Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2.0 PC Staff Report 10.11.2000REQUEST: APPLICANT: ENGINEER: LOCATION: 211 3 c� l PROJECT INFORMATION AND STAFF COMMENTS A request for review of a Preliminary Plan for a three (3) lot subdivision on fifty-one (51) acres. Gaye Leo Colorado River Engineering, Western Water Consulting, Inc. Parcel lies on Taughenbaugh Mesa, southwest of Rifle. Section 20, Township 6 South, Range 93 West WATER: One shared existing well SEWER: Individual sewage disposal systems (ISDS) ACCESS: CR 320 (parcels 2 & 3) and CR 321 (parcel 1) EXISTING ZONING: A/R/RD ADJACENT ZONING: A/R/RD, with O/S to the southwest I. RELATIONSHIP TO THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN According to the Garfield County Comprehensive Plan of 1984, this site lies in "District C — Rural Areas / Minor Environmental Constraints". District C is described as having a moderate ability to absorb growth. This district includes all lands which are not serviceable from an existing municipality or subdivision with water or sewer services. Since this site is located within one (1) mile of District A it is considered to be a transitional area between rural and urban densities. The suggested density is no more than one (1) dwelling unit per two (2) acres, subject to the mitigation of environmental constraints. II. PROJECT INFORMATION A. Site Description: Taughenbaugh Mesa overlooks the Colorado River to the North and is bordered on the west and east by Beaver Creek and Helmer Gulch. BLM land exists to the south of the property. The site slopes about 6% from the highpoint at the southwest down to the northeast. The site is gently rolling pastureland historically irrigated for hay Page 1 of (1t • • crops. The dominant vegetation is grass and sagebrush. Lot 1 is currrently occupied by a single family home, which received a certificate of occupancy on 6/1/00. It is accessed via a gravel driveway to CR 321. B. Development Proposal: The applicant is proposing to divide a fifty-one (51) acre parcel into three (3) single family lots: parcels 1, 2, & 3. The location and size (but not the total # of lots) of the proposed lots has changed from the sketch plan proposal. The sketch plan proposed one 5 acre lot at the far northwestern corner of the property, to be accessed via County Road 321, and one 10 acre parcel along County Road 320. The remainder parcel was about 36 acres in size. The preliminary plan now proposes two 5 acre lots along CR 320, and a remainder parcel of 41 acres to be accessed via CR 321. C. Adjacent Land Uses: Agricultural and residential land uses surround the site. III. REVIEW AGENCY AND OTHER COMMENTS: Referrals of the site plan were sent to the following: A. City of Rifle: On 9/25/00 Pat Hopkins, Rifle Planning Director, said in a telephone conversation with Garfield County Planning Staff that the Leo preliminary plan had been discussed by City Council and they have no concerns or comments. B. Bookcliff Soil Conservation District: No reply received. C. RE -2 School District: Stated on 8/28/00 "no concerns". D. Colorado Geological Survey: See letter dated 9/29/00, page \ �-- . Provided site specific investigations and foundation designs are conducted, this office has no concerns with this development as planned. E. Garfield County Road & Bridge: Jake Mall called on 8/29/00 to say that the plan appears "fine". An access permit has been issued for one driveway (to serve lots 2 & 3) on CR 320. It will be built with a 10' collar and to standard driveway specifications. F. Rifle Fire Protection District: See letter dated 9/26/00, page I1- . Makes some specific recommendations concerning removal of vegetation, road construction, and posting of addresses. Also notes that the water supply in the area has limited fire flow capabilities. Although the proposal meets the District's minimum requirement of having an approved water source within 2 miles, fire flow capabilities would likely not be available to extinguish a fully involved structure fire. G. . C rad oo Dept. of Public Health: See referral sheet, dated 8/8/00, page 1 . Was rovided with a copy of Rifle's sketch plan comments with a request to specifically 191comment on the ISDS issues. Responded with a request to know where the Leo '�1� subdivision falls within the County's master plan. H. Garfield County Engineer: See referral sheet, dated 9/5/00, page 1 (1 and Western Water Consulting letter, page I . The County Engineer noted that Chris Manera's professional engineer's license had become inactive and needed to get it re -installed. She recommended denial due to limited water supplies for fire protection. (Staff comment: Chris Manera addressed the licensing issue by a peer review. Western Water Consulting, Inc. (license #24034) has reviewed, approved, and stamped all necessary Page 2 of lit • • documents. Since the Rifle Fire Protection District has stated that the application meets minimum requirements, the County Engineer stated in a telephone conversation on 9/27/00 that she is no longer opposed to approval of the application.) I. Colorado Div. of Water Resources: See letter dated 9/12/00, page (, , . The State Engineer notes that, "With adequate storage capacity this well should provide an adequate supply for the proposed use". It is the opinion of the State Engineer's Office that, "... the proposed water supply will not cause material injury to decreed water rights, and is physically adequate, so long as the use of the Taughenbaugh Ditch water rights is not expanded". J. Colorado Div. of Wildlife: No reply was received. mar._. P 2-0 , 2 1 K. Garfield County Sheriff: Returned the application without any comment. L. Garfield County Vegetation Management: No reply was received. M. Garfield County Housing Authority: See referral sheet, dated 8/25/00, page. Encourages the developer to keep sale prices affordable and remind her of the need for affordable rentals. IV. STAFF COMMENTS A. Comprehensive Plan: The proposed density is one (1) dwelling unit per seventeen (17) acres, which is much less dense than the Comp Plan's suggested density of one (1) dwelling unit per two (2) acres. The proposal appears to generally conform to the Comp Plan. B. Zoning: A single family dwelling is a use by right in the A/R/RD zone district. Accessory uses are allowed if they are agriculturally related uses. C. Subdivision: The lot design appears to generally meet the standards set forth in the Subdivision Regulations. D. Soils/Topography: Colorado River Engineering, Inc. (CRE), and Western Water Consulting, Inc. (WWC), have both concluded that no hazards or soil constraints exist that would impair the development of the property. However, the possible existence of localized areas of clay -loam lenses with shrink/swell properties warrants future considerations. They recommend that site specific soil samples be collected for each building footprint prior to building permit issuance for parcels 2 & 3. A geotechnical engineer should examine the soils and prepare an engineered foundation. Radiation is not known to be associated with the sedimentary type bedrock formation which underlies the property. The U.S. Geological Survey has stated that if site specific investigations and foundation designs are conducted, they have no concerns with the development. As long as the need for engineered foundations is included as a condition of approval, in Page 3oflp • • the subdivision covenants, and as a plat note, staff does not have any geology related concerns. E. Road/Access: Lot 1 (the 41 acre parcel) will be accessed via an existing access easement to CR 321. The two newly created lots (2 & 3) will share a 30' wide, 70' long point of access to CR 320. Plat notes #8 and #12 discuss the "primitive residential" standard and the maintenance responsibilities of the road. According to the subdivision regulations, the road servicing Parcels 2 & 3 must meet the "primitive residential" standard in Section 9:00 of the Subdivision Regulations. This standard calls for a minimum thirty (30') foot wide access with a single lane at least twelve (12') feet in width with a native surface, and a hammerhead turnaround, amongst other things. Plat note #12 must be amended to replace "property owners' responsibility" with "Homeowner Association's responsibility". The application states that road access costs will be assumed by the lot owner. The applicant should understand all improvements required by the Subdivision Regulations are her cost responsibility and shall be installed according to the Subdivision Improvements Agreement (SIA) and secured by cash or a letter of credit, as is customary and required by the Subdivision Regulations (see section 5:31). Jake Mall, of the Garfield County Road and Bridge Department, called on 8/29/00 to say that the plan appears "fine" . An access permit was issued for one driveway (to serve lots 2&3)onCR320. F. Fire Protection: The application states: "Rifle Fire Protection guidelines are to be reviewed and compliance with suggested fire safety provisions are the individual lot owner's responsibility. This proposal meets all minimum requirements of the Rifle Fire Protection District". Plat note # 9 lists some fire protection comments. The site is located in the Rifle Fire Protection District (RFPD). The RFPD noted some specific recommendations concerning removal of vegetation, road construction, and posting of addresses. The water supply in the area has limited fire flow capabilities. Although the proposal meets the District's minimum requirement of having an approved water source within 2 miles, fire flow capabilities would likely not be available to extinguish a fully involved structure fire. No water storage has been proposed for fire fighting purposes. For this reason, the County Engineer originally recommended denial of the application. However, since the Rifle Fire Protection District has stated that the application meets minimum requirements, the County Engineer stated in a telephone conversation on 9/27/00 that she is no longer opposed to approval of the application. Page 4 of 4 • None of the recommendations made by the fire district have been included in the covenants. It will be very difficult for each individual lot owner comply with suggested safety provisions if they do not know what they are. While plat note #9 attempts to address fire issues, it needs to closely reflect the Rifle Fire District's language in their letter dated 9/26/00. G. Domestic Water System / Irrigation: The household and domestic animal water supply for the three lots is to be provided by a shared well. The well is an existing structure serving the existing residence on the 41 acre parcel. Well permit #221943 was issued as the only well on a 51 acre tract of land and is limited to a pumping rate of 15 gpm. The use of the well water is limited to ordinary household purposes inside 3 single family dwellings, the irrigation of not more than 1 acre of home gardens and lawns, and the watering of domestic animals. The well was pump tested on April 25th, 2000, following the winter period and prior to irrigation water being diverted on to the mesa (typically when water levels are lowest). The initial water level was measured at a depth of 89 feet and provides approx. 41 feet of drawdown capability (130' total depth, 89' static level). The water level dropped about 2 feet within the 1 '/2 hours and stabilized at 2 1/4 feet of drawdown after 21 hours. The pump test was terminated after 24 hours and recovery data was collected for an additional 24 hour period. The well recovered to the initial static level. It is Colorado River Engineering's (CRE's) and Western Water Consulting's (WWC's) opinion that the well yield (in excess of 7 gpm) is capable of meeting the peak average monthly demand off 7 gpriv-for,the.subdivWon. The water quality was tested for bacteria and nitrate/nitrite and found to be within the legal limits. However, it was not tested for dissolved solids. The water must be tested for dissolved solids prior to approval by the Board of County Commissioners. If treatment is necessary, the proposed method of treatment shall be submitted to County Staff and the Board in sufficient time for review prior to approval of the preliminary plan. CRE and WWC state in the application, "The water system will be comprised of the shared well delivering water to individual water storage tanks at each lot. The existing pump has the power to deliver water to all the lots. Each supply line to the lots should have a minimum diameter of 1 -inch to minimize friction losses. The construction of the delivery lines, tank, and tank level controls will be the responsibility of each lot owner". However, this is not consistent with the Subdivsion requirements. It is the applicant's responsibility to install the required water system improvements. In addition, Section 9:53 requires the following: Central water systems shall be designed by an engineer qualified to design water systems Page 5 of • • and be a registered professional engineer licensed by the State of Colorado. Central water and treatment and storage facilities shall be approved by the Colorado Department of Health. All lines in a central water system should be looped, with no dead ends included in the system. Where dead ends are proposed for cul-de-sacs, there will either be a fire hydrant or blow -off valve at the end of the line. The application contains a "Declaration of covenants, well sharing, and irrigation water use agreement". The applicant does not intend to form an Homeowner's Association (HOA) but rather intends to make each lot owner share responsibility for installation and maintenance of the improvements. However, this is contrary to the Subdivsion regulations. Section 4:91 (B) (1) requires that: If a central supply and distribution system is to be provided, a general description of the system, as designed by a Colorado registered engineer. In addition: 1. Nature of the legal entity which will own and operate the water system; and 2. Proposed method of financing the water system. An incorporated HOA has the ability to levy fees, own improvements, and has a separate enforcement capability. Individual lot owners are not "a legal entity" and are much less likely and able to follow through with these responsibilities than an HOA. Irrigation water is to be supplied through the use of 0.52 cfs of the Taughenbaugh ditch, which has been decreed in District Court for Water Division 5. Lots 2 & 3 are to be limited to 3,000 square feet of lawn and garden irrigation with 0.026 cfs for each lot. The owner of Lot 1 shall retain ownership of the remaining 0.468 cfs and may irrigate as much of this lot as is practicable. CRE and WWC state that the well will provide a reliable source of water supply based on the estimated demand level and available physical supply of groundwater. Since the instantaneous peak demands from the parcels could exceed 15 gpm, they recommend that each lot provide a small storage tank (250 to 500 gallons) and booster pump to meet peak demands. They further note that the irrigation water right is "junior in priority" and is typically administratively curtailed in most years following the peak runoff months of Beaver Creek, and a plat note should disclose this information (said note has been included on the plat). The State Engineer notes that, "With adequate storage capacity this well should provide an adequate supply for the proposed use". He also notes that the use of the 0.52 cfs of the Taughenbaugh Ditch must be limited to the historic amount. If any increase occurs, a change of water rights application must be filed with, and approved by, the water court. He further notes a typograhical error (0.26 cfs verses 0.026 cfs), and a needed change to the covenants: the "stockwatering use" must be changed to the "watering of domestic animals". It is the opinion of the State Engineer's Office that, "... the proposed water Page 6 of 1p • • supply will not cause material injury to decreed water rights, and is physically adequate, so long as the use of the Taughenbaugh Ditch water rights is not expanded". H. Wastewater: Individual sewage disposal systems (ISDS) are proposed for each new lot. The existing home (on Lot 1) has wastewater treated by a septic tank and adsorption field. This system was permitted by the Garfield County Sanitation Department based on percolation tests that averaged 7 minutes per inch. It is CRE's and WWC's opinion that septic and adsorption fields can also be utilized on the two new lots. The bedrock and water table are at depths of 80+ feet and will not affect the operation of ISDS. They further emphasize that proper care and maintenance and monitoring by the HOA is essential to assure proper operation. Section 4:92 E (of the Garfield County Subdivision Regulations) requires that a proposed management plan for the operation and maintenance of on-site systems be provided. While the application contains CRE's attachment Pipeline (Fall 1999, Vol. 6, No. 4, prepared by the National Small Flows Clearinghouse) concerning ISDS maintenance, the applicant failed to address this issue in the covenants and/or include Pipeline as an attachment to the covenants. The covenants need to be amended accordingly. Drainage: CRE and WWC state that the property is not in any floodplains or subject to localized flooding. A comparison of the existing conditions versus the developed conditions indicates there will not be any increase in historic runoff flow to downstream property owners. An 18" diameter culvert is recommended at the access entrance to CR 320. The Garfield County Subdivsion Regulations require the following (section 9:44): All culverts shall be designed such that the exposed ends are protected by encasement in concrete or extended a minimum of three feet (3) beyond the driving surface on each side. Culverts, drainage pipes and bridges shall be designed and constructed in accordance with AASHO recommendations for an H-20 live load. The applicant should understand that installation of the necessary drainage features is her cost responsibility. J. Wildlife: The application states that the DOW has been consulted regarding migration patterns. It states, "The existing migration patterns and habitat will remain undisturbed" but the "existing migration patterns" are not identified anywhere within the application. No evidence of such consultation has been included, nor are any migration corridors identified. It states that fencing has been designed to be "elk friendly" and that a wide sage brush ribbon on Lot 1 serves as home to local deer and elk. However, the covenants do not specify any fencing requirements or need to preserve wildlife habitat. The application does not contain a wildlife checklist (available from the County's GIS Page 7 of 1 • • system, or from the DOW) or any formal analysis of possible wildlife impacts. Rob Hykys has provided the DOW WRIS Data checklist at staffs request. It indicates the following wildlife habitat lies entirely within the subject area: Black Bear Overall Range, Elk Winter Range, Elk Overall Range, Mule Deer Winter Range, Mule Deer Severe Winter Range, and Mule Deer Overall Range. The following wildlife habitat lies partially within the subject area: Bald Eagle Active Nest Site. To date, the DOW has failed to make any comment on the application. Staff has historically had a very difficult time getting responses during the hunting season. Staff suggests that the applicant amend the covenants to require wildlife -friendly fencing specifications. K. Assessment / Fees: As determined by Section 9:80 of the Subdivision Regulations, the applicant will be required to dedicate a portion of the gross land area for open space, parks, or schools, or pay fees in lieu thereof ($200 per each newly created parcel). The property owner should be aware that the current agricultural valuation status of the property will change following subdivision. This area appears to lie in traffic study area 1 of the capital improvements plan. The applicant can expect to pay about $2,800 per single family dwelling, minus the appropriate discounts. In the event any fees increase before the time of final plat, the increased fees shall be paid. L. Utilities: The application states that Holy Cross has erected an additional power pole at 2102 CR 321 to serve the two new residences. The lot on CR320 has power located directly across the road. Public Service will provide natural gas and has extended service from CR321 to the parcel. U.S.West will provide telephone service. No cable t.v. is available. All utilities shall be buried. The application also states that access to all utilities will be the cost responsibility of individual lot owners to tie into existing utility outlets. This is not acceptable and shall be the developer's responsibility, as is customary, to extend the utilities to the lot lines of the newly created lots (in cases where the utilities are not located along CR320). M. Covenants, Plat Notes, and other issues: The "Declaration of Covenants, well sharing, and irrigation water use agreement" must become covenants administered by an incorporated HOA, as required by the Subdivision Regulations and discussed previously in this report. L,� , D 1) The plat should be amended as follows: Remove the fence lines shown; Providegal 'if��,,,� descriptions for each of the newly created lots. 41,,-c 2) Plat note #14 needs to be completed to read: "All exterior lighting will be the minimum amount necessary and all exterior lighting will be directed inward, towards the interior of the subdivision, except that provisions may be made to allow for safety lighting that goes beyond the property boundaries." Page 8 of 1 p • • 3) The need for engineered foundations must be added to the covenants and the plat (as a plat note). 4) The covenants (paragraph 15, page 6) need to be amended to reflect the following specific language: replace "shared by a joint driveway access" with "served by a single point of access meeting the primitive residential standards called for in Section 9:00 of the Subdivision Regulations". 5) The covenants (paragraph 16, page 6) need to be amended to reflect the following specific language: "One (1) dog will be allowed for each residential unit and the dog shall be required to be confined within the owners property boundaries." 6) The covenants shall be amended to include the following restriction: "No open hearth solid -fuel fireplaces will be allowed anywhere within the subdivision. One (1) new solid -fuel burning stove as defied by C.R.S. 25-7-401, et. sew., and the regulations promulgated thereunder, will be allowed in any dwelling unit. All dwelling units will be allowed an unrestricted number of natural gas burning stoves and appliances." 7) The covenants shall be amended to include the following: A specific ISDS operation and maintenance plan. 8) The covenants shall be amended to include and require the specific comments made by the Rifle Fire Protection District in their letter dated 9/26/00. 9) The covenants shall be amended to include wildlife friendly fencing specifications. 10) The covenants shall be amended to include appropriate disclosure to all potential lot owners that T.E. McClintock reserves the right to enter upon lots to prospect for, mine, and remove minerals. 11) The covenants shall be amended so that "stockwatering use" is changed to "watering of domestic animals", as noted by the State Engineer. V. RECOMMENDED FINDINGS 1. That proper posting and public notice was provided, as required, for the hearing before the Planning Commission; 2. That the meeting before the Planning Commission was extensive and complete, that all pertinent facts, matters and issues were submitted and that all interested parties were heard at that hearing; Page 9 of 1 t • i 3. That for the above stated and other reasons, the proposed subdivision is in the best interest of the health, safety, morals, convenience, order, prosperity and welfare of the citizens of Garfield County; 4. That the application is in conformance with the 1978 Garfield County Zoning Resolution, as amended; 5. That the application is in conformance with the Garfield County Subdivision Regulations of 1984. VI. STAFF RECOMMENDATION � W Staff recommends that the Planning Commission recommend APPROVAL of the Leo Subdivision Preliminary Plan to the Board of County Commissioners, with the following conditions: 1. That all representations made by the applicant in the application, and at the public hearing before the Planning Commission , shall be conditions of approval, unless specifically altered by the Planning Commission. 2. The recommendations of Colorado River Engineering / Western Water Consulting shall be followed. These recommendations include, but are not limited to: a) Site specific soil samples shall be collected for each building footprint prior to building permit issuance for Lots 2 & 3. Foundations on said lots shall be engineered by a Professional Registered Engineer within the State of Colorado. b) Each lot shall provide a storage tank of 250 to 500 gallons and a booster pump to meet peak demands. c) An 18" diameter culvert will be installed at the newly created point of access on County Road 320. d) Any soils disturbed during construction shall be revegetated as soon as possible to minimize erosion. 3. Pursuant to section 9:18 of the 1984 Garfield County Subdivision Regulations, no further divisions of land within the Subdivision will be allowed. 4. The point of access along County Road 320 shall be constructed to the "primitive residential" standard. 5. The use of the Taughenbaugh ditch water rights shall not be expanded without adequate legal rights to do so. 6. The water shall be tested for dissolved solids prior to approval by the Board of County Commissioners. If treatment is necessary, the proposed method of treatment shall be Page 10 of li� • • submitted to County Staff and the Board in sufficient time for review prior to approval of the preliminary plan. 6. The improvements required by the Subdivision Regulations shall be the cost responsibility of the subdivider. 07. � All lines in the central water system shall be looped, with no dead ends included in the system. Where dead ends are proposed for cul-de-sacs, there will either be a fire hydrant or blow -off valve at the end of the line. 8. The "Declaration of Covenants, well sharing, and irrigation water use agreement" shall be converted into covenants administered by an incorporated HOA, as required by the Subdivision Regulations. 9. The plat shall be amended as follows: a) Remove the fence lines shown. b) Provide legal descriptions for each of the newly created lots. c) Plat note #14 needs to be completed to read: "All exterior lighting will be the minimum amount necessary and all exterior lighting will be directed inward, towards the interior of the subdivision, except that provisions may be made to allow for safety lighting that goes beyond the property boundaries." d) The need for engineered foundations must be added as a plat note. 10. The covenants shall be amended to reflect the following specific language: a) The need for engineered foundations shall be added to the covenants. b) paragraph 15, page 6: replace "shared by a joint driveway access" with "served by a single point of access meeting the primitive residential standards called for in Section 9:00 of the Subdivision Regulations". c) paragraph 16, page 6: "One (1) dog will be allowed for each residential unit and the dog shall be required to be confined within the owners property boundaries." d) Include "No open hearth solid -fuel fireplaces will be allowed anywhere within the subdivision. One (1) new solid -fuel burning stove as defied by C.R.S. 25-7-401, et. sew., and the regulations promulgated thereunder, will be allowed in any dwelling unit. All dwelling units will be allowed an unrestricted number of natural gas burning stoves and appliances." e) Include a specific ISDS operation and maintenance plan. f) Include and require the specific comments made by the Rifle Fire Protection District in their review letter dated 9/26/00. g) Include wildlife friendly fencing specifications. h) Include appropriate disclosure to all potential lot owners that T.E. McClintock reserves the right to enter upon lots to prospect for, mine, and remove minerals. i) "Stockwatering use" shall become "watering of domestic animals". Page 11 of e Sep -29-00 03:53P Coloo RECEIVED SEP 2 9 2000 survey 3038461 P _ 01 STATE OF COLORADO COLORADO GEOLOGICAL SURVEY Division of Minerals and Geology Department of Natural Resources 1313 Sherman Street, Room 715 Denver, Colorado 80203 Phone: (30.i) 866.2611 FAX: (303) 866-2461 September 29, 2000 Post -Ir Fax Note 7671 To COJD891. r� �1clr�o Phone N Flo rig l Sea y Date ft / t � +pagebot fs From Lkie 0.CO. .S Phone• 30p 0.1.‘- ?55r/, Fax +1 Ms. Kit Lyon Garfield County Department Building and Planning 109 8t Street, Suite 303 Glenwood Springs, CO 81601 RE: Leo Subdivision Geologic Hazard Review Dear Ms. Lyon, DEPARTMENT OP NATURAL RESOURCES Bill Cw,- Governor Greg L. wa+chcr Executive, t)iroctor Michael B. Long Division Director Nikki Cowart State Geologist and ui.cetco Thank you for the land use application referral. At your request and in accordance to Senate 13i11 35 (l972) this Office has reviewed the materials submitted and conducted a site inspection on September 20, 2000. The materials submitted included a Soils & Geology/Hazards Evaluation, Water Supply, and Wastewater Treatment reports by Colorado River Engineering, Inc. Please consider our observations and recommendations in your review of this land use application_ The site is on the easternmost edge of Ta.ughenbaugh Mesa. The mesa was formed by ancient coalesced debris flows that have created the fan or apron appearance towards thc north. A mantle of windblown loess of variable thickness also covers the mesa. The subdivision lies on a relatively flat surface that has a gentle slope (5% grade) to the northeast. Two Iarge 5 -acre lots are proposed with the remaining land included in the parcel that contains the existing home. During our site inspection we found no geologic hazards that would significantly impact any residential construction cm these lots. No preliminary geotechnical investigation that includes test borings was submitted. The loess soils, if thick, may have the ability to compact when wetted. We Jecommend that site specitic foundation it y stigatiun, sl>e required that includes test borings and soil ti ffi g: The Iot sizes arc ample to support ISDS for the two parcels. it was noted that thc percolation rates were relatively rapid. Additional percolation tests will be required once septic field locations are determined to insure that the site specific percolation rates do not exceed the minimum for "non -engineered" systems Provided site specific investigations and foundation designs are conducted, this office has no concerns with the development as planned. If you have any questions please contact this office at (303) 866-3551. Sincerely, Jonathan L. White Engineering Geologist 0 0 RIFLE E PROTECTION DI• RICT September 26, 2000 Garfield County Building and Planning Department 109 8t'- Street Glenwood Springs, Colorado 81601 Attention: Jefftourien Reference: Leo Subdivision, preliminary_plan Mr_Lourien, The Rifle Fire Protection District has reviewed the proposed Leo Subdivision on County Road 320 near Rifle. It is the District's understanding that the proposal is to take one 51 - acre parcel and subdivide it into three parcels for construction of one single family dwelling per parcel. The area is within the boundaries of the Rifle Fire Protection District and fire and emergency medical services will be provided_ In order to assist the District in its ability to provide services we would make the following recommendations: 1. Vegetation should be removed from near any structures in order to provide a safe zone in the event of a wild land fire. 2. Road construction: When constructing access roadways into the parcels, consideration should be given to the weights of fire apparatus and accessibility during adverse weather conditions. 3. Postingof the address&The addresses of the properties are to be posted where the driveway intersects the County Road and on the residence itself if shared driveways are used Letter&are to be aminimum of 4' inches in heightrYZinch in width and contrast with background colors. 4. It should be noted that the water supply in the area is limited and fire flow capabilities would likely not be available to extinguish a fully involved structure fire_ The proposal._ does however meetthe District's minimum requirements of having an approved water source within two miles. As the time draws closer to construction of structures on the parcels the District would be happy to set down with the owner/developer to address these items in greater detail. Thank you and feel free to contact me if you have_any additional questions. Sincerely, Mike Morgan District Chief Cc: Gaye Leo Telephone (970) 625-1243 • Fax (970) 625-2963 1850 Railroad Avenue • P.O. Box 1133 • Rifle, Colorado 81650 • • GARFIELD COUNTY Building & Planning Department Review Agency Form Date Sent: 08/23/00 Comments Due: September 27, 2000 Name of application: Leo Subdivision Preliminary Plan Sent to: Garfield County request our comment in review of this project. Please notify the staff contact in the event you are unable to respond by the date listed above. This form may be used for your response, or you may attach your own additional sheets as necessary. Written comments may be mailed, e-mailed, or faxed to: Kit Lyon Garfield County Building & Planning 109 8th Street, Suite 301 Glenwood Springs, CO 81601 Fax: 970-384-5004 Phone: 970-945-8212 E-mail: "garcopin@rof net" General comments: yzAdA, 27)71-2A4 m -'/'e- /2v_/,1 /j,#4 �..�) a/ rn This review agency recommends (circle one): Approval / Denial The following are suggested conditions of approval, or are the reasons for denial: Nam o review agency: By: 7%2/..-a,)2&6 �°�>,,/�� 2a,, Date: 7—Z R Pvi cPr1 1 /10/(1(1 GARFIELD COUNTY Building & Planning Department Review Agency Form Date Sent: 08/23/00 Comments Due: September 27, 2000 Name of application: Leo Subdivision Preliminary Plan Sent to: Garfield County requestour comment in review of this project. e notify the staff contact in the event you are unable to respond by the date listed above. This form may be used for your response, or you may attach your own additional sheets as necessary. Written comments may be mailed, e-mailed, or faxed to: Kit Lyon Garfield County Building & Planning 109 8th Street, Suite 301 Glenwood Springs, CO 81601 Fax: 970-384-5004 Phone: 970-945-8212 E-mail: "garcopin@rof.net" General comm ts• a/ (.17 cik, ' ;o / c t ( tlk / a- ' tiv ' 4 k- i fivt C.r¢� �'L P V [ $ / a� a C- )—vel / C S� 1-t f o f es s [ 64. wP 11. c��(�v.2.e-' I-4 e ' Ctnit f t C.4‘.t 710 %�� P of12t �iv4-1i.`,. a.�)� �✓'o — 1 • . �/1 LvC G c� — �/!�2 /(;Gvri1 t2v'� [.�Q LIQ, Q c1 C.( -K se, o.. 'eke aye 544. Gam',,, % - 77 _ c c."7 -A-7 ti dcr This review agency recommends (circle one): Approval / Denial The following are suggested conditions of approval, or are the re ons for denial: I Y� v^ e,ct 6 N- vt»T 'I1kc4- fru tr n PSC < <1f d r ri Ju l Name of review agency: �� �/d (� �� By: ��+� «o (lc ate: - R Pvi cM 1/10/011 *RECEIVED SEP 0 7 2000 WESTERN WATER CONSULTING, INC. WATER RESOURCES ENGINEERING September 7, 2000 Ms. Kit Lyon Garfield County Building & Planning Department 109 8th Street, Suite 303 Glenwood Springs, Colorado 81601 RE: LEO SUBDIVISION PEER REVIEW Dear Ms. Lyon: On September 5, 2000 a peer review was made of the engineering reports by Colorado River Engineering, Inc. concerning the Leo Subdivision. Specifically, the following engineering reports were reviewed: • Leo Subdivision — Water Supply, June 28, 2000 • Leo Subdivision — Drainage Review, June 28, 2000 • Leo Subdivision — Soils and Geology/Hazards Evaluation, June 29, 2000 • Leo Subdivision — Wastewater Treatment, June 30, 2000 The engineering conclusions and recommendations provided in the engineering reports were found to be acceptable. Attached for your files are copies of the above reports that have been stamped with my engineering seal. �`� oliiiituums ii, 4tp Gls Very truly yours, r0� �+,F.S n y(•to WESTERN WATER CONSULTING, INC. • 0 i1�I�'OU /1/4 a %NpNlltlif�G James H. Hyre, P. E. Cc: Mr. Christopher Manera, Colorado River Engineering, Inc. Ms. Gaye Leo 5938 WEST IDA DRIVE • LITTLETON, COLORADO • 80123 PHONE: 303-794-9337 • FAX: 303-797-0916 EMAIL: hyre@westernwaterconsulting.com jCEIVEo SEP 1 g 2000 STATE OF COLORADO OFFICE OF THE STATE ENGINEER Division of Water Resources Department of Natural Resources 1313 Sherman Street, Room 818 Denver, Colorado 80203 Phone: (303) 866-3581 FAX: (303) 866-3589 http://water.state.co.us/default.htm Kit Lyon Garfield County Building and Planning 109 8th Street, Suite 301 Glenwood Springs, CO 81601 Dear Ms. Lyon: September 12, 2000 Department Re: Leo Subdivision, Preliminary Plan W %2, SW %, Sec. 20, T 6 S, R 93 W, 6th P.M. Water Division 5, Water District 45 Bill Owens Governor Greg E. Walcher Executive Director Hal D. Simpson, P.E. State Engineer We have reviewed the above referenced proposal to subdivide approximately 51 acres into three residential Tots of 5, 5, and 41 acres. Each lot is proposed to have one single-family dwelling. The household and domestic animal water supply for the three lots is to be provided by a shared well. Irrigation water is to be supplied through the use of 0.52 cubic feet per second (cfs) of the Taugenbaugh Ditch (decreed in Civil Action Nos. 89, 934 and 955, Garfield County District Court, and in Case No. W-2180, District Court for Water Division 5). Each of the five acre lots are to be limited to 3,000 square feet of lawn and garden irrigation with a five percent interest of the 0.52 cfs, or 0.026 cfs for each lot. The owner of the 41 -acre parcel will retain ownership of the remaining ninety percent, or 0.468 cfs, and may irrigate as much of this lot as is practicable. Well permit no. 221943 was issued on January 12, 2000, pursuant to CRS 37-92- 602(3)(b)(II)(A) which provides a rebuttable presumption that there will not be material injury to the vested water rights of others or to any other existing wells. Permit no. 221943 was issued as the only well on a tract of land of approximately 51 acres and limits the pumping rate of the well to 15 gallons per minute. The use of water from the well is limited to ordinary household purposes inside three single-family dwellings, the irrigation of not more than one acre of home gardens and lawns, and the watering of domestic animals. The permit also requires the return flow from the use of the well must be through individual waste water disposal systems of the non -evaporative type where the water is returned to the same stream system in which the well is located. The well construction report for this well was submitted on March 13, 2000, and indicates the well was constructed to a depth of 130 feet on February 4, 2000. In a two hour pump test, the well is reported to have produced 8 gallons per minute. The drawdown and recovery of the well during the pump test was not reported. With adequate storage capacity this well should provide an adequate supply for the proposed use. The use of the 0.52 cfs of the Taugenbaugh Ditch must be limited to the historic amount of acreage irrigated on the lands historically irrigated. If any increase in the acreage or change in lands irrigated is to occur, a change of water rights application must be filed with, and approved by, the water court prior to implementation of such change(s). Note that the Declaration of Covenants,Well Sharing and Irrigation Water Use Agreement (the Agreement) currently indicates that the shared well may be used for "stockwater use" and Iip Kit Lyon Leo Subdivision September 12, 2000 "stockwatering use". However, the well permit is limited to the "watering of domestic animals". The Agreement should be modified to be consistent with the well permit. Also, a typographical error in the Agreement characterizes five percent of 0.52 cfs as 0.26 cfs, rather than the correct amount of 0.026 cfs. Pursuant to Section 30-28-136(1)(h)(I), C.R.S., it is our opinion that the proposed water supply will not cause injury to decreed water rights, and is physically adequate, so long as the use of the Taugenbaugh Ditch water rights is not expanded. If you or the applicant has any questions concerning this matter, please contact Craig Lis of this office for assistance Sincerely, Kenneth W. Knox Assistant State Engineer KWK/CMULeo ii.doc cc: Orlyn Bell, Division Engineer Bob Klenda, Water Commissioner, District 45 Garfield County Planning Department GIS Resources: Colorado Division of Wildlife WRIS Data Checklist for: SkODtt/ 6Ao -ro 7 Rob Hykys, GIS Analyst, garcopin@rot.net 970-945-8212, FAX: 970-945-7785 01/03/0010:35 AM gzer Note: For interpretation of this data, contact Pam Schnurr, Wildlife Biologist, Colorado Division of Wildlife, Grand Junction, at 970-297-1192. Wildlife habitat lies: Entirely Partly Within Out in Area in Area 1 Mile of Area Bald Eagle Active Nest Site Bald Eagle Winter Range Black Bear Overall Range Black Bear -Human Conflict Black Bear Fall Concentration Area Black Bear Summer Concentration Area Bighorn Migration Patterns Bighom Overall Range Bighom Winter Range Bighorn Winter Concentration Area Bighorn Summer Range Bighom Production Area Boreal Toad Canada Goose Brood Concentration Area Canada Goose Feeding Area Canada Goose Production Area Canada Goose Wintering Area Canada Goose Winter Concentration Area Chukar Colo River Cuthroat Trout Elk Migration Corridors EIk Winter Range EIk Winter Concentration Area EIk Severe Winter Range Elk Overall Range EIk Summer Range EIk Summer Concentration Area EIk Production Area Golden Eagle Nest Site Golden Eagle Nest Unknown Status Great Blue Heron Nesting Area Kitfox Potential Habitat Kitfox Field Sightings Lynx Mule Deer Migration Pattems Mule Deer Winter Range Mule Deer Winter Concentration Area Mule Deer Severe Winter Range Mule Deer Overall Range Mule Deer Summer Range Mule Deer Resident Population Area Mule Deer Highway Crossing Native Fish WFN t gPP, RTC t N15 341 S Osprey Active Nest Site AZ .1� • • Wildlife habitat lies: Entirely Partly Within 1 Out in Area in Area Mile of Area Peregrine Falcon Active Nest Peregrine Falcon Nesting Area Peregrine Falcon Migratory Hunting Habitat Pronghorn Antelope Overall Range Pronghorn Antelope Winter Range Pronghorn Antelope Winter Concentration Area Ptarmigan Potential Habitat Raptors Razorback Sucker River Otter Overall Range Sage Grouse Brood Area Sage Grouse Overall Range Sage Grouse Production Area Sage Grouse Winter Area Wild Turkey Overall Range Wild Turkey Production Area Wild Turkey Winter Range Wild Turkey Winter Concentration Area Wild Turkey Roosting Sites Wolverine Possible Sighting UV, w't, V4 .iGv v rA:1 D! VVOJD Vial 11G .LLL VLAilA % Name of applicafipi: Sent to: 1 CARFIELD COUNTY Building & Planning Department Review Agency Form fc RECE1VE4 AUG 2 4 A Date Sent 08/23/+00 Leo Subdivision 1reliminl Plan Gatleld County reque your comment in review of I 's project. PI the stag contact in the eveq*jou are linable to respond by the date listed above. This form maybe used for your response, oto may attach your own addict oral sheets as necessary. Written comments may be mat'it& e-mailed, or faxed to: Kit Lyon Garfield County Building & Planning 109 8t Street, Suite 301 Glenwood Springs, CO 81601 Fax: 970-384+5004 Phone: 97G -8212 1~�pail; "gareopin@rofnet" 10 This review agency rwimeuds (circle one): Approval / Denial - The following are suggested conditions of approval, or are tie reasons for denial:__ GARFIELD COUNTY HousoSAIr loWry 212111R,ROAD NSE RIFLE, CO 81886 (970) 945-0779 OR (918) 525-3589 Date: ;r: • HUG -Cid -000U fIUN UO ; e4 rll I; CLU JUt1UUL U 1 l KC( CHA NU. 1 U1 OCJ 41111 lb RECEIVED AUG 2 8 2000 GARFIELD COUNTY Building & Planning Department Review Agency Form r. u i Date Sent: 08/23/00 Comments Due: September 27, 2000 Name of application: Leo Subdivision Preliminary Plan Sent to:jP �- - SCJ c Dk�� Garfield County requests your comment in review of this project Please notify the staff contact in the event you are unable to respond by the date listed above. This form may be used for your response, or you may attach your own additional sheets as necessary. Written comments may be mailed, c -mailed, or faxed to: Kit Lyon Garfield County Building & Planning 109 e` Street, Suite 301 Glenwood Springs, CO 81601 Fax: 970-384-5004 Phone: 970-945-8212 E-mail: "garcopin@rof net" General comments: AJ D C OYIC_ Pn v e This review agency recommends (circle one). Approval / Denial The following are suggested conditions of approval, or are the reasons for denial: Nameco eview age Date: RcwkM inoton • STATE OF COLORADO Bill Owens, Governor DEPARTMENT OF NATURAL RESOURCES DIVISION OF WILDLIFE AN EQUAL OPPORTUNITY EMPLOYER Russell George, Director 6060 Broadway Denver, Colorado 80216 Telephone: (303) 297-1192 Garfield County Planning 109 8th st. Glenwood Springs, CO 81601 Kit Lyon -Planner RE: Gaye Leo Subdivsion Taughenbach Mesa Dear Kit: _$•e• • • • • 1►.w ♦r V _ICE:R.1ED KOT For Wi1dlife- For People November 3, 2000 I have discussed and consulted with Gaye Leo concerning fencing on her property. It is her concern as well as the Division of Wildlife for fencing on the property to be wildlife friendly. I provided our Habitat Partnership Programs fencing handbook to Ms. Leo and discussed fence heights and wire spacing specifications at an on site visit I made to Leo's property. She stressed at that time the concern for wildlife movement and not wanting to create any barriers. We also discussed the type of wire to be used because of potential for wire cuts on her horses. Smooth wire was her choice for both domestic animals as well as wildlife. If fences are constructed to the specifications provided deer and elk should not have problems negotiating their way across this property. If you have questions feel free to contact me at (970)876-2120. Sinc erry�OVill District Wildlife Mgr. Rifle South District 6-40- DEPARTMENT OF NATURAL RESOURCES, Greg E. Walcher, Executive Director WILDLIFE COMMISSION, Bemard L. Black, Jr., Chairman • Rick Enstrom, \Aice-Chairman • Phil) James. Secretary i GarfieCd Count) • RECEIVED OCT 2 4 2000 Pu6Cu Health a(}crsing Service Rifle Office 902 1"aughenbaugh, Suite 104 Rifle, Colorado 81650 (970) 625-5200 10-23-00 Garfield County Board Of County Commissioners 109 8th Street, Suite 300 Glenwood Springs, Colorado 81601-3363 Dear John Martin, Chairman Glenwood Springs Office 109 8th St., Room 202 Glenwood Springs, Colorado 81601 (970) 945-6614 The Garfield County Public Health Nursing Director is aware of the position of the two five acre lots in the Leo Development proposal. It is my understanding that each of the two five acre lots will each have its own ISDS. The ISDS systems are to be pumped out every three years to be in compliance with the propose land owners association rules. In addition all three homes will be served by one water well. The water well has been tested and found to be more than adequate to meet the needs of all three households. The waters is potable and has been thoroughly tested and is currently of no concern. In networking with Mark Bean I also understand the proposed Leo development request is in Compliance with the county master plan Respectfully Submitted, 02e-i-feV12=2/0 Mary Misner Pubiic Heaith Nursing Director cc Gay Leo, Mark Bean Monday, October 30, 2000 2:45 PM 10/30/2000 14:45 Western Water Consulting 303-797-0916 9704564 MANERA \Nip COLORADO RIVER ENGINEERING, INC. October 30, 2000 Ms. Kit Lyon, Senior Planner Garfield County 13uildi% & Planning Dept 109 81' Street, Suite 303 Glenwood Springs, CO. 81601 p.02 EECEIVED OCT 3 1 2000 PAGE 01/03 RE: Leo Subdivision — Water Quality Tests Dear Kit: P.O. Box 1301 Rifle, CO 81650 Tel 970-6254933 Fax 970-825-4564 As requested, enclosed is the water quality test result fox Total Dissolved Solids fox a water sample collected from the LEO Well, The dissolved solids measured 560 Milligrams per liter (mgil). This well is serving an existing home and is proposed to supply two additional residences. A water system serving three homes does not classify as an "community water system", as defined by the Colorado Department of Public Health & Environment, and is not subject to state regulations or review for the waw- system design or water quality parameters. Additionally, the state does not have any regulatory treatment requirements for Total Dissolved Solids for community water systems. Total dissolved solids is viewed as a secondary standard with limits established for esthetics Based on characteristics that effect the desirability of the drinking water supply. This test will serve as an informative tool for the potential lot purchasers with respect to water quality data but will not effect the water system design or treatment requirements. To this end, we have requested that the testing laboratory complete further tests to define the components of the solids (i.e. hardness, salts, sulfates, etc__}. We will forward the test results, as they become available. As a general indicator of water quality along the Grand Valley we have researched Total Dissolved Solids records for community water systems, The health department reported the following available records: Water System Date Total Dissolved Solids (mg/I) Town of Silt 7/89 540 11/90 873 7/91 539 City of Rifle6/90 260 7/90 530 Battlement Mesa 4/90 740 EIk Creek Subdiv. 1989 1070 The total dissolved solids in the Leo Well is similar in water quality to other water suppliers in this part of the county. Please call if you have any questions. Glen Bodnar of the Health 1 Monday, October 30, 2000 2:45 PM Western Water Consulting 303-797-0916 10/30/2000 14:45 97.4554 MANERA • p. 03 PAGE 02!03 Department can be contacted at 1-303-692-3548 if you have any questions concerning water treatlmcnt regulations. CM:cm CC: Gaye Leo James H. Hyre Eucl_ Lyon !Aye Sincerely, Christopher Man= 2 Monday, October 30, 2000 2:45 PM Western Water Consulting 303-797-0916 10/30/2060 14:45 971104 5MANERCI • PAGE 83%0 JOHN C. KEPI/ART & CO. p.04 8R4NJJ JUAV17n,u1;NCTION! [A-JQRA[fflf A3D NoRTN • PMONE �4a�gia • GAANe JUNG -PON. CoLiDR*DD 9t6Q� ANALYTICAL REPORT Raicvattrom: C;oiorada River Enoi.rloor'ir?U Chr i M;aner a PO Pear, i301 Ri-F1e. CO 81650 970) 425-49:37., FAX 6 =i--4564 Ctiitomer No_ Labogto a N4:i &Love u7]t_w1Y Lfa}eRece}ryed 10/20/00 Dalt Repelled 10/24/00 Sample 5145 WATEL.: 2AMF•EE., L. O Total Dissolved Sol i dea ;6ii mt/1 Di ret tor; & Aauer N 0 a • ROrvEo OCT 0 5 soon STATE OF COLOFADO COLORADO GEOLOGICAL SURVEY Division of Minerals and Geology Department of Natural Resources 1313 Sherman Street, Room 715 Denver, Colorado 80203 Phone: (303) 866-2611 FAX: (303) 866-2461 September 29, 2000 Ms. Kit Lyon Garfield County Department Building and Planning 109 8t Street, Suite 303 Glenwood Springs, CO 81601 RE: Leo Subdivision Geologic Hazard Review Dear Ms. Lyon, GA -01-0001 DEPARTMENT OF NATURAL RESOURCES Bill Owens Governor Greg E. Walcher Executive Director Michael B. Long Division Director Vicki Cowart State Geologist and Director Thank you for the land use application referral. At your request and in accordance to Senate Bill 35 (1972) this office has reviewed the materials submitted and conducted a site inspection on September 20, 2000. The materials submitted included a Soils & Geology/Hazards Evaluation, Water Supply, and Wastewater Treatment reports by Colorado River Engineering, Inc. Please consider our observations and recommendations in your review of this land use application. The site is on the easternmost edge of Taughenbaugh Mesa. The mesa was formed by ancient coalesced debris flows that have created the fan or apron appearance towards the north. A mantle of windblown loess of variable thickness also covers the mesa. The subdivision lies on a relatively flat surface that has a gentle slope (5% grade) to the northeast. Two large 5 -acre lots are proposed with the remaining land included in the parcel that contains the existing home. During our site inspection we found no geologic hazards that would significantly impact any residential construction on these lots. No preliminary geotechnical investigation that includes test borings was submitted. The loess soils, if thick, may have the ability to compact when wetted. We recommend that site specific foundation investigations be required that includes test borings and soil testing. The lot sizes are ample to support ISDS for the two parcels. It was noted that the percolation rates were relatively rapid. Additional percolation tests will be required once septic field locations are determined to insure that the site specific percolation rates do not exceed the minimum for "non -engineered" systems Provided site specific investigations and foundation designs are conducted, this office has no concerns with the development as planned. If you have any questions please contact this office at (303) 866-3551. Sincerely, i-43( Jonathan L. White Engineering Geologist • • GARFIELD COUNTY Building & Planning Department Review Agency Form Date Sent: 08/23/00 Comments Due: September 27, 2000 Name of application: Leo Subdivision Preliminary Plan Sent to: mn ent in review of this ro-ect.Please notifythe staff Garfield County requests yob co p � contact in the event you are unable to respond by the date listed above. This form may be used for your response, or you may attach your own additional sheets as necessary. Written comments may be mailed, e-mailed, or faxed to: Kit Lyon Garfield County Building & Planning 109 Stn Street, Suite 301 Glenwood Springs, CO 81601 Fax: 970-384-5004 Phone: 970-945-8212 E-mail: "garcopin@rof.net" / General comments: �� alW�I—�// 4 jjej— This review agency recommends (circle one). Approv. / Denial The following are sugge ted coNitions of approval, or are the reasons for denial: Name of review agency: e,P)• ��• ����� By:Q"o -� 4evn /.c/ 1, r Date: 6 4/40 L. R Pv/1 QPC1 1 /I mmn • • RIFLE FIRE PROTECTION DISTRICT September 26, 2000 Garfield County Building and Planning Department 109 8th Street Glenwood Springs, Colorado 81601 Attention: Jeff Lourien Reference: Leo Subdivision, preliminary_plan Mr_ Lourien, The Rifle Fire Protection District has reviewed the proposed Leo Subdivision on County Road 320 near Rifle. It is the District's understanding that the proposal is to take one 51 - acre parcel and subdivide it into three parcels for construction of one single family dwelling per parcel. The area is within the boundaries of the Rifle Fire Protection District and fire and emergency medical services will be provided. In order to assist the District in its ability to provide services we would make the following recommendations: 1. Vegetation should be removed from near any structures in order to provide a safe zone in the event of a wild land fire. 2. Road construction: When constructing access roadways into the parcels, consideration should be given to the weights of fire apparatus and accessibility during adverse weather conditions. 3. Posting of the address: The addresses of the properties are to be posted where the driveway intersects the County Road and on the residence itself if shared driveways are used Letters are to be &minimum of 4 inches in heightrYzinch in width and contrast with background colors. 4. It should be noted that the water supply in the area is limited and fire flow capabilities would likely not be available to extinguish a fully involved structure fire. The proposal does however meet the District's minimum requirements of having an approved water source within two miles. As the time draws closer to construction of structures on the parcels the District would be happy to set down with the owner/developer to address these items in greater detail. Thank you and feel free to contact me if you have any additional questions. Sincerely, Mike Morgan District Chief Cc: Gaye Leo Telephone (970) 625-1243 • Fax (970) 625-2963 1850 Railroad Avenue • P.O. Box 1133 • Rifle, Colorado 81650 GARFIELD COUNTY Building & Planning Department Review Agency Form Name of Application: Leo Subdivision Sketch Plan Date Sent: 3/21/00 Comments Due: 4/21/00 Sent to: City of Rifle Garfield County requests your comments in review of this project. Please notify the staff in the event that you are unable to respond by the date listed above. This form may be used for your response, or you may attach your own additional sheets as necessary. Written comments may be mailed or faxed to: Garfield County Building & Planning Staff contact: Planner 109 8th Street, Suite 301 Glenwood Springs, CO 81601 Fax: 970-384-5004 Phone: 970-945-8212 General comments: This application was sent to all Rifle Planning Commissioners, Rifle City Council Members and pertinent staff. The overall concem was that Taughenbaugh Mesa was not a good place for residential development due tothe fact that there is not much water. The proposal suggests that three single-family dwellings could effectively use one well. This proposal begs the questions: "What if the well runs dry; would the City of Rifle be expected to serve these residences, and could the development include more residences in the future?" The City of Rifle Water Treatment Plant abuts this property, and discussion was had as to possible seepage occurring around the septic tanks of these residences into the Water Treatment Plant. The Rifle Fire Marshall Mike Morgan was concerned about putting out a fire at this site, since there is no large source of water within two miles of this site, except the Water Treatment Plant. Yet another concern was the apparent fragmentation of viable agricultural land. On April 5, 2000, Rifle City Council approved a motion to recommend to Garfield County Building and Planning denial of the Leo Subdivision Sketch Plan. The minutes of this meeting are enclosed in this referral form. Should you have any questions about this review, please don't hesitate to call Patricia F. Hopkins, Director of Planning and Development, at 625-6253, Monday through Friday, from 8 a.m. to 5 p.m. This review agency recommends (circle one): Approval / Den€al The following are suggested conditions of approval, or are the reasons for denial:_ Stated above are reasons for concern, and therefore reasons for denial. Name of Review Agency: City of Rifle Planning and Development Depai tinent By: Patricia F. Hopkins, Director of Planning and Development Date: April 6, 2000 200D Name of application: • GARFIELD COUNTY Building & Planning Department Review Agency Form Date Sent: 08/23/00 Comments Due: September 27, 2000 Leo Subdivision Preliminary Plan Sent to: aa LCX �1 .�������-- Garfield County requ'M s your comment in review oft is project. Please notify the staff contact in the event you are unable to respond by the date listed above. This form may be used for your response, or you may attach your own additional sheets as necessary. Written comments may be mailed, e-mailed, or faxed to: Kit Lyon Garfield County Building & Planning 109 8th Street, Suite 301 Glenwood Springs, CO 81601 Fax: 970-384-5004 Phone: 970-945-8212 E-mail: "garcopin@rof net" 1 General comments: This review agency recommends (circle one): Approval / Denial The following are suggested conditions of approval, or are the reasons for denial: Name of review agency: By: Date: RPvicPri i1mm(1 08/24/00 20:30 FAX 970 0859 Garfield Cty HA f10 (Ili • RECEIVES AUG 2 4 1 OARFIELD COUNTY Building & Planning Department Review Agency Form Name of applicatio Leo Subdivision Preliminary Plan Sent to: Date Sent: 08/23PoO Garfield County requet your comment in review of this project. Plenot* the staff contact in the event you are unable to respond by the date listed above. This form may be used for your response, or y may attach your own additional sheets as necessary. Written comments may be mailed, e-mailed, or faxed to: Kit Lyon Garfield County Building & Planning 109 8th Street, Suite 301 Glenwood Springs, CO 81601 Fax: 970-384.5004 Phone: 974.90-8212 E ail: "gareopin@rof net" General comments: r -.: • _ _.- 11111A .'4 1J2 erP..r+ _ ! _ „ .L 411A4 a ✓�.., -r te • This review agency rolliunends (circle one): Approval / Denial The following are suggested conditions of approval, or are the reasons for denial: - Name of By: GARFIELD COUNTY HOUSING AIMORITY 2126 RAILROAD AVENUE ,aF RIFLE, C0816511 J(970) 945-0779 OR (970) 625-3589 212, Date: o Romig/NA Nmn m AUG -28-2000 MON 05:24 PM GOIELD SCHOOL DIST RE2 FAX NO. 97/257623 P. 01 GARFIELD COUNTY Building & Planning Department Review Agency Form RECEIVED AUG 2 9 2000 Date Sent: 08/23/00 Comments Due: September 27, 2000 Name of application: Leo Subdivision Preliminary Plan Sent to: Sal co‘ Garfield County requests your comment in review of this project. Please notify the staff contact in the event you are unable to respond by the date listed above. This form may be used for your response, or you may attach your own additional sheets as necessary. Written comments may be mailed, c -mailed, or faxed to: Kit Lyon Garfield County Building & Planning 109 8th Street, Suite 301 Glenwood Springs, CO 81601 Fax: 970-384-5004 Phone: 970-945-8212 1✓ -mail: "garcopin@rof.net" General comments: A/0 C OY1C. Piz c This review agency recommends (circle one): Approval / Denial The following are suggested conditions of approval, or are the reasons for denial: Namep By; eview age Icy, t MM Date: Roviced 1/3nlnn Name of application: Sent to: --------------- GARFIELD COUNTY Building & Planning Department Review Agency Form Date Sent: 08/23/00 Comments Due: September 27, 2000 Leo Subdivision Preliminary Plan Garfield County request our comment in review of this project. se notify the staff contact in the event you are unable to respond by the date listed above. This form may be used for your response, or you may attach your own additional sheets as necessary. Written comments may be mailed, e-mailed, or faxed to: Kit Lyon Garfield County Building & Planning 109 8th Street, Suite 301 Glenwood Springs, CO 81601 Fax: 970-384-5004 Phone: 970-945-8212 E-mail: "garcopin@rof net" General comm ts: r� k1�4 � -1 k C4) -' P CZt,ye v0 k- wvt l t:¢� %� P r/ i S / / ' Cts Cc Gf? Nf �'.Q�r-,t-.S_/) a 2 S s l clk Vt c (�,.Q�?J'<7 l a t -t �cP �v 41 41...ece s? - ate/hi-eta — Gine feu -14 cA-a-e - a 44772-eeliaiii-d1-7e-&11:s1:7° Z614 - This review agency recommends (circle one): Approval / Denial The following are suggested conditions of approval, or are the rea ons for denial: rteC 61-►1v►4.e u..�,QCC C�.�, `P p,�. v L) & zr _/,.� vt. vu ( r 7 Name of review agency: C ws tt ed By: ihfr/+hLLP (AAA- ac I ate: 2 - 5- - JL RPvkM t/'tn/nn GARFIELD COUNTY Building & Planning Department Review Agency Form Date Sent: 08/23/00 Comments Due: September 27, 2000 Name of application: Leo Subdivision Preliminary Plan Sent to: Garfield County request our comment in review of this project. Please notify the staff contact in the event you are unable to respond by the date listed above. This form may be used for your response, or you may attach your own additional sheets as necessary. Written comments may be mailed, e-mailed, or faxed to: Kit Lyon Garfield County Building & Planning 109 8th Street, Suite 301 Glenwood Springs, CO 81601 Fax: 970-384-5004 Phone: 970-945-8212 E-mail: "garcopin@rof.net" General comments: ��r,�. )',)74.)3 J 29� , a 4_4,_ 64 7 _/.."5-ezezz 2,0."41 -?1) This review agency recommends (circle one): Approval / Denial The following are suggested conditions of approval, or are the reasons for denial: Name o review agency: By:7%7>'d)nei� Date: f—z- ifr� R Pvjzp(i z lmmn .CEIVED SEP 1 8 2000 STATE of COLORADO OFFICE OF THE STATE ENGINEER Division of Water Resources Department of Natural Resources 1313 Sherman Street, Room 818 Denver, Colorado 80203 Phone: (303) 866-3581 FAX: (303) 866-3589 http://water.state.co.us/delault.htm September 12, 2000 Kit Lyon Garfield County Building and Planning Department 109 8th Street, Suite 301 Glenwood Springs, CO 81601 Re. Prelimin-zry Plan W '/2, SW 1/4, Sec. 20, T 6 S, R 93 W, 6th P.M. Water Division 5, Water District 45 Dear Ms. Lyon: Bill Owens Governor Greg E. Walcher Executive Director Hal D. Simpson, P.E. State Engineer We have reviewed the above referenced proposal to subdivide approximately 51 acres into three residential lots of 5, 5, and 41 acres. Each lot is proposed to have one single-family dwelling. The household and domestic animal water supply for the three lots is to be provided by a shared well. Irrigation water is to be supplied through the use of 0.52 cubic feet per second (cfs) of the Taugenbaugh Ditch (decreed in Civil Action Nos. 89, 934 and 955, Garfield County District Court, and in Case No. W-2180, District Court for Water Division 5). Each of the five acre lots are to be limited to 3,000 square feet of lawn and garden irrigation with a five percent interest of the 0 52 cfs, or 0.026 cfs for each lot. The owner of the 41 -acre parcel will retain ownership of the remaining ninety percent, or 0.468 cfs, and may irrigate as much of this lot as is practicable. Well permit no. 221943 was issued on January 12, 2000, pursuant to CRS 37-92- 602(3)(b)(II)(A) which provides a rebuttable presumption that there will not be material injury to the vested water rights of others or to any other existing wells. Permit no. 221943 was issued as the only well on a tract of land of approximately 51 acres and limits the pumping rate of the well to 15 gallons per minute. The use of water from the well is limited to ordinary household purposes inside three single-family dwellings, the irrigation of not more than one acre of home gardens and lawns, and the watering of domestic animals. The permit also requires the return flow from the use of the well must be through individual waste water disposal systems of the non -evaporative type where the water is returned to the same stream system in which the well is located. The well construction report for this well was submitted on March 13, 2000, and indicates the well was constructed to a depth of 130 feet on February 4, 2000. In a two hour pump test, the well is reported to have produced 8 gallons per minute. The drawdown and recovery of the well during the pump test was not reported. With adequate storage capacity this well should provide an adequate supply for the proposed use. The use of the 0.52 cfs of the Taugenbaugh Ditch must be limited to the historic amount of acreage irrigated on the lands historically irrigated. If any increase in the acreage or change in lands irrigated is to occur, a change of water rights application must be filed with, and approved by, the water court prior to implementation of such change(s). Note that the Declaration of Covenants, Well Sharing and Irrigation Water Use Agreement (the Agreement) currently indicates that the shared well may be used for "stockwater use" and • Kit Lyon Leo Subdivision • September 12, 2000 "stockwatering use". However, the well permit is limited to the "watering of domestic animals". The Agreement should be modified to be consistent with the well permit. Also, a typographical error in the Agreement characterizes five percent of 0.52 cfs as 0.26 cfs, rather than the correct amount of 0.026 cfs. Pursuant to Section 30-28-136(1)(h)(I), C.R.S., it is our opinion that the proposed water supply will not cause injury to decreed water rights, and is physically adequate, so long as the use of the Taugenbaugh Ditch water rights is not expanded. If you or the applicant has any questions concerning this matter, please contact Craig Lis of this office for assistance Sincerely, Kenneth W. Knox Assistant State Engineer KWK/CML/Leo ii.doc cc: Orlyn Bell, Division Engineer Bob Klenda, Water Commissioner, District 45 Garfield County Planning Department Fax To: Colorado Geological Survey From: Kit Lyon, Senior Planner Fax: 303-866-2641 Pages: 2 Phone: 303-866-2461 Date: 08/30/00 Re: Leo Subdivision Preliminary Plan CC: City of Rifle, without attachment 0 Urgent 0 For Review X Please Comment 0 Please Reply 0 Please Recycle Garfield County has referred the Leo Subdivision Preliminary Plan for your review and comments. At the Sketch Plan phase, the City of Rifle stated concerns about the possibility of seepage from ISDS systems into their Water Plant. (See attached). I would appreciate your examination of, and comment on, these concerns. Please contact me in the event you would like to discuss this matter further. Thank you, Kit Lyon.