Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout3.0 BOCC Staff Report 10.17.2005Exhibits for Public Hearing held on October 17, 2005 — BOCC Overview Preliminary Plan Exhibit Letter (A to Z) Exhibit A Mail Receipts B Proof of Publication C Garfield County Zoning Resolution of 1978, as amended D Garfield County Subdivision Regulations of 1984, as amended E Garfield County Comprehensive Plan of 2000 F Staff Report dated 10-17-05 G Letter dated June 30, 2005 from Colorado State Forest Service H Letter dated June 30, 2005 from Colorado Division of Water Resources I Letter dated June 22, 2005 from Colorado Geologic Survey J Email dated June 14, 2005 from Garfield County Road and Bridge Dept. K Application for Overview for Preliminary Plan L Memo dated July 7, 2005 from Garfield County Vegetation Management Dept M Letter dated July 11, 2005 from Resource Engineering N Email dated September 26, 2005 from Larry Gepfert — Homestead Ranch HOA • • BOCC 10-17-05 RW PROJECT INFORMATION AND STAFF COMMENTS APPLICATION: Preliminary Plan for the Overview Subdivision OWNER: Wayne Rudd APPLICANTS: Steve Oger, Rick Oger, Gary Setnes, Roland Parker LOCATION: 8575 County Road 115 WATER: Overview Well, Permit #252563 SEWER: ISDS SIZE: 48.52 acres (4 lots proposed) EXISTING ZONING: AIR/RD I. GENERAL PROJECT INFORMATION A. Property Description The proposed subdivision is located approximately 5 miles northeast of Carbondale on County Road 115, South of Spring Valley Ranch. The Property lies on the north side of CR 115. There is a large power line easement that runs generally from the southwest corner to the northeast corner of the property. This is a 150' easement for over head power lines, Book 342 Page 384. Running in the same direction north of the power line is a 50' easement for the underground gas line that is owned by Kinder Morgan. There is an irrigation ditch, understood to be owned by James and Thad Nieslanik that meanders from the north to south of the property. An existing drive starts at the southeast corner of lot 3 and will terminate at the northeast portion of lot 1. The land is gently sloping on the eastern and western ends of the property. There are steeper slopes in the center portion of the property. The steeper portion of the property is proposed to be part of the open space tract. 1 • • B. Proposed Use The parent tract of land for this proposed subdivision is Parcel "B" of the 29 Peaks Improvement Survey conveyed to Wayne Rudd through a Warranty Deed on December 31, 2003. The subject property is 48.52 acres. The owner is proposing to divide that land into 4 parcels. The largest of the 4 parcels is 37.16 acres, which will be open space. The proposed open space will account for 76% of the land. The other lots will be 4.15, 3.81, and 3.39 acres, accounting for 1 unit per 16.17 acres of gross land. It is the intention of Mr. Rudd to sell these lots at a discounted price to the 3 applicants, which are long time employees. There is an existing well that will serve domestic water to the proposed homes, one per lot. Sewer will be provided by individual sewage disposal systems (ISDS). The applicants are also proposing to use an underground tank for a fire protection system, which will be filled by the well. Access will be from a dead end road directly off of County Road 115. C. Background This item was heard by the Planning Commission as a Preliminary Plan on June 13, 2005. The Commission voted to recommend approval to the board with conditions. These conditions are listed at the end of the staff report. II. REFERRALS Staff has referred the application to the following State agencies and/or County departments for their review and comment. Comments received are briefly mentioned below or are more comprehensively incorporated within the appropriate section of this staff report. Town of Carbondale: No Comments Carbondale Fire Protection District: No Comments RE -1 School District: No Comments Spring Valley Sanitation District: No Comments Colorado State Forest Service: Additional guidelines for fire mitigation. These guidelines are addressed as a plat note as well as they applicant has submitted a fire protection plan. The applicant's well permit allows the use of water for fire protection. Colorado Division of Wildlife: See checklist under "Wildlife". Colorado Division of Water Resources: Confirmed the ability of the well to serve 3 residences and associated water uses. Colorado Geologic Survey: "No geologic hazards that would preclude development 2 • • on the property. However, the following are concerns I have with the development." Letter dated June 22, 2005 from the Department of Natural Resources CGS Review No GA -05-0008 • Loess deposits may exhibit hydro -compaction and settlement during construction • Loess soils are prone to erosion • Mitigation measures should occur during and after construction to avoid potential soil loss. • Large blocks of basalt may be present in the subsurface, building envelopes should avoid these areas if encountered during excavation to avoid differential settlement of foundations • Building envelopes should be placed to avoid intermittent drainages that are on the property • These drainages are prone to erosion of the silty soils found on the property Garfield County Road & Bridge Department: General Comments dated June 27, 2005 from Jake Mall. • A driveway access permit will be issued upon final plat by the BOCC with conditions specific to the driveway • A stop sign will be required at the entrance of the driveway to CR 115. The stop sign and installation will be in accordance with the "Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices" • A 30 foot easement for a right-of-way from the center line of CR 115, the entire length of the subdivision shall be dedicated to Garfield County at the time of final plat; such right-of-way shall be shown on the final plat. Prior to final plat, all fences, structures, tress and brush encumbering the 30 foot dedication shall be removed back to the new right-of-way at the applicants expense Garfield County Vegetation: No Comments Resource Engineers: No Comments III. GENERAL RELATIONSHIP TO THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN The property is located within Study Area 1 which designates the property as "Residential MH" on the proposed land use designation map. This designation indicates residential development is appropriate for this property at a density of 1 unit per 2 to 6 acres which is also consistent with the minimum lot size in the ARRD zone district. As a result, the residential use, density, and subdivision design are all consistent with and conform to the Comprehensive Plan. 3 i • IV. APPLICABLE ZONING REGULATIONS IN ARRD ZONE DISTRICT The following is an analysis of the proposed development with the ARRD zone district required zoning regulations. A. Proposed Uses The Applicant proposes single-family residential development on the three of the four lots. The fourth lot, as noted previously, will be set aside as open space. The three residential lots are contemplated as a "use by right" in the ARRD zone district and are therefore consistent with the underlying zone district. For other uses, the applicant should consult Section 3.02 of the Zoning Resolution. B. Common Dimensional Requirements Lot Size / Slope: The Applicant is proposing one open space lot and three residential lots totaling 48.52 acres. The residential lots are over 3 acres. This complies with the 2 acres minimum lot size in the ARRD zone. The applicants will need to be aware that every lot will need to have a "building envelope" of at least 1 contiguous acre with slopes less that 40% pursuant to §5.04.02(2) of the Zoning Regulation Maximum Lot Coverage: Fifteen percent (15%) Minimum Setback: Front yard: (a) arterial streets: seventy-five (75) feet from street centerline or fifty (50) feet from front lot line, whichever is greater; (b) local streets: fifty (50) feet from street centerline or twenty-five (25) feet from front lot line, whichever is greater; Rear yard: Twenty-five (25) feet from rear lot line; Side yard: Ten (10) feet from side lot line, or one-half (1/2) the height of the principal building, whichever is greater. Maximum Height of Buildings: Twenty-five (25) feet C. Supplementary Lot Area Regulations Generally speaking, Section 5.04.02(2) requires that all lots must have at least a 1 - acre building envelope that contains slopes less than 40%. Smaller envelopes may be approved by the Board so long as slope is adequately addressed. Note, while the minimum lot size in the ARRD zone district is 2 acres, all of the proposed residential lots will exceed the minimum lot size as well it appears there will be no maximum slope issues. 4 • • V. APPLICABLE REQUIREMENTS FOR PRELIMINARY PLAN A. Preliminary Plan Map as referenced in 44:50 of the Subdivision Regulations Staff Findings: The applicants' Preliminary Plan Map appears to meet the requirements as specified in the regulations B. Additional Information as referenced in $4:60 in the Subdivision Regulations Staff Findings: It appears the applicants will need to address the issue of a Homeowners Association prior to Final Platting. The applicants will need to address the use, limitations, terms, maintenance of the common open space tract, right of way, easements, and well sharing. The applicants have not presented a phasing plan; staff infers there will be only one phase of this plan. VI. SUPPLIMENTAL INFORMATION: 44:60 thru 44:94 A. Geology and Soils Staff Findings: An overview statement was submitted by Zancanella and Associates, Inc. reporting on the soils and geology of the area. This statement was based on Kirkham and Widman's 1997 Mapping and the National Cooperative Soil Survey, USDA Soil Conservation Service. The proposed subdivision is located within an area of Quaternary to Tertiary collapse debris. The map designations for the various geologic units are: • Sheetwash deposits • Alluvium and colluvium • Colluvium • Landslide deposits • Quaternary — Tertiary collapse debris • Tertiary Trachyandesite • Tertiary Basalt • Permian — Pennsylvanian Maroon Formation After review of the statement and in consideration of the proposed plat note, it is stafFs opinion the geological features and soils are adequate for construction of dwelling units. The conclusion of this statement will be most useful for determining the capability of providing safe and adequate foundations for dwelling units: 5 • • "While there is no direct evidence that building problems may occur at the Overview Subdivision, it is believed that care will need to be taken when constructing buildings. Precautions for settlement should be followed when building on loess deposits. Excavation may be more difficult and costly due to the possible presence of large basalt blocks. Notes should be added to the subdivision plat notifying future buyers of the potential problems. We recommend that each residence have an onsite soil analysis and a foundation designed by a registered engineer." B. Vegetation Staff Findings: A written summation of vegetation types was submitted by the applicants. Subdivision regulations require a "Map and Description" of plants associated with the subdivision. Following is a list of plant types on the subject property: • Aspen Trees • Gambel Oak • Serviceberry Shrubs • Mountain Mahogany Shrubs • Brome grass • Wheat Grass • Bitterbrush • Big Sage • Rice grass • Juegrass • Needle and Thread Based on the proposed size of the common open space and the limited number of lots, it does not appear there will be large areas of the disturbed land that would create a need for weed control. Regardless, the Homeowners Association shall prepare a management plan that will address weed control on all of the lots and right of way that will be disturbed. C. Wildlife Staff Findings: A Colorado Division of Wildlife WRIS Data Checklist was submitted identifying types of wildlife that will be impacted by the proposed subdivision. The list of wildlife is a follows: • Bald Eagle Winter Foraging Area • Black Bear Overall Range • Black Bear Fall Concentration Are • Brazilian Free -Tailed Bat Overall Range • Winter Elk Rang • Elk Sever Winter Range • Elk Overall Range • Elk Summer Range • Mule Deer Range 6 • • • Mule Deer Overall Range • Mule Deer Summer Range • Wild Turkey Overall Range The submitted list shows there is a number of wildlife species that could be affected by humans as well as domesticated animals. The applicants will need to be aware of the wildlife and manage any domesticated animals to reduce impacts it may have on wildlife. D. Drainage Plan Staff Findings: A Drainage Plan was submitted for the applicants by Zancanella and Associates, Inc dated January 26, 2005. This plan finds the proposed subdivision is not located in the 100 floodplain established by FEMA. The construction of residences on the proposed lots may slightly affect offsite drainage basins. There is one irrigation ditch on the property that will not be used by the applicants. The logical building sites are all located above the ditch, so the ditch should not affect the proposed residential lots. It is suggested that a reasonable prescriptive easement for the ditch be assumed. The hydrological peak flows of the area are primarily derived from rainfall. It is stated in the report that a simple storm drainage system will be more than adequate to handle spring snowmelt runoff. The estimated flows that could affect the proposed residential lots are minor and will be short lived. Any possible damage to buildings could be mitigated through a simple grading plan. This plan could be no more elaborate than berm or berm/ditch on the uphill side of each building or by elevating the finished floor sufficiently to allow flow away from the buildings in all directions. For onsite drainage, detention is not proposed because of the relatively large lots sizes allowing natural diffusion of minor flows generated from the proposed lot improvements. The Summary of the plan is as follows: "Impacts to proposed building areas due to an on and offsite runoff cam be mitigated by routing flows through the site with reasonable care. Additional storm runoff generated from the development of the Overview Subdivision will be insignificant due to the large lot areas and small impervious areas in relation to the lot size" E. Utility Plan -General Staff Findings: The Subdivision will be served by the following utilities: • Kinder Morgan — Gas • Holy Cross — Electric • Qwest — Phone • Cellular or Digital Wireless Phone Service will be provided by available carriers in the area. Verizon, Sprint, T -Mobile, Cingular, etc. • It is not known if Cable TV is available. • 1 • All other utilities will be provided by private means. F. Utility Plan - Water Staff Findings: Domestic Potable water will be provided by an exempt domestic well, permit # 252563. The Overview Well was completed on May 21, 2003. The water requirements for this well are to serve 3 lots with one dwelling unit each. The County typically uses a water usage calculation of 100 gallons per person per day for a household of 3.5 persons or a total of 350 gallons a day per household. The proposed well location is on the boundary of lots 2 and 3. The proposed water line that will serve the 3 residential lots will run under the access drive. As stated in §9:53 "All lines in a central water systems will be looped, with no dead ends included in the system. Where dead ends are proposed for cul-de-sacs, there will either be a fire hydrant or blow -off valve at the end of the line." The applicants are proposing a % inch frost free hydrant at high point and end for blow -off. Staff finds this is not a looped proposal, yet meets the County requirements. A 4 hour pump test was conducted by J&M Pump Company on June 1, 2004. The rate of 15 GPM was maintained throughout the 4 hour test. The maximum drawdown was 0.17 ft. The water level stabilized early in the test and did not vary throughout the reminder of the test. Because of the relatively small amount of drawdown, no recovery data were collected. Water quality samples were collected for the test. The lab test included analysis for various inorganic chemicals nitrate/nitrate, total dissolved solids and some of the physical properties of the water. Chloroform bacteria tests indicate bacteria were absent from the sample. NOTE: Results of the analysis only include the negative fording of chloroform bacteria. The applicant will need to submit a complete analysis and findings of the water quality as a part of the final plat submittal. Currently there is no well sharing agreement. Staff is recommending the applicants prepare a well access, easement, use, and sharing agreement to be a part of the final plat submittal. G. Utility Plan - Sanitary Sewer Staff Findings: Wastewater treatment is proposed to serve each lot through the use of an individual sewer disposal system ISDS. The applicants are proposing the ISDS be installed by each owner in accordance with all applicable ISDS regulations, and maintained through an ISDS maintenance agreement, to be included in the protective covenants. 8 • • A percolation test was performed on the property resulting in a percolation rate of 20 minutes per inch. This indicates a standard septic tank and leach field system will be appropriate. Each lot owner should do a percolation test for the design of their specific system in the specified area chosen for their absorption prior to pursuance of a building permit. H. Fire Protection Staff Findings: The Proposed subdivision is outside of the Carbondale Fire District boundaries. An independent Uniform Fire Code Inspector — Fire Inspector II and Colorado State Forest Service has researched the site and made several suggestions concerning a fire protection plan. Following are substantive suggestions for protection • The Applicants should use at least a 7000 gallon tank for firefighting purposes. This tank and piping will need to be backfilled appropriately so freezing does not occur and have a dry hydrant for which the fire department will be able to connect. • It is also suggested the applicants clear trees and brush within 15 ft from the edges of the structures. Any dead "fuels" should be removed such as slash and snags, trimming ground fuels, ladder fuels and thinning and pruning of live trees/brush. • Approved noncombustible roofing should be used. • Incorporate defensible space clearing and thinning as outlined in Colorado State Forest Service Publication 6.302, titled "Creating Defensible Zones". • One hour fuels (1/4 inch in diameter and smaller) should be cleared within in proximity to the residences. • Mowing or reseeding can be done to reduce the intensity of a fire in the proposed subdivision. I. Road/Access Plan Staff Findings: The access to the subdivision will come from a main entrance off of CR 115. An internal dead end public road is proposed to provide access to each of the 3 lots. This road is configured to terminate with a "hammerhead". Using the ITT Trip Generation manual, 3 residential lots will generate approximately 28.71 trips at 9.57 trips per dwelling which requires the all internal road be designed to the "Semi Primitive" standard pursuant to Section 9:35 of the Subdivision Regulations. This road type requires a 40 -foot right-of-way, two 8 -foot driving lanes, 2 -foot shoulder widths, 4 -foot ditch widths, and a gravel driving surface. The dead end road is approximately 600 linear feet and appears to comply with the required standard. It appears the proposed internal road has been designed to this standard. Dedication to the public of this internal road will be required. Maintenance however, will be the responsibility of the Homeowners Association and memorialized on the final plat as a plat note. 9 • • J. Easements The Applicant will need to delineate, legally describe, and convey all easements shown on the plat to the Homeowners Association. This dedication needs to be in a form acceptable to the County Attorneys Office and transfer shall occur at the time of recording the final plat. These easements shall include, but are not limited to all drainage easements, shared water system easements (domestic wells and water storage tank), storm -water drainage easements, all internal roads (which will be dedicated to the public on the face of the final plat) and any access and maintenance easements that need to be provided for in the common open space. K. Assessment / Impact Fees: The property is located in Traffic Study Area 9 which requires a $195.00 per ADT fee be paid to the county. This will be figured at the time of final plat. The applicant could expect to pay an approximate preliminary Traffic Impact Fee of $5,600 of which 1/2 shall be paid at final plat and included as a component of the Subdivision Improvement Agreement (SIA). The development is located in the RE -1 School District which will require a fee for School Site Acquisition. This fee will be paid at final plat and included as a component of the Subdivision Improvement Agreement (SIA). The formula for calculating the fee is as follows: Unimproved per acre market value of land x Land Dedication Standard x # of units = Cash -in -lieu Note: the Land Dedication Standard for single family homes is 870 sq. ft. per unit or .020 acres VII: STAFF RECOMENDATIONS: Staff is recommending the Board of County Commissioner approve the Overview Preliminary Plan with the following conditions. 1. The applicant shall place the following plat notes on the final plat and in protective covenants: a. "Colorado is a "Right -to -Farm" State pursuant to C.R.S. 35-3-101, et seq. Landowners, residents and visitors must be prepared to accept the activities, sights, sounds and smells of Garfield County's agricultural operations as a normal and necessary aspect of living in a County with a strong rural character and a healthy ranching sector. All must be prepared to encounter noises, odor, lights, mud, dust, smoke chemicals, machinery on public roads, livestock on public roads, storage and disposal of manure, and the application by spraying or otherwise of chemical fertilizers, soil amendments, herbicides, and pesticides, any one or more of which may naturally occur as a part of a legal and non -negligent agricultural operations." 10 • • b. "No open hearth solid -fuel fireplaces will be allowed anywhere within the subdivision. One (1) new solid -fuel burning stove as defied by C.R.S. 25- 7-401, et. sew., and the regulations promulgated thereunder, will be allowed in any dwelling unit. All dwelling units will be allowed an unrestricted number of natural gas burning stoves and appliances." c. "All owners of land, whether ranch or residence, have obligations under State law and County regulations with regard to the maintenance of fences and irrigation ditches, controlling weeds, keeping livestock and pets under control, using property in accordance with zoning, and other aspects of using and maintaining property. Residents and landowners are encouraged to learn about these rights and responsibilities and act as good neighbors and citizens of the County. A good introductory source for such information is "A Guide to Rural Living & Small Scale Agriculture" put out by the Colorado State University Extension Office in Garfield County." d. "All exterior lighting will be the minimum amount necessary and all exterior lighting will be directed inward and downward towards the interior of the subdivision, except that provisions may be made to allow for safety lighting that goes beyond the property boundaries." e. "One (1) dog will be allowed for each residential unit and the dog shall be required to be confined within the owner's property boundaries." 2. At the time of Final Plat, the Common Open Space lot shall be deeded to the Homeowners Association. 3. Prior to Final Plat the applicant shall submit a complete water quality analysis. 4. The applicants shall make a cash payment in -lieu of dedicating land in the amount and at the time as set forth in the Garfield County Regulations. 5. The applicants shall pay the applicable traffic impact fee in the amount and at the time as set for in the Garfield County Regulations. 6. Right of way dedication shall be at the time of final platting. A plat note using the standard dedication certificate language as set for by Garfield County shall be used. 7. Due to possible soil and geological issues a plat not shall be placed on the final plat stating; "Foundations and Individual Sewage Disposal Systems shall be engineered by a Professional Registered Engineer with the state of Colorado" 8. The Applicant shall include a plat note on the final plat stating the following: "The mineral rights associated with this property (also known as Lotsl, 2, 3 and 11 • • "Common Open Space" of the Overview Subdivision) have been partially severed and are not fully intact or transferred with the surface estate therefore allowing the potential for natural resource extraction on the property by the mineral estate owner(s) or lessee(s)." 9. As a requirement for the final plat application, the Applicant shall establish an incorporated Homeowners Association (HOA) with established by-laws which shall own and maintain the well permit, central water system, and internal road for the Overview Subdivision. This HOA shall also administer protective covenants governing the operation of the HOA. These documents shall be presented as part of the final plat application submittal. 10. The applicant shall identify all easements on the Final Plat that are referenced in the Title Commitment. 11. The applicant shall provide a map inventory of any County listed noxious weeds and provide a weed management plan that will address any inventoried noxious weeds. The HOA shall be the responsible party for execution and management of the weed mitigation plan. 12 • JUL 0 1 2005 GARHIELL) COUNTY BUILDING & PLANNING June 30, 2005 Richard Wheeler Garfield County Building and Planning Department 108 8th Street, Suite 201 Glenwood Springs, Colorado 81601 RE: Overview Subdivision Mr. Wheeler: FOREST SERVICE State Services Building 222 S. 6th Street, Room 416 Grand Junction, Colorado 81501 Telephone: (970) 248-7325 I have reviewed the Preliminary Plan submitted for the Rudd property and requested additional information from the applicant to accurately assess wildfire mitigation issues on the property. I requested the fire mitigation assessment written by Vonda Williams, Uniform Fire Code Inspector for Carbondale Fire Protection District, as there was no information in the preliminary plan regarding wildfire mitigation. After reviewing the assessment I have the following comments regarding wildfire hazard on this proposal. According to the assessment, the primary vegetation is grasses and oak brush with scattered pinyon and juniper trees. Williams recommendation of removing all trees and brush within 15 feet of the structure is correct, also called zone 1. As part of this zone ensure no flammable material is within 3 feet of the structure, including grass. In zone 2, defensible space should extend 75 to 125 feet from the structure. Thinning, creating distances of at least 10 feet between tree crowns, removal of dead fuels, and pruning are management actions for this zone. Slope is an important factor in defensible space. If slope is a concern, zone 2 must be enlarged to reduce the threat of wildfire to the structures. In terms of the grasses, the area must be mowed and kept to a low height. If invasive/non-native weeds are mixed with the grass, mitigation is suggested to improve the health of the ecosystem and lower the wildfire hazard. Also, firewise construction material is recommended to reduce the potential for home loss due to a wildfire. Construction materials include fire resistance siding and noncombustible roofing. Currently I would rate the wildfire hazard on this property at moderate. It is stated a 7,000 gallon water tank will be installed on the property for firefighting purposes. If there is no water tank, a pond or other water holding device needs to be installed on the property to supply additional water beside the dry fire hydrants. EXHIBIT G My specific recommendations to further mitigate wildfire hazard on this property would be to incorporate defensible space clearing and thinning as outlined in Colorado State Forest Service publication 6.302, "Creating Wildfire Defensible Zones" and use firewise construction when feasible. Copies of these publications were mailed to the applicant. Also, the grass and weeds must be dealt with to reduce the accumulation of one-hour fuels. One-hour fuels are 1/4 inch or less in diameter and respond very quickly to changes in their environment. Mowing or re- seeding can be done to reduce the intensity or possibility of a grass fire in the proposed subdivision. The landowner should manage the weed infestation by preventing the spread and improving the health of the land. Thank you for the opportunity to review this proposal. Please call me with any questions at 970- 248-7325. Sincerely, Kamie Fuller -Long Forester Cc: Wayne Rudd 2 • • STATE OF COLORADO OFFICE OF THE STATE ENGINEER Y /F coy Division of Water Resources Department of Natural Resources 1313 Sherman Street, Room 818 Denver, Colorado 80203 Phone (303) 866-3581 FAX (303) 866-3589 www.water.state.co.us E �. `i- JUL 0 5 2005 GAR BUit_DlNlM1,% Richard Wheeler Garfield County Planning Dept 108 8th St Ste 201 Glenwood Springs CO 81601 r\e. Dear Mr. Wheeler: 'N�n � June 30, 2005 Overview SLJ IViSivn p reii r -ii nary an Section 35, T6S, R88W, 6TH PM W. Division 5, W. District 38 \ 18 Bill Owens Governor Russell George Executive Director Hal D. Simpson, P.E. State Engineer We have reviewed the above -referenced proposal to subdivide a parcel of approximately 48.52 acres into 3 residential lots with one single-family dwelling and one barn/accessory structure on each lot. The applicant proposes to supply water through an existing well (Permit No. 252563). Sewage disposal is to be through individual septic systems. The submittal included a copy of a water supply investigation by Zancanella and Associates, Inc. and a copy of cancelled Well Permit No. 250297. Although the applicant referred to Permit No. 250297, this permit was cancelled by the issuance of Permit No. 252563, which was issued on August 26, 2003 for a maximum pumping rate of 15 gpm for fire protection, ordinary household purposes inside not more than three single-family dwellings, irrigation of not more than one acre of home gardens and lawns, and the watering of domestic animals. A Well Construction and Test Report was received under Permit No. 250297 on July 17, 2003. A Pump Installation and Test Report was received for this well on June 24, 2004. Permit No. 252563 is valid for the proposed uses. The June 24, 2004 report by Zancanella and Associates, Inc. indicates that the Overview Subdivision Well produced an average of 15 gallons per minute over a four-hour period on June 1, 2004. If the well continues to produce at this rate, the water supply should be physically adequate. The report by Zancanella and Associates, Inc. indicates that total annual water diversions and consumption for the development will be 2.66 acre-feet and 1.37 acre-feet, respectively. Based on the above, and pursuant to CRS 30-28-136(1)(h)(I), it is our opinion that the proposed domestic water supply will not cause material injury to decreed water rights, so long as the applicant obtains and maintains valid well permits. If you or the applicant has any questions concerning this matter, please contact Cynthia Love at this office for assistance. CML/CJ L/Overview. doc Sincerely, Craig M. Lis, P Water Resource Engineer cc: Alan Martellaro, Division Engineer, Division 5 Bill Blakeslee, Water Commissioner, District 38 • • STATE OF COLORADO COLORADO GEOLOGICAL SURVEY Division of Minerals & Geology Department of Natural Resources 1313 Sherman Street, Room 715 Denver, Colorado 80203 Phone (303) 866-2611 FAX (303) 866-2461 June 22, 2005 Richard Wheeler Garfield County Planning Dept 108 8th St. Suite 201 Glenwood Springs, CO 81601 Re: Overview Subdivision MAILED Legal: SES35, T6S, R88W RC\TED JUL 0 5 2005 GARFi� BUILDINGxI_r 1�4!ItiG CGS Review No. GA -05-0008 Dear Mr. Wheeler; 10010171i DEPARTMENT OF NATURAL RESOURCES Bill Owens Governor Russell George Executive Director Ronald W. Cattany Division Director Vincent Matthews State Geologist In response to your request and in accordance with Senate Bill 35 (1972), I visited the site and reviewed the site plan on June 21, 2005. The site consists of approximately 48.5 acres and the proposed subdivision would split the existing property into 3 residential lots with open space. Water will be supplied by wells and sanitation services will be by individual on -lot septic systems. Included in the review package were a preliminary plat by The Sexton Survey Company (12-3-04), an Overview Subdivision Geology Statement by Zancanella & Associates, Inc. (11-22-04), a Soil Survey of Eagle, Garfield and Pitkin Counties, Colorado by the USDA SCS, and a Drainage Plan by Zancanella & Associates, Inc. (1-26-05). There are no geologic hazards that would preclude development of this property. However, the following are concerns I have with the development. 1. Soils/Subsurface. The soils on the property are loess deposits that may exhibit hydro -compaction and settlement during construction. Over -excavation and compaction during foundation preparation can mitigate settlement potential. Loess soils, and in particular the Showalter-Morval soil complex, are highly prone to erosion. Erosion mitigation should occur during and after construction to avoid potential soil loss. Large blocks of basalt may be present in the subsurface. Building envelopes should avoid these areas if encountered during excavation to avoid differential settlement of foundations. 2. Drainage. The property contains small intermittent drainages. Building envelopes should be placed to avoid these drainages. These drainages may be prone to erosion of the silty soils found on the property. If the recommendations in the submitted reports and the recommendations included in this letter are complied with, then this office has no further concerns regarding this development. If you have any further questions or concerns, please contact me at (303) 866-3350, or andy.qleason(@,state.co.us Sincerely, Andy Gleason Geologist • • GARFIELD COUNTY Building & Planning Department Review Agency Form Name of application: Overview Subdivision Sent to: Garfield County Road & Bridge Dept. Date Sent: June, 14, 2005 Comments Due: July 6, 2005 Garfield County requests your comment in review of this project. Please notify the Planning Department in the event you are unable to respond by the deadline. This form may be used for your response, or you may attach your own additional sheets as necessary. Written comments may be mailed, e-mailed, or faxed to: Garfield County Building & Planning Staff contact: Richard Wheeler 109 8th Street, Suite 301 Glenwood Springs, CO 81601 Fax: 970-384-3470 Phone: 970-945-8212 General Comments: Garfield County Road & Bridge Dept. has no objection to this subdivision with the following requests. A driveway access permit will be issued upon final plat by the BOCC with conditions specific to the driveway. A stop sign will also be required at the entrance of the driveway onto Cr. 115. The stop sign and installation will be as required in the MUTCD (Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices. A 30 -foot easement along Cr. 115 the entire length of the subdivision will be deeded to Garfield County. All fences, structures, trees and brush encumbering the 30 -foot easement will be removed back to the new ROW at the sub dividers expense prior to final Platt. Name of review agency: Garfield County Road and Bridge Dept By: Jake B. Mall Date June 27, 2005 d 3 EXHIBIT Revised 3/30/00 • i MEMORANDUM To: Richard Wheeler From: Steve Anthony Re: Comments on the Overview Preliminary Plan Date: July 7, 2005 The Vegetation Management Department requests that the applicant provide a map and inventory of any County Listed Noxious Weeds (list attached) on the 48 acre parcel and provide a weed management plan that will address any inventoried noxious weeds (if present). Staff requests that the applicant state who the responsible party will be for weed management on the common/agricultural lot. EXHIBIT a -ice GARFIELD COUNTY NOXIOUS WEED LIST Common name Leafy spurge Russian knapweed Yellow starthistle Plumeless thistle Houndstongue Common burdock Scotch thistle Canada thistle Spotted knapweed Diffuse knapweed Dalmation toadflax Yellow toadflax Hoary cress Saltcedar Saltcedar Oxeye Daisy Jointed Goatgrass Chicory Musk thistle Purple loosestrife Russian olive Absinth wormwood Scientific name Euphorbia esula Acroptilon repens Centaurea solstitalis Carduus acanthoides Cynoglossum officinale Arctium minus Onopordum acanthium Cirsium arvense Centaurea maculosa Centaurea diffusa Linaria dalmatica Linaria vulgaris Cardaria draba Tamarix parvora Tamarix ramosissima Chrysanthemum leucantheum Aegilops cylindrica Cichorium intybus Carduus nutans Lythrum salicaria Elaeagnus angustifolia Artemesia absinthium *note Colorado Listed noxious weed. this is a ■■M R E Sib URC E ■■■■■ ■■■■■ E N G I N E E R I N G I N C. Richard Wheeler Garfield County Building and Planning Department 108 Eighth Street, Suite 201 Glenwood Springs CO 81601 RE: Review of Preliminary Plan Submittal for the Overview Subdivision Dear Richard: July 11, 2005 At the request of Garfield County, Resource Engineering, Inc. (RESOURCE) has reviewed the preliminary plan submittal for the proposed Overview Subdivision located at 8575 County Road 115. The submittal includes a package with a cover letter dated May 25, 2005. We reviewed the technical issues related to water rights and water supply, wastewater, drainage, soils/geology, wetlands, and traffic/roads. Our comments are presented below. WATER RIGHTS AND WATER SUPPLY The three proposed lots are to be served by a single shared well. An exempt 35+ acre well permit No. 250297 was issued for the property by the Division of Water Resources. The well permit allows for domestic use in three single family dwelling units, up to one acre of irrigation, and watering of domestic animals. The well has been drilled and tested. The pumping test indicates that the well yields 15 gpm with minimal drawdown. This flow rate, coupled with storage would be adequate for three single family units. Ten thousand gallons of storage is proposed to meet peak demands and provide fire protection. The applicant needs to submit evidence from the fire protection district that they have adequately met the District's fire mitigation requirements. The applicant also needs to address wildfire hazard and mitigation. The fire protection measures should be incorporated into the covenants and referenced on a plat note. The water quality data was not available as of June 24, 2004. We assume this information is now available and should be submitted prior to the BOCC meeting. A well sharing agreement should be included in the Final Plat submittal and referenced in a plat note and in the covenants. Easements for the water system must be included on the plat. WASTEWATER Individual Sewage Disposal Systems (ISDS) are proposed for the project. A percolation test was conducted on the property. The results indicate that conventional ISDS can be constructed for the project. The ISDS Operation and Maintenance Plan should be expanded consistent with other plans and should be incorporated into the covenants. t JUL 1 1 2005 'PL;L;N= PLANNING EXHIBIT tv\ ,.,ers and Hydrologists 909 Colorado Avenue ® Glenwood Springs, CO 81 601 E (970) 945-6777 Fax (970) 945-1137 • • Richard Wheeler July 11, 2005 Page 2 DRAINAGE The drainage plan adequately addresses drainage consistent with County criteria. The erosion and sediment control plan should be expanded to show location and details of any structures for construction of the internal road improvements. SOILS/GEOLOGY The soils and geology present potential concerns for excavation and settlement issues. Consistent with the Zancanella and Associates report, we recommend that a plat note be added that requires a site specific geotechnical analysis and foundation design be submitted with the building permit application. TRAFFIC/ROADS The proposed subdivision will have an average daily trip (ADT) of approximately 30 vehicle trips per day. This will require the internal road to be designed as a semi primitive road with a 40 foot right-of-way, two 8 foot lanes, and 2 foot shoulders. Since the lots are less than 10 acres in size, the road surface must be paved, unless otherwise approved by the BOCC. The road design should be submitted prior to the BOCC hearing. Please call if you have any questions or need additional information. Sincerely, RESOURCE ENGI EERING, INC. Michael J. Eri , P.E. Water Reso rce Engineer MJE/mmm 885-33.0 E:\Client\885\rw overview prelim plat 885.doc CC: Bradley Peek, Zancanella & Associates RESOURCE NIGINEERING INC • • From: Tarry [mailto:llg@sopris.net] Sent: Monday, September 26, 2005 11:10 PM To: Cathi Edinger Subject: rudd spring valley proposal the attchment is the same as the pasted document regarding the application by Wayne Rudd to go before the BOCC. I apologize for the lateness of the comment but hope it can be included. Thank you for your time and effort. Respectfully submitted Larry Gpefert 928-8195 To: Garfield County Planning and Zoning Commission Re: Proposal by Wayne Rudd to split a 35 arce lot into 3 lots on County Rd 115 From: Larry Gepfert 928-8195 Regarding the request by Mr. Rudd to split the 35 acre lot on 115 rd I believe it sets a president for the rest of the area. Mr. Rudd had the opportunity to get 2 extra lots if he had used the rural cluster development option. Since he did not I do not believe he should be entitled to the split. Many people worked long and hard to come up with a way to develop rural lands without using the exemption process. By allowing this split you are essentially nullifying the use of the cluster regulation. If you decide for the lot split you are setting a precedent for the rest of the area which is mostly 35 acre lots. I for one would ask that if this is approved that you also approve the same split for the rest of the 35 acre lots in the area. That should include Homestead ranch with 28 lots; High Aspen with approximately 30 lots; the rest of Mr. Rudds lots; the 4-5 35 acre lots across the road from the Rudd property; Lookout Mountain ranch; Chenoa; various lots in Spring Valley and the yet to be developed portions of the Gould ranch, the Nieslanik ranch and the Berkley ranch. By approving this you are essentially paving the way for 300 to 400 more lots through an exemption type process with little to no mitigation. The lot has a major powerline and easement on it and also a substantial size irrigation ditch going through it. In addition the area is rural in nature; the road is a narrow windy dirt road with increasing bicycle, pedestrian and construction traffic. The entrance to the lot is on a curvy almost blind section of the road. The area is a major winter/ summer migration corridor for deer and elk between the BLM Fischer / Half pasture and the high country. In addition it is a mule deer fawning ground. By increasing the densities you will increase the burden on to the few remaining agricultural ranches to harbor and feed these animals Respectfully submitted Larry Gepfert Homestead Ranch Homeowners Assn. EXHIBIT