavations and testing of site grading operations by a representative of the soil engineer is • ,-ecorme :died.. • • RJV/dc cc: Fon Liston DEN AND ASSOCIATES, DIC. nald ,7 •asquez, Engineering Geologist Reviewed By X` r 't" 4_,— Steven L. Pawlak, P.E. PROPERTY OWNERS OF RECORDS WITHIN 300' OF CATTLE CREEK RANCH P.U.D. John A. McNulty Box 944 Carbondale, CO 81623 Gary K. McNulty Box 200 Carbondale, CO 81623 Upper Cattle Crk. Schse. Assoc. Mary T. Squires 0720 - 121 Rd. Carbondale, CO 81623 Merril & Delores Laurence 11104 Co. Rd. 115 Carbondale, CO 81623 Colo. Country Panorama Est. P.O. Box X Basalt, CO 81621 Edward B. & Michal A. Simpson Box 238 El Jebel, CO 81628 Patrick J. & Rita J. Hunter Box 260 Aspen, CO 81612 • LEGAL DESCRIPTION THE S 1/2 OF THE NE 1/4 AND LOTS 7, 8, 12 and 13 AND THE WEST 29.7 ACRES OF LOT 14 AND THE WEST 980.10 FEET OF LOT 15, EXCEPT A PORTION OF A TRACT CONVEYED BY DEED RECORDED IN BOOK 61 AT PAGE 553 AND EXCEPT THAT PORTION OF LOT 7 LYING SOUTHEASTERLY OF THE RIGHT-OF-WAY OF AN EXISTING COUNTY ROAD (#113), ALL IN SECTION 5; AND SE 1/4 SE 1/4, SECTION 6 EXCEPT A PORTION OF THAT SAME TRACT CONVEYED BY DEED RECORDED IN BOOK 61 AT PAGE 553; AND SE 1/4 NE 1/4, SECTION 7; AND ALL OF SECTION 8 EXCEPT A PARCEL OF LAND DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS: BEGINNING AT THE NORTHEAST CORNER SAID SECTION 8; THENCE S 89°56'46.2" W., 1,641.369', ALONG THE NORTH LINE SAID SECTION 8; THENCE S 0017'48" E., 35.37; THENCE N 89°56'46.2" E. AND PARALLEL TO THE NORTH LINE SAID SECTION 8, 1,641.746; THENCE N 00°54'23" W., 35.37' TO THE POINT OF BEGINNING, CONTAINING 1.333 ACRES MORE OR LESS, ALL IN TOWNSHIP 7 SOUTH, RANGE 87 WEST, OF THE 6TH PRINCIPAL MERIDIAN. 41 • • • American Land Title Association Commitment - Modified 10/73 COMMITMENT FOR TITLE INSURANCE ISSUED BY STEWART TITLE GUARANTY COMPANY STEWART TITLE GUARANTY COMPANY, A Texas Corporation, herein called the Company, for valuable consideration, hereby commits to issue its policy or policies of title insurance, as identified in Schedule A, in favor of the proposed Insured named in Schedule A, as owner or mortgagee of the estate or interest covered hereby in the land described or referred to in Schedule A, upon payment of the premiums and charges therefor; all subject to the provisions of Schedules A and B and to the Conditions and Stipulations hereof. This Commitment shall be effective only when the identity of the proposed Insured and the amount of the policy or policies committed for have been inserted in Schedule A hereof by the Company, either at the time of the issuance of this Commitment or by subsequent endorsement. This Commitment is preliminary to the issuance of such policy or policies of title insurance and all liability and obligations hereunder shall cease and terminate six months after the effective date hereof or when the policy or policies committed for shall issue, whichever first occurs, provided that the failure to issue such policy or policies is not the fault of the Company, This Commitment shall not be valid or binding until countersigned by an authorized officer or agent. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the Company has caused this Commitment to be signed and sealed, to become valid when countersigned by an authorized officer or agent of the Company, all in accordance with its By- Laws. This Commitment is effective as of the date shown in Schedule A as "Effective Date." S'I`EWA, IRT TITLE Chairman of the Board 165 GUARANTY COMPANY 19 0 8 Serial No, cc 108024 President SCHEDULE A Order Number: 3845 t. Effective date: JULY 16, 1981 AT 8:00 O'CLOCK A.M. 2. Policy or Policies to be issued: A. ALTA Owners Policy Proposed Insured: CATTLE CREEK RANCH B. ALTA Loan Policy Proposed Insured: c. Commitment Number: Amount of Insurance Premium $ TO BE DETERMINED $ 3 3. The estate or interest in the land described or referred to in this commitment and coverer. herein is fee simple and title thereto is at the effective date hereof vested in: CATTLE CREEK RANCH 4. The land referred to in this commitment is described as follows' S2iNE1/4 and Lots 7, 8, 12, 13 and the West 29.7 acres of Lot 14, except a tract conveyed by deed recorded in Book 61 at page 553, in Section 5; SE4SE 4 of Section 6; SE'NEQ of Section 7; All of Section 8; All in Township 7 South, Range 87 West of the 6th Principal Meridian. EXCEPTING those parcels conveyed to John A. McNulty by deed recorded October 28, 1977 in Book 502 at Page 214 as Reception No. 281481. (Copy attached) COUNTY OF GARFIELD STATE OF COLORADO NOTE: The tract conveyed by deed recorded in Book 61 at page 553 was the following: Beginning at the SW corner of Lot 8, Section 6, Township 7 South, Range 87 West; thence East along the South line of said Lot 8 about 1320 feet to a point on the line to Sections 6 and 5; thence Northerly along said line to said Sections 6 and 5, 115.75 feet to a point; thence East along the South line of Lot 11 in Section 5, 445 feet to a point on the Southerly line of the County road; thence with and along the Southerly line of said road, S. 46°57' E. 43 feet to a point; thence with and along said last mentioned line, E. 52 feet to a point about 25 feet E. of the E. bank of Coulter Creek; thence South 180 feet to a point East of the East bank of said Creek; thence West about 1845 feet to a point; thence North 50 feet to the place of beginning. Authorized Counterslgnatuje 1652 Page2 m'IF VAL it rl` 'f 1 rig l GUARANTY COMPANY • Order Number: 3845 SCHEDULE B — Section 1 411, Requirements Commitment Number. The following are the requirements to be complied with: Item (a) Payment to or for the account of the grantors or mortgagors of the full consideration for the estate or interest to be insured. • Item (b) Proper instrument(s) creating the estate or interest to be insured must be executed and duly filed for record, to -wit: ---NO REQUIREMENTS AT THIS TIME--- • • • • • 1653 Page 3 STEi,%A11 f'1'ITLI GUARANTY COMPANY i 1 SCHEDULE B Section 2 Exceptions Order Number: 3845 Commitment Number: The policy or policies to be issued will contain exceptions to the following unless the same are disposed of to the satisfaction of the Company: 1. Rights or claims of parties in possession not shown by the public records. 2, Easements, or claims of easements, not shown by the public records. 3. Discrepancies, conflicts in boundary lines, shortage in area, encroachments, and any facts which a correct survey and inspection of the premises would disclose and which are not shown by the public records. 4. Any lien, or right to a lien, for services, labor or material theretofore or hereafter furnished, imposed by law and not shown by the public records. 5. Defects, liens, encumbrances, adverse claims or other matters, if any, created, first appearing in the public records or attaching subsequent to the effective date hereof but prior to the date the proposed insured acquires of record for value the estate or interest or mortgage thereon covered by this Commitment. 6. Any and all unpaid taxes and assessments. 7. Any law, ordinance or governmental regulation (including but not limited to building and zoning ordinance) restricting or regulating or prohibiting the occupancy, use or enjoyment of the land, or regulating the character, dimensions, or location of any improvement now or hereafter erected on said land, or prohibiting a separation in ownership or a reduction in the dimensions or area of any lot or parcel of land. 8. The effect of inclusion in any general or specific water conservancy, fire protection, soil conservation or other district or inclusion in any water service or street improvement area. g. Rights of way and easements of the Eureka Ditch No. 1, Somers Ditch, the Lewis Ditch, Swede's Ditch, Dutchman Ditch, and H.C.L. Ditch, insofar as the sane may affect the subject property, 10. Right of way for road as described in Road Viewers Report recorded December 28, 1888, in Record Book No. 1, page 103, insofar as the same may affect the NE!1W4 of Section 8, Township 7 South, Range 88 West of the 6th P.M. 11. All existing roads, highways, ditches, pipelines, utilities, rights of way and easements therefor. 12. Fifty percent non -participating royalty in and to proceeds derived from sale of oil, gas and other minerals of whatsoever kind or description, produced and saved from subject property, as reserved to Austin F. Heuschkel and Doris B. Heuschkel by deed recorded October 8, 1968 in Book 397 at page 183, and any and all assignments thereof or interests therein. 13. Easement and right of way for pipeline purposes as granted to Rocky Mountain Natural Gas Company, Inc. by Austin F. Heuschkel and Doris 8. Heuschkel in the instrument recorded April 29, 1969 in Book 401 at page 388 as Reception No. 243289, in which the specific location of the easement is not defined. CONTINUED ON PAGE 4-A Exceptions numbered are hereby omitted. 1654 Page 4 STEWART TITLE GUARANTY COMPANY CONTINUATiON SHEET SCHEDULE 8 - Section 2 Order Number: 3845 Commitment Number: 14. Stock watering Easement as granted by document recorded October 28, 1977 in Book 502 at Page 211 as Reception No. 281479. (Copy attached) 15. Restrictions as contained in document recorded November 3, 1980 in Book 559 at Page 101 as Reception No. 308990. (Copy attached) 16. Amendment to Cattle Creek Ranch P.U.D. as recorded August 18, 1980 in Book 554 at Page 26 as Reception No. 306576. (Copy attached) 17. Subdivision Improvement Agreement recorded August 18, 1980 in Book 554 at Page 29 as Reception No. 306577. (Copy attached) 18. Articles of Incorporation of The Cattle Creek Ranch Homeowners Association recorded November 3, 1981 in Book 559 at Page 88 as Reception No. 308989. 19. Deed of Trust from Cottonwood Pass, a limited partnership, to the Public Trustee of Garfield County for the use of Jopesna, a Colorado limited partner- ship, to secure $319,607.78, dated September 24, 1976, recorded October 1, 1976 in Book 489 at Page 47 as Reception No. 274683. 20. Deed of Trust from Cattle Creek Ranch, a Joint Venture, to the Public Trustee of Garfield County for the use of Cottonwood Pass, a Colorado limited partnership, to secure $ dated September 6, 1977, recorded September 12, 1977 in Book 500 at Page 657 as Reception No. 280639. Page 4_ a 0055 S'1'E%VAler TITLIi GUARANTY C[1MPAN1' CONDITIONS AND STIPULATIONS T. The term mortgage, when used herein, shall include deed of trust, trust deed, or other security instrument. 2. If the proposed Insured has or acquires actual knowledge of any defect, lien, encumbrance, adverse claim or other matter affecting the estate or interest or mortgage thereon covered by this Commitment other than those shown in Schedule B hereof, and shall fail to disclose such knowledge to the Company in writing, the Company shall be relieved from liability for any loss or damage resulting from any act of reliance hereon to the extent the Company is prejudiced by failure to so disclose such knowledge. If the proposed Insured shall disclose such knowledge to the Company, or if the Company otherwise acquires actual knowledge of any such defect, lien, encumbrance, adverse claim or other matter, the Company at its option may amend Schedule B of this Commitment accordingly, but such amendment shall not relieve the Company from liability previously incurred pursuant to paragraph 3 of these Conditions and Stipulations. 3. Liability of the Company under this Commitment shall be only to the named proposed Insured and such parties included under the definition of Insured in the form of policy or policies committed for and only for actual loss incurred in reliance hereon in undertaking in good faith (a) to comply with the requirements hereof, or (b) to eliminate exceptions shown in Schedule B, or (c) to acquire or create the estate or interest or mortgage thereon covered by this Commitment. In no event shall such liability exceed the amount stated in Schedule A for the policy or policies committed for and such liability is subject to the insuring provisions and the Conditions and Stipulations and the exclusions from coverage of the form of policy or policies committed for in favor of the proposed Insured which are hereby incorporated by reference and are made a part of this Commitment except as expressly modified herein. 4. Any claim of loss or damage, whether or not based on negligence, and which arises out of the status of the title to the estate or interest or the lien of the insured mortgage covered hereby or any action asserting such claim, shall be restricted to the provisions and Conditions and Stipulations of this Commitment. S T E WA R T TITLE GUARANTY COMPANY Page 5 CATTLE CREEK RR11CH PU �] TRAFFIC ImpRC:T J TUDY CATTLE CREEK RANCH FUD Traffic Impact Study October 1983 Matthew J. Delich, P.E. 3413 Banyan Avenue Loveland, Colorado 8OS37 303-669-2061 • • • • • • • • • TABLE OF CONTENTS I. Introduction Page 1 11. Existing Conditions 2 Description of the Roads 3 Current Traffic Volumes 6 Current Operations 7 Accident History 9 III. Proposed Developments 10 Trip Generation 11 Trip Distribution and Assignment 11 IV. Traffic Impacts 11 Expected Operation 11 "Narrows Analysis 12 Safety Analysis 14 Other Impacts 15 V. Conclusions and Recommendations 17 Conclusions 17 Recommendations 17 Appendix A --Cost Estimates I. INTRODUCTION This transportation study addresses the operation and safety • concerns of Garfield County Roads 113, 103, and 100 between Colorado Highway 82 and the location of the proposed Cattle Creek Ranch PUD. During the course of the analysis, numerous contacts were made with the developer, planning consultant, Garfield County Road Supervisor, and the Garfield County Planning Department. • • • • • • • • The Cattle Creek PUD is an approved development in rural Garfield County. In the approval process, Garfield County placed the following transportation related conditions on the Cattle Creek Ranch PUD: That, prior to preliminary plat approval, the applicant shall demonstrate that it has made its best efforts to accomplish the following off-site road improvements on County Road 113, which, in any case, must be completed in accordance with Garfield County design standards, and to the satisfaction of the Garfield County Road Supervisor prior to final plat approval, or provided for by a Sub- division Improvements Agreement: a. At a point approximately 3.4 miles east of the intersection of Colorado State Highway 82 and County Road 113, the applicant shall reconstruct County Road 113 to Garfield County road standards, which work shall consist of pre -engineering evaluation, acquisition in right-of-way, and con- struction of a new section of County Road 113 for a distance of approximately one eighth (1/8) mile; b. At a point approximately 3.6 miles east of the intersection of Colorado State Highway 82 and County Road 113, the applicant shall reconstruct the intersection of County Roads 112 and 113 so as to relocate that intersection approximately one hundred (100) feet to the east of its present location; c. At a point approximately 6.4 miles east of the intersection of Colorado State Highway 82 and County Road 113, the applicant shall install approximately six hundred (600) feet of guardrail on the south side of County Road 113; d. At a point approximately 6.4 miles east of the intersection of Colorado State Highway 82 and County Road 113, the applicant shall install approximately three hundred (300) feet of binwall or Jersey barrier -type concrete barriers to contain rocks falling from the North side of County Road 113; and e. At a point approximately 7.0 miles east of the intersection of Colorado State Highway 82 and County Road 113, the applicant shall install proper signage at the intersection with County Road 100. The purpose of this report is to verify the priorities stated in. these conditions or reorder the priorities from a capacity, safety, and practical point of view. The remainder of this report consists of the following format: - Existing conditions - Description of the roads - Current traffic volumes - Current operations - Accident history - Proposed developments - Listing of proposed developments - Trip generation - Trip distribution and assignment - Traffic impacts - Expected operations - "Narrows" analysis - Safety analysis - Other impacts - Conclusions and recommendations II. EXISTING CONDITIONS • The Cattle Creek Ranch PUD is located near the confluence of Cattle Creek and Coulter Creek in Sections S and 8 of Township 7 South and Range 87 West in Garfield County, Colorado, as shown in Figure 1. The current use of the land is that of an equestrian • center and agricultural activities, primarily hay operations. This area is primarily served by three Garfield County Roads (113, 103, and 100) as shown in Figure 2. This area is also served from Colorado Highway 82 by Garfield County Road 114+ and 115, but these routes are more circuitous than 113, 103, or 100. It is * also served by the Cottonwood Pass Road from Gypsum in Eagle County. However, this road is not open during the winter months and, as such,. cannot be considered as reasonable, consistent access to Cattle Creek Ranch. 1 '•sl fiercer24 12. • I. ...1 `` - i • blen waod Segs 1tdM3763f Ff 11 - - ..--,..--‘7,7y , 4 ill • I , I +1 — F. /! giies \�`+ , 1 r • Reaert'Di; 3 +j{ :. -,-, • f i `e q `• )) I1 4si l, T� J •' .h. '� ,, �i . lal 11 ..' _1l' 7 i ., \v -,i • LLti ,..,„-5,6„, 1. S ,. * 11 L 13 • rY74' qpG l 1 � 6054 { } J p5}G 1 1 GDg17CZ1iY ,,,4• o r .I. \,3 `. 37.1,,. =Fp y �� . � [ 15.%_,1w`F 1 BR S T . wAl1` { \'.f,... ' ( - . f \ ?lira' kis s 'r �! f n 1 f. I i 1 N 1O i-:11 n '; 1, �` -� •. ▪ l C1ft.r•H u 117(-1-; � �', \: ' ti..Laaxwi/r:' 1a ` r 1 :a ' ! r j...,/-- i� " a'JI _ ' I ,,7p -RN. ' rl .:.....,,.,--i.,..„ - • –r -'GRAND M.S4r 9u i, . 9' 9x35 fes•._ y ,:;..d,ia ' I 1 if'_ 1 fir,f'r ` ..7..'.17 'II 19 'f 4";.:11%. G'J 34'•'i f 1> I13 I8 1 ; "r1 lf.rn Arns 11 '� ▪ 31910,c- A ANI `7r�'� E. - - ��-...�- �.. a CU 1.'vliiJc/I ` clir •+� 1 r�ss .' j 1, `sa �i 1i.2.1`,.+ R11 - h I Ir _ 1 k I l, % fl 1 I ✓7a 7, 20. " j' .?sI I \ x6 1 Is 47.E 1 c .iJ ^fir_"'` -,e,_�r , � � ti '` j 444L-1-1: tr. I I t f { � . 4. „y } �rLL s ', i 'lia ▪ S P 11 - $10017.1- I k 1SidrrgD—Tf 6 36 l 1AT • 7 1 � _'7C CA. • . ;CREEK .RA J fes' � —j -� Itl Cattle' Creek 1- R6dq. 76 • 71 c— 1 • tq • Mme yf• .:,x"il,i :Rr. 41!A V] 7 11 11 1; IN ,1" _,_ I 19 '!7 1f�4 tia5 115 r 30 1 n ▪ ti 1 r •- 1 f' f.3, 16 ! Qa• 6 r r�° ..-I 7 / on 1:2S) ac` y CAUCINOA4 ¢l r•r - 1 48 1� y`. 1 rVKK Carbzs!dale. +6„ �4Cr�— ► + .91•?Lfid ffurcherr 1 �. 'a 1.,1 p 12 1iI . _1 LOCATION OF CATTLE CHEEK POD • FIGURE 1 • • E C3 G7 CC FIGURE 2 Description of the Roads The following description of each county road (113, 103, and 100) begins at the intersection of Colorado Highway 82 and each • respective road to the Cattle Creek Ranch PUD access point or where the road ends. The description, provided by milepost indications, shows changes in alignment, notable side friction, changes in width, changes in paving material, or other character- istics that could affect the capacity, dr:iveability, or safety of the road. This description is provided so that the reader might better understand analyses, comments, conclusions, or recom- mendations provided later in this report. • Garfield County Road 113 (G.C.R. 113) G.C.R. 113 is shown in Figure 3. The approximate location of significant characteristics are also shown. G.C.R. 113 inter- sects Colorado Highway 82 (C.H. 82) approximately 8 miles south of Glenwood Springs (milepost 0.0). Just east of C.H. 82 is a four - leg intersection consisting of a frontage road, G.C.R. 110, and G.C.R. 113. The roads entering this intersection are at skewed angles. There is a school bus turn -around just east of the inter- section. At milepost 0.1, the road is 23-24 feet wide. A drop- off begins at this location on the south side of the road. The speed limit at this location is 40 MPH. The top of slope is 4-5 feet from the edge of the roadway and the drop-off is from 10-20 feet. The slope is vertical or very close to vertical. • The road proceeds to the east at 0-2 percent vertical climb. Numerous driveways intersect G.C.R. 113 on the south side of the road. Due to the drop-off on this side of the road, most drive- ways climb to G.C.R. 113 along the slope and intersect at skewed angles. Often sight distance is limited. From milepost 0.8 to 1.3, a number of driveways access on the north side of the road. • Most of these enter at a skewed angle and have sight distance problems to the east, primarily due to embankment. From milepost 0.0 to 3.1, the roadway varies from 21 to 24 feet in width and is paved (probably chip and seal). At milepost 3.1, the road narrows to 18-19 feet. A "Road • Narrows" sign is on the right for eastbound vehicles. At milepost 3.3, the section known as "the narrows" begins. The road narrows to 13 feet in width for approximately 100-200 feet in length. This section is lined with large (1-2 feet diameter) trees very close to the road. These trees provide a canopy over the road producing a tunnel effect. There is a notable darkening under the canopy. • This is especially noticeable when it is a bright, sunny day. Irrigation ditches line both sides of the road next to the trees. The road gradually widens to 18 feet in width just prior to milepost 3.4. A barn exists on the south side of the road at milepost 3.3+. This barn is very close to the road with a narrow (8-10 feet) drive- way access to G.C.R. 113. At milepost 3.+, G.C.R. 112 intersects • from the south at a skewed angle providing poor sight distance to the east. G.C.R. 112 is a gravel road. 'Phe pavement on G.C.R. 113 ends at milepost 3.4. -3- • • • • r . 15/3 11 N1 I fp 4,611. e *� W ' li rIra r- / r •a: tl 1 CM i r —ii! err` - =L A 47 �++• it fft 1 r+h 40 224 ..-. r Iy ,._ PrS�r�iLr =e R a l t f I' i k 6 !u f•� i,lll / \ f1-' `�J- ‘,...i--7 \ 1!1��1 •'I~`�yyl� l L. :�, 1 r �. • p s1.L. L= '�eL i1 '` V \ 77jtl,�7,'�—! r " ,l '' , r6�` ,y 4aL"rte_• .: �J- �` ' Iy .. "'�.I i 1 ,.�,/ •� ▪ y ill I 1"' -Ii rr ' ` \, �=, �,''r SII, • —t • �tf e^` I 11.'11 An COUNTY ROAD II W CC irX CO 1 FIGURE 3 Intermittently for the next 1-2 miles, brush encroaches on the gravel road (G.C.R. 113) which limits sight distance and artifically narrows the effective width of the road. The width of the gravel road varies between 20 and 25 feet at a gradual (2-3 percent) climb to the east to milepost 4.6. The gravel surface from the end of pavement (milepost 3.4) to milepost 6.6 is very loose. Driving at the posted speed (35 MPH) gave a very uneasy feeling on this surface. Occasionally the rear end of the vehicle was felt to move horizontally. Transverse: corrugations existed at numerous locations. At milepost 3.6, the roadway bank on the south side of the road appeared to be eroding toward a 20 foot drop-off. At milepost 4.1 a need for guard rail existed on the south side of the road for 600-700 feet. Along with brush control, some reduction in bank on the north side of the road would greatly improve the sight distance. Driveways intersect G.C.R. 113 on both sides of the road from milepost 3.6 to 4.6, with sight distance problems generally for driveways that intersect on the south side. At milepost 4.6 a 6 percent climb to the east exists for 0.8 miles. The road width varies between 20 and 24 feet. At milepost 5.0 a Garfield County Road intersects from the south. • This road connects with G.C.R. 103 and has good sight distance at this intersection. From milepost 5.1 to 5.3 a potential need for guard rail exists due to a large drop-off very close to the road edge. At milepost 5.4 the vertical alignment returns to a 2-3 percent grade for approximately 2,000 fee;. • At approximately milepost 5.8 a grade of 4+ percent begins for 0.9 miles. Also at milepost 5.8 a need for guard rail exists on the south side of the road to milepost 6.1. The road width varies from 16 to 21 feet. From milepost 6.1 to 6.7 intermittent sections of guard rail are needed. The approximate length of guard rail required is 1,500 feet. A "falling rock" sign is on the right at milepost 6.3 for eastbound vehicles. There is a signi- ficant cut section from milepost 6.4 to 6.6 on the north side of the road. Some large (2> 8 inches in diameter) rocks were observed near the edge of the road, but none were on the driving surface on the data collection day. At milepost 6.6 a blind curve exists which may require signage and/or speed reduction. At approximately milepost 7.0, the road changed to a more stable surface which made driving significantly more comfortable. From milepost 6.7 to 8.0 (Cattle Creek Ranch) the vertical grade on the road flattened to 0-2 percent climbing to the east. At approximately milepost 7.1, G.G.R. 100 intersected G.C.R. 113 on • the south. The roadway width varied from 20-24 feet in this section. At approximately milepost 7.4, the road left the confines of the canyon and entered the large open area of Cattle Creek Ranch with meadows and gently rolling terrain. Garfield County Road 103 (G.C.R. 103) G.C.R. 103 is shown in Figure 4. The approximate location of significant characteristics are also shown. G.C.R. 103 intersects • • -4- • • • .4 7 i -If IP !j r- W � u",� i \-2 4410 diC CC 's L._ • LY CC Act C.H. 82 approximately 13 miles south of Glenwood Springs. A few hundred feet north of this intersection, G.C.R. 103 begins a 5 percent climb to milepost 0.4. The paved roadway is approximately 20 feet wide. At milepost 0.4, the vertical alignment flattens to a 2 per- cent grade climbing to the north. G.C.R. 104 intersects on the east at milepost 0.7. The roadway width is approximately 20 feet in this section. At milepost 1.0, the vertical alignment increased to 4 percent to milepost 1.5. At milepost 1.3, G.C.R. 112 inter- • sects on the west. From milepost 1.5 to 1.9 the vertical alignment is at approx- imately 8 percent climbing to the north. The pavement width continues at approximately 20 feet. At milepost 1.9, the grade flattens somewhat to 6 percent to milepost 2.4. The pavement ends • at milepost 2.4. From milepost 2.4 to 3.4 the road has a 24 foot gravel surface over gently rolling terrain with a vertical grade of generally 0-2 percent. At milepost 3.4, a 5 percent grade, climbing to the north, begins through an "S" turn, ending at milepost 3.8. The remainder • of the road is generally straight at a grade of 0-2 percent to the intersection of G.C.R. 100 at milepost 4.2. This portion of of the gravel road varies between 16 and 20 feet in width. Garfield County Road 100 (G.C.R. 100) • G.C.R. 100 is shown in Figure 5. The approximate of significant characteristics are also shown. G.C.R. sects C.H. 82 approximately 15 miles south of Glenwood This intersection is a four -leg intersection with C.H. the right of way. The south leg of G.C.R. 100 goes to The north leg of G.C.R. 100 goes to Cattle Creek Ranch • Cottonwood Pass. Auxilary lanes (right- and left -turn acceleration lanes) are provided on C.H. 82 at this in • location 100 inter - Springs. 82 having Carbondale. and to lanes and tersection. The north leg of G.C.R. 100 proceeds for 0.2 miles at a 0 per- cent grade. The road is straight and paved to a width of 24 feet. At milepost 0.2 an 8 percent grade begins for 0.2 miles. At mile- post 0.2, three driveways intersect G.C.R. 100 at the start of this climbing grade. Guard rail is needed on the west side of G.C.R. 100 as the road climbs the hill. The length of guard rail needed is approximately 600 feet. The road is approximately 21 feet wide on this grade. At the top of the grade the road widens at a horizontal turn, but then returns to the 21 foot width. The grade of the road is 0-3 percent from milepost 0.4 to 1.1. There are frequent driveways on both sides of the road in this section. Some driveways may have sight distance problems in this section. The pavement width is 18-20 feet. At milepost 0.9, the first turn of a switch -back occurs. At milepost 1.1 • the second turn of a switch -back occurs. Also, the driveway to the Carbondale landfill enters on the west side of G.C.R. 100 at milepost 1.1. FIGURE 5 COUNTY ROAR i i • At milepost 1.1 a 7 percent grade begins climbing to the north. This grade continues to milepost 1.6. Guard rail is needed on the east side of the road from milepost 1.2 to 1.6. Approximately 110 feet of guard rail currently exists in this section near the top of this grade. A large rock outcrop occurs on the west side of the road at milepost 1.5+. This outcropping is approximately 30 feet high. Elimination or partial elimination could reduce the road curvature and improve the sight distance at this location. The pavement width in this section varies from 18-22 feet. From milepost 1.6 to 2.4, the grade :flattens somewhat to 4 percent. The pavement width varies from 20-22 feet. There are a few driveways accessing ranches or other agricultural uses along this section. There appears to be no sight distance problems at any of these driveway locations. G.C.R. 102 intersects G.C.R. 100 from the east at a channelized "T" intersection at milepost 2.4. G.C.R. 102 is a gravel road. Milepost 2.4 is also the location where G.C.R. 100 changes from a paved surface to a gravel surface. G.C.R. 100 has a gravel surface from milepost 2.4 to the intersection with G.C.R. 113 at milepost 4.7. The grade is gently rolling (0-2 percent) from milepost 2.4 to 3.8. The width of the gravel road varies between 16 and 18 feet. The posted speed in this area is 30 MPH. At milepost 3.8, G.O.R. 103 intersects on the west. From milepost 3.8 to milepost 4.2 (the proposed access road to Cattle Creek Ranch PUL}), G.C.R. 100 climbs a 6 percent grade. The road width varies between 14 and 18 feet. Current Traffic Volumes Inquiry at the Garfield County .Road Supervisor's Office indicated that no traffic count data was available for any of these county roads. Consequently, machine traffic counts were performed from August 23 through 26, 1983. The location of each machine count is shown on Figure 6. Counts taken were two-way volumes accumulated by hour of the day. Table 1 shows the hourly count on each road. The percentage of traffic on each road is: G.C.R. 113--321 VPD = 37% G.C.R. 103--200 VPD = 23% G.C.R. 100--352 VPD = 40% The combined hourly trip distribution is shown in Figure 7. The distribution is not unlike that of an urban area with noticeable morning and afternoon peaks, and the afternoon midday volumes higher than the morning midday volumes. This distribu- tion indicates that many of the current residents living above the counters travel to standard 8-5 jobs similar to that character- istic found in urban areas. -6- • x271 rfr c ■ .73 Lr wa • „�• rQ FIGURE 6 TABLE 1 Traffic Counts Location Hour G.C.R. 113 G.C.R. 100 G.C.R. 103 12-1 0 1 2 1-2 0 0 0 2-3 0 0 0 3-4 0 0 0 4-5 1 0 1 5-6 6 1 0 6-7 26 25 4 ¢ 7-8 25 41 10 8-9 19 15 12 9-10 23 14 12 10-11 20 17 15 11-12 18 15 14 12-1 13 19 11 1-2 18 34 9 2-3 13 29 12 3-4 24 24 23 4-5 30 17 16 5-6 18 37 24 i 6-7 22 15 12 R' 7-8 13 19 11 8-9 17 8 6 9-10 13 11 4 10-11 2 9 1 11-12 0 1 1 Daily 321 352 200 36.8% 40.3% 22.9% • • 50, 40. TWO WAY 20. 10. 0 12 M 2 4 5 5 8 1011 12 2 N HOUR OF DAY COMBINED HOURLY TRIP DISTRIBUTION 4 5 6 • 8 1011 12 M FIGURE 7 From data provided by the Garfield County Planning Depart- ment and field observation, it was determined there were approx- imately 85 dwelling units above the traffic counters which had a reasonable probability of using one of these three roads on a • given weekday. During the times of the traffic counts, consider- able time was spent on each of these roads checking the counters and gathering road characteristic data. It was observed that there appears to be no unusual traffic utilizing these roads. In order to verify the traffic distribution between the • three roads, a gravity model trip distrib'ation was performed utilizing the communities of Glenwood Springs, Carbondale, Basalt, and Aspen as the attractive forces which would draw trips from this area for most employment or commercial purposes. This analysis yielded a distribution among these roads as follows: / G.C.R. 113 = 38.2% G.C.R. 103 = 21.8% G.C.R. 100 = 40.0% These percentages correlate very closely with the counted traffic. • It was, therefore, concluded that a reasonable split for traffic on these roads is: • G.C.R. 113 = 40% G.C.R. 103 = 20% G.C.R. 100 = 40% Current Operations Determination of current operation of each of these roads is • essentially a capacity analysis. In order to better understand the analysis technique utilized, a discussion of "level of service" is presented. Traffic level of service is a qualitative measure of the effect of a number of factors, which include speed and travel time, traffic interruption, freedom to maneuver, safety, driving comfort and convenience. In practice, selected service • levels are defined in terms of particular limiting value of some of these factors. A "service volume" is the highest number of vehicles that can pass over a given section of a roadway in both directions during a specified time period while operating conditions are • maintained corresponding to a specific level of service. The concept of level of service that was developed in the early sixties and exists today suggests that roadways fall into one of six categories of levels of service, ranging from "A" to "F". Description of each level of service for rural highways • are as follows: ` l (1) Source: Highway Capacity Manual. HRB Special Report 87, 1965 p. 300. • -7_ A - Level of Service "A" describes a condition of free flow, low volumes and high speeds. Operating speeds must be 60 MPH or higher. Volumes may reach 20 percent of capacity under ideal conditions. • B - Level of Service "B" also represents good traffic flow conditions; however, most drivers are affected by other vehicles in the traffic stream. Operating speeds are about 50 MPH and volumes may reach 45 percent of capacity under ideal conditions. • C - Level of Service "C" denotes a stable flow condition, with higher traffic volumes. Operating speeds are 40 MPH or above and volumes may reach 70 percent of capacity under ideal conditions,. Typically, most rural roadways are designed for the maximum level of service "C" volume, although exceptions are allowed • where significant design problems, cost, or other factors exist. This level of service is noted as the design service volume for rural highways in the Colorado Roadway Design Manual. D - Level of Service "D" represents the start of a condition in which traffic flow is more sensitive to vehicles entering and exiting the roadway, roadway surface conditions, development activity and trucks. Operating speeds generally fall to 35 MPH and volumes carried may reach 85 percent of capacity. ¶his level of service is recommended in the Colorado Roadway Design Manual for urban arterials. E - At Level of Service "E", or capacity, actual operating speeds will usually be in the neighborhood of 30 MPH, but may vary considerably. Volumes, under ideal conditions, will usually operates at 90 to 100 percent of capacity. • F - Level of Service "F" represents clogged traffic flow with operating speeds less than 30 MPH and widely variable. Volumes carried are usually less than capacity, due to the flow restrLctions from congestion. Expected levels of service designations must meet the speed and volume guidelines set forth in the Highway Capacity Manual. Service volumes for each level of service are influenced by factors such as number of lanes, grade, percentage trucks and buses, shoulder width and passing sight dwstances (for two-lane roads). Service volumes for two-lane roads are always given in terms of volume for both directions of travel (total highway). On relatively flat highways, the operating speed of the vehicles is an important factor in determining the level of service of the roadway. On mountainous highways, operating speeds are limited by physical constraints, rather than traffic congestion; • and, thus, operating speed is invalid to use as a factor. For this analysis, available passing sight distance rather than • • • -8- • operating speed was used as a criteria for the level of service for each county road. Each road was divided into sections based upon grade and road surface. Analysis was conducted for the current roadway under ideal weather conditions. Service volumes at Level of Service C were determined for each section. Level of Service C is considered design level of service for rural roads. Later in this report, projected volumes w.11 be compared to these service volumes to determine if a capacity problem is likely to occur. The results of this analysis are shown in Figure 8 for G.C.R. 113, Figure 9 for G.C.R. 103, and :Figure 10 for G.C.R. 100. No service volume is provided for "the narrows" on G.C.R. 113, since this section requires special treatment and, as such, will be analyzed later in this report. It can be seen by comparing the service volumes inthese figures with the counted traffic on each of the county roads that none of the roads at the respective count locations exceed the hourly volume .or Level of Service C. This indicates that all the facilities are within the design volumes under prevailing conditions. Accident History In determining the priorities for road improvements related to the Cattle Creek Ranch PUD, consideration and analysis should be given to the traffic accidents that have occurred over the past few years. Data on the accident history from 19130 through July 1983 was obtained from the Colorado State Patrol and the Garfield County Road Supervisor. The breakdown of accidents from January 1980 through December 1982 are as follows' Total accidents -- 14 Fatalities -- 2 Injury -- 4 Property Damage Only 8 Broadsides -- 1 Sideswipe -- 1 Overturn -- 1 Ran Off Road -- 11 Day -- 10 Night -- 4 Snow/Ice -- 4 DWI -- 1 From January 1983 through July 1983 the following accidents were reported' Total accidents -- 16 Fatalities -- 0 Injury -- 4 Property Damage Only -- 12 LEVEL OF SERVICE C SERVICE VOLUME 0 1 2 3 MILEPOST 4 SERVICE VOLUMES FOR G.C.R. 113 5 6 7 FIGURE 8 • 8 LEVEL OF SERVICE C SERVICE VOLUME 330 742 ` 430 223 - 281 445 174 742 328 742 132 445 149 445 0 1 2 3 MILEPOST 4 SERVICE VOLUMES FOR G.C.R. 113 5 6 7 FIGURE 8 • 8 LEVEL OF SERVICE C SERVICE VOLUME 330 742 ` 430 223 - 281 445 174 445 1 MILEPOST 2 SERVICE VOLUMES FOR G.C.R. 103 3 FIGURE 9 4 LEVEL OF SERVICE C SERVICE VOLUME 0 1 MILEPOST 2 SERVICE VOLUMES FOR G.G.R. 100 3 FIGURE 10 4 742 328 742 206 477 445 113 0 1 MILEPOST 2 SERVICE VOLUMES FOR G.G.R. 100 3 FIGURE 10 4 The causal factors cited by the investigating officer were: Inattentive Driving -- 3 Exceed Safe Speed -- 3 • Exceed Lawful Speed -- 2 DWI -- Yield ROW -- 1 Wrong Side of Road -- 1 Others -- 4 • Analysis of the accidents indicates that a significant percentage of the accidents are those that could possibly be prevented by a stable road surface. The ability to determine a safe speed on a gravel road is difficult. Inability to determine that safe speed can cause vehicles to drive off the road, sideswipe, or overturn. • Also since many of the accidents are single car -accidents leaving the road, guard rails at strategic locations can certainly lessen the severity of accidents. It is significant to note that in this past 3i years not a single accident has occurred at "the narrows". While "the narrows" % is a less than ideal situation on a two lane facility, there probably are very good reasons why no accidents have occurred: There is good vertical and horizontal sight distance at both approaches to "the narrows". • • • - There are warning signs on the approaches. - Most drivers who use G.C.R. 113 are familiar with "the narrows" and take special care when approaching this area. III. PROPOSED DEVELOPMENTS In order to determine expected traffic impacts to each of the county roads, it is necessary to determine what the proposed developments are in the trip influence area. Data was obtained from the Garfield County Planning Department regarding subdivisions in this area of the county. These included the developments shown in Table 2. Traffic expected from these developments must be added to S the traffic from the existing developments to determine the total traffic at full development. Evaluation will also be conducted utilizing just the Cattle Creek Ranch PUD traffic and the existing traffic. • -10- r • TABLE 2 Proposed Developments in the Trip Influence Area Development Existing Proposed Dwelling Units Dwelling Units Cattle Creek Ranch PUD 1 131 Upper Cattle Creek 8 12 Hardy Hills 0 2 Baby Bean 0 7 / Panorama Ranches 9 53 Kings Row 21 43 Strang Ranch 0 60 TABLE 3 Trip Generation Peak Hour Daily A.M. P.M. Development Trips In. Out In Out Cattle Creek Ranch PUD Residential 668 13 52 52 26 Equestrian Center 80 4 4 8 8 Upper Cattle Creek 36 1 2 2 2 Hardy Hills 18 1 1 1 1 Baby Bean 63 2 4 4 3 Panorama Ranches 378 13 25 25 17 Kings Row 198 7 13 13 9 Strang Ranch 540 18 36 36 24 Trip Generation Trip generation is important in considering the impact of developments on the road system. A compilation of trip generation • information was prepared by the Institute of Transportation Engineers in 1976, and updated periodically. This source was used to project trips that would be generated by the proposed developments in the trip influence area. Table 3 shows the expected trip generation on a daily and peak hour basis. The analysis assumed that no trips would remain internal to the trip • influence area. Also, no adjustments were made to reflect potential transit use or car pooling. These assumptions created a worst case condition for this area. • Trip Distribution and Assignment The directional distribution of the trips generated by the proposed developments within the trip influence area was determined from their relative location to the three roads which serve the area and their relative distance from the various employment/ commercial/activity centers in the area. The trip distribution follows closely the trip split discussed earlier in this report. Trip assignment is how the generated and distributed trips are expected to be loaded on the road system. The assigned trips are the resultant of the trip distribution process. Figure 11 shows the expected daily traffic loadings on each of the county • roads at full development of all of the above developments plus existing traffic. Figure 12 shows the expected daily traffic loadings for the Cattle Creek Ranch PUD plus existing traffic. • IV. TRAFFIC IMPACTS Evaluating the traffic impacts of the Cattle Creek Ranch PUD as well as other developments in the area involved: • - Analyzing the expected operation of the existing roads in the area. - Conducting a special analysis of "the narrows" on G.G.R. 113. • - Conducting a safety analysis based upon the accident history. - Discussing other impacts which should be considered. • • Expected Operation Evaluating the expected operation of each of the county roads entails comparing the projected full development peak hour -11- 0 1 2 3 4 792 r 746 700 I 654 1 545 407 387 372 BCR 113 0 1; CR 103 FULL DEVELOPMENT DAILY. TRAFFIC PROJECTIONS FIGURE 11 674 628 582 GCR 113 • £CR 103 • • 536 427 388 368 353 o m 4 234 184 M1 a CCR 102 1 - GCB 100 EXISTING + CATTLE CREEK PUD TRAFFIC PROJECTIONS FIGURE 12 traffic volumes at various locations along the roads with the service volumes calculated. The projected full development P.M. peak hour volumes by milepost increment are shown in Figure 13 for G.C.R. 113, Figure 14 for G.C.R. 103, and Figure 15 for G.C.R. 100. • Also shown on each of these figures are the Level of Service C service volumes as calculated for the prevailing roadway conditions. It can be seen that at full development of all the develop- ments considered in this analysis, the projected peak hour volumes never exceed the calculated service volumes. The low • service volume in the area on G.C.R. 100 (milepost 1 to milepost 2) is due to the grade and the pavement width at this location. Since the grade is a constraint that cannot be altered without exorbitant cost, the only way to increase the service volume is to widen the pavement and shoulder area. On G.C.R. 113 at milepost 5 and at milepost 6, the low service volume is due to r both grade and road surface. Since it is not practicable to alter the grade, paving the road is the obvious solution to increasing the calculated service volume. Since there are no capacity related problems on any of these three roads at full build -out of the proposed developments evaluated, it is not necessary to evaluate the operation utilizing Cattle Creek Ranch PUD and existing traffic. These volumes would be considerably less than the volumes at full development. "Narrows" Analysis The analysis of "the narrows" is a special case for a number of reasons: - It is not simply analyzed using conventional capacity techniques used earlier in this report. - It is a short one lane (bottleneck) section on a continuous two lane facility. It has had no accidents reported in the past 32 years even though the situation is less than ideal from a safety point of view. - Improvement to "the narrows" is currently under litigation by the adjacent landowners who are seeking to either stop or delay widening. The special analysis conducted on "the narrows" was a probability analysis that two vehicles traveling in opposite directions on G.C.R. 113 would meet at the narrows. It was felt that if the probability was on the order of 40 percent (4 in 10 chances of meeting), then widening of "the narrows" should occur immediately. Ouring the limited observation time on the traffic counting days and data collection days, no vehicles traveling in opposite directions on G.C.R. 113 were seen to meet at "the narrows". -12- • • SERVICE VOLUME 95 82 3 78 74 4 62 55 PM PEAK HOUR TRAFFIC G.C.R. 113 PM PEAK HOUR TRAFFIC 53 52 FIGURE 13 SERVICE VOLUME 330 742 430 223 281 445 174 445 65 1 60 53 39 33 PM PEAK HOUR TRAFFIC G.C.R. 103 PM PEAK HOUR TRAFFIC FIGURE 14 SERVICE VOLUME 742 328 742 1 206 1 477 1 445 113 184 Y 1 181 2 176 PM PEAK HOUR TRAFFIC CU. 100 PM PEAK HOUR TRAFFIC 64 60 67 4 64 FIGURE 15 742 NAR 742 132 445 149 445 95 82 3 78 74 4 62 55 PM PEAK HOUR TRAFFIC G.C.R. 113 PM PEAK HOUR TRAFFIC 53 52 FIGURE 13 SERVICE VOLUME 330 742 430 223 281 445 174 445 65 1 60 53 39 33 PM PEAK HOUR TRAFFIC G.C.R. 103 PM PEAK HOUR TRAFFIC FIGURE 14 SERVICE VOLUME 742 328 742 1 206 1 477 1 445 113 184 Y 1 181 2 176 PM PEAK HOUR TRAFFIC CU. 100 PM PEAK HOUR TRAFFIC 64 60 67 4 64 FIGURE 15 The probability function selected for use in this analysis was a Poisson Distribution. This is a common function used by investigators predicting arrival rates and gap distributions of vehicles in a traffic stream. The formula for a Poisson Distri- • bution describes a random series of events as follows: • • - The location of each event (arrival of a vehicle) is independent of any other event. Any two equal segments of the series have the same likelihood of containing any particular number of points. The Poisson Distribution does not apply to heavy or congested traffic flow. As documented by the current traffic counts and the operation analysis, traffic flow is not congested on G.C.R. 113. The equation describing the Poisson Distribution is as follows: Where: P(X) = e -m mx x: P(X) = probability of the arrival of x vehicles at a point during a given length of time. m = mean number of vehicles arriving in the given length of time = t v 3, 00 t = given time length of gap (seconds) v = volume (vehicles per hour) e = base of Naperian logarithms The time length (t) was determined to be 11 seconds or the time it takes a vehicle to travel through "the narrows" from a two lane section to a two lane section. The evening peak hour was determined to be the critical time period. It was assumed that • during the evening peak hour, 60 percent of the vehicles traveled eastbound and 40 percent of the vehicles traveled westbound. Initially, analysis was performed on the existing condition. A conservative assumption using the evening peak hour count of 30 vehicles was used in this analysis. This assumption is con- servatively high since the traffic counter was approximately 2 miles west of "the narrows". The directional distribution was 18 vehicles eastbound and 12 vehicles westbound. An additional element of conservativeness was introduced into the analysis by assuming that of the peak hour traffic occurred in a peak 15 minute period of that hour. Using the Poisson Distribution analysis, the probability of two vehicles meeting at "the narrows" using current traffic is 17 percent. • -13- Analysis of "the narrows" utilizing existing plus Cattle Creek Ranch PUD traffic indicated that during the evening peak hour 61 vehicles could be expected through "the narrows" with 37 eastbound and 24 westbound. The Poisson Distribution analysis indicated that a probability of two vehicles meeting at "the Narrows" was 30 percent. Analysis utilizing full build -out of all the developments mentioned earlier in this report indicated that during the evening peak hour 74 vehicles could be expected to pass through "the narrows" with 45 eastbound and 29 westbound. Using the Poisson Distribution analysis, the probability of two vehicles meeting at "the narrows" was 36 percent. This analysis indicates that the probability of two vehicles meeting at "the narrows" remains quite low even at full develop- ment of this area. Since full development only referred to those properties the Garfield County Planning Department indicated were being considered for development, this type evaluation should continue as development pressures increase and more land is considered for future development. In consideration of the above analysis and the potential for an accident at "the narrows", the following actions should be considered: - Provide additional signing and, possibly, flashing lights which indicate a narrow road ahead. - Provide guard rail east of "the narrows" on the south side of the road. - Remove some foliage from the trees which are growing in "the narrows". These trees canopy the road producing a tunnel effect to the motorist. - Remove all trees from "the narrows" that can be shown to be in the public right-of-way. Safety Analysis Based upon the historical accident information, if the roads remain the same as they currently exist, the number of accidents will increase at the same proportion that the traffic increases. Since some of the accidents were related to the gravel road, these accidents will increase also. Paving the gravel portions of the most -used county roads will provide a more stable and more predictable road surface, which will probably reduce the rate of the type of accidents which have occurred in the past. Installation of guard rail at key locations will certainly reduce the severity of the accidents. This is especially true for those single car accidents where the vehicle leaves the road in both good and adverse weather conditions. There are a number of roads which intersect C.C.R. 113 at skewed angles. Most of these are driveways over which Garfield -14- County has little control. However, one of the intersections involves G.C.R. 112. The Garfield County Road Supervisor has had plans to improve this intersection by reconstructing it as a 900 "T" intersection. This should be done as funds become • available to the County. • There have been no recent reported accidents at "the narrows", and there is no reason to believe that this will not continue. Implementation of the recommendations listed earlier will make this section of road safer than currently exists. It is further recommended that Garfield County place widening this section on a capital improvement program, possibly tied to the level of development east of "the narrows". Other Impacts This section presents some other considerations pertaining to gravel roads. They are offerred to provoke thought in making decisions regarding the transportation -related priorities. • In deciding whether to pave or not pave a given road, the following should be considered. A. Potential for fugitive dust complaints. The maximum allowable daily traffic count is 200 by EPA before a dust supression plan must be submitted. • B. Increased user costs. These costs are related to motor vehicles operating costs and include: 1. Increased fuel consumption and increased consumption of lubricating oil due to roughness of the surface, loose material • and dust problems. 2. Increased tire wear due to roughness of the surface. 3. Increased wear on the suspension system due to roughness of the surface. 4. Increased depreciation due to increased general wear and tear on the vehicle. • • • C. Increased maintenance costs. The upper limits of traffic volume for which untreated road surfaces are economical varies but is in the range of 100 vehicles per day. When these volumes are exceeded on unpaved roads, costs for both the user and the maintenance agency will increase. At higher traffic volumes, surface pitting, the formation of transverse corrugations, loss of surface materials eroded, blown or thrown by vehicles and dry weather dust problems all lead to higher main- tenance costs of unpaved roads over paved roads. _i5_ Transverse corrugations is an adverse roadway surface condition and is associated with higher volumes of traffic on unpaved roads. Frequent blading is re- quired (which in itself increases maintenance costs), but as material is lost due to erosion, dust, etc., this blading will do no good because there is not enough material to work out the corrugations and often the road surface is too hard to blade. At this point additional material must be brought in. In mountainous areas the cost of material is increased due to long truck hauls. Snow removal is also more of a problem on unpaved roads than on paved roads. Snow plows and blades cannot clean snow down to a smooth, firm surface on unpaved roads, resulting in a layer of snow remaining on the road surface --either to cause skidding problems during freeze -thaw cycles, or causing saturation of the roadway structure, thereby substantially weakening the load carrying capacity of the road. If the snow plow cuts too deep, material is lost, either thrown into the borrow ditches or evert outside of the right- of-way. With a paved road, even if a "clear pavement" philosophy is not followed, at least the pavement surface will keep much of the melting snow and ice from penetrating through the pavement structure and causing subgrade failures. D. Another item to be considered is the safety problem. As vehicles start and stop abruptly, weave in and attempt to avoid rough areas, or reduce wheel hop, etc., the potential for a higher incidence of rearend and sideswipe type accident increases. E. A gravel road should not access onto a paved road. Vehicles using unpaved roads will pull gravel from these roads onto the paved roads. Presence of this material on the paved surface can lead to more rapid deterioration of the pavement and may increase the accident potential at this point due to possibility of skidding on loose gravel. If a gravel road accesses onto a paved road at a negative grade, runoff will cause deposition of gravel on the paved surface and the same problems exist as explained above. • • • • • • • • • • V. CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS Conclusions Based upon the foregoing analysis, the following conclusions are drawn: While Cattle Creek Ranch PUD will increase the daily traffic load on Garfield County Roads 113, 103, and 100, the peak hour traffic load will not increase that significantly. This conclusion is drawn based upon both the nature of the development and the market program of the developers. - Utilizing full build -out of the approved developments in this area as obtained from the Garfield County Planning Department, the projected traffic loads at various analysis sections of Garfield County Roads 113, 103, and 100 do not exceed the service volume at level of service C. Level of service C is defined as stable traffic flow and is the design service volume for rural highways. - The section of Garfield County Road 113 known as "the narrows" (milepost 3.3) constitutes a bottle- neck which must be widened to improve both capacity and safety in this section. Litigation is pending regarding the widening of this section. The length of time necessary to reach a decision concerning this litigation is unknown. Suits of this nature can require a long period of time to be resolved. The litigation is essentially between Garfield County and the landowners adjacent to "the narrows". - Accident reports on Garfield County Road 113 indicated no accidents at "the narrows" in the past 3i years. This is probably due to a combination of relatively low traffic volume and a familiarity of the road by the users. The familiarity probably brings with it a measure of extra care at "the narrows". - Over 85 percent of the reported accidents were those that probably could have been prevented or lessened in severity by either the installation of guard rail or improvement of the road itself (widening, provision of shoulders, more stable surface) . Recommendations Based upon the foregoing analysis and the above conclusions, the following recommendations are made regarding road improvements to Garfield County Roads 113, 103, and 100: -17- • • • • • • • • 1. Guard rail should be installed at the locations noted in Figure 3 on Garfield County Road 113. 2. Guard rail should be installed at the locations noted in Figure 5 on Garfield County Road 100. 3. Pave Garfield County Road 113 from the existing end of pavement (milepost 3.4+) to the entrance to the Cattle Creek Ranch PUD (milepost 8.0) (Garfield County Road 121). The pavement should conform to the Garfield County Road Specification. This recommendation is made in consideration of the recent accident history on Garfield County Road 113. Paving the road can provide a more stable driving surface and improve visibility due to the reduction of dust. As mentioned earlier, the widening at "the narrows" is a necessary project whose need increases signi- ficantly as the traffic increases significantly. Paving of the gravel portion of Road 113, on the other hand, will reap some immediate benefits since it provides a safer driving surface at locations where accidents are known to have occurred. It is felt that given a finite amount of funds for the transportation improvements to roads in the area, paving the roads would bring ars immediate benefit. Pave Garfield County Road 100 from the existing end of pavement (milepost 2.4) to the entrance to Cattle Creek Ranch PUD (milepost 4.2). The pavement should conform to the Garfield County Road Specifications. 5. The section known as "the narrows" on Garfield County Road 113 should be widened to accommodate two lanes of traffic. Widening to 2-12 foot lanes would require the acquisition of right-of-way from adjacent landowners, removal of trees, potential demolition of a barn, and relocation or other treat- ment of irrigation ditches. While the above treatment of "the narrows" will be necessary at some point in time, there is some question whether it must occur immediately. The recent accident history indicates no accidents at "the narrows". The Cattle Creek Ranch PUD does not add significant traffic loads to the peak hour traffic on Road 113. The time and expense of the litigation concerning "the narrows" gives reason to believe a more cost effective expendi- ture of the Cattle Creek Ranch PUD developer's money is more practical. This more effective investment involves paving the remainder of Garfield County Road 113 as explained in item 3 above. The recommendation to delay the widening of "the narrows" should not be construed to mean that widening should never occur, but rather it should occur at a point when traffic -18- • • • • • • • • • an Garfield County Road 113 reaches a point when there is a 40 percent chance that vehicles traveling in opposite directions will meet each other at "the narrows". In the meantime, the following immediate treatments are necessary at "the narrows "": - Provide additional signing and, possibly, flashing lights which indicate a narrow road ahead. - Provide guard rail east of "the narrows" on the south side of the road (approximately 350 feet) . - Remove some foliage from the trees which canopy "the narrows" to lessen the tunnel effect. - Remove all trees from "the narrows" that can be shown to be in the public right-of-way. - Place widening of "the narrows" section of G.C.R. 113 on a capital improvement program possibly tied to the level of development east of "the narrows". 6. Provide safer geometries at the intersection of Garfield County Roads 113 and 112. This will involve providing a "T" intersection and a new crossing of Cattle Creek. 7. Brush and foliage should be kept trimmed along all roads so as to provide the maximum sight distance possible. 8. Concerted efforts should be made to keep all debris (falling rock) from all road surfaces. This is especially true on Road 113 from milepost 6.4 to milepost 6.6 and on Road 100 from milepost 1.1 to milepost 1.6. This may involve some additional cutting of steep slopes and providing a barrier on the cut -side of the road to stop falling rock. -19- Rzgerr‘i--t-; e CATTLE CREEK RANCH A PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT OWNER: MR, FRANK LERNER ASPEN, COLORADO PLANNING AND PROJECT COORDINATION: THE LAND DESIGN PARTNERSHIP GLENWOOD SPRINGS, COLORADO CIVIL ENGINEERING: ELDORADO ENGINEERING GLENWOOD SPRINGS, COLORADO HYDROLOGY: WRIGHT WATER ENGINEERS, INC, GLENWOOD SPRINGS, COLORADO SOILS AND GEOLOGY: DATE; CHEN AND ASSOCIATES GLENWOOD SPRINGS, COLORADO JULY 24, 1981 • • TABLE OF CONTENTS LETTER OF APPLICATION ' THE SITE VICINITY MAP THE DESIGN CONCEPT AND PIU.D4 OBJECTIVES HOME OWNERS ASSOCIATION -- COVENANTS P E ll, D . PHASING PIU.DI PLAN LAND USE SUMMARY P.U.D. ZONE REGULATIONS UTILITIES AND DRAINAGE WATER RIGHTS GEOLOGY AND SOILS SUPPLEMENTAL INFORMATION PROPERTY OWNERS WITHIN 300 FEET LEGAL DESCRIPTION TITLE INSURANCE Letter of Application Mr. Frank Lerner P.O. Box 9140 Aspen, CO 81611 July 24, 1991 Honorable Board of Commissioners of Garfield County Garfield County Court House P.O. Box 640 Glenwood Springs, Colorado 81601 Re: Cattle Creek Ranch P.U.H. Application Gentlemen: Contained herewith, is an application for Planned Unit Development Zoning of approximately 960 acres f property in township 7 south, range 87 west, 6 principal meridian, Gar- field County, Colorado. The propert was zoned in 1977 as a Planned Unit Development accomodati single family re- s- 2-ences.-7Che—€first phase oTthe P.U.D. is presently under construction. As the result of our redefinition of the development ob- jectives for the property, we are submitting to you and request- ing your consideration and approval of the revised development concept presented by this application. As is evidenced by the construction activities at the Ranch this summer, we are intent upon carrying the Cattle Creek Ranch P.U.D. to completion as a high quality residential environment. On behalf of myself and the Cattle Creek Ranch design team, 1 would offer our full cooperation and assistance in your timely review of this application. Please do not hesitate to give myself or Ron Liston of The Land Design Partnership a call to assist you any way in the review proceedings. Sincerely, Fra k Lerner 14 FL/pck The Site • • • i • i • r THE SITE Cattle Creek Ranch is presently an active cattle operation located at the westerly end of Missouri Heights. Access to the Ranch exists over two primary routes. From the west it is approximately 7 miles from Highway 82 and, via County Road 100, a distance of approximately 4 miles from the Catherine Store to the Ranch. Additionally, County Road 115 from Spring Valley and County Road 122 from El Jebel as well as the Cotton- wood Pass Road all converge upon the Ranch site. Using the above described routes the Ranch is approximately 8 miles from Carbondale, 13 miles from Glenwood Springs and 8 miles from El Jebel. The Ranch site is composed of lush green alluvial plains along Cattle and Coulter Creeks which converge at the westerly edge of the Ranch and of higher mesas to the west, north and south of the creeks. There is presently approximately 250 acres of irrigated pasture and hayground along Cattle Creek and on the mesa to the south. The ridges and steeper slopes on the mesa are characterized by mixed sage and oak brush. The high land west of Coulter Creek and north of Cattle Creek is a mixture of dry land wheat fields and rolling sage covered hills. Views from the high lands of the Ranch are characteristic of the Colorado Rockies with majestic vistas of the Maroon Bells, Mt. Sopris, Sunlight Mt., Lookout Mt., and Basalt Mt. as well as the overview of the pastoral ranch lands along Cattle and Coulter Creeks. The property is presently zoned for 131 single family dwellings as the Cattle Creek Ranch P.U.D. • • • • • Vicinity Map i 7. •' , ,o0= 1 i 1 a, . I. - ZI .,,, P— { _i____71r_ ► — — i —1 tC lr I '6 �° „,,,. t I r it_ n t I ''-1.. l �1T tr egg' It trl� U] 1 d '1 J .17 1 _') _ ▪ ' r ', r • - \ ..'1�r ....'ry S 1, 11 1,!.. ## - r ' ) ��9141 _ ''',i -'-'\---'k . • -- - �— fir' -.4.- — • J _ 0. `�',lV .` c. • I • I� /, —'- r \ • I .-I 0 00 N1r-4 - u - ly 1 tb r I 71 7f u _----- } �. - r1= A v 4 ISb, PI • e 77,77.4 •.• N.-, k\1• r t''a _r ` – r- f _ . . ` `- — • • *� =r� wf 71{ I I y 1 i • • • • 4J 0 U { 1 0 • • • • • • • • • The Design Concept and P.U.C. Objectives THE DESIGN CONCEPT & P,U,D, OBJECTIVES The following objectives establish the broad perimeters for the design and development of the Cattle Creek Ranch P.U.D.: 1. Satisfy the demand for a championship 18 hole golf caur in the Roaring Fork Valley. 2. Respond to the marketing demand for a high quality primary and secondary residential environment sup- ported by a variety of recreational amenities. 3. Maximize the premium view qualities of the Cattle Creek Ranch site. 4. Utilize site development and architectural concepts sympathetic to the topographic and native vegetative character of the site. 5. Promote water conserving site and landscapee-s-&cin c_or cePts . 6. Through the implementation of the above objectives and sensitive concern for design detail and the quality of the project implementation establish a true sense of "place" and "destination" at the Cattle Creek Ranch P.U.D. The proposed Cattle Creek Ranch P.U.D. design concept is directly reflective of the above defined objectives. The upper mesa south of the Cattle Creek Valley is characterised by an 18 hole golf course designed by professional golfer and in- ternationally renowned course designer Jack Nicklaus. The course is designed in the historic "Scottish" character which will maximize the use of native vegetation and concentrate irrigated turf only in tee, green and fairway landing areas. This design concept will reduce irrigation water consumption by nearly 40%. Some holes lie snuggly in the valleys and swails of the site, some holes sweep across the broad open fields while other holes fringe the large reservoir proposed around the club house site. The golf course club house and athletic center will be the recreational focus of the Cattle Cre k-Bance.D. It is beautifully sited in the lower basin of the upper mesa and surrounded by a two part reservoir. The club house will be dominated by an overpowering view of Mt. Sopris and will itself create a powerful sense of entry to the golf course from the south entry road into the P.U.D. A variety of racket and ex- cersise facilities will compliment the customary pool an hacker rooms at t e club ouse, restaurant and lounge may also be included in the later phases of the facility The golf course and club house facilities will be owned by the Cattle Creek Ranch Homeowners Association and resident will have automatic social memberships. A variety of fee memberships will be available to satisfy the particular active recreation- al interests of the residents. The club house will also ac- comodate a tennis and golf _ro shop as well as the potential for a Real Estate Sales office and administrative office for the Catfle Creek Homeowners Association. The Ranch will contain a variety of residential dons as explained in the following ne istrict descriptions Residential Sin le Family - Rural Densit : With some revisions to loting pattern, t is istrict contains some of the area previously platted as the Cattle Creek Ranch P.U.D. filing #1. These lots are a minimum 2 acres in size. Much of this district is visable from the Cattle Creek Valley and thereby the desire to maintain a very low density character. These sites are capable of ac- comodating very substantial homes including maid and caretaker quarters. .... Residential/Single Family: This district located entirely on the upper mesa south of the Cattle Creek Valley will be characterized by lots from 8,000 to 20,000 square feet in size. The smaller lots in this range will be concentrated in areas fronting an golf course fairways and in clusters which are located in what has.historically been hay land' The larger lots will be located on the higher ridge lines where the home sites can be nestled among more intensive native vegetation. Building sites and driveway locations will be selected and dictated by the developer. Residential/Cluster Housing District: This district is located exclusively on the mesa north of the Cattle Creek Valley and is intended to allow the creation of a village concept wherein housing types including half acre single family, zero lot line patio simile family, duplexes, three plexes and four ■lex townhomes and condominiums are in — e fixed throug ou e en ire •istrict. Although re- sidences of this district are eligible for membership in all other Cattle Creek Ranch recreational facilities, they will in addition have the option for less formalized re- creational activities at ae.ig orhood park Although the neighborhood park location will not be finalized until the village design is completed, it will contain a minimum of four acres. The park is anticiate to contain tennis ,courts/ multi use cour , volleyba court, chit•rens equipment, restroom facilities activities shelter, ex- cersise course, and an open play field. ....,Residential/Multi-Family: This district contains the same provisions for ixed housingtypes as the cluster housing district butmis located in seven zones associated with the Jack Nicklaus golf course. Commercial/Village Center: The Village Center proposed between Cattle Creek -Mid -County Road 113 near the lower main entry to the Ranch is intended to provide basic commercial services to the residences of the Ranch and the surrounding west -Missouri area. The facility is anticipated to project a country store rchitectural character and will be somewh rom County Road 113 by earthen burms and landscaping. This site Ls also proposed as the location for a fire station facilit pro- bably in the form of a sub -station to t e arson*ale Fire District. A limited number of residential multi -family :_t_t_7 are a lowed in t is •istrict if i .ecomes •esu .ble he housing of store keepers and ranch employees. There is also potential for a small countnn to sup- port the real estate promotional activities of the Ranch and to satisfy the need for guest housing at the Ranch. In addition to the recreational activities of the club house center and neighborhood park, described earlier, the old ranchs:iirdalong side Cattle Creek will become the s e o an e• Ian center. The center is anticipated o include stables, outdoor riding arenas, managers re- sidence, an equestrian lounge serving sandwiches and bever- ages and an equestrian supply shop. The entire lower valley along Cattle Creek will be retained in its present pasture character in support of the equestrian center. Equestrian trails will lead to the more remote open space areas of the Ranch to the west and northeast. Pedestrian ways will connect major recreationalcenter with ea T her and housing concentrations. Pathways will be located along irrigation ditches, in -open space corridors and, where necessary, within roadway right-of-ways. Ped- estrian ways will not be allowed to infringe on the privacy of the residential units or to conflict with play on the golf course. A close study of the P.U.D. plan and the topographic char- acter of the site shows that the majority of the housing units are -located on the higher ridges and mesas where a a imum number cf� a tdences can take advantage b e commanding views from the Ranch site. Such a planning concept raises t.. obvious question of one residential structure interfering with the view of another residential site. Thusly, all building sites and lots will be carefully selected with such coif 3c s kn m1 • • Additionaly, stiff architectural •uide lines will be established to further minimize t is con ict. Although architectural de- tailing may vary somewhat throughout different areas of the Ranch, the overridding architectural concept shall be for very low massing of all site structures including strong incourage- ment for earth sheltered homes. Control of the introduced landscape will also be signi- ficant to view conflicts and the maintenance of the present vegetative character of the site. Although many areas of the site will see the reintroduction of native plant materials non indigenous landscape material selected for its compatability of scale to the native vegetation will also be used for re- sidential landscaping. Irrigated non natives will be utilized only in the high intensity use areas_ of e molt f mi 1y d,.st f. s and in roximity to the single family residences to create and oasis effect. The domestic water and waste water handling systems for the P.U.D. are discussed in the engineers statements later in this application. Recognizing that a development of this size has impacts which extend beyond its boundaries the following is proposed: 1. Roads. The developer proposes to make major improve - men s to the Cattle Creek Road (County Road 113) since this road will carry the majority of the traffic im- pact to the project. The proposed construction in- cludes improvements to improve site distances on curves and curve radius reduction where possible as well as a 24 foot wide chi• and seal surface ■m Hi•hway 82 to the Ranch. proposed fc r •r •rotion of the Catherine Store Road (County Road 100) since this roadway wi receive as 1sser traffic load from the project. 2. Fire rotection As noted earlier, a fire station is proposed in the commercial district -dr -Me project. It is proposed by the developer to equip this facility with basic fire fighting equipment. It is our hope that the station will be excepted as a sub -station to the Carbondale fire district. Less ex ensive im•rovements are a so 3.curit7`-� The entire P.U.D. project will be installed with electronic cable to connect all dwelling units and facility to a central security control station. All residences then may be installed with an electronic security system. f Home Owners Association A home owners association shall be formed at the time of final platting of the first phase of the P.U.D. The pur- poses and powers of association shall include: 1. To promote the health, safety, and welfare of f owners of real property within the P.U.D. 2. To own, maintain, and manage common areas, easements, and domestic and irrigation water systems and wastewater treatment systems. • 3. To enforce all covenants. • Covenants To further assure the development and continuation of the Cattle Creek Ranch P.U.D. as a high quality rural resid- ential area, protective covenants shall be recorded along with the final plattings of the P.U.D. These covenants shall be included but not be limited to the following topics: 1. Architectural Committee. - site and building design - minimum floor area - accessory structure design - modification of the existing landscape and new landscaping • 2. Lot use restrictions. • • • i 3. Signs. 4. Animals. - type allowed - control 5. General site maintenance. 6. Noxious activities. 7. Underground utilities. 8. Vehicle control. 9. Easements. 10. Temporary structures. 11. Landscape/agricultural irrigation limitations. P.U.D. Phasing 1- Complete construction initiated under the Phase I fina plat of the original Planned Unit Development zoning. -Virions of this plat will be amended to meet the concep€ of the herein described P.U.D. 1983 initiates_ construction of the second phase of the development in accordance with this P.U.D. application. 1984- Initiate construction of the first nine holes of the golf course. From this point forward, the proposed phasing as related primarily to the completion of the 18 hole golf course. Development of lots and housing units will be in- itiated as the market may demand. 1985- Finish the first nine holes of the golf course and the initial phase of the club house construction. 1986- Initiate the construction of the second nine holes. 1987- Finish the second nine holes of the golf course. It is anticipated that the development of the entire Cattle Creek Ranch P.U.D. will extend over an approximately 10 year period. • • • • • P.U.D. PLAN LAND USE SUMMARY Open Space District Recreational District 2 Residential/Single Family -Rural Density 21 Residential/Single Family 249 Residential/Cluster Housing District 220 Residential/Multi-Family District 284 Dwelling Units Acres Commercial/Village Center District TOTAL 10 (+ 30 overnight lodging units) 786 dwellin units • ,a3 • • • • • Note: Final engineering refinement of the plan at the time of subdivision platting may result in minor varia- tions in the above acreages. 963 acres • PURI Zone Regulations CATTLE CREEK RANCH P.U.D. ZONE REGULATIONS Section I. A. To carry out the purposes and provisions of the Garfield County Zoning Resolution, Garfield County, Colorado and particularly, Section 4.00 of that title, as amended, the Cattle Creek Ranch Planned Unit Development Zoning District is further divided into the following Zone District Classifications: - Open Space District -• Recreational District - Residential/Single Family - Rural Density - Residential/Single Family - Residential/Cluster Housing District - Residential/Multi-Family - Commercial/Village Center B. The boundaries of these districts shall be located as shown on the Cattle Creek Ranch P.U.D. plan. Section II. Open Space District A. Uses, H Ri ht: Park and Greenbelt ecrea.lona uses including golf course, tennis courts, pedestrian/bike paths, ball fields and other recreational facilities. Agricultural uses including farm, garden, nursery, orchards, ranch and custom area accessory uses including buildings for shelter or enclosure of animals or property employeed in any of the above uses. Kennel and riding stable Wastewater treatment plant Water impoundments B. Uses, Conditional: None C. Uses, Special: None D. Minimum Lot Area: None E. Maximum Lot Coverage: None F. Minimum Setback: Front Yard 20 feet Rear Yard 20 feet Side Yard 20 feet G. Maximum Building Height: 30 feet Section III. Recreational District A. Uses, By Right: All uses by right in the open space district (Section II of this zoning regulation). Golf club house including customary accessory re- creational and maintenance facilities. Equestrian Center Restaurant, bar and lounge and retail commercial aho.p4 customary to the support of the recreational activities associated with this district including golf and tennis pro shop and equestrian tack shop. Offices for the management of these facilities and d- mi_nistrati_ve offices for the Cattle Creek Ranch Homeowners Association. Real Estate Sales Office. Water Impoundments. One dwelling unit in each of the separately designated zones of this district for the purposes of maintenance of security in these areas. B. Uses, Conditional: None C. Uses, Special: None D. Minimum Lot Area: None • E. Maximum Lot Coverage: None F. Minimum Setback: Front Yard 20 feet Rear Yard 20 feet Side Yard 20 feet G. Maximum Building Height 30 feet Section IV. Residential/Single Family/Rural Density District A. Uses, By Right: Single family dwelling and customary accessory uses including buildings for shelter or en- closure of property accessory to the use of the lot for single family residential purposes and fences, hedges, gardens, wall and similar landscape features. Maids and caretakers residence when attached to the � u ► p ary resid hge of the lot. �' Park, greenbelt and golf course. B. Uses, Conditional: None C. Uses, Special: None D. Minimum Lot Area: (2 acres E. Maximum Lot Coverage: 15% F. Minimum Setback: Front Yard 40 feet Rear Yard .. 40 feet Side Yard.. 25 feet G. Maximum Building Height: 25 feet H. Off -Street Parking: Fou ff-street parking spaces on the same lot for each • - ling unit or one space per 600 square feet of floor, which ever is greater. Section V. Residential/Single Family District A. Uses, By Right: Single family dwelling and customary accessory uses including buildings for the enclosure of animals or property accessory to the use of the lot for residential purposes and fences, hedges, gardens, and walls and similar landscape features. Park, open space and golf course. • Water impoundments and domestic water storage tank. n-y��Live-in maids and caretakers quarters when attached to the primary residence on the lot and not exceeding 41 700 square feet in floor area. B. Uses, Conditional: None • C. Uses, Special: None D. Minimum Lot Area • 8,000 square feet E. Maximum Lot Coverage: 60% • • i F. Minimum Setback: Front Yard 25 feet Rear Yard.. 25 feet Side Yard 10 feet G. Maximum Height Of Buildings: 25 feet H. Off -Street Parking: Four off-street parking spaces on the same lot for each dwelling unit or one space per 600 square feet of floor, which ever is greater. Section VI. Residential/Cluster Housing District A. Uses, By Right: Single family, two family, three family and four family dwelling and customary accessory uses • including buildings for the shelter of property accessory to the use of lot for residential purposes and fences, hedges, gardens, walls and similar landscape features. Condominium and row house (maximum four dwelling units per structure) BQre _than one structure or building per lot, complying 0,0Q. .1;o, with the uses ey right, shall be permitted 'as long as the �, total dwelling units do not exceed the designated dis- trict density. Park and open space (a minimum 4 acre ark will be con - 40 VCR—district. �,Live-in maids and caretakers quarters when attached t1 to the primary residenceon the lot and not exceeding 700 square feet in floor area. • • • • • • • • B. Uses, Conditional: Day Nursery C. Uses, Special: None D. Minimum Lot Area: Detached single family dwelling - 44000 square feet Two family dwelling -- 8,000 square feet Provided, however, there shall be no minimum lot area for single or two family cluster or row house lots contained within a multi -family lot meeting the above gross area requirements. E. Maximum Lot Coverage: 70% provided, however, that a row house, condominium or single family cluster lot contained within a R/C.H. District lot shall have no minimum lot coverage. F. Minimum Setbacks: Front Yard 20 feet Rear Yard 20 feet Side Yard ..... 10 feet or as designated on the recorded subdivision final plat for this area. Provided, however, that a row house, condominium or single family clustered lot contained within the re- quired R/C.H. District setback shall have no minimum front, side or rear yard setback. Except as may be shown on the recorded subdivision final plat for this area. G. Maximum Height Of Buildings: 20 feet H. Off -Street Parking: 2.5 parking spaces per dwelling unit. Section VII. Residential/Multi-Family District A. Uses, By Right: Single family, two family, three family and four family dwelling and customary accessory uses including buildings for the shelter of property accessory to the use of lot for residential purposes and fences, hedges, gardens, walls and similar landscape features. Condominium and row house (maximum four dwelling units per structure) More than one structure or building per lot, complying with the uses by right, shall be permitted as long as the total dwelling units do not exceed the designated district density. Park and open space (a minimum 4 acre park will be con- tained in the R/C.H. District.) Golf course Live-in maids and caretakers quarters when attached to the primary residence on the lot and not exceeding 700 square feet in floor area. B. Uses, Conditional: Day Nursery C. Uses, Special: None D. Minimum Lot Area: Detached single family dwelling - 4,000 square feet Two family dwelling -- 8,000 square feet Lot with three or more dwelling units - 3,000 square feet per dwelling unit gross lot size Provided, however, there shall be no minimum lot area for single or two family cluster or row house lots contained within a multi -family lot meeting the above gross area requirements. E. Maximum Lot Coverage: 70% provided, however, that a row house, condominium or single family cluster lot contained within a R/C.H. District lot shall have a minimum lot coverage. F. Minimum Setbacks: Front Yard 20 feet Rear Yard.. 20 feet Side Yard. . 10 feet or as designated on the recorded subdivision final plat for this area. Provided, however, that a row house, condominium or single family clustered lot contained within the re- quired R/C.H. District setback shall have no minimum front, side or rear yard setback. Except as may be shown on the recorded subdivision final plat for this area. G. Maximum Height of Buildings: 20 feet H. Off -Street Parking: 2.5 parking spaces per dwelling unit Section VIII. Commercial/Village Center District A. Uses, By Right: Neighborhood retail commercial and -EtK$ sevice_outleicieservice station. Liquor Store. Restaurant, bar and lounge. Real Estat • ublic fa ' including fire station, security patrol offices and homeowners association administrative offices. Lode, motel, and boarding house (maximum 30 units). Multi -family dwellings (maximum 10 dwelling units) when occuring within structures containing commercial uses. More than one structure or building per lot, complying with the uses, by right, shall be permitted as long as the total dwelling units and commercial coverage does not exceed the designated district density. B. Uses, Conditional: None C. Uses, Special: None D. Minimum Lot Area: None E. Maximum Zone District Coverage: 50% F. Minimum Setback: Setback from County Road 113 - 40 feet No other setback shall be required within this district. G. Maximum Height of Buildings: 30 feet H. Off -Street Parking: Commercial retail uses - 1 parking per 200 sq.ft. of floor area exclusive of utility and storage areas. Overnight lodging - 1 parking space per unit Residential - 2 parking spaces per dwelling unit Office use - 1 parking space per 350 sq.ft. of floor area Section IX. Except as here and above provided and except for the following Sections of the Garfield County Zoning Resolution, all pro- visions of the Garfield County Zoning Resolution shall be applicable to the Cattle Creek Ranch P.U.O. Zoning District. The sections of the said district zoning resolution which shall have no applicability are as follows: Section 3.00 through 3.010.004 Section 5.01.02 Section 5.05.03, paragraphs 4 and 8 CATTLE CREEK RANCH P.U.D. SUBDIVISION REGULATIONS Except for the following sections of the Garfield County subdivision regulations, all provisions of the Garfield County subdivision regulations shall be applicable to the Cattle Creek Ranch P.U.D. The section of the said sub- division regulations which shall have no applicability is as follows: Section 5.09 • • • • • • • • • • Utilities and Drainage • ELDORADO ENGINEERING COMPANY / CONSULTING ENGINEERS 1 REGISTERED LAND SURVEYORS 823 BLAKE AVENUE / P.O. BOX 669 / GLENWOOD SPRINGS, COLORADO 81601 1 303-945-8596 CATTLE CREEK RANCH PLANNEDUNIT DEVELOPMENT i The Cattle Creek Ranch PUD as proposed,_i planned unit development comprising a mixture of approximately/355`,single family and cluster housing units, some commercial usage and -a golf course. The present plan is a revision and expansion of the original PUD approved in August 1980. The following statements are the results__of_conceptual investigations of the water distribution system, sanitary sewer system and storm —� drainage system. Water Distribution Wate Distribution within the PUD will be accomplished by means of a central di tri tem. The source of s _pply will be a series of wells along Cattle Creek. The availability of water, from both a legal and -physical standpoint, is being investigated by Wright Water Engineers, who are enclosing a separate statement with this application. A water storage will be provided_in the sn��teast corner of the propose UD and will be capable of storing both_49nestic -demands and ire flow. ---e tank is projected to have a capacity of approximafeTy million gal on . Sanitary Sewer System Sanitary sewage within the subdivision will be collected by means of an on-site central collection systeawhich will carry the sewage to a proposed plant location on Cattle Creek downstream from the proposed well locations. The plant will be capable of treating an average daily flow of approxi- mately 0.3 MGD.' A site application and discharge permit will be obtained from the Colorado Department of Health, at which time the plant will be designed to perform within the criteria required. • -2- /M Storm Sewage Management Storm drain; e ithin the PUD will be disposed of using the natural drainage ways whe a ,ossible, aided by engineered channels and culverts to direct storm water away from residential areas. The drainage will eventually be disposed of in Coulter Creek and Cattle Creek. It appears +i from the conceptual plan that only the sanitary sewage treatment plant will be in an area of potential stream flooding. Once the type of treatment is determined, the treatment facility will be located as required to avoid any potential flooding problems. • • VI • • • • • Prepared by: David N. Sillars, P. E. DNS/jlw 0001000,, 64 17760 tcLii* .4 Q.co .%, Water Rights • • • • • ASPEN OFFICE 0241 VENTNOR AVENUE ASPEN, COLORADO 81611 CHEYENNE OFFICE 3130 HENDERSON DRIVE CHEYENNE. WYOMING 82001 GLENWOOD SPRINGS OFFICE P.O. BOX 2119 GLENWOOD SPRINGS, COLORADO 81802 STEAMBOAT OFFICE P.O. BOX 5220 STEAMBOAT VILLAGE, COLORADO 80499 WRIGHT WATER ENGINEERS, INC. ENGINEERING CONSULTANTS 2420 ALCOTT STREET DENVER, COLORADO 80211 (303) 458-6201 Glenwood Springs P.O. Box 219 Tel. 945-7755 July 27, 1981 Ron Liston 403 W. 1st Glenwood Springs, CO 81601 RE: Cattle Creek Ranch Water Resources Dear Ron: KENNETH R. WRIGHT WILLIAM L. LORAN RALPH L. TOREN RICHARD D. JOHNSON FRANK J. TRELEASE LEO M. EISEL MARILYN M. STOKES We have reviewed the water requirements for the ultimate Cattle Creek Ranch development and have studied the water resources (physical and legal) available to the development. This letter presents a summary of our conclusions. The ultimate development will include a central municipal water supply that will be able to serve the needs of approximately 860 equivalent residential units. This total includes water necessary to meet the • commercial and retail needs of the development. In addition, Cattle Creek Ranch will have a golf course that will need irrigation water for 75 acres. There is some limited irrigation for open spaces and water will be needed to fill and maintain one or more reservoirs on the property. Cattle Creek Ranch,,allntatbOlias a water resource plan and appropriate • Water Court decrees to meet the needs for 150 EQRs, 14 acres of irrigated land and a small reservoir. The water resources for this portion of the development are defined in a Division 5 Water Court _decree, Case No. W-3496. We recommend that this augmentation plan_remain intact and not be rrlodified — The development + ha add'tional 710 EQR, golf course, etc., will • require approximate) 510 acre-feet if water per year - about half for the central potable water supply system. The (potable watP)system is expected to receive its water from wells drilled into the Cattle Creek alluvium on the ranch. Water far t e reservoirs And irrigation can come from several 5ourcaL__inclutiLis the Eur i tch, • Cattle Creek -wells, and -water pumped directly from_GattleCreek. Besides the water rights transferred in Case W-3496, the development owns 20% of the water rights in the Monarch Ditch and 57.6% of the water in the Eureka Ditch. These ditches normally yield over 600 acre-feet annually to the ranch. • • • i Ron Liston _z _ July 27, 1981 From an engineering point of view, wereLi eve that the historic consumptive use of these _rights on the ranch exceed -the annuaT utiore ultimate consumptive use requremeats_for_the development. Historically, most of the use has been in May and June. If the development converts and uses these rights then the development__mus.t develop about 5C2 a r`ee',+of reservoir storage. This reservoir would store water in May and June for use later in the year for direct use or for augmentation of diversions that are called out by senior rights. Besides transferring the Monarch and Eureka water, the development has several real opportunities to acquire additional water that was not historically appurtenant to the ranch. These options, if exercised, would reduce the amount of storage necessary to adequately operate and maintain a viable water supply system. It is our opinion that Cattle Creek__Ranch_currently owns water rights (when transferred by the Water Court to new points of diversion and type of use) that_are adequate, with sufficient storage, to meet the to water needs of the development. Further, it is our opinion that heranchcan develop an adequate physical supply to meet its potable, irrigation and other water needs. call. If you need additional details at this time, please do not hesitate to WLL:ep cc: Frank Lerner John Dickson 771-24 Very truly yours, WRIGHT WATER ENGINEERS, INC. By !v William L. Lorah • • • • • • • • Geology and Bolls • • chen and associates, Inc. CONSULTING ENGINEERS SOIL L FOUNDATION 96 S. ZUNI • DENVER, COLORADO 80223 • 303/744-7105 ENGINEERING 3924 EAST FIRST STREET • CASPER, WYOMING 82601 • 307/234-2126 Subject: Mr. Frank Lerner c/o Ron Liston Land Design Partnership Suite 208, Village Plaza Glenwood Springs, Colorado 80601 Gentlemen: July 1, 1977 Preliminary Geotechnical investiga- tion for the Cattle Creek Ranch Development, Garfield County, Colorado. Job No. 14,701 We have completed our field and laboratory studies for the preliminary geotechnical investigation at the subject site. We are presently drafting the final report. Our investigation indicates that there are no serious problems associated with the site geology or soil conditions. It should be feasible to develop the property as a residential subdivision. We ex- pect to have our final report out within the next week. This report will describe the site geology and subsoil conditions and discuss their expected effect upon the proposed development. If we can provide you with additional information prior to the submittal of the final report, please let us know. RGM/med Sincerely, CHEN AND ASSOCIATES, INC. By alph Mock, En:lneering Geologist Supplemental information • i r PROPERTY OWNERS OF RECORDS WITHIN 300' OF CATTLE CREEK RANCH P.U.D. John A. McNulty Box 944 Carbondale, CO 81623 Gary K. McNulty Box 200 Carbondale, CO 81623 Upper Cattle Crk. Schse. Assoc. Mary T. Squires 0720 -- 121 Rd. Carbondale, CO 81623 Merril & Delores Laurence 11104 Co. Rd. 115 Carbondale, CO 81623 Colo. Country Panorama Est. P.O. Box X Basalt, CO 81621 Edward B. & Michal A. Simpson Box 238 El Jebel, CO 81628 Patrick J. & Rita J. Hunter Box 260 Aspen, CO 81612 LEGAL DESCRIPTION THE S 1/2 OF THE NE 1/4 AND LOTS 7, 8, 12 and 13 AND THE WEST 29.7 ACRES OF LOT 14 AND THE WEST 980410 FEET OF LOT 15, EXCEPT A PORTION OF A TRACT CONVEYED BY DEED RECORDED IN BOOK 61 AT PAGE 553 AND EXCEPT THAT PORTION OF LOT 7 LYING SOUTHEASTERLY OF THE RIGHT -OF --WAY OF AN EXISTING COUNTY ROAD (#113), ALL IN SECTION 5; AND SE 1/4 SE 1/4, SECTION 6 EXCEPT A PORTION OF THAT SAME TRACT CONVEYED BY DEED RECORDED IN BOOK 61 AT PAGE 553; AND SE 1/4 NE 1/4, SECTION 7; AND ALL OF SECTION 8 EXCEPT A PARCEL OF LAND DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS: BEGINNING AT THE NORTHEAST CORNER SAID SECTION 8; THENCE S 89°56'46.2" W., 1,641.369', ALONG THE NORTH LINE SAID SECTION 8; THENCE S 00°17'48" E., 35.37; THENCE N 89°56'46.2" E. AND PARALLEL TO THE NORTH LINE SAID SECTION 8, 1,641.746; THENCE N O0°54'23" W., 35.37' TO THE POINT OF BEGINNING, CONTAINING 1.333 ACRES MORE OR LESS, ALL IN TOWNSHIP 7 SOUTH, RANGE 87 WEST, OF THE 6TH PRINCIPAL MERIDIAN. • American Land Title Association Commitment - Modified 10/73 1. COMMITMENT FOR TITLE INSURANCE ISSUED BY STEWART TITLE GUARANTY COMPANY STEWART TITLE GUARANTY COMPANY, A Texas Corporation, herein called the Company, for valuable consideration, hereby commits to issue its policy or policies of title insurance, as identified in Schedule A, in favor of the proposed Insured named in Schedule A, as owner or mortgagee of the estate or interest covered hereby in the land described or referred to in Schedule A, upon payment of the premiums and charges therefor; all subject to the provisions of Schedules A and B and to the Conditions and Stipulations hereof. This Commitment shall be effective only when the identity of the proposed Insured and the amount of the policy or policies committed for have been inserted in Schedule A hereof by the Company, either at the time of the issuance of this Commitment or by subsequent endorsement. This Commitment is preliminary to the issuance of such policy or policies of title insurance and all liability and obligations hereunder shall cease and terminate six months after the effective date hereof or when the policy or policies committed for shall issue, whichever first occurs, provided that the failure to issue such policy or policies is not the fault of the Company. This Commitment shall not be valid or binding until countersigned by an authorized officer or agent. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the Company has caused this Commitment to be signed and sealed, to become valid when countersigned by an authorized officer or agent of the Company, all in accordance with its By- Laws This Commitment is effective as of the date shown in Schedule A as "Effective Date." STE./WART TITLE ;.'. Chairman of the Board GUARANTI COMPANY ‘OPOR4 1:1A -.*^ 19 0 8 fo .w,gw/•yfa Serial No. cc 108024 President ll 165 SCHEDULE A Order Number. 3845 41 1. Effective date: JULY 16, 1981 AT 8:00 O'CLOCK A.M. 2. Policy or Policies to be issued: i A- ALTA Owner's Policy Proposed Insured; CATTLE CREEK RANCH B. ALTA Loan Policy Proposed Insured: c. Commitment Number: Amount of Insurance Premium TO BE DETERMINED $ • 3. The estate or interest in the land described or referred to in this commitment and covered herein is fee simple and title thereto is at the -• reof vested in: CATTLE CREEK RANCH 4. The land referred to in this commitment is described as follow& SINE= and Lots 7, 8, 12, 13 and the West 29.7 acres of Lot 14, except a tract conveyed by deed recorded in Book 61 at page 553, in Section 5; SE4SE4 of Section 6; SEaNE' of Section 7; All of Section 8; All in Township 7 South, Range 87 West of the 6th Principal Meridian. EXCEPTING those parcels conveyed to John A. McNulty by deed recorded October 28, 1977 in Book 502 at Page 214 as Reception No. 281481. (Copy attached) COUNTY OF GARFIELD STATE OF COLORADO NOTE: The tract conveyed by deed recorded in Book 61 at page 553 was the following: Beginning at the SW corner of Lot 8, Section 6, Township 7 South, Range 87 West; thence East along the South line of said Lot 8 about 1320 feet to a point on the line to Sections 6 and 5; thence Northerly along said line to said Sections 6 and 5, 115.75 feet to a point; thence East along the South line of Lot 11 in Section 5, 445 feet to a point on the Southerly line of the County road; thence with and along the Southerly line of said road, S. 46°57' E. 43 feet to a point; thence with and along said last mentioned line, E. 52 feet to a point about 25 feet E. of the E. bank of Coulter Creek; thence South 180 feet to a point East of the East bank of said Creek; thence West about 1845 feet to a point; thence North 50 feet to the place of beginning. — .. Authorized Countersignatur Paget STE\%AR'!' TITLE GUARANTY COMPANY • Order Number: 3845 SCHEDULE B ---- Section 1 • Requirements. Commitment Number. The following are the requirements to be complied with: Item (a) Payment to or for the account of the grantors or mortgagors of the full consideration for the estate or interest to be insured. • [tern (b) Proper instrument(s) creating the estate or interest to be insured must be executed and duly filed for record, • • • • • • 1653 to -wit: ---NO REQUIREMENTS AT THIS TIME --- Page 3 S T EWA. IRI' 'I` I'I` , y GUARANTY COMPANY SCHEDULE B — Section 2 Exceptions Order Number: 3845 Commitment Number: The policy or policies to be issued will contain exceptions to the following unless the same are disposed of to the satisfaction of the Company: 1. Rights or claims of parties in possession not shown by the public records. 2. Easements, or claims of easements, not shown by the public records. 3. Discrepancies, conflicts in boundary lines, shortage in area, encroachments, and any facts which a correct survey and inspection of the premises would disclose and which are not shown by the public records. 4, Any hen, or right to a lien, for services, labor or material theretofore or hereafter furnished, imposed by law and not shown by the public records. 5. Defects, liens, encumbrances, adverse claims or other matters, if any, created, first appearing in the public records or attaching subsequent to the effective date hereof but prior to the date the proposed insured acquires of record for value the estate or interest or mortgage thereon covered by this Commitment. 6. Any and all unpaid taxes and assessments. 7. Any law, ordinance or governmental regulation (including but not limited to building and zoning ordinance) restricting or regulating or prohibiting the occupancy, use or enjoyment of the land, or regulating the character, dimensions, or location of any improvement now or hereafter erected on said land, or prohibiting a separation in ownership or a reduction in the dimensions or area of any lot or parcel of land. 8. The effect of inclusion in any general or specific water conservancy, fire protection, soil conservation or other district or inclusion in any water service or street improvement area. g. Rights of way and easements of the Eureka Ditch No. 1, Somers Ditch, the Lewis Ditch, Swede's Ditch, Dutchman Ditch, and H.C.L. Ditch, insofar as the same may affect the subject property. 10. Right of way for road as described in Road Viewers Report recorded December 28, 1888, in Record Book No. 1, page 103, insofar as the same may affect the NE1/4NW4 of Section 8, Township 7 South, Range 88 West of the 6th P.M. 11. All existing roads, highways, ditches, pipelines, utilities, rights of way and easements therefor. 12. Fifty percent non -participating royalty in and to proceeds derived from sale of oil, gas and other minerals of whatsoever kind or description, produced and saved from subject property, as reserved to Austin F. Heuschkel and Doris B. Heuschkel by deed recorded October 8, 1968 in Book 397 at page 183, and any and all assignments thereof or interests therein. 13. Easement and right of way for pipeline purposes as granted to Rocky Mountain Natural Gas Company, Inc. by Austin F. Heuschkel and Doris B. Heuschkel in the instrument recorded April 29, 1969 in Book 401 at page 388 as Reception No. 243289, in which the specific location of the easement is not defined. CONTINUED ON PAGE 4-A Exceptions numbered are hereby omitted. Page 4 ST EWA R T TITLE ANTY COMPANY • Order Number: 3845 .�, CONTINUATION SHEET SCHEDULE 3 - Section 2 Commitment Number: 14. Stock watering Easement as granted by document recorded October 28, 1977 in Book 502 at Page 211 as Reception No. 281479. (Copy attached) • 15. Restrictions as contained in document recorded November 3, 1980 in Book 559 at Page 101 as Reception No. 308990. (Copy attached) 16. Amendment to Cattle Creek Ranch P.U.D. as recorded August 18, 1980 in Book 554 at Page 26 as Reception No. 306576. (Copy attached) • 17. Subdivision Improvement Agreement recorded August 18, 1980 in Book 554 at Page 29 as Reception No. 306577. (Copy attached) 18. Articles of Incorporation of The Cattle Creek Ranch Homeowners Association recorded November 3, 1981 in Book 559 at Page 88 as Reception No. 308989. • 19. Deed of Trust from Cottonwood Pass, a limited partnership, to the Public Trustee of Garfield County for the use of Jopesna, a Colorado limited partner- ship, to secure $319,607.78, dated September 24, 1976, recorded October 1, 1976 in Book 489 at Page 47 as Reception No. 274683. 20. Deed of Trust from Cattle Creek Ranch, a Joint Venture, to the Public Trustee of Garfield County for the use of Cottonwood Pass, a Colorado limited partnership, to secure $ dated September 6, 1977, recorded September 12, 1977 in Book 500 at Page 657 as Reception No. 280639. • • • • • Pay. 4-a 0055 SX11ESVA1 1' TITLE GUARANTY C:(1MPAYY • • • • • • • r • CONDITIONS AND STIPULATIONS 1. The term mortgage, when used herein, shall include deed of trust, trust deed, or other security instrument. 2. If the proposed insured has or acquires actual knowledge of any defect, lien, encumbrance, adverse claim or other matter affecting the estate or interest or mortgage thereon covered by this Commitment other than those shown in Schedule 8 hereof, and shall fail to disclose such knowledge to the Company in writing, the Company shall be relieved from liability for any Loss or damage resulting from any act of reliance hereon to the extent the Company is prejudiced by failure to so disclose such knowledge. If the proposed Insured shall disclose such knowledge to the Company, or if the Company otherwise acquires actual knowledge of any such defect, lien, encumbrance, adverse claim or other matter, the Company at its option may amend Schedule 6 of this Commitment accordingly, but such amendment shall not relieve the Company from liability previously incurred pursuant to paragraph 3 of these Conditions and Stipulations. 3. Liability of the Company under this Commitment shall be only to the named proposed Insured and such parties included under the definition of Insured in the form of policy or policies committed for and only for actual loss incurred in reliance hereon in undertaking in good faith (a) to comply with the requirements hereof, or (b) to eliminate exceptions shown in Schedule 8, or (e) to acquire or create the estate or interest or mortgage thereon covered by this Commitment. In no event shall such liability exceed the amount stated in Schedule A for the policy or policies committed for and such liability is subject to the insuring provisions and the Conditions and Stipulations and the exclusions from coverage of the form of policy or policies committed for in favor of the proposed Insured which are hereby incorporated by reference and are made a part of this Commitment except as expressly modified herein. 4. Any claim of loss or damage, whether or not based on negligence, and which arises out of the status of the title to the estate or interest or the lien of the insured mortgage covered hereby or any action asserting such claim, shall be restricted to the provisions and Conditions and Stipulations of this Commitment. S T EWA RT TITLE GUARANTY COMPANY Page 5 * • • • • • • • • • • CATTLE CREEK RANCH PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT 0 RES./SINGLE FAMILY—RURAL ENSITY DIST. O.S. OPEN SPACE DIST. S./CLUSTER ,HODS iT6 INCLUDE A MINIMUM 4 ACpEIr•AnM RES./CLUSTER HOUSING DIST. OPEN SPACE DIST. rlannraa Land Design Partnership Oilsoarood Springs, Co. CkM hphwariny [Idrado [ oaring Co. Oi niso d Swamps, Ca Mrlkologr Wright weer Eryena.ra. Inc. Oisawaod kinags, Co. *:a11. and Geology Gnu and Aaa0Nae.s. Mo. CaMnwood Springs, Co. MMERCIA VILLAGE NTER DI cRECREATION DIST. OPEN SPACE DIST. PEN SPACE DIS' OPEN SPACE OPEN SPACE DIST. l\\\\, 7/(7/ /OP - RES./SINGLE FAMILY— RURAL DENSITY DIST. RES./SINGLE FAMILY DIST RES./SINGLE .- FAMILYDIST • V. S./SI ILY DIST OPEN S DIST, EATIQ IST. ./SINGLE F LY OPEN SPACE DIST. Tc c L OPEN SPACE DIST. S./MU ILY D RES./MUL AMILY DIST RES./SINGL FAMILY—RURA DENSITY DIST. OPEN S ESa/MULTI FAMILY DIST. 1, RESJS L FAMILY DST. OPEN SPACE DIST. • • • i • • i • • • • CATTLE CREEK RANCH PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT ACCAE 0 300' BOO' S./CLUSTER,HOUS DIST. (TO INCLUDE A MINIMUM A ACREIPARE PEN SPACE DIST. RES./SINGLE FAMILY—RURAL ENSITY DIST. RES./CLUSTER HOUSING DIST. PEN SPACE DIS cRECREATION DIS 0 C. MMERCIA VILLAGE NTER DIS OPEN SPA RES./SINGLE FAMILY— RURAL DENSITY DIST. RES./SINGLE FAMILY DIST OPEN S ./MU ILY I EATIQ 1ST. Monolog Laari Cwlgn rar4,.r./Np Q atelooa gprsrg.. Ce. claE ERgM.arino I$ .ado Ea0Mg0d .. GO. OI.RMaod Spretos. Co, OPEN SPACE DIST. d1rd10109r *toed Write. aniseeds. Inc. oi.Rwaod Springs,. Co. 410 Soils and O.aloos Chen and Associate., Inc. QMnwood Spring.,. Co. t OPEN SPACE DIST. R F S./M ILY D Ti RES./MULTI T. FAMILY DIST. RES./MUL AMILY DIST RES./SINGL FAMILY—RURA ENSITY DIST. OPEN SPA E OPEN SPACE DIST. • chen and associates CONSULTING GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERS 5010 RD. 154 GLEN W OOD SIR( ':GS,COL.ORADO 61601 303/955-7456 PRELIMINARY GEOTECHNICAL INVESTIGATION CA"ITLE CREEK RANCH DEVELOPMENT, GARFIELD COUNTY, COLORADO Prepared For: Mt. Frank Lerner c/o Eldorado Engineering P.O. Box 669 Glenwood Springs, CO 81602 Job No. 23,746 April 13, 1982 OFFICES: CASPER • COLORADO SPRINGS • DENVER • SALT LAKE CITY TALE QF CONTENTS CSONCLUSIONS 1 SCOPE 2 PREVIOUS STUDIES 2 PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT 3 SI'iE CONDITIONS 3 GEOLOGIC SLTIONG 4 SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS Engineering Properties 7 GEOLOGIC CONDITIONS AFFECTING THE PROPOS7 DEVELOPMENT Slope Stability 8 Shallow Groundwater 9 Earthquake Potential 9 Flooding 10 EXCAVATION AND SITE GRADING Construction Slopes 10 Slope Stabilization 12 Subgrade Stabilization 12 Drainage Considerations 13 PRELIMINARY FOUNDATION RECOMMENDATIONS 13 FLOOR SLABS 14 CORROSION 15 LIMITATIONS 15 TABLE O? CONTENTS - (cont.) FIGURE 1 - LOGS OF EXPLORATORY HOLES FIGURE 2 - LOGS OF EXPLORATORY HOLES FIGURE 3 - LOGS OF EXPLORATORY HOLES, LEGEND & NOTES FIGURES 4-11 - StZTL-CONSOLIDATION TEST RESULTS TABLE I - SUMMARY OF LABORATORY TEST RESULTS TABLE II - RESULTS OF CHEMICAL TESTS PLNf I I - SURFICIAL GEOLOGY MAP AND LOCATION OF LEST HOLES PLA LE II - CATTLE CIS PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT AND VITALLY UNSTABLE SLOPES CONCLUSIONS (1) From a geotechnical engineering and geologic consideration, the site is suitable for development of the proposed residential subdivision. No conditions of a geologic nature occur at the site which would constitute a major hazard or render the proposed development infeasible; however, the design and construction of facilities should accomodate certain geologic and subsoil conditions. These conditions are described herein.. (2) Soil conditions at the site are relatively complex and generally consist of fine-grained soils with scattered gravel deposits. The fine -graced soils are moderately susceptible to erosion and will require protection. (3) In general, spread footings and drilled pier foundation systems will be suitable for residential and other lightly loaded structures. Additional investigation should be conducted for ind.ividiial building sites.. (4) Areas of shallow ground water and soft subgrade conditions occur within some of the major drainages, and may require dewatering or ground stabilization techniques. The extent of these areas is rather limited and generally confined to valley bottom areas and the golf course and darn sites. Other localized areas occur. (5) In general, grades steeper than 30% do not exist throughout the building sites, however, areas of slope instability associated with free ground water have been identified within some building sites below existing irrigation ditches. These areas should be studied on an individual basis. -2 - SCOPE This report presents the results of a preliminary geotechnical and geological investigation conducted for the Cattle geek Ranch Development located in eastern Garfield County approximately 10 miles southeast of the Town of Glenwood Springs, Colorado. The study was performed in accordance with our proposal to you dated January 27, 1982. The surficial geologic and general subsoil conditions are described and their expected effects on the proposed development are discussed. Hydrologic aspects of the site have not been presented. PREVIOUS STUDIES Chen and Associates previously conducted several style -lies within and for the Cattle Creek Ranch Development. These studies have been utilized as background information to this report and are listed as follows: (1) Preliminary Geotechnical Investigation, Job No. 14,701, July 6, 1977. (2) Soil and Foundation Investigation, Proposed. 160,000 Gallon Water Storage Tank, Job No. 21,108, October 24, 1980. (3) Geotechnical Site Evaluation., FILM Access Road improvement, Job No. 22,282, July 23, 1981. (4) Observation of Slope Failure, Job No. 22,454, June 9, 1981. (5) Preliminary Geotechnical Investigation, Proposed Earth a. a t� Job No. 22,488, August 6, 1981. (6) Geotechnical Evaluation, Ground Water Seepage Along i-ieuschkel Lane and Cattle Creek Road, Job No. 22,806, August 20, 1981. -3 - PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT The 980 acre parcel has been proposed to be subdivided into a residential subdivision containing a total of 786 mixed single-family and multi -family units. A tentative layout of the residential units are shown on Plate II. The units will be augmented by an 18 -hole golf course which will cover portions of the southern half of the development. Open space is to occupy portions of the far west and extreme northeast section of the site. The valley floors of Coulter and Cattle Creek will also not be developed as residential. Two small earthen tents have been proposed and will occupy a portion of the west central golf course area. Final design for the tents had not been completed at the time of this report preparation, however, maximum height of the structures is expected to be on the order of 10 fact. A total surface area for two reservoirs will be on the order of 5 acres. Additional structures such as for water, qewage, and recreation will also be provided. SITE CONDITIONS The property investigated is located at the intersection of Garfield County Roads 113 and 115 in portions of Sec. 5, 6 and all of Sec. 8. T.7 S., R. 87W., Garfield County, Colorado. The boundaries of the project are shown on Plate 1. The general topography at the site is varied and is made up of nearly level valley floors and terraced surfaces, moderately steep to very steep valley sides and rolling uplands. The site topography is shown by the contour lines presented on Plate I. Ground surface slopes generally do not exceed 30%. Steep to very steep (50% to 70%) valley -4 - sides occur adjacent to portions of Cattle and Coulter Creeks. A few other areas with slopes greater than 30% occur in the rolling uplands which occupy the southeastern one-half of the property. Cattle and Coulter Creeks are the principal drainages crossing the property. Both are small perennial mountain streams and were flowing at the time of our investigation. In addition to these streams, several irrigation ditches also cross the property. The locations of these streams and ditches are shown on Plate I. In the past, the site has been used for pasture and the production of hay and wheat. Present land usage could not be determined as the ground surface was covered with up to 2 feet of snow. Native vegetation consists of grasses, sagebrush and scrub oak. The only structures observed on the property were the ranch house and associated outbuildings located in the north -central portion of the site (valley bottom area of Cattle Creek). Same site grading, in conjunction with the planned development, has been performed. The majority of the main access road into the southern half of the site has been graded along with some utility line installations. Some minor amounts of grading has also been performed along a small portion of the access road into the northern part of the site. GEOLOGIC Sirs IPJG The parcel is situated on a dissected plateauwhich lies between the valleys of the Roaring Fork River on the south and the Colorado River on the north. streams such as Cattle and Coulter Creeks, which drain the plateau, have caused moderately deep to deep valleys below the -5 - rolling upland surface. Near surface bedrock over the majority of the plateau are Tertiary age volcanic rocks and associated sedimentary rocks. The volcanic rocks consist chiefly of basalt flows. Some water deposited tuff was observed to crop out along the valley side north of Cattle Creek. The Tertiary age volcanic and sedimentary rocks overlie older sedimentary rocks of the goon and Eagle Valley Formations of Pennsylvanian and Permian age, T eto and others (1978). Lithologically, the Tertiary age sedimentary bedrock in the test holes and observed in outcrops consist of non-cemented sandstone with claystone lenses. Outcrops of the older sedimentary bedrock formations were not observed at the site, but occur along Cattle Creek to the west. Bedrock, over most of the site, is overlain by alluvial and slope wash soils which range from sandy clays to granular soils with varying amounts of fines. The soils encountered in the test holes are described in the subsurface conditions section of this report. The test holes drilled during this and other investigations indicate that the surficial soil deposits range from nil to maximum 56 feet thick, with the thicker soils occurring along the southeastern part of the site. The general distribution of the bedrock outcrops of soils at the site are shown on the geologic map, Plate I. SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS The general subsoil conditions for the development in addition to the previous subsurface studies were investigated by drilling 21 exploratory holes at the approximate location shown on Plate I. The locations of previous geotechnical studies conducted by Chen and Associates are also -6 - presented on Plate I. The test holes were drilled using the continuous flight auger powered by a CME 45. The drill rig was track mounted to allow for accessibility. Disturbed and relatively undisturbed samples were taken during the exploration program and returned to our laboratory for testing and review by the project engineer and geologist. The soils at the site are of several geologic origins and generally consist of slope wash, terrace alluvium and valley floor alluvium. The slope wash consists of clays and very clayey sand with scattered gravel, 'cobbles and boulders. The 3, low terrace remnants which flank the main valley floor of Cattle Creek and the higher terrace meant along the northern side of Cattle Creek are composed of a dense granular alluvial soil consisting of well rounded gravel and cobbles in a very clayey sand matrix. Exploratory borings and observations along stream banks indicate that the terrace gravels are relatively thin and overlie either volcanic or sedimentary bedrock. The valley floors of Coulter and Cattle Creek are underlain by valley alluvium which appear simillr in nature to the terrace alluvium flanking the valley floors but with an increased amount of fines. Volcanic and sedimentary bedrock was observed along valley sides, in road cuts and in the exploratory holes. The sedimentary bedrock consists of claystone and non --cemented silty, fine sandstone with occasional claystone and clongomerate beds. Three types of volcanic rocks were encountered. These include: (1) lava flows (2) volcanic mudflows and (3) water deposited tuffs. The basalt lava flows crop out along the valley sides adjacent to Cattle and Coulter Creeks. These flows are made up of extremely hard basalt with a widely spaced blocky -7 - joint system. Individia] rock blocks are on the order of 1 to 2 foot in dimension. The volcanic mudflows consist of angular basalt fragments to boulder size in a sandy silt matrix. The mudflow deposits are firm but the matrix is non-cemented. The water -deposited tuffs consist of stratified gravel -size scoriaceous basalt fragments which are moderately cemented. Eicrineering Properties: Graphic logs depicting the soil, bedrock and free water conditions encountered during the field investigation are presented in Figures 1, 2 and 3. As indicated, silty to sandy clays with scattered amounts of sand and gravel layers overlie sandstone or claystone bedrock and volcanic deposits. The upper clays are generally stiff to very stiff whereas the sands and gravels are dense to very dense. Sandstone and claystone bedrock was encountered in several test holes, at a minimum depth of 9 feet at Hole 9. A hard to very hard basaltic rock deposit was encountered in Hole 4 at depth 15 1/2 feet. The claystone bedrock was medium hard to hard with a medium to high plasticity, whereas the sandstone bedrock was generally hard. Swell -consolidation test results, presented on Figures 4 through 11 indicate that some of the upper very stiff fine-grained soils exhibit a nil to moderate swell potential when subjected to relatively light surcharge loading and wetted. Other clay samples exhibit a low to moderate settlement potential. A sample of the underlying claystone bedrock obtained from Hole 9 at 14 feet indicates a moderate swell potential. Samples of stiff to very stiff clays subjected to unconfined compression indicate a moderate to high undrained shear strength. A summary of laboratory test results is presented on Tables 1 and II. -8- Frcc water was not encountered in the exploratory holes at the time of the field investigation. Frcc water was encountered in Hole 15 at a depth of 19 feet when checked several days later. Shallow ground water has been encountered along the valley floors of Cattle and Coulter Creeks and valley sides downslope of irrigation ditches. Development of Eree ground water can be expected in shallow bedrock areas. GEOLOGIC CONDITIONS AFFECTING THE PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT Conditions of a geologic nature which would constitute a major hazard or render the proposed development infeasible were not observed at the site. Geologic conditions requiring consideration during planning and development are discussed below: Slope Stability: The slopes at the site generally appear to have had a stable geologic history with respect to landsliding. A small landslide, approximately as shown on Plate I, is located downslope of an irrigation ditch which crosses the site and was mapped during our 1977 study (Job No. 14,701). A recent failure occurred adjacent to the older slide. The failure and recomr ended remedial measures are discussed in our letter of July 9, 1981, Job No. 22,454. The remedial actions consisted of installing an interceptor drain and lining a portion of the irrigation ditch. During the field study for this failure, seepage was observed along portions of another ditch which occurs at an elevation above the failure. The seepage associated with this ditch was investigated and reported on August 20, 1981, Job No. 22,806. The August 20, 1981 study indicates that the seepage is fairly localized and does not appear continuous along the ditch. -9 - The remainder of the slopes at the site presently appear stable; however, the potential for additional construction -induced failures should be recognized prior to excavation. We recommend that site specific studies be performed in areas of steep slopes (greater that 30%) or in areas which occur below the irrigation ditches. Based on the general soil properties and past slope performance, we feel sone excavations into saturated slopes greater than about 20% are capable of inducing slope failure. Depending on site specific conditions, flatter slopes may also be affected. The areas where potentially unstable slopes are expected are shown on Plate II. Mbdification to the limits of these areas may be required as further subsoil data is obtained. If water is encountered in any excavation, this office should be notified to evaluate the stability of the excavated slopes. Sccpage from the ditches may require the installation of interceptor drains or dutch liners to reduce water problems in the development area. Shallow Groundwater: Groundwater was generally not encountered during this investigation or most of the previous investigation, with the exception of some of the holes and pits opened below the irrigation cutches and within the proposed dam site. Construction downslope of the ditches may require dewatering and inst.Rilation of subdrains around permanent structures. Depending on groundwater conditions, basements may not be feasible in some areas. Earthquake Potential: The site is in an area of low earthquake risk. Potentially capable faults have not been mapped in the vicinity of the site, Kirkham and Rogers, (1981), and with the exception of small to moderate earthquakes which have occurred in the area, historic seismic activity has been relatively low. Considering the type construction proposed, it is our -10 - opinion that the area does not present earthquake risks above those ncrmally considered for the region. The site is in the Uniform Building Code Seismic Zone 1. Flooding: Flooding along Cattle and Coulter Creeks can be expected during periods of heavy precipitation and snowrrlt. The proposed development plans, shown on Plate II, shows that only a few structures are planned adjacent to these creeks. Minor flooding may also be experienced along several of the small ephemeral drainages which cross the upper parts of the site. The flood potential associated with the creeks and small drainages should be incorporated into the development plan. EXCAVATION AND SITE GRADING It is anticipated that extensive site grading will not be required for the preparation of most building sites, roadways or parking areas because of the relatively gentle slopes which exist over the majority of the site. More extensive site grading will be neces5ary for roads or structures located on the steeper slopes. The following criteria should be used in the preparation of grading plans. Construction Slopes: Permanent cut slopes should not exceed 20 feet in height or be steeper than 2:1 (horizontal to vertical). Shallow temporary excavations up to about 10 feet in depth should be stable at inclinations of 1:1 or flatter assuming dry slope conditions. Deeper and steeper excavation are possible, however, specific site stridies should be perfoxil to determine their stability. If seepage is encountered in temporary or permanent excavations, adverse effects of the seepage on the slope stability and mitigation requirements should be determined. This is particularly -11 - important for building sites located directly below exisiing irrigation ditches (see Plate II). A discussion concerning methods for slope stabilization in these areas is given below. Good surface drainage should be provided for all permanent cut slopes. These slopes and other stripped areas should be protected against erosion by re -vegetation or other means. Fill embankments up to about 20 feet high should be stable at inclinations of 2:1 (horizontal to vertical) or flatter and if the ernbarkkrrents are properly compacted and well drained. These tents do not include water empoundment structures which should be individually analyzed. Prior to fill placement, the ground surface should be carefully prepared and should include removal of highly organic topsoil and vegetation. In steeper slope areas, fill en&banianents should be keyed into the slope and be properly compacted, The majority of the on-site soils and bedrock should be suitable for use as overlot fill whereas the well broken sand- stone bedrock and granular soils should be suitable for structural fill below buildings. When utilizing the natural on-site soils and bedrock for fill, oversized material should be removed prior to fill placement and compaction. Other than precautions indicated above for cut slopes, we do not anticipate unusnal problems with shallow excavations in the on-site soils and sedimentary bedrock. In these materials, excavation can be done with medium to heavy duty excavating equipment. Hard sandstone bedrock may be difficult to excavate in confined trenches and some difficulty can be expected when excavating volcanic rocks or large hard -12-- Lasait boulders contained within the mudflows. Deep excavation into the water deposited tuffs and lava flows will require ripping equipment and possibly blasting. Slope Stabilization: The risk of slope instability during excavation appears low provided slopes are drained and graded to 2:1 (horizontal to vertical) or flatter. Several methods of slope stabilization that can be implemented should seepage and instability develop are: (1) Removal of the potential slide mass and replacement with a compacted granular material. (2) Regrading of the area to a flatter slope by excavating material from the head of the potential slide area and replacing compacted material along the toe of the slope. (3) Lowering of the ground water level by installation of interceptor drains or eliminating the water source by lining the adjacent ditches. (4) Construction of gravity retaining structures such as boulder rock fill, gabions or cribbing. Subgrade Stabilization: Areas throughout the valley floors of Cattle and Coulter Creek or other flat meadows and designated for road con- struction Inay require subgrade stabilization. tonere soft wet soils are encountered, two procedures of stabilization can be taken. Either a rock mat can be compacted into the subgrade or a synthetic fabric can be placed on the natural subgrade. In the latter case a coarse granular subbase material of at least 1 foot will probably still be required to obtain a firm surface for pavement. We recommend a representative of the soils engineer observed the pavement subgrade to verify suitability for placement of structural fill or pavement material. -13 - Drainage Considerations : The subsoils encountered throughout the area are moderately susceptible to erosion from surface runoff. To avoid excessive erosion, surface runoff flow across unpaved or unprotected areas should be kept to less than 2.5 feet per second. Flows above this rate should be collected and passed in lined drainageways. Liners for drainages may consist of concrete, asphalt and in some cases riprap. The following design and construction details should be observed: (1) Riprap lined drainages may be constructed within the subdivision on slopes which do not exceed a 5% grade. Riprap specification should be developed once specific water velocities have been determined. (2) Drainages exiting the development across steep sideslopes should be provided with energy dissipators at the entry point into the natural drainages. Increased flow into the natural drainages may result in some additional erosion and may require periodic maintenance or additional protection. PRELIMINARY FOUNDATION RECOMMENDATIONS Several types of foundation systems appear feasible for the proposed development. Stiff to very stiff silty clays or claystone bedrock encountered at near surface or at relatively shallow depth may contain a swell potential. Individual spread footings or mat type foundations placed on expansive soils or bedrock, possess the highest risk of movement and damage due to swelling soils. Where expansive soils or bedrock are encountered, minimum dead loads may be required for footings or a drilled pier foundation may be most suitable. In gineral, we do not expect drilled piers be a common foundation type. Structures located on or adjacent to -14 - steep slopes (greater than 30%) should have foundations with adequate depth and setback to prevent adverse effects on the slope stability. We recommend that site specific studies be made at the individ'ial building locations to determine recommended foundation type. The upper fine-grained soils are expected to support pressures on the order of 1,500 to 4,000 psf whereas the coarse granular soils may have allowable bearing pressures as high as 5,000 psf for shallow spread footings. The underlying sandstone and claystone bedrock may have allowable bearing pressures as high as 30,000 psf, for ;gilled piers, however, the higher pressures can only be used for structures founded entirely on hard bedrock. Minimum dead load pressure may range between 500 to 1,500 psf for footings and 10,000 to 20,000 psf for drilled piers. In most areas, it will be essential that good drainage and restriction of irrigation of the slopes adjacent to the construction be provided to reduce tota] and differential settlement of structures. All foundation excavations should be observed by a representative of the soil engineer to verify bearing conditions. F]IWR SLABS The upper natural soils other than topsoil should be suitable to support lightly loaded floor slabs. Some floor slab heave can be expected where very stiff clay subgrade or claystone bedrock occurs. TO reduce the effect of some differential movement, floor slabs should be separated from bearing members with a positive expansion joint and adequately reinforced. If a significant swell potential is indicated at the site, installation of slip joints shoild be used so that movement of the slab -15 - does not effect the upper structure, or a structural floor (crawl space) should be constructed. Any required fill to support floor slab should consist of non -expansive material compacted to at least 95% standard Proctor density (AS'I'A? D-698) at a moisture content nc'r optimum. A minimum 4 -inch layer of gravel should be provided immediately beneath interior floor slabs. CORROSION Chemical tests performed on the subsoil samples (results presented on Table II) indicate that the on-site soils contain low concentrations of water soluble sulfates. The use of Type I or II cement should be suitable for concrete exposed to the natural soils. Some corrosion of buried metalic conduit could occur when subjected to increased moisture and the use of nonmetalic conduit or other protection of pipes should be considered. LIMITATIONS This report has been prepared in accordance with generally accepted geotechnical engineering practices in this area for the use by the client for design purposes. The conclusions and recommendations presented are based on the data obtained from the exploratory holes at the locations shown on Plate I and on data obtained from a geologic field reconnaissance of the area. The subsoil encountered during the exploratory investigation indicate a general condition across the site. Variations with respect to depth, type and engineering properties of the subsoils should be expected -16 - and nay require re re-evaluation of the reconmendations contained herein. Site specific studies, on-site observation of excavations and testing of site grading operations by a representative of the soil engineer is reconmended. FJV/dc cc: Ron Liston CHEN AND ASSOCIATES, INC. By Ronald J. asguez E Reviewed By 4.464 -• oe y ex . G�- Engineering Geologist Steven L. Pawlak, P.E. 0 1 0 12 2(1 23,746 Ilole 1 El. 7345 28/6 WC=17.6 D=100.0 -200=88 LL=54 P1-30 6 Hole El. 7350 33/ vsS 9 '.9 i67 38/ WC. DD= -2C LL4.6 30/ 52/ Hole 9 El. 7355 27/6 22/9 WC=23.2 DD=103.6 -200=99 LL=66 P1=40 22/9 Mole 10 El. 7330 5 23/12 1tiC=16.3 10 00=103.5 - 200=99 1.1.=56 P1=33 8/9 20 25 30 Logs of Exploratory !toles lig. 1 lU 15 ZU �() ^ 23,746 Hole 11 El. 7580 1/9 20/12 20/l2 WC=l2.4 DD=g7.8 UC=07ll 55/9 � � 1 � � � = 1 � 23/6 NC=l4'8 DD=106.6 4U/0 33/9 26/9 30/6 Hole 18 [l. 73h5 24/12 WC=6.8 DD=iO0.l WSS=0.002 46/12 D 5 lU 1� 20 Logs of Exploratory |»}e5 Fig. T. Hole 19 El. 7465 10 15 2U 30 95/12 43/12 3sional scattered gravel, medium stiff to 'rough coarse gravels, dense to very dense, +eels, dense, moist, brown grained sand, medium dense, moist, brown 1 cobbles and sand lenses, very dense, moist, mi:dy with depth, scattered cobbles, very brown Yard, medium to high plasticity, moist, brown led, moist, brown :o very hard, moist, brown rd, blocky basalt flows, very dense, 35/9 d moderately cemented water deposited NOTES /9 indicates that 35 blows of a 140 lb. to drive the sampler 9'. 1. Holes were drilled on Marc}?1586 continuous flight power aug •ed and number of days after drilling 2. Elevations are approximate WC = Water Content (o) DD = Dry Density (pcf) -200 = Percent Passing No. 26ve bottom of log it indicates multiple LL = Liquid Limit (%) = Plasticity Index (%) UC = Unconfined Compressive 1tiSS = Water Soluble Sulfate TSS = Total Soluble Salts 23,746 Exploratory Boles, Legend and Notes Fig. 3 0 vi cp • 0 _ 0 1 1 0 1 2 4 5 6 25, 746 chen and associates, inc. 100 APPLIED PRESSURE — ksf Moisture Content = 11 . 3 percent Dry Unit Weight 8.4. 3 pcf Sample of: sandy clay From. Hole 2 at 7.5 feet Moisture Content - 1 7 . (i percent Dry Unit Weight - 1{1(7. (1 pcf Sample of: sandy silty ciao From Hole 1 at 5 feet • \\*, I l ''''''''Q\s\s'sb' 1 ' \\\ 4 1 wetting. cotrpres3ioi pre -sure • n t Expansion pressure u du,e ider to constant t e`ting. L _ 100 APPLIED PRESSURE — ksf 10 APPLIED PRESSURE — ksf SWELL -CONSOLIDATION TEST RESULTS Fig. 100 Moisture Content = 11 . 3 percent Dry Unit Weight 8.4. 3 pcf Sample of: sandy clay From. Hole 2 at 7.5 feet 4 N Additicnal under constant due to wetting. cotrpres3ioi pre -sure n t L _ 10 APPLIED PRESSURE — ksf SWELL -CONSOLIDATION TEST RESULTS Fig. 100 CA -1-79 0 a 0 0 cP 11 1 4 1 0 0 1 0 0 2 4 chen and associates, Inc. 0.1 10 10 APPLIED PRESSURE — ksf 1 • Moisture Content = 1 (0 .3 percent Dry Unit Weight - } 04.3 pcf Sample of: sandy clay From: Hole 3 at 7 feet ---------"'L-------i___tL...„,N.\ • • , • Anninilihihr, Additional under constant compres;ioi p--c;sure 0 due to wetting. conipr,ssiofl under constant due to wetting. presSu-:'� 1 0.1 10 10 APPLIED PRESSURE — ksf 1 • Moisture Content = 9.1 percent Dry Unit Weight 113.5 pcf Sampleof: sandy silty clay From: Hole 5 at 3 feet • • , • Anninilihihr, 0 Additicnal conipr,ssiofl under constant due to wetting. presSu-:'� 01 1 0 10 APPLIED PRESSURE — ksf o13,746 SWELL -CONSOLIDATION TEST RESULTS Fig. 100 • OP 0 Compress ian 5 6 4 "23,716 ellen and associates, inc. 0 100 APPLIED PRESSURE — ksf Moisture Content = 8.5 percent Dry Unit Weight - 100.2 pcf Sampleof: silty clay • From: Hole 6 at 2 feet r •NN l , a • c�,datl.onal cosi } �Y_siert. �. • • ' Lnder cue Constant to wetting. pre *sur Exp;,msion )ressure far di Ger conmtant to wet/ ina. • • 0 100 APPLIED PRESSURE — ksf 0 10 APPLIED PRESSURE -- ksf SWELL -CONSOLIDATION TEST RESULTS rig. 100 (, Moisture Content = 12.0 percent Dry Unit Weight = 100.4 pcf Sample cf. silty clay From: Hole 7 at 3 feet r l a • • Exp;,msion )ressure far di Ger conmtant to wet/ ina. 0 10 APPLIED PRESSURE -- ksf SWELL -CONSOLIDATION TEST RESULTS rig. 100 (, CA -1-79 0 1 4 () 1 7 chen and associates, inc. v 10 100 APPLIED PRESSURE — ksf Moisture Content = 10 • b percent Dry Unit Weight = 08. 5 pcf Sample of: s 1 t c1ai' From: IIole 8 at 9 feet • Q ------___,..„........c\ -....,,..„777....._ r i. Additicnal under constant compres Ire ion s6.7e ... \\6 due to wetting. to coistart '''.ting. n. i v 10 100 APPLIED PRESSURE — ksf 1 100 APPLIED PRESSURE — ksf ,.7,•l� SWELL -CONSOLIDATION TEST RESULTS Fig. Moisture Content = percent Dry Unit Weight = pcf Sample of: claystone bedrock From: Hole 9 at 14 feet Q ------___,..„........c\ ... Expansion ressure older due to coistart '''.ting. n. 1 100 APPLIED PRESSURE — ksf ,.7,•l� SWELL -CONSOLIDATION TEST RESULTS Fig. CA -1-79 Compression 0 1 5 6 1 chen and associates, inc. 0.1 10 10 APPLIED PRESSURE — ksf 100 Moisture Content = 16.3 percent Dry Unit Weight = 103.5 pcf Sample of: silty clay From: Hole 10 at 9 feet- 1 a \IN• NNN eb------.".''''N\CCss\r r ' Kpansion ressure under due to constart wctti-14. Ex-pansioi under iue to :ons vett -ant ng. ,preS.sur 0.1 10 10 APPLIED PRESSURE — ksf 100 01 1.0 10 100 APPLIED PRESSURE — ksf .23 SWELL -CONSOLIDATION TEST RESULTS FiO Moisture Content = 19 . 9 percent Dry Unit Weight = 107.3 pcf Sample of Si1ty clay From: Hole 1? at 9 feet 1 a \IN• NNN • Kpansion ressure under due to constart wctti-14. 01 1.0 10 100 APPLIED PRESSURE — ksf .23 SWELL -CONSOLIDATION TEST RESULTS FiO CA -149 op 0 0 0 0 1 3 4 5 1 0 2 Ci 23,744 Then and associates, inc, 1.0 10 100 APPL4ED PRESSURE — ksf Moisture Content - 15.7 percent Dry Unit Weight= 97.9 pcf Sample of: sandy clan From: Hole 14 at 3 feet i --------7,-----...,„...„______„4;3„,....______.N • • ~ i No movement upon wet in( a Expansion pressure under due to constant we -t i.-ig . 1.0 10 100 APPL4ED PRESSURE — ksf 1 10 10 APPLIED PRESSURE — ksf 100 SWELL -CONSOLIDATION TEST RESULTS Fig Moisture Content - 15.1 percent Dry Unit Weight = 116, 8 pcf Sample of: sandy clay From: Hole 15 at 7 feet --------7,-----...,„...„______„4;3„,....______.N Expansion pressure under due to constant we -t i.-ig . 1 10 10 APPLIED PRESSURE — ksf 100 SWELL -CONSOLIDATION TEST RESULTS Fig 0 1 4 cher and associates, inc. Moisture Content = 16.2 percent Dry Unit Weight = 111.5 pcf Sample of: sandy clay From 1IO1e 1 at 13 feet No 1110 1, emeni upon 1 n 1 0 1 1.0 p AP?LIED PRESSURE — ksf 100 1.0 10 100 APPLIED PRESSURE — ksf SWELL -CONSOLIDATION TEST RESULTS Fig 11.1 Moisture Content = 148percent Dry Unit Weight = 106.6 pcf Sample cf silty clay From Hole 17 at 3 feet • - Ex)ans_on u N d r c•nstant prbssu-e du o It etring . 1 1.0 10 100 APPLIED PRESSURE — ksf SWELL -CONSOLIDATION TEST RESULTS Fig 11.1 Compression 0 1 5 7 4 5 6 chen and associates, inc. 10 100 APPLIED PRESSURE -- ksf Moisture Content = 6 • 8 percent Dry Unit Weight _ 100. 1 pcf Sample of sandy c 1 a1' Moisture Content = 13.2 perces! Dry Unit Weight = 99.7 pcf Sample of sandy clay From Hole 21 at 3 feet '''''....,,....,...„,N.,: (1.\\\\*\\\\:, I From Hole 18 r at 2 feet 1----_,,,......„....,0„..,„..,,,... . \ AdditiDnal co re 1psc/n, tinder due to ::ons`an wetting. Additional under duc to cons ThLcLin;;. co-npressior :an t prc s sure 10 100 APPLIED PRESSURE -- ksf 23, .:I f, 10 10 APPLIED PRESSURE — ksf 100 SWELL -CONSOLIDATION TEST RESULTS Fig. 11 Moisture Content = 13.2 perces! Dry Unit Weight = 99.7 pcf Sample of sandy clay From Hole 21 at 3 feet '''''....,,....,...„,N.,: 1----_,,,......„....,0„..,„..,,,... . AdditiDnal co re 1psc/n, tinder due to ::ons`an wetting. 7 pre s , ire 23, .:I f, 10 10 APPLIED PRESSURE — ksf 100 SWELL -CONSOLIDATION TEST RESULTS Fig. 11 SOFL ❑R BEDROCK TYPE J S- • -, Vd -0 -- I rJ 'a cn Sandy clay L - . V .1 "r U 1-! c :n L. +- — U : - U 4- cn _. .,.. •-* ;t r -4 CO 1-I cf c C c C > v :, r« U 4-1 v Cl :, 4 V CI , U 4) LI1 — i aW kl>x YclwN oarsa u 3 r 7 u iri OC s r 1 N OO ATTERBERG LIMITS PLASTICITY INDEX r.1 --1 1 40 ts' NA [— N O 1- a - o 0X s J J V Lf; !--- tom' y^ �.., .w Lr' — _ +J Cr+ F yzow Wwu N w[I ¢0'Ir, aaz _ C t-- Q 17- a a a ca ton Zo 4in 0 GRAVEL (%) ?NATURAL DRY DENSITY (PCF) CO j104.3 tom: G' � _ V . LP cC I+; C t O ^. [ --• — 177.1 • c; NATURAL MOISTURE CONTENT 4%? t..-_ .. —4 10.3 , .--. 4 .—' in Cfj t` - • � .. i — N N) C',1 Ira . :' t-s - 1^J .--1 _. Ci — .-1 t Lr'l. .--. SAMPLE LOC AT ION I F W W W a v. P+'1 L r f. _ t_� U: ri i. r t r .... 'tet .J i - C- 1 ""i tu JO _ ! P ri Lam �' I I' ... .. .-y l tl f' ---.. .—. r C.,1 N fy x z G w W - 4 7 aa2N v 2 G O a 0 2NS N GRAVEL NATURAL DRY DENSITY (PCF) 7J ,-.1 L, : v f NATURAL MOISTURE CONTENT 0/0) } ---• ::: 0 f d GG : M :f., v n. SAMPLE LOCATION W 2 L; H JC% Location Hole 2 at 2.5 Feet Hole 5 at 3 Feet Hole 18 at 2 Feet Hole 20 at 3 Feet Job No. 23,746 TABLE II RESULTS OF CHEMICAL TESTS Total Water Soluble Soluble Salts Sulfates (%) (a) 0.003 0.147 0.009 - 0.002 0.011 REFERENCES Kirkham, R.H., and Rogers, W.T., 1981, Earthquake Potential in Colorado, Colorado Geological Survey, Bulletin 43. Tweto, )., Hoanch, R.H. and Recd, J.C., Jr., 1978, Geologic Map of the Leadville 1° x 20 Quadrangle, Northwestern Colorado, U. S. G.S., Map I-999. L FOUNDATION ENGINEERING 5o30 RD. 154 • GLENV OOD SPRINGS,COLORADO 81601 • 3Q3/945-7453 ellen and associates, inc. CONSULTING ENGINEERS GEOTECHNICAL Silk, EVALUATION PROPOSED BLZ4 ACCESS ROAD ThIPROVENO4T CATTLE CREEK RANCH DEVELOPMENT G ,RFIELD cowry, COLORADO Prepared For: Frank Lerner c/o Eldorado Engineering P.O. Box 669 Glenwood Springs, CO 81602 Job No. 22,282 July 23, 1981 OFFICES DENVER COLORADO r COLORADO SPRINGS. COLORADO CASPER VNYOMING SALT LAKE CITU. 11T40 -I TAS OF CONTENTS 1 Catit lisIOs SCOPE 1 PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT 2 SITE CONDITIO 5 SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS 3 STABILITY r' NALYSE LANDSLIDE RISK REDUCTION 'LIMITATIONS FIGURE 1 - LOCATION OF EXPLORNTORY HOLES FIGURE 2 - LOGS OF EXPLORATORY HOLES FIGURE 3 - LEGEND AND NOTES FIGURE 4 - CROSS SECTION A -A' APPROX. STA. 13+97 FIGURE 5 - GRADATION N TEST RESULTS TABLE I - SUMMARY BY OF LABORATORY TEST RESULTS CONCTUSIONS The probability for slope instability appears low provide road cuts are maintained =at t a slope angle Cuts as steep as 1 (horizontal to vertical) . 1 1/2:1 over short sections of the road may remain stable, however, a high risk of minor slope failures and sloughing exists. Future rises in ground water levels at the site could also initiate instability. SCOPE This report presents the results of a geotechnical site evaluation for the proposed Li access road i mproverrexzt to be located within the Cattle Creek Ranch Development, Garfield County, Colorado. The report presents the results of slope stability evaluation and recO.L.ended slope configuration. A discussion of the subsoil profile, water table conditions, and ether design and construction details related to the stability of the proposed road is also presented. PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT The proposed roadway alignment will closely coincide e with the existing one lane dirt trail shown on Figure 1. A cross section at Station 13+97, performed by Eldorado Engineering, shows a typical profile of the proposed finished section and the. existing ground. As indicated by the profile, both cutting of the uphill slope and filling downslope will be required for the proposed widening. SITE CONDITIONS The proposed roadway ci a north facing slope.. ixnproverrent is located in a mountainous region Slopes as steep as 1 1/2:1 (horizontal to vertical) exist to the north, whereas slopes to the south are shallower, about 3:1. Two irrigation ditches exist in the area, one is located approximately 35 feet north and blow the existing trail and the other is located approximately 75 feet south and above the trail. Both ditches - time of ditches contained approximately 1 foot of flowing water depth at the the field investigation. Elevation differential between the is about 35 feet. No other major drainages cross the date area. A thick growth of shrubs and grasses with a few scattered scrub oak and cedar covered the site. SLTESURFACE CONDITIONS The subsurface conditions at the site were investigated by drilling 4 test borings at the approximate locations shown on Figure 1. Graphic logs of the exploratory holes are shown on Figure 2 . In general, the subsoils encountered within the borings vary slightly. Up to 12 feet of silty to very silty clay overlies clayey sands and gravels. The upper clay deposits, thickest at Test Hole 2, are generally very stiff to hard and slightly moist to moist with depth. The underlying gravels are dense to very dense and moist with frequent layers of cobbles and boulders. At Test Hole 1, silty sand and gravel was encountered immediately below the topsoil. The coarse rock fragments, typically over 3 inches in size, are primarily hard and subangular to angular basalt. Gradation analyses of the granular subsoils performed on the -3 - minus 1 1/2 inch size material are presented on Figure 5 and a summary of the laboratory test results is presented on Table I. Bedrock was not encountered in any of the test holes to the maxim= depth drilled, 24 feet. Free water also was not encountered at the time of drilling or when checker: on June 26, 1981. STABILITY ANALYSES Stability calculations were performed assuming a slope cross section as shown on Figure 4. The clays were assumed to extend to a maximum depth of 12 feet and overlie dense sands and gravels. Based on the general engineering properties of the subsoils, the potential failure surface. occurs in the upper clays. An initial cut. slope configuration of 2:1 (horizontal to vertical) was analyzed. This slope was determined to have a relatively low probability for failure under dry conditions and a moderate probability under saturated conrU tions . Should the slope Mme wetted or develop seepage from the above lying irrigation ditch, scr:e sloughing and/or slu:I1ping could cccur. Pegular raintenannce should be adequate for seasonal surface wetting. Erosion control rreasures such as revegetation, placerre_nt of diversion ditches, etc., should be implemented as soon as practical - Cut slopes steeper than 2:1 would possess a higher risk of instability. Slopes as steep as 1 1/2:1 gray be stable under short term conditions. However, major slumping should be expected under saturated conditions. Additionally, potential for erosion and required maintenance will also be higher. The above analysis assumes a surficial clay depth. If gravels are encountered, steeper cut slopes may be feasible. Additional analysis should be performed to determine suitable slope configurations if this case is encountered. Embankment fill slopes should be stable on a maxima" 1 1/2:1 grade for dry conditions. Adequate protection should be provided to prevent erosion and wetting. Fill should be compacted to at least 95% of standard Proctor density at a moisture content near optima.. Due to the present relatively steep roadway ewbankment, benching and keying the new fill into the bank should be performed. LANDSLIDE RISK REDUCTION CION Based on our analyses, the risk of instability of the landmass as a unit appears relatively .los provided the slope is maintained in a dry condition and graded to 1 1/2:1 ;horizontal to vertical.) or flatter. Several methods of slope stabilization that can be implemented should seepage and instability develop are; (1) Removal of the potential slide mass and replant with a acted granular material. (2) Regrading of the area to a flatter slope by excavating material from the head of the pot-Pntial slide area and replacing compacted material along the toe of the slope. (3) Lcwering of the ground water level by installation of interceptor drains or eliminating the water source by lining the adjacent ditches. (4) Construction of gravity retaining structures such as boulder rock fill, gabions, or cribbing. -5- LJNITATIO►3S This report has been prepared in accordance with generally accepted geotechnical engineering practices in this area for use by the client for design purposes. The conclusions and reccgrendations suhnitted in this report are based upon the data obtained from the test holes drilled at the locations .indicated on test hole plan. The nature and extent of variations between test holes may not become evident until excavation is performed. If during construction soil and ground water conditions appear to be different from those described herein, this office should be advised at once so that re-evaluation of the recomendations may be :rade. On-site observation of excavations by a soils engineer is recommended. Pr/dc CHEN AND ASSOCIATES, INC. Reviewed By Dave Sillers c/o Eldorado Engineering Steven L. Pawlak, P.E. Unpaved Road Cattle Cree Approximate Location Section A-.\ (See Figure 4) Fxisting IrrigatioI —, id, 11°IcH17-1-171., Ditch „.5.------i° 9 .----' ----------------i ,i/7 4 . -----:::-.-- ----------5, fiilpproximate Location f Upper Irrigation Direr Ji Existing Unpaved Road Approximate Scale: 1" 200.0' Existing One Lane Dirt Trail Contour Interval 40' From GS Carhonkiale Quadran le 7.5 M nute Series 11 (Top Traphic) LOCATIONS OF EXPWRATORY HOIJS Fio rt I Bole 1 it r 50/5 LL = 26 PI = 4 36/6 WC = 5.8 -'00 =21 22,282 38/12 Hole _' Hole .7 56/12 LL = 37 PI = 14 5_/1, 50/3 40/6 WC = 8.8 -200 = 25 LL = 30 PI = 9 13/1_' LL = 32 PI = 15 15x'6 28/12 Ik 1c 4 LOGS Of EXPLORATORY HOLES Figure 2 75 LEGEND: 0:4 ig :cp J1l r=ill, gravel, sandy, Moist, brown. Clay (CL -ML) silty to very silty with occasional gravel, medium stiff, moist, brown. Gravel (GM) sandy, silty twith cobbles or boulders, dense to very dense, moist, dark brown. Gravel (GC-GM1 cobbles and boulders, clayey kith some clay 1erls�:s, dense to very dense, moist, dark brown_ `waJard Penetration Test Sample : S1l1 D -158b. The symbol 50/5 indicates 50 blows of a 140 lb. hammer falling 30 inches 1,erc required to di-ive the sampler 5 incites. Undisturbed) Drive Sample. .-Z.epth at which hole caved. NOTES: 1's Test holes were drilled on June 23 and 24, 1981 with a four inch diameter continuous flight power auger. 2) No free water was encountered at the time of drilling or when checked on June 26, 1981. 5) ill = dater Content (5nl DO = Dry D.'.nsity (pef) -200 Percent Passing No. 200 Sieve LL = Liquid Limit (%) P1 = Pasticity Index (a) 22 , ' 2 LEGEND AND NOTES 1-igure 3 North „'50 240 0 220 7200 `"— 7190 A '22,282 i�. T; Test Hole 4 IL Irrigat on Ditch ExistiFig Road Proposed Roadway Section Test Hole 2 Irrigation Ditch (—"Existing Ground 2:1 Proposed Finished Section Approximate Scales: Vertical Scale: 1"=10.0" Horizontal Scale:1"=10.0' South 7250 7250 7220 7210 . 7200 7190 A' CROSS-SECTION A -A' APPROX. STA. 13+9 - Fig. 4 '; I I I t k.. f' 1 �7' e�3j 11 �7'i k•Si c ien and associates, inc. HYDROMETER ANALYSIS TIME REAO1-\.,S .61 7 HR Mei 14 M1N 5J FMN 19. M,N 4 MIN 1 MIN _EN 1 i MMM�IM� _- aEVE ANALYSIS WOO LI 5 51 ANDARO SO-11E� '1[)0 '50 4) 30 '16 .10 -4 CLEAR SLiUARE 6i'EN.N1/4.S y.. 1'-" 3 5..6' t1 - I 4- 1 I ir�l{wFNM --t 4 f 1 1 1 E._ L 02 ;A/5 :„75 CLAY TO SILT 3RAVEL LIQUID LIMIT SAMPLE OF Silty sand and gravel -r 4 P 't 1 LI1 _ 1 r 1 L 1 1J t: "4 149 297 1 590 1 19 239 - - 047 20 DIAMETER OF PARTICLE IN MILLIMETERS SAND INE I_ MDIuM JCOAR5E. 20 30 40 z Solt SOS 70 Si7 i 1 7 J 1 I9.1 L' 100 13 1 39 1 76 2 12'7 200 152 GRAVEL DINE j COARSE COBBLES SAND 42 °c SILT AND CLAY 71 PLASTICITY INDEX FROM Test Hole 1 at 9 feet HYDROMETER ANALYSIS 7HR .•,1E i=EADINGS 50 MIN 19 MIN 4 M1N • MIN "2 SIEVE ANALYSIS U S STANDARD SERIES -100 "50 -41 '30 •15 i' •a CLEAR SO ARE OPENINGS 0 RMMIIMMEINIMINICAMI MUM 10 ssr� i�� OMMEMOMOMUMMUOMMIREMMEMEM ._l:= .�.1 MI =MsI- � � MMMMM�M �ymmiM/MMi sMMwn� iMMMMM�M MillE IINMR R MMMIEMIMIIIIMIMIIIIMMI .E.Imm•immilimmimsilin•mmoiimramiommilldiMIMPMIIIIIMI=M=MIIMM NM SIMMII f maimmi MIMMasimiMMMIMOMMMMMOMMr1MMMiMis e=41 M =. 0. � 'm ilimi�MMMMMn�iMMMMI pl MMMMMMI�MMMMM�M MMMM�M� s_�lp1�^m�sMMMr,�rrrrrr _MMMMM� MMMMMMr�MMM1ws 90 0 T . 1 r- . T i. T 'h I 1 d l,j_. F 1 i r r-1' - 1 II� r r 11 3 y 100 L 005 009 .019 037 074 143 297 1 590 1 19 i2 :i6 4 F5 952 1'31 321 762 127 i 200 042 2 0 152 DIAMETER OF PARTICLE IN MILLIMETERS CLAY TO SILT SAND FINE 1 MEDIUM JC.OARSE r GRAVEL FINE I COARSE COBBLES GRAVEL Z,'' % SAND 48 %'TILTAND CLAY 27 9, LIOUID LiMiT 30 "t PLASTICITY INDEX SAMPLE OF FHOM Clayey sand and ;i':ive Te.7;t. Hole 2 :It 20 feet GRADATION TFgT RESULTS Fin aiialkiA1ili tali iiiiii aki6MtldLiAlt iilai666 igiatiri6664Liu.Wr.6C 1166viL��irlfcatUiCatAi ,.; • rl CIO rl r9 iV • 0 A 0 -r J D (1i w CC (f) @ P V LY. C!7 0 a G 0 < 0 .51C 447' o 1 k L7 lam. r� g M d f -4 i � I G. rV 6 1 y �N r Mc 4J 4 1 •T Cs/ r1 eY r rn a SOIL & FOUNDATION ENGINEERING cher and associates, Inc. CONSULTING ENGINEERS 5080 RD. 154 • GLENWOOD SPRINGS,COLOR ADO 81601 • 303/945-7453 August 20, 1981 Subject: Geotechnical Evaluation, Groundwater Seepage Along Heuschkel Lane and Cattle Creek Road, Cattle creek Ranch Development, Garfield County, Colorado Job No. 22,806 Mt. Frank Lerner c/o Eldorado Engineering 818 Colorado Avenue P.C. Box 669 Glenwood Springs, CO 81601 Dear Sir: As requested, we met at the subject site on July 20, 1981 with Dave Siders of Eldorado Engineering and Rick Nuhoff to observe seepage encountered during Heuschkel Lane grading and to make compaction recom- rendations for portions of Cattle Creek Road which previously had been subjected to local slope failures. previously conducted a preliminary geotechnical investigation for the Cattle Creek Ranch Development reported under our Job No. 14,701 and dated July 6, 1977. We additionally made reccurendations for slope stabilization along that portion of Cattle Creek Road experiencing slope ]nstAhi1ity. The report was dated Jurie 8, 1931 and listed under: our Job t o. 22,454. At the time of our site visit on July 20, approximately 100 feet of Heuschkel Lane at approximate Sta. 6+50 had local seepage emerging from a shallow cut into the hillside. the cut was approximately 150 feat dorimslope fiLla an existing irrigation ditch which contained approximately 1 foot of flowing water. It was indicated cated to Dave Sillers that a test pit should be excavated in the area of the seep to determine the subsoil profile and depth of saturation. A test pit located as shown on Figure 1 was dug the following WWxednesday, July 22, 1981. Within Cattle Creek Road, near the previous localized failure area, Dave Sillers was advised that the soft areas in the roadway went OFFICES- DENVER. COLORADO 1 COLORADO SPRINGS, COLORADO 1 CASPER, WYOMING / SALT LAKE CITY, UTAH Mr.. Frank Lerner August 20, 1981 Page 2 should be sub -excavated a'roiniraurr of 3 feet and stabilized with drier material placed and meted to a minimum 95% standard Proctor density. The fill should be free of organics and oversized material. In other areas requiring fill, the ground surface should be stripped of ay! topsoil and vegetation before fill is placed. The fill should be placed in uniform lifts and compacted to a minimum 95% standard Proctor density at a moisture content near optimum. W'e again rpt at the site on July 31 with Frank Lerner and Dave Sillers to investigate the proba'•hility of slope instability in the area near Heuschkel Lane. At the time of the site visit, Test Pit IA, location shown on Figure 1, had been excavated and the reoommen3ation was rade that the area could be bridged: with a relatively free draining gravel blanket placed below the roadway pavement or that an intercept drain could be placed upslope. We were also inforrred that additional subsurface seeps were encountered during the placezrent of an 8 inch water rain near the end of Heuschkel Lane. Concern was expressed over the stability of the entire area as it appeared that water would be encountered in probable cut areas for buildings. It was decided at that tire that several test pits should be dug along the upper irrigation ditch to delineate probable seepage areas. The pits were dug the following Thursday, August 6, 1981 at the locations shown on Figure 1. Graphical logs of the subsoil profiles encountered are shown on Figure 2. The soils generally encountered in all the test pits consisted of sandy clays. Some gravelly clays Erre encountered in Test Pit lA and claystone bedrock at approximate depth 4 feet below the ground surface was encountered in Test Pit 4. Seepage was additionally noted in Test Pit lA from ground surface to depth of 4.5 feet. No other areas of free water were encountered during the excavation, however, Test Pit 4 con- tained water at a depth of 4.5 feet When ch :ked 12 days after e_zcava- tion. Laboratory test data on samples obtained from Test Pit IA is presented on Figure 3. From the information obtained in the test pit excavations, it appears that migration of water through the higher slope may be localized and that the overall stability of the natural. slopes has not been adversely affected by the presence of the irrigation ditches. The water encountered in Test Pit. lA and in Test Pit 4 appears to be perched above the stiff sandy clays and claystone bedrock, respectively. In our opinion and from a geotechnical standpoint, no conditions exist at the site which would render further development infeasible. However, basement and crawl space construction will probably be limited in some Mr. Frank Lerner August 20, 1981 Page 3 areas. Any cutting at the toe of the slope should also be restricted until subsoil analysis is performed. Wv'e recommend that site specific soil and foundation investigation be performed for each lot and that we be informed of any Pdai tional problems encountered in the area. If you have any questions or if we can be of further service, please ca l l Kj3a Gate% p • 15222 ;* a'`y CVs ,Trec ` •-OF CO DL]/dc Rev. By: S.L.P. Sincerely, Ci AND ASSOCIATES, INC. By 7.--t../<<2Donald Jruez E .T. it 0 Ca e Creek Road proposed) 50 711C 73 Pi 1pprox:S!alei 50 Existing unpavO o a d s 72 Tr' Lot Line typical Proposed Dam Site. Chen .loh No. 22,488 APPROXIMATE LOCATIONS OFTEST 1ITS Figure 1 P I T 1.1 0 '2 „91",c, —200=43 LL=36 PI=17 WC=32.9 DD=87.1. —200=78 LL=60 PI=32 PIT 1 PIT 2 PIT 3 PIT 4 12 LEGEND: C�1 • Topsoil. Clay (CL) , sandy, silty, areas. medium stiff, moist, brown, some soft • Clay (CL -CC), sandy, gravelly, medium stiff, very moist to saturated, brown. Claystone Bedrock, firm to hard, moist, brown to gray. Undisturbed Iland Drive Sample_ Disturbed Bulk Sample. Indicates 2" PVC pipe installed in pit to depth shown. Indicated depth to free water and number of days after excavation measurement was taken. NOTES: (1) Test pits were excavated on July 22 and August 6, 1981 with a backhoe. (2) WC = Water Content (o}; DD = Dry Density (pcf); -200 = Percent Passing No. 200 Sieve; LL = Liquid Limit (1); PI = Plasticity Index;(%). [.471;5 OP I:XP[ ORATORY PITS. I.E:c;f :;) f. NOTES — Fig. mtffilirrstrwiux 1111MEM.IGMML F2 2,506. cher and associates, inc. HYDROMETER ANALYS'S TIME READ:NGS EVE ANALY S 24 l- 7 HFI 45 41;N 1S MIN ,0 M `J 19 M1N.4 MI 1_C 9: 0 :i 002 US SrANUARDSERIES '10 1 MIN '220 900 '50 '40 '30 '16 " CLEAR SOd)ARE ir1PENYNGS. 5-6" 8' s�+ immomimpraiiiminimpopmaatirtramel - .i..r — .rr iliwssl-.�:'li Wilem 4iww�iw�NIMMig e .111111111.11=�M mm.. wgieNsi riirai+..y w.�.liiwii•11lwimisme•imminmiftwapie. ammo.. i wI..wr•airi�ii�..n.iMIIIIIIIIIIIIMMIENMEMMev i.... wirwi.��wwwww� Iw��lw.rwi...4.i. �ri..iw4 ill � .., .mile tim le MPIMIIMMIMMMIRNMIIIIMPIIIMMIIMEIMIMMig mamaipamimismirignmummidmwmppoommmi WMPIMEMIIIMMERNIMIIMIll am MMEMMIMMIMIdli war �w..����� MN Mr.IMM iA l MOM= � MMEI . 5 .009 .619 .133. .074 149297. 2591 1.19 2 0238 4.76 DIAMETER OF PARTICLE ltd MILOMETERS ME -i....�.miii l ril _ iiimmliMMEMPlilmiThilailll IIMIIMNI=M=MN.Mm 1M1 iIMMENIMMiMMOIN CLAY TO SILT GRAVEL 19 % SAND 38 % SILT AND CLAY LIQUID LIMIT 36 PLASTICITY INDEX 17 FINE SAND 1 lAEDIUM J'COARSE SAMPLE OF gravelly sandy clay HYDROMETER ANALYSIS riyc READINGS 2='iP ; NR "IN 15 1.1+2'e 60 M`M 19 MIN 4 MIN 3.? 1 PA :N '270 9.S 19.1 381 GRAVEL FINE I COARSE. 43 % FROM Test Pit 1A at 3 feet U S ST f X17 SERIES '100 '507. '4 '30 SIEVE ANALYSIS '10 .Id i,a i .4 76 2 127 2 152 COFiBLES CLEAR SOuA.15 OPErr'r.GS N'" a. 1',^ i �r— r i`. H-- 0 10 0 W 40Z 1- W 50 x F 2 60 CrE7 7 a 0 0 I r 1 r F-- F .IFIMIIwll=iif .M�_ a r :MOM »4ni rte. Ferri'=fly sOMNI. =NENIUMMI1MaNNE .005 4.l? 1 1 IT L T .013 03; 0:4 1.9 29r` 3'0 1 13 12 33 4 76 9.5 u.. 2 0 DIAMETER OF PARTICLE IN MILLIMETERS CLAY TO SILT FINE GRAVEL % . SAND LIQUID LIMIT 60 °0 SAMPLE OF sandy clay SAND ME 0111 LA COARSE 19.1 10 20 30 0 40 a tr- 50 CC 1- 2 w 80'1) 1L 70 80 90 1 /-"Zl �,,�� f 1100 331 76.2 121; 2.;0 152 GRAVEL. FINE COARSE COBOL ES SILT AND CLAY 78 Dry Density (pc f) = 87.1 PLASTICITY INDEX Water Content (%) = 32.9 FROM Test Pit 1:l at 6 feet GRADATION TEST RESULTS Fig. 3 • • • SOIL & FOUNDATION ENGINEERING chen and associates, inc. CONSULTING ENGINEERS 5080 AD. 154 o GLENWOOD SPRINGS,COLORADO 81601 • 303/945-7458 SIOIL AND FOUNDATION TNVESTIGATI( PROPOSED 160,000 GALLEN WATER STORAGE TANK CATTLE CREEK RANCH, GARFIELD COUNTY, COLORADO Prepared for:- Eldorado or:- Eldorado Engineering' P.O. Box 669 Glenwood Springs, CO 81601 Job. No. 21,108 October 24, 1980 '=ICES DE NvfR COLORADO COLORAno SPRINGS CCLfRAiOC CASPER. WYOMING SALT LAKE CITY UTAH TABLE OF CONTENTS CONCLUSIONS 1 SCOPE 1 PROPOSED CONSTRUCTION 1 SITE CONDITIONS 1 SUBSOIL CONDITIONS 2 FOUNDATION AND SUBGRADE RECOMMENDATIONS 2 & 3 LATERAL EARTH PRESSURES 4 SULFATES 4 SURFACE DRAINAGE 5 MISCELLANEOUS 5 FIGURE 1 - L►OCA11C]N OF EXPLORATORY HOLES FIGURE 2 - LC)GS OF EXPLORATORY HOLES FIGURE 3 -- LEGEND AND NOTES FIGURES 4 -- 7 - SWELL -CONSOLIDATION TEST RESULTS TABLE I - SUMMARY OF LABORATORY TEST RESULTS • • • • ■ • • • i CONCLUSIONS The proposed water tank may be founded on spread foot- ings or on a reinforced mat placed on non -expansive soils designed for a maximum soil pressure of 4,000 psf. Other soil related design and construction de- tails are discussed in the body of the report. SCOPE This report presents the results of a soil and foundation inves- tigation for the proposed 160,000 gallon water tank at the Cattle Creek Ranch Development, about 5 miles southeast of Glenwood Springs in Garfield County, Colorado.. Subsoil conditions, their engineering characteristics, recommended foundations, allowable bearing pressures and other soil related design and construction details are discussed in the report. PROPOSED CONSTRUCTION The proposed water tank will be 40 'feet in diameter and 18 feet high. The tank will be buried with a 3 foot dome showing above the surface. Type of construction will either be pre -cast and pre -stres- sed or cast in place. The exact location of the tank had not been de- termined at the time of this investigation. Test Holes 1, 2, and 3 shown on Figure 1 cover the area being considered. SITE CONDITIONS - At the time of our investigation the site was an undeveloped nor- th facing slope. The ground surface slopes about 5 to 10% down to the -2 - north. General terrain in the region is gently rolling. Vegetation consists of grass, weeds and scrub oak. Irrigation ditches border the ground on the north and east but were dry at the time of our field work. SUBSOIL CONDITIONS As the location of the tank had not been definitely established, three test holes were drilled in the general area. The locations were determined by the client at the site. These test holes revealed some- what erratic subsoil condition. Subsoils are erratic in engineering properties and types. In general, the three test holes revealed 8 to 21 feet of stiff to very stiff silty clay overlying median dense sand and silt to the maximum depth drilled, 50 feet. The lower layer is very erratic varying from clayey silt to silty sand. Near the bottom of the upper clay layer, a highly plastic clay zone occurs. This clay zone exhibits a low to moderate swell potential as shown on the swell` consolidation test results, Figure 5. Results of other tests are shown on Figures 4 and 6 and indicate moderate consolidation under loading and wetting. Grain -size analysis of samples of the upper clay and upper sand are shown on Figure 7. No free water was found in the test holes at the time of dril- ling. FOUNDATION AND StJBGRADE RECOMENDATIC+NS Considering the proposed construction and the subsoil conditions, -3- we recommend the tank be founded on conventional spread footings or on a mat placed on the non--expansive silts or sands. This may require over-excavation of highly plastic clays if they are found at founda- tion level. Such a case way be at the location of Test Hole 2 at a depth of 14 feet. Settlement should be within approximately 1 1/2 in- ch total and 1 inch differential across the tank if the following de- sign and construction details are observed: (1) Footings should be placed on the silty sands, silts or non-expan- sive clays. Expansive clays occuring at foundation level should be over-excavated for a depth of at least 3 feet and replaced with non-expansive on-site materials. Fill supporting the tank should be compacted to at least 100% standard Proctor density. (2) Footings placed on the firm natural-soils or compacted structural fill may be designed for a maximum soil pressure of 4,000 psf. Minimum footing width should be taken as 16 inches for walls and. 2 feet for columns. (3) The excavation should be observed by a representative of the soil engineer to verify that desired bearing stratum is used. Dose or undesirable soils should be removed and replaced with suitable soil or the footings lowered to firmer suitable bearing strata. (4) Footings should be provided with adequate reinforcement to span local anomalies. (5) Footings should be provided with adequate ever for frost protec- tion. -4 - LATERAL EARTH PRESSURES Backfill around the tank will create lateral earth pressure on the tank sides. We recommend backfill to within 3 feet of the ground surface consist of a granular soil with an angle of internal friction of at least 30°. The top 3 feet may consist of the on-site soils and should be compacted to at least 90% standard Proctor density. The lateral earth pressures may be calculated on the basis of a fluid weight of 45 pounds per cubic foot. An underdrain system should be placed at the base of the wall to collect any seepage from the tank or any that infiltrates into the backfill soils. This drain should consist of a minimum 4 inch diameter perforated or open joint pipe surrounded by clean, free draining gravel. A minimum 4 inch layer of free draining gravel should be placed beneath the base slab and connected into the underdrain system. The underdrain should lead to a positive gravity outflow. SULFATES Results of water soluble sulfate tests indicate low concentra- tions and use of Type 1 cement should be suitable for concrete exposed to natural soils. Some corrosion of buried metalic conduit could oc- cur and use of approved non-metalic conduit or other protection of pipes should be considered. • • • • • • • • • • -5- SURFACE DRAINAGE The following drainage precautions should be observed during con- struction and .maintained at all times after the tank has been com- pleted: (1) Excessive wetting or drying of the foundation excavation should be avoided during construction. (2) Backfill around the tank should be moistened and compacted to at least 90% standard Proctor density. (3) The ground surface surrounding the tank should be sloped to drain away in all directions. We recommend a minimum slope of 6 inches in the first 10 feet. (4) Roof drainage should continue to discharge well beyond the limits of all backfill. MISCELLANEOUS This report has been prepared in accordance with generally accep- ted soil and foundation engineering practices in this area for the use by the client for design purposes. The conclusions and recommenda- tions submitted in this report are based upon the data obtained from the exploratory holes drilled at the locations shown on Figure 1. The nature and extent of variations between the exploratory holes may not become evident until excavation is performed. If, during construc- Lion, soil, rock and ground water conditions appear to be different 6_ • from those described herein, this office should be advised at once so 40 that re-evaluation of the recommendations may be made. We recommend on-site observation of excavations and foundation bearing strata by a soil engineer. • • • • • • RCH!sas CHEN PND ASSOCIATES, INC. chard C. Hepwo F Reviewed by 4/4 �,n..�---�-��i^ Steven L. Pawlak, P.E. ob Haystack 10 Countr w 113. �� Ditch Proposed Yellow ric • .a NOTE: Benchmark at top of Galvanized culvert 53' NE of Test Hole 3. d21,if1R Ditch - Fence Line LOC. TON OF EXPLORATORY Hn1.1=S .i0 le loft 3 NScale 1"=3ii(l" Pip. 1 I1 I T 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 :J1 fl 11 0 CD • LOGS OF EXPLORATORY HOLES Fi. 2 • • • LEGEND: ElTopsoil, sandy silt. clay (CL), silty to sandy stiff to very stiff, moist red, brown, slightly calareous cementation. Sand (SM -SCS silty to clayey, some gravel, medium dense to dense, moist red -brown. Sand (SM) silty to silt, (ML), clayey, medium dense, moist, red-browm to grey brown. 0Undisturbed Drive Sample. The symbol 23/12 indicates that 23 blows of a 140 lb. hammer falling 30 inches were required to drive the sampler 12 inches- NOTES.: nches. NO;ES : (1) Test holes were drilled on 9/18/80 with a 4 inch diameter continuous flight power auger. 1 Elevations are approximate and refer to the Benchmark on Fig. 1. (3) No free water was encountered in test holes at time of drilling. (41 WC = Water Content (%) ; DD = Ory Density (pcf); -200 = Percent Passing No. 200 Sieve; LL = Liquid Limit (%): PI = Plasticity Index (%); WSS = Water Soluble Sulfate (%). #21,108 LEGEND NOTES Fig. • • • • • • • • • #:1,108 • 0 4 4 c 0 °1 r; 4 5 chen and associates, inc. 0.1 1.0 APPLIED PRESSURE — ksf Moisture Content = 1. 1 percent Dry Unit Weight = 109.7 pcf Sample of Silty clay From. Hole 1 at 9 feet ' --------------------________________,....,,:,8________r____ Add prssu'e i_ion. dditicon01 oist int compression pressure cue under Under to Wettlin 0 • • 0.1 1.0 APPLIED PRESSURE — ksf 01 1.0 1 APPLIED PRESSURE — ksf SWFI I-rnNisni ffATIC7N TF;ST RFS!, it TS Fir) Moisture Content = 8.9 percent Dry Unit Weight = 124.6 pcf Sample of: Silty clay From. Hole 1 at 19 feet ' --------------------________________,....,,:,8________r____ Add prssu'e i_ion. dice compression to wetting. under c.crstan 01 1.0 1 APPLIED PRESSURE — ksf SWFI I-rnNisni ffATIC7N TF;ST RFS!, it TS Fir) 0 0 • P 1 #21,108 chen and associates, inc. 1 Moisture Content -14.6 percent Dry Unit Weight = 114.8 pcf Sample of: Clay From: Bole 2 at 4 feet chile ns to ilo W 11 C under tting. :ons -an re s 311 0.1 1.0 10 APPLIED PRESSURE — ksf 100 01 1.0 10 APPLIED PRESSURE -- ksf gWFI IIDATICN TFST RES! TS 100 Fda. 5 Moisture Content = 23,9 percent Dry Unit Weight = 101.0 pct Sample of Clay- From:JIole 2 at 14 feet Lx rgsstre Jall ion under due to constant Wetting, .,._._._.____.__._._._____________„o7>.S.„cr.,...iz„<5..NN---r- 01 1.0 10 APPLIED PRESSURE -- ksf gWFI IIDATICN TFST RES! TS 100 Fda. 5 • 1 1 cnen anct assuclates, lilt. 05 1.0 10 APPLIED PRESSURE --- ksf Moisture Content = Dry Unit Weight = Sample of: From. percent pcf 01 G 10 APPLIED PRESSURE — ksf 100 f',21,108 C1NF1 1-%ONSfl IfATIfN TFST PFSI ll TS Fitt 11l 7T11.1 Moisture Content 0Percent Dry Unit Weight 7 117 . 1 pcf Sample of Sandy silt From. Hole 2 at 19 feet — Lpa.nsion tinder constant ---.— pres'staz`e due to wetting. .19 05 1.0 10 APPLIED PRESSURE --- ksf Moisture Content = Dry Unit Weight = Sample of: From. percent pcf 01 G 10 APPLIED PRESSURE — ksf 100 f',21,108 C1NF1 1-%ONSfl IfATIfN TFST PFSI ll TS Fitt chen and associates, inc. HYDROMETER ANALYSIS SIEVE ANALYSIS TIME READINGS 24HR 7 H 45 MIN 15 MIN 60 MN 19 MIN 4 MIN 100 - 90 0 70 60 50 z LL: 0 30 20 1 U 5. STANDARD SERIES IN "200 '100 '50 "40 '30 "16 1I'8 CLEAR SQUARE OPENINGS I 4 0. 001 1 , 11111 9 1 1 1 1 1.1 11 T qM 1 1 111 I 1 1* 7 T 11II 002 005 009 019 037 074 149 297 590 1 19 2 38 4 76 9 52 042 2 0 DIAMETER OF PARTICLE IN MILLIMETERS 2 30 a 40Z 50 z 60 70 82 f 1 1 1 1 [7TT T" 19 1 38 1 76 2 127 2000 152 CLAY TO SILT GRAVEL 0 LIQUID LIMIT SAND FINE I MEDIUM ICOARSE GRAVEL FINE I COARSE COBBLES SAND 19 25 % SAMPLE OF Clayey Silt SILT AND CLAY PLASTICITY INDEX 6 81 9fo FROM Hole 1 at 29 feet HYDROMETER ANALYSIS TIME READINGS 24 HR 7HR 45 MIN 15 MIN 100 80 70 Z 60 co rY. 50 z Tx 40 30 #21,108 10 60 MIN 19 MIN 4 MIN 1 MIN SIEVE ANALYSIS U.S. STANDARD SERIES '100 'S0 '40'30 '16 1IQ8 CLEAR SQUARE OPENINGS 1•01111111=•••/'ii—IMONiMI=IMMUM—l--!= •MINWi•!!M! .�. ---- lrrrin 1r _rmo>r--rri l !MP --Oji_----1• IIIIMMI=mil----.--— smiiimimma1i Ai--__i•�--a--�imal in --,MUIIIMMAMMMOIi---m, —•MI Ii iii— i --- MN= • 19 10—'fiin •— ai___ I— --iii -------.. M1=MMI —rte 1,11 . 1 11 iii---- ire iiIMP —s—a--MMM ,—'—'-- MMIMPE ii rl=MINl--a--'-- MIIMIIMIIIIMINMalal1=1119MMI --'--- IEW iMINM EMilll i---- �i OWE liffl=1 —HIIsMIM=1•1---lrII—M 1a aM Ol= ' 1. —��'—=/. i_----- -- i .191 nt• >i—ism•nomear, qtr all►l—moi—a— ar111,l•='1•—i— —limiri� i— — iwfwl11w41•11,_—i:/, .1•10o•911wia— i--ai 1riMEIMPAIM-1.111M1i i----IIIM• i '—iil•WIPMMMa1=11 i— ,Nall --i—• if1��1MPAIN MMM--1VM,--—I-- Ilia 1••=19 __---,M—' , 19=IMME 11184•••• IlmillM1w 990•11•••i--i---iMMliMsa---i— - a#.----- ---IIN�1rwi i_—a_ • 1---imwr mm1• .-- mmoulin•ma�• --a—w••—ria 111 , nme[[minim.� 001 • — —Ow IN Mr a+uM, Ow� 005 .009 019 ,037 074 149 297 .590 1.19 .38 4.76 042 2.0 DIAMETER OF PARTICLE IN MILLIMETERS 20 30 3 40 u1 5011 z 600 1Y a 70 100 .52 191 381 76.2 127 200 152 t CLAY TO SILT SAND FINE I MEDIUM icoARSE GRAVEL 5 % SAND 63 % LIQUID LIMIT 23 ' SAMPLE OF Silty sand SILT AND CLAY PLASTICITY INDEX 9 FROM GRAVEL FINE 1 COARSE 32 % Hole 3 at 14 feet GRADATION TEST RESULTS COBBLES Fig SOIL TYPE ISilty clay 7 7 U 1 —4 i •H i Cr) Clayey silt B1=0 Cla Silt sand '.Silty sand w—C•aw L.; up > rjo czj wtiz —4 a I �„ •`fid r.- [TRIAXIAL SHEAR TESTS CONFINING PRESSURE (PSF) DEVIATOR STRESS (PS F) 0 W > _ CUz0 Z Cr °� W ate(r CL 0 1- Z 0 D U 1 ATTERBERG LIMITS r U 6, 6 a x V a �, J Cr o r dU7 1-` Cr z V,- DI W ,-- z n C w C^,3a -4 CC I .-I oo �-+ u; Q3 c r- i Z r-,. J 1 -Li cr D --- ' (PI ti.. a — D 2 g u -i ,--, i s � ra + .00 Cr m-. ,. r7 G NI ra DEPTH (FE ET) 9 C7 C e? W 0 ('I 1 • 0 • chen and associates, inc. CONSULTING ENGINEERS SOIL L FOUNDATION 96 S. ZUNI • DENVER, COLORADO 80223 303/744-7105 ENGINEERING 1924 EAST FIRST STREET • CASPER, WYOMING 82601 • 307/234-2126 PRELIMINARY GEOTECHNICAL INVESTIGATION CATTLE CREEK RANCH DEVELOPMENT SOUTHEAST OF GLENWOOD SPRINGS, COLORADO Prepared for: MR. FRANK LERNER P. 0. BOX 9140 ASPEN, COLORADO 81611 Job No. 14,701 July 6, 1977 TABLE OF CONTENTS CONCLUSIONS 1 SCOPE 2 PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT 2 SITE CONDITIONS 2 GEOLOGIC SETTING 3 SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS 4 Soils Bedrock 5 Engineering Properties 5 Ground Water 6 GEOLOGIC CONDITIONS AFFECTING THE PROPOSED CONSTRUCTION 6 Slope Stability 6 Shallow Ground Water and Flooding 7 Earthquake Potential 7 POSSIBLE FOUNDATION TYPES 7 SITE GRADING 8 LEACHING FIELDS 9 ADDITIONAL INVESTIGATIONS 10 FIG. 1 - LOGS OF EXPLORATORY HOLES FIG. 2 - LEGEND AND NOTES FIGS. 3 through 6 - SWELL -CONSOLIDATION TEST RESULTS FIG. 7 - GRADATION TEST RESULTS TABLE I - SUMMARY OF LABORATORY TEST RESULTS TABLE II - PERCOLATION TEST RESULTS PLATE I - SURFICIAL GEOLOGY MAP • • • • • • • • (1) (2) (3) CONCLUSIONS The site is suitable for the proposed residential subdivision from an engineering geology and subsoil point of view. No conditions of a geologic nature occur on the property which would constitute a major hazard or render the proposed development infeasible. Certain geologic and subsoil conditions should be accounted for during future planning and development. These conditions are described and discussed. Soil and foundation conditions at the site are relatively complex. Spread footings and drilled pier foundation systems will be suitable for residential or other light structures. A final soil and founda- tion Investigation should be conducted. (4) The majority of the on-site soils should be suitable for standard leaching field type septic systems. Some areas of shallow ground water and low permeability soils do occur at the site, however, we do not anticipate that these conditions will be extensive. Specific leaching field investigations should be conducted. • • SCOPE In June 1977, a preliminary geotechnical investigation was conducted for the Cattle Creek Ranch development in eastern Garfield County approxi- mately 10 miles southeast of Glenwood Springs. The results of that investigation are presented. The general geologic and soil conditions are described and their expected effect on the proposed construction is discussed. The investigation included a geologic field study which used shallow exploratory holes to determine general subsurface conditions. Laboratory analyses were made on typical soil and bedrock samples. Per- colation tests were conducted at the site to determine the general suitability of on-site soils for standard leaching fields. • PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT We understand that the 980 -acre parcel will be subdivided into a residential subdivision. Individual lots will be relatively large and • much of the property will be left as open space. The valley floors of Coulter and Cattle Creek will not be developed and two large meadow areas in the southeastern part of the parcel will be left as open space. • A network of access roads will be constructed. individual homes will have separate septic systems. • SITE CONDITIONS The 980 -acre parcel investigated is located on Cattle Creek near its confluence with Coulter Creek. The parcel covers all of Sec. 8 and por- tions of Sec. 5, Sec. 6, and Sec. 7, T. 7S., R. 87W. Topography at the site is varied, consisting of nearly level valley floors and terraced • 3 surfaces, moderately steep to very steep valley sides and rolling uplands. The general shape of the topography at the site is shown by the contour lines on Plate I. In general, slopes over the majority of the site do not exceed 30%. Several steep to very steep valley sides occur adjacent to Cattle and Coulter Creeks and a few other areas with slopes greater than 30% occur in the rolling uplands which occupy the southeastern half of the property. i; The principal drainages crossing the area are Cattle and Coulter Creeks. Both are small perennial mountain streams. In addition to these streams, several irrigation ditches traverse the property. The majority of the property is used as pastureland and for the cultivation of hay. Wheat was under cultivation in the northwest corner of the property at the time of our investigation. Native vegetation consists of grasses, sagebrush and scrub oak. The only buildings on the property at the time of our investi- gation was the ranch in the north -central portion of the property. GEOLOGIC SETTING The parcel is situated on a dissected plateau which lies between the main valleys of the Roaring Fork River on the south and the Colorado River on the north. Streams draining the plateau, such as Cattle Creek, have eroded moderately deep to deep valleys below rolling upland surfaces. Near -surface bedrock over the majority of the plateau are Tertiary to Quaternary age volcanic rocks consisting primarily of basalt flows. The volcanic rocks overlie sedimentary rocks of Pennsylvanian and Permian age. The principal formations are the Maroon formation and Eagle Valley evaporate. - k • At the site investigated, bedrock exposed at the surface and encountered in our exploratory holes consisted of volcanic rocks of Tertiary age and Te noncemented sedimentary rock of probable tertiary age. The older Pennsyl- • vanlan and Permian age bedrock formations do not crop out and were not encountered in our exploratory holes. The majority of the Tertiary age bedrock is covered by soil deposits consisting of slopewash, terrace • alluvium, and valley floor alluvium. The general distribution of bedrock outcrops and soils at the site are shown on the geologic map, Plate 1. • SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS The general subsurface conditions at the site were investigated by drilling 8 exploratory holes at the locations shown on Plate 1. Logs of '• soil, bedrock and free water encountered in the holes are shown on Fig. 1. Both disturbed and undisturbed drive samples were taken in the field and returned to our laboratory where their general engineering properties were • analyzed. A summary of laboratory test results is shown on Table I. Soils. Soils are of several geologic origins. Soils consist of slopewash, terrace alluvium, and valley floor alluvium. The slopewash is a thin, dense, • very clayey sand with scattered gravel and cobbles. The maximum thickness of slopewash encountered in the exploratory holes was 6 feet. Three low terrace remnants flank the main valley floor of Cattle Creek • and a higher terrace remnant occurs along the northern valley side of Cattle Creek. The terraces are underlain by dense, granular alluvial soil con- sisting of well rounded gravel and cobbles in a very clayey sand matrix. • Observation along stream banks and in exploratory holes indicates that the terrace gravels are relatively thin and overlie either volcanic or sedimen- tary bedrock. The valley floors of Coulter and Cattle Creek are underlain • • • • • • • • • • • 5 by valley alluvium. No construction is proposed in these areas, therefore, exploratory holes were not located here. We anticipate that these alluvial soils will be similar in nature to the terrace alluvium flanking the valley floors, but containing more fines. The granular terrace alluvium is nonexpansive. The very clayey sand slopewash has a moderate swell potential. Results of swell -consolidation tests are shown on Fig. 3. Results of a gradation analysis of the terrace alluvium are shown on Fig. 7. Bedrock: Volcanic and sedimentary bedrock was observed along valley sides and in road cuts. These rocks were also encountered in the exploratory holes. The sedimentary bedrock consists of firm, noncemented, silty, fine sandstone with occasional claystone and conglomerate beds. Three types of volcanic rock were encountered: (1) lava flows, (2) volcanic mudflows, and (3) water -deposited tuffs. Basalt lava flows crop out along the valley sides adjacent to Cattle and Coulter Creeks. These flows are made up of extremely hard basalt with a widely spaced, blocky joint system. individual rock blocks are on the order of 1 to 2 feet in dimension. The volcanic mud - flows consist of angular basalt fragments to boulder size in a sandy silt matrix. The mudflow deposits are firm but the matrix is not cemented. The water -deposited tuffs consist of stratified gravel -size scoriaceous basalt fragments which are moderately cemented. Engineering Properties: SwelI-consolidation tests indicate that the sand- stone bedrock does not have an expansion potential. The claystone beds show a moderate expansive potential. Both rocks will consolidate slightly to moderately under wetting and loading. The volcanic mudflows have relatively low natural densities. This deposit is nonexpansive but will consolidate moderately under wetting and loading. Both the water -deposited • • • • 6 tuff and the lava flows will not present any expansion problems. Bath of these rocks should have negligible consolidation under loads of the magni- tude associated with normal residential -type construction. Results of swell -consolidation tests are shown on Figs. 3 through 7. Ground Water: Free water was not encountered in our exploratory holes at the time of drilling and we do not anticipate that shallow ground water will be encountered in the proposed construction areas. Shallow ground water probably occurs along the valley floors of Cattle and Coulter Creeks. • GEOLOGIC CONDITIONS AFFECTING THE PROPOSED CONSTRUCTION There are no geologic conditions at the site which would constitute a major hazard or render the proposed development infeasible, however, • certain conditions should be considered during planning and development. Slope Stability: The only evidence of unstable slopes at the site was observed along the steep valley side northeast of Exploratory Hole No. 1. • A small landslide involving the clayey sand slopewash and underlying sand- stone bedrock has taken place downslope from an irrigation ditch. The location of the slide with respect to the irrigation ditch suggests that • leakage from the ditch has saturated the upper bedrock and soils, inducing the small slope failure. The extremely steep slopes adjacent to Cattle and Coulter Creeks are underlain by volcanic rocks which have a low susceptibility • for slope failures. We do not anticipate that unstable slopes will be a major problem to future development provided that reasonable site grading is done. Preliminary recommendations for site grading are presented in the • following section. In areas of steep slopes, slopes greater than 30%, we recommend that specific building sites be investigated with respect to slope stability. • 7 Shallow Ground Water and Flooding: The only areas which may have shallow ground water and are susceptible to flooding are the valley floors of Cattle and Coulter Creek. We understand that no construction is anticipated in either of these areas. Earthquake Potential: The site is in an area of low earthquake risk. Some low to moderate earthquakes have occurred in the region during historic time. All buildings should be designed to resist lateral forces produced by earth- quakes in accordance with Seismic Zone 1 of the Uniform Building Code. POSSIBLE FOUNDATION TYPES Spread footings and drilled piers will be feasible foundation systems for lightly loaded residential structures. By utilizing minimum dead load pressures, spread footings can probably be used in almost all the areas. The most desirable foundation system for a specific structure should be determined by an on-site investigation. Maximum allowable soil pressures for spread footings are expected to range between 2,000 and 10,000 psf. The higher pressures can only be used for structures founded entirely an hard bedrock. Minimum dead loads may be required for spread footings, depending upon the swell potential of the foundation soils or bedrock. In areas where bedrock is shallow, straight -shaft piers drilled into bedrock can be used. Drilled pier foundation will be the most suitable foundations for structures located in areas of potentially expansive soil or bedrock. If possible, all foundations should have a common bearing stratum, i.e.,. the foundation should be located entirely on the natural soils, bedrock, or structural fill. - 8 SITE GRADING We do not anticipate that extensive site grading will be necessary for the preparation of building sites, roadways, or parking areas because of the relatively gentle slopes which exist over the majority of the site. More extensive site grading will be necessary for roadways or structures located on the steeper slopes. In all areas, we recommend the following criteria be used in preparing grading plans: Permanent cut slopes should not exceed 20 feet in depth and be no steeper than 2:1 (horizontal to vertical). Shallow temporary excavations up to 10 feet will be stable at inclinations of 1:1 if well drained. Deeper and steeper excavations are possible, however, we recommend that more exten- sive grading be investigated on an individual basis. If seepage is encountered in temporary or permanent excavations, an investigation is warranted to determine if seepage will adversely affect slope stability. Good surface drainage should be provided for all permanent cut slopes. These slopes and other stripped areas should be protected against erosion by revegetation or other means. Fills up to 20 feet high will be stable if inclinations of 2:1 (horizontal to vertical) are not exceeded and if the fills are properly compacted and well drained. The ground surface underlying the fills should be carefully prepared, highly organic topsoil and vegetation should be removed, fills should be keyed into the steeper slopes, and all fills should be properly compacted. if structural fill is used, careful attention to compaction will be necessary for fill placed below footings. Like cut slopes, all fill slopes should have good surface drainage and be protected against erosion. The majority of the on-site soil and bedrock will be suitable for overlot fill. The majority of the non -expansive sandstone bedrock and granular terrace alluvium will be suitable for structural fill. When utilizing the natural • • • • • • • • • 9 on-site soils and bedrock for fill, particles larger than 6 inches in diameter should be removed prior to placing and compacting the fill. We do not anticipate problems with wide excavations up to 20 feet deep In the on-site soils and sedimentary bedrock. In these materials, excavation can be done with a backhoe or other medium to heavy excavating equipment. Hard sandstone bedrock may be difficult to excavate in confined trenches. Some difficulties can be expected when excavating the volcanic rocks. Problems in excavating through the mudflows will occur when large, hard basalt boulders are encountered. Deep excavation into the water -deposited tuffs and lava flows will require ripping equipment and possibly blasting. LEACHING FIELDS Percolation tests were conducted In shallow holes drilled adjacent to the 8 exploratory holes. The tests were conducted in accordance with stan- dards established by the Department of Health, Education and Welfare. Results of the percolation tests are presented on Table 11. Percolation rates ranged from 10 minutes per inch to 360 minutes per inch with the majority of the tests showing a rate greater than 60 minutes per inch. The percolation tests indicate that the majority of the upper soil and rock materials have suitable percolation rates for standard Teach field type septic systems. Because of the diversity of soil and bedrock materials at the site, no general statement can be made at this time on the suitability of a specific site for a standard leaching field type septic system. Based on the tests conducted, it is our opinion that the majority of building sites will have suitable soil conditions for leaching fields. Specific on-site Investigations should be conducted. • • • • • • • - 10 - ADDITIONAL INVESTIGATIONS This report is preliminary and suitable only for general design and planning. in our opinion, based on our present knowledge of the site geology, there are no conditions which would constitute a major hazard or render the project infeasible. Because of the limited scope of this investigation, we recommend a specific study be done to establish design criteria for founda- tions, and leaching field design.. RGM/med CHEN AND ASSOCIATES, INC. By Ralph G. Reviewed By Engineering Geologist Richard C. Hepworth, P. E. • Hole 1 • 0 • 5 • 10 • 15 • DEPTH - FEET 20 • �-- 25 • I--30 • 1-35 • • #14,701 18/9 WC =12. 1 DD=103.2 LL=46 P1=27 -200=41 WSS=.03 30/9 WC=4. 2 DD=109.7 PI=NP -200=19 28/9 22/6 7 25/9 32/6 40/5 Hole 8 30/9 WC=8.8 DD=92.2 WSS= <001 18/12 WC -11.9 DD=97.7 30/6 38/9 LOGS OF EXPLORATORY HOLES Fig. 1 DEPTH - FEET • LEGEND: Topsoil, sandy clay with scattered gravel and cobbles, moist, soft, moderately organic, dark gray. Sand (SC -CL) very clayey with scattered gravel and cobbles, moist, dense, light brownish red. Sand and gravel (SC -GC), very clayey, slightly moist to dry, dense to very dense, light brownish red. Sandstone, fine grained, silty with occasional conglomerate and claystone lenses, moist, firm, noncemented, brownish red. Conglomerate, moist, hard, noncemented, brownish red. Volcanic rocks made up of extremely hard, blocky basalt flows, very dense, noncemented volcanic mud flows; and hard moderately cemented water -deposited tuft, light to dark gray. Undisturbed drive sample, the symbol 18/4 indicates that 18 blows of a 140 lb. hammer failing 30 inches were required to drive the sampler 4 inches. Disturbed standard Split spoon. NOTES: (1) Test holes were drilled on May 26 and 27, 1977 with a 4 -inch diameter continuous flight power auger. (2) Approximate location of Exploratory Holes are shown on Plate i. (3) No free water was found in test holes at the time of drilling. (4) WC = Water Content (%); DD = Dry Density (pcf); WSS = Water Soluble Sulfate (%). LL .. Liquid Limit () Pi = Plasticity index (%) ; HP - Honplastic; -200 Percent Passing No. 200 Sieve. /14.701 LEGEND AND NOTES fig. 2 c 0 ro 0- X w 0 0 1 l as m 3= 2 0 3 as 0 0 1 L 0- E 2 3 4 CHEN AND ASSOCIATES Natural Dry Unit Weight - 103.2 pcf Natural laoisture Content - 12.1 percent Typical sample of very Ex P Pa ens ision uider const sure upon wett nc ar t clayey sant frorr I-oIc 1 at depth 3 -0". 0.I 1.0 APPLIED PRESSURE - kaf as Natural Dry Unit Weight - 109.7 pcf Natural Moisture Content 4.2 percent 1— Ac d1 cons or or nt a 1 com• ries s i pressure du on ncer to wett In 9 Typical samp e of s. rsldstone from Hole at a€pth $'-Ce'. 1 1 0.1 x`14,701 1.0 10 APPLIED PRESSURE - kat Swell -Consolidation Test Results 100 Fig. ! cm' 0 • • • • ! 3 4 5 6 7 8 CHEN .AND ASSOCIATES PRESSURE — ksf Notu al Dry Unit Weight • 115.6 pcf Naturol Moisture Content : 12.0 percent 1 Naturol Dry Unit Weight . 72.2 Natural Moisture Content = 12.0 • pct percent T i do u movemant uP ol wetting. Acdltlora1 ccns T. tent compression pressure due to unser wetti nc . r L I Typical sample of sandstone from l'olE 3 at 7 depth 8"-o'. T •ic•1 ■.• •. sa et ■• - n . 1_01 7n.gs 0 100 PRESSURE — ksf 0.1 1.0 1 #14,701 APPLICQ PRESSURE — kat Swell -Consolidation Test Results Fig. t+ ?;A 1 Notu al Dry Unit Weight • 115.6 pcf Naturol Moisture Content : 12.0 percent 1 T i do movemant uP ol wetting. T. L I Typical sample of sandstone from l'olE 3 at 7 depth 8"-o'. 0.1 1.0 1 #14,701 APPLICQ PRESSURE — kat Swell -Consolidation Test Results Fig. t+ ?;A 1 • • • • • • • ae0 of 47 L c-2 E 0 3 5 6 7 8 QI CHEN AND ASSOCIATES l Natural Dry Unit Wright • 85.1 Natural Moisture Content • 10.2 pcf percent /.ddi t (.01116t Tonal compre; sion under ant pressure due to wetti "0 0 N1 v L 0. C3 Typica1 s Hole !. at u 0 ow f eon i0 10 APPLIED PRESSURE -- kst 00 0.I 1.0 I00 #14,701 APPLIED PRESSURE — kst Swell-Consoiillation Test Results Fig. CA -1 Natural Ory Unit Wright . 103.1 Pcf Notu 01 Moisture Content • 22.8 percent 6.>\\0„------ Expansion prassure u)on under wet cons 1inrg. tan: v Typical 4._ sample , of o3Av5 1- _ tone f om role -- 5 at dea:h 81-0". - 0.I 1.0 I00 #14,701 APPLIED PRESSURE — kst Swell-Consoiillation Test Results Fig. CA -1 y 0 Leil N L ci E 2 3 4 aap 0 E 2 0 L.) 4 CHEN AND ASSOCIATES Natural Dry Unit Weight + 92.2 pct Natural Moisture Content • 8.8 percent Add i t const 0 ar nal comp t pressu resslon u re d.re to d w er et t n c Typical s 0.I [Tip' e of S" rrd stone € om Ho l c € at d e pth 4' --d' APPLIED PRESSURE — kat DO 0.1 #14,701 1.0 APPLIED PRESSURE — kat Swell -Consolidation Test Results Ivu Fig. i Natural Dry Unit Weight + 97.7 Natural Moisture Content is 11.9 pct percent . 1 1 t,o movement upon we �t i hg. 1 Typical sbmp'e of 5anistone f-om Nole Eat depth 14'-0". 0.1 #14,701 1.0 APPLIED PRESSURE — kat Swell -Consolidation Test Results Ivu Fig. i 90 70 0 CHEN AND ASSOCIATES Consulting Sail and Founctation Engin"im HYDROMETER ANALYSIS SPEY ANS, YSI 0 MA TIME READINSS 110191 191999 4 14111 1 N _�1� U '9 5TAN DARD ER] El sO. RW •100 'SD °doe 50 •r9 CLEAR SOU OPEN AXIS r rr r 1 1 r 1 10 10 3 i 11 1 T 111 1J. 1 T'(fir Lor .001 -009 009 019 D3T 074 1411 277 DIAMET E R OF PAR 5590 1. i 9 1 39 4 LE IN M1LLIilETERI 999 H1 1 1 CIrt71. 3. 79.1; 197 900 CLAY PL9lTIC1 TO SILT 1N04-PLAITICI GRAVEL l:li I1.uIt - 26 TO SAND 37 % LIQUID LIMIT SAMRLE OF SILT AND CLAY 31 TO PLASTICITY INDEX 11 Clayey Sand & Gravel F R OM 37 114 C01IL11 Hole 6 at depth 4'-4". HYDROMETER ANALYSIS SIEVE ANALYSIS ' 7� Til 1(A01NIS U !. STANDL D IER11E7 1 CLEAR SOUARE OPENIN I �W K 41E 90191 19111. 4 W1r 1 MMl ''100 •1100 •90 "0'30 •19 'w` •4 r lw r 1 _ . F 1 bi' 14 11!9 7r _ r r A t IL 10 10 i q 1 1C 0 s 1AO 7 ____.191 maszsoN_.ma1iaWATim 001 006 009 019 037 019 144 247 990 119 a vs 47{ sSR r91 DIAMETER OF PAR 1 LE IN MILLIIAETER$ CLAY 1PLAITICI TO TILT IN099-PL4%7141 GRAVEL LIQUID LIMIT SAMPLE OF 114,701 SAND 1 COIIL14 SILT AND CLAY PLASTICITY INDEX FROM GRADATION TEST RESULTS S 90 W ea• 90 Fig. 7 CA -2 • • • • • d U 0 tnz 4 z 0 w J H PERCENT PASSING SOIL TYPE NO. 200 SIEVE Very Clayey Sand 1 a C 0 am u 3 04.• o Z a7 C 0 in CI C1 cn Mudflow Claystone 1 • Clayey Sand & Gravel 1 ®a C 0 44 an Cr) 0 C 0 4-1un in � V) — m •— LA aNt r-- tr1 • _, M 0 CD 0 V CD 0 V ATTERBERG LIMITS PLASTICITY INDEX {%) 27 NP L10U1 D LIMIT (%) 7 M NATURAL DRY DENSITY (PCF") y- - 1 N t+1 0 r- crl Co NI N rs .o Lr► .--- — Ltt CO M. 0 tv N • c4 r -- Nli I- a- Q7" NATURAL MOISTURE (%) r N r rV 0 CV 12.0 1 N 0 co N N 8.0 1 m Li" CO .-- •-- DEPTH (FE ET) CO rt 0 cx 0 rt 0 cal 3.0 1 0 W 0 -i 0 0 1 LLi -iN 0 Z - Cel. Llt, '1/4.0 CO J 4 4 U TABLE 11 PERCOLATION TEST RESULTS Page 1 of 3 WATER DEPTH WATER DEPTH HOLE HOLE LENGTH OF AT START AT END DROP IN AVERAGE NO. DEPTH INTERVAL OF INTERVAL OF INTERVAL WATER LEVEL PERCOLATION RATE (In.) (Min.) (Inches) (inches) (Inches) (Min./Inch.) 1 36.0 10 19.50 18.50 1.00 10 18.50 17.75 0.75 10 17.75 17.00 0.75 10 17.00 16.50 0.50 10 16.50 16.25 0.25 10 16.25 16.00 0.25 10 16.00 15.75 0.25 10 15.75 15.50 0.25 10 15.50 15.25 0.25 10 15.25 15.00 0.25 10 15.00 14,75 0.25 a 32.0 10 9.00 7.50 1.50 10 16.00 11.50 4.50 10 11.50 9.50 2.00 10 9.50 8.50 1.00 10 8.50 7.50 i 1.00 10 7.50 6.50 1.00 10 17.75 14.00 3.75 10 14.00 11.25 2.75 10 11.25 10.25 1.00 10 10.25 9.25 1.00 10 9.25 8.25 1.00 3A 60.0 10 33.00 31.50 1.50 10 31.50 30.50 1.00 10 30.50 29.25 1.25 10 29.25 28.50 0.75 10 28.50 27.75 0.75 10 27.75 27.25 0.50 10 27.25 26.75 0.50 10 26.75 26.00 0.75 10 26.00 25.50 0.50 10 25.50 25.25 0.25 10 25.25 24.75 0.50 3B 42.5 10 25.50 24.25 1.25 10 24.25 23.50 0.75 10 23.50 22.50 1.00 10 22.50 21.75 0.75 10 21.75 21.25 0.50 10 21.25 20.75 0.50 10 20.75 20.25 0.50 10 20.25 20.00 0.25 10 20.00 19.50 10 0.50 19.50 19.25 0.25 10 19.25 19.00 0.25 114,701 40 Min./In. 10 Min./In. 24 Min./In. J0 Min./In. • TABLE 11 PERCOLATION TEST RESULTS • Page 2 of 3 WATER DEPTH WATER DEPTH HOLE HOLE LENGTH OF AT START AT END DROP IN AVERAGE NO. DEPTH INTERVAL OF INTERVAL OF INTERVAL WATER LEVEL PERCOLATION RATE (In.) (Min.) (inches) (inches) (Inches) (Min./inch.) • • i • • 4 37.5 10 22.00 21.50 0.50 10 21.50 21.50 0.00 10 21.50 21.00 0.50 10 21.00 21.00 0.00 10 21.00 19.75 1.25 10 9.75 19.00 0.75 10 9.00 18.50 0.50 io 8.50 18.25 0.25 10 8.25 18.00 0.25 10 8.00 17.50 0.50 30 7.50 17.00 0.50 30 7.00 17.00 0.00 30 7.00 16.75 0.25 5 43.5 10 24.0o 24.00 0.00 20 24.00 24.00 0.00 30 24.00 24.00 0.00 30 24.00 24.00 0.00 30 '24.00 23.75 0.25 30 23.75 23175 0.00 30 23.75 23.50 0.252} 30 23.50 23.50 0.00 30 23.50 23.50 0.00 6 34.0 10 16.00 15.50 0.50 10 15.50 15.00 0.50 10 15.00 14.75 0.25 10 14.75 14.5o 0.25 15 14.50 14.00 0.50 l0 14.00 13.75 0.25 10 13.75 13.25 0.50 30 13.25 12.00 1.25 30 12.00 10.50 1.50 30 10.50 9.25 1.25 7 32.5 15 19.00 17.50 1.50 10 17.50 17.00 0.50 10 17.00 16.25 0.75 10 16.25 15.75 0.50 30 15.75 14.50 1.25 30 14.50 13.50 1.00 30 13.50 12.75 0.75 120 Min./In. 360 Min./In. 23 M1ndI n; 30 Min./1n. a a TABLE it PERCOLATION TEST RESULTS WATER DEPTH WATER DEPTH HOLE HOLE LENGTH OF AT START AT END NO. DEPTH INTERVAL OF INTERVAL OF INTERVAL (In.) (Min.) _(Inches) (Inches) 8 45.0 10 28.50 28.25 a 10 28.25 27.75 10 27.75 26.75 10 26.75 26.00 10 26.00 25.25 10 33.50 32.00 10 32.00 30.25 a 10 30.25 29.00 10 29.00 28.00 10 28.00 27.25 10 27.25 26.50 a a a #14,701 Page of 3 DROP IN AVERAGE WATER LEVEL PERCOLATION RATE (Inches) (Min./Inch.) 0.25 0.50 1.00 0.75 0.75 1.50 1.75 1.25 1.00 0.75 0.75 12 Min./In. CATTLE CREEK RANCH PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT OWNER Mr. Frank Lerner Aspen, Colorado DESIGN TEAM Planning and Project Coordination The Land Design Partnership Glenwood Springs, Colorado Civil Engineering Gingery and Associates Glenwood Springs, Colorado Hydrology Wright Water Engineers, Inc. Glenwood Springs, Colorado Soils and Geology Chen and Associates Glenwood Springs, Colorado DATE July 5, 1977 Revised- August 8, 1977 Revised -October 21, 1977 LEONARD M. OATES RONALD A. AUSTIN J. NICHOLAS McORATH. JR. WILLIAM R. JORDAN ffi ROBERT W. HUGHES BARRY D. EDWARDS LAW O,74CES OATES, AUSTIN, MCGRATH & ..JORDAN BOO EAST HC=`SINS 57FtEET ASPEN, COLCPAno 81611 June 30, 1977 HONORABLE BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS OF GARFIELD COUNTY Garfield County Courthouse P. O. Box 640 Glenwood Springs, Colorado 81601 Re: Application of F.U.D. - Cattle Creek Joint Venture Consisting of Frank Lerner and J. R. Sturgis Gentlemen: AREA CODE 303 TELEP HONE 92S-2800 Enclosed with this letter is an Application for Planned Unit Development Approval of approximately 960 acres of property in Township 17 South, Range 87 West, 6 Principal Meridian, Garfield County, Colorado. This property is presently under contract to Mr. Frank Lerner with an anticipated Closing date of September 1, 1977. Mr. Lerner has formed a Joint Venture with Mr. Sturgis under the name and style of Cattle Creek Ranch Joint Venture. I, by this letter represent to you, as counselor for both of these gentlemen that they are in agreement with the proceedings of this P.U.D. Application. I would indicate that the remainder of the enclosed presentation has been prepared by Mr. Ron Liston of The Land. Design Partnership in Glenwood Borings and it has been reviewed and approved by Messrs. Lerner and Sturgis. I would also indicate on behalf of my clients and Mr. Liston that we will cooperate fully with you and the County's professional staff in the processing of this Application for P.U.D. Approval. Very truly yours, OATES, AUSTIN, McGRATH & JORDAN By LMO:mt Enclosures Leonard M. O tes LEGAL DESCRIPTION THE S 1/2 LF THE NE 1/4 AND LOTS 7, 8, 12 AND 13 AND THE WEST 29.7 ACRES OF TOOT 14 AND THE WEST 980.10 FEET OF LOT 15, EXCEPT A PORTION OF A TRACT CC`_tiVEYED BY DEED RECORDED IN BOOK 61 AT PAGE 553 AND EXCEPT THAT PORTION OF LOT 7 LYING SOUTHEASTERLY OF THE RIGHT-OF-WAY OF AN EXIS 'I'_NG COUNTY ROAD C4-'113), ALL IN SECTION 5; AND SE 1/4 SE 1/4, SECTION 6 EXCEPT A PORTION OF THAT SANE TRACT CONVEYED BY DEED RECO7=ED IN BOOK 61 AT PAGE 553; AND SE 1/4 NE 1/4, SECTION 7; AND ALL OF SECTION 8 EXCEPT A PARCEL OF LAND DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS: BEGINNING AT THE NORTHEAST CORNER SAID SECTION 8; THENCE S 89'56'46.2" W., 1,641.369', ALONG THE NORTH LINE SAID SECTION 8; THENCE S 00°17'48" E., 35.37; THENCE N 89"56'45.2" E. AND PARALLEL TO THE NORTH LINE SAID SECTION 8, 1,641.746; THENCE N 00"54'23" W., 35.37' TO THE SOINT OF BEGINNING, CONTAINING 1.333 ACRES MORE OR LESS, ALL IN TOWNSHIP 7 SOUTH, RANGE 87 WEST, OF THE 6TH PRINCIPAL MERIDIAN N J. it N - r, - - I o 1 ° a S - l j OD. CI i.—i}lv9—••;1 1. . - I y 'x I~ ' TT_" 4 Yw1i laI+ ,- '�/ s 1� I/ L 0 = I 00 \ • • 1 , ' 11 Tf-'12"a } Y o+ `�s_;6_ "moi c,,,--.. kms. - IY-F 1,`}=l .0- 1 „ yr `i `• v,k„ c �e/fQ `I .,.. 1 Tr, �„ 0 JJjj _ !! -� , " %4,� _ - i_- Y tl i,?=£ ^� ti _,,,,,,--f' � _- r . s :_ -::r) - _.., µ 0 _1 - i _ l - i i.-_.r4I-- ., qq i [sarnv Pr= + 3- -_.' .-w: v aN�?:'Nti I V„ I 'W l4S�T:d13`; 1--- --- w i E 1 r I z 'ate cd. • 1�^ d v 1 �ta= - it`1" - a n I -- r' sy4° c v Gti}. -—, L. o '' `rlA x1 } F I ti ryyi f $.4"_,..,.;,,.. " d /,,,,. \ • �I' J"'`• � ty' ttI .ICr' •. a ° \ICIr µC€.fJ j. C .-- - «%t,41 -. o'M # [._ Park Cr 1`_ _ I � l- I r ' 1 ns� 1 �) �`-1�—� �1 1 . PROPERTY OWNERS OF RECORDS WITHIN 300' OF CATTLE CREEK RANCH P.U.D. John McNulty P.O. Box 200 Carbondale, CO 81623 Mary T. Squires 0720 121 Road Carbondale, CO 81623 Cottonwood Pass c/o E. W. Baker Suite 1011 600 South Cherry Denver, CO 80222 Merrill & Delores Laurence 11104 County Road 115 Carbondale, CO 81623 Gary McNulty P.O. Box 200 Carbondale, CO 81623 J. Salter, S. Bellow Colorado Country Panorama 500 North Street Aspen, CO 81611 Sky High Enterprises 5532 Royal Crest Dallas, Texas 75229 H. M. Crosby c/o Crosby Company 1st National Bank Bldg. Minneapolis, Minn. 55402 CATTLE CREEK P.D.D. OBJECTIVES The following objectives are a summarization of the concepts which have guided the design of the P.U.D. since its inception. 1. To provide a highly desirable rural residential living environment in the mid -Roaring Fork Valley area with an emphasis on preserving the natural beauty and pastoral ranch setting of the site. 2. To provide spacious building sites which maximize the views of the surrounding mountains and irrigated valleys while providing as much privacy to each site as possible. 3. To emphasize the rural setting and to reflect a conscious stewardship for the land, preserve a major portion of the irrigated pasture lands in an agriculturally productive state. 4 To establish a balance between the domestic and irrigation demands on the available water which will allow the continued forage production on the reserved agricultural lands during the average rainfall years. 5. To provide for pedestrian/equestrian movement throughout the site. 6 To provide residents with the opportunity to keep horses on the P.U.D. site. 7. To establish protective covenants including strict.archi- tectural controls over all structures and landscaping. 8. To provide for the ownership and maintenance of common space through a home owners association. L. I LITIC'_rt AND GENERAL SITE CHARACTER Cat Creek Ranch is presently a= active cattle operation located at the westerly end of Missouri Heights. Access to the -an c: exists over two primary routes. From the west it is. e�?r,ximately 7 miles from Highway 82 and,via County Road 100, a distance of approximately 4 miles from the Catherine Store to tie _ nch. Additionally, County Toad 115 from Spring Valley and unt y Road 122 from El Jebel as well as the Cottonwood Pass Road all converge upon the Ranch site. Using the above des- cribed routes the Ranch is aporoxinately 8 miles from Carbondale, 13 t.=1es from Glenwood Springs anc 8 miles from El Jebel. The =tench site is composed of lush green alluvial plains along Cattle and Coulter Creeks which ccnverge at the westerly edge of the Ranch and of higher mesas to the west, north and south of t=e creeks. There is presently approximately 250 acres of irrilated Pasture and hayground along Cattle Creek and on the mesa to the south. The ridges anc steeper slopes on the mesa are co.aracterized by mixed sage and oak brush. The high land west of Coulter Creek and north of Cattle Creek is a mixture of c ; r land wheat fields and rolling sage covered hills. Viewer from the high lands of the Ranch are characteristic of the Colorado Rockies with majestic vistas of the Maroon Bells, Ht. Sopris, Sunlight Mt., lookout Mt., and Basalt Mt. as w -e11 as the overview of the pastoral ranch lands along Catte and Coulter Creeks. P.U.D. CONCEPT The Cattle Creek Ranch P.U.D. is a variety of high quality rural residential living options which combines a unique mixture of rural and suburban amenities. To the north and west (Agriculture/Residential District) lots from 5 to 20 acres Provide the onnortunity to "do your own thing" as well as enjoy the benefits of the PUD onen snace and associated facilities. Lots in the Residential/Single Family District average over 3 acres. Some of these lots allow the stabeling of horses and include irrigation water to main- tain the pasture land existing on the lot. Others prohibit the keeping of livestock or the alteration of the native landscape of the site except as necessary for house construction. A majority of the irrigated agriculture lands have been pre- served as open space for the use and benefit of the PUD resi- dents. The existing ranch homestead will be remodelled to provide stable and riding arena facilities for horses;' of the PUD residents. Equestrian trails along raodways and special easements will connect all open space lands into an integrated equestrian trail system. The lake on the southerly mesa services both a water augmenta- tion and aesthetic recreation purpose. In a more suburban character, a park facility will be developed adjacent to the lake. It shall include picnic grounds and shelter, oven lawn Play area, play equipment, lake side dock and landscaping. All lots in the PUD will be nrovided with central water service including fireflow capacities throughout the Residential/Single Family District. Limitations on landscape irrigation from the domestic water supply have not yet been finalized but water supniies are adequate to allow at least 4,000 square feet of irrigated landscape on each lot. Sewage treatment will be by septic tank and leach field on each lot. Public service utilities including electric, telephone and natural gas shall be installed underground. For the purpose of maintaning a high quality standard through- out the Ranch, an Architectural Control Committee shall have strict control over all structural and site development activi- ties including landscaping. A Home Owners Association will be formed as a non-profit corporation to manage the oven space facilities and water system and to provide miscellaneous services such as maintenance of the private roads in the Agri- culture/Residential District. CAT I CPEEK RANCH P.U.D. ZONING REGULATIONS Sec _ -7 To carry out the purposes and provisions of the Garfield County Zoning Resolution, Garfield County, Colorado and, particularly, Section 1.400 of that title, as amended, the Cattle Creek Ranch Planned Unit Development Zoning District is further divided into the following Zone District classifi- cations R/S.F. A/R A/O.S. - Residential/Single-Family District - Agricultural/Residential District - Agricultural/Open Space District The boundaries of these Districts shall be located as shown on the Cattle. Creek Ranch P.U.D. Plan. Sectio II_ R/S.F. - Residential/Single-Family District L. Uses, by right. Single -Family dwelling and customary accessory uses including buildings for shelter or enclosure of D oDerty accessory to use of the lot for single- family residential purposes and fences, hedges, ,amens, walls and similar landscape features. Parr and greenbelt. Uses, conditional. ``one. C. Uses, special. '_gone. !! n±rnum Lot Area. 2 acres. Maximum Lot Coverage. 5 percent. Yi nmum Setback. 1. Front yard: 40 feet 2. Rear yard: 40 feet 3. Side yard: 25 feet 1.rszi71um Building Height. 25 -eet H. Off -Street Parking/Residential. Four ofd --street parking spaces on the same lot for each dwelling unit or 1 space per 600 hundred square feet of floor area, whichever is greater. Section 111. A/R - Agricultural/Residential District A. Uses, by right. Agricultural including farm garden, greenhouse, nursery, orchard, ranch, small animal farm for production of poultry, fish, fur -bearing or other small animals and customary accessory uses includ- ing buildings for shelter or enclosure of persons, animals, or property employed in any of the above uses, retail establishment for sale of goods pro- cessed from raw materials produced on the lot. Kennel, riding stable and veterinary clinic. Park and greenbelt. Single-family dwelling and customary accessory uses. B. Uses, conditional. Day nursery, studio for conduct of arts and crafts and water impoundments. C. Uses, special. None. D. Minimum Lot Area. 5 acres. E. Maximum Lot Coverage. 10 percent. F. Minimum Setback. 1. Front yard: 75 feet 2. Rear yard: 75 feet 3. Side yard: 50 feet G. Maximum Building Height. 23 feet. H. Off -Street Parking/Residential. Four off-street parking spaces on the same lot for each dwelling unit or i space per 600 square feet of floor area, whichever is greater. Sectitn 1V'. A/©. S . Agricult rE 1/Coen Space District Uses, by right. Agricultural including farm, garden, nursery, orchard, ranch and customary accessory us s including buildings for selter or enclosd e of animals or property em toyed in any of the above uses. Kennel and riding stable. Park and greenbelt. 3. Uses, conditional. Water impoundments. Uses, special. None. D. Minimum Lot Area. 2 acres. Maximum Lot Coverage. 15 percent. Minimum Setback. 1. Front yard: 2. Rear yard: 3. Side yard: 40 feet 40 feet 25 feet . Maximum Building Height. 25 feet. Sects= V. Except as hereinabove providerf, and except for the following Sections of the Garfield County Zoning 2esolution, all provisions of tie Garfield County Zoning Resolution shall be ap:licable to the Cattle Creek Ranch P.U.D. Zone Distr_cs.. The Sections of t -e said Zoning Resolution wh_ci shall have no app- licability are as follows: Section 3.00 through 3.11.y4 Section 4.01.02 paragraph F1) LAND USE ACREAGES AND MAXIMUM DWELLING UNITS Residential/Single-Family District Agricultural/Residential District Agriculture/Open Space District Minimum acres dedicated to Common Open Space 160 Total Gross P.U.D. Density Net Density Residential/Single Family Dist. Agricultural/Residential Dist.. Note: ACRES 420 349 194 963 MAX . DWELLING UNITS 109 22 7.8_acres/unit 3.8 acres/unit 15.9 acres/unit 131 Engineering refinement of the plan as required for final platting may result in minor variations in the proposed acreages. Home miners Association A home owners association shall he formed at the time of final platting of the first phase c.= the P.U.D. The pur- poses and Powers of association shall include: To promote the health, safety, and welfare of owners of real property within the P.U.D. To own, maintain, and manage common areas, easements, and domestic and irrigation water systems. To enforce all covenants. Covenants To further assure the development aad continuation of the Cattle Creek Ranch P.U.D. as a high _muality'_rural resid- ential area, protective covenants shall be recorded along with he final plattings of the P.U.D. These covenants shall be included but not be limited to the following topics: Architectural Committee. - site and building design -- minimum floor area - accessory structure design -- modification of the exist -ng landscape and new landscaping Lot use restrictions. Signs. '_. Animals. - type allowed -- control - General site maintenance. Noxious activities. Underground utilities. Vehicle control. Easements. 1 Temporary Structures. 1L. Landscape/agricultural ir-_ation limitations. School/Parks Dedication In accordance with Section 5.11 of the Subdivision Regulations of Garfield County, Colorado, as amended, the Cattle Creek Ranch P.U.D. owners will cooperate with the Board of County Commissioners to appropriately compensate the county for the reasonably necessary public fawilities (schools/parks) required by the future residents of the P.U.D. Phasing Five phases of development are envisioned for the Cattle Creek Ranch P.U.D. The phases are generally described as follows: Phase 1 will include 17 lots in the R/S.F. District and 10 lots in the A/R. District. The R/S.F. lots will occur along the primary access road as it climbs from Cattle Creek up to the mesa level where it will terminate with a temporary cul-de-sac. A.R. District lots will be located west and north of County Road 113. In addition to the well and service lines, an 8,000 gallon minimum capacity storage facility with gravity flow into the water system will be included in the first phase. Phase 1 will be initiated within the first year following approval of the P.U.D. Phase 2 will develop 3 A/R. lots west of Coulter Creek and 37 R/S.F, lots. Developed facilities will include an 100,000 gallon water storage tank and the extension of the primary access road from the temporary cul-de-sac through the BLM tract to its intersection with County Road 100. It is presently anticipated that Phase 2 will include the development of many open space facilities such as the lake, fencing of open space, stables and corralls. Phase 3 will include the remaining 8 A/R. lots in the northeast segment of the. Ranch and 17 R/S.F. lots. Phase 4 will open up 18 R/S.F. lots. Phase 5 will develop the remaining 20 R/S.F. lots in the south- east corner of the Ranch and the one remaining A/R lot. It is presently anticipated that a complete buildout of facilities be accomplished in a three to five year period. 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 Gingery.4ssocietes, Inc. L1QHS' LILTING' EIV'GIIVEE,?5 SUITE 207, VILLAGE PLAZA GL ENWOOD SPR/NGS, COLORADO 81501 TELEPHONE 303 945-8675 k Qft4F L7FFiCE 2840 SOUTH VALLEJO STREET ENGL EWOOD COLORADO ORADO 801 l0 TELEPHONE 303 761 4860 CATTLE CREEK RANCH PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT ENGINEER'S STATEMENTS A S SQCL4 TES DERYL W GINGERY ELMER L. CCAYCOMB LARRY A. MULLER The Cattle Creek Ranch P.U.D. is a planned development to be located in Sections 5, 6, 7, and 8, Township 7 South, Range 87 West. The proposed development will contain ap- proximately 125 single-family residences on lots ranging in size from about 2 acres to about 40 acres. There are approximately 963 acres within the development boundaries. The following information has been prepared in accordance with various portions of Section 14.08 of the Garfield County Zoning Resolution. The statements are intended to give conceptual descriptions of the various systems pro- posed. WATER DISTRIBUTION SYSTEM The proposed water distribution system is shown on Drawing No. GE 1325.003, Sheet 1 of 1, entitled Water Distribution System. The system will take its supply from a well or series of wells to be located adjacent to Cattle Creek in the northern portion of Section 8. The well is presently being developed under the direction of Wright Water Engi- neers, and a separate report is included with this applica- tion regarding both legal rights and physical ground water supply. Cattle Creek Ranch is to be divided into two separate pres- sure zones. Each zone, however, can be served by both pumped supply or from storage as water use fluctuates. Ap- proximate water pressures available throughout the develop- ment are indicated by pressure contours. There are 12 lots in the upper pressure zone which cannot be served adequately by gravity pressure service from the storage tanks. These lots, indicated with an asterisk, will be supplied by means of a small, auxiliary pressure booster station, drawing its supply from the main storage tank. CIVIL ENGINEERING / LAND SURVEYING /STORM DRAINAGE / STRUCTURAL 1 TRANSPORTATION / WATER & SANITATION / COMPUTER SERVICES Based on 125 single-family resicen:es, the following cal- culations indicate the anticipates average demand: 125 units x 4 persons/unit = 500 persons 500 persons x 100 gpd/person = 50,000 gpd 50,=000 gpd = 35 gallons/min. i.cmestis 2,000 sq. ft. of lawn. requries 1" per week 2,000 sq. ft./unit x 125 units x 1"/week = 20,000 cu. ft./week 20,0,00 cfw x 7.48 gal/cu. ft. = 150,000 gal/week 150,000 gal/week = 15 gal/min irrigation 50 gal/min total demand SEWAGE D-SPOSAL Sew -ace disposal will be accomplished by means of individual, on-lct sewage disposal systems. E_sed on the results of the soils and geological investigation performed by Chen and Associates, Inc., typical percolation rates are in the range of 40 iinutes per inch. Since all of the proposed lots are in excess of 2.0 acres in size, current County Regulations peruit individual disposal systems in areas exhibiting such a percolation rate. Specific tests would be performed on ea 'a lot as they are developed, and specific systems desicne±d in accordance with current regulations. CAE.LE 7EaEVISION Cable te=evision service is not -presently available in the vicinity of Cattle Creek Ranch, a . it is not anticipated that service will be made available in the development in the foreseeable future. NAi'C XL SAS NaturaL gas service is availabe fr:71 the 4 1/2 inch high pressr eygas transmission line locked in the southeastern corner of Section 8. A pressure reducing station would be rel- .ired to drop the operating =-essure to the normal distribution system level. At the time of actual develop- ment, Rocky Mountain Natural Gas Cr4 any, the owner of the line, will design the necessary ua.s distribution system and trovide the owner of Cattle Creek Ranch an estimate of anticipated costs. A normal de-elooment agreement wou.1dbe negotiated between the owner and RMNG regarding pa—+e__t of costs of installation of the necessary system. TEL= =71GNE Tele7:Lone service presently exists in the area along Cattle and C utter Creeks, and can be extended to include the potential development of Cattle Crew{ Ranch. The actual system will be designed by Mountain Sell during the final plat stage of the development. A construction agreement wo li be negotiated with Mountain. ie11 whereby the developer as= -7E=-5. than costs of providing sem=ce. ELECTRIC SERVICE Holy Cross Electric Association presently provides electric service to the Cattle. Creek area, and will provide service for the development. Actual layout of the system will be by Holy Cross at the time of final plat preparation. A development agreement covering all costs will be prepared similar to those with RMNG and Mountain Bell. NATURAL HAZARDS Natural hazards such as avalanche and landslide are being dealth with in the soils and geological report presently being prepared. Based on preliminary information, no major problems exist. Minor, localized sloughing of loose topsoil may however, be experienced in areas sloping in excess of 30°. These areas can be handled on a specific basis as best indicated by the soils report. DRAINAGE AND FLOOD PLAINS In general, the existing natural drainage system presents no problems for development. The natural system will be augmented by means of a customary ditch -and -culvert system to provide for the minor storm occurance. The development plan has been layed out specifically keeping development out of the low -Tying areas along Cattle Creek and Coulter Creek. For this reason, no formal flood plain study has been accomplished to date. If deemed necessary, specific flood -proofing measures can be determined for any development which might occur around the ranching center at the confluence of the two creeks. The water supply well will be protected from the 100 year flood, most probably by means of a dike or berm completely surrounding the facility. PREPARED BY: GINGERY ASSOCIATES, INC. d) c David C. Burnett, Design Engineer Reviewed by: c•-- ---7,-.._-- ,1 r _:,„"e!!_eiN,„/L- Elmer L. Claycomb, P.E. Vice President Manager, Glenwood Springs Office -3- AsPEN OFFICE P. O. BG x PO2S ASPEN, CO&.ORADD SISII GLENWOOO SPRINGS OFFICE P, O. SON Iltt GLENw000 SPRINGS. COLORADO Otto! STEAMYOAT OM FiCT P. O. AOx S;;Q STCAMYOAT VILLAGE, COLORAOO •Gltf WRIGHT WATER ENGINEERS, INC. ENGINEERING CONSULTANTS 420 ALCOTT STREET DENVER, COLORADO ROTI! t303•5O.CI0I GLENWOOD SPRINGS i1r. Frank Lerner P.O. Box 9140 Aspen, Colorado Dear Mr. Lerner: TEL: 945--7755 June 30, 1977 81611 NERNST. R, WRIGHT WILLIAM L. LORAN • RUSSELL E. GARR DR, F. ROPE RY McGREGOR Re: Water Supply for the proposed Cattle Creek Ranch development Wright Water Engineers has completed a preliminary analysis and eval- uation of the water rights associated with the proposed development of the Cattle Creek Ranch. This ranch is also known as the Heuschkel Ranch, and is located near the confluence of Cattle Creek and Coulter Creek in Gar- field County. We have also conducted limited geophysical investigations of the Cat- tle Creek alluvium, and are now in the process of drilling a test well to determine the physical ground water supply in the area. in addition to the Cattle Creek alluvium, we believe that some other areas of the ranch may have good potential for individual wells, The main domestic supply for the development, however, is expected to come from the Cattle Creek alluvium. The water rights situation in the Cattle Creek drainage is extremely tight as the creek is very much over appropriated. Historically, the rela- tive position on Cattle Creek of the Heuschkel Ranch is good as the 3 senior water rights owned by the ranch have never been called out and, in our opinion, will not be called out in the future. We believe that the available physical and "legal" water supply can be developed to adequately meet the domestic needs of the currently proposed 125 residential unit development, even in the dryest years. in addition to water for domestic needs, a significant amount of irrigation water is available which can be retained for use on the land. All or a portion of the senior Lewis and Somers Ditch rights, however, must be transferred by a Water Court decree to domestic and municipal use. If you have questions on the above, please don't hesitate to call. Very truly yours, WRIGHT WATER ENGINEERS, INC. B y �4� i " / 4A- f o William L. Lorah cc: Ron Liston WLL/jp 771--24 f • cher and associates, c. CONSULTING ENGINEERS SOIL a FOe4DAT1aN 96 S. ZUNI • DENVER, COLO=&CO 80223 303/744-7105 ENGINE R 1 H G 1924 EAST FIRST STREET • CASPER., 'WfOMING 82501 • 3071234-2126 .:uiy 1, 1977 Subject: Preliminary Geotechnical Investiga- tiol for the Cattle Creek Ranch evelopment, Garfield County, C=olorado. .lob No. 14,701 14r. Frank Lerner c/o Roo Liston Land Design Partnership Suite 2C3, Village Plaza Glenwood Springs , Colorado 80601 Gentl ereri We have completed our field and laboratory studies for the preliminary geotec'nical investigation at the subject site. We are presently drafting the fi-'al report. Our investigation irdi:ate_ that there are no serious problens associated with the site geology or :oil conditions. it should be fea_i'le to develop the property as a -esiantial subdivision. lie ex- pect tohave our final report out within next week. This report will descri A the site geology and subsoil con iticis and discuss their expected effect upon the proposed development. if we can provide you with additional information prior to the submittal of the final report, please let us Liow. Sincerely, CHEN AND 'SSCCIATES, INC. By RGI4/,..ed alah ?'pack, 1=n:ineering Geologist ACCEPTED and APPROVED this 21st day of November, 1977, and the property the subject hereof zoned as a Planned Unit Development pursuant to Section 14.00 of the Garfield County Zoning Resolution as amended. The Board of County Commissioners of Garfield County, Colorado By ATTEST: Chairman County Clerk CATTLE CREEK RANCH PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT OWNER Mr. Frank Lerner Aspen, Colorado DESIGN TEAM Planning and Project Coordination The Land Design Partnership Glenwood Springs■ Colorado Civil Engineering Gingery and Associates Glenwood Springs, Colorado Hydrology Wright Water Engineers, Inc. Glenwood Springs, Colorado Soils and Geology Chen and Associates Glenwood Springs, Colorado DATE July 5, 1977 Revised -July 19, 977 LEONARD M. OATES RONALD D. AUS+rll4 J. NICHOLAS McGRATH, JR. WILLIAM R. JORDAN 111 ROBERT W. HUGHES BARRY D. EDWARDS LAW OFFICFS OATES, AUSTIN, MCGRATH & JORDAN 600 FAST HOPKiNS STREET ASPEN, COLORADO 81811 June 30, 1977 HONORABLE BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS OF GARFIELD COUNTY Garfield County Courthouse P. O. Box 640 Glenwood Springs, Colorado 81601 Re: Application of P.U.D. - Cattle Creek Joint Venture Consisting of Frank Lerner and J. R. Sturgis Gentlemen: AREA CODE 303 TELEPHONE 926-2600 Enclosed with this letter is an Application for Planned Unit Development Approval of approximately 960 acres of property in Township 17 South, Range 87 West, 6 Principal Meridian, Garfield County, Colorado. This property is presently under contract to Mr. Frank Lerner with an anticipated Closing date of September 1, 1977. Mr. Lerner has formed a Joint Venture with Mr. Sturgis under the name and style of Cattle Creek Ranch Joint Venture. I, by this letter represent to you, as counselor for both of these gentlemen that they are in agreement with the proceedings of this P.U.D. Application. I would indicate that the remainder of the enclosed presentation has been prepared by Mr. Ron Liston of The Land Design Partnership in Glenwood Springs and it has been reviewed and approved by Messrs. Lerner and Sturgis. I would also indicate on behalf of my clients and Mr. Liston that we will cooperate fully with you and the County's professional staff in the processing of this Application for P.0 D Approval. Very truly yours, OATES, AUSTIN, McGRATH & JORDAN By LMC] : m t Enclosures Leonard M. 0 tes ri• - I :I A' f • 0 1 !'rf 1 :. 1 (a`)Y 'r1'1:)\' f - 0,) Cl'1`r1t?D1 V ) i 1 k rj �a `. dry_ ---.T U > 1� . j, • • • a -5.._ + ,/ 1 I',, r., 1 i a. 1` ' rJ ,7 r a I. II: . • 3[ N-' - N. T: _J tom. _ 1 I N• y▪ ,Y± I �r t�\� , U \ - I`v V^" F" JFy 4.4 f\ /Jr =tea i1 If -•••'ti r .rf I Jri a tr , tail. • M f \Iryr I� ;:r '-- t ir--rr�arr� L_ •� j 1 P�+ r r •ii u I r. ,4 r icey C • rl r% 1.1 M 1 - fro r"` --` . r:} .4, 1 i# -- 11 #' I ,7 I� li ur G II • rr 4 k.i a▪ 1 ▪ .l.:A •_— � T _ N 1A 4 �.CiCJ� ✓ � Jr:n-1 I 'j�' rrII �r 6�7f �llClry J��•r� .f.- !! Mj j _���s yµ �.1 s _ , I — yt zil� J ,'�p9 I r- i `r , to ll 1 ` I F,t�� F�,ti9�ti., i Fl /: ° v . I \ (l .r, a wL • . !urk tix7' cT•! ` it - 1 y 1 , - f ^. s 1 • -__ };,`c LEGAL DESCRIPTION S 1/2 NE 1/4 AND LOTS 7, 8, 12, 13 AND THE WEST 29.7 ACRES OF LOT 14 EXCEPT A TRACT CONVEYED BY DEED RECORDED IN BOOK 61 AT PAGE 553, IN SECTION 5; SE 1/4 SE 1/4 OF SECTION 6; SE 1/4 SE 1/4 OF SECTION 7; ALL OF SECTION 8; ALL IN TOWNSHIP 7 SOUTH, RANGE 87 WEST OF THE 6th PRINCIPAL MERIDIAN. PROPERTY OWNERS OF RECORDS WITHIN 300' OF CATTLE CREEK RANCH P.U.D. John McNulty P.O. Box 200 Carbondale, CO 81623 Mary T. Squires 0720 121 Road Carbondale, CO 81623 Cottonwood Pass c/o E. W. Baker Suite 1011 600 South Cherry Denver, CO 80222 Merrill & Delores Laurence 11104 County Road 115 Carbondale, CO 81623 Gary McNulty P.O. Box 200 Carbondale, CO 81623 J. Salter, S. Bellow Colorado Country Panorama 500 North Street Aspen, CO 81611 Sky High Enterprises 5532 Royal Crest Dallas, Texas 75229 H. M. Crosby c/o Crosby Company 1st National Bank Bldg. Minneapolis, Minn. 55402 CATTLE CREEK P.U.D. OBJECTIVES The following objectives are a summarization of the concepts which have guided the design of the P.U.D. since its inception. 1. To provide a highly desirable rural residential living environment in the mid -Roaring Fork Valley area with an emphasis on preserving the natural beauty and pastoral ranch setting of the site. 2. To provide spacious building sites which maximize the views of the surrounding mountains and irrigated valleys while providing as much privacy to each site as possible. 3. To emphasize the rural setting and to reflect a conscious stewardship for the land, preserve a major portion of the irrigated pasture lands in an agriculturally productive state. 4. To establish a balance between the domestic and irrigation demands on the available water which will allow the continued forage production on the reserved agricultural lands during the average rainfall years. 5. To provide for pedestrian/equestrian movement throughout the site. 6 To provide residents with the opportunity to keep horses on the P.U.D. site. 7. To establish protective covenants including strict archi- tectural controls over all structures and landscaping. 8. To provide for the ownership and maintenance of common space through a home owners association. CATTLE CREEK RANCH P.U.D. ZONING REGULATIONS Section I. A. To carry out the purposes and provisions of the Garfield County Zoning Resolution, Garfield County, Colorado and, particularly, Section 1.400 of that title, as amended, the Cattle Creek Ranch Planned Unit Development Zoning District is further divided into the following Zone District classifi- cations: R/S.F. - Residential/Single-Family District A/R - Agricultural/Residential District A/O.S. - Agricultural/Open Space District E. The boundaries of these Districts shall be located as shown on the Cattle Creek Ranch P.U.D. Plan. Section II. R/S.F. - Residential/Single-Family District A. Uses, by right. Single -Family dwelling and customary accessory uses including buildings for shelter or enclosure of property accessory to use of the lot for single- family residential purposes and fences, hedges, gardens, walls and similar' landscape features. Park and greenbelt. B. Uses, conditional. None. C. Uses, special. None. D. Minimum Lot Area. 2 acres. E. Maximum Lot Coverage. 15 percent. F. Minimum Setback. 1. Front yard: 40 feet 2. Rear yard: 40 feet 3. Side yard:' 25 feet G. Maximum Building Height. 30 feet H. Off -Street Parking/Residential. Four off-street parking spaces on the same lot for each dwelling unit or 1 space per 600 hundred square feet of floor area, whichever is greater. Section III. A/R -- Agricultural/Residential District A. Uses, by right. Agricultural including farm garden, greenhouse, nursery, orchard, ranch, small animal farm for production of poultry, fish, fur -bearing or other small animals and customary accessory uses includ- ing buildings for shelter or enclosure of persons, animals, or property employed in any of the above uses, retail establishment for sale of goods pro- cessed from raw materials produced on the lot. Kennel, riding stable and veterinary clinic. Park and greenbelt. Single-family dwelling and customary accessory uses. B. Uses, conditional. Day nursery, studio for conduct of arts and crafts and water impoundments. C. Uses, special. None. D. Minimum Lot Area. 5 acres. E. Maximum Lot Coverage. 10 percent. F. Minimum Setback. 1. Front yard: 75 feet 2. Rear yard: 75 feet 3. Side yard: 50 feet G. Maximum Building Height. 30 feet. H. Off -Street Parking/Residential. Four off-street parking spaces on the same lot for each dwelling unit or 1 space per 600 square feet of floor area, whichever is greater. Section IV. A/O.S. - Agricultural/Open Space District A. Uses, by right. Agricultural including farm, garden, nursery, orchard, ranch and customary accessory uses including buildings for shelter or enclosure of animals or property employed in any of the above uses. Kennel and riding stable. Park and greenbelt. B. Uses, conditional. Water impoundments. C. Uses, special. None. D. Minimum Lot Area. 2 acres. E. Maximum Lot Coverage. 15 percent. F. Minimum Setback. 1. Front yard: 40 feet 2. Rear yard: 40 feet 3. Side yard: 25 feet G. Maximum Building Height. 25 feet. Section V. Except as hereinabove provided, and except for the following Sections of the Garfield County Zoning Resolution, all provisions of the Garfield County Zoning Resolution shall be applicable to the Cattle Creek Ranch P.U.D. Zone Districts. The Sections of the said Zoning Resolution which shall have no app- licability are as follows: Section 3.00 through 3.11.04 Section 4.01.02 paragraph (1) LAND USE ACREAGES AND MAXIMUM DWELLING UNITS Residential/Single-Family District Agricultural/Residential District Agriculture/Open Space District Minimum acres dedicated to Common Open Space 160 Total Gross P.U.D. Density Net Density Residential/Single Family Dist. Agricultural/Residential Dist. Note: ACRES 420 349 194 963 MAX.DWELLING UNITS 112 12 ._7.8_acres/unit 3.8 acres/unit 30.0 acres/unit 124 Engineering refinement of the plan as required for final platting may result in minor variations in the proposed acreages. Horne Owners Association A home owners association shall be formed at the time of final platting of the first phase of the P.U.D. The pur- poses and powers of association shall include: 1. To promote the health, safety, and welfare of owners of real property within the P.U.D. 2. To own, maintain, and manage common areas, easements, and domestic and irrigation water systems. 3 To enforce all covenants. Covenants To further assure the development and continuation of the Cattle Creek Ranch P.U.D. as a high-quality rural resid- ential area, protective covenants shall be recorded along with the final plattings of the P.U.D. These covenants shall be included but not be limited to the following topics: 1. Architectural Committee. - site and building design - minimum floor area - accessory structure design - modification of the existing landscape and new landscaping 2. Lot use restrictions. 3. Signs. 4. Animals. - type allowed - control 5. General site maintenance. 6. Noxious activities. 7. Underground utilities. 8. Vehicle control. 9. Easements. 10. Temporary Structures. 11. Landscape/agricultural irrigation limitations. School/Parks Dedication In accordance with Section 5.11 of the Subdivision Regulations of Garfield County, Colorado, as amended, the Cattle Creek Ranch P.U.D. owners will cooperate with the Board of County Commissioners to appropriately compensate the county for the reasonably necessary public facilities (schools/parks) required by the future residents of the P.U.D. 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 Sing8r,y As.sOCI:e8.5; 11117, -; f SUITE 20/ VILLAGE PLAZA \ 1 GLENWOOD SPRINGS, Ji COLORADO 81601 TELEPHONE 303 945-8676 soY Pi F411 nu ,5 .6= 7 WOOD, altaRtal 2-011C F: I !WON( 33761.46'6,1 CATTLE CREEK RANCH PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT ENGINEER'S STATEMENTS DERYL W. GINGERY ELMER L. CLAYCOMB LARRY A. MULLER The Cattle Creek Ranch P.U.D. is a planned development to be located in Sections 5, 6, 7, and 8, Township 7 South, Range 87 West. The proposed development will contain ap- proximately 125 single-family residences on lots ranging in size from about 2 acres to about 40 acres. There are approximately 963 acres within the development boundaries. The following information has been prepared in accordance with various portions of Section 14.08 of the Garfield County Zoning Resolution. The statements are intended to give conceptual descriptions of the various systems pro- posed. WATER DISTRIBUTION SYSTEM The proposed water distribution system is shown on Drawing No. GE 1325.003, Sheet 1 of 1, entitled Water Distribution System. The system will take its supply from a well or series of wells to be located adjacent to Cattle Creek in the northern portion of Section 8. The well is presently being developed under the direction of Wright Water Engi- neers, and a separate report is included with this applica- tion regarding both legal rights and physical ground water supply. Cattle Creek Ranch is to be divided into two separate pres- sure zones. Each zone, however, can be served by both pumped supply or from storage as water use fluctuates. Ap- proximate water pressures available throughout the develop- ment are indicated by pressure contours. There are 12 lots in the upper pressure zone which cannot be served adequately by gravity pressure service from the storage tanks. These lots, indicated with an asterisk, will be supplied by means of a small, auxiliary pressure booster station, drawing its supply from the main storage tank. CIVIL ENGINEERING / LAND SURVEYING /STORM DRAINAGE / STRUCTURAL / TRANSPORTATION / WATER & SANITATION / COMPUTER SERVICES Based on 125 single --family residences, the following cal- culations indicate the anticipated average demand: 125 units x 4 persons/unit = 500 persons 500 persons x 100 gpd/person = 50,000 gpd 50,000 gpd = 35 gallons/min. domestic 2,000 sq. ft. of lawn requries 1" per week 2,000 sq. ft./unit x 125 units x 1"/week = 20,000 cu. ft./week 20,000 cfw x 7.48 gal/cu. ft. 4 150,000 gal/week 150,000 gal/week = 15 gal/min irrigation 50 gal/min total demand SEWAGE DISPOSAL Sewage disposal will be accomplished by means of individual, on -lot sewage disposal systems. Based on the results of the soils and geological investigation performed by Chen and Associates, Inc., typical percolation rates are in the range of 40 minutes per inch. Since all of the proposed lots are in excess of 2.0 acres in size, current County Regulations permit individual disposal systems in areas exhibiting such a percolation rate. Specific tests would be performed on each lot as they are developed, and specific systems designed in accordance with current regulations. CABLE TELEVISION Cable television service is not presently available in the vicinity of Cattle Creek Ranch, and it is not anticipated that service will be made available in the development in the foreseeable future. NATURAL GAS Natural gas service is availabe from the 4 1/2 inch high pressure gas transmission line located in the southeastern corner of Section 8. A pressure reducing station would be required to drop the operating pressure to the normal distribution system level. At the time of actual develop- ment, Rocky Mountain Natural Gas Company, the owner of the line, will design the necessary gas distribution system and provide the owner of Cattle Creek Ranch an estimate of anticipated costs. A normal development agreement would be negotiated between the owner and RMNG regarding payment of costs of installation of the necessary system. TELEPHONE Telephone service presently exists in the area along Cattle and Coulter Creeks, and can be extended to include the potential development of Cattle Creek Ranch. The actual system, will be designed by Mountain Bell during the final plat stage of the development. A construction agreement would be negotiated with ,fountain 1311 whereby the developer assumes the costs of providing service. ELECTRIC SERVICE Holy Cross Electric Association presently provides electric service to the Cattle Creek area, and will provide service for the development. Actual layout of the system will be by Holy Cross at the time of final plat preparation. A development agreement covering all costs will be prepared similar to those with R4NG and Mountain Bell. NATURAL HAZARDS Natural hazards such as avalanche and landslide are being dealth with in the soils and geological report presently being prepared. Based on preliminary information, no major problems exist. Minor, localized sloughing of loose topsoil may however, be experienced in areas sloping in excess of 30°. These areas can be handled on a specific basis as best indicated by the soils report. DRAINAGE AND FLOOD PLAINS In general, the existing natural drainage system presents no problems for development. The natural system will be augmented by means of a customary ditch -and -culvert system to provide for the minor storm occurance. The development plan has been laved out specifically keeping development out of the low-lying areas along Cattle Creek and Coulter Creek. For this reason, no formal flood plain study has been accomplished to date. If deemed necessary, specific flood -proofing measures can be determined for any development which might occur around the ranching center at the confluence of the two creeks. The water supply well will be protected from the 100 year flood, most probably by means of a dike or berm completely surrounding the facility. PREPARED BY: GINGERY ASSOCIATES, INC. David C. Burnett, Design Engineer Reviewed by: Elmer L. Claycomb, P.E. Vice President f Manager, Glenwood Springs Office -3- w5 .L.. nF Plce P, O Ilt>>4 0132• wS L D, 4.ct i+O{+ •,PI 4ftC5 OFFICE 1. 0. ROA 140E GLSI.wOOO 5PR I^.65. COLORA00 01501 Sre A.A Ar OF'ice .. O. VOX 5220 Si LSMSO5t L°•L LA6-E, COLORA00 004311 WRIGHT WEI-I ER ENGINEERS, INC. Mr. Frank Lerner P.O. Box 9140 Aspen, Colorado Dear Mr. Lerner: ENGINEERING CONSULTANTS 2420 ALCAATT WERE EY DiAr V'6R COLORADO 250291 1303 450-62O1 GLENWOOD SPRINGS TEL: 945--7755 June 30, 1977 81611 k.L 25t1-$ R wHIf,1•1S WILLIAM C. LO13AH RL/SS0I.5. E LIAM0 OR. 0 1E+s11Fi1T 1'seORl r, •SR Re: Water Supply for the proposed Cattle Creek Ranch development Wright Water Engineers has completed a preliminary analysis and eval- uation of the water rights associated with the proposed development of the Cattle Creek Ranch. This ranch is also known as the Heuschkel Ranch, and is located near the confluence of Cattle Creek and Coulter Creek in Gar- field County. We have also conducted limited geophysical investigations of the Cat- tle Creek alluvium, and are naw in the process of drilling a test well to determine the physical ground water supply in the area. in addition to the Cattle Creek alluvium, we believe that some other areas of the ranch may have good potential for individual wells. The main domestic supply for the development, however, is expected to come from the Cattle Creek alluvium. The water rights situation in the Cattle Creek drainage is extremely tight as the creek is very much over appropriated. Historically, the rela- tive position on Cattle Creek of the Heuschkel Ranch is good as the 3 senior water rights owned by the ranch have never been called out and, in our opinion, will not be called out in the future. We believe that the available physical and "legal" water supply can be developed to adequately meet the domestic needs of the currently proposed 125 residential unit development, even in the dryest years. In addition to water For domestic needs, a significant amount of irrigation water is available which can be retained For use on the land. All or a portion of the senior Lewis and Somers Ditch rights, however, must be transferred by a Water Court decree to domestic and municipal use. If you have questions on the above, please don't hesitate to call. Very truly yours, WRIGHT WATER ENGINEERS, INC. /! William L. Lorah cc: Ron Liston WLL/jp 771-24 r �ry 1 9 A �, -1 y CONSULTNG ENCINLL'iI a ,,% Lrae' `.a. SOIL F, FOUNDATION 93 S. ZUNI DENVER, COLORADO 00223 303/744-7105 EH 0 I TI EER I N 0 1924 EAST FIRST STREET • CASPER, 'IYO MING 82301 • 307/234-2126 Subject: lir. Frank Lerner c/o Ron Liston Land Design Partnership Suite 208, Village Plaza Glenwood Springs, Colorado 80601 Gentlemen: July 1, 1977 Preliminary Geotechnical Investiga- tion for the Cattle Creek Ranch Development, Garfield County, Colorado. Job No. 14,701 We have completed our field and laboratory studies for the preliminary geotechnical investigation at the subject site. We are presently drafting the final report. Our investigation indicates that there are no serious problems associated with the site Ideology or soil conditions. It should be feasible to develop the property as a residential subdivision. We ex- pect to have our final report out within the next week. This report will describe the site geology and subsoil conditions and discuss their expected effect upon the proposed development. If we can provide you with additional information prior to the. submittal of the final report, please let us know. Sincerely, CHEN AND ASSOCIATES, INC. By RGMI/med alphCye'i1ock, En:ineering Geologist CATTLE CREEK RANCH PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT OWNER Mr. Frank Lerner Aspen, Colorado DESIGN TEAM Planning and Project Coordination The Land Design Partnership Glenwood Springs, Colorado Civil Engineering Gingery and Associates Glenwood Springs, Colorado Hydrology Wright Water Engineers, Inc. Glenwood Springs, Colorado Soils and Geology Chen and Associates Glenwood Springs, Colorado .�'�r 1)/ /9 72 LEONARD M. OATES RONALD P. AUSTIN J. NICHOLAS MCGRATH. JR. WILLIAM R.JORDAN ILi ROBERT W. HUGHES BARRY D. EDWARDS LAW OFFICES OATES, AUSTIN, MCGRATH a JORDAN 600 FAST HOPKINS STREET ASPEN, COLORADO 81611 June 30, 1977 HONORABLE BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS OF GARFIELD COUNTY Garfield County Courthouse P. O. Box 640 Glenwood Springs, Colorado 81601 Re: Application of P.U.D. -- Cattle Creek Joint Venture Consisting of Frank Lerner and J. R. Sturgis Gentlemen: AREA CODE 303 TELEPHONE Q25-2600 Enclosed with this letter is an Application for Planned Unit Development Approval of approximately 960 acres of property in Township 17 South, Range 87 West, 6 Principal Meridian, Garfield County, Colorado. This property is presently under contract to Mr. Frank Lerner with an anticipated Closing date of September 1, 1977. Mr. Lerner has formed a Joint Venture with Mr. Sturgis under the name and style of Cattle Creek Ranch Joint Venture. I, by this letter represent to you, as counselor for both of these gentlemen that they are in agreement with the proceedings of this P.U.D. Application. I would indicate that the remainder of the enclosed presentation has been prepared by Mr. Ron Liston of The Land Design Partnership in Glenwood Springs and it has been reviewed and approved by Messrs. Lerner and Sturgis. I would also indicate on behalf of my clients and Mr. Liston that we will cooperate fully with you and the County's professional staff in the processing of this Application for P.U.D. Approval. Very truly yours, OATES, AUSTIN, McGRATH & JORDAN By LMO:mt Enclosures ItesLeonard M. - . ••••=•••••••••••.• •r • ▪ - • . 1 • ••••- - Eb.-P • 4i! " • - ' I '-(:. ;.• L'q,. 41 Fr J.' - - - , t • - -.-f / - /0.1 H, u-A.rr:t .... ;. 1' - Th.:71 'IS` ,' 1 ] I ;,..,::_i 7- : 1 , - • r- r-, ''' , _,, , fi 6 % •-• z ", cc -V s- _ ,... .„, <-, v•.,-,.. • ---e-t'.=',=;-.,-,,0" V • t• ....„...• s_....-.., Co" ----I 0 c• (—tI. - 1."' '4,..,- . ' .t. :-.'kV.•V,'''.;'"'-..!I. t, '1 -„-.▪ -- e'.r."Sg..‘,-..;‘,/...,.-•--- I -I •'/'',: //f ) ' •,4 : 1 ,. ,1i ' • a •Ikl, / CeI ..1,, ( 'Vc--_-,')\-'. ,.-...- '.2-1-"'"---- 1.-,--,1______\,,„••;.'-i'if +„/---- 1 1 = z i; ,...., •;-..,..., ••' ••• ,..• .... 1,,,, La'• 191 = A 7 ' 4,• "•9': „:•., aepr • ) i.,--,„ .- . A p , ...1, _ ^, . `,::: ,•. -,,, :4..?""'"'AC7,--- --' . : ,-....,,c;--"...„--- .. .F.7!, _..,..„, : 4.4 - ...,;:1,, - • =_'_-,...,-....- .....k„,„, -.4----:---.._•,...........t....,6„. , •=.---..„1- -A-; , =t.., ''c'T., -1'.-_, Ir. -J.3 1 . • =-, 1 kt., 1:.r, ---, c a .:.,i . :, 0 , ,..t:;---- , 2,, .,::---'- ..; -,...i.. ,..;,, - ,....„ I” 1----- 4- 1 • , ("1 I or. er 1 T-7.=.---.----.;•, i • ._,... • . )..r.:.,._,, . ....._.....y, rri• •,`J - ”" -/- T. ro 2 . kt i.e."' • I'. 0 _ J L.1" F • : F . , • ' k`or I I CS 0 ` r • _C — • i-.. _ -• ---.1-, ''',.., -_ •.-, !.; g ' * e, ( i -- 1 , ;1E — - -..- __-_-; ._ . -,;,,,,- (.-..,)„, ...—..,_ ,,...: 1_. -,....,.... j...ir...),,iszliCi.,, ____,,,,,..--. -.1. ....._ \ . .., . ...1 -, . 9.„' „ ...--,,,,,1_,-,-;---,-. ... 0 ,-.....- _ . ,, : ,. i .1 .' ,..." . I .'- ' -4 ' 6''''' [ '-' 1 4, .....- 1 , ___:_,._ _ — — _2._ T- - • -r1 . re;Jj; -• -I /- ---, 1 ..(.... ..). .„ 1 "`-, ar. e'.',--- -i- ----: ..... ___;_ ii.." frn .,17 ' ..,,,, •''' — a_ l 1 \ I- '41:= . r .. (:,.., '.;" •-• `i. . l. -. <I - .!", _... 4 ',.,-;',..1.? . 1.' • ... • .( „..... ,-.....--- -:, ___L',..„_,,,e--- • -,..:.• _ ....1 ,, ".. ,. '1,„...,; . . .' - ril""V 1-- - ' -..▪ .‘....11)(Y ) A —.,-____-_.•4 _.- .,. ,,,, _,,._.. 0 •-••,t.1), -- :iv 1 t -- - .,_.N.._:,. ...11...,: lit . .....; v ' 1 ..,_ ....... r.... . C. , ,-.._ „,•..), 4> ‘s... r... , _-,-.,...L.1 _.,....,-, ) - • -.... -17 ••t 1 , ,, ,,,,.7______1,...._,F..,'r-•''.:.-'' --- - i 1 ,._ ',,;:„..., -.•-•,-= - \,..- ,..0.„, - 04 - - us I ',,_ LY _ „. t,S, "-' 'r Li0 .. •:;.:. I • '....t. ; -.. ± — - . ':";,.. • . ,,, .f•J'`. , 1 I. . . . , I .. 'll ....' •,• 1,7.... • , - . l ..... - , ''.. ' I i ./1 . — + -- 1- -C=.7,--.--r='"-- q - _ .4.,.,s,' 4 •Z 7_ li ' ▪ , -,:- - -Cir---"-, is. • NC"-- --_ 1\`,-: l- ., ..,,__ 1._,....,...- ...- _ _...... fa4 :_:-*.• N I ,e. 1 ?•• .,....,...,.. ,,, 1 _I -. .A. 1 ''„ .,.; 1 _____ _14. inu•tas!qqRs ',I 3 -X„.'.::-_,..;-, -•,19 N,. ail.k * I •:-."1 I ri ,_ ,, __ - , ;_ it ... _ _ _ _ ,,,..„-. , I ,., . •gi t r...I...._ , • . . ' -- I- -1-.. '6,, '-- '‘'c'cr'zi,..--:' ';'',1 ._' pp, 1 -f!, ' 1 /3 5t.' ,', _ .." - ) I ? ' .-- ":,.0 v,?, I ;',i -0- .1,4_ ,11.-.,.. —.-., -Z,I,t•-- -',.- — 5_!• t_—. ---Th ---- \) C;-" -- 274 - .• I 0.... --: ,-- ,..3, 1 - ----- -q• I q... ,,,-., ----- ,- lc( i<f4R----,-- iP- — -1.c..,,,ri.76r—r- 0 ,...) —I- \ It , A 31,pct ,L2.1 i • ,%. i C-.; .22‘14-1,---=-1-r--------::-----'t : . 't ' __. 21 ‘2,-__:....-- - ‘-- ----- -- _'''.\ ' . 4, • . p_4 .--, ,,- 1 / ) , -'''• ex i7.... ,... i ' t ..-,,,, " t' ' „. ;) - ,, ...,,!;..Ne6. - r. ) . -,_ _ --, .. . F: - .,-----:- -.. ; J A ..' 4' „ 1 _„..;;;/' -7 - )71-- - o . Tm,- .S ., f.—,.---:: -- ,p4.-- -- - • <7.)- - - -- - -- ----- --='; -----L-r- n. -...k% i.,.._ k. 1 ./ .=.„..."..-.- I . ••••••• • • Vj r. .7 .4 ...,./ , .,...,••=_:,1 s.) ; L,.?...„. , , r. ,,,,,„ I „,,,,,.,,,, ,,,,,-----F —1 ci_;:.,<:-,.• 1 ou - '. - 1''' -.:.:-E, 111'...)':.-. .', . -- , it . . I.... /- ...• Ir-.:. ''" I l i W , I ...--.' I.-4 .." ' I e-' ---4-1--:- ---1 - -1 6 ,C — ___,,.." ____ 0'4!0 '`, \ . \ J...,":,. ---`...V.,,,,.. , \--. - '----,....4 - >-!!-• , - c cn, ,..-- 1 k ''s , . / :40 ...1 \,..1;!!"--' ,,t, ......_-.. CO-- ';- / - .-•"-- :,_ ..._ - --.` __,-;','-;-: , • r --q !•,... — --/- ---,. — 1 :I no Ls I • ''. „ I I: -1c l 1, ?' -''', '-.P---;"--,-,; - 1 ,,,,, 1 7::-: '7.• 2.• I 6; 0"76:4 Ili' • X _ , • E no ;•.= ca ., ., - . I1 .,:-0.-. 1cI ,'- •9 :-.—„-• — , . :.i., cf f1 f - ,. 1 r. A .•. LEGAL DESCRIPTION S 1/2 NE 1/4 AND LOTS 7, 8, 12, 13 AND THE WEST 29.7 ACRES OF LOT 14 EXCEPT A TRACT CONVEYED BY DEED RECORDED IN BOOK 61 AT PAGE 553, IN SECTION 5; SE 1/4 SE 1/4 OF SECTION 6; SE 1/4 SE 1/4 OF SECTION 7; ALL OF SECTION 8; ALL IN TOWNSHIP 7 SOUTH, RANGE 87 WEST OF THE 6th PRINCIPAL MERIDIAN. PROPERTY OWNERS OF RECORDS WITHIN 300` OF CATTLE CREEK RANCH P.U.D. P.O. BOX 200 CARBONDALE, CO 81623 John McNulty P.O. Box 200 Carbondale, CO 81623 Mary T. Squires 0720 121 Road Carbondale, CO 81623 Cottonwood Pass c/o E. W. Baker Suite 1011 600 South Cherry Denver, CO 80222 Merrill & Delores Laurence 11104 County Road 115 Carbondale, CO 81623 Gary McNulty P.O. Box 200 Carbondale, CO 81623 J. Salter, S. Bellow Colorado Country Panorama 500 North Street Aspen, CO 81611 Sky High Enterprises 5532 Royal Crest Dallas, Texas 75229 CATTLE CREEK P.U.D. OBJECTIVES The following objectives are a summarization of the concepts which have guided the design of the P.U.D. since its inception. 1. To provide a highly desirable rural residential living environment in the mid -Roaring Fork Valley area with an emphasis on preserving the natural beauty and pastoral ranch setting of the site. 2. To provide spacious building sites which maximize the views of the surrounding mountains and irrigated valleys while providing as much privacy to each site as possible. 3. To emphasize the rural setting and to reflect a conscious stewardship for the land, preserve a major portion of the irrigated pasture lands in an agriculturally productive state. 4. To establish a balance between the domestic and irrigation demands on the available water which will allow the continued forage production on the reserved agricultural lands during the average rainfall years. 5 To provide for pedestrian/equestrian movement throughout the site. 6. To provide residents with the opportunity to keep horses on the P.U.D. site. 7. To establish protective covenants including strict archi- tectural controls over all structures and landscaping. 8. To provide for the ownership and maintenance of all internal project roads and common space through a home owners association. CATTLE CREEK RANCH P.U.D. ZONING REGULATIONS Section I. A. To carry out the purposes and provisions of the Garfield County Zoning Resolution, Garfield County, Colorado and, particularly, Section 1.400 of that title, as amended, the Cattle Creek Ranch Planned Unit: Development Zoning District is further divided into the following Zone District classifi- cations: R/S.F. - Residential/Single-Family District A/R -- Agricultural/Residential District A/O.S. -- Agricultural/Open Space District B. The boundaries of these Districts shall be located as shown on the Cattle Creek Ranch P.U.D. Plan. Section II. R/S.F. -- Residential/Single-Family District A. Uses, by right. Single -Family dwelling and customary accessory uses including buildings for shelter or enclosure of property accessory to use of the lot for single- family residential purposes and fences, hedges, gardens, walls and similar landscape features. Park and greenbelt. B. Uses, conditional. None. C. Uses, special. None. D. Minimum Lot Area. 2 acres. E. Maximum Lot Coverage. 15 percent. F. Minimum Setback. 1. Front yard: 40 feet 2. Rear yard: 40 feet 3. Side yard: 25 feet G. Maximum Building Height. 30 feet H. Off -Street Parking/Residential. Four off-street parking spaces on the same lot for each dwelling unit or 1 space per 600 hundred square feet of floor area, whichever is greater. Section III. A/R - Agricultural/Residential District A. Uses, by right. Agricultural including farm garden, greenhouse, nursery, orchard, ranch, small animal farm for production of poultry, fish, fur -bearing or other small animals and customary accessory uses includ- ing buildings for shelter or enclosure of persons, animals, or property employed in any of the above uses, retail establishment for sale of goods pro- cessed from raw materials produced on the lot. Kennel, riding stable and veterinary clinic. Park and greenbelt. Single-family dwelling and customary accessory uses. B. Uses, conditional. Day nursery,, studio for conduct of arts and crafts and water impoundments. C. Uses, special. None. D. Minimum Lot Area. 5 acres. E. Maximum Lot Coverage. 10 percent. F. Minimum Setback. 1. Front yard: 75 feet 2. Rear yard: 75 feet 3. Side yard: 50 feet G. Maximum Building Height. 30 feet. H. Off -Street Parking/Residential. Four off-street parking spaces on the same lot for each dwelling unit or 1 space per 600 square feet of floor area, whichever is greater. Section IV. A/O.S. -- Agricultural/Open Space District A. Uses, by right. Agricultural including farm, garden, nursery, orchard, ranch and customary accessory uses including buildings for shelter or enclosure of animals or property employed in any of the above uses. Kennel and riding stable. Park and greenbelt. B. Uses, conditional. Water impoundments. C. Uses, special. None. D. Minimum Lot Area. 2 acres. E. Maximum Lot Coverage. 15 percent. F. Minimum Setback. 1. Front yard: 2. Rear yard: 3. Side yard: 40 feet 40 feet 25 feet G. Maximum Building Height. 25 feet. Section V. Except as hereinabove provided, and except for the following Sections of the Garfield County Zoning Resolution, all provisions of the Garfield County Zoning Resolution shall be applicable to the Cattle Creek Ranch P.U.D. Zone Districts. The Sections of the said Zoning Resolution which shall have no app- licability are as follows: Section 3.0{) through 3.11.04 Section 4.0_.02 paragraph (1) LAND USE ACREAGES AND MAXIMUM DWELLING UNITS Residential/Single-Family District Agricultural/Residential District Agriculture/Open Space District Minimum acres dedicated to Common Open Space 160 Total Gross P.U.D. Density Net Density Residential/Single Family Dist. Agricultural/Residential Dist. Note: ACRES 420 349 194 963 MAX.DWELLING UNITS 112 12 7.8 _acres/unit 3.8 acres/unit 30.0 acres/unit 124 Engineering refinement of the plan as required for final platting may result in minor variations in the proposed acreages. Home Owners Association A home owners association shall be formed at the time of final platting of the first phase of the P.U.D. The pur- poses and powers of association shall include: 1. To promote the health, safety, and welfare of owners of real property within the P.U.D. 2. To own, maintain, and manage common areas, roads, easements, and domestic and irrigation water systems. 3. To enforce all covenants. Covenants To further assure the development and continuation of the Cattle Creek Ranch P.U.D. as a high' qualityrural resid- ential area, protective covenants shall be recorded along with the final platt:ings of the P.U.D. These covenants shall be included but not be limited to the following topics: 1. Architectural Committee. - site and building design -- minimum floor area - accessory structure design - modification of the existing landscape and new landscaping 2. Lot use restrictions. 3. Signs. 4. Animals. - type allowed -- control 5. General site maintenance. 6. Noxious activities. 7. Underground utilities. 8. Vehicle control. 9. Easements. 10. Temporary Structures. 11.E Landscape/agricultural irrigation limitations. School/Parks Dedication In accordance with Section 5.11 of the Subdivision Regulations of Garfield County, Colorado, as amended, the Cattle Creek Ranch P.U.D. owners will cooperate with the Board of County Commissioners to appropriately compensate the county for the reasonably necessary public facilities (schools/parks) required by the future residents of the P.U.D. f!' 2840 SOUTH VAL L EJO STRL'F I £AGL EW00fl, COL O4.4O0 b.011(' TELEPHONE 303 761-4860 jV Grlysry ssmityit s, hw. i CLJ/VStJLTfruc3; Enrc1.71.vEE=r7. " SUITE 20/, WI LAG+` PLAZA GL ENWOOD SPRINGS,. r COLORADO ORADO 81601 TELEPHONE 303 945-8676 CATTLE CREEK RANCH PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT ENGINEER'S STATEMENTS DERYL W GINGERY ELMER L. CLAYCOMB LARRY A. MULLER The Cattle Creek Ranch P.U.D. is a planned development to be located in Sections 5, 6, 7, and 8, Township 7 South, Range 87 West. The proposed development will contain ap- proximately 125 single-family residences on lots ranging in size from about 2 acres to about 40 acres. There are approximately 963 acres within the development boundaries. The following information has been prepared in accordance with various portions of Section 14.08 of the Garfield County Zoning Resolution. The statements are intended to give conceptual descriptions of the various systems pro- posed. WATER DISTRIBUTION SYSTEM The proposed water distribution system is shown on Drawing No. GE 1325.003, Sheet 1 of 1, entitled Water Distribution System. The system will take its supply from a well or series of wells to be located adjacent to Cattle Creek in the northern portion. of Section 8. The well is presently being developed under the direction of Wright Water Engi- neers, and a separate report is included with this applica- tion regarding both legal rights and physical ground water supply. Cattle Creek Ranch is to be divided into two separate pres- sure zones. Each zone, however, can be served by both pumped supply or from storage as water use fluctuates. Ap- proximate water pressures available throughout the develop- ment are indicated by pressure contours. There are 12 lots in the upper pressure zone which cannot be served adequately by gravity pressure service from the storage tanks. These lots, indicated with an asterisk, will be supplied by means of a small, auxiliary pressure booster station, drawing its supply from the main storage tank. CIVIL ENGINEERING / LAND SURVEYING /STORM DRAINAGE / STRUCTURAL 1 TRANSPORTATION 1 WATER & SANITATION 1 COMPUTER SERVICES Based on 125 single-family residences, the following cal- culations indicate the anticipated average demand. 125 units x 4 persons/unit = 500 persons 500 persons x 100 gpd/person = 50,000 gpd 50,000 gpd e 35 gallons/min. domestic 2,000 sq. ft. of lawn requries 1" per week 2,000 sq. ft./unit x 125 units x .l"/week = 20,000 cu. ft./week 20,000 cfw x 7.48 gal/cu. ft. = 150,000 gal/week 150,000 gal/week = 15 gal/min irrigation 50 gal/min total demand SEWAGE DISPOSAL Sewage disposal will be accomplished by means of individual, on -lot sewage disposal systems. Based on the results of the soils and geological investigation performed by Chen and Associates, Inc., typical percolation rates are in the range of 40 minutes per inch. Since all of the proposed lots are in excess of 2.0 acres in size, current County Regulations permit individual disposal systems in areas exhibiting such a percolation rate. Specific tests would be performed on each lot as they are developed, and specific systems designed in accordance with current regulations. CABLE TELEVISION Cable television service is not presently available in the vicinity of Cattle Creek Ranch, and it is not anticipated that service will be made available in the development in the foreseeable future. NATURAL GAS Natural gas service is availabe from the 4 1/2 inch high pressure gas transmission line located in the southeastern corner of Section 8. A pressure reducing station would be required to drop the operating pressure to the normal distribution system level. At the time of actual develop- ment, Rocky Mountain Natural. Gas Company, the owner of the line, will design the necessary gas distribution system and provide the owner of Cattle Creek Ranch an estimate of anticipated costs. A normal development agreement would be negotiated between the owner and RMNG regarding payment of costs of installation of the necessary system. TELEPHONE Telephone service presently exists in the area along Cattle and Coulter Creeks, and can be extended to include the potential development of Cattle Creek Ranch. The actual system Will be designed by Mountain Bell during the final. plat stage of the development. A construction agreement would be negotiated with Plountain Bell whereby the developer assumes the costs of providing service. ELECTRIC SERVICE Holy Cross Electric Association presently provides electric service to the Cattle Creek area, and will provide service for the development.. Actual layout of the system will be by Holy Cross at the time of final plat preparation. A development agreement covering all costs will be prepared similar to those with RMNG and Mountain Bell. NATURAL HAZARDS Natural hazards such as avalanche and landslide are being dealth with in the soils and geological report presently being prepared. Based on preliminary information, no major problems exist. Minor, localized sloughing of loose topsoil may however, be experienced in areas sloping in excess of 30°. These areas can be handled on a specific basis as best indicated by the soils report. DRAINAGE AND FLOODPLAINS In general, the existing natural drainage system presents no problems for development. The natural system will be augmented by means of a customary ditch -and -culvert system to provide for the ::minor storm occurance. The development plain has been layed out specifically keeping development out of the low-lying areas along Cattle Creek and Coulter Creek. For this reason, no formal flood plain study has been accomplished to date. If deemed necessary, specific flood -proofing measures can be determined for any development which might occur around the ranching center at the confluence of the two creeks. The water supply well will be protected from the 100 year flood, most probably by means of a dike or berm completely surrounding the facility. (ti 41. CCA : 95 OF CO-C`� PREPARED BY: GINGERY ASSOCIATES, INC. ,..fit_., David C. Burnett, Design Engineer Reviewed by: Elmer L. Claycomb, P.E. Vice President Manager, Glenwood Springs Office -3- A5r[N y�.rICE P. 0 HO If 00,. ASrV N, COLOR ALJ061611 Gf-CNWOnO s wirft:S OflIC! F,0.40% 1206 FLENWDOO 0 RIraGS, SOLORAE.O 01001 5r[AMOOHT OFFICE r, 0,1,0X 5220 9tEAM50AY VILLAyE, COLORADO 00399 WRIGHT WATER ENGINEE=RS, INC. Mr. Frank Lerner P.O. Box 911+0 Aspen, Colorado Dear Mr. Lerner: NGINLERING CON 5ULTANTS 2120 ALCOfT STREET DEI:VER. COLORADO 2l 2I0 13031 1519.670} GLENWOOD SPRINGS TEL: 945-7755 June 30, 1977 81611 Ia[Nr.1€1M R. vd'RIGMT W 1I_t,1004 c, LORAN Rn±SS€LL 6 baCH OR. T. 0100007 Mefe406•C1. Re: Water Supply for the proposed Cattle Creek Ranch development Wright Water Engineers has completed a preliminary analysis and eval- uation of the water rights associated with the proposed development of the Cattle Creek Ranch. This ranch is also known as the Heuschkel Ranch, and is located near the confluence of Cattle Creek and Coulter Creek in Gar- field County. We have also conducted limited geophysical investigations of the Cat- tle Creek alluvium, and are now in the process of drilling a test well to determine the physical ground water supply in the area. In addition to the Cattle Creek alluvium, we believe that some other areas of the ranch may have good potential for individual wells. The main domestic supply for the development, however, is expected to come from the Cattle Creek alluvium. The water rights situation in the Cattle Creek drainage is extremely tight as the creek isvery much over appropriated. Historically, the rela- tive position on Cattle Creek of the Heuschkel Ranch is good as the 3 senior water rights owned by the ranch have never been called out and, in our opinion, will not be called out in the future. We believe that the available physical and "legal" water supply can be developed to adequately meet the domestic needs of the currently proposed 125 residential unit development, even in the dryest years. In addition to water For domestic needs, a significant amount of irrigation water is available which can be retained for use on the land. All or a portion of the senior Lewis and Somers Ditch rights, however, must be transferred by a Water Court decree to domestic and municipal use. If you have questions on the above, please don't hesitate to call. Very truly yours, WRIGHT WATER ENGINEERS, INC. 14/1.&. f ---»1 , William L. Lorah cc: Ron Liston WLL/jp 771 -24 ) t'` �i E5 id cH'Y . ,/ CONSULTING ENGINEERS SOL t'. FOUNDATION 93 S. ZUNI DENVER, COLORADO 00223 • 303/744-7105 E Ii G 1N EERING 1924 EAST F4 :ST STREET • CASPER, WYOMING 32301 • 307/234-2125 Subject. Mr. Frank Lerner c/o Ron Liston Land Design Partnership Suite 208, Village Plaza Glenwood Springs, Colorado 80801 Gentlemen: July 1, 1977 Preliminary Geotechnical Investiga- tion for the Cattle Creek Ranch Development, Garfield County, Colorado. Job Ilo. 14,701 14e have completed our field and laboratory studies for the preliminary geotechnical investigation at the subject site. We are presently drafting the final report. Our investigation indicates that there are no serious problems associated with the site geology or soil conditions. It should be feasible to develop the property as a residential subdivision. We ex- pect to have our final report out within the next week. This report will describe the site gealogv and subsoil conditions and discuss their expected effect upon the proposed development. 1f we can provide you with additional information prior to the submittal of the final report, please let us know. Sincerely, CffEN AND ASSOCIATES, INC. By RGJ4/med al Ph Mock, i=n ineering Geologic CATTLE CREEK RANCH TRAFFIC PROJECTIONS ON THE CATTLE CREEK AND CATHERINE STORE ROADS Prepared by: Eldorado Engineering Company 823 Blake Avenue - P.D. Box 669 Glenwood Springs, Colorado 81601 May 1982 INTRODUCTION The Cattle Creek Ranch as proposed is a planned unit development comprising a mixture of approximately 786 single-family and cluster housing units, some commercial usage and a golf course. Traffic volumes on Cattle Creek Road (County Road #113) and Catherine Store Road (County Road #100) will increase appreciably. The existing conditions of these two roads are adequate for the current traffic flow, but are not adequate for the proposed planned unit development's traffic. This study is made only to supplement the report entitled "Cattle Creek Ranch Off -Site Improvements on the Cattle Creek and Catherine Store Roads" prepared by Eldorado Engineering in February 1982. Purpose The purpose of this study is to make future projections of traffic flow caused by the Cat.:le Creek Ranch Development on the Cattle Creek Road (County Road #113) and the Catherine Store Road (County Road #100). This study rill also give insight as to the type and width of pavement to use and shoulder and right-of-way widths. Traffic Counts The areas that were used in this study are as follows: Name Period of Study Location of Counter 1. West Glenwood 5/11/72 thru 5/14/82 One counter by the intersection of Hwy. 6 and 24 and County Road #130 and one counter by the south stop sign at the intersection of County Road 130 and County Road 133. 2. Westbank Subdivision 5/11/72 thru 5/14/82 One counter at the entrance to the subdivision and counters at the Golf Club entrance and exit. 3. Red -Table Acres 5/17/82 thru 5/19/82 One counter at the entrance of the subdi- vision. 4. Oak Meadows Sub- division 5. Midland Avenue 6. Snowmass Village 5/21/82 thru 5/14/82 One counter at both entrances to the sub- division. 5/11/82 thru 5/14/82 One counter placed across from the Racquet Club. 5/17/82 thru 5/19/82 One counter placed at the intersection of Brush Creek Road and Hwy. 82. 7. Cattle Creek Road (County Road #113) 5/17/82 thru 5/19/82 The results of which are given in Table 1. One counter placed approxi- mately one mile from Hwy. 82. SUMMARY OF COUNTS TABLE 1 Location Units ADT/24 hrs. ADT/Unit DVH % DVH to AOT/24 hrs. **West Glenwood 235 2831 12 189 6.68 **Westbank Subdi- vision 83 453 5.5 56 12.36 *Red Table Acres 65 900.5 14 _-- **Oak Meadows 78 235 3 ___ ***Midland Avenue 4167 268 6.43 projected in winter it doubles to 8334 ADT ***Snowmass Village Road 3000 projected in winter it increases by 2.5 or 7500 AOT Cattle Creek Road ---- 437 Westbank Golf Course 27 453 16.8 parking ADT/parking spaces spaces ADT = Average Daily Traffic DHV = Design Hour Volume *More of a recreation type road and, therefore, will be invalid by unit count. **Oak Meadows Subdivision, Westbank Subdivision and blest Glenwood are more or less like the Cattle Creek Ranch PUD even though West Glenwood is closer to a town and because of this generated a little more traffic, but was still used as part of this study. It was determined from this study that an average unit will generate seven trips per day. ***Two roads (Midland Avenue and Snowmass Village Road) were used in this study to help show the county that a 24'wide chip & seal road with an average shoulder width of 2' (wider where possible) can handle at least 8000 ADT with only minor maintenance over a number of years. Projected Traffic The projected Average Daily Traffic (ADT) count was determined as follows: Type Units ADT/Unit ADT *35% Single Family (in work force) 275 *15% Cluster Residential 118 *15% Multi -Family PUD 118 *35% Retirement Community 275 **7 ***4 ***5 **3 1925 472 590 825 TOTAL 786 Avg. 4.9 trips/ 3812 ADT unit *percentages given by Ron Liston, Cattle Creek Ranch Development Co- ordinator. **Counts received by our study and generally backed by the Trip Generation Manual from the Institute of Transportation Engineers an Informational Report. ***Counts taken from the Trip Generation Manual from the Institute of Transportation Engineers an Informational Report. Also from traffic counts taken on the Westbank Golf Course, it was determined that on the average there are 16.8 ADT per parking space. Assuming that there will be 50 parking spaces at the Cattle Creek Golf Course and using the 16.8 ADT per parking space will produce a total of 840 ADT. Therefore, the total ADT of the planned unit development will be 4652. Results To project the traffic flow that will travel the Cattle Creek Road (County Road #113) versus the Catherine Store Road (County Road #100), it was assumed that approximately 70% of the ADT will travel the Cattle Creek Road (County Road '113) and 30% of the ADT will travel the Catherine Store Road (County Road #100). The results are shown in Table 2. By the results of our study on other subdivisions, the Design Hour Volume was determined to be approximately 8.5% of the ADT. In this study it was noted that only 35% of the planned unit development is in the general work force and that only 5% of the rest of the planned unit development will be leaving or arriving during the Design Hour, therefore, the Design Hour Volume will be as shown in Table 2. In this study, it was found that a 24' wide chip & seal road with 2' wide shoulders (wider where possible) can handle all the traffic that will be generated from the Cattle Creek Ranch Planned Unit Development. Also, the Garfield County Regulations require a 60' right-of-way for all maintained roads (see Table 2). TABLE 2 Item Cattle Creek Road Catherine Store Road Average Daily Traffic 3256 1396 (ADT) Design Hour Volume 111 47 (DHV) Chip & Seal Road Width 24 24 Shoulder Width Minimum 2' wider where Minimum 2' Right -of -Way Width possible 60' Minimum 60' Minimum Conclusions and Recommendations It is evident that the Cattle Creek Ranch Planned Unit Development will generate a large traffic volume. This volume can be controlled to flow smoothly on the Cattle Creek Road (County Road #113) and Catherine Store Road (County Road #100) if the roads have a 24' wide mat of chip and seal and have a minimum of 2' shoulders (wider where possible). It is recommended, however, that the improvements listed by Eldorado Engineering in their report entitled "Cattle Creek Ranch Off -Site .Improvements on the Cattle Creek and Catherine Store Roads" prepared in February 1982 be followed. The intersections of both the Cattle Creek Road (County Road V113) and the Catherine Store Road (County Road 0100) with Colorado State Highway No. 82 have an acceleration lane, deceleration lane and left hand turn lane. These lanes have also been thoroughly studied and should be able to accomodate the design hour volume with little or no interruption of Colorado State Highway No. 82. the land design partnership Information Supplement Cattle Creek Ranch P.U.D. September 10, 1981 Cattle Creek P.U.D. is a recreational oriented development of primary and secondary home sites. The project is directed towards a market which demands extremely high quality site, views and facilities and a variety of housing types. This market is local, national and international. The Roaring Fork Valley has already established itself with its internationally renowned ski facilities, cultural activities and Rocky Mountain scenery as a desired housing location for this market. The Cattle Creek site possesses the outstanding mountain views and desirable terrain configuration required for the projected housing and recreational facilities. Additionally, its location in the lower reaches of the Roaring Fork Valley extend its recreational season one to two months beyond that which could. be provided at sites closer to the Aspen7Snowmass ski complex. Because of the recreational nature of the project and the type of housing market that it is servicing, the Cattle Creek P.U.D. is as much a part of the recreation/tourism industry which is such a key element to the Garfield County economic base as it is of the housing industry in the County. The original Cattle Creek Ranch planned unit development and first phase subdivision were apparently erroneously left out of the new Garfield County Comprehensive Plan. Utilizing the criteria of the Comp Plan, I would understand that the site would be classified as District B, Subdivisions/Rural Service- able Areas, 0 to 1/2 mile radius since the original P.U.D. provided for central water service and septic leach field sewage service. In the following,, I have discussed the pro- ject in the same category sequence as in the Comprehensive Plan. Location: As mentioned earlier, the project already lies within what should 403 West First Street Glenwood Springs Colorado 81601 (303) 945-2246 J • • Information Supplement Cattle Creek Ranch P.U.D. September 10, 1981 Page 2 should be categorized as a Rural Serviceable Area. It is bounded on the south by another existing development, Panorama Ranchettes. The ranch is bounded on the east, north and north- west by private lands in agricultural production or sage and oak brush range land. To the southwest the ranch is bordered by Bureau of Land Management lands. Density: ID Cattle Creek is proposed to have density of .8 units per acre as compared to the Comp Tlan recommended density of .5 units -to the _acres _ This_ s -some-wat higher than is preferred by _ the Comp Plan, but -is__considerably lower -than fie 3 units per " acre ---- ---- • that the Comprehensive Plan sets as the absolute maximum density for Rural Serviceable Areas. The proposed density has been clustered to create the various housing types preferred by the targeted market. The total number of units proposed is what is necessary to support the extensive recreational facility and other costs associated with the quality of development required by this housing market. As a result of the clustering of the housing, the project's able to preser massive amounts of open, space. Of thef96 acres in the ranch t acres are proposed to be in pen spAg.e and -recreational facilities. Tile terrain character of_ the site and •massive open space treatment allows for the preservation of an . open agricultural feel a longi the existing county road _system. ow through_rhe ea ch. The intense areas of development are confined to the upper mesa on the ranch leaving the creek, valleys and existing County road corridors open. • • • • • Technical Services: The central water system proposed for the original Cattle Creek Ranch P.U.D. will be expanded to be of adequate capacity for domestic and fire flow services for the now proposed project. A central waste water treatment facility will also be constructed. Power to the project will be provided by Holy Cross Electric Association and telephone service by Mountain Bell, of course, at the cost of the developer. All lines will be buried within the project. Rocky Mounatin Natural Gas service will be provided to the project, a utility service seldom available to rural developments. • • Information Supplement Cattle Creek Ranch P.U.D. i September 10, 1981 Page 3 i Community Services: Schools • A dedication of laid or cash in lieu of fees will be ma a to the RE -2 School District as per their policies. The project is presently under consideration by the school district. I would anticipate that the demands upon the school system will be somewhat less than normal for a project of this size because of the partial secondary housing nature of the project. Fire Protection: The developer proposes to build and equip a fire station which will be located adjacent to County Road 113. Although we have not begun discussions with the district we would • hope that this fire facility would be administered by the Car- bondale Volunteer Fire District with manpower provided from volunteers in the immediate area. This fire protection facility will not only service the Cattle Creek Development but surrounding housing in the Missouri Heights area. i Police Protection: The Cattle Creek project will be constructed with an electronics system connecting all residences to a central computerized control console such that each residence can be equipped with an electronic burglar alarm system. This electronic security system can be tied directly to the Garfield County Ad - 40 Sheriff's office if that were the preferred arrangement. Ad- ditionally, an on-site security guard may be maintained if it is determined desirable. ( Health Car The electronic security system described above can a so lnc Aide emergency medical call if the residents so choose. This would be directed to the central computer and if i desired, could be relayed on directly to medical facilities in Glenwood. Also, in association with the fire station, it may be possible to maintain a.valunteer maned ambulance. Roads -Access and Circulation: i The existing County road system provides,four routes of access to the Cattle Creek P.U.D.ount Road 100 and County Road 113 will logically carry the vast majority of the traffic burden caf the project Therefore, the developer has proposed to make extensive improvements to these two roads as are more completely defined by i the plans prepared by Eldorado Engineering. The proposed improve - i 1 • Information Supplement Cattle Creek Ranch P.U.D. September 10, 1981 Page 4 ments are intended to bring the road capacities up to a level which will accomodate the traffic generated by the project at 40 its ultimate build out. (See the attached traffic projection summary) Roads within the .project will be_built to Counter specification _except. -where r_ariati-ons--in road 2midth e consistent - with- the . Comprehensive Plans recommendations for eliminating unnecessary avR ement. The primary loop road through the project is pre- sently being constructed to County specifications. Coulter Ridge Road which services the cluster housing district, ill also be built according to County specifications. Th_secon.rt Loop road in the south easterly portion of the project. is pro- ose• • .- - +ur f••t w"de shoulders and two twelve foot paved — - traffic lanes. ocal stree s rvicing_the single family areas with lots smaller than 12,000 square feet are proposed to be a curb and gutter type street with _a ID foot curb to curb width. This provides for parking on one side of the street leaving the other side of the street for snow disposal. A curbless road cross section will be utilized wherever practical to reduce the concentration of storm runoff. A11 Qads within the project will be maintained by the Cattle Creek Home owners Association. Meads within the multifamily districts will be of a private drive nature and maintained at the expense of the multifamily residents. Environmental Constraints: A soils and geologic report prepared by Chen and Associates did not reveal any significant environmental hazards as are suggested by the Comprehensive Plan. Since beginning construction on the Phase I of the original P.U.D., we have isolated some localized soil conditions that have required special considerations regarding road construction and may require engineered foundations for some homes. Chen and Associates has been involved in additional studies in regard to these localized areas and included herewith are copies of their reports to date. The proposed plan has been responsive to environmental concerns of steep slopes, vegetation and low land flood ways. All areas disturbed by development construction will be revegetated. The detailed revegetation program for implementation this fall on those areas disturbed by the 1981 construction is now being prepared. This will be submitted to the County for its review, There will be a strict architectural control committee which will have authority over site disturbance, revegation and landscape treatments, preservation of view corridors as well as architect- ural character. It is the intent to establish an architectural character which restricts residences to a very low structural • 1 • Information Supplement Cattle Creek Ranch P.U.D. September 10, 1981 Page 5 mass profile. Particularily where a structure would infringe upon the visual horizon line. The Comprehensive Plan also made reference that new develop- ment should pay its way and not be a burden upon existing county residents. We feel the Cattle Creek P.U.D. more than meets this criteria with the extensive efforts being made to mitigate direct and immediate impacts that might be created by the project and by the property tax revenues that this pro- ject will generate for the County. Based on information pro- vided to me by Howard Whaley in the County Accessor's office, I have projected that the average residence in the Cattle Creek P.U.D. will pay approximately $3,900.00 in property taxes annually. This is based on present day mill levy and a con- servative projection of the value of the residents in todays dollars. This annual tax revenue at build out of the project would generate in access of $3,000,000.00 for Garfield County each year. This does not include property taxes that would be levyed against recreational facilities or commercial facilities within the project. Based on this estimate, the project would generate in access of $120,000.00 in road and bridge funds annually. In regard to the goals, objectives and policies defined in the Comp Plan, the Cattle Creek project may be summarized as follows: Housing: The Cattle Creek P.U.D. is serving a viable housing market within the Roaring Fork Valley. Industrial/Commercial: The Cattle Creek P.U.D. supports and expands the recreation/rouism economic base of Garfield County. Recreation/Open Space: Extensive recreational facilities are provided within the project which will service primarily project residents and to a limited extent users outside of the Cattle Creek P.U.D. Fifty eight percent of the project is designated for open space and recreation. Much of this open space is located to the visual benefit of not only the project residents but County residents who might drive through the area on the existing County Road system. Agriculture: Some of the open space land is being retained in agricultural type activities such as the equestrian facilities and supportive pasture lands while the remaining open space will • • 0 Information Supplement Cattle Creek Ranch F.U.D. September 10, 1981 Page 6 be either undisturbed native vegetation or in the golf course facility which presents a visual character similar to agricultural lands. Transportation: As described earlier, we intend to improve off-site County roads to deal with the impacts that might be created by this project. Technical Services: The project will be providing central water and central waste water facilities within an area already designated as a Rural Serviceable Area. Environmental: We feel the plan has been sensitively de- signed to meet the natural terrain of the site and the carrying capacity of the land. The open space configuration of the project and the location of concentrated development on the higher mesas combine to preserve the rural character of the area as one moves along the existing County Road system. Community Services: Measures have been proposed to mitigate any direct impacts this project might have on community services and we are confident the tax base from this project will assure adequate revenues to support the community service demands that its residents may make upon the County. 4, CATTLE CREEK F.U.D. • TRAFFIC SUMMARY 1. Present Traffic Load (Spring 1981)* Co. Rd. 113 461 ADT 61 VPH Co. Rd. 100 (Lower section) 458 ADT 61 VPH *by Eldorado Engineering 2. Projected Capacity (following proposed improvements, Type C road - stable flow with minor restrictions)* Co. Rd. 113 650-800 VPH Co. Rd. 100 650-800 VPH *by Eldorado Engineering 3. Projected Traffic Generated by P.U.D. 786 units @ 8 trips/day = 6288 ADT 60% of Projected ADT on Co. Rd. 113 = 3772 ADT 40% of Projected ADT on Co, Rd. 100 = 2513 ADT Co. Rd. 113 - 3772 ADT = 377-490 VPH Co. Rd. 100 - 2513 ADT = 251-327 VPH CATTLE CREEK RANCH PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT OWNER Mr. Frank Lerner Aspen, Colorado DESIGN TEAM Planning and Project Coordination The Land Design Partnership Glenwood Springs, Colorado Civil Engineering Gingery and Associates Glenwood Springs, Colorado Hydrology Wright Water Engineers, Inc. Glenwood Springs, Colorado Soils and Geology Chen and Associates Glenwood Springs, Colorado DATE July 5, 1977 Revised- August 8, 1977 Revised -October 21, 1977 LEONARD M. OATES RONALD A. AUSTIN J. NICHOLAS McORATH. JR. WILLIAM R. JORDAN ffi ROBERT W. HUGHES BARRY D. EDWARDS LAW O,74CES OATES, AUSTIN, MCGRATH & ..JORDAN BOO EAST HC=`SINS 57FtEET ASPEN, COLCPAno 81611 June 30, 1977 HONORABLE BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS OF GARFIELD COUNTY Garfield County Courthouse P. O. Box 640 Glenwood Springs, Colorado 81601 Re: Application of F.U.D. - Cattle Creek Joint Venture Consisting of Frank Lerner and J. R. Sturgis Gentlemen: AREA CODE 303 TELEP HONE 92S-2800 Enclosed with this letter is an Application for Planned Unit Development Approval of approximately 960 acres of property in Township 17 South, Range 87 West, 6 Principal Meridian, Garfield County, Colorado. This property is presently under contract to Mr. Frank Lerner with an anticipated Closing date of September 1, 1977. Mr. Lerner has formed a Joint Venture with Mr. Sturgis under the name and style of Cattle Creek Ranch Joint Venture. I, by this letter represent to you, as counselor for both of these gentlemen that they are in agreement with the proceedings of this P.U.D. Application. I would indicate that the remainder of the enclosed presentation has been prepared by Mr. Ron Liston of The Land. Design Partnership in Glenwood Borings and it has been reviewed and approved by Messrs. Lerner and Sturgis. I would also indicate on behalf of my clients and Mr. Liston that we will cooperate fully with you and the County's professional staff in the processing of this Application for P.U.D. Approval. Very truly yours, OATES, AUSTIN, McGRATH & JORDAN By LMO:mt Enclosures Leonard M. O tes LEGAL DESCRIPTION THE S 1/2 LF THE NE 1/4 AND LOTS 7, 8, 12 AND 13 AND THE WEST 29.7 ACRES OF TOOT 14 AND THE WEST 980.10 FEET OF LOT 15, EXCEPT A PORTION OF A TRACT CC`_tiVEYED BY DEED RECORDED IN BOOK 61 AT PAGE 553 AND EXCEPT THAT PORTION OF LOT 7 LYING SOUTHEASTERLY OF THE RIGHT-OF-WAY OF AN EXIS 'I'_NG COUNTY ROAD C4-'113), ALL IN SECTION 5; AND SE 1/4 SE 1/4, SECTION 6 EXCEPT A PORTION OF THAT SANE TRACT CONVEYED BY DEED RECO7=ED IN BOOK 61 AT PAGE 553; AND SE 1/4 NE 1/4, SECTION 7; AND ALL OF SECTION 8 EXCEPT A PARCEL OF LAND DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS: BEGINNING AT THE NORTHEAST CORNER SAID SECTION 8; THENCE S 89'56'46.2" W., 1,641.369', ALONG THE NORTH LINE SAID SECTION 8; THENCE S 00°17'48" E., 35.37; THENCE N 89"56'45.2" E. AND PARALLEL TO THE NORTH LINE SAID SECTION 8, 1,641.746; THENCE N 00"54'23" W., 35.37' TO THE SOINT OF BEGINNING, CONTAINING 1.333 ACRES MORE OR LESS, ALL IN TOWNSHIP 7 SOUTH, RANGE 87 WEST, OF THE 6TH PRINCIPAL MERIDIAN N J. it N - r, - - I o 1 ° a S - l j OD. CI i.—i}lv9—••;1 1. . - I y 'x I~ ' TT_" 4 Yw1i laI+ ,- '�/ s 1� I/ L 0 = I 00 \ • • 1 , ' 11 Tf-'12"a } Y o+ `�s_;6_ "moi c,,,--.. kms. - IY-F 1,`}=l .0- 1 „ yr `i `• v,k„ c �e/fQ `I .,.. 1 Tr, �„ 0 JJjj _ !! -� , " %4,� _ - i_- Y tl i,?=£ ^� ti _,,,,,,--f' � _- r . s :_ -::r) - _.., µ 0 _1 - i _ l - i i.-_.r4I-- ., qq i [sarnv Pr= + 3- -_.' .-w: v aN�?:'Nti I V„ I 'W l4S�T:d13`; 1--- --- w i E 1 r I z 'ate cd. • 1�^ d v 1 �ta= - it`1" - a n I -- r' sy4° c v Gti}. -—, L. o '' `rlA x1 } F I ti ryyi f $.4"_,..,.;,,.. " d /,,,,. \ • �I' J"'`• � ty' ttI .ICr' •. a ° \ICIr µC€.fJ j. C .-- - «%t,41 -. o'M # [._ Park Cr 1`_ _ I � l- I r ' 1 ns� 1 �) �`-1�—� �1 1 . PROPERTY OWNERS OF RECORDS WITHIN 300' OF CATTLE CREEK RANCH P.U.D. John McNulty P.O. Box 200 Carbondale, CO 81623 Mary T. Squires 0720 121 Road Carbondale, CO 81623 Cottonwood Pass c/o E. W. Baker Suite 1011 600 South Cherry Denver, CO 80222 Merrill & Delores Laurence 11104 County Road 115 Carbondale, CO 81623 Gary McNulty P.O. Box 200 Carbondale, CO 81623 J. Salter, S. Bellow Colorado Country Panorama 500 North Street Aspen, CO 81611 Sky High Enterprises 5532 Royal Crest Dallas, Texas 75229 H. M. Crosby c/o Crosby Company 1st National Bank Bldg. Minneapolis, Minn. 55402 CATTLE CREEK P.D.D. OBJECTIVES The following objectives are a summarization of the concepts which have guided the design of the P.U.D. since its inception. 1. To provide a highly desirable rural residential living environment in the mid -Roaring Fork Valley area with an emphasis on preserving the natural beauty and pastoral ranch setting of the site. 2. To provide spacious building sites which maximize the views of the surrounding mountains and irrigated valleys while providing as much privacy to each site as possible. 3. To emphasize the rural setting and to reflect a conscious stewardship for the land, preserve a major portion of the irrigated pasture lands in an agriculturally productive state. 4 To establish a balance between the domestic and irrigation demands on the available water which will allow the continued forage production on the reserved agricultural lands during the average rainfall years. 5. To provide for pedestrian/equestrian movement throughout the site. 6 To provide residents with the opportunity to keep horses on the P.U.D. site. 7. To establish protective covenants including strict.archi- tectural controls over all structures and landscaping. 8. To provide for the ownership and maintenance of common space through a home owners association. L. I LITIC'_rt AND GENERAL SITE CHARACTER Cat Creek Ranch is presently a= active cattle operation located at the westerly end of Missouri Heights. Access to the -an c: exists over two primary routes. From the west it is. e�?r,ximately 7 miles from Highway 82 and,via County Road 100, a distance of approximately 4 miles from the Catherine Store to tie _ nch. Additionally, County Toad 115 from Spring Valley and unt y Road 122 from El Jebel as well as the Cottonwood Pass Road all converge upon the Ranch site. Using the above des- cribed routes the Ranch is aporoxinately 8 miles from Carbondale, 13 t.=1es from Glenwood Springs anc 8 miles from El Jebel. The =tench site is composed of lush green alluvial plains along Cattle and Coulter Creeks which ccnverge at the westerly edge of the Ranch and of higher mesas to the west, north and south of t=e creeks. There is presently approximately 250 acres of irrilated Pasture and hayground along Cattle Creek and on the mesa to the south. The ridges anc steeper slopes on the mesa are co.aracterized by mixed sage and oak brush. The high land west of Coulter Creek and north of Cattle Creek is a mixture of c ; r land wheat fields and rolling sage covered hills. Viewer from the high lands of the Ranch are characteristic of the Colorado Rockies with majestic vistas of the Maroon Bells, Ht. Sopris, Sunlight Mt., lookout Mt., and Basalt Mt. as w -e11 as the overview of the pastoral ranch lands along Catte and Coulter Creeks. P.U.D. CONCEPT The Cattle Creek Ranch P.U.D. is a variety of high quality rural residential living options which combines a unique mixture of rural and suburban amenities. To the north and west (Agriculture/Residential District) lots from 5 to 20 acres Provide the onnortunity to "do your own thing" as well as enjoy the benefits of the PUD onen snace and associated facilities. Lots in the Residential/Single Family District average over 3 acres. Some of these lots allow the stabeling of horses and include irrigation water to main- tain the pasture land existing on the lot. Others prohibit the keeping of livestock or the alteration of the native landscape of the site except as necessary for house construction. A majority of the irrigated agriculture lands have been pre- served as open space for the use and benefit of the PUD resi- dents. The existing ranch homestead will be remodelled to provide stable and riding arena facilities for horses;' of the PUD residents. Equestrian trails along raodways and special easements will connect all open space lands into an integrated equestrian trail system. The lake on the southerly mesa services both a water augmenta- tion and aesthetic recreation purpose. In a more suburban character, a park facility will be developed adjacent to the lake. It shall include picnic grounds and shelter, oven lawn Play area, play equipment, lake side dock and landscaping. All lots in the PUD will be nrovided with central water service including fireflow capacities throughout the Residential/Single Family District. Limitations on landscape irrigation from the domestic water supply have not yet been finalized but water supniies are adequate to allow at least 4,000 square feet of irrigated landscape on each lot. Sewage treatment will be by septic tank and leach field on each lot. Public service utilities including electric, telephone and natural gas shall be installed underground. For the purpose of maintaning a high quality standard through- out the Ranch, an Architectural Control Committee shall have strict control over all structural and site development activi- ties including landscaping. A Home Owners Association will be formed as a non-profit corporation to manage the oven space facilities and water system and to provide miscellaneous services such as maintenance of the private roads in the Agri- culture/Residential District. CAT I CPEEK RANCH P.U.D. ZONING REGULATIONS Sec _ -7 To carry out the purposes and provisions of the Garfield County Zoning Resolution, Garfield County, Colorado and, particularly, Section 1.400 of that title, as amended, the Cattle Creek Ranch Planned Unit Development Zoning District is further divided into the following Zone District classifi- cations R/S.F. A/R A/O.S. - Residential/Single-Family District - Agricultural/Residential District - Agricultural/Open Space District The boundaries of these Districts shall be located as shown on the Cattle. Creek Ranch P.U.D. Plan. Sectio II_ R/S.F. - Residential/Single-Family District L. Uses, by right. Single -Family dwelling and customary accessory uses including buildings for shelter or enclosure of D oDerty accessory to use of the lot for single- family residential purposes and fences, hedges, ,amens, walls and similar landscape features. Parr and greenbelt. Uses, conditional. ``one. C. Uses, special. '_gone. !! n±rnum Lot Area. 2 acres. Maximum Lot Coverage. 5 percent. Yi nmum Setback. 1. Front yard: 40 feet 2. Rear yard: 40 feet 3. Side yard: 25 feet 1.rszi71um Building Height. 25 -eet H. Off -Street Parking/Residential. Four ofd --street parking spaces on the same lot for each dwelling unit or 1 space per 600 hundred square feet of floor area, whichever is greater. Section 111. A/R - Agricultural/Residential District A. Uses, by right. Agricultural including farm garden, greenhouse, nursery, orchard, ranch, small animal farm for production of poultry, fish, fur -bearing or other small animals and customary accessory uses includ- ing buildings for shelter or enclosure of persons, animals, or property employed in any of the above uses, retail establishment for sale of goods pro- cessed from raw materials produced on the lot. Kennel, riding stable and veterinary clinic. Park and greenbelt. Single-family dwelling and customary accessory uses. B. Uses, conditional. Day nursery, studio for conduct of arts and crafts and water impoundments. C. Uses, special. None. D. Minimum Lot Area. 5 acres. E. Maximum Lot Coverage. 10 percent. F. Minimum Setback. 1. Front yard: 75 feet 2. Rear yard: 75 feet 3. Side yard: 50 feet G. Maximum Building Height. 23 feet. H. Off -Street Parking/Residential. Four off-street parking spaces on the same lot for each dwelling unit or i space per 600 square feet of floor area, whichever is greater. Sectitn 1V'. A/©. S . Agricult rE 1/Coen Space District Uses, by right. Agricultural including farm, garden, nursery, orchard, ranch and customary accessory us s including buildings for selter or enclosd e of animals or property em toyed in any of the above uses. Kennel and riding stable. Park and greenbelt. 3. Uses, conditional. Water impoundments. Uses, special. None. D. Minimum Lot Area. 2 acres. Maximum Lot Coverage. 15 percent. Minimum Setback. 1. Front yard: 2. Rear yard: 3. Side yard: 40 feet 40 feet 25 feet . Maximum Building Height. 25 feet. Sects= V. Except as hereinabove providerf, and except for the following Sections of the Garfield County Zoning 2esolution, all provisions of tie Garfield County Zoning Resolution shall be ap:licable to the Cattle Creek Ranch P.U.D. Zone Distr_cs.. The Sections of t -e said Zoning Resolution wh_ci shall have no app- licability are as follows: Section 3.00 through 3.11.y4 Section 4.01.02 paragraph F1) LAND USE ACREAGES AND MAXIMUM DWELLING UNITS Residential/Single-Family District Agricultural/Residential District Agriculture/Open Space District Minimum acres dedicated to Common Open Space 160 Total Gross P.U.D. Density Net Density Residential/Single Family Dist. Agricultural/Residential Dist.. Note: ACRES 420 349 194 963 MAX . DWELLING UNITS 109 22 7.8_acres/unit 3.8 acres/unit 15.9 acres/unit 131 Engineering refinement of the plan as required for final platting may result in minor variations in the proposed acreages. Home miners Association A home owners association shall he formed at the time of final platting of the first phase c.= the P.U.D. The pur- poses and Powers of association shall include: To promote the health, safety, and welfare of owners of real property within the P.U.D. To own, maintain, and manage common areas, easements, and domestic and irrigation water systems. To enforce all covenants. Covenants To further assure the development aad continuation of the Cattle Creek Ranch P.U.D. as a high _muality'_rural resid- ential area, protective covenants shall be recorded along with he final plattings of the P.U.D. These covenants shall be included but not be limited to the following topics: Architectural Committee. - site and building design -- minimum floor area - accessory structure design -- modification of the exist -ng landscape and new landscaping Lot use restrictions. Signs. '_. Animals. - type allowed -- control - General site maintenance. Noxious activities. Underground utilities. Vehicle control. Easements. 1 Temporary Structures. 1L. Landscape/agricultural ir-_ation limitations. School/Parks Dedication In accordance with Section 5.11 of the Subdivision Regulations of Garfield County, Colorado, as amended, the Cattle Creek Ranch P.U.D. owners will cooperate with the Board of County Commissioners to appropriately compensate the county for the reasonably necessary public fawilities (schools/parks) required by the future residents of the P.U.D. Phasing Five phases of development are envisioned for the Cattle Creek Ranch P.U.D. The phases are generally described as follows: Phase 1 will include 17 lots in the R/S.F. District and 10 lots in the A/R. District. The R/S.F. lots will occur along the primary access road as it climbs from Cattle Creek up to the mesa level where it will terminate with a temporary cul-de-sac. A.R. District lots will be located west and north of County Road 113. In addition to the well and service lines, an 8,000 gallon minimum capacity storage facility with gravity flow into the water system will be included in the first phase. Phase 1 will be initiated within the first year following approval of the P.U.D. Phase 2 will develop 3 A/R. lots west of Coulter Creek and 37 R/S.F, lots. Developed facilities will include an 100,000 gallon water storage tank and the extension of the primary access road from the temporary cul-de-sac through the BLM tract to its intersection with County Road 100. It is presently anticipated that Phase 2 will include the development of many open space facilities such as the lake, fencing of open space, stables and corralls. Phase 3 will include the remaining 8 A/R. lots in the northeast segment of the. Ranch and 17 R/S.F. lots. Phase 4 will open up 18 R/S.F. lots. Phase 5 will develop the remaining 20 R/S.F. lots in the south- east corner of the Ranch and the one remaining A/R lot. It is presently anticipated that a complete buildout of facilities be accomplished in a three to five year period. 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 Gingery.4ssocietes, Inc. L1QHS' LILTING' EIV'GIIVEE,?5 SUITE 207, VILLAGE PLAZA GL ENWOOD SPR/NGS, COLORADO 81501 TELEPHONE 303 945-8675 k Qft4F L7FFiCE 2840 SOUTH VALLEJO STREET ENGL EWOOD COLORADO ORADO 801 l0 TELEPHONE 303 761 4860 CATTLE CREEK RANCH PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT ENGINEER'S STATEMENTS A S SQCL4 TES DERYL W GINGERY ELMER L. CCAYCOMB LARRY A. MULLER The Cattle Creek Ranch P.U.D. is a planned development to be located in Sections 5, 6, 7, and 8, Township 7 South, Range 87 West. The proposed development will contain ap- proximately 125 single-family residences on lots ranging in size from about 2 acres to about 40 acres. There are approximately 963 acres within the development boundaries. The following information has been prepared in accordance with various portions of Section 14.08 of the Garfield County Zoning Resolution. The statements are intended to give conceptual descriptions of the various systems pro- posed. WATER DISTRIBUTION SYSTEM The proposed water distribution system is shown on Drawing No. GE 1325.003, Sheet 1 of 1, entitled Water Distribution System. The system will take its supply from a well or series of wells to be located adjacent to Cattle Creek in the northern portion of Section 8. The well is presently being developed under the direction of Wright Water Engi- neers, and a separate report is included with this applica- tion regarding both legal rights and physical ground water supply. Cattle Creek Ranch is to be divided into two separate pres- sure zones. Each zone, however, can be served by both pumped supply or from storage as water use fluctuates. Ap- proximate water pressures available throughout the develop- ment are indicated by pressure contours. There are 12 lots in the upper pressure zone which cannot be served adequately by gravity pressure service from the storage tanks. These lots, indicated with an asterisk, will be supplied by means of a small, auxiliary pressure booster station, drawing its supply from the main storage tank. CIVIL ENGINEERING / LAND SURVEYING /STORM DRAINAGE / STRUCTURAL 1 TRANSPORTATION / WATER & SANITATION / COMPUTER SERVICES Based on 125 single-family resicen:es, the following cal- culations indicate the anticipates average demand: 125 units x 4 persons/unit = 500 persons 500 persons x 100 gpd/person = 50,000 gpd 50,=000 gpd = 35 gallons/min. i.cmestis 2,000 sq. ft. of lawn. requries 1" per week 2,000 sq. ft./unit x 125 units x 1"/week = 20,000 cu. ft./week 20,0,00 cfw x 7.48 gal/cu. ft. = 150,000 gal/week 150,000 gal/week = 15 gal/min irrigation 50 gal/min total demand SEWAGE D-SPOSAL Sew -ace disposal will be accomplished by means of individual, on-lct sewage disposal systems. E_sed on the results of the soils and geological investigation performed by Chen and Associates, Inc., typical percolation rates are in the range of 40 iinutes per inch. Since all of the proposed lots are in excess of 2.0 acres in size, current County Regulations peruit individual disposal systems in areas exhibiting such a percolation rate. Specific tests would be performed on ea 'a lot as they are developed, and specific systems desicne±d in accordance with current regulations. CAE.LE 7EaEVISION Cable te=evision service is not -presently available in the vicinity of Cattle Creek Ranch, a . it is not anticipated that service will be made available in the development in the foreseeable future. NAi'C XL SAS NaturaL gas service is availabe fr:71 the 4 1/2 inch high pressr eygas transmission line locked in the southeastern corner of Section 8. A pressure reducing station would be rel- .ired to drop the operating =-essure to the normal distribution system level. At the time of actual develop- ment, Rocky Mountain Natural Gas Cr4 any, the owner of the line, will design the necessary ua.s distribution system and trovide the owner of Cattle Creek Ranch an estimate of anticipated costs. A normal de-elooment agreement wou.1dbe negotiated between the owner and RMNG regarding pa—+e__t of costs of installation of the necessary system. TEL= =71GNE Tele7:Lone service presently exists in the area along Cattle and C utter Creeks, and can be extended to include the potential development of Cattle Crew{ Ranch. The actual system will be designed by Mountain Sell during the final plat stage of the development. A construction agreement wo li be negotiated with Mountain. ie11 whereby the developer as= -7E=-5. than costs of providing sem=ce. ELECTRIC SERVICE Holy Cross Electric Association presently provides electric service to the Cattle. Creek area, and will provide service for the development. Actual layout of the system will be by Holy Cross at the time of final plat preparation. A development agreement covering all costs will be prepared similar to those with RMNG and Mountain Bell. NATURAL HAZARDS Natural hazards such as avalanche and landslide are being dealth with in the soils and geological report presently being prepared. Based on preliminary information, no major problems exist. Minor, localized sloughing of loose topsoil may however, be experienced in areas sloping in excess of 30°. These areas can be handled on a specific basis as best indicated by the soils report. DRAINAGE AND FLOOD PLAINS In general, the existing natural drainage system presents no problems for development. The natural system will be augmented by means of a customary ditch -and -culvert system to provide for the minor storm occurance. The development plan has been layed out specifically keeping development out of the low -Tying areas along Cattle Creek and Coulter Creek. For this reason, no formal flood plain study has been accomplished to date. If deemed necessary, specific flood -proofing measures can be determined for any development which might occur around the ranching center at the confluence of the two creeks. The water supply well will be protected from the 100 year flood, most probably by means of a dike or berm completely surrounding the facility. PREPARED BY: GINGERY ASSOCIATES, INC. d) c David C. Burnett, Design Engineer Reviewed by: c•-- ---7,-.._-- ,1 r _:,„"e!!_eiN,„/L- Elmer L. Claycomb, P.E. Vice President Manager, Glenwood Springs Office -3- AsPEN OFFICE P. O. BG x PO2S ASPEN, CO&.ORADD SISII GLENWOOO SPRINGS OFFICE P, O. SON Iltt GLENw000 SPRINGS. COLORADO Otto! STEAMYOAT OM FiCT P. O. AOx S;;Q STCAMYOAT VILLAGE, COLORAOO •Gltf WRIGHT WATER ENGINEERS, INC. ENGINEERING CONSULTANTS 420 ALCOTT STREET DENVER, COLORADO ROTI! t303•5O.CI0I GLENWOOD SPRINGS i1r. Frank Lerner P.O. Box 9140 Aspen, Colorado Dear Mr. Lerner: TEL: 945--7755 June 30, 1977 81611 NERNST. R, WRIGHT WILLIAM L. LORAN • RUSSELL E. GARR DR, F. ROPE RY McGREGOR Re: Water Supply for the proposed Cattle Creek Ranch development Wright Water Engineers has completed a preliminary analysis and eval- uation of the water rights associated with the proposed development of the Cattle Creek Ranch. This ranch is also known as the Heuschkel Ranch, and is located near the confluence of Cattle Creek and Coulter Creek in Gar- field County. We have also conducted limited geophysical investigations of the Cat- tle Creek alluvium, and are now in the process of drilling a test well to determine the physical ground water supply in the area. in addition to the Cattle Creek alluvium, we believe that some other areas of the ranch may have good potential for individual wells, The main domestic supply for the development, however, is expected to come from the Cattle Creek alluvium. The water rights situation in the Cattle Creek drainage is extremely tight as the creek is very much over appropriated. Historically, the rela- tive position on Cattle Creek of the Heuschkel Ranch is good as the 3 senior water rights owned by the ranch have never been called out and, in our opinion, will not be called out in the future. We believe that the available physical and "legal" water supply can be developed to adequately meet the domestic needs of the currently proposed 125 residential unit development, even in the dryest years. in addition to water for domestic needs, a significant amount of irrigation water is available which can be retained for use on the land. All or a portion of the senior Lewis and Somers Ditch rights, however, must be transferred by a Water Court decree to domestic and municipal use. If you have questions on the above, please don't hesitate to call. Very truly yours, WRIGHT WATER ENGINEERS, INC. B y �4� i " / 4A- f o William L. Lorah cc: Ron Liston WLL/jp 771--24 f • cher and associates, c. CONSULTING ENGINEERS SOIL a FOe4DAT1aN 96 S. ZUNI • DENVER, COLO=&CO 80223 303/744-7105 ENGINE R 1 H G 1924 EAST FIRST STREET • CASPER., 'WfOMING 82501 • 3071234-2126 .:uiy 1, 1977 Subject: Preliminary Geotechnical Investiga- tiol for the Cattle Creek Ranch evelopment, Garfield County, C=olorado. .lob No. 14,701 14r. Frank Lerner c/o Roo Liston Land Design Partnership Suite 2C3, Village Plaza Glenwood Springs , Colorado 80601 Gentl ereri We have completed our field and laboratory studies for the preliminary geotec'nical investigation at the subject site. We are presently drafting the fi-'al report. Our investigation irdi:ate_ that there are no serious problens associated with the site geology or :oil conditions. it should be fea_i'le to develop the property as a -esiantial subdivision. lie ex- pect tohave our final report out within next week. This report will descri A the site geology and subsoil con iticis and discuss their expected effect upon the proposed development. if we can provide you with additional information prior to the submittal of the final report, please let us Liow. Sincerely, CHEN AND 'SSCCIATES, INC. By RGI4/,..ed alah ?'pack, 1=n:ineering Geologist ACCEPTED and APPROVED this 21st day of November, 1977, and the property the subject hereof zoned as a Planned Unit Development pursuant to Section 14.00 of the Garfield County Zoning Resolution as amended. The Board of County Commissioners of Garfield County, Colorado By ATTEST: Chairman County Clerk CATTLE CREEK RANCH PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT OWNER Mr. Frank Lerner Aspen, Colorado DESIGN TEAM Planning and Project Coordination The Land Design Partnership Glenwood Springs■ Colorado Civil Engineering Gingery and Associates Glenwood Springs, Colorado Hydrology Wright Water Engineers, Inc. Glenwood Springs, Colorado Soils and Geology Chen and Associates Glenwood Springs, Colorado DATE July 5, 1977 Revised -July 19, 977 LEONARD M. OATES RONALD D. AUS+rll4 J. NICHOLAS McGRATH, JR. WILLIAM R. JORDAN 111 ROBERT W. HUGHES BARRY D. EDWARDS LAW OFFICFS OATES, AUSTIN, MCGRATH & JORDAN 600 FAST HOPKiNS STREET ASPEN, COLORADO 81811 June 30, 1977 HONORABLE BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS OF GARFIELD COUNTY Garfield County Courthouse P. O. Box 640 Glenwood Springs, Colorado 81601 Re: Application of P.U.D. - Cattle Creek Joint Venture Consisting of Frank Lerner and J. R. Sturgis Gentlemen: AREA CODE 303 TELEPHONE 926-2600 Enclosed with this letter is an Application for Planned Unit Development Approval of approximately 960 acres of property in Township 17 South, Range 87 West, 6 Principal Meridian, Garfield County, Colorado. This property is presently under contract to Mr. Frank Lerner with an anticipated Closing date of September 1, 1977. Mr. Lerner has formed a Joint Venture with Mr. Sturgis under the name and style of Cattle Creek Ranch Joint Venture. I, by this letter represent to you, as counselor for both of these gentlemen that they are in agreement with the proceedings of this P.U.D. Application. I would indicate that the remainder of the enclosed presentation has been prepared by Mr. Ron Liston of The Land Design Partnership in Glenwood Springs and it has been reviewed and approved by Messrs. Lerner and Sturgis. I would also indicate on behalf of my clients and Mr. Liston that we will cooperate fully with you and the County's professional staff in the processing of this Application for P.0 D Approval. Very truly yours, OATES, AUSTIN, McGRATH & JORDAN By LMC] : m t Enclosures Leonard M. 0 tes ri• - I :I A' f • 0 1 !'rf 1 :. 1 (a`)Y 'r1'1:)\' f - 0,) Cl'1`r1t?D1 V ) i 1 k rj �a `. dry_ ---.T U > 1� . j, • • • a -5.._ + ,/ 1 I',, r., 1 i a. 1` ' rJ ,7 r a I. II: . • 3[ N-' - N. T: _J tom. _ 1 I N• y▪ ,Y± I �r t�\� , U \ - I`v V^" F" JFy 4.4 f\ /Jr =tea i1 If -•••'ti r .rf I Jri a tr , tail. • M f \Iryr I� ;:r '-- t ir--rr�arr� L_ •� j 1 P�+ r r •ii u I r. ,4 r icey C • rl r% 1.1 M 1 - fro r"` --` . r:} .4, 1 i# -- 11 #' I ,7 I� li ur G II • rr 4 k.i a▪ 1 ▪ .l.:A •_— � T _ N 1A 4 �.CiCJ� ✓ � Jr:n-1 I 'j�' rrII �r 6�7f �llClry J��•r� .f.- !! Mj j _���s yµ �.1 s _ , I — yt zil� J ,'�p9 I r- i `r , to ll 1 ` I F,t�� F�,ti9�ti., i Fl /: ° v . I \ (l .r, a wL • . !urk tix7' cT•! ` it - 1 y 1 , - f ^. s 1 • -__ };,`c LEGAL DESCRIPTION S 1/2 NE 1/4 AND LOTS 7, 8, 12, 13 AND THE WEST 29.7 ACRES OF LOT 14 EXCEPT A TRACT CONVEYED BY DEED RECORDED IN BOOK 61 AT PAGE 553, IN SECTION 5; SE 1/4 SE 1/4 OF SECTION 6; SE 1/4 SE 1/4 OF SECTION 7; ALL OF SECTION 8; ALL IN TOWNSHIP 7 SOUTH, RANGE 87 WEST OF THE 6th PRINCIPAL MERIDIAN. PROPERTY OWNERS OF RECORDS WITHIN 300' OF CATTLE CREEK RANCH P.U.D. John McNulty P.O. Box 200 Carbondale, CO 81623 Mary T. Squires 0720 121 Road Carbondale, CO 81623 Cottonwood Pass c/o E. W. Baker Suite 1011 600 South Cherry Denver, CO 80222 Merrill & Delores Laurence 11104 County Road 115 Carbondale, CO 81623 Gary McNulty P.O. Box 200 Carbondale, CO 81623 J. Salter, S. Bellow Colorado Country Panorama 500 North Street Aspen, CO 81611 Sky High Enterprises 5532 Royal Crest Dallas, Texas 75229 H. M. Crosby c/o Crosby Company 1st National Bank Bldg. Minneapolis, Minn. 55402 CATTLE CREEK P.U.D. OBJECTIVES The following objectives are a summarization of the concepts which have guided the design of the P.U.D. since its inception. 1. To provide a highly desirable rural residential living environment in the mid -Roaring Fork Valley area with an emphasis on preserving the natural beauty and pastoral ranch setting of the site. 2. To provide spacious building sites which maximize the views of the surrounding mountains and irrigated valleys while providing as much privacy to each site as possible. 3. To emphasize the rural setting and to reflect a conscious stewardship for the land, preserve a major portion of the irrigated pasture lands in an agriculturally productive state. 4. To establish a balance between the domestic and irrigation demands on the available water which will allow the continued forage production on the reserved agricultural lands during the average rainfall years. 5. To provide for pedestrian/equestrian movement throughout the site. 6 To provide residents with the opportunity to keep horses on the P.U.D. site. 7. To establish protective covenants including strict archi- tectural controls over all structures and landscaping. 8. To provide for the ownership and maintenance of common space through a home owners association. CATTLE CREEK RANCH P.U.D. ZONING REGULATIONS Section I. A. To carry out the purposes and provisions of the Garfield County Zoning Resolution, Garfield County, Colorado and, particularly, Section 1.400 of that title, as amended, the Cattle Creek Ranch Planned Unit Development Zoning District is further divided into the following Zone District classifi- cations: R/S.F. - Residential/Single-Family District A/R - Agricultural/Residential District A/O.S. - Agricultural/Open Space District E. The boundaries of these Districts shall be located as shown on the Cattle Creek Ranch P.U.D. Plan. Section II. R/S.F. - Residential/Single-Family District A. Uses, by right. Single -Family dwelling and customary accessory uses including buildings for shelter or enclosure of property accessory to use of the lot for single- family residential purposes and fences, hedges, gardens, walls and similar' landscape features. Park and greenbelt. B. Uses, conditional. None. C. Uses, special. None. D. Minimum Lot Area. 2 acres. E. Maximum Lot Coverage. 15 percent. F. Minimum Setback. 1. Front yard: 40 feet 2. Rear yard: 40 feet 3. Side yard:' 25 feet G. Maximum Building Height. 30 feet H. Off -Street Parking/Residential. Four off-street parking spaces on the same lot for each dwelling unit or 1 space per 600 hundred square feet of floor area, whichever is greater. Section III. A/R -- Agricultural/Residential District A. Uses, by right. Agricultural including farm garden, greenhouse, nursery, orchard, ranch, small animal farm for production of poultry, fish, fur -bearing or other small animals and customary accessory uses includ- ing buildings for shelter or enclosure of persons, animals, or property employed in any of the above uses, retail establishment for sale of goods pro- cessed from raw materials produced on the lot. Kennel, riding stable and veterinary clinic. Park and greenbelt. Single-family dwelling and customary accessory uses. B. Uses, conditional. Day nursery, studio for conduct of arts and crafts and water impoundments. C. Uses, special. None. D. Minimum Lot Area. 5 acres. E. Maximum Lot Coverage. 10 percent. F. Minimum Setback. 1. Front yard: 75 feet 2. Rear yard: 75 feet 3. Side yard: 50 feet G. Maximum Building Height. 30 feet. H. Off -Street Parking/Residential. Four off-street parking spaces on the same lot for each dwelling unit or 1 space per 600 square feet of floor area, whichever is greater. Section IV. A/O.S. - Agricultural/Open Space District A. Uses, by right. Agricultural including farm, garden, nursery, orchard, ranch and customary accessory uses including buildings for shelter or enclosure of animals or property employed in any of the above uses. Kennel and riding stable. Park and greenbelt. B. Uses, conditional. Water impoundments. C. Uses, special. None. D. Minimum Lot Area. 2 acres. E. Maximum Lot Coverage. 15 percent. F. Minimum Setback. 1. Front yard: 40 feet 2. Rear yard: 40 feet 3. Side yard: 25 feet G. Maximum Building Height. 25 feet. Section V. Except as hereinabove provided, and except for the following Sections of the Garfield County Zoning Resolution, all provisions of the Garfield County Zoning Resolution shall be applicable to the Cattle Creek Ranch P.U.D. Zone Districts. The Sections of the said Zoning Resolution which shall have no app- licability are as follows: Section 3.00 through 3.11.04 Section 4.01.02 paragraph (1) LAND USE ACREAGES AND MAXIMUM DWELLING UNITS Residential/Single-Family District Agricultural/Residential District Agriculture/Open Space District Minimum acres dedicated to Common Open Space 160 Total Gross P.U.D. Density Net Density Residential/Single Family Dist. Agricultural/Residential Dist. Note: ACRES 420 349 194 963 MAX.DWELLING UNITS 112 12 ._7.8_acres/unit 3.8 acres/unit 30.0 acres/unit 124 Engineering refinement of the plan as required for final platting may result in minor variations in the proposed acreages. Horne Owners Association A home owners association shall be formed at the time of final platting of the first phase of the P.U.D. The pur- poses and powers of association shall include: 1. To promote the health, safety, and welfare of owners of real property within the P.U.D. 2. To own, maintain, and manage common areas, easements, and domestic and irrigation water systems. 3 To enforce all covenants. Covenants To further assure the development and continuation of the Cattle Creek Ranch P.U.D. as a high-quality rural resid- ential area, protective covenants shall be recorded along with the final plattings of the P.U.D. These covenants shall be included but not be limited to the following topics: 1. Architectural Committee. - site and building design - minimum floor area - accessory structure design - modification of the existing landscape and new landscaping 2. Lot use restrictions. 3. Signs. 4. Animals. - type allowed - control 5. General site maintenance. 6. Noxious activities. 7. Underground utilities. 8. Vehicle control. 9. Easements. 10. Temporary Structures. 11. Landscape/agricultural irrigation limitations. School/Parks Dedication In accordance with Section 5.11 of the Subdivision Regulations of Garfield County, Colorado, as amended, the Cattle Creek Ranch P.U.D. owners will cooperate with the Board of County Commissioners to appropriately compensate the county for the reasonably necessary public facilities (schools/parks) required by the future residents of the P.U.D. 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 Sing8r,y As.sOCI:e8.5; 11117, -; f SUITE 20/ VILLAGE PLAZA \ 1 GLENWOOD SPRINGS, Ji COLORADO 81601 TELEPHONE 303 945-8676 soY Pi F411 nu ,5 .6= 7 WOOD, altaRtal 2-011C F: I !WON( 33761.46'6,1 CATTLE CREEK RANCH PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT ENGINEER'S STATEMENTS DERYL W. GINGERY ELMER L. CLAYCOMB LARRY A. MULLER The Cattle Creek Ranch P.U.D. is a planned development to be located in Sections 5, 6, 7, and 8, Township 7 South, Range 87 West. The proposed development will contain ap- proximately 125 single-family residences on lots ranging in size from about 2 acres to about 40 acres. There are approximately 963 acres within the development boundaries. The following information has been prepared in accordance with various portions of Section 14.08 of the Garfield County Zoning Resolution. The statements are intended to give conceptual descriptions of the various systems pro- posed. WATER DISTRIBUTION SYSTEM The proposed water distribution system is shown on Drawing No. GE 1325.003, Sheet 1 of 1, entitled Water Distribution System. The system will take its supply from a well or series of wells to be located adjacent to Cattle Creek in the northern portion of Section 8. The well is presently being developed under the direction of Wright Water Engi- neers, and a separate report is included with this applica- tion regarding both legal rights and physical ground water supply. Cattle Creek Ranch is to be divided into two separate pres- sure zones. Each zone, however, can be served by both pumped supply or from storage as water use fluctuates. Ap- proximate water pressures available throughout the develop- ment are indicated by pressure contours. There are 12 lots in the upper pressure zone which cannot be served adequately by gravity pressure service from the storage tanks. These lots, indicated with an asterisk, will be supplied by means of a small, auxiliary pressure booster station, drawing its supply from the main storage tank. CIVIL ENGINEERING / LAND SURVEYING /STORM DRAINAGE / STRUCTURAL / TRANSPORTATION / WATER & SANITATION / COMPUTER SERVICES Based on 125 single --family residences, the following cal- culations indicate the anticipated average demand: 125 units x 4 persons/unit = 500 persons 500 persons x 100 gpd/person = 50,000 gpd 50,000 gpd = 35 gallons/min. domestic 2,000 sq. ft. of lawn requries 1" per week 2,000 sq. ft./unit x 125 units x 1"/week = 20,000 cu. ft./week 20,000 cfw x 7.48 gal/cu. ft. 4 150,000 gal/week 150,000 gal/week = 15 gal/min irrigation 50 gal/min total demand SEWAGE DISPOSAL Sewage disposal will be accomplished by means of individual, on -lot sewage disposal systems. Based on the results of the soils and geological investigation performed by Chen and Associates, Inc., typical percolation rates are in the range of 40 minutes per inch. Since all of the proposed lots are in excess of 2.0 acres in size, current County Regulations permit individual disposal systems in areas exhibiting such a percolation rate. Specific tests would be performed on each lot as they are developed, and specific systems designed in accordance with current regulations. CABLE TELEVISION Cable television service is not presently available in the vicinity of Cattle Creek Ranch, and it is not anticipated that service will be made available in the development in the foreseeable future. NATURAL GAS Natural gas service is availabe from the 4 1/2 inch high pressure gas transmission line located in the southeastern corner of Section 8. A pressure reducing station would be required to drop the operating pressure to the normal distribution system level. At the time of actual develop- ment, Rocky Mountain Natural Gas Company, the owner of the line, will design the necessary gas distribution system and provide the owner of Cattle Creek Ranch an estimate of anticipated costs. A normal development agreement would be negotiated between the owner and RMNG regarding payment of costs of installation of the necessary system. TELEPHONE Telephone service presently exists in the area along Cattle and Coulter Creeks, and can be extended to include the potential development of Cattle Creek Ranch. The actual system, will be designed by Mountain Bell during the final plat stage of the development. A construction agreement would be negotiated with ,fountain 1311 whereby the developer assumes the costs of providing service. ELECTRIC SERVICE Holy Cross Electric Association presently provides electric service to the Cattle Creek area, and will provide service for the development. Actual layout of the system will be by Holy Cross at the time of final plat preparation. A development agreement covering all costs will be prepared similar to those with R4NG and Mountain Bell. NATURAL HAZARDS Natural hazards such as avalanche and landslide are being dealth with in the soils and geological report presently being prepared. Based on preliminary information, no major problems exist. Minor, localized sloughing of loose topsoil may however, be experienced in areas sloping in excess of 30°. These areas can be handled on a specific basis as best indicated by the soils report. DRAINAGE AND FLOOD PLAINS In general, the existing natural drainage system presents no problems for development. The natural system will be augmented by means of a customary ditch -and -culvert system to provide for the minor storm occurance. The development plan has been laved out specifically keeping development out of the low-lying areas along Cattle Creek and Coulter Creek. For this reason, no formal flood plain study has been accomplished to date. If deemed necessary, specific flood -proofing measures can be determined for any development which might occur around the ranching center at the confluence of the two creeks. The water supply well will be protected from the 100 year flood, most probably by means of a dike or berm completely surrounding the facility. PREPARED BY: GINGERY ASSOCIATES, INC. David C. Burnett, Design Engineer Reviewed by: Elmer L. Claycomb, P.E. Vice President f Manager, Glenwood Springs Office -3- w5 .L.. nF Plce P, O Ilt>>4 0132• wS L D, 4.ct i+O{+ •,PI 4ftC5 OFFICE 1. 0. ROA 140E GLSI.wOOO 5PR I^.65. COLORA00 01501 Sre A.A Ar OF'ice .. O. VOX 5220 Si LSMSO5t L°•L LA6-E, COLORA00 004311 WRIGHT WEI-I ER ENGINEERS, INC. Mr. Frank Lerner P.O. Box 9140 Aspen, Colorado Dear Mr. Lerner: ENGINEERING CONSULTANTS 2420 ALCAATT WERE EY DiAr V'6R COLORADO 250291 1303 450-62O1 GLENWOOD SPRINGS TEL: 945--7755 June 30, 1977 81611 k.L 25t1-$ R wHIf,1•1S WILLIAM C. LO13AH RL/SS0I.5. E LIAM0 OR. 0 1E+s11Fi1T 1'seORl r, •SR Re: Water Supply for the proposed Cattle Creek Ranch development Wright Water Engineers has completed a preliminary analysis and eval- uation of the water rights associated with the proposed development of the Cattle Creek Ranch. This ranch is also known as the Heuschkel Ranch, and is located near the confluence of Cattle Creek and Coulter Creek in Gar- field County. We have also conducted limited geophysical investigations of the Cat- tle Creek alluvium, and are naw in the process of drilling a test well to determine the physical ground water supply in the area. in addition to the Cattle Creek alluvium, we believe that some other areas of the ranch may have good potential for individual wells. The main domestic supply for the development, however, is expected to come from the Cattle Creek alluvium. The water rights situation in the Cattle Creek drainage is extremely tight as the creek is very much over appropriated. Historically, the rela- tive position on Cattle Creek of the Heuschkel Ranch is good as the 3 senior water rights owned by the ranch have never been called out and, in our opinion, will not be called out in the future. We believe that the available physical and "legal" water supply can be developed to adequately meet the domestic needs of the currently proposed 125 residential unit development, even in the dryest years. In addition to water For domestic needs, a significant amount of irrigation water is available which can be retained For use on the land. All or a portion of the senior Lewis and Somers Ditch rights, however, must be transferred by a Water Court decree to domestic and municipal use. If you have questions on the above, please don't hesitate to call. Very truly yours, WRIGHT WATER ENGINEERS, INC. /! William L. Lorah cc: Ron Liston WLL/jp 771-24 r �ry 1 9 A �, -1 y CONSULTNG ENCINLL'iI a ,,% Lrae' `.a. SOIL F, FOUNDATION 93 S. ZUNI DENVER, COLORADO 00223 303/744-7105 EH 0 I TI EER I N 0 1924 EAST FIRST STREET • CASPER, 'IYO MING 82301 • 307/234-2126 Subject: lir. Frank Lerner c/o Ron Liston Land Design Partnership Suite 208, Village Plaza Glenwood Springs, Colorado 80601 Gentlemen: July 1, 1977 Preliminary Geotechnical Investiga- tion for the Cattle Creek Ranch Development, Garfield County, Colorado. Job No. 14,701 We have completed our field and laboratory studies for the preliminary geotechnical investigation at the subject site. We are presently drafting the final report. Our investigation indicates that there are no serious problems associated with the site Ideology or soil conditions. It should be feasible to develop the property as a residential subdivision. We ex- pect to have our final report out within the next week. This report will describe the site geology and subsoil conditions and discuss their expected effect upon the proposed development. If we can provide you with additional information prior to the. submittal of the final report, please let us know. Sincerely, CHEN AND ASSOCIATES, INC. By RGMI/med alphCye'i1ock, En:ineering Geologist CATTLE CREEK RANCH PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT OWNER Mr. Frank Lerner Aspen, Colorado DESIGN TEAM Planning and Project Coordination The Land Design Partnership Glenwood Springs, Colorado Civil Engineering Gingery and Associates Glenwood Springs, Colorado Hydrology Wright Water Engineers, Inc. Glenwood Springs, Colorado Soils and Geology Chen and Associates Glenwood Springs, Colorado .�'�r 1)/ /9 72 LEONARD M. OATES RONALD P. AUSTIN J. NICHOLAS MCGRATH. JR. WILLIAM R.JORDAN ILi ROBERT W. HUGHES BARRY D. EDWARDS LAW OFFICES OATES, AUSTIN, MCGRATH a JORDAN 600 FAST HOPKINS STREET ASPEN, COLORADO 81611 June 30, 1977 HONORABLE BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS OF GARFIELD COUNTY Garfield County Courthouse P. O. Box 640 Glenwood Springs, Colorado 81601 Re: Application of P.U.D. -- Cattle Creek Joint Venture Consisting of Frank Lerner and J. R. Sturgis Gentlemen: AREA CODE 303 TELEPHONE Q25-2600 Enclosed with this letter is an Application for Planned Unit Development Approval of approximately 960 acres of property in Township 17 South, Range 87 West, 6 Principal Meridian, Garfield County, Colorado. This property is presently under contract to Mr. Frank Lerner with an anticipated Closing date of September 1, 1977. Mr. Lerner has formed a Joint Venture with Mr. Sturgis under the name and style of Cattle Creek Ranch Joint Venture. I, by this letter represent to you, as counselor for both of these gentlemen that they are in agreement with the proceedings of this P.U.D. Application. I would indicate that the remainder of the enclosed presentation has been prepared by Mr. Ron Liston of The Land Design Partnership in Glenwood Springs and it has been reviewed and approved by Messrs. Lerner and Sturgis. I would also indicate on behalf of my clients and Mr. Liston that we will cooperate fully with you and the County's professional staff in the processing of this Application for P.U.D. Approval. Very truly yours, OATES, AUSTIN, McGRATH & JORDAN By LMO:mt Enclosures ItesLeonard M. - . ••••=•••••••••••.• •r • ▪ - • . 1 • ••••- - Eb.-P • 4i! " • - ' I '-(:. ;.• L'q,. 41 Fr J.' - - - , t • - -.-f / - /0.1 H, u-A.rr:t .... ;. 1' - Th.:71 'IS` ,' 1 ] I ;,..,::_i 7- : 1 , - • r- r-, ''' , _,, , fi 6 % •-• z ", cc -V s- _ ,... .„, <-, v•.,-,.. • ---e-t'.=',=;-.,-,,0" V • t• ....„...• s_....-.., Co" ----I 0 c• (—tI. - 1."' '4,..,- . ' .t. :-.'kV.•V,'''.;'"'-..!I. t, '1 -„-.▪ -- e'.r."Sg..‘,-..;‘,/...,.-•--- I -I •'/'',: //f ) ' •,4 : 1 ,. ,1i ' • a •Ikl, / CeI ..1,, ( 'Vc--_-,')\-'. ,.-...- '.2-1-"'"---- 1.-,--,1______\,,„••;.'-i'if +„/---- 1 1 = z i; ,...., •;-..,..., ••' ••• ,..• .... 1,,,, La'• 191 = A 7 ' 4,• "•9': „:•., aepr • ) i.,--,„ .- . A p , ...1, _ ^, . `,::: ,•. -,,, :4..?""'"'AC7,--- --' . : ,-....,,c;--"...„--- .. .F.7!, _..,..„, : 4.4 - ...,;:1,, - • =_'_-,...,-....- .....k„,„, -.4----:---.._•,...........t....,6„. , •=.---..„1- -A-; , =t.., ''c'T., -1'.-_, Ir. -J.3 1 . • =-, 1 kt., 1:.r, ---, c a .:.,i . :, 0 , ,..t:;---- , 2,, .,::---'- ..; -,...i.. ,..;,, - ,....„ I” 1----- 4- 1 • , ("1 I or. er 1 T-7.=.---.----.;•, i • ._,... • . )..r.:.,._,, . ....._.....y, rri• •,`J - ”" -/- T. ro 2 . kt i.e."' • I'. 0 _ J L.1" F • : F . , • ' k`or I I CS 0 ` r • _C — • i-.. _ -• ---.1-, ''',.., -_ •.-, !.; g ' * e, ( i -- 1 , ;1E — - -..- __-_-; ._ . -,;,,,,- (.-..,)„, ...—..,_ ,,...: 1_. -,....,.... j...ir...),,iszliCi.,, ____,,,,,..--. -.1. ....._ \ . .., . ...1 -, . 9.„' „ ...--,,,,,1_,-,-;---,-. ... 0 ,-.....- _ . ,, : ,. i .1 .' ,..." . I .'- ' -4 ' 6''''' [ '-' 1 4, .....- 1 , ___:_,._ _ — — _2._ T- - • -r1 . re;Jj; -• -I /- ---, 1 ..(.... ..). .„ 1 "`-, ar. e'.',--- -i- ----: ..... ___;_ ii.." frn .,17 ' ..,,,, •''' — a_ l 1 \ I- '41:= . r .. (:,.., '.;" •-• `i. . l. -. <I - .!", _... 4 ',.,-;',..1.? . 1.' • ... • .( „..... ,-.....--- -:, ___L',..„_,,,e--- • -,..:.• _ ....1 ,, ".. ,. '1,„...,; . . .' - ril""V 1-- - ' -..▪ .‘....11)(Y ) A —.,-____-_.•4 _.- .,. ,,,, _,,._.. 0 •-••,t.1), -- :iv 1 t -- - .,_.N.._:,. ...11...,: lit . .....; v ' 1 ..,_ ....... r.... . C. , ,-.._ „,•..), 4> ‘s... r... , _-,-.,...L.1 _.,....,-, ) - • -.... -17 ••t 1 , ,, ,,,,.7______1,...._,F..,'r-•''.:.-'' --- - i 1 ,._ ',,;:„..., -.•-•,-= - \,..- ,..0.„, - 04 - - us I ',,_ LY _ „. t,S, "-' 'r Li0 .. •:;.:. I • '....t. ; -.. ± — - . ':";,.. • . ,,, .f•J'`. , 1 I. . . . , I .. 'll ....' •,• 1,7.... • , - . l ..... - , ''.. ' I i ./1 . — + -- 1- -C=.7,--.--r='"-- q - _ .4.,.,s,' 4 •Z 7_ li ' ▪ , -,:- - -Cir---"-, is. • NC"-- --_ 1\`,-: l- ., ..,,__ 1._,....,...- ...- _ _...... fa4 :_:-*.• N I ,e. 1 ?•• .,....,...,.. ,,, 1 _I -. .A. 1 ''„ .,.; 1 _____ _14. inu•tas!qqRs ',I 3 -X„.'.::-_,..;-, -•,19 N,. ail.k * I •:-."1 I ri ,_ ,, __ - , ;_ it ... _ _ _ _ ,,,..„-. , I ,., . •gi t r...I...._ , • . . ' -- I- -1-.. '6,, '-- '‘'c'cr'zi,..--:' ';'',1 ._' pp, 1 -f!, ' 1 /3 5t.' ,', _ .." - ) I ? ' .-- ":,.0 v,?, I ;',i -0- .1,4_ ,11.-.,.. —.-., -Z,I,t•-- -',.- — 5_!• t_—. ---Th ---- \) C;-" -- 274 - .• I 0.... --: ,-- ,..3, 1 - ----- -q• I q... ,,,-., ----- ,- lc( i<f4R----,-- iP- — -1.c..,,,ri.76r—r- 0 ,...) —I- \ It , A 31,pct ,L2.1 i • ,%. i C-.; .22‘14-1,---=-1-r--------::-----'t : . 't ' __. 21 ‘2,-__:....-- - ‘-- ----- -- _'''.\ ' . 4, • . p_4 .--, ,,- 1 / ) , -'''• ex i7.... ,... i ' t ..-,,,, " t' ' „. ;) - ,, ...,,!;..Ne6. - r. ) . -,_ _ --, .. . F: - .,-----:- -.. ; J A ..' 4' „ 1 _„..;;;/' -7 - )71-- - o . Tm,- .S ., f.—,.---:: -- ,p4.-- -- - • <7.)- - - -- - -- ----- --='; -----L-r- n. -...k% i.,.._ k. 1 ./ .=.„..."..-.- I . ••••••• • • Vj r. .7 .4 ...,./ , .,...,••=_:,1 s.) ; L,.?...„. , , r. ,,,,,„ I „,,,,,.,,,, ,,,,,-----F —1 ci_;:.,<:-,.• 1 ou - '. - 1''' -.:.:-E, 111'...)':.-. .', . -- , it . . I.... /- ...• Ir-.:. ''" I l i W , I ...--.' I.-4 .." ' I e-' ---4-1--:- ---1 - -1 6 ,C — ___,,.." ____ 0'4!0 '`, \ . \ J...,":,. ---`...V.,,,,.. , \--. - '----,....4 - >-!!-• , - c cn, ,..-- 1 k ''s , . / :40 ...1 \,..1;!!"--' ,,t, ......_-.. CO-- ';- / - .-•"-- :,_ ..._ - --.` __,-;','-;-: , • r --q !•,... — --/- ---,. — 1 :I no Ls I • ''. „ I I: -1c l 1, ?' -''', '-.P---;"--,-,; - 1 ,,,,, 1 7::-: '7.• 2.• I 6; 0"76:4 Ili' • X _ , • E no ;•.= ca ., ., - . I1 .,:-0.-. 1cI ,'- •9 :-.—„-• — , . :.i., cf f1 f - ,. 1 r. A .•. LEGAL DESCRIPTION S 1/2 NE 1/4 AND LOTS 7, 8, 12, 13 AND THE WEST 29.7 ACRES OF LOT 14 EXCEPT A TRACT CONVEYED BY DEED RECORDED IN BOOK 61 AT PAGE 553, IN SECTION 5; SE 1/4 SE 1/4 OF SECTION 6; SE 1/4 SE 1/4 OF SECTION 7; ALL OF SECTION 8; ALL IN TOWNSHIP 7 SOUTH, RANGE 87 WEST OF THE 6th PRINCIPAL MERIDIAN. PROPERTY OWNERS OF RECORDS WITHIN 300` OF CATTLE CREEK RANCH P.U.D. P.O. BOX 200 CARBONDALE, CO 81623 John McNulty P.O. Box 200 Carbondale, CO 81623 Mary T. Squires 0720 121 Road Carbondale, CO 81623 Cottonwood Pass c/o E. W. Baker Suite 1011 600 South Cherry Denver, CO 80222 Merrill & Delores Laurence 11104 County Road 115 Carbondale, CO 81623 Gary McNulty P.O. Box 200 Carbondale, CO 81623 J. Salter, S. Bellow Colorado Country Panorama 500 North Street Aspen, CO 81611 Sky High Enterprises 5532 Royal Crest Dallas, Texas 75229 CATTLE CREEK P.U.D. OBJECTIVES The following objectives are a summarization of the concepts which have guided the design of the P.U.D. since its inception. 1. To provide a highly desirable rural residential living environment in the mid -Roaring Fork Valley area with an emphasis on preserving the natural beauty and pastoral ranch setting of the site. 2. To provide spacious building sites which maximize the views of the surrounding mountains and irrigated valleys while providing as much privacy to each site as possible. 3. To emphasize the rural setting and to reflect a conscious stewardship for the land, preserve a major portion of the irrigated pasture lands in an agriculturally productive state. 4. To establish a balance between the domestic and irrigation demands on the available water which will allow the continued forage production on the reserved agricultural lands during the average rainfall years. 5 To provide for pedestrian/equestrian movement throughout the site. 6. To provide residents with the opportunity to keep horses on the P.U.D. site. 7. To establish protective covenants including strict archi- tectural controls over all structures and landscaping. 8. To provide for the ownership and maintenance of all internal project roads and common space through a home owners association. CATTLE CREEK RANCH P.U.D. ZONING REGULATIONS Section I. A. To carry out the purposes and provisions of the Garfield County Zoning Resolution, Garfield County, Colorado and, particularly, Section 1.400 of that title, as amended, the Cattle Creek Ranch Planned Unit: Development Zoning District is further divided into the following Zone District classifi- cations: R/S.F. - Residential/Single-Family District A/R -- Agricultural/Residential District A/O.S. -- Agricultural/Open Space District B. The boundaries of these Districts shall be located as shown on the Cattle Creek Ranch P.U.D. Plan. Section II. R/S.F. -- Residential/Single-Family District A. Uses, by right. Single -Family dwelling and customary accessory uses including buildings for shelter or enclosure of property accessory to use of the lot for single- family residential purposes and fences, hedges, gardens, walls and similar landscape features. Park and greenbelt. B. Uses, conditional. None. C. Uses, special. None. D. Minimum Lot Area. 2 acres. E. Maximum Lot Coverage. 15 percent. F. Minimum Setback. 1. Front yard: 40 feet 2. Rear yard: 40 feet 3. Side yard: 25 feet G. Maximum Building Height. 30 feet H. Off -Street Parking/Residential. Four off-street parking spaces on the same lot for each dwelling unit or 1 space per 600 hundred square feet of floor area, whichever is greater. Section III. A/R - Agricultural/Residential District A. Uses, by right. Agricultural including farm garden, greenhouse, nursery, orchard, ranch, small animal farm for production of poultry, fish, fur -bearing or other small animals and customary accessory uses includ- ing buildings for shelter or enclosure of persons, animals, or property employed in any of the above uses, retail establishment for sale of goods pro- cessed from raw materials produced on the lot. Kennel, riding stable and veterinary clinic. Park and greenbelt. Single-family dwelling and customary accessory uses. B. Uses, conditional. Day nursery,, studio for conduct of arts and crafts and water impoundments. C. Uses, special. None. D. Minimum Lot Area. 5 acres. E. Maximum Lot Coverage. 10 percent. F. Minimum Setback. 1. Front yard: 75 feet 2. Rear yard: 75 feet 3. Side yard: 50 feet G. Maximum Building Height. 30 feet. H. Off -Street Parking/Residential. Four off-street parking spaces on the same lot for each dwelling unit or 1 space per 600 square feet of floor area, whichever is greater. Section IV. A/O.S. -- Agricultural/Open Space District A. Uses, by right. Agricultural including farm, garden, nursery, orchard, ranch and customary accessory uses including buildings for shelter or enclosure of animals or property employed in any of the above uses. Kennel and riding stable. Park and greenbelt. B. Uses, conditional. Water impoundments. C. Uses, special. None. D. Minimum Lot Area. 2 acres. E. Maximum Lot Coverage. 15 percent. F. Minimum Setback. 1. Front yard: 2. Rear yard: 3. Side yard: 40 feet 40 feet 25 feet G. Maximum Building Height. 25 feet. Section V. Except as hereinabove provided, and except for the following Sections of the Garfield County Zoning Resolution, all provisions of the Garfield County Zoning Resolution shall be applicable to the Cattle Creek Ranch P.U.D. Zone Districts. The Sections of the said Zoning Resolution which shall have no app- licability are as follows: Section 3.0{) through 3.11.04 Section 4.0_.02 paragraph (1) LAND USE ACREAGES AND MAXIMUM DWELLING UNITS Residential/Single-Family District Agricultural/Residential District Agriculture/Open Space District Minimum acres dedicated to Common Open Space 160 Total Gross P.U.D. Density Net Density Residential/Single Family Dist. Agricultural/Residential Dist. Note: ACRES 420 349 194 963 MAX.DWELLING UNITS 112 12 7.8 _acres/unit 3.8 acres/unit 30.0 acres/unit 124 Engineering refinement of the plan as required for final platting may result in minor variations in the proposed acreages. Home Owners Association A home owners association shall be formed at the time of final platting of the first phase of the P.U.D. The pur- poses and powers of association shall include: 1. To promote the health, safety, and welfare of owners of real property within the P.U.D. 2. To own, maintain, and manage common areas, roads, easements, and domestic and irrigation water systems. 3. To enforce all covenants. Covenants To further assure the development and continuation of the Cattle Creek Ranch P.U.D. as a high' qualityrural resid- ential area, protective covenants shall be recorded along with the final platt:ings of the P.U.D. These covenants shall be included but not be limited to the following topics: 1. Architectural Committee. - site and building design -- minimum floor area - accessory structure design - modification of the existing landscape and new landscaping 2. Lot use restrictions. 3. Signs. 4. Animals. - type allowed -- control 5. General site maintenance. 6. Noxious activities. 7. Underground utilities. 8. Vehicle control. 9. Easements. 10. Temporary Structures. 11.E Landscape/agricultural irrigation limitations. School/Parks Dedication In accordance with Section 5.11 of the Subdivision Regulations of Garfield County, Colorado, as amended, the Cattle Creek Ranch P.U.D. owners will cooperate with the Board of County Commissioners to appropriately compensate the county for the reasonably necessary public facilities (schools/parks) required by the future residents of the P.U.D. f!' 2840 SOUTH VAL L EJO STRL'F I £AGL EW00fl, COL O4.4O0 b.011(' TELEPHONE 303 761-4860 jV Grlysry ssmityit s, hw. i CLJ/VStJLTfruc3; Enrc1.71.vEE=r7. " SUITE 20/, WI LAG+` PLAZA GL ENWOOD SPRINGS,. r COLORADO ORADO 81601 TELEPHONE 303 945-8676 CATTLE CREEK RANCH PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT ENGINEER'S STATEMENTS DERYL W GINGERY ELMER L. CLAYCOMB LARRY A. MULLER The Cattle Creek Ranch P.U.D. is a planned development to be located in Sections 5, 6, 7, and 8, Township 7 South, Range 87 West. The proposed development will contain ap- proximately 125 single-family residences on lots ranging in size from about 2 acres to about 40 acres. There are approximately 963 acres within the development boundaries. The following information has been prepared in accordance with various portions of Section 14.08 of the Garfield County Zoning Resolution. The statements are intended to give conceptual descriptions of the various systems pro- posed. WATER DISTRIBUTION SYSTEM The proposed water distribution system is shown on Drawing No. GE 1325.003, Sheet 1 of 1, entitled Water Distribution System. The system will take its supply from a well or series of wells to be located adjacent to Cattle Creek in the northern portion. of Section 8. The well is presently being developed under the direction of Wright Water Engi- neers, and a separate report is included with this applica- tion regarding both legal rights and physical ground water supply. Cattle Creek Ranch is to be divided into two separate pres- sure zones. Each zone, however, can be served by both pumped supply or from storage as water use fluctuates. Ap- proximate water pressures available throughout the develop- ment are indicated by pressure contours. There are 12 lots in the upper pressure zone which cannot be served adequately by gravity pressure service from the storage tanks. These lots, indicated with an asterisk, will be supplied by means of a small, auxiliary pressure booster station, drawing its supply from the main storage tank. CIVIL ENGINEERING / LAND SURVEYING /STORM DRAINAGE / STRUCTURAL 1 TRANSPORTATION 1 WATER & SANITATION 1 COMPUTER SERVICES Based on 125 single-family residences, the following cal- culations indicate the anticipated average demand. 125 units x 4 persons/unit = 500 persons 500 persons x 100 gpd/person = 50,000 gpd 50,000 gpd e 35 gallons/min. domestic 2,000 sq. ft. of lawn requries 1" per week 2,000 sq. ft./unit x 125 units x .l"/week = 20,000 cu. ft./week 20,000 cfw x 7.48 gal/cu. ft. = 150,000 gal/week 150,000 gal/week = 15 gal/min irrigation 50 gal/min total demand SEWAGE DISPOSAL Sewage disposal will be accomplished by means of individual, on -lot sewage disposal systems. Based on the results of the soils and geological investigation performed by Chen and Associates, Inc., typical percolation rates are in the range of 40 minutes per inch. Since all of the proposed lots are in excess of 2.0 acres in size, current County Regulations permit individual disposal systems in areas exhibiting such a percolation rate. Specific tests would be performed on each lot as they are developed, and specific systems designed in accordance with current regulations. CABLE TELEVISION Cable television service is not presently available in the vicinity of Cattle Creek Ranch, and it is not anticipated that service will be made available in the development in the foreseeable future. NATURAL GAS Natural gas service is availabe from the 4 1/2 inch high pressure gas transmission line located in the southeastern corner of Section 8. A pressure reducing station would be required to drop the operating pressure to the normal distribution system level. At the time of actual develop- ment, Rocky Mountain Natural. Gas Company, the owner of the line, will design the necessary gas distribution system and provide the owner of Cattle Creek Ranch an estimate of anticipated costs. A normal development agreement would be negotiated between the owner and RMNG regarding payment of costs of installation of the necessary system. TELEPHONE Telephone service presently exists in the area along Cattle and Coulter Creeks, and can be extended to include the potential development of Cattle Creek Ranch. The actual system Will be designed by Mountain Bell during the final. plat stage of the development. A construction agreement would be negotiated with Plountain Bell whereby the developer assumes the costs of providing service. ELECTRIC SERVICE Holy Cross Electric Association presently provides electric service to the Cattle Creek area, and will provide service for the development.. Actual layout of the system will be by Holy Cross at the time of final plat preparation. A development agreement covering all costs will be prepared similar to those with RMNG and Mountain Bell. NATURAL HAZARDS Natural hazards such as avalanche and landslide are being dealth with in the soils and geological report presently being prepared. Based on preliminary information, no major problems exist. Minor, localized sloughing of loose topsoil may however, be experienced in areas sloping in excess of 30°. These areas can be handled on a specific basis as best indicated by the soils report. DRAINAGE AND FLOODPLAINS In general, the existing natural drainage system presents no problems for development. The natural system will be augmented by means of a customary ditch -and -culvert system to provide for the ::minor storm occurance. The development plain has been layed out specifically keeping development out of the low-lying areas along Cattle Creek and Coulter Creek. For this reason, no formal flood plain study has been accomplished to date. If deemed necessary, specific flood -proofing measures can be determined for any development which might occur around the ranching center at the confluence of the two creeks. The water supply well will be protected from the 100 year flood, most probably by means of a dike or berm completely surrounding the facility. (ti 41. CCA : 95 OF CO-C`� PREPARED BY: GINGERY ASSOCIATES, INC. ,..fit_., David C. Burnett, Design Engineer Reviewed by: Elmer L. Claycomb, P.E. Vice President Manager, Glenwood Springs Office -3- A5r[N y�.rICE P. 0 HO If 00,. ASrV N, COLOR ALJ061611 Gf-CNWOnO s wirft:S OflIC! F,0.40% 1206 FLENWDOO 0 RIraGS, SOLORAE.O 01001 5r[AMOOHT OFFICE r, 0,1,0X 5220 9tEAM50AY VILLAyE, COLORADO 00399 WRIGHT WATER ENGINEE=RS, INC. Mr. Frank Lerner P.O. Box 911+0 Aspen, Colorado Dear Mr. Lerner: NGINLERING CON 5ULTANTS 2120 ALCOfT STREET DEI:VER. COLORADO 2l 2I0 13031 1519.670} GLENWOOD SPRINGS TEL: 945-7755 June 30, 1977 81611 Ia[Nr.1€1M R. vd'RIGMT W 1I_t,1004 c, LORAN Rn±SS€LL 6 baCH OR. T. 0100007 Mefe406•C1. Re: Water Supply for the proposed Cattle Creek Ranch development Wright Water Engineers has completed a preliminary analysis and eval- uation of the water rights associated with the proposed development of the Cattle Creek Ranch. This ranch is also known as the Heuschkel Ranch, and is located near the confluence of Cattle Creek and Coulter Creek in Gar- field County. We have also conducted limited geophysical investigations of the Cat- tle Creek alluvium, and are now in the process of drilling a test well to determine the physical ground water supply in the area. In addition to the Cattle Creek alluvium, we believe that some other areas of the ranch may have good potential for individual wells. The main domestic supply for the development, however, is expected to come from the Cattle Creek alluvium. The water rights situation in the Cattle Creek drainage is extremely tight as the creek isvery much over appropriated. Historically, the rela- tive position on Cattle Creek of the Heuschkel Ranch is good as the 3 senior water rights owned by the ranch have never been called out and, in our opinion, will not be called out in the future. We believe that the available physical and "legal" water supply can be developed to adequately meet the domestic needs of the currently proposed 125 residential unit development, even in the dryest years. In addition to water For domestic needs, a significant amount of irrigation water is available which can be retained for use on the land. All or a portion of the senior Lewis and Somers Ditch rights, however, must be transferred by a Water Court decree to domestic and municipal use. If you have questions on the above, please don't hesitate to call. Very truly yours, WRIGHT WATER ENGINEERS, INC. 14/1.&. f ---»1 , William L. Lorah cc: Ron Liston WLL/jp 771 -24 ) t'` �i E5 id cH'Y . ,/ CONSULTING ENGINEERS SOL t'. FOUNDATION 93 S. ZUNI DENVER, COLORADO 00223 • 303/744-7105 E Ii G 1N EERING 1924 EAST F4 :ST STREET • CASPER, WYOMING 32301 • 307/234-2125 Subject. Mr. Frank Lerner c/o Ron Liston Land Design Partnership Suite 208, Village Plaza Glenwood Springs, Colorado 80801 Gentlemen: July 1, 1977 Preliminary Geotechnical Investiga- tion for the Cattle Creek Ranch Development, Garfield County, Colorado. Job Ilo. 14,701 14e have completed our field and laboratory studies for the preliminary geotechnical investigation at the subject site. We are presently drafting the final report. Our investigation indicates that there are no serious problems associated with the site geology or soil conditions. It should be feasible to develop the property as a residential subdivision. We ex- pect to have our final report out within the next week. This report will describe the site gealogv and subsoil conditions and discuss their expected effect upon the proposed development. 1f we can provide you with additional information prior to the submittal of the final report, please let us know. Sincerely, CffEN AND ASSOCIATES, INC. By RGJ4/med al Ph Mock, i=n ineering Geologic CATTLE CREEK RANCH TRAFFIC PROJECTIONS ON THE CATTLE CREEK AND CATHERINE STORE ROADS Prepared by: Eldorado Engineering Company 823 Blake Avenue - P.D. Box 669 Glenwood Springs, Colorado 81601 May 1982 INTRODUCTION The Cattle Creek Ranch as proposed is a planned unit development comprising a mixture of approximately 786 single-family and cluster housing units, some commercial usage and a golf course. Traffic volumes on Cattle Creek Road (County Road #113) and Catherine Store Road (County Road #100) will increase appreciably. The existing conditions of these two roads are adequate for the current traffic flow, but are not adequate for the proposed planned unit development's traffic. This study is made only to supplement the report entitled "Cattle Creek Ranch Off -Site Improvements on the Cattle Creek and Catherine Store Roads" prepared by Eldorado Engineering in February 1982. Purpose The purpose of this study is to make future projections of traffic flow caused by the Cat.:le Creek Ranch Development on the Cattle Creek Road (County Road #113) and the Catherine Store Road (County Road #100). This study rill also give insight as to the type and width of pavement to use and shoulder and right-of-way widths. Traffic Counts The areas that were used in this study are as follows: Name Period of Study Location of Counter 1. West Glenwood 5/11/72 thru 5/14/82 One counter by the intersection of Hwy. 6 and 24 and County Road #130 and one counter by the south stop sign at the intersection of County Road 130 and County Road 133. 2. Westbank Subdivision 5/11/72 thru 5/14/82 One counter at the entrance to the subdivision and counters at the Golf Club entrance and exit. 3. Red -Table Acres 5/17/82 thru 5/19/82 One counter at the entrance of the subdi- vision. 4. Oak Meadows Sub- division 5. Midland Avenue 6. Snowmass Village 5/21/82 thru 5/14/82 One counter at both entrances to the sub- division. 5/11/82 thru 5/14/82 One counter placed across from the Racquet Club. 5/17/82 thru 5/19/82 One counter placed at the intersection of Brush Creek Road and Hwy. 82. 7. Cattle Creek Road (County Road #113) 5/17/82 thru 5/19/82 The results of which are given in Table 1. One counter placed approxi- mately one mile from Hwy. 82. SUMMARY OF COUNTS TABLE 1 Location Units ADT/24 hrs. ADT/Unit DVH % DVH to AOT/24 hrs. **West Glenwood 235 2831 12 189 6.68 **Westbank Subdi- vision 83 453 5.5 56 12.36 *Red Table Acres 65 900.5 14 _-- **Oak Meadows 78 235 3 ___ ***Midland Avenue 4167 268 6.43 projected in winter it doubles to 8334 ADT ***Snowmass Village Road 3000 projected in winter it increases by 2.5 or 7500 AOT Cattle Creek Road ---- 437 Westbank Golf Course 27 453 16.8 parking ADT/parking spaces spaces ADT = Average Daily Traffic DHV = Design Hour Volume *More of a recreation type road and, therefore, will be invalid by unit count. **Oak Meadows Subdivision, Westbank Subdivision and blest Glenwood are more or less like the Cattle Creek Ranch PUD even though West Glenwood is closer to a town and because of this generated a little more traffic, but was still used as part of this study. It was determined from this study that an average unit will generate seven trips per day. ***Two roads (Midland Avenue and Snowmass Village Road) were used in this study to help show the county that a 24'wide chip & seal road with an average shoulder width of 2' (wider where possible) can handle at least 8000 ADT with only minor maintenance over a number of years. Projected Traffic The projected Average Daily Traffic (ADT) count was determined as follows: Type Units ADT/Unit ADT *35% Single Family (in work force) 275 *15% Cluster Residential 118 *15% Multi -Family PUD 118 *35% Retirement Community 275 **7 ***4 ***5 **3 1925 472 590 825 TOTAL 786 Avg. 4.9 trips/ 3812 ADT unit *percentages given by Ron Liston, Cattle Creek Ranch Development Co- ordinator. **Counts received by our study and generally backed by the Trip Generation Manual from the Institute of Transportation Engineers an Informational Report. ***Counts taken from the Trip Generation Manual from the Institute of Transportation Engineers an Informational Report. Also from traffic counts taken on the Westbank Golf Course, it was determined that on the average there are 16.8 ADT per parking space. Assuming that there will be 50 parking spaces at the Cattle Creek Golf Course and using the 16.8 ADT per parking space will produce a total of 840 ADT. Therefore, the total ADT of the planned unit development will be 4652. Results To project the traffic flow that will travel the Cattle Creek Road (County Road #113) versus the Catherine Store Road (County Road #100), it was assumed that approximately 70% of the ADT will travel the Cattle Creek Road (County Road '113) and 30% of the ADT will travel the Catherine Store Road (County Road #100). The results are shown in Table 2. By the results of our study on other subdivisions, the Design Hour Volume was determined to be approximately 8.5% of the ADT. In this study it was noted that only 35% of the planned unit development is in the general work force and that only 5% of the rest of the planned unit development will be leaving or arriving during the Design Hour, therefore, the Design Hour Volume will be as shown in Table 2. In this study, it was found that a 24' wide chip & seal road with 2' wide shoulders (wider where possible) can handle all the traffic that will be generated from the Cattle Creek Ranch Planned Unit Development. Also, the Garfield County Regulations require a 60' right-of-way for all maintained roads (see Table 2). TABLE 2 Item Cattle Creek Road Catherine Store Road Average Daily Traffic 3256 1396 (ADT) Design Hour Volume 111 47 (DHV) Chip & Seal Road Width 24 24 Shoulder Width Minimum 2' wider where Minimum 2' Right -of -Way Width possible 60' Minimum 60' Minimum Conclusions and Recommendations It is evident that the Cattle Creek Ranch Planned Unit Development will generate a large traffic volume. This volume can be controlled to flow smoothly on the Cattle Creek Road (County Road #113) and Catherine Store Road (County Road #100) if the roads have a 24' wide mat of chip and seal and have a minimum of 2' shoulders (wider where possible). It is recommended, however, that the improvements listed by Eldorado Engineering in their report entitled "Cattle Creek Ranch Off -Site .Improvements on the Cattle Creek and Catherine Store Roads" prepared in February 1982 be followed. The intersections of both the Cattle Creek Road (County Road V113) and the Catherine Store Road (County Road 0100) with Colorado State Highway No. 82 have an acceleration lane, deceleration lane and left hand turn lane. These lanes have also been thoroughly studied and should be able to accomodate the design hour volume with little or no interruption of Colorado State Highway No. 82. the land design partnership Information Supplement Cattle Creek Ranch P.U.D. September 10, 1981 Cattle Creek P.U.D. is a recreational oriented development of primary and secondary home sites. The project is directed towards a market which demands extremely high quality site, views and facilities and a variety of housing types. This market is local, national and international. The Roaring Fork Valley has already established itself with its internationally renowned ski facilities, cultural activities and Rocky Mountain scenery as a desired housing location for this market. The Cattle Creek site possesses the outstanding mountain views and desirable terrain configuration required for the projected housing and recreational facilities. Additionally, its location in the lower reaches of the Roaring Fork Valley extend its recreational season one to two months beyond that which could. be provided at sites closer to the Aspen7Snowmass ski complex. Because of the recreational nature of the project and the type of housing market that it is servicing, the Cattle Creek P.U.D. is as much a part of the recreation/tourism industry which is such a key element to the Garfield County economic base as it is of the housing industry in the County. The original Cattle Creek Ranch planned unit development and first phase subdivision were apparently erroneously left out of the new Garfield County Comprehensive Plan. Utilizing the criteria of the Comp Plan, I would understand that the site would be classified as District B, Subdivisions/Rural Service- able Areas, 0 to 1/2 mile radius since the original P.U.D. provided for central water service and septic leach field sewage service. In the following,, I have discussed the pro- ject in the same category sequence as in the Comprehensive Plan. Location: As mentioned earlier, the project already lies within what should 403 West First Street Glenwood Springs Colorado 81601 (303) 945-2246 J • • Information Supplement Cattle Creek Ranch P.U.D. September 10, 1981 Page 2 should be categorized as a Rural Serviceable Area. It is bounded on the south by another existing development, Panorama Ranchettes. The ranch is bounded on the east, north and north- west by private lands in agricultural production or sage and oak brush range land. To the southwest the ranch is bordered by Bureau of Land Management lands. Density: ID Cattle Creek is proposed to have density of .8 units per acre as compared to the Comp Tlan recommended density of .5 units -to the _acres _ This_ s -some-wat higher than is preferred by _ the Comp Plan, but -is__considerably lower -than fie 3 units per " acre ---- ---- • that the Comprehensive Plan sets as the absolute maximum density for Rural Serviceable Areas. The proposed density has been clustered to create the various housing types preferred by the targeted market. The total number of units proposed is what is necessary to support the extensive recreational facility and other costs associated with the quality of development required by this housing market. As a result of the clustering of the housing, the project's able to preser massive amounts of open, space. Of thef96 acres in the ranch t acres are proposed to be in pen spAg.e and -recreational facilities. Tile terrain character of_ the site and •massive open space treatment allows for the preservation of an . open agricultural feel a longi the existing county road _system. ow through_rhe ea ch. The intense areas of development are confined to the upper mesa on the ranch leaving the creek, valleys and existing County road corridors open. • • • • • Technical Services: The central water system proposed for the original Cattle Creek Ranch P.U.D. will be expanded to be of adequate capacity for domestic and fire flow services for the now proposed project. A central waste water treatment facility will also be constructed. Power to the project will be provided by Holy Cross Electric Association and telephone service by Mountain Bell, of course, at the cost of the developer. All lines will be buried within the project. Rocky Mounatin Natural Gas service will be provided to the project, a utility service seldom available to rural developments. • • Information Supplement Cattle Creek Ranch P.U.D. i September 10, 1981 Page 3 i Community Services: Schools • A dedication of laid or cash in lieu of fees will be ma a to the RE -2 School District as per their policies. The project is presently under consideration by the school district. I would anticipate that the demands upon the school system will be somewhat less than normal for a project of this size because of the partial secondary housing nature of the project. Fire Protection: The developer proposes to build and equip a fire station which will be located adjacent to County Road 113. Although we have not begun discussions with the district we would • hope that this fire facility would be administered by the Car- bondale Volunteer Fire District with manpower provided from volunteers in the immediate area. This fire protection facility will not only service the Cattle Creek Development but surrounding housing in the Missouri Heights area. i Police Protection: The Cattle Creek project will be constructed with an electronics system connecting all residences to a central computerized control console such that each residence can be equipped with an electronic burglar alarm system. This electronic security system can be tied directly to the Garfield County Ad - 40 Sheriff's office if that were the preferred arrangement. Ad- ditionally, an on-site security guard may be maintained if it is determined desirable. ( Health Car The electronic security system described above can a so lnc Aide emergency medical call if the residents so choose. This would be directed to the central computer and if i desired, could be relayed on directly to medical facilities in Glenwood. Also, in association with the fire station, it may be possible to maintain a.valunteer maned ambulance. Roads -Access and Circulation: i The existing County road system provides,four routes of access to the Cattle Creek P.U.D.ount Road 100 and County Road 113 will logically carry the vast majority of the traffic burden caf the project Therefore, the developer has proposed to make extensive improvements to these two roads as are more completely defined by i the plans prepared by Eldorado Engineering. The proposed improve - i 1 • Information Supplement Cattle Creek Ranch P.U.D. September 10, 1981 Page 4 ments are intended to bring the road capacities up to a level which will accomodate the traffic generated by the project at 40 its ultimate build out. (See the attached traffic projection summary) Roads within the .project will be_built to Counter specification _except. -where r_ariati-ons--in road 2midth e consistent - with- the . Comprehensive Plans recommendations for eliminating unnecessary avR ement. The primary loop road through the project is pre- sently being constructed to County specifications. Coulter Ridge Road which services the cluster housing district, ill also be built according to County specifications. Th_secon.rt Loop road in the south easterly portion of the project. is pro- ose• • .- - +ur f••t w"de shoulders and two twelve foot paved — - traffic lanes. ocal stree s rvicing_the single family areas with lots smaller than 12,000 square feet are proposed to be a curb and gutter type street with _a ID foot curb to curb width. This provides for parking on one side of the street leaving the other side of the street for snow disposal. A curbless road cross section will be utilized wherever practical to reduce the concentration of storm runoff. A11 Qads within the project will be maintained by the Cattle Creek Home owners Association. Meads within the multifamily districts will be of a private drive nature and maintained at the expense of the multifamily residents. Environmental Constraints: A soils and geologic report prepared by Chen and Associates did not reveal any significant environmental hazards as are suggested by the Comprehensive Plan. Since beginning construction on the Phase I of the original P.U.D., we have isolated some localized soil conditions that have required special considerations regarding road construction and may require engineered foundations for some homes. Chen and Associates has been involved in additional studies in regard to these localized areas and included herewith are copies of their reports to date. The proposed plan has been responsive to environmental concerns of steep slopes, vegetation and low land flood ways. All areas disturbed by development construction will be revegetated. The detailed revegetation program for implementation this fall on those areas disturbed by the 1981 construction is now being prepared. This will be submitted to the County for its review, There will be a strict architectural control committee which will have authority over site disturbance, revegation and landscape treatments, preservation of view corridors as well as architect- ural character. It is the intent to establish an architectural character which restricts residences to a very low structural • 1 • Information Supplement Cattle Creek Ranch P.U.D. September 10, 1981 Page 5 mass profile. Particularily where a structure would infringe upon the visual horizon line. The Comprehensive Plan also made reference that new develop- ment should pay its way and not be a burden upon existing county residents. We feel the Cattle Creek P.U.D. more than meets this criteria with the extensive efforts being made to mitigate direct and immediate impacts that might be created by the project and by the property tax revenues that this pro- ject will generate for the County. Based on information pro- vided to me by Howard Whaley in the County Accessor's office, I have projected that the average residence in the Cattle Creek P.U.D. will pay approximately $3,900.00 in property taxes annually. This is based on present day mill levy and a con- servative projection of the value of the residents in todays dollars. This annual tax revenue at build out of the project would generate in access of $3,000,000.00 for Garfield County each year. This does not include property taxes that would be levyed against recreational facilities or commercial facilities within the project. Based on this estimate, the project would generate in access of $120,000.00 in road and bridge funds annually. In regard to the goals, objectives and policies defined in the Comp Plan, the Cattle Creek project may be summarized as follows: Housing: The Cattle Creek P.U.D. is serving a viable housing market within the Roaring Fork Valley. Industrial/Commercial: The Cattle Creek P.U.D. supports and expands the recreation/rouism economic base of Garfield County. Recreation/Open Space: Extensive recreational facilities are provided within the project which will service primarily project residents and to a limited extent users outside of the Cattle Creek P.U.D. Fifty eight percent of the project is designated for open space and recreation. Much of this open space is located to the visual benefit of not only the project residents but County residents who might drive through the area on the existing County Road system. Agriculture: Some of the open space land is being retained in agricultural type activities such as the equestrian facilities and supportive pasture lands while the remaining open space will • • 0 Information Supplement Cattle Creek Ranch F.U.D. September 10, 1981 Page 6 be either undisturbed native vegetation or in the golf course facility which presents a visual character similar to agricultural lands. Transportation: As described earlier, we intend to improve off-site County roads to deal with the impacts that might be created by this project. Technical Services: The project will be providing central water and central waste water facilities within an area already designated as a Rural Serviceable Area. Environmental: We feel the plan has been sensitively de- signed to meet the natural terrain of the site and the carrying capacity of the land. The open space configuration of the project and the location of concentrated development on the higher mesas combine to preserve the rural character of the area as one moves along the existing County Road system. Community Services: Measures have been proposed to mitigate any direct impacts this project might have on community services and we are confident the tax base from this project will assure adequate revenues to support the community service demands that its residents may make upon the County. 4, CATTLE CREEK F.U.D. • TRAFFIC SUMMARY 1. Present Traffic Load (Spring 1981)* Co. Rd. 113 461 ADT 61 VPH Co. Rd. 100 (Lower section) 458 ADT 61 VPH *by Eldorado Engineering 2. Projected Capacity (following proposed improvements, Type C road - stable flow with minor restrictions)* Co. Rd. 113 650-800 VPH Co. Rd. 100 650-800 VPH *by Eldorado Engineering 3. Projected Traffic Generated by P.U.D. 786 units @ 8 trips/day = 6288 ADT 60% of Projected ADT on Co. Rd. 113 = 3772 ADT 40% of Projected ADT on Co, Rd. 100 = 2513 ADT Co. Rd. 113 - 3772 ADT = 377-490 VPH Co. Rd. 100 - 2513 ADT = 251-327 VPH