HomeMy WebLinkAbout3.0 PC Staff Report 11.12.1997 & 02.11.1998PC 11/12/97
2/11/98
PROJECT INFORMATION AND STAFF COMMENTS
REQUEST: Preliminary Plan consideration of the
Ponderosa Subdivision.
APPLICANT: Kenneth (Scott) Rose
LOCATION: A tract of land located within Section 5, T5S,
R93W of the 6th P.M.; located approximately
10 miles northwest of the City of Rifle, along
State Highway 13.
SITE DATA: 8.56 Acres
WATER: Shared spring/shared well
SEWER: Individual sewage disposal systems
ACCESS: Direct access to State Highway 13
EXISTING ZONING: AIR/RD
ADJACENT ZONING: North/East: O/S
South/West: R/L
I. RELATIONSHIP TO THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN
The subject tract is located within District C - Rural Areas/Minor Environmental Constraints,
as designated by the Garfield County Comprehensive Plan's Management Districts Map.
II. DESCRIPTION OF THE PROPOSAL
A. Site Description: The 8.56 acre tract is located approximately 10 miles northwest of
Rifle, along SH 13 and is currently utilized as a single family residential homesite, with
an existing mobile home and addition occupying the site. Slope varies across the tract
and in the eastern portion exceeds 40%. However, the majority of the tract slopes at
gentler angles between 2% and 20%. Vegetation appears to be native, with pinion -
juniper, sage and annual grasses scattered across the tract.
B. Adjacent Land Uses: The area is largely devoted to single-family residential, limited
agricultural and recreational land uses. See vicinity map, page • ,Z • .
C. Development Proposal: The applicant proposes to subdivide the 8.56 acre tract into
two (2) parcels of 3.06 and 5.50 acres each. The larger parcel would contain the
existing mobile home and other improvements, and the smaller parcel would be
developed as a single family residential parcel. See sketch map, page • a 7--
M.
'
III. REVIEW AGENCY/PUBLIC COMMENTS
A. Garfield School District No. Re -2: Has reviewed the proposal and due to the size of
the project, has no comment. See letter, page:4I
Book Cliff Soil Conservation District: States concerns regarding erosion and
revegetation using weed -free seed, animal control, drainage, and water quality. See
letter, pages .,/9�%,3Q.
Division of Water Resources: Has evaluated the water supply documentation and in
their opinion the supply would cause material injury to decreed water rights and
would not be an adequate, physical supply. See letter, page — c • .
Colorado Geological Survey: Has reviewed the proposal and identifies the site located
upon both landslide and alluvial fan deposits. Recommends that this subdivision be
investigated by a qualified engineering geologist, prior to any approval. See letter,
pages ,j.2-33
IV. MAJOR ISSUES AND CONCERNS
A. Zoning: The subject tract is located within the A/R/RD zone district and both
proposed lots meet the two (2) acre minimum lot size requirement. It appears that
slope would not be a significant constraint to development and neither lot is within an
identified, 100 -year floodplain. According to the Colorado Geological Survey, the
entire subdivision site is located on geologically hazardous terrain and building
envelopes should be evaluated and proposed by a qualified professional.
Physical Water Supply: The majority of the water supply would be derived from an
adjudicated spring, located east of the subdivision site, on BLM property. This supply
has been evaluated over the course of the last year, both before and after development
of the spring. This spring has been found to produce between 936 and 1195 gallons
per day and, for the duration of the flow measurements, appears to be a continual
water source. There is an existing well that may also be utilized; however, historically
it has not been a reliable water source.
In both the engineering report and the letter provided by the Division of Water
Resources, there is concern for the amount of the physical water supply in periods of
prolonged drought, where the spring may not be capable of meeting even the in-house
demand.
Legal Water Supply: Originally, the existing well was the subject of a West Divide
Water Allotment contract, which was amended to include diversions made from the
springs. The springs are the subject of a conditional water right decree, wherein the
applicant was awarded an amount equivalent to 75 gallons per minute (GPM)', for
each spring. This right is subordinate to an absolute right granted to the BLM (USA)
for an equivalent amount of 3.1 GPM, for wildlife watering and habitat. (Although
this decree is for Ponderosa Springs #1 and #2, only Spring #2 has been developed
and measured.)
Obviously, the spring is not flowing at this rate, which underscores the issue
associated with the Division of Water Resources' opinion that a call could be placed
on the spring and possible curtailment of the water source to the subdivision. Since
the BLM has the absolute right, it appears that the Division does not consider the
statement made by Roy Smith, BLM Water Rights and Instream Flow Coordinator
(wherein the BLM would not place a call on the spring), to be enforceable and
suggests a call on the subdivision water supply is possible.
C. Soils/Sewer: The method of waste water disposal is the use of ISD systems for the
individual lots. According to the Soil Conservation Service, soils on-site are
predominantly within the Nihill channery loam classification, typically deep and well -
drained soils. When used for community development and the placement of ISD
systems, these soils are considered, by the SCS, to have severe constraints. On July
25, 1996, percolation tests were performed, indicating that conventional septic
systems could be utilized. See report, page -3 y • . Given this information, it is
likely that a conventional ISD system could be utilized.
D. Access: Access to the lots would be from the historical access point, which would
be developed as a shared easement, proposed to be 30 feet wide. Regulations require
this 30 foot easement, which may be developed with a single travel lane, 12 feet in
width. Flows from an existing drainage gully would be directed through a 36 inch
culvert to provide access to the designated building envelope for Lot 1. The State
highway department has recently issued a driveway permit that approves access to the
proposed lots. Site distances along State Highway 13 are sufficient and staff sees no
special problems associated with access, as long as it is constructed in a way that does
not impede the historic drainage flows.
E. Fire Protection: The Rifle Fire Protection District has responded, suggesting this
subdivision would not materially impact the ability of the District to provide services.
The District does request that the applicant create defensible space around the
0.1666 cubic feet x 7.48 gallons x 60 sec = 74.7 gallons
1 sec 1 CF 1 min 1 min
dwellings and instructs the applicant to work with neighbors to identify water supplies
for fire fighting purposes. See letter, page -3..S" - . Staff suggests the inclusion of
the standard plat note addressing wildfire mitigation.
Natural Hazards: According to Exhibit H of the application,' the eastern portion of
the subdivision site is identified on a landslide deposit (Qls) and the western portion
is identified on an alluvial fan deposit (Qfy). The Colorado Geological Survey has
conducted an analysis of the site and strongly recommends that these hazards be
evaluated by a qualified professional, and an appropriate building envelope, for Lot
#1, be designated on the plat. Staff supports this recommendation.
Easements: All required easements for access, utilities, water supply, etc.,would be
required to be shown on an a final plat.
H. School Site Acquisition Fees: The applicant would be required to pay the $200.00
school site acquisition fee, for the creation of the subdivision parcel.
V. SUGGESTED FINDINGS
1. That proper publication and public notice and posting were provided as required by
law for the hearing before the Planning Commission.
That the hearing before the Planning Commission was extensive and complete, that
all pertinent facts, matters and issues were submitted and that all interested parties
were heard at the hearings.
That the proposed subdivision of land is in conformity with the recommendations set
forth in the Comprehensive Plan for the unincorporated area of the County.
That the proposed subdivision of land conforms to the Garfield County Zoning
Resolution.
That all data, surveys, analyses, studies, plans and designs as are required by the State
of Colorado and Garfield County have been submitted.
VI. RECOMMENDATION
Based on the opinion of the Division of Water Resources "that the proposed water supply will
cause material injury to decreed water rights and that the water supply is not adequate to meet
requirements of the subdivision," staff recommends DENIAL of the application.
'Preliminary Geologic Map of the Horse Mountain Quadrangle, Garfield County,
Colorado
a��
.e
8.400'...., Q
/41"
•w (. ..1.-0 \- •{�'" te 'I
=, :. ; ,,, a, •• . c c
1,1 _,
I 1)
I 1 1-+0 000 FEL ( QQ
*int f -XV 7 411
6LtNw000 !:'RINGS
a6-
VICENTTY
MAP
SCALE: 1 " = 2000'
SSEZZICAZWII2LCAEDILAND_D_DECIS
r'N�W AL_ .MEN B'. THESE RRESEN`3.
THAT KENNETH S. ROSE IS, ARE THE 'OM'IEK(S) JF THA -
SITUATED TN THE OOUNTr CF GARFIELD. STATE CF COIL
PART OF THE SW1 /4SW1 /4 OF SE'C T;CN 5, TOWNSHIP 5
WEST CF THE SIXTH PRINCIPLE MERIDIAN AS SHOWN ON
PLAT, SAID REAL PRCPERTY BEING MORE PARTICULARLY
FOLLOWS.
BEGINNING AT THE INTERSECTION POINT CF THE NORTHE
WAY OF COLORADO STATE HIGHWAY 13 AND THE NORTI-
SW1 /4SW'/ 4, WHENCE THE SOUTH 1/16 CORNER COMM(
4.0
o.
a
U�
z
(n
CO
0 O
CO
v
z
0
9
0
u,
1
r1
m
0
4J.
U
4
0)
0
w
U
0)
(n
(0
N
N
rA
O
P
i4
N
0
(0
441
,O
O
A
1
s p• V l Z y
20W>
O ma
1
m
dWD „9L JNUSIX3
O0°
dWp .,9£ JNl1SIX3
/ V
�a/,'
/ /
C)'/ ` I
// `./ / l.,
ori rte
' C Y / y r� I
%� :c
ao ^0 �/ H / ,
O .,, �" / ,---.-..-,..-z r} 1
z u m i
l) c
Gi�L�a ' >mJ PA
�c
-;m�^T
iz0 �t0
P C n y� Z
4.J.
''I
ii
a'
y1
i'1
A/a /J. U
; A m / m z
/ :0 // ^r+i
s) O / b .-.1
i , //
m U113 / 1S,d /
1 Bg -
r1 0
x %b'
/� ZO
> m :I
/ t ►•
11,
AA/
///
\ v//71
/
I / // \-m
// a s; \
/ ____----\''
'' r"m / / m
/ __ p0 d) I gtoh
A �V Y I U
b
/ / n y / /0 01,1�a�;��' �� 4.1 / D c
I\ 0
0
▪ 01 W ~'`
• v.
O n7 / / / z _
/ m
u1
/ 6? ��y ' I i
/ .$0. / ' Z z
/ v
z / -) y
/ i G r
/ /
/ D
m
/ 1 / Citi
ASO• %
lJ —
m
i
O
0
8
N00'20'53"E
683.96'
September 29, 1997
=r
OCTi(
0.11997
GarJle[c[ school (District o. (e-2
Iennard (Eckhardt Superintendent
�awrence
g). AccBride Associate Superintendent
Garfield County Planning Department
109 8th Street, Suite 303
Glenwood Springs, CO 81601
To Whom It May Concern:
The Garfield Re -2 Board of Directors has reviewed the Ponderosa Subdivision
preliminary plan request which is going before the planning commission on November
12. Due to the size of the project, there were no concerns or comments.
Sincerely,
ru/14,-,ki
Lennard Eckhardt
Superintendent
839 CWhiteriver Avenue, Rite, Colorado 81650-5500
(970) 625-7600 g -ax 625-7623
BOOR CLIFF SOIL CONSERVATION DISTRICT
P.O. BOX 1302
GLENWOOD SPRINGS, CO 81602
October 3, 1997
Eric McCafferty
Garfield County Planning Department
109 8th Street, Suite 303
Glenwood Springs, CO 81601
Dear Sir,
1 . ...-..---
IX
T 46 1991
At the regular monthly meeting of the Book Cliff Soil
Conservation District, the Board reviewed the application and
plan for the The Ponderosa Subdivision and have the following
comments and concerns about the project.
Any cuts for roads or construction should be revegetated to
prevent erosion. Weed free seed and mulch should be used for any
reseeding of the area. Monitoring of all seeding should be done
to see if the grass is establishing or if weeds are becoming a
problem. Reseeding or weed control practices should be
implemented if a problem is noticed.
The board is always concerned about animal control in an area
where there is the potential for conflict between wildlife or
domestic livestock and dogs from the subdivision. Dogs running
in packs of two or more can maim or kill domestic livestock and
wildlife. The District recommends animal control regulations be
adopted in the covenants for the subdivision and that they be
enforced.
Of prime concern to the Board, is the proper maintenance and
protection of any irrigation ditch which is on the site. New
landowners should be informed that the ditch owners have right of
way easement to maintain the irrigation system, that they will
be cleaning and working on the ditch, and that this work may be
in their yards.
The district would like to know what the impact will be on the
Wetlands in this area? All Wetlands should be protected and
remain in as pristine condition as possible.
The Board recommends that any irrigation water rights be used by
the landowners so they are maintained. In order to use these
rights, a raw water delivery system could be used for landscape,
fire protection, open space, etc. If at all possible, this system
should be incorporated into the infa-structure of the subdivision
plans as it would be more cost efficient at this time. Their
concern is always for soil and water conservation and
preservation and plans should consider these concerns.
Drainage has the potential to be a problem in the area and
engineering recommendations for control of drainage should be
closely followed by the builder and/or homeowner.
They felt that any disturbance of soil could adversely affect
other landowners, and great care should be taken to mitigate as
many of the problems as possible which arise when building on an
alluvial fan deposit area.
With increased concerns about Water Quality, the District is
concerned about monitoring chemical application for fertilizer,
weed control, and other pest management reasons. Their concern is
the chemicals that will be used to fertilize grasses and control
weeds in the area. They feel that the chemicals should be
closely monitored in this area due to the possibility that the
chemicals will soak into the soils and run off into the creeks.
The District suggests drilling of wells to monitor ground water
pollution, and that this expense and future expenses should be
bore by the developer.
Sincerely,
Charles Ryden, esident
Book Cliff Soil Conservation District
STATE OF COLORADO
OFFICE OF THE STATE ENGINEER
Division of Water Resources
Department of Natural Resources
131 3 Sherman Street, Room 318
Denver, Colorado 80203
Phone '303) 366-3581
FAX .303)866-3589
3.
October 27, 1997
Mr. Eric McCafferty
Garfield County Building and Planning
109 8th St Ste 303
Glenwood Springs CO 81601
Re: Ponderosa Subdivision
SW1% Sec. 5, T5S, R93W, 6TH PM
W. Division 5, W. District 39
..ins Romer
..� r Governor
t ;ames S. Lochhead
Executive Director
Hal D. Simpson
State Engineer
Dear Mr.. McCafferty:
We have reviewed the above referenced proposal to create two single family lots on a parcel of 8.56
acres. The proposed water supply is to be provided through a shared well and two springs, one of which has
been improved. The springs were decreed in consolidated case nos. 95CW11/96CW166.
As noted in our previous letter of June 21, 1996, permit no. 46279-F was issued on June 20, 1996, for
expansion of use of the existing well with permit no. 185364. ,Permit no. 46729-F was issued pursuant to a
water allotment contract with the West Divide Water Conservancy District, and allows the well to be used for
ordinary household purposes inside two single family dwellings, the irrigation of a total of 24,000 square feet
of lawns and garden, and the watering of domestic animals.
In contrast, the Water Supply Report prepared by Zancanella and Associates indicates that the water
supply is not adequate for the proposed uses. The report states that historically the well has experienced
shortages in meeting the water requirements of the existing home, and that the improved spring, Ponderosa
Spring #2, is not capable of meeting the assumed irrigation demand. Based on data gathered from October
of 1996 through August of 1997, the report indicates that Ponderosa Spring # 2 appears more than adequate
to meet the in-house demands of the subdivision. However, there is no data to support the conclusion that
the water supply will be adequate during drought periods. The decree in consolidated case no.
95CW11/96CW166 also indicates that the applicants uses are junior to the Bureau of Land Management's
uses, which means that there is a possibility that the applicant may be called out, with no augmentation plan
in place to allow continued diversions without injury to the senior water right.
Therefore, pursuant to Section 30-28-136(1)(h)(I), C.R.S., it is our opinion that the proposed water
supply will cause material injury to decreed water rights and that the water supply is not adequate to meet
requirements of the proposed subdivision. If you or the applicant has any questions concerning this matter,
please contact Craig Lis of this office for assistance.
Sincerely,
Steve Lautenschlager
Assistant State Engineer
SPL/CML/ponde_sr.doc
cc: Oriyn Bell, Division Engineer
James Lemon, Water Commissioner, District 38
-3/
STATE OF COLORADO
COLORADO GEOLOGICAL SURVEY
Division of Minerals and Geology
Department of Natural Resources
1313 Sherman Street, Room 713
Denver, Colorado 80203
Phone (303) 866-2611
FAX (303) 866-2461
October 30, 1997
Mr. Eric McCafferty
Garfield County Department Building and Planning
109 8th Street, Suite 303
Glenwood Springs, CO 81601
wirlIrara
DEPARTMENT OF
.NATURAL
SOURCES
�i^1ie7v Romer
t' I' Governor
i J 1997 james S. Lochheaa
1
tfarecut>ve Director
__ _ __ _.,_,ryichael B. Long
•..Sliwsion Director
RE: Ponderosa Subdivision Preliminary Plan Land Use Review
Dear Mr. McCafferty:
Vicki Cowart
State Geologist
.and Director
At your request and in accordance to Senate Bill 35 (1972) this office has reviewed the
materials submitted for this proposed subdivision and conducted a site inspection on October 28,
1997. The property is northwest of Rifle, located on the edge of the steep hills of the Grand
Hogback. The Grand Hogback is a monocline where the Mesa Verde Sandstones beds are steeply
inclined and form the very steep ridges and flatirons.
This office has reviewed the preliminary plan for the subdivision. In that plan are the
excerpts from the latest geologic map of the Horse Mountain Quadrangle and the SCS soils report.
Within the plan it is stated that `Further geologic investigation is not warranted for this simple two
lot subdivision.' It is not appropriate for a lawyer to be making land use judgements concerning
geologic hazards.
A review of the geologic map insert in the preliminary plan, in fact. shows that the site
bridges two different mapped geologic units. Both landslide and alluvial fans terrains are potentially
hazardous and can create problems for residential land usage.
A large portion of Lot #2 lies within the landslide complex. While the location of the
existing trailer home is acceptable, as is most of the southwest portion of the lot. we do not
recommend acceptance of the building envelope as shown on the preliminary map plan. The entire
portion of the lot #2 north of the power line easement, and the eastern margin, lie within the mapped
landslide and should be excluded from approved building envelopes within the lot.
Lot #1 lies entirely on an alluvial fan. Alluvial fans are created by sediments that are
transported by water. The bulk of the sediment is deposited during debris flow storm events. The
fan shape is the result of the channel constantly moving. They wander over the entire fan because
debris flows have the ability to bridge, or plug off, established channels and create new ones. In our
field inspection we verified that the drainage that divides the two lots comes from a small basin that
only extends to the rock face of the flatirons. That basin is several feet lower than the elevation of
the main drainage where it exits the ridgeline onto the fan. There is only about a two foot saddle of
earth that prevents the lower basin from capturing the main drainage and directing this much larger
flow towards the two lots. Another potential hazard that can result from alluvial fans are
hydrocompactive soils. These soils have the property where they compress, or settle, when they
become wetted. This type of settlement can create serious problems with shallow foundations and
slab on grades.
Our recommendation to the county is that they not grant approval for this land use until the
landowner provides them with a professional engineering geologist's analysis, opinions, and
recommendations on the hazards mentioned above. We recommend that the County resubmit this
additional data to the CGS for our review. If you have any questions please contact this office at
(303) 894-2167.
Sincerely,
z,v4
/Jonathan L. White
Engineering Geologist
SOPRIS ENGINEERING • LLC
CIVIL CONSULTANTS
Kenneth S. Rose
10286 Highway 13
Rifle, CO 81650
November 11, 1996
RE. Ponderosa Subdivision, Sopris Engineering Project No. 96014.01
Dear Mr. Rose:
A percolation test was done on-site at the location of the proposed septic field. The test was performed per
Garfield County standards as required to determine the soil percolation rate. A profile hole of
approximately eight feet in depth was dug and six inches to one foot of topsoil was encountered. The
remaining soil was uniform in type and gradation. The test was performed on July 25, 1996 and the
percolation rate was determined to be one inch in 35 minutes for hole #1. one inch in 27 minutes for hole
#2 and 46 minutes for hole #3. The average is 37 minutes for one inch of percolation. The percolation
rate was very uniform for the three holes and falls close to the middle of the required rate for a standard
septic system.
A standard septic system will be adequate for the on-site soils as long as the septic system is sized for the
home.
If you have any questions or need additional information, please let me know
Sincerely,
Sopris Engineering, LLC
Yancy Nichol. P.E.
Project Engineer
cl"'"
1101 Vtt.LAoe Roho, SUITE UL -38, • CACMONOALS, CO 81623 • 970-704-0311 • FAX: 970-704-0313
11:36 JOHN W SAVAGE
_-14-97 06:33P Kenneth S. Rose
9706250803
970 625 4454
RIFLE FIRE PROTECTION DISTRICT
Ken Rose
10286 highway 13
Rifle, Colorado 81650
April 16, 1996
Re; Subdivision
Mr _ Rose.
As per our discussion on April 12, the Rifle Fire
Protection District has reviewed your proposed subdivision
of the property located at 10286 Highway 13. As we had
discussed, your intentions are to take the property and
split it into two parcels of approximately equal size. The
intentions for the new piece of property are to put one
single family dwelling on the parcel.
This action does not make any significant impacts on
fire protection requirements of the District. The main
concern, as we had discussed, is that a defensible space
should be created around the structure to help and protect
it in the event of a wild lend fire. Obviously, though not
required, I would encourage you to work with the Fire
District and your neighbors to identify potential water
supplies for any fire suppression activities which may
arise in the future.
The Rifle Fire Protection District finds that this
proposal complies with the current standards adopted by
the District. Thank you for your cooperation and feel free
to contact me if I can be of further assistance.
Sincerely,
Mike Morgan
Fire Marshal
Rifle Fire Protection District
Telephone (970) 625-1243 • Fax (970) 625-2963
1850 Railroad Avenue • P.O. Box 1133 • Rifle, Colorado 81650
P.02
P.02