The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About7.0 CorrespondenceIITI'ITIIT'I IIIIIIIII ITI FIESbUHCE ENGINEEFlING INC Mr. Fred Jarman Garfield County Building and Planning Dept 108 8th Street, Suite 401 Glenwood Springs CO 81601 RE: The Rapids on the Colorado PUD and Preliminary Plan Supplemental Submittal Review November 1,2006 NOv 0 I 2006 r.'rj . r.-: Dear Fred: At the request of Garfietd County, Resource Engineering, lnc. (RESOURCE) has reviewed the Planned Unit Development and Preliminary Plan supplemental submittal for The Rapids on the Colorado Subdivision near New Castle. The submittal includes three spiral bound books dated October 5, 2006. A traffic report from Kimley-Horn and Associates received via email October 31, 2006, an October 9, 2006 letter with attachment from Leavenworth and Karp, P.C. and a set of 16 drawings dated September 27, 2006. Our review of technical criteria includes water supply/water rights, wastewater, drainage, soils/geology, traffic/roads, and other agency permitting. Our comments are presented below and are based on the Preliminary Plan Subdivision Regulation requirements since the Preliminary Plan is included with the PUD submittal. WATER RIGHTS AND WATER SUPPLY The 104 lot subdivision is proposed to be served by a central water system utilizing two wells, an existing treatment, system, an existing 150,000 gallon storage tank, and a distribution system (some of which is existing) designed to provide fire flow. The existing water system design was approved by the Colorado Department of Public Health and Environment (CDPHE). The potable water system will provide water for in-house and fire protection uses only. All irrigation will be from a non potable irrigation system using water from the Moore Ditch. The potable water diversions are included in a plan for augmentation decreed in Case No. W-3262. Such decree augments out-of-priority depletions during the irrigation season. The Applicant has obtained one acre foot of contract water from the West Divide Water Conservancy District, but such amount does not appear to be adequate. The Applicant should obtain an amended water allotment contract for additional water prior to the BOCC hearing. The existing water system is owned by The Rapids on the Colorado Homeowners Association. A letter indicating that the HOA will provide service to the proposed 104 lots is included in the submittal. WASTEWATER The wastewater collection and disposal for the project is proposed to be through a central system. The Applicant has submitted a site application to the CDPHE for ConsulEing Engineens and Hydnologists 9OB Colonado Avenue I Glenwood Spnings, CO El1601 I [97O) 945-6777 I Fax t97O)945,-1137 Mr. Fred Jarman Page2 approval of a 45,000 gallon per day treatment facility. The site approved prior to any Final Plat approval. November 1, 2006 application must be DRAINAGE The drainage study and analysis is consistent with standard practices and meets GARCO criteria. The drainage -ptan provides for conveyance of storm water through the property and management oi *'"t"r io address water quality impacts from development lctivitiei. The pla-n generally routes off site drainage around the lots with surface drainage structuies or'into the control pond and orlt t9 the river open space in a pipe' i6e Oiicnarge of all drainage systems is to grass lined swales prior to discharge to the river. The river frontage lots are within the flood fringe area of the floodplain boundary. This lot area was the suuiect of a Floodplain Speciil Use Permit for the original subdivision' The area was filled to raise the lot area above the 100 year base flood elevation' As a result, the proposed lots are shown to be outside of the fioodplain. Portions of proposed Lots i through l, iO through 18 and the wastewater treatment plant site are within the floodplain O5unaary, Oui Etevated above the 100 year base flood elevation' lt is recommended that'a new administrative Floodplain Permit be obtained for this project due to the above and due to permit conditions which conflict with the new project and our review recommendations dt tne proposed project. clean up of the floodplain permit issues is a relativeiy sirpfe adminisirative procedure and should be completed prior to the BOCC hearing. SOILS'GEOLOGY Site constraints identified in the 1980 Lincoln-Devore Study include debris flow potential, debris fans, high grounO water, and soils which are subject to differential movement when loaded or *Ltt"d. The old 1980 report does not map the hazard-areas. The jr"Aing and drainage ptan has been modified to provide for mitigation of debris flow hazards. Based on the hazards present, we recommend that a plat note be added requiring that individual site speciiic beotecrrnical investigations and foundation design be submitted with the building permit application. TRAFF!C'ROADS The proposed subdivision will generate 1,078 average daily trips (lOn' This requires the rirain loop road to Oe designed as a minor collector. (We disagree with Kimley- Horn's prorata lot count analysii for downsizing the design.) A minor collector road has ;60 f*t right-of-wiy, lz loot lanes, and minimum 4 foot shoulder. The existing loop road has 11 foot rin6i, a 2 foot curb and gutter, a 4 foot sidewalk, and a proposed- 50 foot right-of-way "i""pi for 450 feet at thJ county road entrance which has a 60 foot right-o:f-way. T[re PUD text should indicate that the request is for the above noted road s6ction such that a variance to the County Standard can be approved for the Preliminary Plan design. iii:iFlESOUFICE !!:!:=NGTNEERTNG rNC November 1, 2006 The traffic study does not address the fact that County Road 335 is in poor condition in several areas and in need of improvement for existing traffic. However this project is.in a Oesignated road lmpact fee area and the presumption is that the fee was based on the need to improve the road. The recommended formula for the road impact fee is based on the theoretical calculation for the project takinj into account the exisiing project This translates to one-half of the iorJ inip.Li fee for"71 lots at final plat ano one haF of the road impact fee at building permit for all remaining un-built lots. OTHER AGENCY PERMITS There does not appear to be any Section 404 wetland issues within the proposed development portion of the property. As mentioned above, approval of the wastewater treatment ptant is required fiom CDPSE prior to any Final Plat approvf. A Storm Water OL"n"rg"'permit and a Construction Dewatering irermit from CDPHE will be required for construction of the additional subdivision improvements. Please call if you have any questions or need additional information' Sincerely, Mr. Fred Jarman Page 3 RESOURCE NG, INC. MichaelJ. Water Engineer MJUmmm 885-50.0 KlClienbESS GARCO\50.0 The RapkJs on the Cob\rw prelim pud'doc iii:iFtESOUFICE :!!!!=NGINEEFtTNG rNC LOYALE. LEAVENWORTH SANDERN. KARP JAMES S. NEU KARLJ. HANLON SUSANW. LAATSCH ANNAS.ITENBERG MICHAELJ. SAWYER CASSIAR. FI,JRMAN BETH E. KINNE CASSANDRAL. COLEMAN LAI.'RAM. WASSMUTI{ LEAVENWORTH & KARP, P.C. ATTORNEYS AT LAW 2OI I4TH STREET, SUITE 2OO P. O. DRAWER 2O3O GLENWOOD SPRINGS, COLORADO 81602 Telephone: (97 0) 9 45 -2261 Facsimile: (97 0) 945 -7 336 kjh@lklawfirm.com August 9,2006 DENVER OFFICE:* 7OO WASHINGTON ST. STE 702 DENVER, COLORADO 80203 Telephone: (303) 825-3995 *(Please direct all conespondence to our Glenwood Springs ffice) Mark Bean, Director Garfield County Building & Planning Departrnent 108 8d" suite 201 Glenwood Springs, CO 81601 Re: Rapids Development Application supplemental materials Dear Mark: Attached please find the following: l. Revised drawings from Chris Hale, 2. Correspondence dated August 2,2006 from Chris Hale, P.E. regarding revisions to site plan. 3. Correspondence dated August 4 ,2006 from Chris Hale, P.E. regarding Special Use Permit. 4. Correspondence dated August 2,2ll6from Burning Mountain Fire Protection District. 5. Correspondence dated August 7,2006 from Peter Belau, P.E. regarding potable water system. Veryh'rlyyours, LEAVENWORTH & KARP, P.C. KJIVcak MOUNTAIN CROSS ENGINEERING, INC. Crvn eNo Eruvrnoxrr,ttNter CoNsutrtHc mo Drstcr.t August 2,2006 Resource Engineering, Inc. Mr. Michael Erion 909 Colorado Avenue Glenwood Springs, CO 81601 Rapids on the Colorado PUD Dear Michael: Attached are letters and plan sheets that have been submitted to address cornrents as follows: Sanitary Sewer profiles have been included in the plan and profile sheets per your comments from the letter dated July 11, 2006. Mr. Jonathan White of the Colorado Geologic Survey states in a letter dated June 30, 2006, " . .. the site has relatively benign geologic hazards conditions." He also metrtions that " .... the first lot on the west side of Paddlewheel should incorporate some type of shallow swale/berm configrration in its landscaping to redirect any possible. flows to the west, towards the adjacent open space." These recommendations have been incorporated and are shown on the Drainage plan. It is our request that the letter and incorporations of comments from the Geologic Survey satisfu the request for a mitigation or avoidance plan under Soils/Geology. The letter from Mr. White has been attached for your use. The Drainage plan has been modified to include general notes describing construction methods for topsoil and revegetation per comments from Steve Anthony. A letter from Mr. Brit Mclin of the Burning Mountain Fire Protection District is attached. The balance of your comments will be addressed by others. Feel free to call with any questions or comments. Thank you for your help in this mafter. Attachments Karl Hanlon, Leavenworth & Karp, d attachments Richard Wheeler, Garfield County, w/ attachments 826112 Grand Avenue . Clenwood Springs, CO 815O1 PH: 97O.945.5544 o FAX: 970.945.5558 . www.mountaincross-eng.com STATE OF COLORADO COLORADO GEOLOGICAL SURVEY Department of Natural Resources 1313 Sherman Street, Room 715 Denver, CO 80203 Phone: (303)86&2611 Fax (303)866-2461 RflCEHVEB JUL 1 I 2006 GARFIELD COUI.JTY BUILDING & PLANNiNG CGS LUR No. GA-06-0011 Legal: SW%, Sec. 4, Sec. 12, T63, R91W June 30,2006 Mr. Richard Wheeler Garfield County Building and Planning Department 109 8t Street, Suite 201 Glenwood Springs, CO 81601 RE: Geologic Hazards Review of the Rapids on the Colorado PUD. DearMr. Wheeler, NATURAL RESOURCES Bill Oil,ens Govemor Russell Georgp Executive Director Vincent MatlhewE Division Direcior and State Geologist 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 by your office. The CGS had previously reviewed this land parcel in 1996 and delivered to your office a generally favorable land- use review letter dated June 28, 1996 that was addressed to Mr. Eric McCafferty (CGS LUR No. GA-96-0015). The proposed PUD has a significant change in housing density so CGS conducted another site investigation on Jwrc29,2006. Please consider the following observations and recommendations are you review the proposed PUD. It appears the property is in a state of suspended development. The entire road network is in place and four newer homes have been constructed on Rapids View Lane near the intersection with Paddlewheel Lane. Some of the homes are vacant and all appear in a state of semi-abandonment without landscaping. It is uncertain by us whether the proposed lot boundaries shown in the March 30, 2005 preliminary plan we received fits the current home footprints. We understand that a central wastewater heatment plant is included with the development plan. As stated in our earlier 1996 review, the site has relatively benign geologrc hazard conditions. The site lies on an old river terrace and packed river gravel shallowly underlie the property, which are overlain by fine-grained soils that likely thicken towards CR 335 and the upper slope bank. These thin mantles of fine-grained soils overlying the gravel may be hydrocompactive so site-specific foundation investigations are recommended. There are two other hazard potential areas. One is the minor risk of shallow failures or sloughing of the slope above the site, which is not a significant hazardbecause such a small slope failure would need to cross CR 335 before entering COLORADO DEPARTMENT OF the development. The second is the possibility of minor debris flow flooding from the small drainage basin that exits onto CR 335 across from the Paddlewheel Lane turn-off. There is a possibility that concentrated flows could cross the roadway into the development. The existing 18- inch culvert is poorly maintained and almost completely plugged off. The first lot on the west side of Paddlewheel should incorporate some type of shallow swale/berm configuration in its landscapin to re-direct any possible flows to the west, towards the adjacent open space. In ctosing, provided the observations and recommendations state above are noted and complied with, we have no further concern with the development has it is presently intended. If any interested party has any questions about this review letter, please contact this office at (303) 8 66-3 5 5 1 or e-mail : i onathan.white@.state.co.us Sincerely, onathan L. White Senior Engineering Geologist Raylids 'rlr '-h'- ('uir;riii'T . i')l: 01 OG 06: OZP Rdmin BURNING 6I I Main St. P.O. Box2 Silt, CO- 81652 970 -876-2'77 4 p.1 iI{OUNTAINS FIRE PROTECTION DISTR.ICT Britc. Mcl.inchief Phone: tgzo) szGsz3g Fax: (970) 8iG2774 E-Mail: burningmountainschief@msn.com 2 tugust2006 Garfield Cormty Building and Flaaning I have reviewed the PtlD proposal known as the Rapids and have met with Ckis Flale- The street widths are adequate so long as there is no parking allowed and &ey are so posted. Theradii of the cul de sacs zre acceptable. The proposed water storage will be accepcable, particularly if fire departnaeat acce$s via a dry standpipe inthe pond is gra*ted. The proposed fire hydrant spacing will likely be acceptable barring any unusual hrilding envelopas on th proposed lo,ts. Should the developer elect to roquire that dl new residences be provide wi& automatic fire sprinklers, the hydrant densrty rnay be reduced. I f you have any questions, please fel free to contact rne. Yours tnrly, ---'-" ");,Fn!! r-.t-r...jair:-_r!__"_ " Efil c h{clin FROI1 : Mounta inCrossEnq' I nc FAX N0. :9789455558 r E4 2BO6 AS:BSPN P? PIOUNTAIN'CROSS ENGINEERING, INE. 909 Colorddo Avenue .RE: Tliank ir"u &r taking thc timc tb talk *ith m.e ioaay.' The p,urposo.of thii cortespondcnob ic to chtif youl . icel fi,ec hi.crill *itir lny q,rc tions or bomments, thanks egsin for lour help in this m6ttgr, 'Sitrcorelyr. August 7,2006 Public Healttr Engineer DdnkingWater Progtam Water Q"rlity Contol Division Colorado Dept of Public Health 4300 Cherry Cteek Dtive South Denver, CO 8024G1530 SUBJECT: RAPIDS ON THE COLORADO SUBDTVISION, GARFIELD COTINTY Dear Public Healtl F.ngrneer The design and construction speciEcations for the water supply systern refercnced above were apqtoved by the Watet Quality Control Division on January 9, l9g7: A PWSID number was not assigned at that time. I yot tr: dolgn errgneer for ttris water system and I was also the eogineer that inspected the construction of the watet supply facilities ti 1997. I hereby cemi& that the water suPPly facilities fot thg Rapids on the CJorado Subdivision in Garfield County were built as approved by the Water Quality Coatol Division. Please assign a PWSID number forthis sysretrr. Sincerely, Petet Belau, P.E. cc: Chds Hale, Mountain Cross Engineedng Gene Hilton 1053 CLOUD CAP AVENUE PAGOSA SPRINGS, CO 8r147 970-946-8595 I Mounta i nGroSSEng., I nc FRX NO.:9749455558 tg. @4 ?A@6 As:A1Pfi P2 August 4, 2006 Rehource Engir:eering Lnc. r Mr. Miohael Erion 909 Colonido Avenue j Glenwood Springs, CO 81601 ,REr Rupidr on thc Colorndo PUI), Flood Plain $pccial Uro Peimit Dear Michaeh a Thank you for rakiry the time io mlk with me tnday. The purpose of this correspondence is to clarif! your oomments from your letter dated July I l, 2006. : ' , ., ,i -' ' ThE diecuision concemiug the river lote wos for'hietorical purposes atrd therc wae NOT au ieeue concerning them or the elcvations. As wc discussed, lhe previous special use permit was obtainrcd in ordor 1o Fis0thq finished floor elevations above the adjaoent tOO-yoar haso flood elevation. Ilvidenco of that having been Si.nodrely, ss Enginc C: Gene Hilton Katl Haalon, Leavettworth and Iftrp nighard Whecler, Oar.field County MOUNTAIN CROSS ENSINEERING, IN€. CNtt ANn ENvtBoNMnNT t Cot'uurlnc,rNp 0r$cx ale, PE t zG. t/z Crul{- luglue . Gionwood Springs, CO Bt60tpHr 970'945.S5!4 1 .FAX:, 970.9rr.iisi,'i www.mountaincross.en*.com RECETVED AUE $ ? 2006 8fis'ffi?l'8H't'll August 2,2006 Resource Engineering, Inc. Mr. Michael Erion 909 Colorado Avenue Glenwood Springs, CO 81601 RE: Rapids on the Colorado PUD Dear Michael: Attached are letters and plan sheets that have been submitted to address comments as follows: o Sanitary Sewer profiles have been included in the plan and profile sheets per your comments froin the letter dated July 11, 2006. o Mr. Jonathan White of the Colorado Geologic Survey states in a letter dated June 30,2006, " "' the site has relatively benign geologic hazards conditions." He also mentions that " ... the first lot on the west side of paddlewheel should incorporate some type of shallow swale/berm configuration in is landscaping to redirect any possible flows to the west, towards the adjacent open space'" These recommendations have been incorporated and are shown on the Drainage plan. It is our request that the letter and incorporations of comments from the Geologic Survey satisfu the request for a mitigation or avoidance plan under Soils/Geology. The letter from Mr. White has been attached for your use' . The Drainage plan has been modified to include general notes describing construction methods for topsoil and revegetation per comments from Steve Anthony' o A letter from Mr. Brit Mclin of the Burning Mountain Fire Protection District is attached' The balance of your comments will.be addressed by others. Feel free to call with any questions or comments. Thank you for your help in this maffer. Attachments C: Gene Hilton, w/ atiachments Karl Hanlon, Leavenworth & Karp, wl attachments Richard Wheeler, Garfield County, w/ attachments 826 DrJ. O7n qr( MOUNTAIN CROSS ENGINEERING, INC. Crvu nNo ENvtnoNuenret Corusurrtxc lNo Dr$cN 'l12 Grand Avenue ' Glenwood Springs, CO 81601 11/la d EAY. q7n or(tr < tr Q a larl^rl^, mnr rnf linnv^cc-onfi '^m STATE OF COLORADO COLORADOCOLORADO GEOLOGICAL Department of Natural Resources 1313 Sherman Sheet, Room 715 Denver, CO 80203 Phone: (303)866-2611 Fax (303)86G2461 June 30,2006 Mr. Richard Wheeler Garfield County Building and Planning Department 109 8t Street, Suite 201 Glenwood Springs, CO 81601 DEPARTMENTOF NATURAL RESOURCES Bill O/vens Govemor Russell George Executive Director Vincent Matthews Division Director and State Geologist RE: Geologic Hazards Review of the Rapids on the Colorado PUD. Dear Mr. Wheeler, 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 by your office. The CGS had previously reviewed this land parcel in 1996 and delivered to your office a generally favorable land- use review letter dated June 28, 1996 that was addressed to Mr. Eric McCaffety (CGS LUR No. GA-96-0015). The proposed PUD has a significant change in housing density so CGS conducted another site investigation on June 29, 2006. Please consider the following observations and recommendations are you review the proposed PIJD. It appears the property is in a state of suspended development. The entire road nefirork is in place and four newer homes have been conskucted on Rapids View Lane near the intersection with Paddlewheel Lane. Some of the homes are vacant and all appear in a state of semi-abandonment without landscaping. It is uncertain by us whether the proposed lot boundaries shown in the March 30, 2005 preliminary plan we received fits the current home footprints. We understand that acentral wastewater heatment plant is included with the development plan. As stated in our earlier 1996 review, the site has relatively benign geologic hazard conditions. The site lies on an old river terrace and packed river gravel shallowly underlie the property, which are overlain by fine-grained soils that likely thicken towards CR 335 and the upper slope bank. These thin mantles of fine-grained soils overlying the gravel may be hydrocompactive so site-specific foundation investigations are recommended. There are two other hazard potential areas. One is the minor risk of shallow failures or sloughing of the slope above the site, which is not a significant hazard.because such a small slope failure would need to cross CR 335 before entering the development. The second is the possibility of minor debris flow flooding from the small drainage basin that exits onto CR 335 across from the Paddlewheel Lane turn.off. There is a possibiiity that concentrated flows could cross the roadway into the development. The existing 18- inch culvert is poorly maintained and almost completely plugged off. The first lot on the west side of paddlewheel should incorporate some type of shallow swale/berm configuration in its landscaping to re-direct any possible flows to the west, towards the adjacent open space. In closing, provided the observations and recommendations state above are noted and complied with, ie-have no further concem with the development has it is presently intended' If any interested party has any questions about this review letter, please contact this office at (303) 866-3 5 5 1 or e-mail: i onathan.white@state.co'us Sincerely, Senior Engineering Geolo gi st ? ai;irls,iri'ti:u 1.. t.ilr.r r'itl,i:, i:ragl 1: 9?O-8?6 -2774 L{OUNTAINS F'TRE PROT'ECTION DIST'RTCT Brit C. Mcl,in Chief Phone: t970) 87G5738 Fax: (970) 876'?774 E-N{ail : burningrnountainschief@.msn. com p.1 O1 OG O6:O2P Rdmin BURNING 6I I Main St. P.O. Box2 Silt, CO.81652 2.Augus 2006 Garfietd Cormty Buitding and Flaaning I have reviewed the PIID proposal known as the Rapids and have met with Chis Flale. The street widths are adequate so long as there is no parking allowed and they are r" p"""a. The radii of t}e cul dL sacs "tt u"t"ptuble^ The proposed water storage will G'"o"pt"U[e, particulafly if fi.re departrnent acoessvja a dry standpipe inthe pond is granted. The proposed nr" nya.*fPacing will likely beacceptable ba{nng any unusual 6"ifar"g "rrrelop"s on the prJp"*"a Utt. S-ir*ta the developer elect to require that all new residences be providewith automatic fire sprinklers, the hydrant densrty may be reduced. I f you have any questionx please f'eel free to contact me. :NountaincliossEng, Inc FRX N0. :9ZA94S55SB lus. 04 zgZG OstATPn P1 Mounlain Crass E ngineering, Inc, Civil artd Environmental Consulting and De,tign 826 % Grand Avenue, Olenwood Springs, CO Sld|l Plr: 970.945,5544, Fx: 970.945.5S5{t FAX TRANSMTSSION MEMO DATE: 08/04/06 NUMBER OF pACiHS (TNCLUDING THIS CO\mR SHEET) 2 ", - Attachcd is the letter we discussed. The original is in the mail. Feel frec to call if you have arry questions or comments. C: Gcnc Hilton, #303,79S.t 7SO{ / Karl Hanlon, Leuvenworth and Karp, #94l.n3dv,. Richard Wheeler, Carfrcld County, #3t43470 { REctry&,e AUG a 7 zonn '?,rffi8?,ffi.trJJ FR0l'1 : NountaincrossEng, Inc FRX N0. :97A9455558 ,u9. @4 2A@5 OsiA?Pn MOUNTATN CROSS ENGINEERING, INC. CNI AND Exvnonmnxml CoNfurTrNc AND pE$cN ' P2 August 4, 2006 Thank you fgr uking the tinre io mlk with mp today. The purpgse.of this coneqpondence is to clari$ lour Rehource Engineering; Inc. Mr. Miahael Erion' 909 Colomdo Avenue j REI ltupidr on thc Cirklrndo PUtt, f,'lood Plain Spcwial Uro Peimit oomm€nts from your letter dated July I l, 2006. Ths diocussion concemiug ttte rivcr lots wos for'historical purpoees ancl there wna NOT atr iesue concerning them or the elcvations. As wc cliscusse{ the previous special use permit was obtained in ordor to raisO"the finished floor elcvations above the adjacent l00-yoar base floodleievation, Evidcnce of that hayingbcdn done adequately is given by way of a letter dated December 30, t998 Uy neter Belau nom gnartech, lnc. 'Yout qommcnt oonoeming thc spcoial usc pcrynit is,specifically conccnrcd with the conditions that moy.not be applicabte to thc prgposcd PUD subdivision. : ,] , . Feel free to call wrth any qucstiotrn or oommenH. Thanks again f.or your help in thih mettor, , Katl l{aulon, Leavenworth and IGrp Righard Whecler, Oarfield County sze.tlz Grand Avonue . Gionwood.Springs, CO Bl60IPHr 920.948.5544 i fAXz.97A,94.E.#il'. wrryw.mountaincross.ens.com Crug Schultz 2859 CountY Road 335 New Castle,CO 81647 November 6,2006 Garfreld CountY AttorneY Re: Possible conflict of interest To Whom It MaY Concern: On August g,2[O6there was ameeting of the Garfield.County Planning Commission addressing trr" proporla puD for trr. d"piar on the.lolo1ado subdivision' There was a motionby a committee member,o r".oil*"nd denial' which failed ona4-3 vote' There was a motion ro, ,orrti*ance which passed on a 4-3 vote' Subsequent to the meeting' it came to light that ;;;i ,". membei e"i F"il"non may have a conflict of interest' I am forwarding tftit i"f"t-"ii"n to you for your review and direction' per the enclosed membership roster of real estate agents, Bob Fullerton is an agent for Glenwood grok rr]-Pri tfr" rn"tor.a p't"t"gr"pft1,b1to*ood Brokers is the listing agent for the rental prop.rti., currently .orrt o,tJd on the property' It has been stated' but I cannot provide d";;;;iion, ihut *;;il *"" ro' sale on the property' Glenwood Brokers was the listing agent for the rott. rnit has the appearance of a conflict of interest, and I would request that you i""i"*,t i, situation and provide your guidance. IfyoudeemthereisaconflictofinterestthatshouldhaverecusedFullertonfromvoting, then your goiaaoce ;il b" ,r"ed"a u, fofi",ton would have cast the deciding vote on the motion for denial, and the motion fo, ,onti,,o*"e' If you deem there is not a conflict of interest, then everything is fine as it stands' The next meeting on this PUD application is scheduledfor 11/8/6' Thank you for your attention to this matter' Craig Schultz Enclosures Copy of MembershiP Roster 1 Pag^e , ii.:i"gt"prtt of subject property - 2 photographs I Ph. No. Vfr Tqb , Net+O raxno' ?:ril..ffi I ' lV 5O CI--ORADO GEOLOGICAL SUh' iY SUBMTTTAL iOCna FOR LAND-USE REVIEWS CountY Project Name APPLICANT (or Appticant,s Authorized Represent tirl-i""ponsible lor paying CGgreview fee) Name Address CGS LAND USE REVIEWS Geological studies are required by Colorado counties for all subdivisions of unincorpo- rated land into parceis of^less Uran gS uo"r, under State statute C'R'S' 30-28-101 et seq' (Senate Bill 35, fgZZi. -So*; Qq"*99.*""i9ipuiiti"t require geological studies for sub- division of incorporat"JUrra. In addition,loial governments are emPowered to regu- late development u.tiriti", in hazardoril. *i"Jtal-resource areas under C'R'S' 24-65'1- i.0i. et seq. (Hous" riiii roar, 1974) and.C.R.S. 34.1,-3o1et seq' (House Bill1529'1973)' respectivelY. Local-government agencies sulmif proposed subdivision applications and supporting technical reports aoit," Colorado C*fo'gi.uiSurvey ":::1:1.;vul"ation of those geologic factors which would have significant i#pact on the proposed use of the land"' in accor- dance with State statutes. Th"e CGS reviews the submitted documents and Serves as a technical advisor to tocal-government planning agencies {uring the planning Process' Since 1984, the CGS has been requir"d!; h* ?o [to""t the full direct cost of perform- ing such reviews. The adequate knowledge of a site's.geology is essentialfor any development project' It is needed at the start of the project i.;J!; to plan, desi4, and construct a-safe devel- opment. proper p1;;;;il gJotogicat conditions can hilp developers and future oirrr"r, /.rr"., ."dr." unnecessary maintenance and / or repair costs' Colorado Geological SurueY iCii sn"-.n Stt"el, Room 715, Denver' co 80203 Ph: 303-866'261 1, Fd: 303-866-2461 http://gsosuruey.stalo.co.us White coPY to CGS Y€llow coPY to Plannlng Agency Pink coPY to APpllcant G:LURD/application torm.qxd created Uld98, rwised 9/9/02 Yn11r,*'1n'1nf Township-$-5oud- Range I t lu^)a,.f Frequently Asked euestions and Answers Regarding the CGS Land Use Review process 1 lMy am I required to haoe a CGS retsieta zohen I already hired and paid for my own consultant? 1n1972, Senate Bill 35 was passed stating that any person or entity subdividing a property into parcels of 35 acres or less onunincorporated land must submit geologic or geotechnical reports to the County as part of the preliminary plat application process. Municipalities or public agencies may request that CGSreview a site, although these reviews are not governed by the statute. 2 Why is a CGS reaiezo necessary tthen I already hired my own geologist? The CGS review is an independent third_party review that is done.for the County, similar to the service a building inspector provides for construction review. The purpose of the CG-s review is to ensure that all geologic concerns hu,r" be"., adequately identified and addressed in the geologic reports and that the proposed development is feasible. 3 Why does CGS charge for land use reztiews? Doesn,t taxpayer money pay for this seruice? CGS land use reviews are not subsidized through the general fund, although some other review agencies are supporled by taxpayer money. In 1984 the state legislature decided that C-GSreviews should be paid for with fees paid by the applicant of the proposed development so that taxpayers are not viewed assubsidizing development. 4 Did the CGS geologist make a field oisit to the site? A CGS geologist yisits each site being reviewed. If the review is are-submittal for a site that has been visited previously, a second site visit may not be necessary. If significani changes have occurred since the initial review, the site may be vlsited again. 5 Why is the CGS reoieut letter so short and simple? What is my fee paying for? The CGS letter is a review of the geologic material submitted and reflects the level of detail contained in ihose documents. CGS does not offer designs, but rather ensures that the work that has been done is meaningful and adequate for the site conditions and p_roposed development. A site review that adequately addresses all the geologic conditions present at the site miy be a short confirmation letter. If more work needs to be done or if difficurt site conditions are present, the letter may be longer. 6 What type of information do I need to submit to CGS for a land use teztiew? The more geologic information that is submitted to CGS, the easier it is for CGS to evaluate the property. The required documents may vary based on countyrequirements and the potential problems that may impact the proposed development. A topographic map is essential. Also, information regarding slope, surficial materials, subsurface materials and bidrockl presence of groundwater and depth, and specific geologic hazards should be included, where applicable. Griding"plans, frllage plans, and geotechnical testing results are utso- ,ery helpful for the review. The presence of geologic hazards should be_evaluated with respect to the developmenl plan. Also, the effect of development on geologic conditions should be discussed. The evaluation should include alternatives such as avoidance and mitigation techniques. 7 The subilioision down the road was apptooed, why uasn,t mine? There could be several reasons: geologic condition! can change over short distances; subdivisions made prior to 1972were not required to undergo a CGS review and may have not been evaluated for geologic suitability at all; the area down the road may be incorporated as part of a municipality, which exempts itfrom the CGS review process. Another consideration is thai geologic reviews are continually evolving and site conditions that have been judged acceptable in the past may no longer be considered as such, based on the currenf undersLnding "of the geologic processes and adverse impacts associated with them. 8 Why are CGS reoieuts reiquired eoen ofl low-density properties? Senate Bill 35 pertains to subdivisions ofless than 55 acres. Geologic hazards can occur on large-scales or small_scales; relying on low-density subdivision can not mitigate all geologic hazards. For instance, entire hillsides might be prone to rockfall or landslide hazards. Large tracts of land may be subject to groundwater problems. 9 Why can't I just use the soil consentation maps for a geologic report? The USDA soil conservation maps are a good start for geologic investigations, but do not contain sufficient detail on Ui" poiiUtu geologic problems that may occur at any site. 70 Aren't some of yout reoiew comments beyond the scope of geologic hazards on my site? Technically other agencies have regulatory authority regarding issues such as flood plains, groundwater ivailability ani wildfire, but these issues are also important factors in the overall geologic context of the site and may iffect geologic hazards on the site. The mention of a condition in the iGs review letter is not intended to influence the statutory authority of any other agency, but rather to ensure that all parties are aware of a potentially problematic geologic condition. For instance, mention of a situation involving a major drainage is a flag that the U.S.Army Corps of Engineers or the Colorado Water Conservation Board should be reviewing development plans. 71 When I bought this ptoperty, no one told me about any geologic hazarils on the site; can I go back to the preoious oxaflers somehow? CGS can not give legal advice. If the seller was aware of adverse conditions with respect to the proposed use, this should have been disclosed. A legal opinion should be sought. 12 Can I get a wahter from haoing the CGS do a reoiew? The discretion to grant waivers is vested by law with the counties. Once an application for review is submitted to CGS, we are under a statutory responsibility to respond. 73 I am willing to accept the risk associated with my propefty -why is it anyone,s business uthat I ilo with my own lani? The presumption associated with a subdivision is that portions of the property will be sold to others. This then assigns any risk to future buyers, and the county is required to protect their interests. Senate Bill 35 addresses a wide variety of land use iszues as well as geologic suitability in an attempt to provide information so that the overall appropriateness Lf the subdivision proposal can be evaluated. '&- ".-h^v A"aa?^ n %., "iP.n" n+' v.-? 3783z}-3zil$m GENE R. OR MARY HILTON 5010316 ;';; w aRAPAHoE DR. 798-1Mo A;o, w. ARAPAHoE DR' 7e8-1uo a,/ / ,/ " - LITTLETON, CO 80160 ,*ff O6 +rl LO 2OO I aOEt: 50 lO I IErt'1?B I REFERRAL FORM Garfield County Building and Planning Department 108 8th Street, Suite 401, Glenwood Springs, CO 81601 Date Sent: June 16, 2006 Return Requested: July 10, 2@6 97 O) 9 45 -82121 | ax; (97 tJ) 384-347 t) File Name(s)Project Name(s)Type of Application(s) The Rapids on the Colorado same Zone District Amend - PUD & Preliminary Plan. Staff Planner: Richard Wheeler (rwheeler@ garfi eld-county.com)Phone: (970) 945-8212 Applicant: Gene R. & Mary J. Hilton Phone: Contact Person: Chris Hale, Mountain Cross Engineering Phone: (970)945-55M Location: County Road 335, one mile west of Apple Tree IWII Park, on the south side of Colorado River Summary of Request: Request is to rezone two existing parcels from A/I & A/R/D to PUD and to subdivide those parcels into l2l sinele-farrily lots. The Garfield County Planning Department has received a land use request as referrcnced above. Your comments are an important part of the evaluation process. In order to review all appropriate agency comments and incorporate them into the Staff Repor! we request your response bV Mondav.Iulv 10.2006. (nhml Dicaia Road & Bridee Countv Attomev \tr/qtar Ilaa^rrr.pc pr I\, Ceolooical Survev (Fee) Health Deoartment Forest Service (Fee) Wildlife Division ,F fT Q lvaar Public Service [Inlw Crnss Flenfrir G.S./Carbondale Fire District Silt/New Castle/Rifle Fire District Soil Conservation Disaict Planning Commission BOCC Application Name: %t- Tlrq dr+ 4,,r",*- 6s[ 3s Mt. Sopris Soil Conservation District Bookctff Soil Conservation District Town of DeBeque City of Rifle Town of Basalt Town of Carbondale ti;.\C - ' -T- --E- x_T-T _-:- --v- x--r -r City of Glenwood Springs- X Town of New Castle / * Town of Silt vz Town ofParachute Eagle County Planning Department Rio Blanco County Planning Department Pitkin County Planning Department Mesa Counry Planning Department Buming Mtn. Fire District ,/- Town of Silt Fire Department Rifle Fire Protection District Grand Valley Fire Protection District Carbondale Fire Protection District Glenwood Springs & Rural Fire RE-l School District t RE-2 School Disnct v/ School District 16 Carbondale Sanitation District Battlement Mesa Metropolitan District Spring Valley Sanitation District West Glenwood Sanitation Dismict Mid-Valley Metropolitan Sanitation District Roaring Fork Water and Sanitation District Holy Cross Electric @oaring Fork, S. of Co. River west) Public Service Company (N of Co. River west) KN Energy (S. of Co. River, Roaring Fork ) Western Slope Gas Company US West Communications (G.S. & C'dale area) US West Communications (N.C., Silt, Rifle) US West Communications @ifle, B.M., Parachute) AT&T Cable Service Colorado State Forest Service - Colorado Departrnent of Transportation / Colorado Division of Wildlife (GWS Office: Canyon Creek East) , Colorado Division of Wildlife (GJ office: Canyon Creek West) 9./ Colorado Dept. of Public Health & Environment u/ Colorado Division of Water Resources u/ Colorado Geological Survey (Need prepay form) . / - N .vlu-ulao.,t r^ lu,-"^ Colorado Water Conservancy Board / 0 Colorado Mined t and Reclamation Board Bureau of Land Management Department of Energy - Western Area Power Admin. Bureau of Reclamation - Westem Colorado Area Office US Corps of Engineers Northwest Options of long Term Care Roaring Fork Transportation Authority --& Garfield County Road & Bridge (Dist. l: Canyon Creek East, Dist. 2: Canyon Creek West and N. of I-70, Dist.f Garfield County Vegetation (Steve Anthony) )/ Garfield County Housing Authority (Ganeva powell) Garfield County Engineer (Jeff Nelson) € Garfield County Oily Oil and Gas Auditor @oug Dennison) Garfield County Sheriff Department (Lou Valario) Garfield County Auomey y' + Engineering: Ditch Companies:x - 6vC" HEnL+h Atin PAlt rZ 3: S. of I-70) r./ ,"d ..t ht .c\ x. \,; 1!iq ,-. la '. !;':,;l , H,.) .!'rlf-.. Garfield Coun$ BUILDING & PLANNING DEPARTMENT June 1,2006 Gene Hilton 21 AZ West AraPahoe Drive Littleton, CO 801 20-3008 RE: Rapi& PUD - Zone Distict Amendment and Prcliminary Plan Dear Mr. Hilton, This office is in receipt of the additional information you.subm$*..9n May ?2' 2006 regarding sre prcriri;lrv igl e.pplicad; for the Rapids ptanned unit Deveropnrent and TsneDistric{ Amendment. This letter is to inform you that upon-additional review, the apprication is oeemed technicafly *rpr"t". pr€ad understand that a detennination of technical compreteness shall not be vrcnieO as a re@mmenddion of approval, finding of an adequate apptlcation,or a finding "f-g#;J-omptiance with any goelor obiectlt,e of the Garfield County SubdMsion Regulations' The applicafions will be revbu,od Uy S!! and. a.report will be .sent to you' These applications are scfreOufeO for a Planiting Cormission hearing on Wdnccday' A,guct gdt,2fi,6 at 6:30 pH to discuss ano revlqv the applicatiqni-.at a public hering' The meetino will be hetd in the commur[*rs' Meetird iroom in the Garfierd county Plaza SriHini, 108 80'St., GbnvYood Springs, CO 81601' As a matter of process, the pranning commission shafi hord an adverfie'd public lpering only on the propeed _Preliminaff -Fl"n al a regularly scfiedutd. meetin' of tfie Commission. The T,,fieDist6ct lmincnpnt prryoei win -be heH as a tn@ting' and will not require noticing until the i1gm 90;*06..* BPCG' The Applicant shall be sobly reaponsbb fur the pubricatfrrn, p*ffi-"J *l "g * a[ notioes and shafi present proof of publicattrn ard mailirq at or Ue$orqg;-mo€ilitry. ff mtr.ct noticing rcquiraments heve not bcen mcq thc meetingr onnot f" held t{otice f6g, tfe meeting shall be given as follow: 1. Noti6 by publicqtion, indudirqg the nam'e of.the applicant, description of ffle subiect to( a descril*bn of ffi;roGed subdivbircn, text amendment nafi'1rc of t* rr*"UriZ, g, 4.i", fine ;;;Aae tor the. hearing shall be given one in a nr*r"prp"r"Jgd;tJ "lt*r*oti in rrat porfion of tte County in wfiich the sut{ect p;;#,ili" located ,t r*J ttirryj3g} but not more fr;gn sbdv (80) davs pfior to tlrerd srdt l*tirq,-.nd proir or;rd*batkE Ehall be preseEbd et hearing bY tre aPPlicant- 108 8th street, suite 201, Glenwood springs, colorado 81601 (g70)g4s-5212(970)255-7972Fax:(970)384-3470 2 2. Notice by mail, containing information as described under paragraph (1) above' shall be mailed to all orners of record as shown in the Gounty Assesso/s office of lots within two hundred feet (200) of the subiec* lot, all 91 ,nera of mineral interest in tre subiect property, and all tena{s^ of any structure proposed-for conversion to ondominiums,'aileast fitirty (30) but not more than sixty (60) days priorto sudr hearing tir"Ly c.itine,i P!,i* receipt mail, and receipts shall be'prlsented at the hearing by the applicant' 3. The site shall be postd sucfr that the notioe is dearly and consptcuously visibb from a public =Jrti-ot-o"y, wtfii notice signs provided by the Planning Depargnent The posting ,r"t hke plaie at l99st thifty (30) but not more frtan sixty (00) Orro p*; A SE nearing d;1" Td.19 the sole responsibilitv of $e applicant to post the notie, t;d 6n"rt" that it remains posted until and during the date of the hearirg. As mentioned above, enclosed is the appropri{e nltice and "posting sfeet Torthe planning Cornmissbn ,*ting. n6o eirifoieO is a Submittal Form for Land Use Revburs to The ddfi c"|rugiol sr*w Please submit the appropriab tue to $e County of Garfteld AdUlng anC F6nnirg D;parfingy* to avoird a prwing fee' Brlote: Pleess oubmit 28 copiee of the completed applicatiolt.g thia offioe no latsr [han Jum{6, 2006. 1; d1g copies have not been submitbd by tfiie dab, you] pubtic he*ing may bo ieopardizod.l Do not hsitate to contact thie orffioE Ehould you have furfrrer queetions' Best regards, Richald Wheehr Senior Planner Endosures PUBLIC NOTICE TAKE NOTICE that Rapids Dwelopment corporation has applied 1o the Planning Commission, Garfield County, State of Cotorado, for the Preliminary Plan review of the n plO" on tfre Colorado plan-ned Unit Developrneqt pursuant to S4!qq of the Subdivision n"brntions of 19&4, and S4.00 of the Zoning Resolution of 1978, as amended, in connec{ion with ttre folowinglescribed propertyiituated in the Goun{ of GarfeH, State of Colorado; to-wit: Leqal Description: (See ExhibitA attached) practical Location: Approximately one mile west of New Castle on County Road 335. The propoeed Prcliminary Plen invotvca subdividing 121.49 acnm, currenfiy zoncd en anO ArR R fr, into l216ts - u*rich will rcguire tlre suMivicion to be developed ar planned Unit Development Of the total aerce W, 8.2 acret will be for tlre rcekl'cnthl lots, Bl.0E acl6a wili be br opn spt@, lhe lemaindcr of tlre property will be sst aside fiortbsets and utilities. All persons affected by the proposed subdivision are invited to appcar and etete their vievus, protests or suppbtt. lf you can not appear personally a! suc[n3ring, then you ale urged to state yorr ui"*rl6 by lettor, as tfle Planning Commiseion will give consideration to thI commentsbf sunounding property orflnerE, and othem affected, in decidingut!9he1to Jrr"G o""v m" rcquest. flL aiptiiatlon may ue rcylenrea at the office of fie Planning D"prrtn*t'hcabd at 108 Bfir'lilrEt, Suili4{t1, 108 8m Straet Ghrntrood Springs, Coiorado between the hours of 8:30 a.m. and 5:00 p'm., Mondeythrough Frktay' A publie hearing on the ftCiminery Phn trs been sehdulcd fior tP 9s &y of tfuuct 2ff8, at5:30 P.il. in ttre County Gonrmissbners Ghambers, Room 100, 108 8tr1 Stee( Gbrmood Springs, Colordo. Phnning Departnent GarfieH Gounty IBIT SGHEDULE OF PROPERTY OWNERS WITHIN 2OO FEET OF THE RAPTDS ON THE COLORADO PROPOSED PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT Names and addresses of owners of record of all parcets adjoining and within two hundred feet (200) feet of the proposed subdivision, including those -separated only by a public right-of'way ttre ownerstrip anO addresses were obtained from the office of the Garfield Gounty Assessor on May22,2006 1. Parcel 2181-054-00-158 JACE, LLC lSl,lsvlsl River Road Snowmass, CO 81654 2. Parcel 2181-054-00-129 Donald Ray and Sandra L. SnYder Box 9 New Castle, Co 81647-0009 3. Parcel 2181-054-00-14{ Musich, Patricia L. P.O. Box 588 PineclifG, CO 80471 -0588 4. Parcel 2181-091-00-076 Parcel 2181-04/-l00-1il Gene R. and MaryJ. Hilton 2102 West AraPahoe Drive Littleton, CO 80120-3008 5. Parcel 2181-054-00-140 Fred L. and Gharlotte J. SnYder P.O.Box277 New Castle, CO81U74277 6. Parcel 2181-04-00471 Brannan Properties, lnc JF&T Co.. Attn: Faye Faas P O. Boxll89 Glenwood SPrings Colorado 81602 7. Parcel 2181-05/-100-251 Duke llevelopment, LLC. 8101 East Prentice Ave., Suite 510 Greenwood Village, CO 80111 8. Parcel 2181-054-00-208 Pauline Rippy Box 24il New Castle, CO 81647 9. Parcel 2181-271-00-201 State of Golorado Dlvision of Wildlife 6060 Broadway Denver, CO 80216 10. Parcel 2181-043-00-120 Kenneth R. and PeggY A. Collins 3839 County Road 335 New Castle, CO 81647-9641 SCHEDULE OF PROPERry OWNERS WITHIN 200 FEET.doc 11. Parcel 2181-163-00-085 Richard C. and MaryJolley Famlly, LLP 1288 County Road 245 New Castle, CO 81647-9796 12. Parcel 2181-041-00-124 Mary Edith Logan 39492 River Frontage Road New Castle, CO 81647 13. Parcel 2181-043.00-125 Earlene and Clyde Dale Alcorn 38992 Rlver Frontage Rd New Gastle, CO 81647 14. Parcel 2181-043-00-016 Roy R. Raklch and Martha A. Rakich P.O. BOX444 Glenwood Springs, CO 81602'0444 15. lnterstate 70 Right of WaY Colorado Department of Transportatlon Plans and Surveys Sectlon 401 East Arkansas Avenue Denver, CO80222 16. 2181-xxx-xxx-0O1 through 033 Rapids on the Colorado Rlver Homeowners Assn. And Rapids Development Gorporatlon 2102 West Arapahoe Drlve Littleton, CO 80120-3008 17. 2181-043-07-036 and 007'010 Gene R. and MaryJ. Hilton 2102 West AraPahoe Drlve Littleton, CO 80120-3008 RECEIVED MAY 2 2 2006 3,fffi:?,.,ff#JI, GARFIELD COUNTY BUILDING AND PLANNING DEPARTMENT AGREEMENT FOR PAYMENT FORM (Shall be submitted with application) GARFIELD COUNTY (hereinafter COUNTy) and - Rapids Development Corp' (hereinafter APPLICANT) agee as follows: an application for (hereinafter, TIIE PROJECT). 2. APPLICANIT understands and agrees that Garfield Cormty Resohrtion No. 98-09, as amended, establishes a fee schedule for each tSpe of suMivision or land use review applications, and the guidelines for the administration of the fee structrxe. 3. APPLJCAhIT and COUNTY agee that becaus. oi A. size, nature or scope of the proposed project, it is not possible at this time to ascertain the fuII extent of the costs involved in processing the application APPLICAI.IT agrees to make payr::ent of the Base Fee, established for the PROJECT, and to thereafter permit additional costs to be billed to APPLICAT{T. APPLICANIT agrees to make additionat payrnents upon notification by the COLINTY when they are necessary as costs are incurred. 4. The Base Fee shall be in addition to and exclusive of any cost for publication or cost of consulting service determined necessary by the Board of Cotrrrty Commissioners for the consideration of an application or additional COUNTY staff time or expense not covered by the Base Fee. If actual recorded costs exceed the initial Base Fee, APPLICA].IT shall pay additional billings to COUNTY to reimburse tbe COUNTY for the processing of tlre PROJECT mentioned above. APPLICAI{T acknowledges that a[ biling shall be paid prior to the final consideration by the COLINTY of any land use permit, zoning amendment, or suMivision plan. .rl S utizl//.to/submittedto 6€v/€ 17, //z,7a'd Print Name Mailing Addrrcss: Z t o Z dar r ./U/r(^: ?t' (E L .-f,a7a{, Co E)a/?o - ;J?e u "ss,H'*lf ituo* 1. APPLICANIT Signature tat2004 Page 4 GARFIELD COUNTY BUILDING AND PLANNING DEPARTMENT AGREEMENT FOR PAYMENT FORM (Shall be submitted with application) '?rva/a4Pilsa7 Gtzr'' GARFIELD COUNTY (hereinafter COUNTY) and (hereinafter APPLICAIIT) agrce as follows: 1.,2,inafter, THE PROJECT). Z. APPLICAI.IT understands and agrees that Garfield County Resohrtion No. 98-09, as amende4 establishes a fee schedule'for each t}rpe of zubdivision or land use review applications, and ttrc guidelines for the administration of the fee structure. 3. APPLICANIT and COUNTy agree that because of the size, nah[e or scope of the proposed project, it is not possible at this time to u."otuio the fuIl extent of the costs involved in processing the uppti.uiior- appilcaNr agrees to make paymont of the Base Fee, established for the PRoJECT, and to ttereafter permit additional -costs to be billed to APPLICAI{T. APPLICANT agrees to make additional payments uBon notification by the COUNTY when they are necessary as costs are incurred 4. The Base Fee shall be in addition to and exclusive of any cost for publication or cost of consulting service detercrined necessary by the Board of County Commissioners for the_consideration of an application or "ddt ilJ couxrv stafftime or expense not cove.red by the Base Fee. If actual recorded costs exceed the initial Base Fee, AppLICAIIT shall pay additional bilings to COUNTY to reimburse the C0LTNTY for the processing of the pROJECT mentioned ibon . APPLICAI.{T acknowledges that alt biling shallbe paid prior to the final consideration by the COLINTY of any land use permit, zoning amendment, or subdivision plan' pLICAI.{T has submitted to couNTY an application for 7 ' - 4fflZrf R$,ql;;xwo*", S/zr/o 6 GF - ro/ Print Name Maiting Address: 2/o ?- r,c) ae r 424 ?z/)oe Ttzl/f, -r.,-ffilzo-=oot Signature tol2004 Page 4 Guffield Coan$ May 17,2006 Gene Hilton 2102 West Arapahoe Drive Littleton, CO 801 20-3008 RE: Rapids PatD - Rezone and Pteliminary Plan Dear Mr. Hilton, The Building and planning Department is in receipt of the above mentioned application submltted dy you. This a-ppllcation has been reviened by staff and has been deemed bchnicallyintompbe. Sitarwifi need further inturmation ftom you beJore this applkntion can be pr6cessed any further. Li$ted below are the items you will need to include, compnti, or revise and resubmit. ]terns of importanoe have hon underlined for your revieuv. 1) Please submit a list of all property ov\rnerc within 200 feet of the entire devebpment.' The minerat oyylerB of dre iubiiA prcperty urcre only submitted. Please refer to exhibit I of yoursubmitted applicatirn. Z) please sign and date the encloeed "Agreenent to Pay Form'for each land use applicstion. Once the information discugsed above has been submitted and revbtlrcd to tre satisfadion of this office, Statr wifi disctrso sctreduling the applicatbn for revieruv in public hearings before the Phnning Commission and the Board of Gounty Commissionels. Do not hesitate to contact this office should you have further questions. Best regards, BUILDING & PLANNING DEPARTMENT 108 8th Street, Suite 201, Glenwood Springs, Colorado 81601 (970) 94s-8212 (970) 2s5-7972 Fax: (970) 384-3470 Ricfiard Wheeler Senior Planner Enclosures 4644 GENE R. OR MARY HILTON 2102 W. ARAPAHOE DR. 798-1640 LITTLETON, CO 80120 aa lOl IEtt' l.El.l. PAY TO THE Ec:uoceoo RAPIDS DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION CONSTRUCTION DRAW ACCOUNT 2102 WEST ARAPAHOE DRIVE PH. 303.798-1640 LTTTLETON, CO 80120-3008 7,//4 PAY TO THE ORDEB OF 7zs *)//e ' ar;;G"u .y'rrrl,>/2 ilrOO 50 I L[r rl A t-i:l'"'L' *fostStar Baa[ Do@i Colorarro Custorner lnfo 1 -888"46&6400 *w-@Ehrbek.m L lqt:8EOO e9OB I lrt'tozIol RAPIDS DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION CONSTRUCTION DRAW ACCOUNT 21 02 WEST ARAPAHOE DRIVE PH. 303.798-1 640 LTTTLETON, CO 80120-3008 Vzaz*o s{so" *rs$Star Ban[ urOO 50 IOrt r! LO 2 IO I t Lqr:BEOO aqOB I lrr' r> PI#s- ;nd Application to the Following Referra, asencies Application Name: Date Application Sent: Mt. Sopris Soil Conservation District Bookcliff Soil Conservation District Town ofDeBeque City of Rifle Town of Basalt Town of Carbondale City of Glenwood Springs Town of New Castle Town of Silt Town of Parachute Eagle County Planning Department Rio Blanco County Planning Department Pitkin County Planning Department Mesa County Planning Department Buming Mtn. Fire District Town of Silt Fire Department Rifle Fire Protection District Grand Valley Fire Protection District Carbondale Fire Protection District Glenwood Springs & Rural Fire RE-l School District RE-2 School District School District 16 Carbondale Sanitation District Battlement Mesa Metropolitan District Spring Valley Sanitarion District \[est Glenwood Sanitation Distict Mid-Valley Metropolitan Sanitation District Roaring Fork Water and Sanitation Disrict Holy Cross Electric @oaring Forlq S. of Co. River west) Public Service Company (N of Co. River west) KN Energy (S. of Co. River, Roaring Fork ) Western Slope Gas Company US West Communications (G.S. & C'dale area) US West Communications (N.C., Silt, Rifle) US West Communications @ifle, B.M., Parachute) AT&T Cable Service Colorado State Forest Service Colorado Department of Transportation Colorado Division of Wildlife (GWS Office: Canyon Creek East) Colorado Division of Wildlife (GJ office: Canyon Creek West) Colorado Dept. of Public Health & Environment Colorado Division of Water Resources Colorado Geological Survey (Need prepay form) Colorado Water Conservancy Board Colorado Mined Land Reclamation Board Bureau of l,and Management Department of Energy - Western Area Power Admin. Bureau of Reclamation - Westem Colorado Area Office US Corps of Engineers Northwest Options of Long Term Care Roaring Fork Transportation Authority Garfield County Road & Bridge (Dist. l: Canyon Creek East, Dist. 2: Canyon Creek West and N. of I-70, Dist. 3: S. of I-70) Garfield County Vegetation (Steve Anthony) Garfield County Housing Authority (Ganeva Powell) Garfield County Engineer (Jeff Nelson) Gafreld County Oil and Gas Auditor (Doug Dennison) Garfield County Sheriff Department (Lou Valario) Garfield County Attorney Engineering: Ditch Companies: Proposed PUD- IzL Lots # Continues Use as Single-Family Residential # Large Open Space Adjacent to Neighbors + Increases Open Space From LBo/o to 670/o Q Provides Range of Housing Types and Costs + Cluster Concept Utilized Rural Atmosphere OTrail System Along River For Public Use +Open Space Adjacent to Wildlife Area # Provides Central Waste Water Treatment +Improves Water Quality - Eliminates 33 Septic Systems 13 Map Soil Hazard Exhibit - Soil Eazard llap TEE RAPNS ON TEE COLOBAI'O PMP(,8EO P.VO. EfgI,EDTI'IEION PUNsrr,/1 stgmou l aND sat,a wtmv a tBs. prl oF tw etg P.!. =o,Ea -oEo -o,No, -lo- C) ,fl?f-F $r*$$ $$*t$E Nll\ $stE*$ B H5 EEa-zdlI'ia4 fra 7a BTTE i:tr I*Et'aB @ I k €o Io'tt!\tr st Etr BI BI :oislEI Bl st El E b {l \i $xi sEtil. ;H G-hB} EB E \ Pur =o,E (-) -t -lt+ -lo oJ -- =-l IJ(+o -lFo, -J(oo I MI -x iiil.$-{t Hlm?ilt oI't o1)> -{ t- 'a,aa mf,e tgB 8E:q I b 'rtE otr s tsoo E $ olr i:.EI EEE]a-f, tgilt IE: EE F cr) Map Critical Winter Range r Deer 36 ,,. NEWCAST. ragiw RoPids Boundory 3 P;,"'75Y"o' 1:::-.: Highwoy/Rood Rood E Porcets 'wi "*Y!!j,%,r,; uew C.o.st!9 F:a-i Stotelovn Lrmtls l- o |OOO Z@q/ffi Ma 9@ B@ tu ,=* scab 1"'2ooo' hoi tutfi* @.dry ds lElEatiKrltlt{TAlFl CROSSHWr.%, Prnonurnrna mr' i.,-.,.., 32 \ ,', t=*------= \.-\o* COAL RID6E ESTATES .-:/a -:' .\)..,., iill r-:i------* -*'...,=+-..:-:=r>*\ RMERSIDE PARK .) . Sueoustott - NuIe Deer ViaterConceattatlonWsst,tt sscclott 4 lI,lD 8El/1 SEC'fiON 6' tos. Rerg oF l@ aTa P.u. aAN0ELD COWrr, c9IpRtDO -----f7 Staff Report Issues 1. 2. Flood Plain Permit Amendment - No ISDS Now New Castle Comprehensive Plan + 5-10 Unit Clusters Not 28 Acre Cluster + Nine Parking Spaces For Public Use + Zero Lot Line Classification Not Single-Family Re-Vegetation Plans Now On Design Drawings Noxious Weed Control In Covenants Sewer Collector Lines Design Was Provided Resource Engineering Letter From Fire District Attached 3. 4. 5. 6. 18 a(+ o, -h-tFoEo -l(+ o l5 HHI$ 5 Ig N|SIF E J $slg gN' r.I S{ Nilto\ o\ $H N$od\ r-. NS NB $dEi R.€ Ed $$ g$ t-[ 6. \d N \{ t- l\Ol* l@ Els EIHl() l.' I(Ulo lo (-) oJao \o @(-) =Ho+ =o,a le lezIJ lo IU} l(D IP Hr() o l= I(Ul-l'!ol- tr{aaCoa =g !(D Staff Report Geological Hazards Review by Colorado Geological Issues Suruey ".....the site has relatively benign geological hazards." Recommendations 1. "Site-specificfoundation investigations are recommended." 2. "Minor Risk of shallow failures or sloughing of the slope above the site which is not a significant hazard, because such a small slope failure would need to cioss CR 335 before entering the development." 3. "The possibility of a minor debris flow flooding from the small draingge il3h1ii#Z,Y,ii)itriijj],{'' some type of swale configuration in iB landscaping to redirect any possible flows to the west toward the adjacent open space. "In closin vided the ruations a recommen ions stated ve are n comolied with. we hav further co the develoDment as it is Dresentlv intended. Statr Report Issues 9. Traffic Study to Consider the Effect the Subdivision will have on the Surrounding Area. + Response - Traffic Impact Study Prepared by a Certified Traffic Engineer Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc. Curtis D. Rowe, PE, PTOE Determination: 1. Proiect Does Not Require CDOT Permit. Z. 60 Foot Right of Way - Two Short Distances (If Required) 2L Staff Report Issues Staff Concern:Zero Lot Lines and Size of Cluster 10. Staff Concern: Zero Lot Lines and Size of Cluster + The propefi is located within the 3-mile Area of Influence of the Town of New Castle' + "The County has determined the Town's Compr?tlen?iveiiii will cognized concerning densities and land uses." (Page 6 Staff RePort) qF The Town of New Castle has approved the Plan which includes Zero Lot Lines and the 28-acre Cluster design of the Subdivision. + The Memorandum of Agreement between the Town and Rapids (based on Rapids compliance with the MOU) states: " ihe Tiwn supporti the ptlD because of its substantial compliance with its Comprehensive Plan... ..-. ." 22 Colorado Revised Statutes (CRS) OThe Colorado Revised Statutes establish general standards of review for rezoning land in the County. OThe standard used for reviewing a rezoning request that is in compliance with the Comprehensive Plan is the proposed rezoning need onl r a reasonable relationship to the qeneral welfare of the commun 23 Ga rfield Cou nty Reg u lations QGarfield County has adopted Zoning Regulations and Subdivision Regulations that guide subdivision and zoning actions within the County. O In addition, the County has adopted a Comprehensive Plan 2000 that provides a general statement of direction for land use planning in unincorporated Garfield County. 24 Comprehensive Plan 2000 Urban Area of Infl uence + The Comprehensive Plan 2000 establishes Goals, Objectives, Policies and Programs regarding land use within three miles of municipalities. + Garfield CouotY, in compliance with Comprehensive Program 10.1, PIePared a map "Proposed Land Use Disiricts, Study Areas 2 & 3, Garfield County, Colorado" + The Rapids property is classified on the map as "subdivision Within Two-Mile Sphere of Influence" of the Town of New Castle. 25 (')o 3o -To - Jo TJa -l (D ! -(U IJ N)OoO =C -J IIoIIo(U - =o,Eln '*la ,3 Hg I illg Bie tlllFs' l*H'ilrH IFl[EIilH',o lel= != lo #+ lH flf; ls# 5E IEg(o lo l!2. o- Fl1 l+: ;la lfl€;++ gq e la lilg =lq 'A = rtrr. =o-lo oo\- cLCU=' oro= =ld(D dEor 3lo= g l"t = \Jlgq BPz. -r l=ElfrlE ls =o) I ! -lo(foa(D ro- Ilr l(Ul=lo- lc o Ui-r Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) Town of New Castle and Rapids Subject to the provisions contained in the MOU, the Town of New Castle 1. Recommended to the BOCC that it "recommend approval of the Site Application for a WWTF." 2. "The Town supports t substantial compliance with its Comprehensive PIan.......? + + + + General Wetfare of the Community The existing "Rapids" subdivision is better utilizeQ to provide additional diverse housing lypgs.ne9ded for energy related growth in Western Garfield County. The PUD design provides public recreational access to trails and over 2,800 feet of river frontage access. The PUD design increases open space from L7.95 Acres (18o/o) in the existing subdivision to 81.051 Acres (670/o) in the Proposed PUD. Approval of the PUD would improve water quality by eliminating 33 septic sYstems WWTF Setback From Residences 't")"$ B ^%;yrE-]l #$i ,=H \..-" PortnershipProperty'HOA rnaeeloxd$P COU\VTY RD 335 MOUFnilN GROSS EFrcINEERTNO ITIG.Gudltudtu&adr.bEUdd.*.!Haia,6a0 The RAPIDS on flTeGOLORADO Waste Water Treatment Plant Setbaek Exhibit SCALEt00 fi o tqt --30 General Welfare of the Community (Continued) SThe cluster development design, utilized in the proposed PUD, incorporates many of the Goals and Objectives of the Comprehensive Plan 2000 regarding; Housing, Open Space, Trails, Development within Urban Areas of Influence, Recreation, Transportation, Agriculture, Water Seruice, Sewer Seruice and the Natural Environment. 31 =ry=o (-) E',\r, =(nJ -Tt \Jxo,rn t++og= g. ='(D =!:-(, I - Jo,a=o-]r (-)o 3p- 6' IJ (') (D #T6) =-'EA -+! -r rtoo =cr-15 ,^\Ioii 15=lqq19w lEgIbol-kru laa15'!l-oJt-t{=l--l-r Il--ll-l Eafq- --tJ I CC'o- II o'.o -J o -fi C+EJo o-Io(fo = -ho -I Cao o,a 9. 8H =lJJ !-rEFol= EE -lJ6lo -rlol=!lEga,' oJ=' 3B t+ l=".I' lJ-a lgl-.lrlo,IC]l= ls 18 lB=IO- -'E=lEol-.lq -l-J t+ -Jo ='t+o -loat+a o-frrt -Jo -Jo(U -r-ts -Jt @(U -ho l6- f. (')o -J o -J ?D' -J C)o\ o -To-o -T\ (f, -loaoo -l (U -Jo- =o --r cf.No -Ja o -|i 6)(U3 (D o-ooC -J (.^) NJ Hea lth, Safety, Welfa re * The proposed PUD is in the best interests of the Health, Safety, and Welfare of the Citizens of Gaffield County as supported by engineering and professional Lincoln-Devore - Soils Tests and Geologic Report Wright Water Engineers - Water Rights, Augmentation Plan Mountain Cross Engineering - Subdivision Design, Drainage Study, Road and Utilities Desigr, Traffic Report Hepworth-Pawlak, Inc. - WWTF Site Soils Study Richard Holsan Surueying - Boundary suruey Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc. - Traffic Impacts I-70 Enartech - Flood Plain Analysis, Original Design Aqua-Tec - Well Pump Tests, Pumps, Controls, Etc. I I I 33 arrl I o,fi![ , ?+-.. - ._ \ \,,i itl/ !..:-''/ i:'\- /1.\ ti!. "'i.---*, jjf tt*ztt n ; Ifttu^ak:t dy:!ri,t/ rffiq/' l i r\,'l I I I - /j'l, '.'. l r{i U.t/ €d;ut Logcc--.i q'\ -o.\ n5 '\., i , t ii 1 scli,E:4 :E ' t*" i=gG;Es:@, \ \\'I x -r.{3N-*xN e*ssl- G"*"* ModM r mwglz lodla a tMvuBM lr.**, B YAffi WU&at lN aStL I O.M ea c ,@nic AtPEs ru I tffi 2,. O ) taqt GL rrt8 sruBtoa ,'!vrl aJ&9 .!.. t"nq.rqjl't E rtil 1 d_ic,t_/,i3d} i ENGIT{EERET{fr, [NC, I Civil and Erwkonfrcnlnt Consulling uat Ooslorr I 426 13 Grrd Avuuc Clrnvccd Sprlur. rc 81601 Iy-__a ':_:::::t__:i': L The HAFIE$ on the S$l-CIH/,{$X] Flarrmed t imit Eevelopruremt ryEE&!ryErq4ryY pL&ry Planning Commission Discussion Page I of2 Lis, Craig From: Bill Lorah[blorah@wrightwater.com] Sent: Monday, December 18, 2006 10:50 AM To: Lis, Craig Cc: jross@DuffordBrown.com; Leavenworth, Lee Subject RE: Div 5 RaPids Craig- The pond is off-channel. According to Gene Hilton, they did not intercept the groundwater table when the pond was constructed. The pond is lined. 3) The existing pond surface area is 1.67 acres. The gross annual open water evaporation rate is 3.33 feet (40 inches). The calculations, done by the West Divide Water Conservancy District, are attached. Thank you. Please do not hesitate to call if you have any questions. William L. Loratr, P.E. Wright Water Engineers, Inc. 818 Colorado Ave., Suite 307 Glenwood Springs, CO 81601 (97 0)945 -7 755 Fax (97 0)9 4s -92t0 Denver Direct (303) 893-1608 By RECEMNG THIS ELECTRONIC INFORMATION, including all attachments, the receiver agrees lhai this data may not be modificd or transfened !o any other parE documents. This privileged and confdentiat information is intended only for the use of the addressee(s) named above. Anyone who receives lhis communicalion in error should notif, us immediately by reply email. From: Lis, Craig [mailto:Craig.Lis@state.co.us] Senfi Friday, December 15,200610:57 AM To: Bill Lorah Cc : j ross@DuffordBrown. com ; Leavenworth, Lee Subject: RE: CORRECT Div 5 Rapids Letter Bilt: The following information regarding the Rapids Pond is necessary for the revised letter to - Is the pond on or off-channel? - Does the pond intercept ground water? If so, a well permit is required for the pond. - What is the surface area of the pond? Please provide a copy of your evaporation calculation. Please contact me if you have any questions. v312007 1) 2l Page I of I Lis, Craig From: Sent: To: Pond Evaporation lnigation Cc: jross@DuffordBrown.com; Leavenworth, Lee; 'Gene Hilton' SubJect: RaPids on the Colorado Attachments: Pond Evap Table.Pdf You are conect that Case W-3262 identified all of Priority 3 (0.25 cfs) of the Moore Ditch being associated with the 70 acres of claimed dry up. In fact, Mr. Hilton has always owned only 0.20 of the first priority. All of the claimed 70 acres of dry up have always been on Mr. Hilton's land. The totalclaimed historic consumptive use by Mr. Hilton in the Moore Ditch is 96.6 AF (70Ac multiplied by 1.38 AF/Ac). lnJright Water Engineers, lnc.'s (\A/\A/E) December 5, 2006, letter to you presents the engineering background on how W- 3262 augments the water supply for Rapids on the Colorado. Following is the calculation of consumptive use needs for the subdivision. Future Project Consumptive Use AF Single-Family Units 121 @ 0.0118 AF/unit= 1.43 Bill Lorah Iblorah@wrig htwater.com] Wednesday, January 31,2007 '11:22 AM Lis, Craig 1.67 Ac @ 3.33 AF/Ac= 5.56 40.2 Ac @2 AFIAI= 80.40 87.39 The project's consumptive use of 87.39 will require the dry up of 66.33 Ac (87.39 divided by 1.38) Note that 40.2 of these 66.33 acres will be reinigated. Rights to be dedicated to Homeowners Moore Ditch Prior 3 0.20 cfs Moore Ditch Prior 14 1.19 cfs 1.39 cb Attached are the open water surface evaporation calculations that were prepared by the West Divide Water Conservancy District. Please do not hesitate to callif you have any questions. \A/illiam L. Lorah, P.E. Might Water Engineers, lnc. 818 Colorado Ave., Suite 307 Glenwood Springs, CO 81601 (97 0)945-77 55 Fax (970)945-92 1 0 Denver Direct (303) 893-1608 BY RECEIVING THIS ELECTRONIC INFORMATION, including all attachments, the receiver agrees lhat this data may not be modified or transfened to any other party without lhe prior written cons€nt of Vvright Wbter Engineers, lhat lhis electronic informalion may nol n€cossarily represent the infomatbn shown on the ecorded or approved ffnal developments and/or documents, and thal the receiver is responsible lor verifying the informalion contained within the eledronic data against the recorded or approved final documents. This privileged and confidential information is intended only for lhe use of lhe addressee(s) namod abovs. Anyone who receives this communication in enor should notifo us immediately by reply email. 2t5t2007 ELEVATION ZONE = 5000 TO 5499 FEET ESTIMATES OF POND EVAPORATION Location: West Divide Water Conservancy District Boundary Area (acres): I Elevation: 5250 45 Gross Evaporation from NWS 33 (inches): Gross Evaporation nches 1.35 1.58 2.48 4.05 5.40 6.53 6.75 6.08 4.50 3.15 1.80 1.35 Total Precipitation inches 1.16 1.09 1.09 0.98 1.31 0.90 0.95 1.24 1.24 1.45 0.78 0.85 Effective Precipitation Net Evaporation (5) Mean Temperature 23.77 30.55 39.23 48.21 56.64 64.79 71.36 69.58 6'1.34 49.60 36.94 26.53 Adjusted Net Evaporation tn 0.00 1-06 2.48 4.05 5.40 6.53 6.75 6.08 4.50 3.15 0.05 0.00 (4)(3)(2)(1)(6) inches inches 0.00 1.35 0.00 1.58 0.00 2.48 0.00 4 05 0,00 5.40 0.00 6.53 0,00 6.75 0.00 6.08 0.00 4.50 0.00 3.15 0.00 1.80 0.00 1.35 45.00 13.03 0.00 45,00 40.03 (1) Monthly distribution based on guidelines for substitute water supply plans for sand and (2) From Rifle, Glenwood Springs, & Aspen Climate Stations (3) Column (21' 70o/o (4) Column (1) minus Column (3) (5) From Rifle, Glenwood Springs, & Aspan Climate Stations (6) Estimated ice coverage from November 29 through February 19, based on temperaturt (7) Column (6) times pond surface area, in acre feet Elevation Coneclion for 5250 ft March' April May June JulY August September October November December Table I The Rapids on the Colorado Moore Ditch Dedication Estimates Notes: 40.2 acres of the "dry-up" is land converted from agricultural irrigation to landscape and amenig irrigation. As such, only 23.13 acres willactually be removed from irrigation. (63.33 acres - 40.2 acres = 23.13 acres) The amount "Deeded to the HOA'includes undetermined amounts previously deeded to the HOA for this development. Dry-up for ln-house depletions 121 ResidentialUnits x 0.0118 AF/yrlunit 1.4278 AFlyr+ 1.38 AF/acre credit for dry-upT63acres Dry-up for lnigation 40.2 acres of landscape & amenity irrigationx 2 AF/acre for landscape & amenity irrigation -667.AFconsumptiveuseforlandscape&amenityirrigation + 1.38 AF/acre credit for dry-up----------m' acres dry-u p of ag ricu ltu ral i rrigation Dry-up for Pond Evaporation 1.67 acres of pond surface 3.33 feet of evaporation 5.56 AF of evaporation 1.38 AF/acre credit for dry-up Dry-up (acres) ury-up Generatec Priority 3 by PN 3(cfs) (acres) Dry-uP Generatec Priority 14 by PN 14(cfs) (acres) totat Dry-up Total Generatec(cfs) (acres) )riginalDecree )hanged in W3262 Sold? {vailable 7C 2.2t 67.72 0.250 0.250 0.050 0.200 1.330 1.287 0.000 1.287 1.560 1.537 1.487 )eeded to the HOA ln House lrrigation Pond Evaporation Total 1.0: 58.2€ 4.0: 63.3:0.2000 9.10s 1.1904 54.22 1.3904 63.33 reviouslv deeded to the HoA 0.o394 0.2535 0.2929 \dditional amount to be Ieeded to the HOA 0.1606 0.9369 1.0975 letained by Hilton 4.44 O.UUUU u.u9tio o.09oo 4.03 acres pf dry-up for evaporation