Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1.0 Application• • • • • • P.RE.S.HANA F A R M 3275 100 Road, Carbondale, Colorado 81623 (303) 963-1885 • • • • • • s • • PRESHANA FARMS APPLICATION FOR PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT ZONING AMENDMENT OWNERS HENRY & LANA TRE1TIN 3275 100 Road Carbondale, CO 81623 PLANNING LAND DESIGN PARTNERSHIP, INC. P.C. Box 517 Glenwood Springs, CO 81602 ENGINEFRING HIGH COUNTRY ENGINEERING Village Plaza Glenwood Springs, CO 81601 Revised August 23, 1989 • • ( land design partnership August 3, 1989 Mark Bean, Planning Director 109 8th Glenwood Springs, CO 81602 RE: PRESHANA FARMS PUD Dear Mark: Attached, herewith, is the revised PUD Application for Preshana Farms. This document reflects the recommended conditions of the Planning and Zoning Commissions approval, as well as a zone district name change. The lodging district has been retitled Service Residential District . The Land Use Summary for the project has also been incorporated into your 100 -scale file copy of the PUD Zone Map. Your assistance in the processing of this application has been appreciated. Sincerely, -�7 Ronald B. Liston Attachment: Revised PUD Application P.O. Box 517 • Glenwood Springs, Colorado 81602 918 Cooper Avenue (303) 945-2246 • • • PRESHANA FARMS 3275 100 Road Carbondale, Colorado 81623 (303) 963-1885 April 7, 1989 Board of County Commissioners of Garfield County Garfield County Court House 109 8th Glenwood Springs, CO 81602 RE: Preshana Farm P.U.D. Application Dear Commissioners: Attached herewith, please find the plans and information required by the Garfield County Zoning Regulations, for an application for a zone district amendment. As owners of Preshana Farm, we are requesting to change the present zoning from Agricultural/Residential/Rural Density to Planned Unit Development. It is our goal to create a high-quality equestrian center in accompaniment • with a limited number of very unique residential housing opportunities. The concept of the project will preserve the pastoral open space character of the farm, while creating a very exciting addition to the housing opportunities in the mid/lower valley area. The concept is a compatible and logical extension to the Ranch at Roaring Fork Development. If you have any questions or require additional information, please contact Ron Liston, our planning consultant, at 945-2246. • Sincerely, Mr. & Mrs. Henry & Lana Trettin • • • • • • • • • • PRFSHANA FARM P.U.D Preshana Farm, previously referred to as Saint Finbarr Farm, is bounded on the east by County Road 100, on the north by Highway 82, on the west by the Ranch at Roaring Fork and on the south by what remains of the Saint Finbarr Farm property. The Catherine Store property is located at the northeast corner of Preshana Farm and is not part of the farm property. The site is characterized by extensive equestrian facilities including: Two indoor riding arenas Stable barns Residences and paddocks and, Pastures and equestrian paddocks. The site slopes gently (2-4 percent) from the northeast to the southwest. The majority of the site is characterized by pasture lands and equestrian facilities. In the southwest portion of the site is a strip of land protected by private covenant as a Greenbelt. This area contains extensive mature growth of cottonwood. With the exception of some portions of the Grccnbelt area, the Preshana Farm site is not within the Roaring Fork River 100 -year Flood Plan. The property is presently zoned Agricultural/Residential/Rural Density. The farm is operated as an Equestrian Riding Center, providing horse boarding and training services and facilities. Existing dwelling units on the property are used for employee housing for the Farm Operations. bo • 24 i)_ reek Spr t +6805 rr I' I 1 II I tai o 7/. _'j:6922 ;/' 1p/ -2A i v I , 1 , , b:1 ,77-1- � I I L, - I 4�` 1 \� ii ( i •\ If r, /- - // 70 r6 - � �/ N.. i \ � 1 . 1 \ X6875/ - %;i ,ii' i' - f \ �V���/ 9 7009 X 6285 7 (% 29 -9 4i29i u II orr• \ H ANAa .. 4 0 +6289 6400 'li 4 Y P- •_•.+4:�:io. vipiKNN INL I N. / ! - : "--7 : 7-- 7: 7 kAk : SS\ / 1 /L — _ /Mulford F R — 6284 I ii COUNTYac,RD g%R 32 ��:�73 R - -'67 2_� ( i. v I i i :•• r 6895 z x 6895 \ \ • •\✓ ��i / \ , ��` 'i ' `� �% p L ) o0,- 0 e •F 1 • • 0 Goa, 6e • • • • • • • • • 41 PRESHANA FARM P.U.D PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT CONCEPT Since the acquisition of the farm property, in 1988, the applicant has undertaken extensive improvements and expansions to the equestrian facilities at the farm. A major emphasis of the improvements have been, to not only accommodate the equestrian functions, but to provide a more pleasant facility for the horse owners, students and their guests. Consistent with the high quality of the Preshana Farm Equestrian Center, the applicant proposes to develop a limited number of extremely high quality residential housing opportunities. It is perceived that the market for these housing opportunities may be somewhat diverse in their desires for types of units and property maintenance responsibilities. Preshana Farm is proposed to be divided into five zoning districts generally described as follows: Open Space District: This district contains the pastures and farmlands of the property. Fir uestrianCenter District: Within the Equestrian Center District, are located all the major structures associated with the farm and equestrian activities, as well as employee housing facilities. Included in this district are provisions for a Tack Shop and Veterinary Clinic, which are consistent with the Equestrian Center functions. Residential/Single Family District: Within this district are proposed ,single family lots of 15,000 square feet or larger. These lots face onto a 100 -foot road right-of-way, which incorporates extensive landscaping and water features. The rear of the lots face onto open space tracks of the Polo Field and adiacent properties of Saint Finbarr Farm. The lots are designed so as to provide maximum exposure to the landscaped right-of-way, and to open space. The eastwest orientation of the lots also provides for excellent solar exposure. • • • • • • • • • • • Residential/Cluster Housing District: The Cluster Housing District is designed to accommodate eleven (11) patio homes. The patio homes are grouped around a central courtyard/cul-de-sac and all look out upon open space areas. The patio homes are intended to meet the requirements of buyers" who desire the privacy of a single family dwelling unit, with intensely landscaped outdoor rooms without the responsibility for maintenance of a large residential lot. These lots provide for zero setbacks on one lot line to allow for the maximum utilization of the separation space between structures. Service Residential District: Two attached or detached single family residences are provided for in their district. Most likely these would be occupied by the owner(s) or manager(s) of the Equestrian facility. A bed and breakfast inn and restaurant are allowed as a special use within the District. Given the unique quality of Preshana Farms and the numerous guests and visitors that will frequent the facility, the bed and breakfast inn will be a very complimentary use. The Preshana Farm P.U.D. satisfies a series of sound planning concepts from the County's standpoints. 1. Convenient vehicular access 1/4 mile from Highway 82 at a channelized intersection. 2. It places a new development adjacent to existing development with the potential for joint utilization of utility systems. 3. It preserves the natural character and agricultural uses of the site. The general public will continue to benefit from the visual and open space quality of the site much as it does now. 4. The equestrian center is a clean commercial industry which is a positive economic activity for the area. 5. The character of the project and its location will combine to provide high tax revenues to the county with the minimum impacts on county services. In summary, Preshana Farm P.U.D. will create minimal negative impacts while preserving the natural character of a unique site to the benefit of the public. • • • UTILITY SERVICES It is the desire of Preshana Farms that domestic water service and wastewater treatment be provided through ioint agreements with existing utility systems in the area. Preliminary discussions have been initiated, but no agreements have been identified. If such agreements cannot be achieved, Preshana Farms would develop its own waste water treatment facility and domestic water well and storage facility. It is anticipated any required water rights would be purchased from the Basalt Water Conservancy District. The farm property does have more than adaquate water rights to accommodate the development if this were determined to be desirable. The engineer's statement, contained in this application, contains more detailed information regarding utilities, drainage and water rights. SCHOOL DEDICATION: The Preshana Farm property does not contain adaquate acreage or generate enough school impact to consider the dedication of a school site. The project will make a cash, in lieu of payment, to the School District, as provided for by the R.E.1 Board Policy. COVENANTS: To further assure the development and continuation of the Preshana Farm P.U.D. as a high quality residential area, protective covenants will be recorded along with the final platting of the P.U.D.. Following are topics of particular importance to be included in the covenants. A preliminary draft of these covenants will be provided to the County Planning Department with a preliminary plan submittal. 1. Architectural Committee: --Building siting --Site and structural design --Landscaping --Fencing restrictions 2. Lot Use Restrictions: --Residential structure --Garage/storage structure --Use of Open Space area 3. Animals --No horses or livestock on lot --Dog leashing requirement • c/) • • • • OOL 4VO1 '03 r J OJOV/s}!un 99 —I —I O O D D r r 0 D m O r- O Z c _Z () —I (n O O O 0 Ut (0 1 1 co N O N N 0) 01 0 -. W O O O .a) Zo cr) Cn rn CO v ry N co CC) W N CTS 0 n c (n D 0 rn 0 C XHVININIlls • • • • • • • • 4. Underground Utilities Required: 5. Vehicle Control: --Limitations on recreational vehicle storage 6. General Site Maintenance: 7. Noxious Activities: 8. Easements: 9. Signs: 10. Temporary Structures: b:pfpud2 Revised 8-2-89 i . ` ,/ AfA, , - --- 1 1 c J' / pir�aot .e..n�n,e / \ / / 1 / // 1 • • • 1 • • • / / 1/ /I /,1/ 1 1 /• ? ; 1/ r / i 1 / 1 81 1Cfl / / / ' // / .l1 1 \ - 7 IY / _,/.� \ 1 — %.•/ / 7 \ 11 • / / 1/ 11 / / �, 111 / /• / ,II/ 1 1 ./ / 1 , 1 ill 1•4./ /' / / / / ,'.j � / I11 1. , F,A- , // / / / g // / � i II ! . / ► / - / / i� r / / � 1 1 ►— / , 1 111 / (� /� /� // 1 / L/. / '• /yyJ� ��' / / / / /' •I•- / / / / / / /' �t // —I 7 /•• . // // / / /, •/l 1i 1 I t 1 / / / /! ' 1 �'� // / / 1 // • 1 1 11• // / / / ; i 1 / I / / / 1 i �� 1 \ '' 1 1 •I1 I / / 1 1 .111 CD / 1 1 ,• 1 I. / , l I t7�� 1 7, :.,, ,/ tv/ oot odoa •oo / OO L avow '00 • • • • • • • • • PRESHANA FARM PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT LAND USE SUMMARY Revised 8-02-89 DWELLING ACRES % OF UNITS PUD Open Space District 30.6 52.85 EQUESTRIAN CENTER DIST.(Employee Housing) 10 10.2 17.62 SINGLE FAMILY DISTRICT 15 10.9 18.83 CLUSTER HOUSING DISTRICT 11 3.6 6.22 SERVTCE RESIDENTIAL DISTRICT DWELLTNG UNITS 2 2.6 4.49 LODGING UNITS 10 (by Special Use Review) TOTAL DWELLING UNITS TOTAL LODGING UNITS . GROSS DENSITY(Dwelling Units) .66 Units/Acre 38 57.9 10 100.00 • • • • • • • • • PRESHANA FARM PUD ZONE REGULATIONS 8-23-89 SECTION I. A. To carry out the purposes and provisions of the Garfield County Zoning Resolution, Garfield County, Colorado and particularly, Section 4.00 of that title, as amended, the Preshana Farm Planned Unit Development Zoning District is further divided into the following Zone District Classifications: - Open Space District - Equestrian Center District - Single Family District - Cluster Housing District - Service Residential District B. The boundaries of these districts shall be located as shown on the Preshana Farm P.U.D. Plan, Section II. Open Space District A. Uses, by Right: Agricultural use including farm, garden, nursery, orchards, ranch and customary accessory uses including buildings for shelter or enclosure .of animals or property employeed in any of the above uses. Open Space Equestrian activities including public equestrian events addended by less than 300 spectators. Water impoundments. B. Uses, Conditional: None C. Uses, Special: Public Events - Greater than 300 spectators. • • • Page 2 Preshana Farm PUD Zone Regulations Domestic Water Storage Structure Wastewater Treatment Facility. D. Minimum Lot Area: None E. Maximum Lot Coverage: None F. Minimum Setback: Front Yard 20 Feet Rear Yard 20 Feet Side Yard 20 Feet G. Maximum Building Height: • 25 foot Section III. Equestrian Center District A. Uses, By Right: • • • • • • Agricultural used including farm, garden, nursery, orchards, ranch and customary accessory uses including buildings for shelter or enclosure of persons, animals or property employed in any of the above uses. Single family, two-family, multi -family dwelling, for persons employed on the premises. Riding Stable Tack Shop Veterinary Clinic Kennel Day Nursery, Camp, and School. B. Uses, Conditional: None C. Uses, Special: Domestic Water Storage Structure. Wastewater Treatment Facility. Page 3 Preshana Farm PUD Zone Regulations D. Minimum Lot Area: None E. Maximum Lot Coverage: None F. Minimum Setback: Front yard 25 Feet Rear Yard 25 Feet Side Yard 25 Feet G. Maximum Building Height: 25 Feet H. Off -Street Parking: Single Family Dwelling - 2 parking spaces. Two -Family & Multi -Family Dwelling - 1-1/2 parking spaces. Section IV. Single Family District A. Uses, y Ric ht: Single family dwelling and customary accessory uses including buildings for the enclosure of property accessory to the use of the lot for residential purposes and fences, hedges, gardens, and walls and similar landscape features. No animals shall be kept on a lot except for dogs and cats, which may be kept for non-commercial purposes. Park, open space Water impoundments Live-in maids and caretakers quarters when attached to the primary residence on the lot and not exceeding 650 square feet in floor area Community Recreation Facilities for use of Preshana Farm PUD residents and guests. B. Uses, Conditional: None C. Uses, Special: Wastewater Treatment Facility • • • • • • • • • • • Page 4 Preshana Farm PUD Zone Regulations D. Minimum Lot Area: 14,000 square feet E. Maximum Lot Coverage: 60% F. Minimum Setbacks: Front Yard 20 Feet Rear Yard 20 Feet Side Yard 20 Feet G. Maximum Height of Buildings: 27 feet H. Off -Street Parking: Four parking spaces per single family dwelling unit. One parking space per caretaker unit. The Community Recreation Facility shall provide a minimum of six parking spaces. Section V. Cluster Housing District A. Uses, By Right: Single family and two family dwellings and customary accessory uses including buildings for the enclosure of property accessory to the use of the lot for residential purposes and fences, hedges, gardens; and walls and similar landscape features. No animals shall be kept on a lot except for dogs and cats, which may be kept for non-commercial purposes. Park, open space Water impoundments B. Uses, Conditional: None C. Uses, Special: None D. Minimum Lot Area: 5,000 square feet • • • • • s • • Page 5 Preshana Farm PUD Zone Regulations E. Maximum Lot Coverage: 60% F. Minimum Setbacks: As shown on the Preshana Farm Final Plat G. Maximum Height of Buildings: 27 feet H. Off -Street Parking: Two Parking Spaces/Dwelling Unit Section VI. Service Residential District A. Uses, By Right: Single family and two family dwellings and customary accessory uses including buildings for the enclosure of property accessory to the use of the lot for residential purposes and fences, hedges, gardens, and walls and similar landscape features. No animals shall be kept on a lot except for dogs and cats, which may be kept for non-commercial purposes. B. Uses, Conditional: None C. Uses, Spcial: Bed and Breakfast Inn - (Maximum 10 rooms) Restaurant (Maximum Seating: 80) D. Minimum Lot Area: 15,000 square feet E. Maximum Lot Coverag: 60% F. Minimum Setbacks Frcrn Lodging District Boundaries: Front Yard 20 Feet Rear Yard 20 Feet Side Yard 20 Feet • Page 6 Preshana Farm PUD Zone Regulations • • • • • • • • • G. Maximum Height of Buildings: 25 feet H. Off -Street Parking: Lodging Unit - 1 Restaurant - 1 Single Family Dwelling - 2 Two Family Dwelling - 1 Revised 08-23-89 b:pfzr8-23 parking space/unit space/4 seats parking spaces 1/2 parking spaces. • • • • April 7, 1989 Board of County Commissioners Garfield County, Colorado P.O. Box 640 Glenwood Springs, CO 81601 RE: Preshana Farm Proposed Development HCE Job No. 9010.001 Dear Commissioners: The following information is meant to provide some of the • information required for the Sketch Plan Submittal for the above referenced project. There does not appear to be any natural hazards affecting the area proposed to be developed. The floodplains of the Roaring Fork River and Blue Creek lie southerly of the development, the • floodplain infringes slightly onto the southern edge of the property in the area marked "greenbelt," however, it does not affect any of the area proposed to be developed. Water service shall be provided by a central system, and service is anticipated to be provided by the existing system at the Ranch • at Roaring Fork, which is adjacent to this development. Per information from their engineer, the Ranch at Roaring Fork has sufficient physical supply to serve both itself and Preshana Farm. The existing storage tank is also adequately sized to serve both. Note that no agreement is currently in place for the Ranch at Roaring Fork to provide any service, even though this is the • preferred alternative. However, if no reasonable agreement can be reached, Preshana Farm is prepared to develop their own well based system using water purchased from the Basalt Water Conservancy District. • • Suite 205, Village Plaza • Glenwood Springs, CO 81601 Telephone 303-945-8676 • • • • • • Board of County Commissioners Page 2 April 7, 1989 The preferred alternative for sewage treatment is also to make use of the existing waste water treatment plant at the Ranch at Roaring Fork. However, modifications and additions will be necessary to the existing treatment system to accommodate the additional load. Therefore, again, an agreement would need to be reached on the necessary improvements and their associated cost. If a reasonable agreement cannot be reached, Preshana Farm is prepared to construct their own small sewage treatment plant. Other utilities anticipated to serve this project are as follows: Holy Cross Electric Association Rocky Mountain Natural Gas U.S. West Direct (telephone) A copy of a soils report, which was completed for a previously proposed development on this same property, is included in the material submitted with this package. Sincerely yours, HIGH COUNTRY ENGINEERING, INC. Tim thy P. Beck, P.E. Pro] ; ct Manager • TPB:rjm Enclosure • • • • • • Lincoln DeVore 1000 West Fillmore St. Colorado Springs, Colorado 80907 (303) 632-3593 Home Office Land Design Village Plaza, Suite 208 Glenwood Springs, CO 81601 Attn: Ron Liston Re: Gentlemen: April 4, 1979 GENERAL & ENGINEERING GEOLOGY & SOILS ST. FINBAR PROPERTY GARFIELD COUNTY, COLORADO Transmitted herewith is a report concerning the general and engineering geology and soils of the proposed development • located at the St. Finbar Property, in Garfield County, Colorado. • • Respectfully submitted, LINCOLN-DeVORE TESTING LABORATORY, INC By: Robert L. Bass Civil Engineer By: 11/ Mael T. Weaver Professional Geologist RLB & MTW/vfb LDTL Job No. GS -987 `2700 Highway 50 West Pueblo, Colo 81003 '303) 546.1150 • P.O. Box 1427 Glenwood Springs, Colo 81601 (303) 945-6020 109 Rosemont Plaza Montrose, Colo 81401 (303) 249-7838 Reviewed y George D. Morris Professional Engineer P.O. Box 1882 Grand Junction, Colo 81501 (303) 242-8968 P.O. Box 1643 Rock Springs, Wyo 82901 (307) 382-2649 INTRODUCTION The content of this report is a geological site evaluation and subsurface soils investigation with engineering recommendations for a 142 acre parcel of • land located in the west half of Section 31, Township 7 South, Range 87 West of the 6th Principal Meridian, Gar- field County, Colorado. The site lies between Higha:ay 82 • and the Roaring Fork River, just south of the Catherine Store. A 52 acre tract along Highway 82 is proposed to be left as meadow and pastureland and the remainder of the site to be subdivided into single and/or multiple family dwellings. It is our understanding that central water supply and septic disposal are to be supplied to the property by an ex- tension of the system at the Ranch at the Roaring Fork. Vegetation consists of large cottonwoods along braided stream drainages with many willows, • elms and oak. Mountain grasses, shrubs and other low herbals are abundant. The site is predominately level and con- sists of terrace and river alluvial deposits of the Roar- • ing Fork River. Several drainages and irrigation ditches cross the site in a westerly direction. • • Cu 1CLUSTO1\1 ::171) RECOMNDTAf2pr 41 Since the magnitude and nature of the proposed foundation loads are not precisely known to the Laboratory at this time the recommendations contained herein must be quite general in nature. Any special loads or unusual design conditions should be reported to the Lab- oratory so that changes in these recommendations may be made 41 if necessary. However based upon our analysis of the soil conditions and project characteristics previously outlined the following recommendations are made. a It is our recommendation that shallow foundation systemsconsisting of continuous-foundations beneath bearing walls and isolated spread footings beneath • columns and other points of concentrated load be used to carry the weight of the proposed structures. The presence of shallow ground water will necessitate special consideration 41 in foundation design and this will be discussed in this section. Foundations which rest on the alluvial gravels of Soil Type No. 2 may be proportioned on basis of a maximum 41 allowable bearing capacity of 3000 psf with no minimum dead- load pressure required. The bottoms of foundations should be located a minimum of 3.5 feet below finished grade or greater 4 if dicated by local building codes, for frost protection. Obviously the presence of ground water at a relatively shallow depth will create difficulties • in the installation and performance of basement type found- ation systems. Therefore, basements are not recommended for this site. A crawl space type frame floor or a slab on grade could be used on this site providing special precautions axe taken. If :i ci „w1',pace type foundat:i on i used it in • recommended that_ the interior of the crawl space be backfilled to an elevation equal to or greater than the finished exterior grade in order to minimize the possibility for standing water • in the crawl space. It would then be necessary of course, to construct the floor a sufficient distance above this backfill to provide access if required, and to satisfy any building • codes requirements. If a slab on grade type of foundation is used the floor slabs should be placed above a capillary • break consisting of a clean compacted gravel laver of approx- imately 6 inches in thickness. It is recommended that the bottom of this capillary break layer be located at or above • the finished exterior grade elevation. The capillary break should be provided with a free drainage outlet to the exter- ior so as not to serve as a water trap beneath the floor • slabs. A vapor barrier is recommended beneath all floor slabs between the slab and the capillary break. Floor slabs shoul:l be constructed • in such a manner that they act independently of columns and bearing walls. Additionally, concrete floor slabs on grade should be placed in sections no greater than 25 feet on a • side. Deep construction or contraction joints could be placed at these lines to facilitate even breakage. This will help reduce any unsightly cracking which could be caused • from differential movement of slabs. It is recommended that any topsoil material and any of the soft, silty clays of Soil Type No. 1 which are located in the slab area be completely • removed and replaced with a suitable backfill compacted to • at least 9j% of the maximum stLind:frd iroctc,r dry Oensity, • ASTM D-698. 11: is r-ecoirtnc.nded that the pro- posed foundation systems be well balanced. Exterior bearing • wall pressures should be balanced to within + 500 psf around the entire structure. Isolated interior footings should be designed for unit loads of about 200 psf less than the • average of those selected for the exterior walls. The cri- teria for..this balance will depend somewhat upon the nature of the structure. Single -story slab on grade structures may • be balanced on the basis of deadload only. Other types of structures should be blanced on the basis of deadload plus approximately one-half the live load. • Any stemwalls for continuous footings should be designed as grade beams capable of sf an- ning at least 12 feet. The horizontal reinforcement requir- • ed for this design should be placed continuously around the building with no gaps or b.rea .s in the reinforcingg ._ teel J unless specially deignad. Beans should a reinforced at both top and bottom with the majority of the reinforcement being located at the bottom of the beam. Where stemwalls are placed beneath interior foundation loads they should of course, be designed according to the criteria given above and should be rigidly interconnected with the exterior foundation walls. • • t Adequate drainage must be pro- vided in the foundation area both during and after con- struction to prevent the ponding of water. The ground surface around the building should be graded such that surface water will be crried quick.1, a:.1y from the structure. • Minimum gradient within 10 feet of ..-iy structure will depend upor, surface landscaping. Bare or paved teas should have a minimum gradient of 2%, while landscaped areas should have • a minimum gradient of 5%. Roof drains, if used, should be carried across all backfilled areas and dischargee3 well away from the structure. The overall drainage pattern should • be such that water directed away from one structure is not directed against an adjacent structure. The presence of ground water at shallow depth may create some difficulties in the in- stallation of foundations and dewatering techniques inay be necessary. Typical dewatering techniques would include • well points, drainage ditches, sump pits with pumps, and deep wells. Probably the most practical dewatering system for this particular site would be the use of sump pits • with pumps. Basically this would involve placing several pits or low areas in the foun.c9;; Bio: e •inn and eremoving water from these pits by pu:pping. The nuiTb_f and size of • sump pits required for any given structure and the necessary capacity for pumps are dependent upon many factors and are beyond the scope of this report. Regardless of the type of • dewatering system used, it will be necessary to remove the water from the excavation for sufficient periods of time to permit proper grading of the fooundation soil, placement of concrete and placement of backfill around foundations. Backfill around the proposed stru- cture and in utility trenches leading to the structure should be compacted to at least 90% of the maximum standard Proctor dry density, ASTM D-698. Backfill on the interior of the • Sl.LU4l,l1LE'. W1111.:11 :.111 i)C1'0CaLea U(_nC atn ZJ.00r Slabs Should be compacted to at least 95% of the lt•a::] It t1Ii, Proctol dry density. The native :-oils on this site will be suitable for this backfill, with the exception of any topsoil • materials or debris. Backfill should be placed in lifts not to exceed 6 inches compacted thickness and at a mois- ture content of approximately equal to the Proctor optimum moisture content + 2%. All material in excess of 6 inches 40 diameter should be removed from backfill prior to place- ment. Backfill should be compacted to the required density by mechanical means. No water flooding techniques of any type should be used in the placement of fill on this site. Any topsoil or debris should be removed from the construction area prior to beginning of construction of foundations. Additionally, should any poc- kets of debris, organic material or otherwise unsuitable mat- erial encountered at foundation level, these materials should • be removed and replaced with backfill co;r:_,acted to 95% of the :r&a_rimum Proctor clry density, usin=: the procedures previously outlined. • The open foundaton excavation should be inspected prior to the construction of forms or placement • of concrete to establish that proper design bearing material has been reached and that no debris, soft spots or other unsuitable materials are located within the foundation area. • The silty clay of Soil Type No.1 was noted to contain sulfates in detrimental quantities. Additionally, ground water in this area can be expected to carry significant quantities of sulfates. For these reasons a sulfate resistant cement, such as Type II Cement is re- commended for all concrete which will be in contact with • • • • the :;oi] . Under no circumstances hculd ever be added to a Type II Current, in the event that Type II Cement is difficult to obtain a Type I Cement may be used providing the concrete is separated from the soil by water resistant membranes. It is believed that all pertinent points concerning the subsurface soils on this site have been covered in this report. If soil types and conditions other than those outlined herein are noted during construc- tion on this site, these should be reported to the Laboratory so that changes and recommendations may be made if necessary. Should questions arise or further information be desired please feel free to contact the Laboratory. • 7-•'•^-•-• ? e .f♦ iJ '( .• >~ ✓` .�'L �-� � yam. ✓-•,.Y"-^r.'. �•-ri-r •'1^ Y' Yom.. N.. ✓' r it- Y � v:x�v��yr:.»"1.r3:�. j[T�: •.....5�''b-'� ''r„�s•ti;..-.�.. •-,•tea-Lrr2.`.- .� •r .f'e �`�-'„•', '�'-^. •'.-.. ^�.w �'•,.. �''�•- f- _..-.�-,x .., .5"L'i•,--A :y \S:�ji��� • POLICY OF TITLE INSURANCE ISSUED BY r•: fir. +, • • -7)/Y7\4_ ir4-1 TITIF GUARANTY COMPANY SUBJECT TO THE EXCLUSIONS FROM COVERAGE, THE EXCEPTIONS FROM•COVERAGE CONTAINED IN SCHEDULE. B AND THE CONDITIONS AND STIPULATIONS, STEWART TITLE GUARANTY COMPANY, a Texas corporation, herein called the Company, insures, as of Date of Policy shown in Schedule A, against loss or damage, not exceeding the Amount of Insurance stated in Schedule A, sustained or incurred by the insured by reason of: 1. Title to the estate or interest described in Schedule A being vested other than as stated therein; 2. Any defect in or lien or encumbrance on the title; 3. Unrnarketability of the title; 4. Lack of a right of access to and from the land. The Company will also pay the costs, attorneys' fees and expenses incurred in defense of the title, as insured, but only to the extent provided in the Conditions and Stipulations. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, Stewart Title Guaranty Company has caused this policy to be signed and sealed by its duly authorized officers as of the Date of Policy shown in Schedule A. Chairman of the Countersigned: .4,a,T ,1,I 1 E3" GUARANTY c.ir.rt•:tN5• • t'1Of 18 gv�'e`rt'"ltft of Glenw i Springs, Inc. CompaittOX 430, Glenwood Springs, CO 81502 •• • • • • I• t • City, State EXCLUSIONS FROM COVERAGE The following matters cre expressly excluded from the coverage of this policy and the Company will not pa;• loss or dcmaae, costs, attorneys' fees or expenses which arise by reason of: 1. (a) Any law, ordinance or governmental regulation (including but not limited to building and zoning laws, ordinances, or regulations) restr.cHg, .coloring, prohibiting or relating to (i) the occupancy, use, or enjoyment of the land; (ii) the character, dimensions or location of any improvement now or hereafter erected on the land; (iii) a separation in ownership or o change in the dimensions or area of the land or any parcel of which the land is or was a s_-cn; or (iv) environmental protection, or the effect of any violation of these lawns, ordinances or governmental regulations, except to the extent that a ncr:e of the enforcement thereof or a notice of a defect, lien or encumbrance resulting from a violation cr alleged violation affecting the land has been recorded in the public records et Dote of Policy. (b) Any governmental police power not excluded by (a) above, except to the extent that a notice of the exercise thereof or o notice of a defect, hen cr encumbrance resulting from o violction or alleged violation effecting the lard has been record'd in the public records Dote of Policy, Rights of eminent domain unless notice of the exercise thereof has been recorded in the public records at Date of Policy, but not excluding from .cv: • ce any taking which hes c,curred prior to Date of Policy ,,,hich would be binding on the rights ci o purchaser for value without knowledge. cts, rens, encu :brance-s. adverse claims cr other matters: .r oted, suffered, css:mid or agreed to ^i the insured ci:::ina, t rot known to the Compony, not recorded n the pebt, r_ccrds at Dote of ?c!icy, but known to the insured claimant end not disciosed in writing to ..rarar•y by the insured claimant prior tc the dote the in:urnd claimant beta,' an insured under this policy; rsu!ting in no !os: or c..... tc to the in:cred cloi:r,cnt; or u. c ed s.,,-..:1uent to Cat; of Policy; cr resui' .'c in les :.r der, viiich w: c,:ld not he':e been sutoin .:! if rho ;• . .: ,i c!cimcrni !sod !.o :; vo!ue for the estate or interest insured by his • i' • • • rt. . r) • �i RLH/RM SCHEDULE A Order No.: 15577-G Policy No.: 0-9941-37587 Date of Policy: September 03, 1988 At 4:18 P. M Amount of Insurance: $ 8 7 5 , 000.00 • 1. Name of Insured: LANA TRETTIN AND HENRY TETT zr, AS JOINT TENANTS • • 2. The estate or interest in the land which is covered by this policy is: FEE SIMPLE Title to the estate or interest in the land is vested in: LANA rr TT 1`AND HENRY TRETm ! _S JOTNT TE dAT8.� 4. The land referred to in this policy is described as follows: SET 72,G75 2.. • II• • • • • • • • PROPERTY OWNERS ADJACENT TO PRESHANA FARMS, DA'Z'ED JULY, 17, 1989 Russell C. & Clare C. Cutter P.O. Box 3563 Grand Junction, CO 81502 Jupiter Enterprises c/o Peter VanDomelen 315 East Hyman Ave. Aspen, CO 81611 Glenwood Industrial Bank c/o John A. & Susan K. Tindall P.O. Box 2014 Glenwood Springs, CO 81602 William J. & Jayne M. Gilligan 3222 County Road 100 Carbondale, CO 81623 Kmoco Oil Co. c/o Lael E. & Eddie V. Hughes 3844 County Road 100 Carbondale, CO 81623 Mary Ann Hyde P.O. Box 1557 Aspen, CO 81612 Stanley Lyle & Sarah K. Oliver 15524 Hwy 82 Carbondale, CO 81623 Duanne E. & Martha Shilling 15452 Hwy. 82 Carbondale, CO 81623 Trude Peet ATTN: G.L. Peet Revocable Trust #26704-1 First Trust Co., Inc. P.O. Box 64704 St. Paul, Minn. 55164-0704 Ranch At Roaring Fork 0395 Stagecoach Lane Carbondale, CO 81623 Leonard A & Jean A. Barnes 0900 El Jebel Road El Jebel, CO 81628 Michael T. & Luanne D. Costanzo 0477 Stagecoach Lane Carbondale, CO 81623 • • • cS2Q7/ OCAT and q/VarkE7, LlnC. Reg. Land Surveyors and Engineers 811 Colorado Avenue Glenwood Springs, Colorado 81601 (303) 945-8664 PROPERTY DESCRIPTION A parcel of land situated in a portion of Lots 3, 4, 6, 17, 18 and 19 of Section 31, Township 7 South, Range 87 West of the Sixth Principal Meridian, County of Garfield, State of Colorado, said parcel being more particularly described as follows: Commencing at the Witness Corner to the Northeast Corner of said Section 31, a stone in place; thence S.60°01'05"W. 2350.39 feet to the Southeast Corner of Reception No. 279416, also being a point on the westerly right-of-way of County • Road No. 100, a rebar and cap L.S. No. 10732 in place, the True Point of Beginning; thence S.00°11'29"W. along said westerly right-of-way 827.14 feet to a rebar and cap L.S. No. 10732 in place; thence continuing along said westerly right-of-way S.03°56'29"W. 117.74 feet to a rebar and cap L. S. No. 10732 in place; thence continuing along said westerly right-of-way S.11°37'27"W. 299.44 feet; thence leaving said westerly right-of-way N.72°41'32"W. along a line being northerly of Blue Creek 136.34 feet; thence continuing along a line being northerly of Blue Creek N.77°44'52"W. 317.09 feet; thence continuing along a line being northerly of Blue Creek N.62°48'46"W. 375.98 feet; thence continuing along a line being northerly of Blue Creek N.41°30'29"W. 89.74 feet; thence continuing along a line being northerly of Blue Creek N.81°01'17"W. 285.92 feet; thence N.13°12'20"E. 120.00 feet to a point in an existing fence; thence N.76°47'40"W. along said existing fence 1038.73 feet to a point on the easterly line of Parcel B of Reception No. 375658 (from whence rebar and cap L.S. No. 10732 bears S.00°00'18"W. 263.28 feet); thence N.00°00'18"E. along said easterly line 1013.61 feet to a point on the southerly right-of-way of Colorado State Highway No. 82 as evidenced by existing right-of-way monuments and the existing centerline (whence a rebar and cap L.S. No. 3317 bears S.00°00'18"W. 3.99 feet); thence S.79°56'55"E. along said southerly right-of-way 1982.77 feet; thence S.10°30'58"W. along the easterly line of said Reception No. 279416 133.47 feet to a rebar and cap L.S. No. 10732 in place; thence S.79°44'32"E. along the southerly line of said Reception No. 279416 247.29 feet to the True Point of Beginning; said parcel containing 57.889 acres, more or less. Together with a perpetual easement being a portion of Parcel "B" shown in Reception No. 375658 situated in a portion of Lot 17 of Section 31, Township 7 South, Range 87 West of the Sixth Principal Meridian, County of Garfield, State of Colorado; said easment being more particularly described as follows: Commencing at the Witness Corner to the Northeast Corner of said Section 31, a stone in place; thence S.81°10'28"W. 4257.59 feet to a point on the southerly right-of-way of State Highway No. 82, the True Point of Beginning; thence S.00°00'18"W. along the easterly line of said Parcel "B" 1013.61 feet to a point on an existing fence; thence N.76°47'40"W. along said fence 67.27 feet to a point on the westerly line of said Parcel "B"; thence N.00°07'35"E. along said westerly line 1009.48 feet to a point on the southerly right-of-way of said State Highway No. 82; thence S.79°56'55"E. along said southerly right-of- way 64.35 feet to the True Point of Beginning; said easement containing 1.496 acres, more or less. December 2, 1987