Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2.0 BOCC Staff Report & Exhibits 08.04.2003• BOARD: 8/4/03 TP PROJECT INFORMATION AND STAFF COMMENTS REQUEST: Preliminary Plan review for the Village View Village PUD Subdivision SUMMARY OF REQUEST: A request to subdivide approximately 36 acres into 47 lots; 119 units consisting of single-, two- and multi -family dwelling units. PROPERTY OWNER / APPLICANT: Edward and Ida Lee Hoglund REPRESENTATIVE (S): LOCATION: WATER/SEWER: ACCESS: EXISTING / ADJA Dartar, LLC.; Ron Weilder — High Country Engineering ("HCE"); and Ron Liston — Land Design Partnership The property is located at the southwest quadrant of the intersection of Battlement Mesa Parkway and Stone Quarry Road within the Battlement Mesa PUD. Battlement Mesa Consolidated Metropolitan District Battlement Mesa Parkway and Stone Quarry Road ZONING: PUD (Planned Unit Development) / Battlement Mesa PUD I. DEVELOPMENT PROPOSAL The Applicant is proposing to subdivide approximately 36 acres site into 47 lots, as follows: Structures 1 (Single -Family) 1 (Single -Family) 1 (Two -Family) 1 (Two -Family) 1 (Two -Family) 3 (Multi -Family) 2 (Multi -Family) 2 (Multi -Family) 7 (Multi -Family) Vacant II. PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION No. of Units 1 1 2 each 2 each 2 each 6 each 2 each 4 each 6 each n/a Tutalurtts 22 19 2 2 2 18 4 8 42 0 119 units The Preliminary Plan heard by the Planning Commission on June 11, 2003. A copy of the minutes can be seen in more detail in Exhibit 00. The Planning Commission forwarded a recommendation of approval with a number of conditions, which are outlined under Section XII of this memorandum. The items that • Valley View Village PUD Subdivision Preliminary Plan BOARD: 8/4/03 Page 2 were to be addressed "prior to the Board of County Commissioners review" are discussed throughout this memorandum, as applicable, and are reflected in the conditions of approval. III. BACKGROUND The subject tract of land was not included in the original Battlement Mesa Planned Unit Development ("PUD"). In 1982, the Gun Stock Ranch Partnership requested an amendment to the Battlement Mesa PUD to include the subject property within the boundary of the PUD and to divide the property into four different zone districts each of which are described in the Battlement Mesa PUD. Approval of this amendment was granted by the Board of County Commissioners ("Board") pursuant to Resolution No. 82-330 (Exhibit K). The four zone districts include: 1. Neighborhood Commercial ("NC") 2. Medium Density Residential ("MDR") 3. Low Density Residential ("LDR") 4. Public Space / Residential ("PSR") It appears that the PSR zone district was an error given that in Resolution No. 80-82 (see Exhibit L) there is no PSR zone district within the district regulation for the Battlement Mesa PUD. It appears that it was the intent of Item 4, above, to read "Public, Semipublic, Recreation", which is the proper title for the public space district of the Battlement Mesa PUD. The configuration of the listed zone districts was defined by a plan titled "Conceptual Land use Diagram, Skeme 1". The Public, Semi -Public, and Recreation ("PSR") Zone District is in the northwest corner of the property within an area dedicated to Garfield County in 1982. The owners of Gun Stock Ranch Partnership gave Garfield County this approximately 2 acre tract of land after PUD approval in 1982. Pursuant to Resolution No. 82-327 (Exhibit M), the Board granted an exemption from the definition of subdivision for the division of approximately 38 acres of land into two tracts: 2 acres and 36 acres. Exemption Plat was not recorded in 1982. Conceptual Land Use Diagram, Scheme 1 te`lic=1.1t, zM� IV. SITE DESCRIPTION / EXISTING CONDITIONS The subject property is bound by South Battlement Parkway to the north, which is a four lane roadway divided by a center landscaped median. Stone Quarry Road, to the east, is also a four lane roadway without a median. The property slopes in a north and west direction and is bisected by a well-defined Valley View Village PUD Subdivision Preliminary Plan BOARD: 8/4/03 Page 3 drainage that runs midway along the easterly boundary (Stone Quarry Road) of the property in a northwesterly direction across the property. The property is improved with an old homestead (vacant ranch house and accessory structures). The vegetation on site consists of sparse grassland south of the gully, pinion and juniper on the north side of the gully and dry land pasture around the existing homestead. There is a high voltage power line that crosses the northwest corner of the Garfield County parcel within a 100 -foot wide easement. A high pressure natural gas transmission line enters the property, through the Garfield County parcel, in the northwest corner, and parallels the south side of the gully to Stone Quarry Road where it turns south and parallels Stone Quarry Road. This gas line does not lie within the designated, recorded 50 -foot wide easement. On the Preliminary Plan, there are two 50' Gas Easements delineated. One is the recorded 50' Gas Easement and the other is a proposed 50' Gas Easement which represents the location of the actual gas line. The 50' gas line easement issue is discussed further in this memorandum. There also a 20' Utility Easement along the southwestern corner of the subject property abutting Lots 16, 17 and 18. V. PROJECT DESCRIPTION The northeast corner of the proposed development, Lot 47, is identified as an area for future development. The Applicant indicated that a plat note is proposed that will restrict the issuance of a building permit within Lot 47 until such time as this lot has been re -subdivided in accordance with standard subdivision procedures. The Applicant noted that it is likely that at a future time, an amendment to the PUD will be applied for to rezone all or nearly all of this commercial designated area to residential use. The zoned Medium Density Residential (MDR) area is located south and west of the gulley. Multi -family development with a mixture of building sizes and dwelling unit designs are proposed for these areas. Individual structures will contain two, four and six dwelling units. Single-family residential units are proposed in the southerly area of the subdivision within the Low Density Residential (LDR) zoning. These lots within the LDR range from 7,000 square feet to 10,000 square feet in size. Open Space corridors along the west and south sides of the subject property are in accordance with the Conceptual Plan approved in 1982. A more detailed discussion with respect to these open space corridors can be seen further in this memorandum. There are four tracts (Tracts B, C, D and E) that have been identified as open space areas within the subdivision. Tract B is an area between the county owned property, in the northwest corner of the property, and the right-of-way to be dedicated to the County (identified as Tract A). Tract C is located immediately north of Lots 25 and 26. Tract D is an open space area that encompasses the gulley from Valley View Drive to Stone Quarry Road. The majority of this tract is located within the floodplain. And, Tract E, the open space area south side of Valley View Drive, will be developed into a park with an asphalt pedestrian path, children's play equipment, benches, landscaping and an automatic underground • • Valley View Village PUD Subdivision Preliminary Plan BOARD: 8/4/03 Page 4 irrigation system. The pedestrian path connects with the sidewalk system that circulates throughout the residential areas of the project. The Applicant has identified along Battlement Parkway, from Valley View Drive to Stone Quarry Road, a 6' asphalt trail which will be constructed with Phase A of the project (see Sheet 25 of the Preliminary Plan for the location of the trail and Sheet 24 for the construction detail of the trail). The 6' asphalt trail from Battlement Parkway, along Stone Quarry Road, to Valley View Drive is proposed to be constructed in conjunction with Phase D of the project. The 8' pedestrian bridge over the gully will also be constructed at Phase D. VI. ADJACENT LAND USES: The following land uses surround the subject site: 1. North: Battlement Mesa Parkway & Willow Park Apartments. 2. East: Stone Quarry Road; Vacant land; Cemetery adjacent to County Road 302 3. South: Vacant land 4. West: Vacant land VII. RELATIONSHIP TO THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN: The subject property is designated on the `Proposed Land Use Districts Map for Study Areas 2 & 3' in the Garfield County Comprehensive Plan as "Subdivision". The property does lie within the Parachute 2 mile Sphere of Influence. Comments from the Town of Parachute have been integrated throughout this memorandum and can be seen in more detailed in Exhibit S. A number of policies in Comprehensive Plan are aimed at reducing density in future developments and preserving open space and agricultural uses. The following statements from the Comprehensive Plan Goals, Objectives and Policies are applicable to this application: 5.0 Recreation and Open Space Policies: 5.3 If physically possible, subdivisions and PUDs will be encouraged to design open space areas to become contiguous with existing and proposed open spaces adjacent to the project. 5.0(a) Open Space and Trails Goal: 5.1(A) To ensure that wildlife habitat is a component of the review process and reasonable mitigation • • Valley View Village PUD Subdivision Preliminary Plan BOARD: 8/4/03 Page 5 measures are imposed on projects that negatively impact critical habitat. 5.3(A) That the development of passive and active trails in the County should be developed in a comprehensive fashion, consistent with efforts by adjacent jurisdictions. 7.0 Water and Sewer Services Objective: 7.2 Development located adjacent to municipalities or sanitation districts with available capacity in their central water / sewer systems will be strongly encouraged to tie into these services before project approval. 7.6 High density development, defined as exceeding one (1) dwelling unit per one (1) acre, will be required to assess the potential of connecting into exiting central water and sewer facilities. Policies: 7.5 High density development is considered urban in nature and requires appropriate service. Through the Zoning Resolution, Garfield County will strongly encourage high density development to locate in areas where these services are available. 8.0 Natural Environment Goals: Garfield County will encourage a land use pattern that recognizes that environmental sensitivity of the land, does not overburden the physical capacity of the land and is in the best interests of the health, safety and welfare of Garfield County. Objectives: 8.2 Proposed projects will be required to recognize the physical features of the land and design projects in a manner that is compatible with the physical environment. 8.3 Garfield County will ensure that natural drainages are protected from alteration. 8.5 Development proposals will be required to address soil constraints unique to the proposed site. 8.6 Garfield County will ensure that natural, scenic and ecological resources and critical wildlife habitats are protected. 8.7 Development will be encouraged in areas with the least development constraints. Policies: 8.3 Natural drainage patterns will be preserved so that cumulative impact of public and private land s • Valley View Village PUD Subdivision Preliminary Plan BOARD: 8/4/03 Page 6 use activities will not cause storm drainage and floodwater patterns to exceed the capacity of natural or constructed drain -ways, or to subject other areas to an increased potential for damage due to flooding, erosion or sedimentation or result in pollution to streams, rivers or other natural bodies of water. 10.0 Urban Area of Influence Goals Promote development in and around existing communities. Ensure that development and overall land use policies occurring in the County that will affect a municipality are compatible with the existing zoning and future land use objectives of the appropriate municipality. Objectives: 10.5 Development that requires urban services will be encouraged to locate in areas where these services are available. 10.6 Development in an Urban Area of Influence will have street patterns that are compatible with the affected municipality. Policies 10.2 Projects proposed adjacent to local municipalities that require urban services will be encouraged to annex into the affected jurisdiction. VIII. REFERRAL AGENCIES: The application was referred to the following agency (ies) for comments. Comments that were received have been integrated throughout this memorandum where applicable. 1. Town of Parachute: Exhibit Y. 2. Grand Valley Fire Protection District: Exhibit HH, II, and LL. 3. School District 16: Exhibit X. 4. Battlement Mesa Water and Sanitation District: Exhibit N, S, V, PP, SS, and TT. 5. Public Service Company / Xcel Energy: Exhibit DD. 6. Western Slope Gas Company: No comments. 7. US West Communications: No comments. 8. Colorado Division of Wildlife: Exhibit FF. 9. Colorado Division of Water Resource: Exhibit 0 and R. 10. Colorado Geological Survey: Exhibit MM. Valley View Village PUD Subdivision Preliminary Plan BOARD: 8/4/03 Page 7 11. Garfield County Road and Bridge: Exhibit W. 12. Garfield County Vegetation Management: Exhibit GG. 13. Garfield County Engineering Department: Exhibit Z and BB. 14. Battlement Mesa Park and Recreation District: No comments. IX. APPLICABLITY: Pursuant to section 4:20 of the Subdivision Regulations, the Planning Commission shall hold an advertised public hearing on the proposed subdivision at a regularly scheduled meeting of the Commission. The Commission shall complete its review and make its recommendation to the Board at the public hearing on the Preliminary Plan or continue the hearing to the next regularly scheduled Planning Commission meeting for additional information or public input before making a decision. The Planning Commission may recommend approval, conditional approval or disapproval of the Plan. The reasons for disapproval, or any conditions of approval, shall be set forth in the minutes of the meeting or in a written Resolution. If the Final Plat is to be phased, the Planning Commission shall recommend a phasing plan, along with the approval or conditional approval. X. STAFF COMMENTS: A. Zoning As noted previously, as part of the approval granted in 1982, pursuant to Resolution No. 82-330 (see Exhibit K), four specific Zone Districts were designated on the subject property in conjunction with the zoning of the Battlement Mesa PUD. The configuration of the zone districts were delineated on a plan titled "Conceptual Land Use Diagram, Scheme 1" which was included with Resolution No. 82-330 as Exhibit A. These Zone Districts include: 1. Neighborhood/Commercial ("NC") 2. Medium Density Residential ("MDR") 3. Low Density Residential ("LDR") 4. Public Space/Residential [which should actually read Public, Semipublic, and 17Ig (MDR) e�ro. �1r�\ ono - OPEN SPACE A! 1LDB)_ 7"—(EIDRY4 LL =AI LQL2 'i'19L0 io'v. L7ZB 1 L4I, LA_T.Z ;4,4i Recreation pursuant to Resolution No. 80-82] ("PSR") • • Valley View Village PUD Subdivision Preliminary Plan BOARD: 8/4/03 Page 8 Pursuant to Resolution 80-82 (Exhibit L), specified development regulations, such as lot area, setbacks, and uses, for each of the above-mentioned Zone Districts are outlined. Excerpts of these district regulations are included with the application. The PUD approval, pursuant to Resolution No. 82-330, was granted subject to the following conditions [Staff responses are in italics]: 1. That the property be tied into the pedestrian and bike plan, which ties into the Open Space, and that some provision be made to facilitate safe crossing of the Battlement Parkway. The Applicant will be providing a pedestrian crossing of Stone Quarry Road where it intersects with Valley View Drive. Appropriate signage will be installed to alert north and south bound Stone Quarry Road traffic of the pedestrian crossing. The Applicant has not provided an exact location of the proposed pedestrian crossing. There is an existing pedestrian crossing at the intersection of Battlement Parkway and Stone Quarry Road. 2. That the Gun Stock Ranch Development and Architectural Standard is compatible with that of Battlement Mesa and parallel in review structure or agree to submit to review by the Battlement Mesa Design Review Committee. Article VI of the Master Declaration of Covenants, Conditions and Restrictions for Valley View Village Subdivision outlines the Architectural Committee for the Valley View Village Subdivision. It is unclear as to whether these architectural guidelines are compatible with those of Battlement Mesa. 3. That because this parcel is part of the whole PUD, there should be some specific agreement for inclusion of this parcel and to the maintenance and improvements of the PUD Open Space and PSR Districts at the sketch plan. According to the Applicant, a Valley View Village Master' Homeowners Association will be incorporated to own and maintain the common open space tracts and to maintain public roads within the subdivision. One or more `slave' homeowners associations will be formed to own and maintain common use property and facilities, including drives and parking, within the multi- and two-family areas. At the time of Final Plat, Valley View Village will be annexed into the Battlement Mesa Service Association, which owns and maintains various Battlement Mesa Community wide common use facilities. Each lot owner within Valley View Village will thereby be a member of the Battlement Mesa Service Association and will pay dues to that Association at a rate that is 50% of the regular dues. 4. The MDR (Medium Density Residential) and NC (Neighborhood/Commercial) Districts should be connected across the gulley on the property by a pedestrian bridge. On Sheet 25 of the Preliminary Plan, a pedestrian bridge has been delineated adjacent to Stone Quarry Road. The Applicant has noted that this pedestrian bridge, along with the easterly 6' asphalt trail will be constructed in conjunction with Phase D of the project. Valley View Village PUD Subdivision Preliminary Plan BOARD: 8/4/03 Page 9 5. That the Applicant should provide landscaping, berming and buffers along Battlement Parkway and the proposed uses. On Sheet 3 of 4 on the Preliminary Plan, a 15' wide "landscape buffer" easement has been identified on the Lot 47 from Valley View Drive adjacent to Battlement Mesa Parkway to Stone Quarry Road. The Applicant has noted that since the 15' wide Landscape Buffer Easement is entirely located on Lot 47, a Landscape Plan for Lot 47 will be submitted to the County at the time of re -subdivision. The Applicant noted that a plat note on the Preliminary Plan will be added to secure this requirement. B. Water Supply / Wastewater The property is located within the Battlement Mesa Community Consolidated Metropolitan District ("CMD"). Staff understands that CMD is obligated to provide wastewater and water service to the subdivision. The Applicant asserted that all water and sewer lines will be constructed per the District's specifications and dedicated to the District. Pursuant to Section 4:91(C) of the Subdivision Regulations: "If connection is to be made to an existing water system, a letter from an authorized representative of said system staging that the proposed development will be served, and evidence from either the Colorado State Engineers Office or Water Court, Water Division No. 5, that the existing water system presently possesses an adequate legal water supply to serve the proposed development." The Applicant has been working with CMD to resolve water and sewer system design issues. Correspondence between West Water Engineering ("WWE"), the engineering firm that represents CMD, CMD, and High Country Engineer ("HCE") can be seen in Exhibits S, T, U, V, PP, SS and TT. Staff understands from the latest correspondence from R. Bruce Smith of CMD, that "the Valley View Village Subdivision water and wastewater plans are approved for the Preliminary Plan process" (see Exhibit TT). Mr. Smith noted that "the District has capacity and will serve the proposed development subject to the terms and conditions expressed by Mr. LaBonde [WWE], and the additional conditions of Garfield County and the Grand Valley Fire Protection District." Kenneth Knox of the Division of Water Resources noted in his comments dated May 6, 2003, that "pursuant to CRS 30-28-136(1)(h)(II), it is our opinion that the proposed water supply will not cause injury to existing water rights so long as Consolidated Metropolitan District operates according to the terms and conditions of its current plan for augmentation" (see Exhibit R). In addition, Mr. Knox noted that "the average daily demand for the project is estimated to be 75,250 gallon per day (84.3 AF/yr). A letter dated January 28, 2003, from CMD shows that the District has agreed to provide water and sewer services for Valley View, based upon an estimated peak day water demand of 225,750 gallons per day (three times the average daily demand) for the proposed 215 EQR's. " • • Valley View Village PUD Subdivision Preliminary Plan BOARD: 8/4/03 Page 10 Comments were received from Jeff Nelson, Assistant County Engineer, which outlined a variety of issues pertaining to the sanitary sewer (see Exhibit Z). The Applicant has worked with Mr. Nelson to resolve these issues. Mr. Nelson provided a letter indicating that all issues with respect to wastewater have been resolved (see Exhibit BB). C. Utilities The Applicant noted that that following shallow utilities will be provided to the subdivision: 1. Telephone — Qwest 2. Electric — Xcel Energy 3. Gas — Xcel Energy 4. Cable TV — Battlement Mesa Communications Will serve letters from Qwest and Battlement Mesa Communication were not provided. A 50' gas line easement for Public Service Company ("PSCo") traverses the subject property, as well as the County owned property, in a west / east direction. The 50' gas line easement, recorded as Reception No. 221322, does not represent the exact location of the actual gas line. David McConaughy of Leavenworth & Karp, legal council for the Applicant, provided a letter explaining that the rights-of-way easements for the gas transmission line reserve rights to the landowner to use and occupy the easement for any purpose that will not interfere with or endanger any of the gas company's facilities (see Exhibit EE). A condition of approval from the Planning Commission was that prior to the Board of County Commissioners review of Preliminary Plan, the gas line issue was to be resolved. Mr. McConaughy indicated that in order to correct the gas line easement issue, PSCo / Xcel Energy is required to relinquish the existing (wrong) easement by quit claim deeds, and than the property owners and the Board of County Commissioners will be asked to grant new easements to match the actual location of the gas line (see Exhibit QQ). The necessary documents prepared by PSCo / Xcel Energy have been provided with Mr. McConaughy's letter. Staff understands that that new proposed easements are non-exclusive and reserve the grantor's rights to use the property for any purpose other than erecting buildings or structures or placing mobile homes on the easements. The reserved rights include the right to install utilities. Mr. McConaughy has provided a letter from PSCo / Xcel Energy confirming that utilities would be permitted in the new easements. Lastly, Mr. McConaughy noted that proposed deeds, provided in Exhibit QQ, require the County Attorney's review and approval, as well as a formal approval by the Board of County Commissioners to 1 complete the exchange. Mr. McConaughy requested that the Board of County Commissioners include a new condition of approval that provides for the exchange deeds to be executed by PSCo, the landowner, and the Board of County Commissioners and recorded prior to recording of the Final Plat. Staff has included a condition of approval reflecting this request. A copy of an "Agreement to Exchange Real • • Valley View Village PUD Subdivision Preliminary Plan BOARD: 8/4/03 Page 11 Estate Interests" between the Applicant, Edward and Ida Lee Hoaglund and PSCo has been provided (see Exhibit RR). According to Jeff Nelson, Assistant County Engineer, the issues with respect to the Utility Plans addressed in his letter dated April 21, 2003, (see Exhibit Z) have been resolved (see Exhibit BB). D. Floodplain / Wetlands The property is located on the FEMA Flood Insurance Rate Map (panel 1315 of 1900), Community -Panel No. 080205 1315B. The map indicates that the site has two areas that have been designated as containing Zone A. One area mapped for Zone A encompasses the gully that traverses the property. The second area is along the southwest corner of Lots 16, 17 & 18. Zone A on the FEMA maps is explained as `areas of 100 year flood, base flood elevations and flood hazard factors not determined.' The Applicant noted that since these onsite flood areas where not determined, HCE calculated flood elevations in two critical locations. HCE determined that the buildings in Basin PR -D (Exhibit 4 of the Proposed Drainage Map) are adequate. There does not appear to be development within the 100 -year floodplain that would warrant a Floodplain Special Use Permit. There are no lakes or streams located on the subject property. E. Soils/Geology According to the soil survey, from USDA Soil and Conservation Service, the soils on the subject property consist of: 1. Potts loam, 6 to 12 percent slopes: deep, well -drained, moderate permeability, hydrologic Group B. 2. Potts-Ildefonso complex, 12 to 25 percent slopes: deep, well -drained, moderate permeability, hydrologic Group B. The interpretation tables for these types of soils can be seen in more detail in the application. A Geotechnical Study (Job No. 102 526, dated September 16, 2002) for the subdivision was conducted for the project by Hepworth-Pawlak Geotechnical, Inc. ("HP GeoTech"), which can be seen in more detail in that application. In summary, HP GeoTech indicated that the site is suitable for the proposed development based on geologic and geotechnical conditions. The Geotechnical Study ("Study") noted that if the development plan changes significantly from what is described in the Study, HP GeoTech shall be notified in order to re-evaluate the recommendations presented in the Study. HP GeoTech provided conclusions and recommendations based on the proposed development, subsurface conditions encountered in the exploratory borings, and their experience in the area. The Study indicates that the recommendations are suitable for planning and preliminary design, but site specific studies should • • Valley View Village PUD Subdivision Preliminary Plan BOARD: 8/4/03 Page 12 be conducted for the individual development facilities and for building on each lot. The `Preliminary Design Recommendations' outlined in the Study provides provisions for foundations, floor slabs, under - drain system, surface drainage, and pavement subgrade which shall be adhered. HP GeoTech noted that the conclusions and recommendations submitted in the Study are based upon the data obtained from review of previous geologic reports, the exploratory borings, the proposed type of construction, and their experience in the area. The findings include interpolation and extrapolation of the subsurface conditions identified at the exploratory borings and variation in the subsurface conditions may not become evident until excavation is performed. Significant design changes may require additional analysis or modifications to the recommendations in the Study. Sean Gaffney of the Colorado Geological Survey ("CGS") indicated that CGS is in general agreement with the under -drain system recommendation in the HP GeoTech report (see Exhibit MM). Mr. Gaffney noted that "due to the presence of swelling clay soils, perimeter drains should be installed around foundations. Perimeter drains prevent excessive ground moisture from saturating the soils and thus reduce the overall potential for expansion or consolidation." F. Radiation: According to HP GeoTech (see Exhibit CC), the proposed development is not located in an area where geologic deposits are expected to have unusually high concentrations of radioactive minerals. However, there is a potential that radon gas could be present in the area. HP GeoTech indicated that it is difficult to assess the potential for future radon gas concentrations in buildings before the buildings are constructed. Testing for radon gas can be done when the residences and other occupied structures have been completed. HP GeoTech noted that new buildings are often designed with provisions for ventilation of lower enclosed spaces should post construction testing show unacceptable radon gas concentrations. G. Drainage The Drainage Plan submitted with the application was prepared by High County Engineering ("HCE"). According to HCE, the purpose of the plan is to outline a storm water management system to accommodate the runoff from the development in accordance with the regulations by Garfield County. Historic stormwater generally flows from southeast to northwest. There are two drainages that flow through the site. The first drainage way is located in the northern half of the site. The second drainage swale is located on the southwest corner of the site. HCE indicated that the overall drainage patterns under developed conditions are proposed to be similar to those of existing (historic) conditions with on- site detention where developed basin flows exceed historic conditions. Jeff Nelson, Assistant County Engineer, indicated in his letter dated April 21, 2002, (see Exhibit Z) that on the Proposed Drainage Map, Sheet 8 of the Preliminary Plan: • • Valley View Village PUD Subdivision Preliminary Plan BOARD: 8/4/03 Page 13 1. Portions of the proposed detention facility are located off the Applicant's property and on Garfield County's property. The facility should be adjusted so it is entirely located within the subject property. If this is not feasible, then an agreement between the Applicant, subdivision, and Garfield County shall be drawn up by the Applicant. In this agreement, Garfield County should have use of the facility for storage, etc. for any improvements to the county property. If the agreement is completed then the detention facility shall need to be redesigned to handle any additional storage capacities associated with the agreement. 2. A copy of the approval letter from the Army Corps of Engineers stating they have given permission for the detention facility to be located within the 100 -year floodplain at its current proposed location shall be provided. This document should also address the proposed design and the facilities location within an existing drainage channel. The Applicant responded that a formal request for the use of a portion of the County parcel will be made to the Commission at the public hearing. According to HCE's Drainage Report, the proposed pond has already been oversized to accommodate for the future developed runoff from the County parcel. The Applicant noted that if an agreement cannot be reached, revisions will be made to move most of the detention to the east side of Valley View Circle (see Exhibit I). At the July 21, 2003, Board of County Commissioners meeting, the Board determined that the Applicant will not be allowed to locate the proposed detentions facility on the County owned parcel. The Board indicated that the Applicant would either need to purchase the parcel from the County or redesign the detention facility to be located off of the County parcel prior to Final Plat (see Condition 16 below). Revised plans / drawings of the detention facility shall be reviewed and approved by the County Engineer prior to submittal of Final Plat. Sean Gaffney of the Colorado Geological Survey ("CGS") noted that "the proposed changes to the slope grade along the drainage that crosses the site appear to be configured at a stable angle. Once the grading plan has been completed, the drainage report should be updated to account for the new cross-sectional profile of the drainage. If the new channel cross-section changes the flow velocities within the drainage, some type of slope reinforcement maybe necessary to prevent erosion along the length of the fill slope." H. Road/Access Valley View Drive is the primary roadway through the subdivision, accessing off of both South Battlement Mesa Parkway and Stone Quarry Road. Cliff View Circle and Gregory Lane access off of Valley View Drive to provide access to the units / lots in the south and west portion of the subdivision. Cliff View Circle is a semi -loop roadway off of Valley View Drive which will serve the south and west single family lots. Cliff View Circle connects Cliff View Lane, adjacent to Lots 31 — 38, and Gregory Lane, adjacent to Lots 27, 34, 35 and 26. Gregory Lane intersects with Cliff View Circle and Cliff View Court, which provides access to the two- and multi -family units. There is a looped "40' private access, ingress, egress, emergency access, utility and drainage easement", • • Valley View Village PUD Subdivision Preliminary Plan BOARD: 8/4/03 Page 14 referred to as Bryan Loop, off of Cliff View Court. This provides access to the proposed 18 units on Lot 26. There are also three (3) "40' private access, ingress, egress, emergency access, utility and drainage easements" accessing off of Valley View Drive providing access to the units on Lot 46. Two of the three 40' easements, referred to as Angelica Circle, connect with the proposed 50' wide gas easement, which has been identified on the preliminary plan as "50' private access, ingress, egress, emergency access, utility and drainage easement". Jessica Lane is an access point that enters Lot 46 in the middle off of Valley View Road. Tract A, approximately 0.648 acres, adjacent to Tract B in the northwest corner of the property, has been identified on the Preliminary Plan as an area to be "dedicated to Garfield County for public right-of-way". A Traffic Analysis, prepared by High Country Engineering ("HCE"), is included with the application. The purpose of the analysis was to determine what improvements would need to be made to allow for a safe intersection. The anticipated improvements are as follows: 1. Valley View and Stone Quarry Road: This intersection will not have any additional turning lanes. According to the CDOT Access Code, this intersection does not have enough turning movements to warrant additional lanes. 2. Valley View and Battlement Mesa Parkway: A right turn deceleration will be provided for vehicles entering the project, because per the CODT Access Code, this turning lane is warranted. No other turning lanes are required. 3. Battlement Parkway and Stone Quarry Road: No improvements are required or needed at this intersection. HCE concluded that the project itself will have very little impact on the surrounding roadway capacities, however, if growth continues at the rate of 4.5% per annum, the intersection of Battlement Parkway and Stone Quarry Road will need to be signalized within 10 years. The Applicant noted that a pedestrian crossing of Stone Quarry Road is proposed at its intersection with Valley View Drive. The Applicant asserted that there is approximately 350 feet of sight distance from the south and in excess of 400 feet of sight distance from the north. The Applicant indicated that it is anticipated that there will be a strong desire for pedestrians to access the Battlement Mesa Community Trail System located on the east side of Stone Quarry Road. The Applicant asserted that appropriate signage will be installed at alert north and south bound Stone Quarry traffic of the pedestrian crossings. The exact location of the pedestrian crossing has not been identified on the preliminary plan maps and shall be delineated on the Final Plat. The Comprehensive Plan defines County Road 300 (Stone Quarry Road and South Battlement Mesa Parkway) as a road in "fair" condition. Jake Mall, Garfield County Road and Bridge Department, provided the following comments (see Exhibit W): • • Valley View Village PUD Subdivision Preliminary Plan BOARD: 8/4/03 Page 15 1. The deceleration lane for the entrance to Valley View Drive from South Battlement Parkway shall have proper signage to indicate traffic exiting South Battlement Parkway. A stop sign shall be required at the exit from Valley View Drive onto South Battlement Parkway. 2. On the downhill lane of South Battlement Parkway at the exit of Valley View Drive, a sign designating the intersection shall be installed. 3. It was agreed upon during the site visit on April 10, 2003, that a deceleration lane from Stone Quarry Road was not needed for the entrance to Valley View Drive. 4. A stop sign shall be required at the exit from Valley View Drive onto Stone Quarry Road. There shall be an intersection sign placed on both traffic directions of Stone Quarry Road warning of traffic entering and exiting from Valley View Drive. 5. The cross walk on Stone Quarry Road shall be located as agreed to on the site visit (adjacent to Stone Quarry Road). A portion of the guardrail of Stone Quarry Road may be removed to accommodate cross walk. There shall be flashing lights and proper signage warning traffic traveling in both directions on Stone Quarry Road of the cross walk. 6. Proper work zone signage and traffic control shall be required for all work being performed on South Battlement Parkway and Stone Quarry Road and of construction vehicles entering and exiting project. 7. All signage and flashing lights shall meet standards and installation guidelines as set forth in the Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices. 8. Driveway access permits will be issued with provisions specific to the permits upon final approval of the subdivision. The Applicant indicated that access within the multi -family areas will be privately owned and maintained by the multi -family homeowners association, but will be overlain with an emergency access easement to facilitate police and fire services. The Applicant noted that section 11.2 of the Battlement Mesa Planned Unit Development District Regulations specifically provides for the designation of private roadways at the time of subdivision platting. Jeff Nelson, Assistant County Engineer, noted that all rights-of-way shall be 60 feet wide per 9:35 of the Subdivision Regulations. The roadways fall into the minor collector category according to Mr. Nelson's preliminary trip count estimates. The plans show Angelica Circle and Jessica Lane labeled as private access easements. These should also be public rights-of-way and 60 feet wide (see Exhibit Z). In addition, Mr. Nelson noted in his letter dated May 29, 2003, that since the "Battlement Mesa zoning regulations have jurisdiction in this proposed development....I recommend that battlement mesa submit a response letter stating they have review the subdivision and all the proposed rights of way or proposed private access easement widths are acceptable. I reviewed it in reference to the current Garfield County subdivision regulations" (see Exhibit AA). Staff would agree with the Applicant that Resolution No. 80-82 (see Exhibit K), approved by the County in 1982, outlined land use districts within the Battlement Mesa Planned Unit Development with "District Regulations", dimensional standards, which included provisions for street standards. Since these Valley View Village PUD Subdivision Preliminary Plan BOARD: 8/4/03 Page 16 regulations where adopted by the County, these regulations shall be utilized in the County's review of this project. The Applicant shall note that the roads within the subdivision are not considered private, except for the private driveways within the multi -family lots (i.e. Angelica Circle, Jessica lane and Bryan Loop). Pursuant to section 9:34 of the Subdivision Regulations, "All streets are dedicated to the public but all streets will be constructed to standards consistent with these Regulations and repair and maintenance shall be the responsibility of the incorporated Homeowners Association of the Subdivision." This shall be reflected in the Protective Covenants. John Loschke of the Town of Parachute provided the following comments with respect to the project (see Exhibit Y): 1. The Traffic Study submitted with the application does not identify the access point to Battlement Mesa, i.e. the I-70 Interchange at Parachute, or the Colorado River bridge. The proposed development will generate a considerable amount of daily trips not only across the Colorado River bridge and the I-70 Interchange, but on the Town of Parachute. 2. Ordinance No. 469, adopted by the Board of Trustees of the Town of Parachute, after the completion of an extensive traffic study, established a Master Plan which included street improvements and carefully considered costs related to residential and commercial developers. The traffic study specifically addressed the I-70 Interchange area and the needs that the continued growth would create. The Board of Trustees would like to see some consideration from Garfield County and the developers that will utilize the river crossing, the 1-70 Interchange, streets and intersections within the Town. 3. There are additional concerns regarding law enforcement related to traffic on County Road 300 and the backed up traffic at South Frontage Road, Grand Valley Way, and the 1-70 east and west bound access lanes. The Parachute Police Department and the Garfield County Sheriff's Department have an "agreement of understanding" that the Parachute Police Department will respond to calls in the Battlement Mesa area when an emergency situation arises and a Garfield County Officer's estimated arrival time to the scene will be more than 15 minutes. To date, this cooperative agreement has worked effectively, however, with added growth it could limit coverage to the entire area. 4. The Board of Trustees and staff realize the benefits of growth in the area and the positive effect on businesses in the Town of Parachute. The Town requests that the Garfield County the burden of the development and maintenance of the streets and roads accessing the development and the possibility of additional Parachute Police Department officers should not be the sole responsibility of the Town of Parachute tax payers. The subject property is located within the 2 -mile sphere of influence for the Town of Parachute, however, it is not located within the Town of Parachute's municipal boundary. There is no legal basis for the County to require the developer to pay the street improvement fees in accordance to the Town of Parachute recently adopted Ordinance. This application was not referred to the Sheriff's Department. • • Valley View Village PUD Subdivision Preliminary Plan BOARD: 8/4/03 Page 17 I. Fire Protection The Applicant has established a Wildfire Mitigation Plan ("Wildfire Plan") for the Subdivision which was submitted with the application. The Applicant indicated that the mitigation measures outlined in the Wildfire Plan include landscaping design and maintenance practices that will reduce the wildfire hazard to the residential units within the Subdivision. The following mitigation measures have been outlined in the Wildfire Plan for the Subdivision, which closely reflect the standard requirements for wildfire mitigation by the Colorado Forest Service: 1. Trees greater than 15 -feet in height at maturity should have a minimum spacing of 5 -feet between the edges of the crown. All dead trees should be removed. 2. Spacing between clumps of brush and/or shrubs should be 2 1/2 times the height of the vegetation. 3. The maximum diameter of the brush and/or shrub clumps should be 2 times the height of the vegetation measured at the crown of vegetation. 4. All ladder fuels should be removed from under brush, shrubs, and the tree canopies. 5. Non-combustible ground cover (gravel) should be placed under trees, brush, and shrubs to the edges of the crown or the vegetation should be pruned to a height of 10 -feet above the ground or 1/2 the height of the plant, whichever is the least. 6. Native grasses used for grazing and hay production should be kept to a minimum of 30 feet from all structures. 7. Lawns should be kept to a maximum height of 4 -inches. The Wildfire Mitigation Plan, dated January 24, 2003, (HCE Project No. 2021056.00) shall be referenced within the Protective Covenants and as a note on the Final Plat. David Blair of the Grand Valley Fire Protection District ("District") provided in his initially letter dated April 28, 2003, a number of comments / concerns regarding the project (see Exhibit HH). The Applicant has worked with Mr. Blair to resolve some of the comments and concerns. Mr. Blair noted in his letter dated May 30, 2003, (see Exhibit LL) that the items outlined in HCE's letter (see Exhibit KK) are acceptable and shall be addressed prior to Final Plat. J. Wildlife The Applicant provided a Wildlife Report prepared by Kirk Beattie of Beattie Natural Resources Consulting, Inc. dated August 18, 2002. In summary of this extensive report, Mr. Beattie noted that "for several reasons, development of the Battlement Mesa Subdivision will have very minimal impacts on wildlife" habitat. Mr. Beattie noted that there are no Federal or Colorado threatened, endangered, or candidate wildlife, or Colorado species of special concern, which will be measurably impacted by the subdivision. Mr. Beattie did provided the following wildlife mitigation measures, which should be included within the Protective Covenants: • • Valley View Village PUD Subdivision Preliminary Plan BOARD: 8/4/03 Page 18 1. Dog and Pet Control (pages 18, 19 and 20) of the report. However, pursuant to section 9:15 of the Subdivision Regulation, only 1 dog is allowed for each a residence. 2. Garbage, Trash, and Compost Containers. Garbage and trash shall be in secured receptacles. 3. Indemnification, disposal of animal carcasses, skunk and raccoon denning areas, and enforcement of provisions by the homeowners association. John Broderick, Colorado Division of Wildlife, provided the following comments (see Exhibit FF): 1. Some of the details contained in the Wildlife Report ("Report") prepared by Beattie Natural Resource Consulting, are different than those proposed in the Protective Covenants for the subdivision. 2. In page 20 of the Report, garbage containers are addressed in a different manner than is proposed in Item 5.23 of the Covenants. The CDOW supports the language and intent in the Covenant. 3. CDOW believes that controlling dogs per Item 5.13 of the Covenants is preferred over those measures proposed in the Report (page 20). 4. Cats shall also be included in the Covenants. 5. CDOW endorses the provisions of Item 6.6(d) of the Covenants to restrict fence height to facilitate wildlife movement in the subdivision. 6. Item 5.23 of the Covenants prohibits hunting. It will not be necessary to indemnify CDOW as proposed in the Report (page 20). 7. CDOW agrees that the homeowners association should own and maintain the common open space. Maintaining wildlife cover and forage in the common open space will help to mitigate most of the negative impacts to wildlife associated with the project. The open space corridors should also be maintained in this manner. Proposing that individual lot owners manage the corridors does not assure that the area will remain productive wildlife habitat. 8. CDOW proposes that aquatic and wetland plants be integrated into the design and function of the drainage detention facility. 9. Clarifying the discrepancies mentioned above and adding the CDOW suggestions into the Valley View Subdivision Preliminary Plan will mitigate most of the negative impacts to wildlife. K. Vegetation The Applicant provided a Vegetation Inventory and Weed Management Plan ("Plan") conducted by Beach Environmental, LLC. ("BEL") dated January 20, 2003. The Plan has been designated for all common areas including roadside, open space, ditch, and utility easements. Recommended control measures for weedy species include cultural, mechanical, chemical, and biological techniques. BEL recommends that chemical control be limited to the maximum extent possible and only reserved for large outbreaks of noxious weeds. BEL indicated that the property consists primarily of open grazed pastures, an east and west drainage way populated with elm, cottonwood, juniper, currant and sage. Weeds were found primarily in and along the irrigation ditches and in areas where the ditches first enter the irrigated pastures. The noxious weeds • • Valley View Village PUD Subdivision Preliminary Plan BOARD: 8/4/03 Page 19 identified on the property include: Canada thistle, Plumeless thistle, Musk thistle, Russian knapweed, Diffuse knapweed, Houndstongue, and Volunteer rye. BEL noted that an extensive outbreak of weeds has not occurred, however, the Plan has established guidelines to help control the spread of these species. BEL provided in the Plan a list of plat materials to be used for revegetation planting and weed control service companies. Kirk Beattie of Beattie Natural Resources Consulting, Inc. noted that Field Bindweed, one of Colorado's top ten noxious weeds, is widely distributed on the areas proposed for development. This noxious weed was not mentioned in the management plan conducted by Beach Environmental, LLC. Pursuant to section 4.07 of the Garfield County Noxious Weed Management Plan, adopted by the Board of County Commissioners on May 1, 2000, "at the discretion of the Board of County Commissioners, as part of the Planning and Zoning approval process, for land disturbances outside of the building envelope, the County may require, at preliminary plan and prior to Final Plat, the following items" 1. A Soil Plan 2. A Revegetation Plan 3. A Revegetation Security (which shall be in an amount to be determined by the Board) Steve Anthony, Garfield County Weed Management Director, provided the following comments with respect to the proposed Subdivision (See Exhibit GG): 1. Noxious Weeds A. Inventory and mapping: The Applicant has inventoried the property for vegetation which mentions noxious weeds, and does provide specific locations of the County -listed noxious weeds on a map. B. Weed Management: The weed management plan is acceptable. The inventory lists the presence of Diffuse knapweed and Plumeless thistle. These are weeds that should be treated immediately when found. The Applicant shall provide for noxious weed treatment this spring and thus prevent seed production before any earthmoving work is started. C. Common area weed management: The Applicant states that the Valley View property owners will be responsible for weed management. Is this just on private lots? The Applicant needs to designate weed management responsibilities for common areas, including roadsides, open spaces, and the asphalt bike/ped trail. D. Covenants: It has been common for vacant lots in Battlement Mesa to become infested with Russian knapweed. Due to the number of lots, it creates a staffing problem for the County in attempting to do enforcement. It is suggested that the Applicant incorporate language in the covenants that will strongly encourage vacant lot owners to manage their noxious weeds under • • Valley View Village PUD Subdivision Preliminary Plan BOARD: 8/4/03 Page 20 Colorado law. In Section 5.13 of the Protective Covenants, there is an assessment and penalty process for dog violations. The Applicant should draft language into the covenants that would give the Homeowners Association the authority and responsibility to assess vacant lots with unattended county -listed noxious weeds for treatment costs. 2. Revegetation A. The revised Revegetation Guidelines from the Garfield County Weed Management Plan calls for the following: i. Plant material list. ii. Planting schedule. iii. A map of the areas impacted by soil disturbances (outside of the building envelopes). iv. A revegetation bond or security at Preliminary Plan and prior to Final Plat. The Applicant provided a plant material list. The schedule of planting, and maps specific to revegetation, and the security are not mentioned. A landscaping map is provided, but is lacking the aforementioned details. A map and information shall be submitted prior to final plat that quantifies the area, in terms of acres, to be disturbed and subsequently reseeded on road cut and utility disturbances. This information will help determine the amount of security that will be held for revegetation. The security shall be held by Garfield County until vegetation has been successfully re-established according to the Reclamation Standards in the County Weed Management Plan. The Board of County Commissioners will designate a member of their staff to evaluate the reclamation prior to the release of the security. 3. Soil Plan A. The Revegetation Guidelines also request that the Applicant provide a Soil Management Plan that includes: i. Provisions for salvaging on-site topsoil. ii. A timetable for eliminating topsoil and/or aggregate piles. iii. A plan that provides for soil cover if any disturbances or stockpiles will sit exposed for a period of 90 days or more. • Valley View Village PUD Subdivision Preliminary Plan BOARD: 8/4/03 Page 21 L. Assessment / Fees 1. Off -Site Road Impact The Traffic Analysis report prepared by High Country Engineering ("HCE") noted that the ITE Trip Generation Manual, 6th Edition was referenced to project traffic volumes for the three (3) directed uses within the project, which include: single-family detached housing, duplex, town -homes, and condos. Once trips were determined, HCE split the project into two (2) traffic sub -basins, Basin 1 and Basin 2. The delineation of the Basins can be seen in my detail in Figure 2 of the Traffic Analysis. Basin 1 is anticipated to primarily use the new intersection of Valley View Road and Battlement Mesa Parkway, therefore all trips from this Basin were applied to this intersection. Basin 2 was primarily anticipated to use the intersection of Valley View Road and Stone Quarry Road during the AM peak, however, during the PM peak, it is anticipated that most vehicles traveling eastbound on Battlement Mesa Parkway will most likely turn right onto Valley View Road rather than turn at Stone Quarry Road, travel sound than turn right onto Valley View Road. Therefore, the traffic was applied accordingly. According to Figure 2 of the Traffic Analysis, the following traffic distribution was calculated: np 35 Out 35 Peas 'rips Out 17 15 52 55 29 The ITE Trip Generation Manual, 6th Edition uses the following average vehicle trip rate: Single-family detached housing - 9.57 trips per day; Residential Condominium / Townhouse - 5.86 trips per day; and Apartment - 6.63 trips per day. The project contains 41 single-family dwelling units, 6 duplex units, and 72 condominium / townhouses. The proposed subdivision is located in the Garfield County Traffic Study Area 1. The final impact fee amount shall be determined prior to finalization of the Final Plat. Pursuant to section 4:94 of the Subdivision Regulations, 50% of the road impact fees shall be collected at the Final Plat for the Subdivision. All other road impact fees will be collected at the issuance of a building permit. 2. Site Acquisition Fee Pursuant to Section 9.80 of the Subdivision Regulations, the Board of County Commissioners may seek land or cash -in -lieu of land for parks and / or schools during the subdivision review process when such are reasonably necessary to serve the proposed subdivision and future residents. • • Valley View Village PUD Subdivision Preliminary Plan BOARD: 8/4/03 Page 22 The property is located with the Garfield County School District No. 16. Comments were received by the School District, however, the District did not request any site acquisition fees (see Exhibit X). Pursuant to Section 9:81 of the Subdivision Regulations, the Board of County Commissioners may require a developer of residential housing to make a cash payment in -lieu of dedicating land. However, the Board may only request cash payment in -lieu if it is requested by the applicable School District. The exception is the RE -1 School District, which has provided the County a formula for site acquisition fees, which has been codified in the Subdivision Regulations. Therefore, no School Site Acquisition Fee is required for this development. 3. Open Space (6t 1 f As noted previously in this memorandum, there are four (4) open space tracts. The Table below is a breakdown of the proposed Common Open Space within the project: Open Space Tract B 0.213 1.585 D 3.053 E 1.076 Total Acreage 5.927 Pursuant to section 4.07.09 of the Zoning Resolution: "Twenty-five percent (25%) of the total area within the boundary of any PUD shall be devoted to Common Open Space. Not more than twenty-five percent (25%) of the Common Open Space shall be an area of water classified as commercial open space. Of the 25% open space requirement within PUDs, no more than 40% of the 25% total required, shall be limited use open space, with the balance being retained as one or more of the remaining open space categories, listed above. Provided, however, that the County Commissioners may reduce such requirement if they find that such decrease is warranted by the design of and the amenities and features incorporated into the Plan, and that the needs of the occupants of the PUD for Common Open Space can be met in the proposed PUD. (A. 97- 109) The "total area" of the PUD, which includes the parcel owned by the County, is 38 acres. Twenty five percent (25%) of 38 acres is 9.5 acres. At the Planning Commission meeting, it was discussed that the 25% requirement for open space pertained to the 36 acres, the subject of this application, and the 2 acre County owned parcel would be required to provide 25% open space at the time of development. The Applicant provided an Open Space Summary sheet representing the Total Open Space for the project (Exhibit NN). There was discussion regarding the "kind" of open space being provided by the Applicant. The Applicant indicated that additional open space, to make up any existing discrepancies, would be provided at the time Lot 47 was developed (Exhibit QQ). • • Valley View Village PUD Subdivision Preliminary Plan BOARD: 8/4/03 Page 23 Open Space Buffer areas, along the west and south sides of the property, were established during the PUD process in accordance with the Conceptual Land Use Diagram plan approved in 1982. The Conceptual Diagram identified these areas as 20' Buffer, Pedestrian and Utility Easement. The Applicant asserted that "based on their experience with these types of corridors in surrounding areas, Battlement Mesa representatives have indicated that these buffer areas end up becoming a collection point of wind blown brush, tumble weeds and trash, creating an unnecessary wildfire hazard." The Applicant requests that to alleviate these challenges, these corridors are proposed as easements on the rear of the residential lots, such that they will be owned and maintained by the lot owner. The Applicant noted that building envelopes shown on the Preliminary Plan are measured from the easement line, thus preserving the easement's function as a spatial buffer. Staff had a concern with the integration of the 20' Buffer, Pedestrian and Utility Easement with the adjacent private properties, since this open space "buffer, pedestrian, utility" easement was established during the PUD process, and any changes, to these areas would require an amendment to the PUD. The Applicant noted that the notes on the Preliminary Plan will be revised to identify the easements at the rear of the single family lots along the south and east as a 20 foot Buffer, Utility and Pedestrian Easement as described on the original PUD Concept Plan. The Applicant noted that the buffer will still be an easement on the Low Density Residential lots but maintenance of the easement will be the responsibility of the Valley View Village Home Owners Association and the covenants will restrict cross fencing of the easement. The Applicant noted that Tract D, the open space that contains the gully, will be maintained in its native condition except for a pedestrian bridge crossing at the easterly end of the gulley. Tract C, the open space tract west of Valley View Drive and immediately adjacent to Lots 25 and 26, will also be maintained in native vegetation, except for the introduction of a detention pond with will restrict storm drainage releases from the site at historic volumes. M. Phasing of the Development Pursuant to section 4:20 of the Subdivision Regulations, if the Final Plat is to be phased, the Planning Commission shall recommend a phasing plan, along with the approval or conditional approval. The Applicant indicated that phasing will take place in 5 phases, which is reflected in Sheet 6 of the Preliminary Plan. These phases include: Valley View Village PUD Subdivision Preliminary Plan BOARD: 8/4/03 Page 24 Phase' Phase A Lot 46 .................. .................. ................. .................. Tot: 54 November 2003 May 2005 Phase B Phase C PhaseD Lots 1-13, 31-45 Lots 23-26 28 May 2004 September 2005 24 April 2005 August 2005 Floating Lots 14-22, 27-30 Lot 48 13 TBD February 2006 December 2007 May 2007 May 2009 119 units (128 max) The Applicant provided a Construction Phasing Plan for the project reflected in the table above (see Exhibit QQ). The Floating Phase is the area zoned as Neighborhood Commercial. The Applicant noted that it is likely that the Applicant in the future will apply for an amendment to the PUD to rezone all or nearly all of this commercial area to residential use. Pursuant to section 4.09.01 of the Zoning Resolution, "the applicant must begin development of the PUD within one (1) year from the time of its final zone change approval; provided, however, that the PUD may be developed in stages and the Board may approve the commencement of development activity beyond one (1) year. The applicant must complete the development of each state and of the PUD as a whole in substantial compliance with the development schedule approved by the County Commissioners." N. Resubdivison Process The Applicant is anticipating the desire to condominiumize the multi -family structures and to divide attached two-family structures along the common wall of the dwelling units. Pursuant to section 7:30 of the Subdivision Regulations, the Applicant requests that the Board of County Commissioners approve a simplified procedure for the re -subdivision of the multi- and two-family lots. This procedure would apply specifically to Lots 23, 24, 25, 26 and 46. The Preliminary Plan depicts the building envelopes for each multi- and two-family structure. Within these lots the number of dwelling units has been noted. All private access drives, drainage facilities, utility systems and parking are shown on the Preliminary Plan and associated engineering drawings and are referenced in the appropriate engineering reports. The Applicant noted that surety for public improvements necessary to serve the lots created within the building envelopes will be secured by the Subdivider's Improvement Agreement associated with the final plat. 5 aC.{ �.�?w2Ctc ElC, • • Valley View Village PUD Subdivision Preliminary Plan BOARD: 8/4/03 Page 25 Section 7:30 of the Subdivision Regulation reads as follows: "The redivision, through conversion into condominiums, apartments or other multiple -dwelling units may not be required to comply with those provisions of the Subdivision Regulations which the Board determines are satisfied by reference to Preliminary Plan and/or Final Plat approval for the original subdivision, provided the proposed conversion will not substantially increase land use density." The Applicant proposes that an amended final plat for each building envelope, lot or group of building envelopes and/or lot may be submitted to the County for review in accordance with the procedures defined in Section 6:00 [Amended and Corrected Plan] of the Subdivision Regulations, and to also confirm the amended plat's consistency with the approved preliminary plan for the subdivision and the final plat for the applicable phase of the development. The Applicant noted that necessary site improvements will have been previously guaranteed by the Final Plat SIA and the sequence of the filing of the final plats can be at the discretion of the developer. O. Ownership / Maintenance of Common Use Property and Facilities The Applicant noted that the Valley View Village "master" homeowners association will be incorporated to own and maintain the common open space tracts and to maintain the public roads within the subdivision. One or more "slave" homeowners association will be formed to own and maintain common use property and facilities, including drives and parking , within the multi- and two-family areas. At the time of Final Plat, Valley View Village will be annexed into the Battlement Mesa Service Association which owns and maintains various Battlement Mesa Community wide common use facilities. Each lot owner within Valley View Village will thereby be a member of the Battlement Mesa Service Association and will pay dues to that Association at a rate that is 50% of the regular dues. P. Additional Comments: Homeowner's Association Documents: The Applicant has provided draft copies of the following Homeowner's Association documents: 1. Articles of Incorporation for Valley View Village Homeowners Association, a Colorado Non - Profit Corporation. 2. Master Declaration of Covenant, Conditions and Restrictions for Valley View Village Subdivision. 3. Supplemental Declaration of Covenants, Conditions, and Restrictions for Valley View Village Subdivision for Valley View Village Condominiums. • • Valley View Village PUD Subdivision Preliminary Plan BOARD: 8/4/03 Page 26 XI. PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMENDED FINDINGS: 1. That proper posting and public notice was provided, as required, for the hearing before the Planning Commission; 2. That the meeting before the Planning Commission was extensive and complete, that all pertinent facts, matters and issues were [not] submitted and that all interested parties were heard at that hearing; 3. That for the above stated and other reasons, the proposed subdivision is [not] in the best interest of the health, safety, morals, convenience, order, prosperity and welfare of the citizens of Garfield County; 4. That the application is not n conformance with the 1978 Garfield County Zoning Resolution, as amended; 5. That the application iEnoln conformance with the Garfield County Subdivision Regulations of 1984, as amended. XII. PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION Note: The conditions of approval below that have been double -stricken, in staff's opinion, have been addressed by the Applicant. The underlined changes to the conditions of approval below are recommendations of Staff with explanation of the changes in italics. The Planning Commission forwarded a recommendation of APPROVAL to the Board of County Commissioners for the Preliminary Plan request for the Valley View Village Subdivision, subject to the following conditions of approval: 1. That all representations made by the Applicant in the application, and at the public hearing before the Planning Commission, shall be conditions of approval, unless specifically altered by the Planning Commission. 2. At the same time the Final Plat is submitted, the Applicant shall submit an Exemption Plat for the created two tracts: 2 acres (owned by the County) and 36 acres (the subject of this approval), which was approved by the County pursuant to Resolution No. 82-327. Upon approval by the Board, the Exemption Plat shall be recorded at the same time as the Final Plat. 3. The Applicant shall modify the Protective Covenants to reflect the wildlife habitat mitigation measures recommended in the Wildlife Report dated August 18, 2002, prepared by Kirk Beattie of Beattie Natural Resources Consulting, Inc. in the Wildlife Report, and the recommendations of the • • Valley View Village PUD Subdivision Preliminary Plan BOARD: 8/4/03 Page 27 4. Colorado Division of Wildlife as follows: A. Some details contained in the Wildlife Report ("Report") prepared by Beattie Natural Resource Consulting, are different than those proposed in the Covenants for the subdivision and shall be modified unless otherwise noted below. B. On page 20 of the Report, garbage containers are addressed in a different manner than is proposed in Item 5.23 of the Covenants. The CDOW supports the language and intent in the Covenant. C. CDOW believes that controlling dogs per Item 5.13 of the Covenants is preferred over those measures proposed in the Report (page 20). D. Cats shall also be included in the Covenants. E. CDOW endorses the provisions of the Covenants to facilitate wildlife movement in the subdivision. F. Item 5.23 of the Covenants prohibits hunting. It will not be necessary to indemnify CDOW as proposed in the Report (page 20). G. CDOW agrees that the homeowners association should own and maintain the common open space. Maintaining wildlife cover and forage in the common open space will help to mitigate most of the negative impacts to wildlife associated with the project. The open space corridors should also be maintained in this manner. Proposing that individual lot owners manage the corridors does not assure that the area will remain productive wildlife habitat. H. Clarifying the discrepancies mentioned above and adding the CDOW suggestions into the Valley View Subdivision Preliminary Plan will mitigate most of the negative impacts to wildlife. ncrs review of thc Preliminary Plan, thc Applicant shall A letter from R. Bruce Smith of the Consolidated Metropolitan District indicated that "the District has capacity and will serve the proposed development subject to the terms and conditions expressed by Mr. LaBonde [West Water Engineering], and the additional conditions of Garfield County and the Grand Valley Fire Protection District" (see Exhibit TT). 5 Prior to thc Board of County Commissioners review of Pr-climinary Plan, thc Applicant shall provided writtcn resolution with regard to thc Xccl Encrgy / Public Service Comp existing gas linc cascmcnts. This condition has been addressed per David McCoanaughy's, attorney for the Applicant, letter dated July 23, 2003 (see Exhibit QQ). The Applicant has provided necessary documents in order to relinquish the existing (wrong) easements and grant new easement to match the actual location of the gas line. However, in order to correct the gas line issue, the property owners and the Board of County Commissioners will need to grant a new easement to match the actual location of the line. This condition has been replaced by Condition 5(A) below. • • Valley View Village PUD Subdivision Preliminary Plan BOARD: 8/4/03 Page 28 5(A). Prior to recording of the Final Plat, the exchange of deeds for the 50' gas line by Public Service Company / Xcel Energy, the County and the landowners, shall be executed and recorded 6. Prior to Board of County Commissioners review of the Preliminary Plan, the Applicant shall provide a Phasing Plan with specific timeframes associated with each phase of the project. Pursuant to section 4.09.01 of the Zoning Resolution, the Applicant shall begin development within one year from the time of final approval. The Applicant has provided a Construction Phasing Plan for the project which is addressed previously in the memorandum and can be seen in more detailed in Exhibit QQ. 7. Prior to the recording of the Final Plat, a copy of the annexation documentations shall be provided to the County. 8. The following geologic hazard mitigation measures shall be adhered, as well as Plat notes and in the Protective Covenants: A. The recommendations by Hepworth-Pawlak Geotechnical, Inc. ("HP GeoTech") outlined in the Preliminary Geotechnical Study for the Subdivision dated September 16, 2002, [Job No. 102 526] shall be adhered. These Preliminary Design Recommendations include provisions for foundations, floor slabs, under -drain system, site grading, surface drainage and pavement subgrade. B. In addition to the drain systems for foundations recommended by HP GeoTech, due to the presence of swelling clay soils, perimeter drains should be installed around foundations. Perimeter drains prevent excessive ground moisture from saturating the soils and thus reduce the over potential for expansion or consolidation. C. Due to the possible presence of radon gas in the area, testing for radon gas shall be done when the residences and other occupied structures have been completed, prior to the issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy. D. Once the grading plan has been completed on site, the drainage report shall be updated to account for new cross-sectional profile of the drainage. If a new channel cross-section changes the flow velocities within the drainage, some type of slope reinforcement may be necessary to prevent erosion along the length of the fill slope. 9. Prior to Final Plat, the Applicant shall comply with the recommendations of the Garfield County Road and Bridge Department, dated April 2, 2003, listed below which are applicable at Final Plat. The remainder of these recommendations shall be incorporated within the Access Permit obtained from the Road and Bridge Department: A. The deceleration lane for the entrance to Valley View Drive from South Battlement Parkway • • Valley View Village PUD Subdivision Preliminary Plan BOARD: 8/4/03 Page 29 shall have proper signage to indicate traffic exiting South Battlement Parkway. A stop sign shall be required at the exit from Valley View Drive onto South Battlement Parkway. B. On the downhill lane of South Battlement Parkway at the exit of Valley View Drive, a sign designating the intersection shall be installed. C. It was agreed upon during the site visit on April 10, 2003, that a deceleration lane from Stone Quarry Road was not needed for the entrance to Valley View Drive. D. A stop sign shall be required at the exit from Valley View Drive onto Stone Quarry Road. There shall be an intersection sign placed on both traffic directions of Stone Quarry Road warning of traffic entering and exiting from Valley View Drive. E. The cross walk on Stone Quarry Road shall be located as agreed to on the site visit (adjacent to Stone Quarry Road). A portion of the guardrail of Stone Quarry Road may be removed to accommodate cross walk. There shall be flashing lights and proper signage warning traffic traveling in both directions on Stone Quarry Road of the cross walk. This crosswalk shall be delineated on the Final Plat. F. Proper work zone signage and traffic control shall be required for all work being performed on South Battlement Parkway and Stone Quarry Road and of construction vehicles entering and exiting project. G. All signage and flashing lights shall meet standards and installation guidelines as set forth in the Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices. H. Driveway access permits will be issued with provisions specific to the permits upon final approval of the subdivision. 10. Pursuant to section 9:34 of the Subdivision Regulations, all streets / roads within the subdivision shall be dedicated to the public, except those private driveways within the multi -family lots (i.e. Angelica Circle, Jessica Lane and Bryan Loop). Repair and maintenance of these streets / roads shall be the responsibility of the incorporated Homeowners Association of the Subdivision. This shall be reflected in the Protective Covenants. 11. The project shall provide for 9 acres of Common Open Space (25% of 36 acres) as required pursuant to 4.07.09 of the Zoning Resolution. Unless, the County Commissioners reduces the 25% open space requirement based on design, amenities and features of the Plan. 12. Prior to Final Plat, as agreed upon by the Grand Valley Fire Protection District, the Applicant shall address and provided written confirmation that the items outlined in High Country Engineering's letter dated May 30, 2003 have been resolved as agreed upon. 13. Prior to the submittal of Final Plat, the Applicant shall provide the following weed management information for review and approval by the Garfield County Weed Management Director: A. Noxious Weeds: • • Valley View Village PUD Subdivision Preliminary Plan BOARD: 8/4/03 Page 30 i. Weed Management: The Applicant inventory list provided by the Applicant lists the presence of Diffuse knapweed and Plumeless thistle. These are weeds that should be treated immediately when found. Prior the Board of County Commissioner review of Preliminary Plan, the Applicant shall provide for noxious weed treatment and thus prevent seed production before any earthmoving commences. ii. Common area weed management: The Applicant shall designate weed management responsibilities for common areas, including roadsides, open spaces, and the asphalt bike / pedestrian trail. iii. Covenants: It is common for vacant lot sin Battlement Mesa to become infested with Russian knapweed. Due to the number of lots, it creates a staffing problem for the County in attempting to conduct enforcement. The Applicant shall incorporate language in the covenants that will require vacant lot owners to manage noxious weeds under Colorado law. The Applicant shall provide language into the covenants that will give the Homeowners Association the authority and responsibility to access vacant lots with unattended county -listed noxious weeds for treatment costs. B. Revegetation: i. The revised Revegetation Guidelines from the Garfield County Weed Management Plan calls for the following: a). Plant material list. b) Planting schedule. c) A map of the areas impacted by soil disturbances (outside of the building envelopes). d) A revegetation bond or security shall be determined at Final Plat and paid prior to Final Plat submittal. ii. Prior to Final Plat, the Applicant shall provide a plant material list. The Applicant shall provided detailed information with respect to Item 12(B)(i)(a-d) listed above. iii. Prior to Final Plat, the Applicant shall submit a map that quantifies the area, in terms of acres, to be disturbed and subsequently reseeded on road cut and utility disturbances. iv. The security shall be held by Garfield County until vegetation has been successfully re- established according to the Reclamation Standards in the County Weed Management Plan. The Board of County Commissioners will designate a member of their staff to evaluate the reclamation prior to the release of the security. • • Valley View Village PUD Subdivision Preliminary Plan BOARD: 8/4/03 Page 31 C. Soil Plan: i. The Revegetation Guidelines also request that the Applicant provide a Soil Management Plan that includes: a) Provisions for salvaging on-site topsoil. b) A timetable for eliminating topsoil and/or aggregate piles. c) A plan that provides for soil cover if any disturbances or stockpiles will sit exposed for a period of 90 days or more. 14. The proposed subdivision is located in the Garfield County Traffic Study Area 1. The total impact fee payment shall be determined prior to Final Plat. The fee shall be calculated in accordance to section 4:94 of the Subdivision Regulations. Fifty percent (50%) of the road impact fees shall be collected at the submission of Final Plat for the Subdivision. All other road impact fees will be collected at the issuance of a building permit. 15. The 20' Buffer, Pedestrian, and Utility Easement, approved as part of the Planned Unit Development, shall be delineated on the Final Plat as such. The maintenance of the easement will be the responsibility of the Valley View Village Homeowners Association, which shall be reflected in the Protective Covenants. In addition, the Protective Covenants will restrict any development, i.e. fences, within this easement. 16. -. - facility on thc parcel owncd by thc County, Prior to Final Plat, the Applicant shall provide revised drawings, to be reviewed and approved by the County Engineer, of the detention facility which will be relocated on the east side of Valley View Circle within the PUD. It was determined by the Board of County Commissioners on July 21, 2003, that the proposed detention facility will not be approved on a portion of County owned land. 17. In addition to other required conditions of approval, the Applicant shall include the following plat notes on the Final Plat: A. No building permits shall be issued for Lot 47 until such time this lot has been re -subdivided in accordance with standard subdivision procedures. B. All exterior lighting will be the minimum amount necessary and all exterior lighting will be directed inward, towards the interior of the subdivision, except that provisions may be made to allow for safety lighting that goes beyond the property boundaries. C. 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. • • Valley View Village PUD Subdivision Preliminary Plan BOARD: 8/4/03 Page 32 D. No open hearth solid -fuel fireplaces will be allowed anywhere within an exemption. One (1) new solid -fuel burning stove as defied by C.R.S. 25-7-401, et. seq., and the regulations promulgated there under, will be allowed in any dwelling unit. All dwelling units will be allowed an unrestricted number of natural gas burning stoves and appliances. E. 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. F. 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. XIII. STAFF'S RECOMMENDATION Staff recommended that the Garfield County Planning Commission recommend approval to the Garfield County Board of County Commissioners for the Preliminary Plan request for the Village View Village PUD and continues to recommend approval with the above outlined conditions. FAX Number of Pages: (including this cover sheet) Date: /08/4.3 TO: /i& A.<1 A Y' FROM: /-74/--Lk--x V FAX #: 9¢s X33 G Comments: `vi91Ji, 4;719Cf/Ea /cc y Ger)" e.,c /kgs '�i%3-1o7 WQ2-e-7 e-./ W4(.474., Pr's fixiv, //C/E ..%LlsY 47Di 7 -Nr- 15;607-IPTivi✓ PZ -gr 7-40AX fr%Q-01A1 /-/ Garfield County Building & Planning Department 108 Ste Street, Suite 201 Glenwood Springs, CO 81601 (970) 945-8212 Fax # (970) 384-3470 • • EXHIBITS VALLEY VIEW VILLAGE PUD PRELIMINARY PLAN Board of County Commissioners — August 4, 2003 Exhibit A: Proof of Certified Mailing Receipts Exhibit B: Proof of Publication Exhibit C: Garfield County Zoning Regulations of 1978, as amended Exhibit D: Garfield County Subdivision Regulations of 1984, as amended Exhibit E: Garfield County Comprehensive Plan of 2000, as amended Exhibit F: Staff Report dated June 11, 2003 Exhibit G: Application Materials Exhibit H: Addendum to application from High Country Engineering, dated April 9, 2003. Exhibit I: Supplemental Information submitted by Land Design Partnership dated May 29, 2003. Exhibit J: Battlement Mesa PUD Zoning Resolution as applicable to Valley View Subdivision complied by Applicant. Exhibit K: Resolution No. 82-330 Exhibit L: Resolution No. 80-82 Exhibit M: Resolution No. 82-327 Exhibit N: Letter from R. Bruce Smith, Consolidated Metropolitan District, dated April 8, 2003 Exhibit 0: Letter from Kenneth Knox, Division of Water Resources, dated April 25, 2003. Exhibit P: Excerpt from the Rules and Regulations for Consolidated Metropolitan District approved December 22, 1999. Exhibit Q: Letter from R. Bruce Smith, Consolidated Metropolitan District, to Schmueser Gordon Meyer, dated December 18, 1997 • • Exhibit R: Letter from Kenneth Knox, Division of Water Resources, dated May 6, 2003. Exhibit S: Letter from Stephen LaBonde, West Water Engineering, dated May 6, 2003 Exhibit T: Letter to Stephen LaBonde, West Water Engineering, from High Country Engineering, dated June 2, 2003 Exhibit U: Letter to Bruce Smith, Consolidated Metropolitan District, from High Country Engineering, dated May 28, 2003. Exhibit V: Letter from Bruce Smith, Consolidated Metropolitan District, to High Country Engineering, dated May 29, 2003. Exhibit W: Letter from Jake Mall, Garfield County Road and Bridge Department, dated April 22, 2003 Exhibit X: Letter from Ronald Palmer, Garfield County School District No. 16, dated April 16, 2003 Exhibit Y: Letter from John Loschke, Town of Parachute, dated April 15, 2003 Exhibit Z: Letter from Jeff Nelson, Garfield County Engineering Department, dated April 21, 2003. Exhibit AA: Letter to Jeff Nelson from Deric Walter, High Country Engineering, dated May 28, 2003. Exhibit BB: Letter from Jeff Nelson, Garfield County Engineering Department, dated May 29, 2003. Exhibit CC: Letter from HP GeoTech regarding radiation potential, dated March 5, 2003. Exhibit DD: Letter from Kathryn Bauer, Xcel Energy / Public Service Company, dated April 25, 2003. Exhibit EE: Letter to High Country Engineering, from David McConaughy, Leavenworth and Karp, PC, dated May 7, 2003 Exhibit FF: Letter from the John Broderick, Colorado Division of Wildlife, dated April 23, 2003. Exhibit GG: Exhibit HH: Exhibit II: Exhibit JJ: Exhibit KK: Exhibit LL: Exhibit MM: Exhibit NN: Exhibit 00: Exhibit PP: Exhibit QQ: Exhibit RR: Exhibit SS: Exhibit TT: • • Letter from Steven Anthony, Vegetation Management, dated April 28, 2003. Letter from David Blair, Grand Valley Fire Protection District, dated April 29, 2003. Letter from David Blair, Grand Valley Fire Protection District, dated May 5, 2003. Letter to David Blair, Grand Valley Fire Protection District, from High Country Engineering, dated May 27, 2003. Letter to David Blair, Grand Valley Fire Protection District, from High Country Engineering, dated May 30, 2003. Letter from David Blair, Grand Valley Fire Protection District, dated May 20, 2003 Letter from Sean Gaffney, Colorado Geological Survey, dated April 28, 2003. Valley View Village Open Space summary provided by Applicant at Planning Commission meeting. Excerpt from the June 11, 2003, Planning Commission meeting minutes. Letter from West Water Engineering to the Battlement Mesa Consolidated Metro District date July 1, 2003 Supplemental information provided by Applicant on July 25, 2003, including: Phasing Plan, Open Space waiver, and gas line easement agreements) Agreement to Exchange Real Estate Interests between Edward and Ida Lee Hoaglund and Public Service Company of Colorado. Letter from West Water Engineering to the Battlement Mesa Consolidated Metro District dated July 29, 2003 Letter from Consolidated Metropolitan District dated July 29, 2003. Last minute additions: Please note that the following documents were not reviewed by Staff prior to distribution of packet materials. Exhibit UU: Letter from Battlement Mesa citizens Exhibit VV: Exhibit WW: • • Revised Master Declaration of Covenants, Conditions, and Restrictions for Valley View Village Subdivision Revised Supplemental Declaration of Covenants, Conditions and Restrictions for Valley View Village Subdivision for Valley View Village Townhomes 1. t-LovtA (kici L'n-4) • • Ei /NEEP/NG April 9, 2003 Tamara Pregl Garfield County Building and Planning 108 8th Street, Ste. 201 Glenwood Springs, CO 81601 Re: Valley View Village Subdivision Preliminary Plan Revision HCE Proposal No. 2021056.0412 Dear Tamara: The purpose of this letter is to provide you with minor revisions to the Valley View Village Subdivision Preliminary Plan Application. It has come to my attention that the application as submitted refers to the Owner as Darter, LLC. Darter, LLC is the Applicant and the Owners are Edward J. Hoaglund and Ida Lee Hoaglund. The property will be conveyed to Darter, LLC prior to the recording of the final plat. Therefore, I have attached a revised Cover Sheet, Letter of Application, Subdivision Application Form and a statement of authorization from the Hoaglunds. Please replace or include these sheets with the submitted application. I apologize for any confusion this may have caused. Please contact me if you have any questions or additional comments. Sincerely, HIGH COUNTRY ENGIN ERING, INC. Deric J. Walter, P.E. Project Manager CC: Terry Lawrence Ron Liston David McConaughy Del Dawson 1517 Blake Avenue, Suite 101 Glenwood Springs, CO 81601 Telephone (970) 945-8676 - Fax (970) 945-2555 14 Inverness Drive East Suite D-136 Englewood, CO 80112 Telephone (303) 925-0544 - Fax (303) 925-0547 • • PRELIMINARY PLAN APPLICATION FOR THE VALLEY VIEW VILLAGE SUBDIVISION (Submitted as Roan Cliff Village Subdivision at Sketch Plan) GARFIELD COUNTY, COLORADO HCE JOB NUMBER: 2021056.0412 January 31, 2003 Updated March 31, 2003 Prepared for: Darter, LLC 786 Valley Court Grand Junction, CO 81505 tele: (970) 9523-5555 Prepared by: High Country Engineering, Inc. 1517 Blake Avenue, Suite 101 Glenwood Springs, CO 81601 • • /'7/Gff Cl/NT/7 EGYiVcE:P/NG January 31, 2003 Revised April 9, 2003 Tamara Pregl Garfield County Planning Department 108 8th Street Glenwood Springs, CO 81601 RE: Valley View Village Subdivision (Submitted at Sketch Plan as "Roan Cliff Village") Preliminary Plan Application HCE Project No. 2021056.0412 Dear Tamara, Attached herewith are the Preliminary Plan and Supplemental Information documents as required by the Subdivision Regulations of Garfield County for Preliminary Plan review. Also included is a check for the application fee of $675.00 for the Preliminary Plan and a check for $595.00 for the Colorado Geologic Survey review. The proposed subdivision property is a 36.4 -acre tract of land located at the southwest corner of Battlement Mesa Parkway and Stone Quarry Road (Battlement Mesa), in Garfield County, Colorado. On behalf of the owner, Edward J. Hoaglund and Ida Lee Hoaglund, and the applicant, Darter, LLC, we request that this application be reviewed for completeness in accordance with the Garfield County Subdivision Regulations. If you have any questions or need further information, please fell free to contact us. Respectfully, Deric J. Walter, P.E. Project Manager Enc. 1517 Blake Avenue, Suite 101 Glenwood Springs, CO 81601 Telephone (970) 945-8676 - Fax (970) 945-2555 14 Inverness Drive East Suite D-136 Englewood, CO 80112 Telephone (303) 925-0544 - Fax (303) 925-0547 • • Sketch Plan Preliminary Plan XXXX Final Plan SUBDIVISION APPLICATION FORM SUBDIVISION NAME: VALLEY VIEW VILLAGE SUBDIVISION OWNER: Edward J. Hoaglund and Ida Lee Hoaglund APPLICANT: Darter, LLC ENGINEER/PLANNER/SURVEYOR: Planner - Land Design Part.; Engineer/Surveyor - High Country Eng., Inc LOCATION: Section: 18, T7S R95W, 6th P.M. WATER SOURCE: Central water distribution provided by the Battlement Mesa Community Consolidated Metro District SEWAGE DISPOSAL METHOD: Central treatment provided by the Battlement Mesa Community Consolidated Metro District PUBLIC ACCESS VIA: Battlement Mesa Parkway and Stone Quarry Road EXISTING ZONING: Battlement Mesa Planned Unit Development District Regulations recorded in Book 610, Page 453, as modified by Resolution 82-330 recorded in Book 615, Page 886. Neighborhood Commercial (NC), Medium Density Residential (MDR), Low Density Residential (LDR) and Public, Semipublic, and Recreation (PSR) See narrative in at Tab D EASEMENTS: Power line, gas main TOTAL DEVELOPMENT AREA: (1) Residential Number Acres Single Family 41 8.974 Attached Single Family 3 Lots (6 dwellings) 1.046 Multi -family 2 Lots (72 dwellings) 6.486 Mobile Home 0 0 (2) Commercial Floor Area Acres T.B.D. 8.005 (3) Industrial 0 0 (4) Public/Quasi-Public (road right-of-ways) 5.924 (5) Open Space / Common Area 5.937 TOTAL: 100 36.372 PARKING SPACES: Residential 208 Commercial T.B.D. Industrial APR.11.2003 2:10PM STIllp & LEMOINE, PC April 11, 2003 4111 NO.436 P.2 To: Crart"xeld County Building and Planning Department As the owners of 100% of the property described in the preliminary plan application for Valley View Village Subdivision, we have consented to the application submitted by High County Engineering, Inc. on behalf of Darter, LLC. Dated January 31, 2003, and updated March 31, 2003. Ida Lee Hoaglund STATE OF COLORADO ) ) ss. COUNTY OF GARFIELD ) &The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me on the 1/ da PA -45r _, 2003, by Edward J. Hoaglund and Ida Lee Hoaglund. Witness my hand and official seal. My commission expires f . 0 3 Notary public May 29 03 03:13p Rona.B Liston 970-940066 LAND DESIGN PARTNERSHIP 918 Cooper Avenue, Glenwood Springs, CO 81601 970-945-2246 / Fax 970-945-4066 May 29, 2003 Ms. Tamara Pregl Garfield County Planning Dept 108 8th Street, Ste 201 Glenwood Springs, CO 81601 Re: Valley View Village Preliminary Plan — Supplemental Information Dear Ms. Pregl: EXHIBIT Thank you for meeting with Deric and 1 on Tuesday. Following is a summary of our review of the topics of concern for the Valley View Village Preliminary Plan referenced by the pertinent section number from your Staff Report of May 14, 2003. 1. Section IX Staff Comments, B. Water Supply: The State has, subsequent to the writing of your report, provided the County with a letter stating that the project will have "no material injury" to decreed water rights. 2. Section IX Staff Comments, B. Wu(y & C. Wastewater: As I understand, it is clear from the conference call that you and Deric Walter had with Bruce Smith, that the Metro District has every intention of providing water and wastewater service to the project but Mr. Smith may not provide a letter to that effect until the District's engineer has approved the final construction drawings for water and sewer service. High Country Engineering is currently modifying the construction drawings to satisfy the drafting and engineering preferences of the District's engineering consultant and they should be re- submitted to the District next week. The District has directed High Country to connect the subdivision to a different water system pressure zone than was initially identified for the subdivision by the District. This requires considerable redesign and a new analysis of the system. Mr. Smith has made it clear that the District's consulting engineer is quite busy so he would make no commitments as to when I Iigh Country's revised plans would be reviewed by Westwater Engineers. The District may or may not have a final approval letter to the County before the June 1 1 t meeting of the Planning Commission. Should the District not have a Can and Will Serve letter for that meeting, 1 would request that this subject be handled by a condition requiring a letter from the District prior to approval of the Preliminary Plan by the Board of County Commissioners. Since there appears to be no major engineering challenges from the District's perspective and since the District intends to and is obligated to serve the subdivision, it seems that a condition at this stage of the May 29 03 03:13p Ronal B Liston 970-944088 p.3 Preliminary Plan review would be appropriate. 3. Section IX Staff Comments, C. Wastewater: Reference is made in this section to Jeff Nelson's comments regarding the sanitary sewer. Jeff -comments actual cover a variety of topics in addition to sanitary sewer and Deric Walter has met with Jeff and reviewed his comments. The results of that meeting are summarized in a Memo from Devic to Jeff Nelson dated May 28th and of which you were copied. Today I received copy of the memo Jeff Nelson sent to you which acknowledges the resolution of issues outlined in his previous memo with the exception of 3.1 which is discussed in #5. 4. Section IX Staff Comments, D Utilities: Apparently the Xcel representative that told you the project was in conflict with the terms of the gas line easement was not aware of the fact that the gas line in question is not within Xcel's described easement. High Country Engineering reviewed the criteria for construction site improvements within the Xcel easement before the start of design and complied with the guidance provided. Additionally, review of the Xcel easement language by the Valley View Village legal council indicates that the land owner is allowed to install, within the easement, the types of improvements required to serve the multifamily area. The property owner has offered to grant Xcel a new easement that will legalize the existing location of the gas line and that clearly states the owner's ability to install roads and other utility services within the new gas line easement. The unoccupied portion of the existing easement would be then vacated by Xcel. The conclusion to these proceedings between the property owners and Xcel Energy may not be completed by June 11"'. In that case, I would again offer that a Preliminary Plan approval include a condition that requires documentation of the new gas line easement agreement be in place prior to Final Plat. 5. Section IX Staff Comments, i Road Access: As we clarified at our meeting on Tuesday, the Valley View Village property is in fact governed by the Battlement Mesa PUD District Regulations and Supplemental Regulations which clearly provide for "private streets" (Section 1 1.3) for which there is no defined minimum easement width. Jeff Nelson, in his Memo of May 29th, requests that "Battlement Mesa" review the plans for compliance. I would point out that there is no `Battlement Mesa" entity with the authority to enforce the Battlement Mesa Zone Regulations. The Battlement Mesa PUD Zone Regulation are implemented and enforced by Garfield County The road and easement plans for the multi -family areas are compliant with the Battlement Mesa PUD District Regulations and Supplemental Regulations. Easement widths are provided as necessary to accommodate private road and utility needs within the multi -family tracts. b. Section IX Staff Comments, J Fire Protection: The Fire Chief had had a few comments of which the Applicant has no objection. Implementation of these can be required as a condition of approval. Devic Walters has sent a memo to the Fire Chief acknowledging the incorporation of the Chiefs requests. I believe you received a copy of that memo. 7. Section IX Staff Comments, M Assessment / Fees, 3. Open Space: Notes on the preliminary pian wiii be revised to identify the easements at the rear of the single family lots along the south and east as "Buffer, Utility and Pedestrian Easement" as is described on the original PUD Concept Plan. The buffer will still be an easement on the Low Density Residential lots but maintenance of the easement will be the responsibility of the 2 May 29 03 03:13p Ronal B Liston 970-94066 p.4 Valley View Village Home Owners Association and the covenants will restrict cross fencing of the easement_ The original PUD Concept Plan specifically calls for this buffer to be an easement placed upon the residentially zoned property. I understand you will be inquiring of the County Attorney the procedure is to establish an agreement between the County and the developer regarding the detention pond that infringes onto the County owned tract and how this detention facility can be used jointly by the development and the County. The Applicants request is that the Staff Report for the June 1 1 t meeting include an up -date on the topics discussed above and suggested conditions that could facilitate a Planning Commission action to conditionally approve the Preliminary Plan and move it on to the Board of County Commissioners. Please call myself or Deric Water is you have any questions. Ronald B. Liston Pc: Deric Walter David McConaughy Terry Lawrence MAY. 10, 2003 2:44PM LF NWORTH & KARP • NO. 101 Battlement Mesa PUD Zoning Resolutions As Applicable to Valley View Village Subdivision This summary is based on available information from the Garfield County Clerk. $ olution 80-82 (included in staff report) - superseded and replaced in 1982 (see below) Resoluti4 t82 -12j (recorded 13610 P445) - re -adopts complete zone district regulations ju82-327 (B615 P880) - subdivides subject property into Tract A and Tract B - Tract A donated to Garfield County EXHIBIT tion 82-3 86 - subjects Tracts A and B to Battlement Mesa PUD guidelines. - zones property into four districts: Neighborhood/Commercial (NC), Medium Density Residential (MDR), Low Density Residential (LDR), Public Space/Residential (PSR) **Note: There is no "public space/residential." Both Resolutions 80-82 and 82-327 do, however, define a "public, semipublic, and recreation" district, which County staff believes to apply. - incorporates the "conceptual land use diagram" as the zone district boundary map , - applies five specific conditions as set forth in the resolution relating to pedestrian and bike plans, architectural standards, an agreement for maintenance of open space, construction of a pedestrian bridge, and landscaping issues. Resolution 88-049 (B736, P47) - modifies zoning for the `Battlement Mesa PUD" for the MHR, RDR, LDR, MDR, and CAR districts - As applicable here, LDR and MDR district text amended, at Sections 2.1 and 3.1, respectively, to add the following use by right: Temporary real estate sales offices and model homes used only for the purpose of initial sales by the developer of property located within the [Low] [Medium] Density Residential Zone District. - deletes the second paragraph in Section 10.2 of the Supplemental Regulations referring to "mobile bachelor dwellings" as permitted uses. 1 MAY. 20. 2003 2:44PM LoNWORTH & KARP • N0. 101 P 3 Resolution 9Q-014 (B772, P440) - adds a definition of "guest suite" and regulations concerning guest suites in the CAR district (not applicable to Valley View Village) Resolution 96-69 (B995 P539) - amends the front yard setback provisions in the MDR zone by replacing Section 3.7(1)(c) with the following: (c) For zero -lot -line and townhouse, attached single-family dwellings: (1-1) No lot shall front on an arterial or collector street. (2-2) Local streets: 20 feet Front Setback from the front lot line, if there is a front -facing garage; no Front Setback if there is a side -facing garage or at least 20 feet of common open space between curb line and lot line. Resolution97-74 ($1029, P994) - amends the PUD map with respect to an area near the "Town Center" (not applicable to Valley View Village) Resolution 97-10$ 011.042„ P32) - amends tate NC zone district regulations to add the following use by right: Section 6.1. Unmanned carwash facilities (coin operated self-service or automatic touch -free) with four or less wash bays and vacuum stations, which must be sited with limited vehicular access. - deletes the phrase "and without car washing facilities" from this section. Resolution.20Q2-2 (81401, P437) - grants a variance to a specific parcel (not applicable to VVV) 2 MAY. /U. 1UUi 1:44PM L'NWUKIH & KAKV ill NO. 101 P. 4 Resolution 2002-61 (81367. P525) - further amends Section 6.1 (uses by right in the NC zone district) to add additional uses and to now read as follows: Section 6.1 J aes by right: Retail commercial establishments not exceeding 15,000 square feet of building area for each principal use, including grocery, dry goods, hardware, bakery, liquor, dug, florist, books, and similar uses. Personal service establishments not exceeding 5,000 square feet of area for each principal use, including barber, beauty, self-service, laundry, dry cleaning, photo and art studios, travel agency, shoe health spa [sic], private clubs, indoor eating and drinking establishments (which may include liquor), banks, and similar uses. Offices for business and professional uses. Gasoline service stations with two or less service bays, which must be sited with limited vehicular access and service areas reasonably screened from public view, self service storage facilities. Unmanned carwash facilities (coin operated self-service or automatic touch -free) with four or less wash bays and vacuum stations, which must be sited with limited vehicular access Prepared May 15, 2003, by David McConaughy, Leavenworth & Karp, P.C. 3 SIATE OF WIORPOO (OflNT'Y OF GPP.0 1E1:,D ) ) ss. At a regular meating of the heard of County Commissioners for Garfield County, •Colorado, held at the Cormnissloners' Annex in Glenwood Springs, Colorado on Monday , the 27th day of December , A. D. 19.82 , there were present; • Fiaven J. Cerise Eugene "Jim" Drinkhouse Lard Velasgeuz Earl Rhodes Stan Broome Mildred .Alsdorf Commissioner Chairman Commissioner Corrrnnis sioner County Attorney County rancor County Clerk when the following proceedings, among others were had and done, to wit: RFSBLUFION 1\X). 82-330 RESOLUTION CIJNCRNED WITH TIE APPROVAL OF AN APPLICATION OF TIE GIN STOCK RmQI PFi2!NE1SI[LP FOR MODIFICATION OF A SP3CIFIC IORTION OF THE BATTLFNENT MESA FLANN'LD UNIT DE.FL IMENT PLAN WHEREAS, the (lin Stock Fang Partnership has •filed a petition with the Board of County Commissioners of Garfield County, Colorado, for approval of a modification of the Battlement ivesa Planned Crit D3velopnent Plan for that area.described below in a2cordance with Saction 10 of the Garfield County Zoning Resolution of 1978, as amended; • WIEREAS, by action of toil Ward on August 7, 1975, this Board approved a zone district amendment to the Garfield County Zoning Fesolution, ;,hick established the Battlement Fesa Planned Cnit Development; WIsEREFS, a public hearing was held as to the proposed rrrdi.fication, vihich hearing ocazrecl ori April 12,. 1982; • WI-ERFPS, based. on. the evidence, testimony, exhibits, study of the master plan tor the unincorporated area of the County, comments of the Garfield County Planning Iepartsnent, comments of public officials and agencies, comments from all interested parties, this Board finds as follows; 1. That proper publication and public notice was govidad as required by law for the hearing before the Board; 2. That the hearing before the Fbard was extensive and complete, that all pertinent .facts, matters, and issues were submitted and that all interested parties were heard at the hearing; 3. That the Garfield County Planning Commission has recommended to this Board that the to uested zoning change be granted, provided that certain conditions be addressed prior to the recording of the final plat; 4. That the proposed zoning is in general compliance with the recommendations sat forth in the master plan for the unincorporated area of the County; 5. That the proposed land use will be compatible with the existing land uses in the nearby area; 6. That the requested modification of the Planned thit Levelopnent Plan meets all requirements of the zoning resolution of Garfield County, and further, that the requested planned unit cevelopment is suitable and approEri.ate for the subject property concerning • the location, condition and ciraamstances of said property, and that the proposed arneldnent implements the purpoms and meets the standards and r.eguirmerits of the planned emit development provisions of the. Garfield County `ironing It solution; EXHIBIT • 7. That for the above -stated and other reasons, the proposed zone district amendment and planned unit ccvelopnent plan is in the best interest of the health, safety, morals, convenience, order, prosperity, and welfare of the citizens of Garfield County. NM, TlERE1ORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Board of County Commissioners of Garfield County, Colorado, that the petition for modification of the Battlement Nbse Planned Wit Ltvelopment Plan be approved for the following described unincorporated areas of Garfield County as follows: Section I. CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL That the petition of the Gin Stock Ranch Partnership for nodificaticn of the Planned Chit Development Plan be approved, subject to the following conditions as follows: 1. That the property be tied into the pedestrian and bike plan, which ties into the Open Space, and that some provision be made to facilitate safe crossing of the Battlement Parkway. 2. That the Qin Stock Ranch revelopment and Architectural Standard is compatible with that of Battlement Mesa and parallel in review structure or agree to submit to review by the Battlement Nese resign Ieview Committee. 3. That because this parcel is part of the whole AJD, there should be some specific agreement for inclusion of this parcel and to the maintenance and improvements of the FUD Open Space and ISR Zone Districts at the sketch plan. 4. The MCR (Medium tensity residential) and NC (Neighborhood/Comnercial) Districts should be connected across the gully on the property by a redestrian bridge. 5. That the applicant should provide landscaping, berming and buffers along Battlement Parkway and the proposed uses. Section II. ZONE DISTRICTS That for the below described portions of the Battlement Mesa Planned Chit Developnent Plan, there shall be four (4) Zane Districts, the boundaries of which are indicated on Ekhibit "A", which is attached hereto and incorporated herein by reference, which districts shall be designated as follows: a. Neighborhood/Commercial b. Medium Density residential c. Tow tensity Iesid=ntial d. Public Space/Besidential Section III. ZONE DISTRICT REQJIATIONS That the uses permitted within said Districts, together with regulations effecting the usage of land contained therein, shall be as defined for the Battlement Mesa Planned Wit Development Plan as of the date of the adoption of this Resolution. PTD, FORTIER, BE IT RESOLED that upon presentation of the amended awed district map, which reflects the amendment herein granted to the following described unincorporated area of Garfield County, the Chairman be and hereby is authorized to execute the said zone district map: LECAL DESCRIPTION: The SE 1/4 of the NE 1/4 of Section 18, exctipt that portion conveyed to the Board of County Commissioners of Garfield County, Colorado, by instrument recorded in Book 561 at Page 675, I c.eption N. 310152, in Tbwhship 7 South, Range 95 fnest of the 6th Principal. Meridian. Upon motion duly made and seconded the foregoing Resolution was adopted by the followirr5 voted - i - 2 , Aye , Aye t.. Commissioners • STATE OF WIORAro ) co TY OF GARFIELD ) ss. I, , County Clerk and ex -officio Clerk of the Ibard of County Commissioners in and for the County and State aforesaid do hereby certify that the annexed and foregoing order is truly copied from the Fecords of the Proceedings of the Board of County Commissioners for said Garfield County, now in my office. IN WITNESS WIiERIDF, I have hereunto set my hand and affixed the seal of said County, at Glenwood SFxings, this day of , A. D. 19 County Clerk and ex -officio Clerk of the Bard of County Comn is sioners . 3 —:,Te or. cO:.onauo County of C:rfirld At regular • cling cf the Ec ,d of County Commissioners for Cc:field County, Colc held at the Court House in Cl•thwood Springs on f•lo'n•Jay 19th 1•iay y , the day cf Richard -C.: D' .. O Sera a present: . EXHIBIT Larry Velasquez Flaven J. Cerise Arthur A. Abplanalo, Jr. Nancy Sprick Page, Deputy when the following proceedings, among others were had and done, to -wit: Cwnraisioner Chairman Connnissioner Commissioner Coc.•.ty Attorney - Clerk cf the Board RESOLUTION NO. 80-82 RESOLUTION CONCERNED WITH THE APPLICATION -0F BATTLEMENT MESA, INC., FOR AMENDMENT TO THE BATTLEMENT MESA PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT PLAN AND RESOLUTION OF AUGUST 14, 1975. WHEREAS, Battlement esa, Inc. has made application to the Board of County Commissioners of Garfield County, Colorado, for ap- proval of an amendment to the Battlement Mesa Planned Unit Development Plan and Resolution of August 14, 1975, of -the Board approving such plan and establishing the uses permitted on the land as described in said Resolution in association with such plan, which amendment would modify the location and type of uses permitted in and by the Battle- ment Mesa Planned Unit Development; and WHEREAS, the Board has observed that the Resolution heretofore • entered by .this Board dated August 14, 1975, failed to provide therein for. the specific uses permitted within the Battlement Mesa Planned Unit Development as required by Section 4.07.08 of the' Garfield County Zoning Resolution; and WHEREAS, the Board has determined that the proposed.amendment. is consistent.wh the efficient-developrrent.and preservation or the• entire planned' unit• developrrent,•.does.not effect in -a substantailly .adverse manner either the, njoyrr.ent•o` the laird abutting upon or ecross the •street from the planned unit -development or the -public interest, is not intended to solely to confer a special benefit upon any person, in accordance• with the provisions of C.R.S. 1975, 624-67-106 (3)(b), • and•will.further effect•the intent of this Board in adopting its Reso- lution dated August 14,.]975, by which -the Battlement Mesa •Planned• Unit Development was approved, and ',Mich was to have established the uses to be permitted in the lands• described in Battlement Mesa Unit Planned Development; and NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the.Board of County CorJnis- sioners of•Garfield County, Colorado: I. That the modification of the Battlement Mesa Planned Unit Development Plan requested by Battlement Mesa, Inc. be and. hereby is • granted and approved, subject to the following conditions: a) That the sch3ol acreaca figures as set forth in the• plan be adj:'sted and codified, as the phases of .the Planned Unit Development progress, as required to represent actual experience in terms of enrollments -in the 'appropriate schools, and that additional land .be designated and donated for school sites if the same is indicated by actual pupil census figures. b) That prior to final plat approval of any portico of the Planned Unit Development, evidence of ownership of suffi- cient inter rights to provide to the planned unit develop- ment an adequate supoly•of notble t.f-iter to serve the needs of the proposed developm:nt for domestic and related usage. a c) That the Battlement Mesa Planned Unit Development shall • consist of the following zoning districts, the boundaries of which shall be indicated upon the final plat of Battle- ment Mesa Planned Unit Development, or various final plats thereof, which districts shall be identified as follows: BATTLEMENT MESA PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT REGULATIONS The land use districts within the Battlement Mesa Planned Unit'. Development shall be governed in conformity with the following regula- tions: 1.0 RDR - Rural Density Residential 1.1 Uses, by right: Detached single-family dwellings.and customary accessory uses, including buildings for shelter or enclosure of animals or property accessory.to use of the lot for single-family residential purposes and fences, hedges, gardens, walks, and similar landscape features; park 1.2 Uses, conditional: Church,.school, community building, day nursery, fire station, and other public uses. • 1.3 Uses, special: Extraction and processing of natural resources 1.4 Intensity of Use: 0.3 to 1.0 dwelling units per gross acre. 1.5 Minimum Lot Area: 12,500 square :feet 1.6 Maximum Site Coverage: For detached single-family dwellings, without common area as part of the plat at time of subdivision, not more than 35% of eachlot shall be covered by buildings and parking areas. For. detached.single-family dwellings with common open -area as part of the platat time of subdivision, not more than 40% of the platted area $hall be covered by buildings, parking areas, and private streets. 1.7 Minimum Setback: (1) Front Yard: (a) arterial streets: no structure shall front on an arterial street; (b) Local Streets; 50 feet from street centerline or 20 feet from front lot line, whichever is greater; (2) Rear Yard: 20 feet from rear lot line; (3) Side Yard: 10.feet from side lot line, or 1/2 the height of the principal building, whichever is greater. • 1.8 Maximum Building Height: 35 feet measured at the vertical to the .grade at the center of the building. 1.9 Minimum Off -Street Parking: Two spaces per dwelling unit. 1.10 Additional Requirements: A1.1 uses.shall be subject to the provisions under Section 10.0 (Supplementary Regulations) and Section 11.0 (Modi- fications of Subdivision Regulations). -2- ow Density Residential 2.1 Uses, by right: Detached single-family dwellings and attached single-family dwellings and customary accessory uses, including buildings for shelter or enclosure of animals or property accessory to use of the lot for single-family residential purposes and fences, hedges, gardens, walks, and similar landscape features; park 2.2 Uses, conditional: Church, school, community building, day nursery, fire station, and other public uses. 2.3 Uses; special: Extraction 2.4 Intensity of Use 2.5 .Minimum Lot Area:. 7,500 square feet 2.6 .Maximum Site Covera e: For detached and attached single-family dwellings without common area as part of the plat at time of."sub- division, not'more than 50Z of each lot shall be covered by buildings and parking areas. For detached and attached single-family dwellingswith common open area as part of the plat at time of subdivision, not more than 60% of the platted area shall be covered by buildins, parking areas, and private streets. 2.7 .Minimum Setback: 1.0 to. 5.0 dwelling units per gross acre. (1) Front Yard: (a) arterial streets: no structure shall front on an arterial street; (b) Local Streets: 50 feet -from street centerline or 20 feet from front lot line, whichever is gr:,ater; (2) Rear Yard: 20 feet from rear lot line; (3) Side Yard: 10 feet from side lot line,.or 1/2 the height of the.principal.building, whichever is greater. 2.8 Maximum 8uildih Heiaht: 35 feet measured at the vertical to the grade at the center of the building. 2.9 Minimum Off -Street Parkin Two spaces per.dwellingUnit. 2.10 Additional Re uirements: All uses shall be subject to the provisions under Section 10.0 Supplementary'Regulations) and Section 11.0 (Modi- fications of Subdivision Regulations). 3. MDR - M.edium Density Residential 3.1 Uses, b ri ht: Attached single-family..dwellings, two-familyand multiple -family dwellings, and customary accessory uses inclu_uding buildings for shelter or enclosure of animals or property accessory to use of the lot for residential purposes and fences, hedges, gar- dens, walks, and similar landscape features; park 3.2 Uses, conditional: Church, school, community building, day nursery, fire station, and other public uses. -3- 3:. Intensity of•Use: 5.0 to 12.0 dwellling units per gross acre. 3.4 Minimum Lot Area: 7,500 square feet 3.5 Maximum Site Coverage: For attached single-family dwellings without common open arca as part of the plat at time of subdivision, not more than 50% of each lot shall be covered by buildings and parking areas. For attached. single-family drrellings with common open area as part of the plat at tithe of subdivision, not more than 75% of the platted area shall be covered bybuiidings, parking areas and private streets. For multiple family,dwellings,.not more than 75% of,the platted area at the time of subdivision shall be covered by buildings, parking and private streets. A lot shall not be limited to one principal structure -provided: • 1. The uses of each structure shall be allowed within the applicable zone' • district: 2. The total accumulated improvements do not exceed the maximum site coverage nor violate any other requirements of tho zone district. 3. The entire lot remains under.one ownership. 3.0 Minimum Setback: . (1) Front Yard: (a) arterial streets:. 75 feet from street centerline or 50 feet from front lot line, whichever is greater; (b) Local Streets: 45 feet from street centerline or 20 feet from front lot. line, .a;hicrc:rer is grorter; (2) Rear Pard: .20 feet from rear lot line; (3). Side Yard 10 feet from side lot line, or 1/2 the height of the princi- pal building, whichever is greater. . 3.7 i•,aximum Building Height: 35 feet measured at the verticle to the grade at the center of the building. 3.8 .Minimum Off -Street Parking: One and one-half spaces per dwelling unit. 3.2 Additional Requirements: P.11 uses shall be subject to the provisions under Section 10:0. Suppicsrentary Regulations) and Section 11.0 (Modifications of Subdivision Regulations). • 4R - Central Area Residential 4.1 Usos, by ri;ht: Attached single-family dwellings, tiro -family and multiple family care flings, and customary accessory uses including buildings for shelter or enclosure of animals or property accessory to use of the lot for resi- dential•purposes and fences, hedges, gardeens, walks; and similar landscape features; park 4.2 Uses, conditional: Church,. school, Lmunity building, day nursery, fire station, and other public uses. 4.3 Intensity of Use: 12.0 to 20.0 dwelling units per gross acre. 4.4 Minimum Lot Area: 7,500 square feet.• 4:5 Maximum Site -Coverage: For attached single-family dwellings without common open area as part of.the plat at time of subdivision, not -more than 60.•oi: each lot shall. be covered• by buildings.and•parking areas. For attached single-family dwellings with•common open area as part of the plat at time of,subdivisicn, not more than 75% of the platted area shall. -be covered by buildings; parking area sand private streets. • For multiple. family •dt•rellings, not more than 75% of the platted area at the time of subdivision shall be covered. by buildings, parking and- privatestreets. A lot shall.not be limited to one principal structure provided: 1. The Uses of each structure shall be allowed iiithin• the applicable zone district.. 2. The total accumulated improvements do not exceed the maximum site coverage - nor violate 'any -other requirements of the zone district. 3. The entire lot remains. under ore •oi•;nership. 4 u Minimum Setback: (1) Front Yard: (a) •arterial streets:: 75 feet -from street centerline or 50. feet -from front lot line, whichever:i=.treater; `') (b) Local. Streets :45.feet from street centerline or 20 feet.from front lot line, whichever is greater; (2) Rear.Yard 25'feet from rear lot line; (3) Side Yard: 10 feet from side lot line, or 1/2 the height,of the .princi- pal building,•whichever is greater.. 4.7 Maximum Building-Hci_ght 60 feet measured at the vertical to the grade at the Teeter o the bui Ging. 4.8 Minimum Off -Street Parking: One and one-half spaces per dwelling unit. 4.9 Additional Requirements: All uses shall be subject to the provisions -under • Section 10.0 (Supplementary Regulations) and Section 11.0 (Modifications of Subdivision Regulations). 5.0 i5HR - Mobile Hone Residential 5.1 Use, b; rishht: Mobile homes,, mobile bachelor dwellings*, camper parks, =1.1obile bachelor dwellings are defined in Section 10, Supplementary Regulations. and customary accessory.uses, including buildings for shelter or enclosure of animals or property accessory to use of the lot for residential purposes and fences, hedges, gardens, walks, and similar landscape features; park. 5.2 Uses, conditional: Church, school,•community building, day nursery, fire station, and other public uses.' • Office for the purpose ofmanaging a mobile home or camper vehicle park. 5.3 Intensity of Use: 5.0 to 9.0 mobile home units per gross acre. 5.4 Minimum. Lot Area: 3,000 square feet • 5.5 Maximum Site Coverage: For mobile homes not more than 60% of each lot', shall be covered by buildings and parking areas. For mobile bachelor dwellings and camper parks,.no maxinum site coverage shall apply. Travel trailers, cac.per, vehicles and/or recreational vehicles accommodated shall not exceed forty (40) feet in length and eight.(8) feet•in width. No more then two (2) camper vehicles shall be allowed on any one mobile home space. 5.6 Minimum Setback: Minimum setback requirements of the adjacent zone district regulations shall be observed on the periphery ofa mobile home 'park'. The minimum Oace.betreen any two mobile homes or appurtenances thereto shall be 12 feet. 5.7 Maximum Building Height: 35. feet measured at the,vertical to the grade at the center -the buil ding. • x 5.8 t•linimumOff-Street Parking: One and ,one-half spaces per dwelling unit.. 5.9 Additional 'Requirements: All uses shall be subject to the provisions under" Section 10.0. Supp.e[�dentary Regulations) and Section 11.0 (I'lodifications of • lations). 6.0 NC Neighborhood Commerci 1 6.1 ise , al commercial establishments not exceeding 15,000 square feet of building area for.each principal use; including grocery; dry goods, hardware, bakery, liquor, drug, florist; books, and similar uses.' Personal service establishments not exceeding 5,000 square feet'of building. area for each principal use, including barber, beauty, self-service laundry, dry cleaning, photo and art studios, travel agency, shoe repair, health spa, private clubs, indoor eating and drinking establishments (which may include liquor)-, banks, and similar uses. Offices for business and professional. uses. -6- G n ✓_, c3 Gasoline service stations with two orOess service bays and -without car wa,hing facilities, which must be sited with limited vehicular access and service areas reasonably screened frau public view. Any use, by right, in this zone district used principally as a drive-in establishment :here the customer receives -goods or services while occupying a vehicle shall apply for a special use•pennit. 6.2 Uses, conditional: Church, •corrr unity building, day nursery and school;', auditorium, public building for administration, fraternal. lodge, art gallery, museum, library. . 6.3 Intensity of Use;. See general conditions under'Supple;nentary Regulations.. 6.4 iinimucn Lot Area; 7,500 square feet 6.5 Maximum Site Coverage: Not more than 80% of the platted area at the time of subdivision shall be covered by buildings, parking areas and private streets. • - A lot shall not be limited tel one principal structure provided: 1. The uses of •each structure shall be allowed within the applicable zone district. • 2. The total accumulated improvements do not exceed the maximum site cover- age nor violate any other requirements of the zone district. 3. The entire. lot remains under one ownership. 6.6 Minimum Setback: rTh (1) :Front lard (a),.arterial streets.:. 60 feet from.street centerline or °-- 20 feet from front lot line, whichever is greater; • (b) Local Streets: 50 feet -from street.centerline or 20 feet from front • lot line, whichever is greater; (2) Rear Yard: 25 feet.from rear lot -line -for lots occupied by residential uses; 7.5 feet for lots with no residential occupancy; Side Yard: 10 feet from side -lot line or. -1/2 the height of the princi- pal building, whiciiever is greater. 6.7 iaximum Building Height: 35.feet measured at the center of the bui)ding.• ' 6.8 Minimum Off -Street Parking: Retail commercial- and personal service: One parking space per 200 square feet of floor area. Office: One parking•space per 400 square feet of floor area. .6.9 Additional Re uirements: All uses -shall be subject to the provisions under Stiction 10.O�Suppie entary Regulations) and Section 11.0 (I.lodifications'of. Subdivision Regulations). (3) the vertical to the grade at 7.0 OP •- Office Park Ob r.1 Uses,_ y right: Offices for business and professional uses; research facilities, testing laboratories, and •facilities for the manufacturing, fabrication, processing or assembly of products provided that such facilities are completely enclosed and provided that noise, smoke, glare, vibration, fumes, or other environmental problems which exceed normal residential conditions are confined to the user's lot. Personal service establishments,.including barber, beauty, self-service laundry, dry cleaning, photo and 'art studios, travel agency, shoe repair, health spa, private clubs, indoor eating and drinking establishments (which may include liquor), within the principal building. Any use, by right, in this zone district used principally as a drive-in establishment where the customer receives goods or services while occupying a vehicle shall apply for a special use pennit. r.2 Uses, conditional:• Church; community building, day nursery and school;. auditorium, public building for administration, fraternal lodge, art gallery,. museum, library. ; P:3 Intensity of Use: See general conditions under Supplementary Regulations. P.4 Minimum Lot Area: 7,500 square feet 7.5 Maximum Site Coverag: Not more than 80% of the platted area at the time of subdivision shall be covered by buildings,'parking areas, and private streets. A lot shall not be limited to one principal structure provided: ,,,� 1. The uses of e?.h structure shall be allowed within the applicable zone district, 2. The total accumulated improvements do not exceJd the maximum site coverage nor violate any other requirements of:,the zone district. 3. The entire lot remains under one ownership. 6 Minimum Setback: (1) Front Yard: (a) arterial streets: GO feet from street centerline or 20 feet from front lot line, whichever is greater; (b) Local streets: 50 feet from street centerline or 20 feet from front lot line, whichever is greater;. (2) Rear Yard: '•25 feet from rear lot line for lots occupied by residential uses; 7.5 feet for lots with no residential occupancy; (3) Site Yard: 10 feet from side lot line or 1/2 the height of the principal building, whichever is greater. .7 F:aximum Building Height: 40 feet measured at- the vertical to the grade at the center. of the building. .8 Minimum Off -Street Parking: Office, research facility, testing laboratory, manufacturing, fabrication, processing or assembly facility: •One parking space per 400 square feet of floor area. Personal service establishments: One•parking space per 200 square feet of floor area (except storage area). ' Recreation facility: Parking shall be provided on the basis of one parking space per each four persons using the facility (figured at a maximum capacity use period). • Hotels and hotels: One parking•space per motel or hotel unit. • • ./ 7.9 Additional Re uircments: All uses shall be subject to the provisions under Section 10.0 (Supplementary Regulations) and Section 11.0 .(Modifications of Subdivision Regulations), 8.0 TC = •Torrn Center 8.1 Uses, by right: Retail commercial establishments, including grocery, dry goods, hardware, bakery, liquor, drug; florist, books, sporting goods, appli- ances, variety stores,' department stores, automotive accessory parts, furni- ture,.garden supply, animal feed, plant nursery outlets and similar uses., Personal service establishments, including barber, beauty, self-service laundry, dry cleaning, photo and art studios,•travel agency, shoe repair, health spa, private clubs, indoor eating and•drinking establishments (which may include Liquor), banks and similar uses. • Offices for business and professional uses; research facilities; testing laboratories,'and facilities•for•manufacturing fabrication', processing or assembly.of products provided that such facilities are completely enclosed • and provided that.noise,•smoke, glare, vibration,. fumes or other environmental problems -which .e..ceed. normal residential conditions are • confined to the user's lot. Churches; day-care centers`and'indoor theatres. • •Recreation facilities,. provided.•that noise, smoke, glare, vibration, fumes or. other' environmental problems which -exceed -normal- residential -conditions are confined to the•user's lot. - • 'Gasoline service stations; car wash and automotive services, which must be sited with limited vehicular. access'and•with service areas reasonably screened from public view. • liotels,.hotels, including eating.and drinking establishments (which may include. liquor). •a • Multiple family •dwellings when. located above retail commercial, personal. service.or office uses. Public and sc,•ni-public uses as.specified in this PUD. Any use, by right, in this zone district used principally as a drive-in establishMent where the customer receives goods or services while occupying a vehicle.shail apply for a special use permit. 8.2 Uses, conditional: Church, community building; day nursery and school, auditoriuM, aublic building for administration, fraternal lodge, art gallery, museum, library. 8.3 Intensity of Use: See general conditions under Supplementary Regulations. 8.4 Minimum Lot Area: 7,500 square feet 8.5 Maximum Site Coverage: Not more than. 801 of the platted area at the time of subdivision shall be covered by buildings, parking areas, and private streets. A lot shall not be; limited to,one'principal structure provided: 1. The uses of each structure shall be allowed within the applicable zone district. 2. The totalaccumulated improvements do not -;exceed the maximum..site'cover- age nor violate any other requirements of thezone district. 3. Theentire lot remains under one ownership. 8.6 Minimum Setback: (1) Front Yard: (a) arterial streets: 60 feet from street centerline Cr 20 feet frcm.front lot line,•whichever.is greater; (b) Local -Streets: 50 feet from street centerline or 20 feet from front • lot line, whichever is greater; (2) Rear Yard: 25 feet from rear lot•line•for lots occupied by residential uses; 7.5 feet for lots. with no 'residential. occupancy; (3) Side. Yard: 10 feet from .side lot line or 1/2 the height of the princi- pal building, whichever is greater. .7 Maximum Building Height:. 40 feet measured at'the vertical to the grade at the center of the building, . 8.8 Minimum Off -Street Parking: Retail commercial and personal service: One parking space:per 200 square feet of floor area (except storage area). Office, research facility, testing laboratory, manufacturing, fabrication, processing or assembly facility: One parking space per 400 square feet of floor area.: • Church or theatre: One parking space per three'seats. Recreation facility: Parking shall be provided on the basis of dile parking space per' each four persons using the facility (figured •.t a maximum.capacity use period). ' Motels and hotels: One parking space per motel or hotel unit. Multiple family dwellings: One•parking space per dwelling unit. 8.9 Additional Requirements: All uses shall be subject to the provisions under Section 10.0 (S::pplementary Regulations) and Section 11.0 (Hodif.ications of Subdivision Regulations).• -10- • 9.0 PSR - .Public, Semipublic, and Recreation 9.1 Uses, by_right: School sites, governmental offices, police and fire stations, library; day-care centers, public and semipublic health facilities, including hospitals and clinics, recreation uses, churches, community center, neighborhood center, well sites, :sewage treatment facilities, water treatment and storage, facilities, and ether public and private utility facilities and buildings. Community open space and parks, including hiking and bicycle trails, equestraitrails, intensive use playfields, picnic areas, sledding areas, swimming pools, tennis courts, natural areas, archery, skeet shooting and similar uses. Golf.course with clubhouse including. eating and drinking facilities (which may include liquor); equestrain center: 9.2 Uses, conditional: trot applicable. 9.3 Uses, special:- Extraction and processing of natrual resources. 9.4 Intensity of Use: ,See general conditions under Supplementary Re- gulatjons. 9.5 Minimum Lot Area: None 9.6 Maximum Site Coverage: Not more than 80% of the platted area at the time of subdivision shall be covered by buildings, parking areas, and private streets. A lot .shall not be limited. to one principal structure provided: 1. The Uses.of each structure shall be allowed:within the applicable zone district. 2. The total accumulated improvements do not exceed the maximum site coverage nor violate any other requirements of the zone district. 3. The entire lot remains under one. ownership. 9.7 (1) Front Yard: (a). arterial streets: 60 feet from street center- line or 20 feet from front lot line, whichever is greater; (b) Local streets: .50 feet from street centerline or 20 feet from front lot line, whichever is greater; (2) Rear.Yard: 25 feet from rear.lot line for lots occupied by resi- dential uses, 7.5 feet for lots with no residential occupancy; Side Yard: 10 feet from side lot line or 1/2 the height of the principal building, whichever is greater: (3) 9.8 Maximum Building Height: grade at the center or the 617i ding. ., d .t the vertical to the 9 )Minimum Off-Stre arkino' Auditorium and aublic assembly One Wiper 100 square feet of floor area used•for seating or assembly. -11- Governmental offices and health facilities (exec t auditorium andubl' assembly): •One space per 200 square feet of floor arca except storage area). Church:. One parking space per three seats. • Recreation facility: Parkin shall be provided on the basis of one' par{:ir19 space per cacn tour persons• usin the aci it fi•ured at a maximum capacity use perio• 9.10 Additional -Requirements: All uses shall he subject to the provisions'under • Section•10.0 (Supp1TIientary Regulations) and •Section 11.0 (Modifications of S::bdivisi.on Regulations). 17.0 SuppleMentary Regulations Division of the subject lands into -land use areas and their related develop - rent standards will be as shown on the PUD map and as outlined by the preceding' development standards. 'To further avoid problems of interpretation, the following listed supplementary regulations arc included as part of. the Planned . Unit Development.- Where the preceding general standards or• the following supplemental regulations do not adequately describe what is permitted or required, reference shall be made to the officially adopted Garfield. County Zoning Resolution -of January 2, 1979, including the zoning amendment, adopted • October 15, 1979, and to the officially adopted Garfield County Subdivision .Regulations of January 2, 1979, and amendments of October 15, 1979. • 10.1 Land Use Types: The PUD map•shows.generally where within the PUD each type • of use is located. .The precise•location..of each -use and th location of lots,. blocks and other parcels within each area devoted to each u e•shall beshotinn as that area is•hereafter. subdivided and platted. 10.2 Uses Permitted: .The•principal uses•for each land use area are listed asa • Tart of the gene.ral•development standards; however, any other building;•.•. structure or.use which is -similar to those 'enumerated and not.more ohnoxious • or detrimental. to•the area in which -it -is located -shall be permitted. Mobile bachelor dwellings and modular bachelor dwellings shall --include groupings or single room living units with co non restroom facilities, community recreation space and central eating facilities, in place of rest - rooms, kitchens and larger living areas within each separate living unit. An attached single family -dwelling is -a building containing two or more single family dwelling units sharing one or two common side building walls. 0.3 Intensity of• Use: In any residential area defined on the POD n:ap', the net density in any given part of a subdivided area may exceed the gross density which would be permitted for the entire subdivided -area so long as the entire subdivided area, including open space, is within tha range of the applicable -gross intensity of use set forth above in the development standards. - -12- 10.4 S.tbacks: The following yard requirements shall be observed in all zone districts: Through Lots: on lots extending from one street to another paralleling• street, both streets shall be considered as front streets for purposes of calculating front yard setbacks; . _.f Corner Lots: on lots bordered on two (2) contiguous sides by streets, the required front yard setback shall be observed along.both streets; Two Family Dwellings: for.purposes of setback. calculations, a two family dwelling shall be construed as one buildingoccupying'one lot; Row House: for purposes of setback calculations, only those row houses which do not share a common wall with an adjacent row house need observe the required side yard setback for the district; providing building code rc:luirements for this type of structure are observed; Projections: every part of a required yard shall be unobstructed from ground level to the sky .except for projections of architecturalfeatures as follows: cornices, sills and ornamental features - 12 inches; roof eaves -.18 inches; uncovered porches, slabs and patios, walks, steps. fences, hedges, and walls - no restriction; fire escapes and individual balconies not used as passageways mayproject 18.inches into any•required side yard of four (4) feet into any required front or rear yard; Accessory Building in Required Rear Yard: an accessory building May be •'.' located in a required rear yard provided not more than forty (40) percent of the rear yard area is covered. Such building .shall observe a seven and one-half (7 112) foot setback from the rear lot -line when there is ;lot an adjacent alley. An•adjacen.t alley shall observe a ten (10) foot setback from lot line; , Accessory Structure in Required Yards: a fence, hedge, or wall may be located in any required yard provided no such installation shall exceed eight (8).feet in height in.a required .side yard or rear yard, nor shall any such structure exceed three (3) feet in height in any required front yard. 10.5 Maximum Buildin_y Height: For purposes of reasuring the maximum building height, .grade shall mean the original. natural ground level or newly established elevation resulting from compacted fill so long as any re- graded area does not exceed a four -to -one" -slope between the.ground level of any exterior building•wall-and adjacent lot line or property line. 0.b Minimum Off -Street.. Parking:. Each off-street parking space shall he not . less than 8 feet wide and •18 feet long; shall be provided with vehicular. access to a street or alley; shall be surfaced with gravel, asphalt, ' concrete or equivalent; shall be properly drained; and shall be located within convenient walking'distance of the principal building or use for .which the parking space is provided. For either detached single family d;;ellings or attached single-family dwellings, tandem parking.spaces shall be pnrnitted: t•!.cre an off-street parking space serves more than one •. • -13- vi., use and peak tiimes for parking arc atr diffcrcnt times of the day, such parking'space may be included as,part of the minimum requirement .for each use. L0.7.Modifications: In general, the proposed development standards for the Battlement Mesa Planned Unit Development correspond closely to normal criteria -of the Garfield County .Zoning Resolution. in some cases,. -the Battlement Mesa standards are more limiting, -while in .others typical County zoning regulations appear to be nmore.restrictive. Wherever this -last situation exists, the added flexibility of development with the PUD permits desirable variety and in some situations .essential economies of construction and maintenance. • Throughout the Planned Unit Development program, special. attention will be given to bordering private properties so that their values as established by existing Garfield County• zoning standards Will be maintained. In line with Garfield County zoning requirements that no portion of a-PhD.shall be used or occupied, otherwise than as•was peimitted immediately prior to the approval of rezoning as a•PhD,'until a subdivision plat for said portion is, approved by the Board of County Commissioners of Garfield County, Battlement Mesa, Inc., recognizes the need to design and construct each phase according to all reasonable public. interest. .0.8 Additional Restrictions: Battlement 1esa,,Inc.,• reserves the right to make the use or occupancy'of any particular area more restrictive than this PUD would permit, by provisions on the subdivision plat, restrictive covenants, or provisions in the deeds. 1.0 i•lodifications-.of Subdivision Regulations • The Planned Unit Development grill conform to the Subdivision Regulations of Garfield County, Colorado, adopted January 2, 1979, except as noted. below or otherwise provided.in this application- and except as nay.be• • permitted by the Board of County Commissioners.at the time of subdividing.. The specific modifications set forth below are requested to better allow the developer to fulfill the previously stated purposes and objectives of • this PUD. 1. Street Pattern (Sub. Req. 5.02.01): The -street patterns will be designed to continue to provide access to adjacent lands not included in the•PhD which presently. have access through a public dedicated right-of-way. Adjacent privately owned land which does not presently have access. off a public dedicated right-of-way through. the area of the PUD will be pro- vided appropriate -access. Adjacent land in public.ownership which -presently does not have access.off,a public dedicated right-of-way through the area of the PUD will be provided access at the time of platting at the request of the public agency controlling the land. Dead-end streets may be designed -with a cul-de-sac head that meets the functional requirements of vehicular turning radii'and snow storage; this design may vary from the 90 fc,at turnaround. -14- • Residential lots bordering arterial. streets may be sided against the street as long as access to the lot is not from the arterial streets. This is presented as an alternative solution to providing access off a parallel frontage road or to having lots backed against the arterial street. .1.2 Private Streets (Sub.Reg. 502.021: Private streets may be used in areas within the PUO where through traffic is not desired and where pavement widths can be.narrower than. -those required on public. streets. In such cases; roadway widths -of 20 to 24.feet may be used where the. design con- . siders traffic volumes, satisfactory off-street parking arrangements, • planned snow.storage areas,•adequa.te sight distances-, reasonable gradients and turnarounds adequate for ecergency•vehicles. - At time of platting, the design,. construction standards, maintenance responsibility and policing arrangements will be presented. 1.3 Street Widths (Sub. Req. 5.02.03): Public.street widths'proposed in the PUD will be determined by -projected traffic volume, parking •arrangements and other factors at. the. time of platting. The •range of requirements is proposed to be as follows: Range of Dedicated Range of Street Type Right -of -Way Width Roadway Width Arterial 80 -100 feet .40-72 feet Collector 60- 80 feet 36 -44 feet Neighborhood or -Local 40 - 60 feet 24 36 feet 1.4 Grades, Curves, and Site Distances (Sub. Reg. 5:02.04): Grades, curves, and sight distances will adhere to'county stan:'ards except that .variances•• may be requested at.the-.time of platting for neighborhood, local, or other low volume traffic 'streets. In no instances shall road .grades exceed 8% within the. development, • 1.5 Relationship to Adjacent Slopes (Sub. Reg-: 5-.02.05): Cut -and -fill slopes are proposed to blend with the'natural topography and may extend outside public dedicated street.rights-of-way providing revegetation requirements are met 1.6 Sidewalks, Curb and Gutter (Sub. Reg. 5.-02.06): Sidewalk locations will be in accordance with the plat at the time of subdividing and will be sited so as to optimize pedestrian routes through open space to residential, educa- tional and cornunity facilities. Curb and gutter will be placed where necessary to direct storm drainage and' where it would add to ease of road edge maintenance. Where a rural character is desired and storm drainage can be handled by ditch swales, curb and gutter may be eliminated. -15- 1.7 I::�t!tr,l s (Slfb. RC . 5 _07. _U�:' Ro. will conform in construction . -Specification;, .uther Allan width, Minty requirements. Design of roadway surface may vary from para • crown to inverted center pitch depending upon storm drainage requir•c,.,^_nts.of various areas of the"PUD. 1.8 Streets lia:nes•and. Signs (Sub_Rcg. 5.02.08) Street-signs.will conform to a unifon system of signs and graphics designed. for the total PUD. area. ATTEST: BOARD OF COUNTY COM!IISSIONERS GARFIELD COUNTY, COLORADO 4/111fL /ii /Li 2 Dejuty perk 'of to Board Up..n _orlon July made and teconde.i the forcgoin9' Resolution was adopted 'try the following vote: Richard C. .'lollop Aye Larry Velascuez Flaven J. Cerise 'ATE OF COLORADO uc:y of Ca:ficld Aye Aye Commiss:ancrs ,_County Ge:k auu t.•eMelo MAI; of the Board of County Commissioners and ler the County and arra uurea.iy .:4 i,e...l.s ce. .its iuregonisi urger is truly copiers from firs keecrds or Froca:Gia, of the Board of County Commissioners for said Carfield Count;, now In my office. rlr l',ii'aESS WHEREOF, 1 have hereunto set toy hand and affc:rd the seal of sand County, at Cl•tnwood Springs, Gaye( A. D. 19 County Clerk and es;offieio Clerk of tho board of County Commissioners. STATE OF COLORADO County of Garfield At a • regular held at the Court House in Glenwood Springs on December A. A. 1982 , there were present: Eleven J. Cerise o:: Board of C;nrnnuennne[s for GarfieldCounty, Colorado, Monday the 27th day of Eugene "Jim" Drinkhouse Larry Velasquez Earl Rhodes Mildred Alsdorf Commissioner Chairman , Commissioner , Commissioner , County Attorney , Clerk of the Board when the following proceedings, among others were had and done, to -wit: RESOLUTION NO. 82-327 A RESOLUTION CONCERNED WITH GRANTING AN EXEMPTION FROM THE GARFIELD COUNTY SUBDIVISION REGULATIONS FOR GUNSTOCK RANCH JOINT VENTURE. WHEREAS, Gunstock Ranch Joint Venture has petitioned the Board of County Commissioners of Garfield County, Colorado, for an exemption from the definition of the terms "subdivision'! and "subdivided land" under C.R.S. 1973, 30-28-101 (10) (a) -(d), as amended, and the Subdivision Regulations of Garfield County, Colorado, adopted January 2, 1979, Sections 2.02.21 (d) and 3.02.01 for the division of a 37.62 acre tract described as follows: Township 7 South, Range 45 West of the 6th Principal Meridian, Section 18 SE4 NE4, except that portion conveyed to the Board of County Commissioners Garfield County, Colorado by instrument recorded in Book 561 at Page 675, Reception No. 310152 into 2 tracts of approximately 2.48 acres and 35.14 acres each, more or less, which proposed divided tracts are more particularly described as follows: TRACT A: A tract of land in the SE4 of the NE1 of Section 13, Township 7 South Range 95 West of the 6th Principal Meridian in Garfield County, Colorado, and being more particularly described as follows: Beginning at the NW Corner of said SE4 of the NE4 of said Section 18, thence S.01`01'32"W. a distance of 40.00 feet to the True Point of Beginning; thence S.88°11'07"E. a distance of 511.07 feet to a point on the Westerly right-of-way line of a proposed road;. thence S.01°48'53"W. and along said Westerly right- of-way line a distance of 30.94 feet; thence continuing along said Westerly right-of-way linealong a curve to the right having a central angle of 46°53'00" and a radius of 151.27 feet for an arc length distance of 124.00 feet and whose chord bears S.25°17'53"W. a distance of 120.56 feet; thence continuing along said Westerly right-of-way line along a curve to the left having a central angle of 46°58'00" and a radius of 201.27 feet for an arc length distance of 164.99 feet and whose chord bears S.25°17'53"W. a distance of 160.41 feet; thence N.50°54'00"W: and following the centerline of a gulch a distance of 92.88 feet; thence N.83°05'00"W. and continuing along said centerline of gulch a distance of 188.00 feet; thence West a distance of 135.00 feet more or less to a point on the West line of said SE4 of the NE4 of said Section 18; thence N.01°01'32"E. and along said West line, a distance of 219.96 feet more or less to the Point of Beginning, in Garfield County, Colorado. TRACT B: A tract of land in the SE4 of the NE4 of Section 18, Township 7 South, Range 95 West of the 6th Principal Meridian in Garfield County, Colorado, and being more particularly described as follows: Beginning at the NW Corner of the said SE4 of the NE4 of said Section 18, thence S.01° 01'32"W. a distance of 40.00 feet; thence S.88°11'07"E. and along the Southerly right-of-way line of County Road No.300 a distance of 511.07 feet to a pointon the Westerly right-of-way line of a proposed road, said point being the Point of Beginning; thence S.88°11'07"II. and continuing along the said Southerly right-of-way line a distance of 769.73 feet to a point on the Westerly right-of-way line of Mesa Drive thence S.01°05'52"W. and along said Westerly right-of-way line a distance of 1279.23 feet to a point on the South line of said SE4 of the NE4 of said Section 18; thence N.88°22'43"W. and along said South line a distance of 1279.08 feet: to the SW.Corner of said SE4 of the NE4 of said Section 18; thence N.0001'32"E. and along the West line of said SE4 of the NEI/ of said Section 18 a distance of 1064.37 feet to a point in the centerline of a gulch; thence•_East and along said centerline a distance of 135.00 feet; thence S.83°05'00"E. and continuing along said centerline a distance of. 188.00 feet; thence S'.50°54'00"E. and D a EXHIBIT contlnuing alot,A said co, .:cline a distance of 94.88 feet: to a po" on the Westerly right -o ' line of a proposed road; thence aloni said Westerly right -of -w, line along a curve to the right having central angle of 46°58'00" and a radius of 201.27 feet for an arc lenght distance of 164.99 feet and whose chord bears N.25°17'53"E.a distance of 160.41 feet; thence continuing along said Westerly right- of-way line along a curve to the left having a central angle of 46° 58'00" and a radius of 151.27 feet for an arc lenght distance of 124.00 feet and whose chord bears N.2.5°17'53"E. a distance of 120.56 feet; thence N.01°48'53"E. and continuing along said Westerly right-of-way line a distance of 30.94 feet more or less to the Point of Beginning. Containing 35.1414 acres, more or•,less. (in the State of Colorado and County of Garfield); and WHEREAS, the Petitioners have demonstrated to the satisfaction of.the Board of County Commissioners of Garfield County, Colorado, that the proposed division does not fall within the purposes of Part 1, Article 28, Title 30, Colorado Revised Statutes 1973, as amended, for the reason that the newly created tract will be owned by a public entity and that the impact created does not warrant further review; and WHEREAS, the Petitioners have demonstrated to the satisfaction of the Board of County Commissioners of Garfield County, Colorado, that there is a reasonable probability of locating domestic water on each of said tracts, that there is adequate ingress and egress to said tracts, that the location of septic tanks will be permitted by the Colorado Department of Health, that the requested division does not fall within the general purposes and intent of the subdivision regulations of the State of Colorado and the County. of Garfield, and should, therefore, be exempted from the definition of the terms "subdivision" and "subdivided land" as set forth in C.R.S. 1973, 30-28-101 (10) (a) -(d), as amended; and WHEREAS, the Petitioners have donated said Tract A to the Board of County Commis- sioners, Garfield County, Colorado, in recognition of a need for human resource facilities in the County; NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the division of the above described tracts "A" and "B".from the above described 37.62 acre tract is hereby exempted front such definitions and said tract may be divided into tracts "A" and "B", all as is more fully described above, and said divided tract may be conveyed in the form of such smaller tracts without further compliance with the aforesaid subdivision statutes and regulations; provided, however, that this exemption is granted on the condition and with the express understanding and agreement of the Petitioners that no further exemptions be allowed on said tracts "A" and "B", and that a copy of the instrument or instruments of conveyance when recorded shall be filed with this Resolution. ATTEST: ?2), (AQ-ridt4/L Clerk of the Board% BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS GARFIELD COUNTY, COLORADO Upon motion duly made and seconded the foregoing Resolution was adopted by the following vote: Aye Aye STATE OF COLORADO County of Garfield Aye Commissioners County Clerk and ex -officio Clerk of the Board of County Commissioners in and for the County and State aforesaid do hereLy certify that the annexed and foregoing Order is truly copied from the Records of the Proceedings of the Board of County Commissioners for said Garfield County, now in my office. IN WITNESS WFIEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and affixed the seal of said County, at Glenwood Springs, this day of A. D. 19 .............. County Clerk and ex -officio Clerk of the Board of County Commissioners. CONSOLIDFED METROPOLITAJISTRICT 109 TAMARISK TRAIL / P.O. BOX 6116 / BATTLEMENT MESA, CO (970) 285-9050 / FAX (970) 285-9631 April 8, 2003 Tamara Pregl Garfield County Planning Department 198 8th Street, Suite 201 Glenwood Springs, CO 81601 Re: Valley View Village Preliminary Plan Dear Ms. Pregl: EXHIBIT RE C._ Atiq.nf,IG P�.ANNING As I have previously informed the applicant of the above referenced subdivision, water and sewer service will not be provided to the subject proposed subdivision until approved plans and specifications are submitted to this office. The preliminary plans do not meet our minimum requirements. I also informed the applicants that before the plans and specification will be reviewed, the applicant must provide escrow payment to the District for the cost to have the District's engineers review the submittals. By copy of this letter I am asking WestWater Engineering to provide an estimate of cost to review the preliminary plans and final submittal, should there be one. In turn, the applicant must escrow that estimated amount with the District. Based on the foregoing and the complete lack of any sewer plan whatsoever, it is my recommendation that the preliminary plan be "disapproved", or at best "tabled". Please contact me if you need additional information. Very truly yours, R. Bruce Smith District Manager cc: Westwater Engineering Board of Directors APR -29-2003 11:33 DIV WATER RESOURCES • 303 856 3589 • STATE OF COLORA OFFICE OF THE STATE ENGINEER Division of Water Resources Department of Natural Resources 1313 Sherman Street, Room $111 Denver, Colorado 80203 Phone (303) 866-3581 FAX (303) 866-3589 www Tamara Pregl Garfield County Building and Planning Dept 108 8th St, Suite 201 Glenwood Springs CO 81601 April 25, 2003 RECE_' (3.ARF ELD COUNTY BUILDING & PLANNING Re: Valley View Preliminary Plan SE'/4NE'h. Section 18, T7S, R95W, 6th PM W. Division 5, W. District 39 EXHIBIT 0 Bill Owens Governor Greg E. Walcher Executive Director Hal D. Sim/.0n, PE. State Engineer Dear Ms. Pregl: We have reviewed the above referenced proposal to subdivide a parcel of 36-372 acres into 41 Single Family lots, 3 Attached Dwelling lots (6 dwellings) and 2 Multi -Family lots (72 dwellings). The applicant proposes to provide water and sewer services from Consolidated Metropolitan District (CMD). The average daily demand for the project is estimated to be 75,250 gallon per day (84.3 AF/yr). A letter dated January 28, 2003, from CMD shows that the District has agreed to provide water and sewer services for Valley View, based upon an estimated peak day water demand of 225,750 gallons per day (three times the average daily demand) for the proposed 215 EQR's. No information was provided concerning the physical adequacy of the water supply. As stated in CRS 30-28-133(3)(d), the subdivider is required to submit "Adequate evidence that a water supply that is sufficient in terms of quality, quantity, and dependability will be available to ensure an adequate supply of water for the type of subdivision proposed_" Adequate evidence is usually provided in the form of a water resource report, prepared by a professional engineer or water consultant, which addresses the quality, quantity, and dependability issues. A report of this nature was not provided. See the attached Guidelines for Subdivision Water Supply Plan Reports for the necessary information. Pursuant to CRS 30-28-136(1)(h)(II), a municipality or quasi -municipality is required to file a report with the county and the State Engineer documenting the amount of water which can be supplied to the proposed development without causing injury to existing water rights. A report of this nature was not included. See the attached Guidelines for Subdivision Water Supply Pian Reports for the necessary information. Since insufficient information was provided, we cannot comment on the potential for injury to existing water rights under the provisions of CRS 30-28-136(1)(h)(11). If you or the applicant has any questions concerning this matter, please contact John Redding at this office. Sincerely, 74< Kenneth W. Knox Assistant State Engineer KW K/JW RNalleyViewVillage.doc cc: Alan Martellaro, Division Engineer, Division 5 Robert Klenda, Water Commissioner, District 45 TOTAL P.02 r ■ a a w r r 1 w • • RULES & REGULATIONS For EXHIBIT P CONSOLIDATED METROPOLITAN DISTRICT Approved December 22, 1999 Welton Francis, President the District shall in each such case asses a foreclosure fee against the subject property in the amour: of $3,000, which tee shall be payable in full upon assessment and shall be included in the amount then being foreclosed. Payment and said foreclosure fee and any and all other fees outstanding against the subject property shall be a precondition to the resumption of service to that property. 40 CMD '99 Version association existsfo_ a number of units receiving service from the District, said! association shall receive an invoice for all units served by the association. The District shall have the right to issue onl' one bill for a multi-unit structure or development. Any structure with more than one living unit off the service line, which is not separately metered, shall establish one responsible party for water and sewer bills. If separate bills are issued to lessees or multiple occupants, the District will collect for nonpayment of any such accounts from the structure owner such billing is provided as a convenience to the building owner and shall not be a bar to full collection efforts including statutory liens. The customer shall pa; to the District, by no later than the 15th of the month, the ful amount of the statement. Where the customer believes sai statement is in error, the customer must file, in writing, within 15 days of the billing date, a notice to the District of the alleged error, and request a adjustment from the -District Manager.. The District Manager shall respond to the request for adjustment within 15 (fifteen)days. The District Manager's decision may be appealed to the Board of Directors provided that the outstanding bill, including disputed charges, is paid in full. In the event the request for adjustment of the billing is approved, the imposition of late fees shall be suspended until the,10 (tenth) day following the postmark of the re-issued bill. All billings are presumed accurate and adjustments shall be forever barred on the 60th (sixtieth) day following the billing date. At the discretion of the District, adjustments to bills may be made in the form of a credit against future charges or a refund. The customer shall have the option to prepay water and sewer charges. 8.10 Penalty for Late Payment. At any time the Customer is tardy in payment of any charges due the District, the District shall have the right to assess in interest charge at a rate of one and one half percent (1-1/2%) per month on the unpaid balance. The District shall further have the right, in its sole discretion, to terminate service to any Customer who becomes thirty (30) days or more tardy in payment of scheduled services, following the opportunity for a hearing as outlined herein. The District has the right to assess to any Customer who is tardy in payment of his account, all legal, court, disconnection, and other costs necessary to or incidental to the collection of said . account. The Manager's right to waiver up to $10.00 of late payment penalty fees shall not be deemed a continuing waiver. 8.11 Penalties for Foreclosure Proceedings. At any time it becomes necessary for the District, following efforts to collect tardy payments of any fee or charge assessed by the District under these Rules and Regulations and/or Colorado law, to initiate foreclosure proceedings as allowed by Title 32, C.R.S., 39 CMD '99 Version ARTICLE VIII RATES ' AND C ARGES 8.1 General. The information contained in; pertinent to all h-�-- `1 this Article is p charges of whatever nature to be levied for the provision of sewer and/or water services. Said rates and charges as herein established are in existence and effect at this time, and shall remain in effect until modified by the Board under the provisions of these Rules and Regulations, and under the applicable statutes of the State of Colorado. Nothing contained herein shall limit the Board from modifying from modifying any classification, rates and charges, or 8.2 Application of this Article. The rates, charges, and other information shown herein shall apply only to customers inside the District, and shall in no way obligate the District with respect to services provided outside the District boundaries. 8.3 Classification of Customers. For the purpose of levying fair, reasonable, uniform, and equitable charges, classifications and related definitions are provided in Appendix F. 8.4 Tap Fee. Tap fees are set and collected by the Wholesale treatment entity --Battlement Mesa Metropolitan District. A receipt evidencing payment of said fees may be required by the District as a prerequisite for service connection, etc. 8.5 Transfer of Tap Fees. All provisions of transfer are regulated by the Battlement Mesa Metropolitan District. 8.6 Service Charge. Service charges shall be as reflected in the Schedule of Fees and Charges attached hereto as Appendix F. Service charges will begin upon connection to the system. Monthly service charges shall be suspended during any month(s) in which service through a newly constructed tap to a building prior to its occupancy has been turned -off in accordance with Section 5.11 of these Rules and Regulations. 8.7 Amended Tap Fees. The Battlement Mesa Metropolitan District regulated tap fees. 8.8 Amended Service Charges. In those situations where, in the Board's Articles do not represent a fair, reasonable, and equitable charge for the intended use, the Board, in its sole discretion, may adjust said rates. 8.9 Payment of Service Charges. It is the policy of the District to bill -all monthly service charges in arrears. Bills are prepared and issued the last of each month following: Jan/Mar/May/July/Sept/Nov. When a condominium or homeowners' 38 CMD '99 Version Mar 06 03 10:33a • CONSOLIDATED METROPOLITAN DISTRIC 109 TAMARISK TRAIL / P.O. BOX 6116 / BATTLEMENT MESA, CO 81636 (970) 285-9050 / FAX (970) 285-9631 December 18, 1997 Debbie Duley, Project Manager SGM 118 West 6th, Suite 200 Glenwood Springs, Co 81601 Re: Parcel 3-1, Battlement Mesa 72 unit residential subdivision Dear Ms. Duley: The following information is provided pursuant to 30-28-136, 1 (h) (2) , C.R.S.. The District owns 20 cfs, abso]ute, Dow Pumping Plant (1955), Colorado River, guaranteed by Green Mountain Reservoir. The District also owns various Colorado River water rights as follows: (a) .22 cfs, 1974, case w-2560; (b) 1.1 cfs, Atlantic Richfield Well B, 1974, case w-2560; (c) 300 gpm, Battlement Mesa Well No. B4, 1981, case 82CW107; (d) groundwater wells 300 gpm, case 82CW107; Mesa Lakes Nos. 1,2,4, and 5, 80.1 acre feet, case 79CW349; (e) Huntley Ditch, 15 cfs; Monument Reservoir No. 3, 500 acre feet; Monument Gulch Ditch, 1.5 cfs, absolute, case 86CW105; Ruedi Reservoir, 1,250 acre feet; plus other miscellaneous water rights. In 1996, the District's total water consumption was less than 300,000,000 gallons, or about 920 acre feet. Based on the foregoing, the District has several hundred million gallons of water supply available to serve the estimated demand of approximately 24,850 gallons per year for the subdivision. Please contact me if you need additional information. Very truly yours, R. Bruce Smith District Manager cc: Board of Directors MAY -06-2003 14:59 DIU WATER RESOURCES 303 866 3589 P s • STATE OF COLORA OFFICE OF THE STATE ENGINEER Division of Water Resources Department of Natural Resources 1313 Sherman Street, Room 816 Denver, Colorado 80203 Phone (303) 866-3581 FAX (303) 866-3589 www.water.state.co.us Tamara Pregl Garfield County Building and Planning Dept 108 8th St, Suite 201 Glenwood Springs CO 81601 May 6, 2003 Re: Valley View Village Preliminary Plan SE'/NE'/o. Section 18, T7S, R95W, 6th PM W. Division 5, W. District 39 .0 .0 a EXHIBIT B it Owon> Governor Greg E. Walcher Executive Director Hal D. Simpson, PE. State Engineer Dear Ms_ Pregl: We have reviewed the above referenced proposal to subdivide a parcel of 36.372 acres into 41 Single Family Tots, 3 Attached Dwelling Tots (6 dwellings) and 2 Multi -Family lots (72 dwellings). The applicant proposes to provide water and sewer services from Consolidated Metropolitan District (CMD). The average daily demand for the project is estimated to be 75,250 gallon per day (84.3 AF/yr). A letter dated January 28, 2003, from CMD shows that the District has agreed to provide water and sewer services for Valley View, based upon an estimated peak day water demand of 225,750 gallons per day (three times the average daily demand) for the proposed 215 EQR's. Pursuant to CRS 30-28-136(1)(h)(II), it is our opinion that the proposed water supply will not cause injury to existing water rights so long as Consolidated Metropolitan District operates according to the terms and conditions of its current plan for augmentation. If you or the applicant has any questions concerning this matter, please contact John Redding of this office for assistance. Sincerely, Kenneth W. Knox Chief Deputy State Engineer KWK/J W RNal leyViewVillage. doc cc: Alan Martellaro, Division Engineer, Division 5 Robert Klenda, Water Commissioner, District 45 TOTAL P.02 5-06-2003 3:09PM FROM WESTWATER ENGR 970 241 7097 • 1141 WestWater Engineering 2518 FORESIGHT CIRCLE, #1 • D a EXHIBIT GRAND JUNCTION, COLORADO 81505 (970) 241-7076 FAX (970) 241-7097 May 6, 2003 Bruce Smith, District Manager Battlement Mesa Consolidated Metro District P.O. Box 6116 Battlement Mesa, Colorado 81636 RE: Review Comments on Preliminary Plan for Valley View Village PUD Dear Mr. Smith, The following are our review comments on the Preliminary Plan for the proposed Valley View Subdivision that were submitted to our office by High Country Engineering Inc. Our comments are exclusive to the water and sewer systems that the District will ultimately own and maintain_ Our comments are also prefaced on the Preliminary Plan and general layout of the water and sewer lines and whether the District can provide service to the development. We have only reviewed the general water and sewer layout on the utility composite included on Sheets 17-19 of the Plans. Detailed comments on final construction plans have been reserved until such time that the Preliminary Plan is approved by Garfield County. We have also separated our comments between the water distribution system and the sewer collection system that are summarized below: Wates Distribution System - Water Report 1. It is unclear how the required fire flows are accounted for in the Watercad Analysis. The summary page of the Appendix, dated January 15, 2003, calculates a total volume of 270,000 gallons of water used during a maximum fire flow of 2,250 gpm over a 2 -hour fire duration. This volume calculation is useful to evaluate needed finished water storage for the fire flow component of storage. However, there are no subsequent calculations for other components of water storage requirements, such as the additional storage required for equalization (daily fluctuation in storage tank water levels) or of emergency conditions (such as water treatment plant taken out of service). Impacts of the proposed development with respect to needed finished water storage volumes should be clarified and complete. In addition, there is no mention of existing water storage volume(s) available to be used by the development or existing reserve capacity to provide service to the development if this is an issue for the District to evaluate. 2. The total volume of water used during a 2 -hour fire flow appears to be converted to an average 24-hour demand (270,000 gpd), and is then added to the maximum day demand to analyze the distribution system. The January 15, 2003 summary page in the 5-06-2003 3:1OPM FROM WESTWATER ENGR 970 241 7097 • • Bmce Snaith May 6, 2003 Page 2 P_ 3 Appendix indicates that peak maximum day demands of the 215 residential units (225,750 gpd) plus fire flow equals 495,750 gpd (344 gpm). This calculation incorrectly misrepresents the required demand on the proposed distribution system, since the 2 -hour fire flow should not be averaged over a 24-hour period, but should be equal to 2,250 gpm and added to the maximum demand when analyzing the water system. Based on the demands presented in the report the maximum day demand plus fire flow for the distribution system analysis is 2,406.8 gpm. The system should be reanalyzed with the appropriate demands. 3. The Appendix should be clarified to separate and label calculations for water storage requirements from calculations for distribution system sizing. It would be helpful to include computer print-outs for individual fire flow scenarios of the distribution system analysis. As a minimum, the rate of flow in each pipe segment should be identified to ensure that water demands assigned in the model are equal to the maximum day residential demand plus the correct fire flows delivered to various fire hydrants. 4. It appears the computer model simulates a constant 37 psi at the existing 18 -inch diameter DIP waterline along Stone Quarry Road near the proposed connection for the development by assigning an imaginary storage tank, or constant energy point at this location. It is questioned whether this scenario of a consistent working pressure is representative of actual conditions that would be expected if the estimated water demands for the development are conveyed through the entire water system upstream from the proposed connection, It is likely that additional pressure losses would occur, which would reduce the pressure available to the development at the connection. If there is a condition where the pressure would be less than 37 psi at the proposed connection in Stone Quarry Road, the residual pressures within the development would be reduced equally, and would fall below the minimum required pressure of 20 psi in the water main with the pipe sizes as proposed. Water Distribution System - Plans If the water system for the development is proposed to be constructed in four phases plus a floating phase, phase lines should be added to the waterline Plans, and the individual waterline extensions should be detailed to show requirements of construction at the end of one phase, and construction requirements at the beginning of subsequent phases. Consideration should be given to accommodate flushing and testing requirements. In the event all of the water system will be installed as a part of Phase A, an all weather driving surface should be provided to access the water system, and an easement be granted for legal access to the water system during the interim until other phases of the development are Platted. WSW. aw.N.>4I.-1.m.,41.a WV,.p 5-0G-2003 3,11PM FROM WESTWATER ENGR 970 241 7097 • • Bruce Smith May 6, 2003 Page 3 2. The waterline should be protected at all sewerline crossings to prevent inadvertent damage of the waterline if the sewerline is excavated in the future. Future excavation of the sewerline will otherwise expose the waterline in the trench. Consideration should be given to protection against mechanical damage caused by excavations, and from unsupported lengths of pipe or pipe joints in open trenches. 3. Waterline (and sewerline) profiles should be placed on separate utility profile sheets, and removed from street profile sheets. Utility profiles should not be included on street profile sheets. 4. There appears to be some discrepancies between the graphic scales given on Sheets 17, 18 and 19, and the measured stationing and written lengths of pipe on Plan views which should be corrected, 5. Bryan Loop has been omitted on Sheet 18 and should be added for clarity. 6. Additional detail and requirements for the "hot tap" referenced on Sheets 17 and 19 for connecting to the existing 18 -inch DIP water main should be provided. Include materials for construction, requirements for protecting the existing system against construction debris and contamination. 7. Utility alignments shown along the western portion of Angelica Circle between its intersection with Valley View Drive and the hammerhead intersection approximately 300 feet northeast of the intersection do not coincide between matching Sheets 17 and 18 and should be corrected. 8. It appears that service taps have been omitted for the 6-plex located northwest of the intersection of Valley View Drive and Gregory Lane, for the duplex locate northeast of the intersection of Valley View Drive and Angelica Circle, and for the 6-plex located southeast of the intersection of Valley View Drive and Angelica Circle. 9. A minimum of three valves should be installed at all tee fittings along the water main. Valves should be added at the intersection of Valley View Drive and Angelica Circle and Gregory Lane and Cliff View Lane on Sheet 18. In addition, if a cross fitting is not used as proposed at the intersection of Valley View Drive/Angelica Circle/Cliff View Circle, the number and placement of valves should be revised accordingly. 10. The 2h -inch water service shown for Lot 46 on Sheet 18 along Valley View Drive in the vicinity of Station 10+85 is incorrectly shown to connect to the sewerline. This should be corrected to connect to the water main. 11. It is questioned why the water line alignment along Angelica Circle is offset from the paved roadway, shown on Sheet 19. The waterline should be relocated to the street. P. 4 5-06-2003 3:11PM FROM WESTWATER ENGR 970 241 7097 • • Bruce Smith May 6, 2003 Page 4 P. 5 12. Ownership of the 6-plex units should be verified. If these are proposed rental units under single ownership, one common 2% -inch tap is acceptable. Tap fees and monthly user fees are presumed to be proportionally adjusted. In the event individual units can be owned independently, a separate 3/4 -inch tap and service line should be provided for each unit in lieu of the common tap. Sewer Collection Sy,,st , 1. The connection to the District's existing sewerline in Battlement Mesa Parkway will require a new manhole installed near the center of lane of Valley View Drive at the intersection of Battlement Mesa Parkway, rather than connecting to the District's existing manhole that will be located in the gutter flowline of the curb return. The existing manhole is to be removed as part of the project and a new sewerline extended from the proposed manhole in Valley View Drive to where the existing manhole is removed. The size and type of pipe of the District's existing sewerline should also be shown on the Plans. 2. Manholes in new subdivisions should be installed in the center of travel lane or center line of road to avoid the vehicle wheel path within a traveled lane, This will require relocation and realignment of some of the sewerlines and manholes. 3. The sewerline between MH -A4 and MH -C1 crosses through proposed Lot 26. Where sewerlines cross proposed lots in new subdivisions, an outlot 20 -foot in width centered over the sewerline should be provided to allow the District clear and unobstructed access for maintenance and cleaning purposes. The outlet will need to be included on the final plat. Lot 26 is also located adjacent to an open space area to the north. It may make sense to modify the configuration of Lot 26 so that the sewerline is located within the open space. 4. There is some question as to how sewer services are being proposed for the 6-plexes that are located around Bryan Loop that is not shown on the Utility Composite Sheet 18. 5. The sewerline along Angelica Circle should be relocated to the street center of lane or center line in lieu of the proposed location within the utility easement offset from the street. This will avoid the sewerline being within 10 -feet of the proposed water line. The manholes along this section of sewerline between MH -D2 to MH -D4 should also be standard manholes rather than wet cast as proposed. 6. The sewerline between MH -A7 and MH -B2 appears to be located within the same general alignment as the proposed water line. The water line should be relocated so that there is a minimum 10 -foot separation between the water and sewerline. 5-06-2003 3 12P FROM WESTWATER ENGR 970 241 7097 • • Bruce Smith May 6, 2003 Page 5 P. 6 7. The deflection angle at MH -A7 from the Angelica Circle inlet sewerline and the outlet sewer makes an acute angle that is not allowed. The sewerline alignment will need to be reconfigured or manholes added so that a minimum 90° deflection angle is provided between all the inlet and outlet sewerlines at MH -A7, 8. The building envelops for the proposed 6-plexes should be shown on the common lots that have more than 1 6-plex proposed. This includes Lots 26, 46, and 50. This will determine the location of sewer service lines in relation to the proposed 6-plex units on the Utility Composite. 9. There are several questions as to how sewer service is to be provided to the 6-plex units. If the 6-plexes are to be individually owned, separate sewer services should be provided to each unit. If the 6-plexes are proposed as apartment complexes or rental units, the District's requirements may allow for a single sewer service line to each individual 6-plex building. If this is the case, the service line will need to be sized in accordance with the Uniform Plumbing Code (UPC). A minimum 6 -inch sewer service per UPC is required if this is the case and should be specified. 10. All new manholes should be stationed with equation stations provided that tee or cross manholes. Stationing should start with 0+00 for each different segment of sewerline along the different streets. Sewer line stationing should also be exclusive to the sewer line and not referenced to the street center line. 11. Sewer service lines should be stationed on the Utility Composite for future reference by the District. 12. Directional flow avows should be provided for each segment of sewerline. 13. The size, type of pipe, and length between manholes should be provided for each segment of sewerline between manholes. 14. The second sewer service to Lot 25 should be connected upstream of MH -C1, so that it is perpendicular to the new sewer main, similar to the other service line for ease of reference by the District in the future. 15. The sewerline along Valley View Drive should be extended to the intersection of Stone Quarry Road to provide potential sewer service along Stone Quarry Road or adjacent parcels that could potentially be served in the future. The aforementioned comments are based on the assumption that the subdivision can be adequately served by the District's existing treatment facilities and water rights. We have also copied our comments to the Garfield County Planning Department for inclusion in their review packet to the Planning Commission. If the Preliminary Plan is approved, all of the'District's 5-06-2003 3 = 1 3PM FROM WESTWATER ENGR 970 241 7097 F_ • Bruce Smith May 6, 2003 Page 6 requirements for water and sewerline extensions in new developments will need to be met including Plan and Profile Sheets separate from the street design. Because of the level of comments, we would recommend that the water distribution system be reanalyzed with appropriate demands and existing system pressures, and the Utility Composite sheets be revised to address the aforementioned comments and resubmitted to the District for further review, prior to the Preliminary Plan being approved. If you have any question regarding any of our comments, please feel free to call either myself or Kellie Knowles at our office. Respectfully, Ij7L\-)L Stephe T. LaBonde, P.E. STL/ap cc: Pamera Pregl, Garfield County Planning Department Darin Carei, Darter, LLC Deric Walter, High Country Engineering GGUNT.?Y �NG/NEE.?/NC June 2, 2003 Steve LaBonde West Water Engineering, Inc. 2526 Foresight Circle, #1 Grand Junction, CO 81505 Re: Valley View Village Subdivision Preliminary Plan Technical Compliance HCE Proposal No. 2021056.00-0450 Dear Steve: The purpose of this letter is to discuss revisions to the Preliminary Plan Submittal for the Valley View Village Subdivision, located in Battlement Mesa, Colorado. Per your letter, dated May 6, 2003, to Bruce Smith of the Consolidated Metropolitan District, the following revisions have been made: Water Distribution System -Water Report 1. HCE's Preliminary Water Report has been significantly revised to analyze a connection to the higher -pressure system, `Zone -B'. Section III. System Demand has been revised to discuss proposed demand flows and existing water storage volumes. 2. HCE's previous analysis for `Zone -A' was performed by adding the Fire Flow Demand to the Peak Day Demand as required. The report has been revised for `Zone -B' by adding the Fire Flow Demand to the Peak Hour Demand to analyze a more intensive situation. Section IV. WaterCAD Analysis has been revised to discuss the method of analysis. 3. The Appendix has been revised for the `Zone -B' system analysis and storage calculations have been better separated from demand calculations. Individual fire flow scenarios have been performed as requested. These analyses are marked in the Appendix by a `*' and a `*'. 4. As required, the use of `Zone -A' has been abandoned. The proposed system shall tie into `Zone -B' at an existing stub at the intersection of Stone Quarry Road and 302 Road. The existing system has been modeled using a reservoir and pump to more correctly model the existing system and a pressure -reducing valve has been sized to maintain more appropriate pressures within the proposed development. 1517 Blake Avenue, Suite 101 (lenwnn1 Snrinoc ('n 5216(11 14 Inverness Drive East Suite F-120 Fnolewnnri rn 52(1117 • • Steve LaBonde-West Water Engineering, Inc. HCE Project No. 2021056.00-0450 June 2, 2003 Page 2 of 4 Water Distribution System — Plans 1. Upon Preliminary Plan approval, which includes approval of phasing, plans shall be better detailed to delineate the extents of construction for each phase and resubmitted for Final Plan approval. A specific condition of phasing shall be that water mains be continued beyond the constructed phase as necessary to provide for a system loop and that all stubs be equipped with blow -off valves. The developer is not interested in constructing the entire project in a single phase. 2. It is unclear as to what specific information is being requested. In trying to meet this condition, the Master Utility Plans notes have been revised to require that warning tape be installed 24" above all water main at all sewer crossings, 10 -feet each side of the crossing. 3. Water and sewer have been removed from the roadway profiles and additional sheets have been created for each individual sewer run as required. 4. The graphic scale has been corrected. 5. Bryan Loop has been added. 6. The proposed system shall tie into an existing water stub at the intersection of Stone Quarry Road and 302 Road. No hot taps shall be required. 7. The Master Utility Sheet views have been revised to accurately represent the proposed system. 8. Individual services have been included as required since all units will be individually owned. 9. Valves have been added as required. 10. The service connection has been corrected. 11. An existing Xcel Energy high-pressure gas main runs through the center of Angelica Circle along the east/west portion of the alignment. This main is approximately 30- 36 inches below the existing grade. Alan Morganfield of Xcel Energy has indicated that the minimum separation between the main and any parallel utility must be at least 7-1/2 feet and that crossings should be reduced to the least number necessary to provide service. Therefore, the water main has been shown nearest to the gas main since it will be installed at the shallower depth. Sewer has been shown to be installed within 10 -feet of the water main and with at least 18 -inches of vertical separation to 1517 Blake Avenue, Suite 101 C:lvmm�nA cnrinac Cr) R1 (,n1 14 Inverness Drive East Suite F-120 Fnalpwnnri (l1 gni12 • • Steve LaRonde-West Water Engineering, Inc. HCE Project No. 2021056.00-0450 June 2, 2003 Page 3 of 4 keep all utilities within the shared easement. All sewer main joints have also been called out with concrete encasement for additional protection. Installing the water and/or sewer mains within the roadway on the south side of the gas main and crossing the gas main with numerous services would greatly increase the probability of damage to the gas main and/or place the installer in greater risk. 12. All units will be individually owned. Therefore, separate services have been added as required. Sewer Collection System 1. The existing manhole will be replaced as required to connect to the existing 12" sanitary sewer main. Information on the type of existing pipe will be requested from the Consolidated Metropolitan District and shown on the Final Plans. 2. Manholes have been relocated as required. 3. A 15 -foot utility easement has been added within Lot 26 to provide access to the proposed sewer alignment. The Open Space does not require an additional utility easement. 4. Services have been added as required. 5. See #11 of the Water Distribution System — Plans comments. 6. A minimum 10 -foot separation has been maintained between water and sewer along the sewer run from MH -B2 to MH -A7. 7. The deflection angle at MH -A7 is greater than 90° (95° to be precise) and not acute. 8. Building envelopes have been included on the Master Utility Plans as required. 9. All units will be individually owned. Therefore, separate services have been added as required. 10. Sewer alignments and stationing has been incorporated into the additional sewer profile sheets. 11. Sewer service line stationing has been added as required. 12. Directional flow arrows have been added as required. 1517 Blake Avenue, Suite 101 14 Inverness Drive East Suite F-120 l:�r.nwnnri Grinoc cn RIAni Fnslewood. CD 80112 • • Steve La -Ronde -West Water Engineering;, Inc. HCE Project No. 2021056.00-0450 June 2, 2003 Page 4 of 4 13. The requested information is represented on the sewer profiles. 14. The service line has been relocated as required. 15. The sewer main has been extended to a point near the intersection of Stone Quarry Road as required. Attached is a set of the revised Preliminary Construction Plan Documents and the revised Preliminary Water Report for your review. I understand that Tamara Pregl, Garfield County Building and Planning, is requesting an additional letter from you responding to the redesign and this letter. If you could, please fax your response to Bruce Smith at (970) 285-9631, Tamara at (970) 384-3470 and myself at (970) 945-2555. Thank you very much for your time and consideration. If you have any questions or comments, please contact me before you write your letter at (970) 945-8676 x 140 or (970) 379-3970. Sincerely, HIGH COUNTRY ENG ERING, INC. Deric J. Walter, P.E. Project Manager CC: Bruce Smith- Consolidated Metropolitan District Tamara Pregl- Garfield County Bldg & Planning Terry Lawrence- Grace Homes Ron Liston -Land Design Partnership 1517 Blake Avenue, Suite 101 14 Inverness Drive East Suite F-120 niA,,,,,,,,,,4 c.,.;,.r, rn 214,11 F..nle„ -wl rn sm 1 MAY -28-03 WED 04:30 PM HIGH COUNTRY ENGINEERING FAX NO. 970 945 2555 • • e%vr,Qr �it«�ivE�,r Nc= Memo To: Bruce Smith -Consolidated Metropolitan District via fax: (970) 285-9631 From: Dcric Walter Date: May 28, 2003 Re: Valley View Village: HCE Project No. 2021056.00-0450 Tamara Pregl of Garfield County Building and Planning has asked that I contact you to discuss the Consolidated Metropolitan District's (CMD) conditions for approval of the Preliminary Plan for the Valley View Village Subdivision. Per our previous conversations, the proposed development is located within the boundaries of the CMD, the CMD has the ability to provide water and sewer service to the proposed subdivision, and the CMD will do so upon approval of the Final Construction Plan Documents. Prior to Final Construction Plan approval, the proposed water and sewer system designs shall be revised according to the design requirements stated by Steve LaBonde of West Water Engineering, Inc. in his letter to you dated May 6, 2003. The proposed water system shall be designed to connect to the CMD's higher pressure system, `Zone -B', at a point near the southeast corner of the proposed development and High Country Engineering, Inc.'s (LICE) Water Supply Report shall be revised to determine system specific demand flows, fire flows and component requirements of that system. Individual sewer main profiles shall also be prepared and submitted for Final Construction Plan approval as required by Mr. LaBondc. HCE will also continue to work with the CMD and Mr. LaBonde to resolve other design issues prior to Final Construction Plan approval and Final Plat with the understanding that no utility construction may occur without the approval of the CMD. According to Doug Ayers of the CMD, `Zone -B' possesses fluctuating demand flow pressures of 80-110 psi near the proposed tie in location while the lower pressure system, `Zone -A' only possesses pressures around 37 psi. To adequately design the proposed water system connected to `Zone -B' and to revise the Water Supply Report, HCE needs recent fire hydrant testing results at or near the proposed tie in location. Therefore, 1 ask that you please authorize Mr. Ayersto perform such a test and report the result to HCE for static pressure, residual pressure at open flow and the open flow rate in gallons per minute. 1517131:ike Avenue, Suite 101 Glenwood Springs, CO 81601 Telephone (970) 945.8676 - Fax (970) 945-2555 14 Inverness Drive Last Suite F•120 Englewood, CO 80112 Telephone (303) 925-0544 • Fax (303) 925-0547 MAY -28-03 WED 04:31 PM HIGH COUNTRY ENGINEERING FAX NO. 970 945 2555 P. 02/02 Bruce Smith -Consolidated Metropolitan District TICE Project No. 2021056.00-0450 May 28, 2003 I understand that Tamara is requesting an additional letter from you confirming the CMD's comnritinent to service the Valley View Village Subdivision conditioned upon the resolution of the engineering issues, as stated by Mr. LaBonde, prior to Final Plat. If you could, please fax your response to her at 384-3470 and to myself at 945-2555. Thank you very much for your time and consideration. If you have any questions or comments, please contact me at (970) 945- 8676 x 140. CC: Tamara Pregl- Garfield County Bldg & Planning via fax; 384-3470 Terry Lawrence- Grace Homes via fax: (970) 523-0103 Ron Liston -Land Design Partnership via fax: 945-4066 1517 Blake Avenue, Suiic 101 11 Inverness Drive Gist Some F-120 Glenwood Springs, CO 81601 Englewood, CU A0112 Telephone (970) 945-867G , Fax (970) 945-2555 Telephone (303) 925.0544 - Pax (303) 925-0547 May 29 03 11:45a • • CONSOLIDATED METROPOLITAN DISTRICT 109 TAMARISK TRAIL / P.O. BOX 6116 / BATTLEMENT MESA, CO 81636 (970) 285-9050 / FAX (970) 285-9631 To: Deric Walter, Hi From: Bruce Smith Subject: Your memo Date: May 29, 2003 Countngineering May 28, 2003 a EXHIBIT I do not accept the positions which you tried to assert for me in the above referenced memorandum. Rather than merely promising to do so, High Country Engineering needs to resolve the questions raised in the WestWater Engineering letter reviewing the preliminary plan. At that point 1 will send a letter to Tamara. I interpret your second paragraph as saying `we'll make everything right". That ignores the cost consequences of doing so. If each agency accepted the statements made in your second paragraph there would be no need for Preliminary Plan Review. District personnel will not be making pressure studies for High Country Engineering. cc: Tamara Pregl, Garfield County Planning Steve LaBonde, WestWater Engineering .0 a EXHIBIT 04/21/2003 19:05 6258627 ROAD AND BRIDGE • GARFIELD COUNTY Building & Planning Department Review Agency Form • Date Sent: 4/4/03 Comments Due: 4/28/03 Name of application Valley View Village Sent to: Garfield County Roadjnd Bridge D. 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 continents may be mailed, e-mailed, or faxed to: Garfield County Building & Planning Staff contact: Tamara Pregl 109 8a Street, Suite 301 Glenwood Springs, CO 81601 Fax: 970-384-3470 Phone; 970-945-8212 PAGE 02 General comments;tecornendations alter onsite visit on April 10 2003 The deceleration lane for the entrance to V View Drive fi S Parkways l have aper s na a to indicate traffic. meting South l attlement Parkway. stop sign shall be required at.the exit ;o n Valley View Drive onto Soh en Parkway. There shall be a sign designating an intersection placed in the Inter island on the down ' ll lane of South Battlement Parkway at the exit of Valley View Drive. After our make visit it was agreed that a deceleration line from Stone Quarry Road was not needed for the entrance to Valley Vi v Drive, Aim sign be required at the exit m Valley View Drive onto Stour Rid There shall bean intersection sign.placed on both traffic directions of Stone (%pr4 wanting of traffic entering and eating tm View Drive The cross walk on Stone Quarry ' • t ed •�)I a•n • rail • II.!+x.1_..1 a •: �•1>.� war . There shall be flashing lights a<nd proper signage war** trade traveling in both directions on Stone Quarry Itoatstf the cnalgi k. Proper year* mne signage and traffic COMM shall be req all irad for rk wobeing L. _ / 1.1 •f •y� vehieles entetina and exiting project. All sigusge and flashing Higgs staadarkgnd i ion i forth in the Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices. ss •iKi,l.. • will approval of the subdivision, 0 the 0.-.14 • _1,0 1 1, Revised 3/30/00 04/21/2003 19:05 6258627 ROAD AND BRIDGE • PAGE 03 • GARFIELD COUNTY Building & Planning Department Review Agency Form Name of review agency. By: Jake B. Mall B Date 4/2J03 CHILDREN FIRS I CHILDREN FIRST1 (CHILFIRST' DREN 't RHINFIRST ` ILDRF 1S11 tE, o^RF tlS • • Garfield County School District No. 16 Dr. Steven A. McKee, Superintendent Rose H. Belden, Director of Business Services (970) 285-7759 FAX: (970)285-9821 April 16, 2003 Garfield County Planning Department 108 8th Street, Suite 201 Glenwood Springs, CO 81601 Re: Valley View Village Subdivision To Whom It May Concern: Please accept this correspondence as support of the Valley View Village Subdivision. Garfield County School District No. 16 understands growth is vital in order to maintain a healthy community, and we welcome the planned growth. In addition, the school district is pleased to see that Valley View Drive has been widened. Although the school district desires fourteen -foot lanes for safety reasons, the twelve -foot lanes are manageable. Please feel free to contact me if I can assist in answering any questions regarding this matter. Sincerely, IC,AAAJ Ronald A. Palmer School Board President Cc: Board of Education ADMINISTRATION OFFICES: 251 North Parachute Avenue, Parachute, Colorado 81635 MAILING ADDRESS: P.O. Box 68, Parachute, Colorado 81635 D a EXHIBIT AR B 1:- p�N�y1NG �v4l:�o�G TOWN OF PARACHUTE PO Box 100 222 Grand Valley Way Parachute, CO 81635 Telephone: (970) 285-7630 Mayor FAX: (970) 285-9146 John Loschke April 15, 2003 Tamara Pregl, Staff Planner Garfield County Building & Planning Department 108 8th Street, Suite 201 Glenwood Springs, CO 81601 RE: VALLEY VIEW VILLAGE PRELIMINARY PLAN The Board of Trustees for the Town of Parachute reviewed the application for Valley View Village Preliminary Plan at their regularly scheduled Board meeting April 10, 2003. The following are some of the concerns presented to the Board by staff for consideration with regard to this application: The Traffic Study provided in the Valley View Village Preliminary Plan does not identify the access point to Battlement Mesa ie. the I-70 Interchange at Parachute or the Colorado River bridge. The proposed development of 208 residential units plus undetermined commercial development would generate a considerable amount of daily trips not only across the Colorado River bridge and the I-70 Interchange, but on Town of Parachute streets. • South Frontage and Grand Valley Way as access to commercial development south of I-70 and Grand Valley High School • Highway 6 & 24 (First Street) and County Road 215 as access to commercial development north of I-70. • The proposed unidentified commercial development included in Valley View Village Preliminary Plan could also create a high daily trip generation from the Town of Parachute to that location. Recently the Town of Parachute adopted Ordinance No. 469: AN ORDINANCE OF THE TOWN OF PARACHUTE, COLORADO, AMENDING TITLE 15 OF THE PARACHUTE MUNICIPAL CODE, CONCERNING STREET IMPROVEMENT FEES ON LAND DEVELOPMENT ACTIVITY WHICH GENERATES ADDITIONAL TRAFFIC. ' • 1 Ordinance No. 469 was adopted by the Board of Trustees after completing an extensive traffic study, establishing a Master Plan which included street improvements and careful consideration of costs related to residential and commercial developers. The traffic study specifically addressed the I-70 Interchange area and the needs that the continued growth will create. The Board of Trustees would like to see some consideration from Garfield County and the developers that will utilize the river crossing, the I-70 Interchange, streets and intersections within the Town. The are additional concerns regarding law enforcement related to traffic on County Road 300 and backed up traffic at South Frontage Road, Grand Valley Way and the I-70 east and west bound access lanes. The added 208 residential units will create more job, student, parent and consumer related trips within the jurisdiction of the Parachute Police Department. More traffic — more accidents. Currently the Parachute Police Department is a five -person department. There are periods of time when there is only one officer on duty. The Parachute Police Department and the Garfield County Sheriff's Department have an "agreement of understanding" that the Parachute Police Department will respond to calls in the Battlement Mesa area when an emergency situation arises and a Garfield County Officers' estimated arrival time to the scene will be more than 15 minutes. To date, this cooperative agreement has worked effectively; however, with added growth it could limit coverage to the entire area. The Town of Parachute Board of Trustees and staff realize the benefits of growth in the area and the positive effect on the businesses in the Town of Parachute. Our request to the Garfield County Planning Department is that the review of this application considers all jurisdictions affected by this proposal. The burden of the development and maintenance of the streets and roads accessing this development and the possibility of additional Parachute Police Department officers should not be the sole responsibility of Town of Parachute tax payers. Sincerely, John Loschke, Mayor xc: Dave Beasley, Mayor Pro -Tem Derrol Almond, Trustee Judith Hayward, Trustee Billie Sue Koch, Trustee Linda Waite, Trustee John Yadloski, Trustee file • • [ngineenngGarfield County Department To: Attn: Date: Project: Re: Garfield County Building and Planning Department Tamara Pregl Monday, April 21, 2003 Valley View Village Subdivision, preliminary construction plans Engineering department review of the preliminary construction plans for project Tamara, I have reviewed the above-mentioned project submittal in accordance with section 9:00, 10:00 of the Garfield County Subdivision Regulations. I have the following comments and recommendations. 1. General Comments: 1.1. The documents, engineering, and design supplied by the applicants engineer were in a very orderly, complete and professional manor. I want to state that when information is supplied in this fashion, the engineering review process is very efficient. 1.2. I recommend the subdivision for engineering approval with the following conditions. 2. Boundary and Existing Conditions Map 2.1. The map shows an existing irrigation ditch infrastructure through the project. The proposed subdivision appears to have overlooked this system. Provide information and plans on the existing irrigation system and the proposed modifications to it. 3. Preliminary Plat, Sheet 5 3.1. All right of ways shall be 60 feet wide per 9:35 of the subdivision regulations. The roadways fall into the minor collector category according to my preliminary trip count estimates. The plans show Angelica Circle, and Jessica Lane labeled as private access easements. These should also be public right of ways and 60 feet wide. 3.2. Building setback line L40 and lot line N67D08'44"W, 130.00' are located within the 100 year flood plain limits. Move the building setback line out of within the floodplain limits for safety of the future residence. 4. Proposed Drainage Map, Exhibit 4 4.1. Portions of the proposed detention facility are located off the applicant's property and on Garfield County's property. Adjust the facility so it is entirely located within the applicant's property. If this is not feasible, then I recommend an agreement between the applicant, subdivision, and Garfield County be drawn up by the applicant. In this agreement, Garfield County should have use of the facility for storage etc. for any improvements to the county property. If the agreement is completed then the detention facility shall need to be redesigned to handle any additional storage capacities associated with the agreement. 4.2. Provide a copy of the approval letter from the Army Corps of Engineers stating they have given permission for the detention facility to be located within the 100 -year flood plain at its current proposed location. This document should also address the proposed design and the facilities location within an existing drainage channel. 4.3. The proposed drainage map appears to have over looked the existing irrigation on and adjacent to the site. Provide information. 4.4. At station, 4+50 on valley view drive there is a low point across the entire roadway. Address this and how the storm water shall be taken from the roadway to the drainage channels. At this location, I recommend a concrete flume type structure to convey the water at least 5 feet from the edge of roadway before letting it into a riprap channel. 4.5. At station 3+30, right 60' on angelica circle there is a low point at the dead end. Address this and how the storm water shall be taken from the roadway to the drainage channels. At this location, I recommend a concrete flume type structure to convey the water at least 5 feet from the edge of roadway before letting it into a riprap channel. 4.6. The plans label channel cross section #1 and #2. I failed to find these cross sections. Provide them and details of how the 100 year flood water level and its relation to the proposed building finished floor elevations. 4.7. Detail proposed silt -fencing locations on the plan view of the drainage plan. 5. Plan And Profile Showing Buried Utilities, Sheet 10 5.1. Station 1+10, left 40 feet of Valley View Drive. Existing grate inlet invert and grate information has not been provided. Address the existing inlet and make sure it will work with proposed drainage and construction plans. 5.2. Station 4+50 of Valley View Drive has a low point designed. There appears to be no outlets to handle this low point across the entire roadway. 5.3. Station 1+31.90; offset 26' left of Valley View Drive appears to have a design grade bust. The low point is at this location and no outlet is proposed. 6. Plan And Profile Showing Buried Utilities, Sheet 12 Page 1 of 2 144 East Third Street, Rifle Co, 625-6172 ext. 4002 Jtn Www.clarfield-county.com, jnelsonna Barfield-county.com C:\Projects\Valley Mew Village Subdivision\review-01.doc • • 6.1. Station 5+41.51, offset 26.82 right, appears to have a design grade bust. The low point is at this location and no outlet is proposed. 6.2. Station 2+40 of Angelica Circle has a low point designed into the vertical curve. Address this low point with outlets etc. 6.3. There is a proposed swale between Valley View Drive, Jessica Lane and angelic circle. Where is this swale going to access the roadway? How is the swale getting across or beneath the roadway? 7. Plan And Profile Showing Buried Utilities, Sheet 13 7.1. The scupper at the north end of the cul-de-sac should have a concrete flume to direct storm drainage away from back of sidewalk. 7.2. Station 2+28.22, offset 28.00' left of cliff view court appears to have a design grade bust. The low point is at this location and no outlet is proposed. 7.3. Station 3+09.97, offset 28.00 left of cliff view court appears to have a design grade bust. The low point is at this location and no outlet is proposed. 8. Plan And Profile Showing Buried Utilities, Sheet 14 8.1. Station 4+36.06, offset 12.50 left of Gregory Lane appears to have a design grade bust. The low point is at this location and no outlet is proposed. 9. Plan And Profile Showing Buried Utilities, Sheet 15 9.1. Station 18+36.67, offset 18.50 right of cliff view circle appears to have a design grade bust. The low point is at this location and no outlet is proposed. 10. Master Utility Plan, Sheet 17 10.1. Add general notes to the construction plans. 10.1.1. All Sanitary Sewer and Potable Water infrastructure shall be installed per consolidated metropolitan district rules and regulations. 10.1.2. Add general notes explaining which utilities will be installed during which phases. 10.2. All potable water central systems shall be looped. It is the responsibility of the engineer to design the water system in a manor of which it will be looped at all times. 10.3. All utilities shall be within either an easement of right of way. It appears per your plan view the shallow utilities are proposed to be installed on private property. Adjust plans and details as necessary. 10.4. Loop the water main from Cliff View Court to Valley View Drive. The looped water main shall also be installed within an easement. 10.5. The sanitary sewer loop from Cliff View Court to valley view drive is not located within an easement. Add an easement on the north side of lot 26 for utilities and access. 11. Master Utility Plan, Sheet 18 11.1. It appears the spacing of the fire hydrants is further apart in some cases than 250 feet. Provide a letter from the grand Valley Fire Protection District stating the fire hydrant locations have been reviewed and are approved. 11.2. I recommend additional fire hydrants to accomplish two needs. Closer spacing of fire hydrants for fire protection, and to serve as altematives to blow offs and air release valves. The hydrant locations I am recommending are in the proximity of station; 7+50 of Cliff View Circle and station 1+40 of Cliff View Lane. 12. Sanitary Sewer Detail Sheet, Sheet 21 12.1. Replace the standard manhole and the encasement details with the standard Garfield County details I have attached. 12.2. Garfield County will provide the details in CAD form if requested. 13. Storm Water Detail Sheet, Sheet 23 13.1. Detail the structural steel connection between the headwall and the footers. Detail the structural steel in the footer. 14. Miscellaneous Detail Sheet, Sheet 24 14.1. Detail reflective tape on the bollard detail. Reflective tape shall be installed per MUTCD guidelines and recommendations. If you have any questions or concerns, please do not hesitate to call. Sincerely, Jeff T Nelson Assistant County Engineer Page 2 of 2 Jtn C:\Projects\Valley View Village Subdivision\review-01.doc 14" (MAX) 5' - 4" i" TO z" 18" FINISHED GRADE OF ROAD BASE EXTENDS OVER THE EDGE OF CONCRETE PAD CONCRETE, 3000 PSI W/ FIBER MESH, SLOPED AWAY FROM FRAME AND COVER WHEN MANHOLE LOCATED IN GRAVEL CONCRETE PAD DETAIL 2 1•� w w z w 0 FRAME & COVER, HS20 LOADING RATED, TYPE NEENAH R-1683 W/ APPLICABLE LETTERING OR APPROVED EQUAL PRECAST RISER RINGS SHALL BE SEALED BETWEEN RINGS AND GROUTED IN PLACE. MAX HEIGHT SHALL BE 7" PRE CAST ECCENTRIC CONE 5" MIN. z 0 4" (MIN) 2'+ b 6" v 16" O.C. TYP — 4' OR 5' I.D. (SEE NOTES) CENTERLINE w m w 0 INSTALL 1" DIAMETER RAM NECK(OR EQUAL) ON INNER AND OUTER RINGS, PROVIDE 1.5" DIAMETER RAM NECK ON MANHOLES LARGER THAN 48". PRE CAST REINFORCED CONCRETE MANHOLE BARREL PER ASTM -C478 WITH STEPS INSIDE LIP TO BE HIGHER THAN OUTSIDE LIP TOP OF BENCH HAND SHAPE AS ECESSARY AROUND PIPE TO PROVIDE DRAINAGE LOCATION TAPE TO BE PLACED 24" ✓ ABOVE PIPE OR ANY PROTRUSION f 12" • FLOW GENERAL NOTES �';•w I.•.,• •' .••••i• .• 3/4" SCREENED ROCK SECTIO 8" rMIN) PIPE PENETRATION GASKET PLACED IN CORE TO ACCEPT PIPE; KOR-N-SEAL, A-LOK, OR EQUAL PRECAST MANHOLE BASE AND FIRST BARREL SECTION CAST MONOLITHIC ASTM -C478 STATION OFFSET LABEL REFERENCE LOCATION UNDISTURBED EARTH 1. ALL CONCRETE WORK SHALL COMPLY WITH LATEST ACI -318 SPECIFICATIONS 2. MANHOLE TROUGH SHALL HAVE A MINIMUM OF .20' DROP FROM ENTRANCE THROUGH EXIT 3. MANHOLE I.D. SHALL BE 5'-0" IF PIPE DIA>12" 4. FRAME AND COVER CONCRETE RING SHALL BE INSTALLED WHEN MANHOLE LOCATED WITHIN UNPAVED ROAD SURFACE 5. MANHOLE FRAME AND COVER SHALL BE LOCATED ALONG THE CENTERLINE OF THE ROADWAY UNLESS OTHERWISE STATED ON DRAWINGS SHEET OF SHEET 1 1 CGARFIELD COUNTY ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT 144 EAST THIRD STREET RIFLE, COLORADO 81650 TEL: 625-6172, 625-0973 FAX: 625-0908 WWW.GARFIELD-COUNTY.COM SANITARY SEWER ENGINERING AND DESIGN STANDARDS STANDARD SANITARY SEWER MANHOLE • • HARCO COUPLING _ OR EQUIVALENT WATER LINE 10 GAUGE INSULATED �.� COPPER WIRE 10 FEET L 10 FEET C-900 OR POLYETHYLENEENCASEMENT SEWER LINE HARCO COUPLING OR EQUIVALENT IF WATERLINE IS 18 INCHES OR LESS ABOVE SEWER OR IF WATER LINE IS ANY DISTANCE BELOW THE SEWER LINE, INSTALL C900 PVC PRESSURE PIPE OR POLYETHYLENE PIPE. PRESSURE PIPE MUST EXTEND UNTIL THE LINES ACHIEVE THE REQUIRED SEPARATION AS MEASURED FROM EXTERIOR WALL TO EXTERIOR WALL, OR THE JOINTS OF THE SEWER LINE ARE OFFSET BY 10' HORIZONTALLY FROM THE CENTER OF THE WATER LINE. SIDE VIEW FOR CROSSING LINES IN 10 FOOT BUFFER HARCO COUPLING OR EQUIVALENT min 10 FEET OR GREATER ENCASEMENT: C-900 OR POLYETHYLENE. LESS THAN SPECIFIED LESS THAN SPECIFIED HARCO COUPLING OR EQUIVALENT 10 FEET OR GREATER WATER LINE DIP IF WATER MAIN IS 18 INCHES OR LESS ABOVE SEWER MAIN OR IF WATER MAIN AND SEWER MAIN COME WITHIN 10 FEET HORIZONTALLY, THEN THE INSTALLED SEWER MAIN IS TO BE CONSTRUCTED OF C900 PVC PRESSURE PIPE OR POLYETHYLENE PRESSURE PIPE. PRESSURE PIPE MUST EXTEND UNTIL THE WATER AND SEWER PIPE ARE SEPARATED BY MORE THAN 10 FEET HORIZONTALLY AND OR MORE THAN 18 INCHES VERTICALLY. TOP VIEW FOR PARALLEL LINES ENCASEMENT DETAIL HAY -28-03 WED 05:22 PM HIGH COUNTRY ENGINEERING FAX NO. 970 945 2555 �L.l1i{/lti y Memo • • E LVED MAY 2 25133 GARFIELD COUNTY TNG BUILDING & PLAN To: JeffNclson via fax: (970) 625-0908 Frotnt Doric Walter Date: May 28, 2003 Re: Valley View Village; HCE Project No. 2021056.0450 EXHIBIT A Tamara Pregl of Garfield County Building and Planning has asked that 1 contact you to discuss the Garfield County Engineering Department's conditions for approval of the Preliminary Plan for the Valley View Village Subdivision. Per our discussion, the following items will be addressed prior to Final Plat: 2.1 The map shows on (existing irrigation ditch infra.uvructurc through the project. The proposed subdivision appears to have overlooked this system. Provide information and plans on the existing irrigation system and the proposed modifications to it. The referenced irrigation ditches arc internal litigation laterals that only serve the existing property and will be abandoned. There do not appear to bc any downstream users of any irrigation waters that may run off the property. Any diversion structures directing water onto the property will also be abandoned and or scaled. 3.1 All right of ways shall be 60 feet wide per 9:35 of the subdivision regulations. The roadways fall into the minor collector category according to my preliminary trip count estimates. The plans show Angelica Circle, and Jessica Lane labeled as private access easements. These should also be public right of ways and 60 feet wide, Per the title work and David McConaughy of Leavenworth & Karp, P.C., the property is subject to various resolutions, including Resolution 8082 pertaining to the Battlement Mesa Zoning Regulations, which allows for private streets within the multi -family areas. Following the Resolution guidelines, Valley View Drive will bc classified as a minor collector with a 60 -foot public right-of-way and other streets, not including those within the multi -family parcels, will be classified as local streets with 50 -foot public right-of-ways. Private streets will be located within 40 to 50 -foot ingress/egress/emergency access/utility and drainage easements. 3.2 Building setback line L40 and lot line N67D03'44"W, 130.00' are located within the 100 year flood plain limits. Move the building setback line out of within the floodplain limits for safety of the future residence The l00 -yr floodplain as shown is based on FEMA Flood Insurance Rate Map CP#080205 131513, which loosely delineates the existing channels as `Zone -A: areas of 100 -yr flood; base flood elevations and flood hazard factors not determined.' Since FEMA elevation information has not been determined, the flood lines shown are based on digitized information. When using the FEMA mapped section lines/corners, the 'mapped' floodplain falls about 200' south of the actual channel. 1 herefore, the FEMA floodplain lines were `positioned' along the center of the channel. Because of this loose delineation, HCE calculated the actual developed 100 -yr stormwater runoff for the offsite basin and modeled that flow through the proposed channel. This information is located in IICE's Drainage Report. Design flows were confirmed by the previous study Battlement Mesa-I,etter of Map Revision by Wright Water Engineers, Inc., dated February 1990. Based on the confirmed runoff and the actual channel topography, the 100 -yr floodplain actually sits about 1.8-2.2 feet above the bottom of the channel, or about 10 feet below the lowest point of any proposed building envelope. Therefore, the building envelopes arc not positioned in the calculated 100 -yr floodplain. hICE's Drainage 1517 Blake Avenue, Suite 101 (ilensvonil Springs, CO 81601 Telephone (970) 945-8676 - Fax (970) 945-7555 14 Inverness Drive East Suite D-136 Encicwood, Cl) 80112 I elcphnne (303) 925-0544 - F. x (303) 925-0547 MAY -28-03 WED 05:23 PM HIGH COUNTRY ENGINEERING FAX NO, 970 945 2555 P. 02/04 1111 • Jeff Nelson -Garfield County Engineering Department IICE # 2021056,0450 May 28, 2003 Page 2 of 4 Study will be revised to show the calculated floodplain boundary and submitted at the time of Final Plan Submittal. - 4.1 Portions oldie proposed detention facility are located off the applicant's property and on Uarfreld County's properly. Adjust the facility so it is entirely located within the applicant's property. If this is not feasible, then / recommend an agreement between the applicant, subdivision, and Garfield County be drawn tip by the applicant. ht this agreement, Cat field County should have use of the facility for storage etc. for any improvements to the county property. lithe agreement is completed then the detention facility shall need to be redesigned to handle any additional storage capacities associated with the agreement. As you noted, portions of the drainage facility have been shown within the County parcel. This parcel was part of the original Gun Stock Ranch Conceptual Land Use Diagram from which the existing PUD is based. A formal request for use will be made to the Commission at the public hearing. According to HCE's Drainage Report, the proposed pond has already been oversized to accommodate for the future developed runoff from the County parcel. If an agreement cannot be reached, revisions will be made to move most of the detention to the east aide of Valley View Drive, 4.2 Provide a copy oldie approval letter from the Army Corns of Engineers stating they, have given permission for the detention facility to be located within the 10o year flood plain at its current proposed location. This document should u1.4o address the proposed design and the facilities location within an existing drainage channel. Beach Environmental is currently working to determine the extent of stream bed that may be affected. This additional information and any permits that may be required from the USACE will be obtained and submitted at the time of Final Plan Submittal. 4.3 The proposed drainage Wrap appears to have over looked the existing irrigation on and adjacent to the site. Provide information. See comments to Item 2.1. 4.4 At station, 4+50 on valley view drive there is a low point across the entire roadway. Address this and how the storm water shall be taken from the roadway to the drainage channels. Ar this location, / recommend a concrete flume type structure to convey the water at least 5 feet from thc edge of roadway before letting it into a riprap channel. Storm water will exit the roadways at low points via curb cuts, scuppers, splash pans and fabric lined channels. Appropriate structural details have been included in the Miscellaneous Detail Sheet. 4.5 At station 3+30, right 60' on angelica circle there is a low point at the dead end Address this and how the storm water shall be taken firm the roadway' w the drainage channels. At this location, / recommend a concrete flume type structure to convey the water at leas! 5 feet from the edge of roadway before letting it into n riprap channel See comments to Item 4.4. 4.6 The plans label channel cross-section l and #?, 1 failed to find these cross-sections. Provide them and details of how the 100 -year flood water level and its relation to the proposed buildingfinished floor elevations. Channel cross-sections will be added to I ICE's Revised Drainage Report 1517131akc AYCnlle, Suitt 101 Cilenwvod Springs, CO 81601 Telephone (970) 945-8676 - Fax (970) 945-2555 14 Inverness Drive East Suite D-136 Englewood, CO 80112 Telephone (303) 925.0544 - rix (303) 925-0547 MAY -28-03 WED 05:23 PM HIGH COUNTRY ENGINEERING FAX NO. 970 945 2555 P. 03/04 • Jeff Nelson -Garfield County Engineering Department HCE 4 2021056.0450 May 28, 2003 Page 3 of 4 4.7 Detail proposed sill fencing locations on the plan view of the drainage plan. Sediment control fencing will be shown along the south and westerly subdivision boundaries on the Grading, Drainage and Erosion Control Plan. 5.1 Station 1+10, left 40 feet of Valley VView Drive. Existing grate inlet invert and grate information has not been provided. Address the existing inlet and make sure it will work with proposed drainage and construction plans The existing inlet will require a rim adjustment only which will be called out on the road plan. The inverts will remain the same, 5.2-6.2 Spot elevations will he adjusted at all intersections to maintain positive surface flow through Rnd away from all intersections. Stormwatcr will exit the roadway at low points via curb cuts, scuppers and fabric lined channels as detailed. 6.3 There is a proposed swale between Valley View Drive, Jessica Lane and Angelic Circle, Where is this swale going to access the rourhvay? /low is the swore getting across or beneath the roadway? The purpose of the represented grass lined shallow swale is for lot specific drainage to maintain positive drainage away from the proposed buildings. A plan annotation will be added calling for the proposed shallow swale will he fanned out and brought to grade at the sidewalk. 7.1-9.1 Sec comments for 5.2-6,2, 10,1-11.2 The required notes will be added to the Master Utility Plans and phasing will he shown in greater detail. As noted, the project will be served by and subject to the Consolidated Metropolitan District for potable water and sewer services. The District Manager, Bruce Smith, and the review engineer, Mr. Steve LaBonde in their letters to the Building and Planning Department, also addressed many of your comments pertaining to these items. Additional fire hydrants shall be installed as recommended and also near the subdivision entrances. The Grand Valley Fire Protection District fire chief, David Blair, has approved fire hydrant spacing of with a curbline zone of influence of 250' or less. Easements will also be incorporated into the Final Plat as required. 12.1-2 HCE recognizes your request to coordinate Final Plan Construction details with the Consolidated Metropolitan District and will forward any details we receive to your office. 13,1 Derail the structural steel connection between the headwall and the footers. Detail the structural steel in the footer. It will be a requirement of the Contract Document Technical Specifications that the Contractor submit shop drawings detailing the proposed headwalls and footers. These drawings will have to be stamped by a licensed engineer and approved by the Garfield County Engineer prior to installation. 14.1 Detail reflective tape on the bollard detail. Reflective tape shall be installed per MUTCD guidelines and recommendations. This infortnation will be added to the bollard construction detail. 1517 Blake Avenue, Suite 101 Glenwood String‘, CO 81601 Telephone (970) 945-8676 • Fax (970) 945-2555 14 Inverness Drive East Suite D-136 Englewood, CO 80112 Telephone (303) 925-0544 - Fax (303) 925-0547 MAY -28-03 WED 05:24 PM HIGH COUNTRY ENGINEERING FAX NO, 970 945 2.555 P. 04/04 4110 Jeff Nelson -Garfield County Engineering Department I -ICE # 2021056.0450 May 28, 2003 Page 4 of 4 I understand that Tamara is requesting an additional letter from you confirming our meeting and the contents of this memo. if you could, please fax your response to her at 384-3470 and myself at 945-2555. Thanks you very much for your time and consideration. If you have any questions or comments, please contact me at (970) 945-8676. CC: Tamara Pregl- Garfield County Bldg & Planning via fax: 384-3470 Terry Lawrence- Grace Homes via fax: (970) 523-0103 Ron Liston -Land Design Partnership via fax: 945-4066 1517 Blake Avenue, Suite 101 Glenwood Springs, CO 81601 Telephone (970) 945-8676 - Fax (970) 945.2555 14 Inverness Drive East Suite D-136 Englewood, CO 80112 Telephone (303) 925-0544 - fax (303) 925.0547 Garfield County Engineering Department IP To: Garfield County Building and Planning Department Attn: Tamara Pregl Date: Thursday, May 29, 2003 Project: Valley View Village Subdivision, preliminary construction plans Re: High Country Engineering memo to my review dated May 28, 2003 Tamara, I have met with and received a memo from high country engineering (Deric Walter) concerning their replies to my review of the above-mentioned project. Concerning the meeting and their response letter, I still have an outstanding issue related to their response to my review comment 3.1. 3.1 review comment: All right of ways shall be 60 feet wide per 9:35 of the subdivision regulations. The roadways fall into the minor collector category according to my preliminary trip count estimates. The plans show Angelica Circle, and Jessica Lane labeled as private access easements. These should also be public right of ways and 60 feet wide HCE response is that they have designed the right of ways per a previous Garfield County Colorado Resolution 80-20 stating that Battlement Mesa zoning regulations have jurisdiction in this proposed development. If this is found to be the case, I recommend that battlement mesa submit a response letter stating they have reviewed the subdivision and all of the proposed rights of ways or proposed private access easement widths are acceptable. I reviewed it in reference to the current Garfield County Colorado subdivision regulations. If you have any questions or concerns, please do not hesitate to call. Sincerely, Jeff T Nelson Assistant County Engineer c Deric Walter, High Country Engineering Page 1 of 1 144 East Third Street, Rifle Co, 625-6172 ext. 4002 Jtn Www.garfield-county.com, jnelson@garfield-county.com C:\Documents and Settings\tpregf\Local Settings\Temporary Internet Files \OLKB\review-02.doc Qrth• HEPWORTH - PAWLAK GEOTECHNICAL March 5, 2003 Grace Homes, Inc. Attn: Terry Lawrence 786 Valley Court Grand Junction, Colorado 81505 • Hepworth-Pawlak Geotechnical, 5020 County Road 154 Glenwood Springs, Colorado 81 Phone: 970-945-7988 Fax: 970-945-8454 email: hpgeo©hpgeotech.com Job No. 102 526 Subject: Radiation Potential, Proposed Roan Cliff Village Development, Parcels 2-5 and 2-6, Battlement Mesa, Garfield County, Colorado Dear Mr. Lawrence: As requested by Deric Walter of High Country Engineering, we are providing radiation potential information for the subject site as a supplement to our preliminary geotechnical study report dated September 16, 2002, Job No. 102 526. The proposed development is not located in an area where geologic deposits are expected to have unusually high concentrations of radioactive minerals. However, there is a potential that radon gas could be present in the area. It is difficult to assess the potential for future radon gas concentrations in buildings before the buildings are constructed. Testing for radon gas can be done after construction of a residence or other occupied structure. New buildings are often designed with provisions for ventilation of lower enclosed spaces should post construction testing show unacceptable radon gas concentrations. If you have any questions or if we can be of further assistance, please call our office. Sincerely, HEPWORTH-PA Steven L. Pawlak, P SLP/ksw cc: High County Engineertn: Deric Walter Parker 303-841-7119 • Colorado Springs 719-633-5562 • Silverthome 970-468-1989 • Xcel EnergysM PUBLIC SERVICE COMPANY April 25, 2003 GARFIELD COUNTY BUILDING AND PLANNING DEPT. 108 8TH STREET, SUITE 201 GLENWOOD SPRINGS, CO 81601 EXHIBIT DD Siting and Land Rights 550 15th Street, Suite 700 Denver, Colorado 80202-4256 Telephone: 303.571.7799 Facsimile: 303.571.7877 RE: Valley View Village (Tamara Pregl) Public Service Company of Colorado (PSCo) has determined that a conflict exists with the above captioned project. PSCo has a 230Kv Electrical Transmission Line located within the proposed development. Any crossings, designations of open space, proposed landscaping or similar activities involving our existing transmission line right-of-way will require PSCo approval. These encroachments must be approved and documented with a license agreement to be executed by the adjacent landowner/developer and PSCo. Enclosed please find an encroachment application packet. Prior to any construction, including any grading, please have the property owner/developer complete the application as instructed and return to Mr. Jim Craig for review at the following address: Public Service Company of Colorado 550 15th Street, Suite 700 Denver, CO 80202-4256 If you have any questions regarding the enclosed application or the review process, please contact Mr. Craig at 303-571-7291. Sincerely, Katt fyn Bauer Contract Right of Way Processor MAY -07-03 WED 04:15 PM H141010UNTRY ENGINEERING FAX NO. 97011'2555 MAY. 7.2003 2 : 32PM LEAVENWORTH & KARP N0.875 LOYAL E.1,EAVENWORTH SANDER N. KARP DAVID IL McCONAUGHY JAMES S. NEU JULIE C. BERQUIST SUSAN W_ L.AATSCH NICOLE D. GARRJMONE ANNA S. ITENBERI3 MICHAEL J. SAWYER TERESA L HOCK JO$LYN V. WOOD` *Of Counsel LEAVENWORTI I & KARP, P.C. ATTORNEYS AT LAW 1011 `RAND AVENUE P.O. DRAWER 2030 GLENWOOD SPRINGS, COLORADO 81602 Telcpbone: (970) 945-2261 Facsimile: (970) 94.5-7336 4hregillklawfam.com Deric J. Walter, P.E. High County Engineering, Inc. 1517 Blake Avenue, Suite 101 Glenwood Springs, CO 81601 May 7, 2003 Re: Valley View Village Subdivision EXHIBIT DENVER OFFICE:* WAZEE EXCHANGE BUILDING 1900 WAZEE STREET, STE. 203 DENVER, COLORADO 80202 Telepltope: (303) 825-3995 Facsimile: (303) 825-3997 *(Phase direct all correspondanoe to our Glenwood Springs Office) VIA FAX Dear Doric: You have indicated that Public Service Company (Xcel Energy) has raised an issue regarding the location of paved roads with curb and gutter inside of the right of way easement for a gas transmission line. This is not a legitimate objection. The easements arise out of two deeds recorded in Book 340 at Page 538 and Book 349 at Page 58. Copies are enclosed. Both deeds reserve rights to the landowner, including the right to "use and occupy said premises for any purpose.. . which will not interfere with or endanger any of (the gas company's) facilities." The landowner is, however, prohibited from planting trees or shrubs and from constructing "buildings or structures" within the easement. The easement deeds do not prohibit the construction ofthc road as proposed for Valley View Village. First, the existing gas line is actually not within the easement. The landowner and the gas company are negotiating a new easement for the actual location. Since the gas lines are technically trespassing at this time, the landowner is in a position to reserve the right expressly to construct roads within the easement as part of any new easement deed. We are presently working with Xcel Anergy to prepare new easement deeds and intend to negotiate in good faith to make sure their concerns are addressed. Nevertheless, since there are no facilities within the current deeded easements, no use by the landowner there could possibly "intezferc with, or endanger" any of the gas company's facilities. Second, the easement deeds allow the construction of roads as part of the landowner's reserved rights to use and occupy the premises. A road is not prohibited as a "structure" See Buick v. Highland Meadow Estates at Castle Peak Ranch, 21 P.3d 860 (Colo. 2001) (holding that a road 1:120Qt1CUcclarow Renes Water.2.wpd MAY -07-03 WED 04:15 PM OUNTRY ENGINEERING FAX NO. 970. 2555 P. 03/05 MAY. 7. 2003 2:33PM LEAVENWORTH & KARP NO. 875 P. 3/5 LEAVENWORTH & KARP, P.C. t erle Walter Page 2 May 7, 2003 may be prohibited by a "use' restriction in covenants but not by a "structural' restriction); Beaver Lakes Corp. v. Ponzie, 484 P.2d 1255 (Colo. App. 1971) (distinguishing between "structures" and "improvements" and stating that a road is not within the common meaning of the word "structure"). Based on the language of the deeds, the actual location of the gas line on the property, and Colorado law, Xcel Energy has no basis to prohibit the construction of the proposed roads and streets within Valley View Village subdivision. Please call me if you have any questions, OHM: Very truly yours, LEA y►i`. • • "e KARP, P.C. 2,1 -r. H. � consughy MAY -07-03 WED 04:16 PiilliIGH COUNTRY ENGINEERING FAX NO. 970 945 Ali P. 05/05 MAY. 7.2003 2:33P1111. LEAVENWORTH & KARP 1111,875 P. 5/5 Book paj;e C Recorded May CO 2 1963 at 4:53 M 58� ,,\! Reception No. 1121322 Chas: S. Xeelinn, Necarder q WETWAN ,itOF F GillCOMPANYDoc . No . (c 9 /1 ta•Strr OF WAY EMMETT(' P1uL no. N"�y �j NO For and In Conolde•r.ttlo,. or Tty.a mo,/bt: 67 Y.(frt-r e4 ltuil,trs ($ :2(3 ) to frond paid, the rean:pt or vi.icb is iueret•y acknovle4ged, the undurairned Grantor(a) hereby grant(s) to Western Siopo Crt6 Company, a Colorado corpon.lion, its succeseore ani assigns, an easement for n right of way fifty (5o) feet in width, Lo install, construct, maintain, alter, repair, replace, reconstruct, operate and remove pipe- lines and related nppurterau.ees, fixtures, or devices for the transportation of o11 or gas on, under, over or thrcur ri Lltr l'Oltuv(ry dencr(bcd Lando in (io4Le1d County, State of Colorado, described ns renown, to-vlt: _wad abathbeg ngof am as (point on the vest side of the north -south county road em the N,oth l n NS'} of section 18, T7S.195',�. Garfield oouttyi Colorado, thence E. 537•S foot in the Count roui•thenoe,learing the road,N.51°20116 600 feet; thence ::.85° 57'w. 231.3 feet; thence C.t9c406. 1:42.O feet; thence 9.57°52'W. 332.2 het; thence N.8800,16 96.) feet to the north vnst.corner of the N1 of said section 18 Said sum is acknowledged bl the undersigned lyned ns full C(msiderhtion for the ease- ment of right of way, and aloo her deeaw,(ee to both land and growing Grope occasioned by the initial installation. Thr Grantor(n) ruse.rve(s) the riphl. to cultivate, use and occupy 'said preraieees•For tory purpose consistent with the right.and privile ea above granted and which wL11 not Interfere with .'r endanger any of the said Compeny'e facilities therein or use thereof. 5n:h reservation by the Grantor(*) shall in no ievent include the right to conatrt:t any buildings or structures, to impound any water, or to plant any trees or ahruhn upon Lhe right of way herein granted. The Grantee, at all tinea, shall have ;h.. right or th reon and egress by o reasonable route to said right of way mnJ Ming r:nd upou,the sgme for the purposes hereof, which &hall include surveying, Impel:tion u,t,i testing. Grantee shalt pay Grantor(a) for actual damages to land and growin,; crops occasioned by any future installations, construction, maintenance, altcr•etion, rciatring, replacing, reconetructton, and removal of any said pipelines. To Have and i.c Hold -the said e•eucmcnt unto the said Western Slope Gas Company, ita successors and assigns, so lora, as the same shall be used or rueful for the purposes of the Grantee as aforasnid: This easement replace* one recorded in book 340,Fage 538 on April 25,1962 in Garfield cottety,Colorado, This grant is aub,Ie.;t to r_:i;.e.inr• mineral lens's covering any.part of the above described land. Executed by Grantor(rt) this 4 day or a , 19.Lt. STATE or COLORADO ) , , �I4y'r .2J<fL -- ter'' •' ox: ) .1. • . � ::121f2.411.,2101,4,t,t. i , e '.e 'toregoinn instrument war; Acknowledged before me this is/ day or : t' -o-4- •.i�'� `*' ,tLfe iL-Lei rn)-/mss JPee -', 3/s oes2/4 ri -9-+e 'Ie f' Co; a - WITNESS ay hand and official ■eat. .�;►i, Doeument File My Commission expiree6 q.1:'i/, /(# *FANO 7 - Creator �"" �Draftsmeitt File ,',� ��� 3rd Copy - Draftsman t ' Rotary pu lie MAY -07-03 WED 04:15 PillikIGH COUNTRY ENGINEERING FAX NO. 970 945P. 04/05 /..:;MAY, 7. 2003 2:33PM LEAVENWORTH & KARP WO. 875 P. 4/5 • Book 340 Page 538 .,I ;...4 •� ti Recorded ,fpr 25, 1962 at ):55 P.M. Reception No. 21 35p Chas. S. Keegan' Recorder W TtEN SLOPE GAS c PA.m Doc. No. RICHT OF WAY ?ASU 1' Plat No. :For and in coneidcratior of 46"14E t+upoRIU SI$TY FIV goners ($ /GI 00 ) in hand paid, the receipt of which is hereby acknowledged, the undersigned Grantor(s) hereby grast(s) to Western Slope Cas Company, a -Colorado corporation, ite successors and assigns, an easement far a right of vey fifty (50) feet in vidth, to inata12, ., construct, maintain, alter, repair, replace, reconstruct, operate and remove pipe- __ lines and related appurtcuancen, rlxlurea, or devices for the transportation of oil or gas on, under, over or throw, the f.allovina described lands in Ga><rri.7a . County, State of Colorado, described as follows, to -vita Beginning at a point on an save - rest soenty road along the north line of t s S> autism atism 18,f74,89516Garfield toaaty,Colorado;dieh Point is 5.76° 3311!, 6,,07.9 fest fro* the north east comer of sciatica 17,175. N9514 thanes $.29°comera'1. 622.8 test; thenen 8.$5°52'B. 231.3 feet; theme S.59°20'E. 600 feet to a point ba a northasouth county road along the oast line of aaid S>t} Ng of section 18,mhith point is 5.65° 6h'W. 5,781+.8 feet from the north last earner of emotion 1T, T7S. R9514 Said owe is acknowledged DS life undersigned an full consideration for the eaee- meast of right of way, ami also fur damages to both ]and and growing crops occasioned by the initial inotallation. The Crnntor(e) reoerve(s) the right to cultivate, use and occupy said premises for :uny parpwo consistent with the right and privileges c, above granted and which will no:. interfere vtth or endanger any the said Company's ;aeilitiea therein or use thereof. Such reservation by the Grantor(s) shall in no 'event include the right to construct puny buildings or structures, to impound any eater, or to plant any trees or shrubs upon the right or vay herein granted. The Grantee, at all times, shall have Lite right of /agrees and egress by a reasonable route to raid. right of any and ial„ng rand upoh the rams for the purposes hereof, whish shall include survoying, inspection end testing. Grantee shall pay Grantor(s) far actual damages to land and a;roving crops occasioned by any future installations, construction, maintenance, alteration, repairing, replacing, rcaonstruction, and removal or any said pipelines. To Have and to }told the snld easement unto the said Western Slope Gas Company, its successors and assigns, so long as the same shall be used or useful for the purposes of the Grantee as aforeoat.id. This grant is subject to existing mineral leasee covering any part of the above described land. Executed by Grantor(e) this. /1P day of STATE Or COLORADO =wry OF, T) 1,4121,21_3==.4:11 --� The fore�gooingg 1ns�t�rtanent war. acknowled ed before me this 11,.. day o2 ` /71 ".-)''p7 _`Eira., '14 tl4 4..r (1Z//6! eeft,L, `'' 1 .1 ..,4i ..r4), WITNESS my hand and official seal. VA ice- 4 1acument File MY Commission expires lld�, !! i 9eG rt_ �.6erntar •1 • r w 't+oent File 'e'Dt+tftsannm' Notary Public er GG` Jig, . a`�..a ••"• r �" y • • STATE OF COLORADO Bill Owens, Governor DEPARTMENT OF NATURAL RESOURCES DIVISION OF WILDLIFE AN EQUAL OPPORTUNITY EMPLOYER Russell George, Director 6060 Broadway Denver, Colorado 80216 Telephone: (303) 297-1192 Tamara Pregl Garfield County Planning Department 108 8th Street Glenwood Springs, CO 81601 April 23, 2003 Dear Tamara, For Wildlife - For People The Colorado Division of Wildlife (CDOW) has reviewed the Preliminary Plan and Supplemental Information for the Valley View Subdivision. Please consider the following comments in your evaluation of the Preliminary plan. The applicant has provided a very thorough and detailed plan. The CDOW notes, however, that some of the details contained in the wildlife report are different than those proposed as protective covenants. Specifically, page twenty of the wildlife report addresses garbage containers in a different manner than is proposed in protective covenant 5.23. The CDOW supports the language and intent of the covenant. Additionally, the CDOW believes that controlling dogs per covenant 5.13 is preferred over those measures proposed in the wildlife report (page 20). We also believe that cats should be included in this covenant. The CDOW endorses the provisions of covenant 6.6(d) to restrict fence height to facilitate wildlife movement in the subdivision. Since covenant 5.23 prohibits hunting, it will not be necessary to indemnify the CDOW as proposed in the wildlife report (page 20). The CDOW agrees that the homeowners association should own and maintain the common open space. Maintaining wildlife cover and forage in the common open space will help to mitigate most of the negative impacts to wildlife associated with the project. The open space corridors should also be maintained in this manner. Proposing that individual lot owners manage the corridors does not assure that the area will remain productive wildlife habitat. This is especially true in regard to the amount of noxious weeds that have been documented on the site. DEPARTMENT OF NATURAL RESOURCES, Greg E. Walcher, Executive Director WILDLIFE COMMISSION, Rick Enstrom, Chair • Philip James, Vice -Chair • Olive Valdez, Secretary Members. Bemard Black • Tom Burke • Jeffrey Crawford • Brad Phelps • Robert Shoemaker • Ken Torres • • The CDOW proposes that aquatic and wetland plants be integrated into the design and function of the drainage detention facility. This area could be designed to provide excellent wildlife habitat along with wildlife viewing and recreation opportunities. Clarifying the discrepancies mentioned above and adding the CDOW suggestions into the Valley View Subdivision preliminary plan will mitigate most of the negative impacts to wildlife. If the CDOW can be of any further assistance, please call. Sincere ohn Broderick District Wildlife Manager- Parachute 970 285 9036 • • MEMORANDUM To: Tamara Pregl From: Steve Anthony Re: Comments on Valley View Village Date: April 28, 2003 EXHIBIT 6.,61 Thanks for the opportunity to comment on Valley View Village. I recommend that the applicant post a revegetation security for disturbances outside the building lots, to include roadside cuts and utility line placements. My comments are as follows: 1. Noxious Weeds A. Inventory and mapping -The applicant has inventoried the property for vegetation mentions noxious weeds, and does provide specific locations of the County -listed noxious weeds on a map. B. Weed Management -The weed management plan is acceptable. The inventory lists the presence of diffuse knapweed and plumeless thistle. These are weeds that we would like to treat immediately when they are found. I request that the applicant provide for noxious weed treatment this spring and thus prevent seed production before any earth moving work is started. C. Common area weed management -The applicant states that the Valley View property owners will be responsible for weed management. Is this just on private lots? The applicant needs to designate weed management responsibilities for common areas, including roadsides, open spaces, and the asphalt bike/ped trail. D. Covenants -It has been common for vacant lots in Battlement Mesa to become infested with Russian knapweed. Due to the number of lots, it creates a staffing problem for the County in attempting to do enforcement. It is suggested that the applicant incorporate language in the covenants that will strongly encourage vacant lot owners to manage their noxious weeds under Colorado law. In Section 5.13, there is an assessment and penalty process for dog violations. Would it be possible to ask the applicant to draft language into the covenants that would give the Homeowners Association the authority and responsibility to assess vacant lots with unattended county -listed noxious weeds for treatment costs? 2. Revegetation A. The revised Revegetation Guidelines from the Garfield County Weed Management Plan calls for the following: • • • Plant material list. • Planting schedule. • A map of the areas impacted by soil disturbances (outside of the building envelopes). • A revegetation bond or security at Preliminary Plan and prior to Final Plat. The applicant has provided a plant material list. The schedule of planting, and maps specific to revegetation, and the security are not mentioned. A landscaping map is provided, but is lacking the aforementioned details. Please provide a map or information, prior to final plat that quantifies the area, in terms of acres, to be disturbed and subsequently reseeded on road cut and utility disturbances. This information will help determine the amount of security that will be held for revegetation. The security shall be held by Garfield County until vegetation has been successfully reestablished according to the Reclamation Standards in the County Weed Management Plan. The Board of County Commissioners will designate a member of their staff to evaluate the reclamation prior to the release of the security. 3. Soil Plan A. The Revegetation Guidelines also request that the applicant provide a Soil Management Plan that includes: • Provisions for salvaging on-site topsoil. • A timetable for eliminating topsoil and/or aggregate piles. • A plan that provides for soil cover if any disturbances or stockpiles will sit exposed for a period of 90 days or more. Please feel free to contact me at 625-8601. • GRAND VALLEY FIRE PROTECTION DISTRICT 1777 S. BATTLEMENT PARKWAY PO BOX 295 PARACHUTE, CO 81635 (970) 285-9119, FAX (970) 285-9748 April 28, 2003 Tamara Pregl, Staff Planner Garfield County Building and Planning Department 108 8th Street, Suite 201 Glenwood Springs, CO 81601 Subject: Valley View Village Preliminary Plan .0 EXHIBIT Tamara, I have reviewed the application book and drawings you sent me and offer the following comments: ➢ The District agrees that this project is within the Grand Valley Fire Protection District. ➢ The District notes that this project is within the Battlement Mesa PUD, but not part of the Battlement Mesa Company Properties. ➢ The District notes that the project will most likely get its water supply from the Battlement Mesa Metro District, Zone A water system, and that it will be looped appropriately as per the Battlement Mesa Metro District requirements. ➢ The District notes that there is to be 4 phases to this project: Phase A, B, C and Floating Phase. I am unclear if Phases A, B and C are to be started simultaneously and the Floating Phase left for a future date, or if all four of the phases are to be staggered in their time of start. It won't matter if the infrastructure is put in at one time, but it may if Phase A, B and C are staggered, i.e. additional valves may be required. ➢ The District notes in Section M, page 19 that there are several requirements for dog control. On page 20, enforcement will be the responsibility of the Battlement Mesa Subdivision Homeowners Association. I have talked with Jane Chapman of Battlement Mesa Company and the Homeowners association is no longer a functioning group. It is unclear if perhaps this is to be a new association name for the Valley View Village Subdivision. The dog control issue is a concern of all emergency responders. ➢ The District notes in Section 0, Wildfire Mitigation Plan, the applicant has stated that trees greater than 15 feet should have a minimum spacing of 5 feet from the edges of the crown. This sentence needs to be re -written to state that trees SHALL have a minimum spacing of 10 feet from adjacent crowns, structures, overhead electrical facilities or unmodified fuels, as per the International Urban-Wildland Interface Code and Colorado State Forest Service requirements/recommendations. ➢ The District notes in Section Q, Detail Sheets 11 — 15, the applicant has shown intersection signage. The District recommends that all intersections that have yield signs be changed to stop signs, as is the case throughout the rest of Battlement Mesa. The District recommends a stop sign be added to the intersection of Jessica Lane and Angelica Circle. There is currently no sign shown at this location. ➢ The District notes in Section Q, Detail Sheet 16, Valley View Village Key Map, there is numerous notations for 11' x 20' building spaces. Is this to represent off street "parking" spaces or building spaces for storage facilities? ➢ The District notes in Section Q, Detail Sheet 17, an 8" stub is provided for future expansion of the water system, however it is unclear if it is to tie back to the east end of Valley View Drive or straight to a future hot -tap on the Stone Quarry Road main. If it is to tie back to the east end of • Valley View Drive, an 8" stub, such as the west end stub, may be appropriate. This could prevent having to shut all water into the subdivision off, in order to install a tee & valve later. It appears that there are an ample number of fire hydrants and they are located appropriately. The District is concerned that the minimum required fire flow might not be able to be met in the areas of the multiple -family buildings. The applicant needs to submit additional information as to type of construction and square footage of the multiple -family buildings so a determination as to minimum fire flows can be made, in accordance with the 1997 UFC, Table A -III -A1. The District also notes that according to the 1997 UFC, there are no fire hydrants planned along West Battlement Parkway or Stone Quarry Road. The code requires a fire hydrant every (at least) 1000' for potential transportation incidents. There is currently a hydrant "near" the intersection of West Battlement Parkway and Stone Quarry Road, and an additional hydrant east of the intersection on South Battlement Parkway. I have talked with the Battlement Mesa Metro District and these two required hydrants will be the responsibility of the developer. > The District notes m Section Q, Detail Sheet 20, Street Cross Sections, the required minimum road widths have been maintained. This is provided that parking is kept to areas designated as such and not on both sides of the street. This may have to be monitored by the homeowner association. > The District notes in Section Q, Detail Sheet 22, Fire Hydrant assembly, that the applicant has specified either Mueller or Kennedy hydrants will be used. The District requires that all hydrants have a single 4 W' outlet and two 2 '/Z" outlets, with the 4 '/z" outlet facing/parallel to the street. If you have estions regarding this review, I can be reached at 285-9119, or 250-9851. David A. Blair District Fire Chief, GVFPD Cc: Board of Directors, GVFPD P/BMVFD Fire Chief, Gary Mahaffey Battlement Mesa Metro District, Bruce Smith File Apr 04 02 10:06p May 5, 2003 gvfpd 9702859748 • • GRAND VALLEY FIRE PROTECTION DISTRICT 1777 S. BATTLEMENT PARKWAY PO BOX 295 PARACHUTE, CO 81635 (970) 285-9119, FAX (970) 285-9748 Tamara Pregl, Staff Planner Garfield County Building and Planning Department 108 8th Street, Suite 201 Glenwood Springs, CO 81601 Subject: Clarification of sub -section titles in reviewing the Valley View Village Preliminary Plan Tamara, 1 used the sub -section titles listed in the Table of Contents of the notebook provided by the applicant, when I did the review of this project. I have attached the Table of Contents page to this letter. If you have any questions regarding this review, 1 can be reached at 285-9119, or 250-9851. David A. Blair District Fire Chief, GVFPD Cc: Board of Directors, GVFPD P/BMVFD Fire Chief, Gary Mahaffey Battlement Mesa Metro District, Bruce Smith File Apr 04 02 10:06p gvfp: 97028548 TABLE OF CONTENTS Application Form Garfield County Preliminary Plan Requirements Letter of Application High Country Engineering, Inc. Dom. ;;Overview and Zone Regulations High Country Engineering, Inc. t Title Policy Stewart Title Guaranty Company F: Mineral Rights Leavenworth & Karp, PC . Supplemental Information High Country Engineering, Inc. Water Report High Country Engineering, Inc. I: Sewer Report High Country Engineering, Inc. Drainage Report High Country Engineering, Inc. ;Traffic Report High Country Engineering, Inc. . `Geotechnical Report Hepworth-Pawlak Geotechnical, Inc. �45 . Wildlife Report Beattie Natural Resources Consulting a; Vegetation/Weed ManagementBeach Environmental, LLC Wildfire Mitigation Plan High CountryEngineering, Inc. Protective Covenants Leavenworth & Karp, PC !Preliminary Plans High Country Engineering, Inc. k:\wp\202\ 1056 \ preconts. doe p.3 MAY-28-03 WED 12:52 PM HIGH COUNTRY ENGINEERING FAX NO. 970 945 2555 • r7.i,e7z-rYivc CEIVED MAY 28 2003 GARFIELD COUNTY 3UILDING & PLANNING Memo To: David Blair -Grand Valley Fire Protection District via fax: (970) 285-9748 From: Deric Walter ^ ��l Date: May 27, 2003 Re: Valley View Village: MCF, Project No. 2021056.00-0450 Tamara Prcgl of Garfield County Building and Planning has askcd that I contact you to discuss the Grand Valley Fire Protection District's conditions for approval of the Preliminary Plan for the Valley View Village Subdivision. Per our discussion, the following items will be addressed prior to Final Plat: • The Consolidated Metropolitan District (CMD) will provide potable water. As you know, Iiigh Country Engineering, Inc. (HCE) previously evaluated the District's lower pressure system, Zone -A', and found that while that system appears to provide adequate (low and pressure, the available pressure is marginal, Therefore, HCE is currently working on a study to determine the system requirements to connect to the District's higher -pressure system, `Zone -B'. According to Mr. Doug Ayers of the CMD, `Zone -B' possesses system pressure of approximately 90 psi near the 1,000,000 -gallon tank and a fluctuating pressure of between 90-110 psi at the Middle School. This system analysis will be coordinated with and approved by the CMD prior to Final Plat. • Subdivision phasing will require that all water mains within each phase of construction be looped internally within the subdivision. • The Valley View Village IIomeowncr's Association will be responsible for enforcing dog control. • The Wildfire Mitigation Plan will be revised to read `Trees greater than 15 feet in height at maturity shall have a minimum spacing of 5 feet between the edges of the crown.' • All `Yield' signs shown on the plans will be changed to `Stop' signs. • As you noted, the 11'x20' spaces within the multi -family lots are in fact parking spaces and not buildings spaces as annotated. This error will be corrected on the Final Construction Plans. • A second 8" water stub will he installed near the subdivision entrance off Battlement Mesa Parkway leading into the Floating Phase to provide for an internal water loop within the Floating Phase parcel. 1517 Bl ikc Avenue. Snitc 101 Glenwood Springs, CO 81601 Telephone (970) 945-8676 • Fax (970) 945-2555 14 lnvcrncss Urive Last Snits; t-120 Englewood, CO 50112 1cl phone (303) 025-0544 - Fax (303) 925-0547 MAY -28-03 WED 12:52 PM HIGH COUNTRY ENGINEERING FAX NO, 970 9455 • David Blair 1 -ICE Project No, 2021056.00-0450 May 27, 2003 • Additional fire hydrants will be installed at the subdivision entrances, as required, to provide a minimum separation of 1000' along Battlement Mesa Parkway and Stone Quarry Road. • 'No Parking' signs will be installed as shown on the Roadway Plan and Profile sheets (Preliminary Plan Sheets 10-15). • Fire hydrants shall be installed within 6 -feet of the top back of curb throughout the subdivision and the fire hydrant detail shall be revised to require that all hydrants have a single 4-1/2" outlet and two 2-1/2" outlets, with the 4-1/2" outlet facing the street. I understand that Tamara is requesting an additional letter from you confirming our conversation and the contents of this memo, If you could, please fax your response to her at 384-3470. Thank you very much for your time and consideration, If you have any questions or comments, please contact me at (970) 945-8676 x 140. CC: Tamara Pregl- Garfield County Bldg & Planning via fax: 384-3470 Terry Lawrence- Grace Homes via fax: (970) 523-0103 Ron Liston -Land Design Partnership via fax: 945-4066 1517 Blake Avenue, Suite 101 Glenwood Springs, CO EU 601 Telephone (970) 945-8416 - fax (970) 045-2555 14 liwcrnes.. Drive East Suite F-120 Englewood, CO 80112 rcicphonc (303) 925-0544 - Fax (303) 925-0547 P. 02/02 MAY -30-03 FRI 11:40 AM HIGH COUNTRY ENGINEERING FAX NO, 970 945 2555 • MAY 3 0 2003 GARFIELD COUNTY BUILDING & PLANNING Memo To: David Blair -Grand Valley Fire Protection District via fax, (970) 285-9748 From: Deric Walter Date: May 30, 2003 Re: Valley View Village: HCE Project No. 2021056.00-0450 P. 01/02 Per our discussion, the previous my previous memo to you dated May 27, 2003 will be revised to read: Tamara Pregl of Garfield County Building and Planning has asked that 1 contact you to discuss the Grand Valley Fire Protection District's conditions for approval of the Preliminary Plan for the Valley View Village Subdivision. Per our discussion, the following items will be addressed prior to Final Plat: • The Consolidated Metropolitan District (CMD) will provide potable water. As you know, High Country Engineering, Inc. (HCE) previously evaluated the District's lower pressure system, "Zone -A', and found that while that system appears to provide adequate flow and pressure, the available pressure is marginal. Therefore, HCE is currently working on a study to determine the system requirements to connect to the District's higher -pressure system, `Zone -B'. According to Mr. Doug Ayers of the CMD, `Zone -B' possesses system pressure of approximately 90 psi near the 1,000,000 -gallon tank and a fluctuating pressure of between 90-110 psi at the Middle School_ This system analysis will be coordinated with and approved by the CMD prior to Final Plat. • Subdivision phasing will require that all water mains within each phase of construction be looped internally within the subdivision. • The Valley View Village I-lolneowner's Association will be responsible for enforcing dog control, • The Wildfire Mitigation Plan will be revised to read `Trees greater than 15 -feet in height at maturity shall have a minimum spacing of 10 -feet between the edges o f the crown.' • All 'Yield' signs shown on the plans will be changed to 'Stop' signs and an additional sign will be added at the intersection of Jessica Lane and Angelica Circle. • As you noted, the 11'x20' spaces within the multi -family lots are in fact parking spaces and not buildings spaces as annotated. This error will be corrected on the Final Construction Plans. 1517 Blake Avenue, Suite 101 Glenwood Springs, CO 81601 Telephone (970) 945.8676 - Fax (970) 945-2555 14 Inverness Drive Inst Suite F-120 Englewood, CO 110112 Telephone (103) 925-0544. Fax (303) 925-0547 MAY -30-03 FRI 11:40 AM HIGH COUNTRY ENGINEERING FAX N0. 970 945i 2555 P. 02/02 i David Blair HCl; Project No. 2021056.00-0450 May 27, 2003 • A second 8" water stub will be installed near the subdivision entrance off Battlement Mesa Parkway leading into the Floating Phase to provide for an internal water loop within the Floating Phase parcel. • Additional fire hydrants will be installed at the subdivision entrances, as required, to provide a minimum separation of 1000' along Battlement Mesa Parkway And Stone Quarry Road. • No Parking' signs will be installed as shown on the Roadway Plan and Profile sheets (Preliminary Plan Sheets 10-15). • Fire hydrants shall be installed within 6 -feet of the top back of curb throughout the subdivision and the fire hydrant detail shall be revised to require that all hydrants have a single 4-1/2" outlet and two 2-1/2" outlets, with the 4-1/2" outlet facing the Street. I understand that Tamara is requesting an additional letter from you confirming our conversation and the contents of this memo. If you could, please fax your response to her at 384-3470. Thank you very much for your time and consideration. If you have any questions or comments, please contact me at (970) 945-8676 x 140. CC: Tamara Pregl- Garfield County Bldg & Planning via fax: 384-3470 Terry Lawrence- Grace Homes via fax: (970) 523-0103 Ron Liston -Land Design Partnership via fax: 945-4066 1517 Blake Avenue, Suite 101 Glenwood Springs, CO 61601 Telephone (970) 945-8676 - Fax (970) 945.2555 14 Inverness Drive East Suite F•I20 EnOcwood, CO 80112 Telephone (303) 925.0541 - Fax (303) 925-0547 Apr 30 02 01:54a gvfpd 9702848 II) May 30, 2003 GRAND VALLEY FIRE PROTECTION DISTRICT 1777 S. BATTLEMENT PARKWAY PO BOX 295 PARACHUTE, CO 81635 (970) 285-9119, FAX (970) 285-9748 Tamara Pregl, Stag Planner Garfield County Building and Planning Department 108 8th Street, Suite 201 Glenwood Springs, CO 81601 Subject: High Country Engineering, Responses to review of Valley View Village, April 28, 2003 Tamara, I received the original response letter dated May 27, 2003 and contacted Mr. Doric Walter regarding 2 of the responses. He has since amended his original response letter as to the questions raised by the Grand Valley Fire Protection District. The responses cited in the May 30, 2003 letter are acceptable to the Grand Valley Fire Protection District and as of this time, the District has no further tire protection concerns. If you have any qu ions regarding this review, I can be reached at 285-9119, or 250-9851. David A, Blair District Fire Chief, GVFPD Cc: Board of Directors, GVFPD P/BMVFD Fire Chief, Gary Mahaffey Battlement Mesa Metro District, Bruce Smith Fite MAY -61-2003 12:43PM FROM -Colorado Geolog 1 Survey COLORADO DEOLOGICAL SURVEY Department of Natural Resources 1313 Sherman Street, Room 715 Denver, Colorado 80203 Phone (303) 866-2611 FAX (303) 866-2461 3038662461 -576 P 003/004 STATE OF CLORAD April 28.2003 Legal Location : SE Y., NE %, S18, 17S, R95W CGS Case No. GA -03-0011 Ms. Tamara Pregl Garfield County Planning Department 109 Eighth Street, Suite 303 Glenwood Springs, CO 81601 Re: Valley View Village, Mesa County, Colorado EXHIBIT MNI loot DEPARTMENT OF NATURAL RESOURCES Dear Ms. Pregl: In response to your request and in accordance with Senate Bill 35 (1972), I visited this property to review the plat. A Preliminary Plan Application (3-31-03), prepared by High Country Engineering; a Preliminary Geotechnical Study (9-16-02), prepared by Hepworth Pawlak Geotechnical, Inc.; a Preliminary Drainage Plan (3-12-03) and a Preliminary Plan Set (3-3-03), prepared by High Country Engineering; were included in the referral. The proposed forty-seven lot mixed use development is located on approximately thirty-four acres of undeveloped land. The subject site is characterized by gently sloping topography and is bisected by a natural drainage. The referral indicated that water and sanitary sewer services will be provided by the local district. The following conditions were described in the referral and observed during the site visit: 1) Soils. The presence of expansive clay soils are documented in the Hepworth-Pavvlak report. All subsurface structures planned for this site should be engineered to accommodate the swell pressures and potential movement caused by these soils, where applicable. Engineering designs for below grade structures should be based on lot -specific geotechnical investigations. Plat note #18 dearly identifies the need for design level geotechnical studies and engineered foundations within the proposed subdivision. Due to the presence of swelling clay soils, perimeter drains should be installed around foundations. Perimeter drains prevent excessive ground moisture from saturating the soils and thus reduce the overall potential for expansion or consolidation, The CGS is in general agreement with the underdrain system recommendation in the Hepworth-Pawlak report. 2) Grading and Drainage. The proposed changes to the slope grade along the drainage that crosses the site appear to be configured at a stable angle. Once the grading plan has been completed, the drainage report should be updated to account for the new cross-sectional profile of the drainage. If the new channel cross- section Changes the flow velocities within the drainage, some type of slope reinforcement may be necessary to prevent erosion along the length of the fill slope_ Insummary, the geological constraints on this site appear to be manageable, provided careful assessment and design of each home site is planned. Lot -specific geotechnical investigations related to Bill Owens Governor Greg E. Walcher Executive Director Ron Cattany Division Director Ron Cattany Acting State Geologist and Director 1 MAY -01-2003 12:43PM FROM -Colorado Geolo 1 Survey 3038662461 46576 P 004/004 F-430 foundation design and building envelope siting can be competed at the time of building permit. Please feel free to contact me at (303) 866-2611 if you have any questions or concerns. Sincerely, PA1-D Sean P. Gaffney Geologist • • VALLEY VIEW VILLAGE OPEN SPACE SUMMARY Garfield County Resolution 82-330, which approved the PUD Amendment submitted by the Gun Stock Ranch Partnership, included the following finding in paragraph #6; "That the requested modification of the Planed Unit Development Plan meets all requirements of the zoning resolution of Garfield County, and further, that the requested planned unit development is suitable and appropriate for the subject property concerning the location, conditions and circumstances of said property, and that the proposed amendment implements the purposes and meets the standards and requirements of the planned unit development provisions of the Garfield County Zoning Resolution;". There are no conditions in the Resolution calling for subsequent submissions to define open space in addition to that which is portrayed by Exhibit A (Conceptual Land Use Diagram). Even though the PSR zone district allows for non -recreational, public service types of uses in addition to parks and open space, Resolution 82-330 makes no direct or implied determination that the open space requirements of the Garfield County Zoning Resolution have not been satisfied by the PUD amendment. The dedication of the PSR tract to the County did not remove that land from the PUD. Original PUD (Including the PSR tract owned by Garfield County) 25% of total PUD Acreage Open Space Summary: County Parcel (PSR District) 2.482 Tract B Tract C Tract D Tract E 20' Buffer Easements 15' Landscape Easement 0.213 1.585 3.063 1.076 1.548 0.243 TOTAL OPEN SPACE 10.210 ACRES 38.801 ac. 9.70 ac. • Planning Commission Meeting, Minutes from June 11, 2003 P&Z Members Present Staff Present David Stover Cheryl Chandler Michelle Foster Bob Fullerton Mike Deer a 3 EXHIBIT 0 0 Mark Bean, B&P Director Tamara Pregl, Planner Carolyn Dahlgren, Assist Cty. Atty. Randy Russell, Planner Roll call was taken and the following members are absent tonight: Phil Vaughan, Colin Laird, Kit Chapin, Rolly Fischer, and Jock Jacober. David Stover will be the Chairperson tonight. Bob Fullerton was appointed as a regular voting member for tonight's hearings. Bob Fullerton made a motion to approve the minutes from the May 14, 2003 Planning Commission Meeting and Michelle Foster seconded the motion. All members approved unanimously. e first item of discussion is a public meeting to review a request for a Sketch Plan Ap. cation for the Sweetwater Perennials Subdivision. The property is located at 0193 Swee . ter Road, immediately to the west of the county line of Eagle and Garfield Counties. The applicants are proposing to subdivide approximately 18 acres into 3 lots. The applics are Kevin and Sandra Story. Present for the ap icants tonight is their representative Sid Fox. Tamara is the County . er on this project and she will review the staff findings. The subject property is curren improved with a single family dwelling and various out buildings. A pond is curren being installed to the south of the residence. The Gannon Ditch traverses the property fro west to east, and is located to the north of the residence and all existing improvements. Th. - are two gullies that pass through the property. One is located above Lot 1 and the other is cated between proposed Lots 2 and 3. The applicants are proposing: Lot 1: S/F residence and an ADU Lot 2: Existing S/F residence Lot 3: S/F residence and ADU The subject property is located within Study Area 4 in the . •rfield County Comprehensive Plan. There are no recommended densities in . t study area. The property is zoned A/R/RD which has a two acre minimum. All p greater than the two acre minimum. osed lots are 1 amendment to comprehe second e as L (clean it up) and Cheryl Chandler on. A vote was taken and all approved unanimously. The next item on the agenda is a continued public hearing request is for review of a Preliminary Plan application for Valley View Village Subdivision. The property is located at the southwest corner of Battlement Mesa Parkway and Stone Quarry Road. The applicants are proposing to subdivide 36.4 acres into 41 single-family lots, 3 duplex lots and 2 multi -family lots. The applicant is Darter, LLC. Tamara is the County Planner for this project and she entered the following exhibits into the record: Exhibit A: Proof of Certified Mailing Receipts Exhibit B: Proof of Publication Exhibit C: Garfield County Zoning Resolution of 1978, as amended Exhibit D: Garfield County Subdivision Regulations of 1984, as amended Exhibit E: Garfield County Comprehensive Plan of 2000, as amended Exhibit F: Staff Report dated June 11, 2003 Exhibit G: Application Materials Exhibit H: Addendum to application from High Country Engineering, dated April 9, 2003. Exhibit I: Supplemental information submitted by Land Design Partnership dated May 29, 2003. Exhibit J: Battlement Mesa PUD Zoning Resolution as applicable to Valley View Subdivision complied by Applicant. Exhibit K: Resolution No. 82-330 Exhibit L: Resolution No. 80-82 Exhibit M: Resolution No. 82-327 Exhibit N: Letter from R. Bruce Smith, Consolidated Metropolitan District, dated April 8, 2003. Exhibit 0: Letter from Kenneth Knox, Division of Water Resources, dated April 25, 2003. Exhibit P: Excerpt from the Rules and Regulations for Consolidated Metropolitan District approved December 22, 1999. Exhibit Q: Letter from R. Bruce Smith, Consolidated Metropolitan District, to Schmueser Gordon Meyer, dated December 18, 1997. Exhibit R: Letter from Kenneth Knox, Division of Water Resources, dated May 6, 2003. Exhibit S: Letter from Stephen LaBonde, West Water Engineering, dated May 6, 2003. Exhibit T: Letter to Stephen LaBonde, West Water Engineering, from High Country Engineering, dated June 2, 2003. Exhibit U: Letter to Bruce Smith, Consolidated Metropolitan District, from High Country Engineering, dated May 28, 2003. Exhibit V: Letter from Bruce Smith, Consolidated Metropolitan District, to High Country Engineering, dated May 29, 2003. Exhibit W: Letter from Jake Mall, Garfield County Road & Bridge Department, dated April 22, 2003. 7 • • Exhibit X: Letter from Ronald Palmer, Garfield County School District No. 16, dated April 16, 2003. Exhibit Y: Letter from John Loschke, Town of Parachute, dated April 15, 2003. Exhibit Z: Letter from Jeff Nelson, Garfield County Engineering Department, dated April 21, 2003. Exhibit AA: Letter to Jeff Nelson from Deric Walter, High Country Engineering, dated May 28, 2003. Exhibit BB: Letter from Jeff Nelson, Garfield County Engineering Department, dated May 29, 2003. Exhibit CC: Letter from HP Geotech regarding radiation potential, dated March 5, 2003. Exhibit DD: Letter from Kathryn Bauer, Xcel Energy / Public Service Company, dated April 25, 2003. Exhibit EE: Letter to High Country Engineering, from David McConaughy, Leavenworth and Karp, PC, dated May 7, 2003. Exhibit FF: Letter from John Boderick, Colorado Division of Wildlife, dated April 23, 2003. Exhibit GG: Letter from Steve Anthony, Vegetation Management, dated April 28, 2003. Exhibit HH: Letter from David Blair, Grand Valley Fire Protection District, dated April 29, 2003. Exhibit II: Letter from David Blair, Grand Valley Fire Protection District, dated May 5, 2003. Exhibit JJ: Letter to David Blair, Grand Valley Fire Protection District, from High Country Engineering, dated May 27, 2003. Exhibit KK: Letter to David Blair, Grand Valley Fire Protection District, from High Country Engineering, dated May 30, 2003. Exhibit LL: Letter from David Blair, Grand Valley Fire Protection District, dated May 20, 2003. Exhibit MM: Letter from Sean Gaffney, Colorado Geological Survey, dated April 28, 2003. All exhibits are accepted into the record. Tamara gave background and pointed out the issues. The applicant is proposing to subdivide approximately 36 acres into 47 lots with 119 total units. The subject tract of land was not included in the original Battlement Mesa PUD. In 1982, an amendment was requested by the Gun Stock Ranch Partnership to the Battlement Mesa PUD to include the subject property within the boundary of the PUD and to divide the property into four different zone districts each of which are described in the Battlement Mesa PUD. Approval of this amendment was granted by the BOCC under Resolution No. 82-330. The PSR zone district is in the northwest corner of the property within an area dedicated to Garfield County in 1982. The subject property is bound by South Battlement Parkway to the north, which is a four lane roadway. Stone Quarry Road, to the east, is also a four lane roadway. Drainage runs midway along the easterly boundary of the property in a northwesterly direction across the property. The property is improved with an old homestead. 8 • • There is a high voltage power line that crosses the northwest corner of the County parcel within a 100 -foot easement. A high pressure natural gas transmission line enters the property through the Garfield County parcel, and parallels the south side of the gully. This gas line does not lie within the designated, recorded 50 -foot wide easement. The applicant has noted that the appropriate documents are being processed to record a new easement based on the actual location of the gas line. The utility easement problem to clear up is a condition of approval prior to BOCC reviewing the preliminary plan. There are four open space tracts within the subdivision. Tract E will be developed into a park with an asphalt pedestrian path, play equipment, benches, landscaping and an automatic underground irrigation system. The pedestrian path connects with the sidewalk system that circulates through out the residential areas of the project. The subject property is designated on the "Proposed Land Use Districts Map for Study Areas 2 & 3" as "Subdivision". The property does lie within the Parachute 2 mile sphere of influence. Tamara identified items in bold in the staff report that pertain to the policies in the comprehensive plan for this area. Water and wastewater is to be handled through the Battlement Mesa Consolidated Metropolitan District. As of this time, we have not received a letter to provide service for this project from the District. That has been made a condition of approval prior to preliminary plan application hearing by the BOCC. Kenneth Knox, with the Division of Water says they do have adequate water if they comply with the District. The Drainage Plan submitted with the application was prepared by High Country Engineering and the purpose of the plan is to outline a storm water management system to accommodate runoff from the project. There are two drainages that flow through the site. HCE indicates that the overall drainage patterns under developed conditions will be similar to those of existing historic conditions with on-site detention. Jeff Nelson, Assistant County Engineer indicated that portions of the proposed detention facility are located off the Applicant's property and on Garfield County's property. That facility needs to be located entirely on the applicant's property. Also, Jeff has requested that a copy of the approval letter from the Army Corps of Engineers stating they have given permission for the detention facility to be located within the 100 -year floodplain at its current proposed location shall be provided. Valley View Drive is the primary roadway through the subdivision, accessing off of both South Battlement Mesa Parkway and Stone Quarry Road. A traffic analysis, prepared by HCE is included with the application. The purpose of the analysis was to determine what improvements would need to be made to allow for a safe intersection. HCE concluded that the project itself will have very little impact on surrounding roadway capacities, 9 • • however if the growth continues, the intersection of Battlement Parkway and Stone Quarry Road will need to be signalized within 10 years. The applicants shall note that the roads within the subdivision are not considered private. Pursuant to section 9:34 of the Subdivision Regulations, "All streets are dedicated to the public but all streets will be constructed to standards consistent with these Regulations and repair and maintenance shall be the responsibility of the incorporated HOA of the subdivision." County Engineer issues about the roads have been resolved. The applicant has been working with David Blair of the Grand Valley Fire Protection District and has resolved most of the issues. Section 9:80 of the Subdivision Regulations states that the BOCC may seek land or cash - in -lieu of land for parks and/or schools during the subdivision review process. The property is located within the Garfield County School District No. 16. Comments were received by from the School District; however the District did not request any site acquisition fees. Twenty-five percent of the total area within the boundary of any PUD shall be devoted to Common Open Space. 25% of 36 acres is 9 acres. It appears that the open space proposed in the development does not meet the required amount. The BOCC may reduce the 25% open space requirement. The applicant wants to include the County parcel and staff doesn't agree. The applicant indicated that phasing will take place in 5 phases however they have not provided a timeline as to the length of time each phase will take place. That information will need to be provided prior to the BOCC hearing on the preliminary plan application. Staff recommends that the Planning Commission recommend approval to the BOCC for the preliminary plan application request for Valley View Village Subdivision with conditions listed in the staff report on pages 26 through 32. Change condition #10 to "Main Valley View Dr. to be dedicated. Condition #14, delete last sentence. No questions for staff at this time. David swore in all speakers. Present for the applicants are Ron Liston, Land Design Partnership, 918 Cooper Avenue, David McConaughy, Legal Council, Terry Lawrence with Grace Homes and Deric Walter with High Country Engineering. Ron highlighted a few items in a power point presentation. Ron complemented the staff for all their work. Ron reviewed their proposed zoning map. Questionable whether that much commercial is needed. Will probably do an amendment later and ask for residential in that area instead. 10 • • Gas line easement proposal shown on the map. Open space corridor follows the gully. Open space added in center of project for a neighborhood park. Pedestrian easement will be maintained by HOA. They agree with most of the conditions that staff has listed. He went down the list next: Condition #2: exemption plat, will record plat (was never done) Condition #3: A) DOW fencing language is reviewed by consideration of wildlife for project. Require to allow for privacy fencing on smaller lots. (Asking for consideration) 3D) only holds water for a brief time. Don't bind them to plant wetland material, not enough water in that area. Condition #4: in process Condition #5: have submitted to Excel easement that exists on the plat where pipe isn't (to abandon) Applicant will correct on County parcel as well. Condition #6: phasing plan will be provided Condition #7: copy of annexation documentation will be done by final plat Condition #8: geological hazards will consult with HP Geotech and comply with their recommendations. Condition #9: R&B provisions, in agreement. Stone Quarry Rd. will have flashing light for pedestrian crossing. Condition #10: Valley View Drive and roads to left are public roads and will be maintained by HOA. Driveways in multi -family (lots 26-46) will be private drives. Condition #11: open space, Ron handed out his understanding of this within a PUD. Resolution No. 82-330 approved the PUD zoning. Ron's letter was accepted as Exhibit NN. Condition numbers 12 & 13 are fine. As well as condition numbers 14 and 15. (Residence will pay fee to be annexed into association) Condition #16: detention pond will be sized appropriately (2 areas of detention) Condition #17: ask to eliminate item "B", not necessary as a plat note, already implemented on preliminary plan. All other conditions are okay. Asking for questions and comments at this time. No public comments were made. Michelle asked about the adequacy of the internal roads and how will the kids be picked up for school? Ron said school district wants wider lanes (14'). He thinks kids will be picked up along Valley View Dr. Deric Walter said asphalt is 12' with a 2' shoulder. Valley View Dr. will be maintained by Valley View Association. Mike said exception is not just to Valley View Dr. it will be all except private driveway. 11 • r Michelle asked if snow removal would be by Valley View HOA. Ron said that is correct. Michelle asked what plans for vegetation are. Ron said they haven't looked at commercial area but they will provide a landscape plan. Mike has a question for staff on condition #11 regarding Ron's comments if we leave it as is then the BOCC can decide. Carolyn read the regulation related to interpretation of open space into the record. Mark responded on percentage of open space. Our property and their property should each have 25%. David McConaughy agrees that you have to look at the total PUD for percentage. Mike Deer has a question for the applicant, problem regarding fencing. Ron requests that "remove or re -write" design review committee to review that. David McConaughy said CDOW endorses covenants addressing fences. Michelle said other areas in the PUD use their review committee to review plans. Michelle has a question for Mark; does the County have property here and there? Mark responded we have some lots. Michelle asked would County lease this property to Parachute/Battlement Mesa Recreation. Mark said County might be interested. Ron clarified that Mike Deer crossed out condition #17B and Tamara agreed. Michelle agrees that area proposed is not a very appropriate area for commercial development. Traffic issues, difficult to maneuver. Residential is more appropriate. A motion was made by Mike to close the public hearing and Bob seconded the motion. Mike Deer moved for approval by the Garfield County Planning Commission to the Garfield County Board of Commissioners a recommendation of approval subject to the following conditions of approval: All of those items listed in the staff report with the following changes: On #3A (2nd A), would recommend that we change that to "CDOW endorses the provisions of the covenants to facilitate wildlife movement in the subdivision." Eliminate 3D (2nd D) about the aquatic and wetland plans. Item #10 recommends that it be altered to "all streets and roads within the subdivision except those provided in the multi -family lots are dedicated to the public"; and the remaining of that condition stays the same. Item #11, leave as is. Item #14, strike out the final sentence. On Item 17 delete item B. Michelle seconded the motion. All approved unanimously. In other business, Mark suggested to th • • - . : ' . ion o s e er t e adoption o the By -Laws until mo - •• - - are present. Five members are missing tonight. All present agreed. 12 • • WestWater Engineering EXHIBIT 2516 FORESIGHT CIRCLE, #1 UNCTION, COLORADO 81505 (970) 241-7076 FAX (970) 241-7097 July 1, 2003 JUL 0 7 2003 GARFIELD COUNTY 9UtLDING & PLANNING Bruce Smith, District Manager Battlement Mesa Consolidated Metro District P.O. Box 6116 Battlement Mesa, Colorado 81636 RE: Second Review and Comments on Proposed Water and Sewer System Extensions Valley View Village PUD Dear Mr. Smith, High Country Engineering has updated their original submittal of the Preliminary Plan for the proposed Valley View Village PUD. This second submittal includes: 1) a letter to WestWater Engineering dated June 2, 2003 indicating that revisions have been made per our May 6, 2003 comments, 2) one set of revised Plans dated May 31, 2003, and 3) a copy of the Preliminary Water Report, Revised May 30, 2003. We are continuing to view the submittal as a Preliminary Plan and again have prefaced our comments on the general layout of the water and sewer systems as depicted on the Utility Composite Sheets 17-19. Based on the revised Preliminary Plan submittal we have the following comments. Comments are generally listed in the same order as our May 30 letter, with any new additional comments numbered in sequence after our prior comments. Updated Water Report, May 30, 2003 1. Section III of the report calculates a fire flow volume of 270,000 gallons of water storage requirement for a fire flow of 2,250 gpm over a 2 -hour duration. The report narrative further indicates the District has a 1 million and 3 million gallon water storage tank. You are quoted in the report as having stated that these tanks are sufficient in size to accommodate the proposed development. If this is the case, then water storage is not an issue for serving the subdivision. 2. The report has been revised for connection to Zone -B, and evaluates peak hour demand for in-home use, along with fire flows concurrent with peak hour demand. Fire flows are typically evaluated simultaneous with maximum day demand, rather than the more intensive situation of peak hour demands. Analyzing fire flows together with the higher peak hour demands represents more sever conditions than standard design criteria, and is not necessary but is acceptable. • • Bruce Smith July 1, 2003 Page 2 3. Computer print-outs for individual fire flow scenarios of the distribution system analysis have been included as requested. We would suggest adding a pipe junction node directly downstream from the proposed PRV valve vault in order to verify pressure settings for the PRVs. Also, the rate of flow and corresponding velocities in individual segments of the proposed distribution system are not listed, and should be identified. The reason for this information is to verify flow routing through the system. Our cursory estimate of potential system velocities warrant inclusion of velocity head loss coefficients in conjunction with friction loss, primarily head loss through a fire hydrant that is assumed to provide 1,500 to 2,250 gpm fire flows through two (2) 2'/2 -inch hose nozzles. This level of detail will also be useful once phases of development are established in order to assess the adequacy of portions of the water distribution system proposed to be installed and placed in service in each incremental phase of development. Flow characteristics in each pipe segment should be included in the report for each fire flow scenario, in units of gpm and fps. We would also recommend that fire hydrants be flow tested once installed as a part of initial acceptance testing, to verify that the required fire flow at each hydrant location can be provided. 4. The computer evaluation has been modified to include a modeled reservoir and pump system which has been developed to approximate system pressure losses prior to the subdivision connection based on experience of the Fire Department and District personnel with the existing system. This approach appears more representative of the actual system performance than the original model. 5. The proposed 2'/2 -inch irrigation tap for the open space south of Valley View Drive is not accounted for in the report. If use of the domestic water system is approved for irrigation purposes by the District, allowable irrigation water flows and watering schedule(s) will need to be approved by the District. 6. Page 1 of the report indicates that the high pressure Zone -B may contain an 8 -inch stub that is accessible at the intersection of County Road 302 and Stone Quarry Road, but the location and/or presence of this stub has not been verified. Additional research is needed to verify connection requirements. 7. The report should include an assessment of static pressures. The combination of a PRV set at a downstream pressure of 60 psi, and the site topography may result in excessive static in-home pressures that require individual pressure regulators per the Uniform Plumbing Code for Lots at lower elevations. • • Bruce Smith July 1, 2003 Page 3 Revised Plans - Water Distribution System 1. The Petitioner's Engineer has acknowledged the intent to construct the development in phases, but proposes to provide better detailed delineation of the extent of construction for each phase at the time of Final Plan approval. Postponing identification of phases of construction is acceptable from an engineering perspective, however, additional computer modeling may be required for each phase of construction to ensure that each incremental phase can preform adequately during the interim of the subsequent phase. 2. The water line should be protected at all sewerline crossings to prevent inadvertent damage of the water line if the sewerline is excavated in the future. The current Plans require continuous tracing wire along the water lines as well as 20 -feet of warning tape 24" above the waterline at all sewer crossings. These precautions protect the water line to the extent that utility locates are observed by future excavations. 3. Water line profiles have been eliminated and the sewerline profiles have been placed on utility profile sheets separate from the street profile sheets. Elevations should be shown at locations along the water line to prevent high points while providing the minimum cover over the top of the water lines. It is noted that water line information given on the sewerline profile on Sheet 20 at approximate Stations 0+40 and 2+25 of Valley View Drive will result in either a high point, or less than 36 -inches bury. Also, there is a discrepancy between minimum depth of bury for water lines. Sheet 28 indicates an approximate depth of 4'-6" (54") and Sheet 29 requires 52" minimum bury. The minimum depth of bury should be consistently shown on all Plan sheets. 4. The graphic scales and Plan views appear to be corrected. 5. Bryan Loop has been added. 6. Additional detail and requirements for the connection to existing Zone -B water stub at the intersection of Stone Quarry Road and 302 Road referenced on Sheet 19 should be provided. Include verification of the existing stub, and any valves, thrust blocks, blow offs or other water system components that may exist. The plan view should show all information available on the stub, if it exists. It may be necessary to pot hole the existing water system to determine connection requirements. If this presumed stub does not exist, or if it is not adequately configured with a shut-off valve to allow a "dry" connection, the method for completing a "wet tap" or other means of connecting to the existing system will be necessary. 7. Utility alignments between matching Plan Sheets 17 and 18 appear to have been corrected. • • Bruce Smith July 1, 2003 Page 4 8. Individual 3/4 -inch service taps have been provided for all units on all lots. 9. The Plans have been revised to include the required valves. The District's standard for location of valves relative to offset distance from tee and cross fittings should be shown on the Plans and complied with during construction. 10. Water service tap connection to water mains have been corrected. 11. Sheet 17 of the Plans now includes a note prohibiting installation of utilities within 7'/2 -feet of the existing Xcel high pressure gas main when running parallel along Angelica Circle. This note further prohibits utility service line crossings of the Xcel gas main. Based on this new requirement, the water main along Angelica Circle is still aligned in the parking lot outside of the street, rather than consistently locating utilities within the street alignment. The street should be realigned to the northeast such that the gas main is located in the east- bound lane which would then place the water main in the west -bound lane. The existing 50 -foot gas easement would not need to be revised, but additional street and utility right-of- way would be required. As an alternative, the gas main could be relocated in order to install the water and sewer mains within the limits of street improvements. 12. In lieu of the minimum required horizontal separation of 10 feet between water and sewer mains along Angelica Circle, the Engineer proposes to install the sewerline 5 -foot from the water line at least 18" below the water main. In this situation, the sewerline should be upgraded to SDR -26 PVC low pressure sewer pipe. This pipe is color coded green for sewer, and is compatible with standard wye fittings for sewer pipe. The Plans also require the sewerline to be constructed of materials and with joints that are equivalent to water main standards of construction if the 18 -inch vertical separation cannot be obtained. It is recommended that the water and sewer systems be redesigned to avoid this condition by either modifying pipe elevations or providing the standard 10 -foot horizontal separation. 13. If irrigation use of the water system is approved by the District, the Plans will need to show requirements for tap installation. As a minimum, reduced pressure backflow protection device(s) with flow meter/totalizer located in a vault accessible to District personnel should be provided. The District may also want to consider a pressure sustaining valve to prevent irrigation use if the upstream pressure falls to a predetermined value, and/or a rate of flow control valve to allow only a maximum approved flow rate. It is presumed the tap would be the responsibility of a Home Owner's Association, including an appropriate tap fee to be established by the District, monthly user fees, and operation and maintenance. • • Bruce Smith July 1, 2003 Page 5 14. An additional water line is shown along the north portion of Bryan Loop between Cliff View Court and Valley View Drive that is probably not necessary. The eastern portion of this water line is centered in a proposed 10 -foot utility easement. The minimum width requirement is 20 -foot centered on the water line. If the Petitioner feels the water line is necessary to connect back into the Valley View Drive water line, it is recommended that the area be dedicated as an out -lot in lieu of a utility easement to avoid potential conflicts with future private improvements. In addition, the water line should be extended around Bryan Loop to service the southeasterly 6-plex in lieu of the long service lines proposed. It may actually be more beneficial to loop the water line in Bryan Loop with two connections provided on Cliff View Circle. 15. There appears to be an alignment conflict between a main line valve and the service line to Lot 43 along Cliff View Circle on Sheet 19, which should be resolved by relocating either the service line or the main line valve. 16. The drain line from the PRV vault should be shown on Sheet 19, and on the drainage plan in order to detail how the drain daylights to discharge. Also, the end of the drain line should be protected against potential intrusion with a flapper valve. 17. Water line crossings should be shown on the sewerline profile drawings on Sheets 20 through 26. 18. The profile along Cliff View Court on Sheets 22 and 23 indicate a substantial amount of fill material will be placed to the finished grade. The street fill must be placed and compacted at least to the street subgrade elevation prior to trenching for water and sewer line installation. A note addressing this requirement should be added to the Plans. 19. Sheet 28 shows typical utility service locations relative to property lines, with the water service offset 5 -foot from property line and the sewer service 15 -foot from property line. We would recommend a minimum 10 -foot offset from property line for any utility service to allow sufficient area for future excavations without encroaching upon the neighboring property. Also, the detail should identify the required 10 -foot separation between water and sewer lines. 20. The proposed PRV valve and vault shown on Sheet 29 should be modified to include two (2) PRV's plus a bypass line. One PRV should be sized for low flows of normal peak hour in-house water use. The second PRV should be sized for higher fire flows. In addition, the proposed single 6 -inch PRV does not have adequate capacity for the design fire flows based on manufacturer recommended flow ratings. Consequently, cavitation will occur, and the valve life expectancy will be reduced. Piping in the vault should include pipe spools, flanged adapters and couplings to allow disassembly of the pipe if ever necessary. Pressure • • Bruce Smith July 1, 2003 Page 6 gages upstream and downstream from the PRV are specified to 250 psi, yet the Preliminary Water Report indicates maximum upstream system pressures of 112 psi. The range of pressure gages should more closely match anticipated system pressures in order to utilize more of the full scale range and obtain more accurate measurements. Also, there is a pipe accessory item shown next to pressure gages which is not labeled and should be specified. Also the District's standard PRV manufacturer should be specified to provide consistency within the District system for providing spare parts and operation and maintenance procedures. The District should be consulted on the preferred manufacturer and type of PRV's. Additional dimensions and details of the PRV vault should be provided, including depth of bury on the water main, height of water main through the vault, width of vault, requirements for traffic rating of the vault structure, and pipe restraints at vault walls. Flange rating for pipe fittings and valves should be specified. Depending upon the District's preferred type of PRV, a strainer upstream from the PRVs may also be recommended. We would also question the small diameter type M copper tubing as a bypass pipe, or if the more standard PVC pressure pipe with flange fittings is more appropriate. The District's standard PRV vault with high and low flow PRV's and bypass piping is available upon request. 21. Since blow -off valves are generally located in unimproved areas, it is recommended to include a concrete collar around the valve box and cover to protect against displacement or damage to these components. Revised Plans - Sewer Collection System 1. A new MH -A1 is proposed to be installed on the District's existing sewerline in Battlement Mesa Parkway. Reference to requirements per WestWater Engineering should be removed and replaced with per Battlement Mesa Consolidated Metro District. The final Plans will need to provide more detail with a note to clarify that the existing manhole is to removed as part of the project and that a new sewerline be extended from the proposed manhole in Valley View Drive to where the existing manhole was removed. This can be shown in a detail or described in a note at the Petitioners preference. The size and type of pipe of the District's existing sewerline should be noted on the Plans that was not addressed. 2. The requirement for new manholes be installed in the center of travel lane or center line of road has been addressed except along Angelica Circle. 3. The requirement for an outlot centered on the sewerline between MH -C1 and MH -A6 has not been addressed. The easement proposed and the explanation provided is not recommended. Bruce Smith July 1, 2003 Page 7 4. The sewerline along Angelica Circle is still outside the street. The explanation is now given that the high pressure gas line has dictated the location of the sanitary sewer, and proximity of the waterline being less then 10 -feet from the sanitary sewer. We still view the alignment as unacceptable. If the gas line has dictated the utility alignment, then Angelica Circle should be realigned so that the water and sewer lines are installed within the street with a minimum 10 -foot separation. As an option it would appear that the sanitary sewer could be installed south of the gas line. Reference to the manholes being wet cast rather than standard manholes has also not been addressed. It would appear from the resubmittal that the Petitioner is unwilling to provide a water and sanitary sewer alignment along Angelica Circle that meets the District's standards and requirements. 5. The sewerline has been realigned between MH -A7 and MH -B2 to provide the minimum 10 -foot separation between the water and sewerline. 6. The deflection angle (direction of flow angle) at MH -7 from the Angelica Circle inlet sewerline on the previous submittal was less then 90°. This has now been addressed by realigning the sewerline between MH -D1 to MH -A8 across the duplex unit lot (Lot 46). This alignment should be modified to place the sewerline in Angelica Circle that connects to MH -A9 at the intersection of Valley View Drive and Angelica Circle with an inlet sewerline that has a directional flow angle of 90° or greater. This most likely will require an additional manhole in Angelica Circle. 7. The building envelope for the proposed 6-plexes has been shown. If possible unit numbers for the different 6-plexes, 4-plexes and duplexes should be given on the Utility Composite for future reference by the District. In addition, each type of multifamily unit should be called out (i.e. 6-plex, 4-plex, etc.) on the Utility Composite. 8. Individual sewer service lines are provided for each unit in the 6-plex buildings, since they are proposed to be individually owned. Depending on the 6-plex building configuration, the sewer service lines should be spread out to be oriented more in line with the individual unit layout, rather than grouped together as proposed. However, it is not clear how the individual units will be designed, and the grouping of the sewer service lines may be acceptable, if it is better suited for the building plans of the 6-plex. 9. Manholes have not been stationed on the Utility Composite as requested. 10. Sewer service lines have not been stationed on the Utility Composite as requested. Typically the District will utilize the Utility Composite for locating sewer services in the future based on stationing and distance from manholes which is the reason for requiring the manhole stationing and sewer service stationing on the Utility Composite. In addition, the sewer service lines should be extended beyond the front lot utility easements to avoid r • Bruce Smith July 1, 2003 Page 8 having to excavate under existing utilities when the sewer services are extended to individual homes. 11. Directional flow arrows have been added as requested. 12. The size, type of pipe, and length between manholes has not been provided as requested on the Utility Composite. 13. The second sewer service for Lot 25 has been reoriented. 14. The sewerline along Valley View Drive has been extended to near the intersection of Stone Query Court as requested. There still appears to be significant issues regarding the general water and sewer line layout in particular along Angelica Circle that need to be resolved prior to the Preliminary Plan being approved. We again did not review the Plans from a final construction standpoint. Detailed comments on the final construction plans will be reserved until such time that the Preliminary Plan is approved by Garfield County. We would recommend that the Utility Composite Sheets be revised to address the aforementioned comments and resubmitted to the District for further review prior to the Preliminary Plan being approved. Respectfully, Stephen T. LaBonde Project Engineer cc: Pamara Pregl, Garfield County Planning Department Darin Carei, Darter LLC Ron Weidler, High Country Engineering rl/Gff d G/i1/EE/�/NG Memo To: Tamara Pregl From: Ron Weidler, P.E. Date: 7/25/2003 Re: Battlement Mesa Subdivision, HCE #2021056.0412 1 A construction phasing plan and schedule have been provided as attachments to this memo as requested in the conditions of the Planning and Zoning , paragraph #6. Please contact this office if any additional information is required. 1517 Blake Avenue, Suite 101 Glenwood Springs, CO 81601 Telephone (970) 945-8676 - Fax (970) 945-2555 RECEIVED JUL 2 5 2003 GARFIELD COUNTY BUILDING & PLANNING 14 Inverness Drive East Suite D-136 Englewood, CO 80112 Telephone (303) 925-0544 - Fax (303) 925-0547 8 e. MESA PARKWAY` C� t� r•, OPEN SPACE LOT 25 2 1114T OL T24 2 11118 LOT 23 2 LINTS 611TH 1 METH FLOATING PHASE (TO BE DEVELOPED ANYTIME AFTER PHASE 1) IvSpgc F. LOT 47 411(18 411(18 EMI NM LOT 22 LOT 21 ...._LOT 20 LOT 19 LOT 18 PHASE METH rn 0 c_ I � 0 LOT 16 I LOT 15 LOT 14 I LOT 13 LOT 12 LOT 11 LOT 10 ! LOT 9 " LOT 8 LOT 7 LOT 6 LOT 5 LOT 4 1 LOT 1 LOT 2 LOT 3 THIGH COUNTRY ENGINEERING, INC. 1517 BLAKE AVENUE, 14 INVERNESS DRIVE EAST, SUITE 101 SUITE 0136 GLENWOOD SPRINGS, CO 81601 ENGLEWOOD, CO 80112 PH.(970) 945-8676 PH.(303) 925-0554 FX.(970) 945-2555 FX.(303) 925-0547 GRACE HOMES GARFIELD COUNTY, CO VALLEY VIEW VILLAGE, PUD PHASING PLAN SCALE:1 ' =200' PHASING.DWG DES. DJW CK: DR. DJW DATE: 12/4/02 FILE NO. 2021056.00 SHEET • • VALLEY VIrE,W VILLAciE Conatrucitlian Pltaw ng' Plan 2C21056.0412 25 -Jul -03 Phase Beginning Date Completion Date A November -03 May -05 13 i May -04 (September -05 C !April -05 D February -06 4May-07 December -07 QAugust-06 Floating Phase May -09 • LAND DESIGN PARTNERSHIP 918 Cooper Avenue, Glenwood Springs, CO 81601 970-945-2246 / Fax 970-945-4066 July 25, 2003 Ms. Tamara Pregl Garfield County Planning Dept. 108 8th Street, Ste. 201 Glenwood Springs, CO 81601 Re: Valley View Village Preliminary Plan — Supplemental Information Dear Ms. Pregl: The concept of requesting a wavier from the BOCC on the 25% Open Space requirement as suggested by Staff is very appropriate but it seems like the best time to make such a request is when we make application to amend the PUD in regard to changes to the commercial zoned area, Tract 47. Therefore we agree with P&Z's recommended condition # 11 with the understanding that the additional open space will be identified within the Future Development Tract # 47 when that area is re -subdivided, unless other provisions regarding open space are approved as a part of a future PUD amendment. If you have any questions on this subject please give me a call. Ronald Liston LOYAL E. LEAVENWORTH SANDER N. KARP DAVID H. McCONAUGHY JAMES S. NEU JULIE C. BERQUIST SUSAN W. LAATSCH NICOLE D. GARRIMONE ANNA S. ITENBERG MICHAEL J. SAWYER TERESA L. HOCK JOSLYN V. WOOD* *Of Counsel LEAVENWORTH & KARP, P.C. ATTORNEYS AT LAW 1011 GRAND AVENUE P. O. DRAWER 2030 GLENWOOD SPRINGS, COLORADO 81602 Telephone: (970) 945-2261 Facsimile: (970) 945-7336 dhm@lklawfirm.com Ms. Tamara Pregl, Planner Garfield County Building and Planning 108 8t'' Street, Suite 201 Glenwood Springs, CO 81601 July 23, 2003 DENVER OFFICE:* WAZEE EXCHANGE BUILDING 1900 WAZEE STREET, STE. 203 DENVER, COLORADO 80202 Telephone: (303) 825-3995 Facsimile: (303) 825-3997 *(Please direct all correspondence to our Glenwood Springs Office) Re: Valley View Village Dear Tamara: This letter is to respond to condition #5 of the Planning Commission's recommendation for approval of the preliminary plan for Valley View Village, which reads as follows: 5. Prior to the Board of County Commissioners review of Preliminary Plan, the Applicant shall provide written resolution with regard to the Xcel Energy / Public Service Company new and existing gas line easements. As you know, the actual location of the gas line on the property proposed for development as well as the County's adjacent parcel lies outside of the recorded easements. To correct this situation, Public Service Company will be required to relinquish the existing (wrong) easements by quit claim deeds, and then the property owners and the Board of County Commissioners will be asked to grant new easements to match the actual location of the line. Public Service Company / Xcel Energy has prepared the necessary documents to accomplish this exchange, which are enclosed. The new proposed easements are non-exclusive and reserve the grantors' rights to use the property for any purpose other than erecting buildings or structures or placing mobile homes on the easements. The reserved rights include the right to install utilities. A letter from Xcel confirming that utilities would be permitted in the new easements is enclosed. The proposed deeds as drafted need the County Attorney's review and approval as well as formal approval by the Board of County Commissioners to complete the exchange. We request that the Board consider this at its meeting on August 4, 2003. I:\2003\Clients\Grace Homes\Letters\Pregl-1.wpd • • LEAVENWORTH & KARP, P.C. Tamara Pregl Page 2 July 23, 2003 I would suggest that the Board of County Commissioners include a new condition that the exchange deeds be executed by Public Service Company, the landowner, and the Board of County Commissioners and recorded prior to recording of the final plat. If you have any further questions or concerns about condition #5, please do not hesitate to contact me. DHM: Enclosure I:\2003\Clients\Grace Homes\Letters\Preg1-1.wpd Very truly yours, LEAVENWO& KARP, P.C. Davi • H. McConaugh JUL-23-2003 WED 11:43 AM LO EE ENERGY Xcel Energysu PUBLIC SERVICE COMPANY July 23, 2003 Leavenworth & Karp, P.C. ATTN: David H. McConaughy PO Box Drawer 2030 Glenwood Springs, CO 81602 FAX NO. 3.38787 P. 02 RE: PSCo easement language clarification for Valley View Village Dear Mr. McConaughy, Siting and Land Rights 550 15th Street, Suite 700 Denver, Colorado 80202-4256 Telephone: 303.571.7799 Facsimile: 303.571.7877 In regards to your questions about the restricted use within the area of the easement being granted for the above planned unit development; Public Service Company (PSCo) only acquires a non-exclusive easement for its facilities. As such, the non-exclusive easement allows the landowner to convey and use the area of the easement for other utilities, provided that the other utilities installed do not interfere with or endanger PSCo's gas line. IIowever, per the easement language there can be no permanent structures (structures with a foundation), mobile homes or trailers built or placed on top of the easement area. If you have any further questions, please do not hesitate to call. Ve ' Truly Yours, ustin Mater, ontract Agent ublic Service Company of Colorado 1 of 1 • • Division: Mountain Division Easement Location: Sec 18-T7S-R95W ROW Agent: Austin Mater Author Address: 621 17'" Street. #2501 Denver, CO 80293 QUITCLAIM DEED Doc. No.: 69189 Plat/Grid No.: KNOW ALL MEN BY THESE PRESENTS, that Public Service Company of Colorado, a Colorado corporation, of Denver, Colorado for good and valuable consideration hereby sells and quitclaims to: Edward J. Hoaglund and Ida Lee Hoaglund, as joint tenants As present owner(s) of the real property of record and whose address is: 4064 County Road 309 Parachute, CO 81635-9108 The following described real property in the County of Garfield and State of Colorado, to -wit: Part of that certain Public Service Company of Colorado easement(s) originally acquired by Western Slope Gas Company, a wholly owned subsidiary of Public Service Company of Colorado now merged into the parent, (Document No. 64079) recorded on April 25, 1962, in Book 340 at Page 538, Garfield County records, subsequently replaced by (Document No. 69189) recorded on May 2, 1963, in Book 349 at Page 58 Garfield County records; situated within the SE1/4 NE1/4 of Section 18, Township 7 S, Range 95 W of the 6th P.M., Garfield County, State of Colorado, as it crosses and effects a tract of land more particularly described as follows: All that portion of the SE1/4 NE'/4 of said Section 18 described in a Quit Claim Deed from Gunstock Ranch, a Joint Venture, et al to Edward J. Hoaglund and Ida Lee Hoaglund recorded in Book 748 at Page 893 on February 10, 1989 in the Garfield County records. Consideration: (less than $600) with all its appurtenances. Signed this day of , 2003. PUBLIC SERVICE COMPANY OF COLORADO By Nicholas B. Faes, Manager Siting & Land Rights, Xcel Energy Services, Inc. Agent for Public Service Company of Colorado STATE OF COLORADO ) ) ss. City and County of Denver ) The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this day of By Nicholas B. Faes, Manager, Siting & Land Rights, Xcel Energy Services, Inc. as Agent for the Public Service Company of Colorado, a Colorado Corporation. Witness my hand and official seal. My commission expires: 2003 Notary Public Address • • Division: Mountain Division Easement Location: Sec 18-T7S-R95W ROW Agent: Austin Mater Author Address: 621 17' Street, #2501 Denver, CO 80293 QUITCLAIM DEED Doc. No.: 69189 Plat/Grid No.:_ KNOW ALL MEN BY THESE PRESENTS, that Public Service Company of Colorado, a Colorado corporation, of Denver, Colorado for good and valuable consideration hereby sells and quitclaims to: Board of County Commissioners of Garfield County As present owner(s) of the real property of record and whose address is: 109 8th Street, Suite 300 Glenwood Springs, CO 81601-3363 The following described real property in the County of Garfield and State of Colorado, to -wit:. Part of that certain Public Service Company of Colorado easement(s) originally acquired by Westem Slope Gas Company, a wholly owned subsidiary of Public Service Company of Colorado now merged into the parent, (Document No. 64079) recorded on April 25, 1962, in Book 340 at Page 538, Garfield County records, subsequently replaced by (Document No. 69189) recorded on May 2, 1963, in Book 349 at Page 58 Garfield County records; situated within the SEt/. NE'/ of Section 18, Township 7 S, Range 95 W of the 6th P.M., Garfield County, State of Colorado, as it crosses and effects a tract of land more particularly described as follows: Beginning at the NW Corner of the SE'/ of the NE% of said Section 18, thence S01 °01'32"W a distance of 40 feet to the true point of beginning; thence S89°11 '07"E a distance of 511.07 feet; thence S01°48'53"W a distance of 30.94 feet; thence continuing in a westerly direction along a curve to the right having a central angle of 46°58'00" and a radius of 151.27 feet for an arc length distance of 124.00 feet and whose chord bears S25°17'53"W a distance of 120.56 feet; thence continuing in a westerly direction along a curve to the left having a central angle of 46°58'00" and a radius of 201.27 feet for an arc length distance of 164.99 feet and whose chord bears S25°17'53"W a distance of 160.41 feet; thence N50°54'00"W and following the centerline of a gulch a distance of 92.88 feet; thence N83°05'00"W and continuing along said centerline of said gulch a distance of 188.00 feet, thence West a distance of 135.00 feet more or less to a point on the West line of said SE'/< of the NE'/a of said Section 18, thence N01°01'32"E and along said West line, a distance of 219.96 feet more or less to the point of beginning. Consideration: (less than $600) with all its appurtenances. Signed this day of , 2003. PUBLIC SERVICE COMPANY OF COLORADO By Nicholas B. Faes, Manager Siting & Land Rights, Xcel Energy Services, Inc. Agent for Public Service Company of Colorado STATE OF COLORADO ) ) ss. City and County of Denver ) The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this day of , 2003 By Nicholas B. Faes, Manager, Siting & Land Rights, Xcel Energy Services, Inc. as Agent for the Public Service Company of Colorado, a Colorado Corporation. Witness my hand and official seal. My commission expires: Notary Public Address • • DIVISION Mtn Div ROW AGENT Austin Mater LOCATION Sec 18-T7S-R95W DESCRIPTION AUTHOR Frank Harrington AUTHOR ADDRESS 1517 Blake Ave #101 Glenwood Spring, CO 81601 DOC. NO. PLATIGRID NO. WO/JO/CREG NO. PUBLIC SERVICE COMPANY OF COLORADO EASEMENT The undersigned Grantor hereby acknowledges receipt of good and valuable consideration from PUBLIC SERVICE COMPANY OF COLORADO (Company), 1225-171' Street, Denver, Colorado, 80202-5533, in consideration of which Grantor(s) hereby grants unto said Company, its successors and assigns, a non-exclusive easement to construct, operate, maintain, repair, and replace pipelines and all fixtures and devices, used or useful in the operation of said pipelines, through, under, across, and along a course as said pipelines may be constructed in LOT , BLOCK , SUBDIVISION _, in the SE% NE% of Section 18 , Township 7 South , Range 95 West of the 6th Principal Meridian in the City of _ County of Garfield , State of Colorado, the easement being described as follows: SEE "BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISIONERS PARCEL" IN EXHIBIT B ATTACHED HERETO AND MADE A PART HEREOF The easement is 50 feet in width. The side boundary lines of the easement shall be lengthened and shortened as necessary to encompass a continuous strip of not Tess than the above width at all points on Grantor's property crossed by the above described easement and extending to the boundaries of adjacent properties. Together with the right to enter upon said premises, to survey, construct, maintain, operate, repair, replace, control, and use said pipelines and related fixtures and devices, and to remove objects interfering therewith, including the trimming of trees and bushes, and together with the right to use so much of the adjoining premises of Grantor during surveying, construction, maintenance, repair, removal, or replacement of said pipelines and related fixtures and devices as may be required to permit the operation of standard pipeline construction or repair machinery. Company shall pay Grantor(s) for actual damages to land and growing crops occasioned by any future installations, construction, maintenance, alteration, repairing, replacing, reconstruction and removal of any of Company's facilities. The Grantor reserves the right to use and occupy the easement for any purpose consistent with the rights and privileges above granted and which will not interfere with or endanger any of the said Company's facilities therein or use thereof. Such reservations by the Grantor shall in no event include the right to erect or cause to be erected any buildings or structures upon the easement granted or to locate any mobile home or trailer units thereon. In case of the permanent abandonment of the easement, all right, privilege, and interest granted shall terminate. The work of installing and maintaining said lines and fixtures shall be done with care; the surface along the easement shall be restored substantially to its original level and condition. Signed this day of ,2003. (Type or print name below each signature line with official title if corporation, partnership, etc.): GRANTOR: BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS of GARFIELD COUNTY, COLORADO By: Title: STATE OF COLORADO COUNTY OF )ss. The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this by [Grantor name(s) from above]: day of ,2003 By As for the BOARD OF COUNTY OF GARFIELD COUNTY, COLORADO Witness my hand and official seal. My commission Expires Notary Public _ • NORTHEAST SIXTEENTH CORNER, SECTION 18 POINT OF BEGINNING 50' WIDE GAS EASEMENT S 89'47'02" E C3 EXHIBIT B v SHEET 1 OF 2 J BATTLEMENT MESA PARKWAY 1280.85' C5 L16 L7 2407-181-00-001 Board Of County Commesioners of Garfield County 109 8th Street, Suite 300 Glenwood Springs. CO 81601 108,026 SQ. FT. ± 2.480 -ACRES ± C4 CENTERLINE PROPOSED 50' WIDE GAS EASEMENT BASED ON LOCATION OF EXISTING GAS LINE le SCALE: 1" = 200' LINE TABLE LINELENGTH RADIUS BEARING L1 135.00' N 88'24'45' E L2 188.00' S 84'40'15' E L3 92.88' S 52'29'15' E L4 30.94' N 00'13'38' E L5 511.07' N 89'46'22' W L6 40,00' N 00'33'38' W L7 957.38' S 89'31'29' W L8 219.95' N 00'33'38' W L9 73.56' S 84'50'03' E L10 350.62' S 57'44'57' E LII 386.77' S 26'59'50' E L12 778.18' S 67'0B'44' E L13 35.05' S 00'33'38' E L14 57.51' S 84'50'03' E L15 16.05' S 84'50'03' E L16 26.15' S 26'59'50' E L17 360.62' S 26'59'50' E L18 31.46' S 55'04'53' E L19 40.00' S 89'59'15' E N 89'59'15" W 2407-181-00-002 Edward J. Hoaglund and Ida Lee Hoaglund 4064 County Road 309 Parachute, CO 81635 1,556,132 SQ. FT ± 35.724 ACRES ± CURVE TABLE CURVE RADIUS LENGTH CHORD BEARINGCHORD DELTA 01 201.27' 164.99' N 23'42'38' E 160.41' 46'58'06' C2 15127' 124.00' N 23'42'36' E 120.56' 46'58'05' C3 1350,00' 297.53' N 84'09'41' W 296.93'12'37'39' C4 201.27' 61.11' N 08'55'31' E 60.88' 17'23'51' C5 201.27' 103.88' N 32'24'34' E 102.73' 29'34'15' SEE SHEET 2 FOR LEGAL DESCRIPTION BY: FRANK W. HARRINGTON, L.S.#19598 GoUNTiP ENC/NEEiPXi ,C 1279.39' EAST QUARTER CORNER OF SECTION 18 DATE: JANUARY 20, 2003 JOB NO.: 2021056.00-0450 HIGH COUNTRY ENGINEERING, INC. 14 INVERNESS DRIVE EAST, STE D-136 1517 BLAKE AVENUE, SUITE 101 ENGLEWOOD, CO 80112 GLENWOOD SPRINGS, CO 81601 (303) 925-0544 (970) 945-8676 (1) 3 „6G,6Z.00 9 50' GAS LINE EASEMENT SHEET 2 OF 2 A 50 FOOT WIDE STRIP OF LAND SITUATED IN THE SE1/4NE1/4 SECTION 18, TOWNSHIP 7 SOUTH, RANGE 95 WEST OF THE SIXTH PRINCIPAL MERIDIAN, COUNTY OF GARFIELD, STATE OF COLORADO; SAID STRIP LYING 25' EACH SIDE OF THE FOLLOWING DESCRIBED CENTERLINE: COMMENCING AT THE NORTHEAST SIXTEENTH CORNER OF SAID SECTION 18 (WHENCE THE EAST QUARTER CORNER OF SAID SECTION 18 BEARS S45'09'57"E A DISTANCE OF 1,878.79 FEET); THENCE S00'33'38"E ALONG THE WESTERLY BOUNDARY OF SAID SE1/4NE1/4 SECTION 18 A DISTANCE OF 35.05 FEET; THENCE LEAVING SAID WESTERLY BOUNDARY S84'50'03"E ALONG SAID CENTERLINE A DISTANCE OF 57.51 FEET TO THE POINT OF BEGINNING; THENCE CONTINUING ALONG SAID CENTERLINE S84'50'03"E A DISTANCE OF 16.05 FEET; THENCE S55'04'53"E ALONG SAID CENTERLINE A DISTANCE OF 31.46 FEET; THENCE S57'44'57"E ALONG SAID CENTERLINE A DISTANCE OF 350.62 FEET; THENCE S26'59'50"E A DISTANCE OF 26.15 FEET TO THE POINT OF TERMINUS. WHENCE THE EAST QUARTER CORNER OF SAID SECTION 18 BEARS S4114'28"E A DISTANCE OF 1402.47 FEET. 4 .5c GoUNTiP ENG/NEE.Y�NG DATE: JANUARY 20, 2003 JOB NO.: 2021056.00-0450 HIGH COUNTRY ENGINEERING, INC. 14 INVERNESS DRIVE EAST, STE D-136 1517 BLAKE AVENUE, SUITE 101 ENGLEWOOD, CO 80112 GLENWOOD SPRINGS, CO 81601 (303) 925-0544 (970) 945-8676 • • DIVISION Mtn Div ROW AGENT Austin Mater LOCATION Sec 18-T7S-R95W DESCRIPTION AUTHOR Frank Harrington AUTHOR ADDRESS 1517 Blake Ave #101 Glenwood Spring, CO 81601 DOC. NO. PLAT/GRID NO. WOIJOICREG NO. PUBLIC SERVICE COMPANY OF COLORADO EASEMENT The undersigned Grantor hereby acknowledges receipt of good and valuable consideration from PUBLIC SERVICE COMPANY OF COLORADO (Company), 1225-17"' Street, Denver, Colorado, 80202-5533, in consideration of which Grantor(s) hereby grants unto said Company, its successors and assigns, a non-exclusive easement to construct, operate, maintain, repair, and replace pipelines and all fixtures and devices, used or useful In the operation of said pipelines, through, under, across, and along a course as said pipelines may be constructed in LOT , BLOCK , SUBDIVISION _, in the SE'/, NEV.. of Section 18 , Township 7 South_, Range 95 West of the 6th Principal Meridian in the City of _ County of Garfield , State of Colorado, the easement being described as follows: SEE "HOAGLUND PARCEL" IN EXHIBIT A ATTACHED HERETO AND MADE A PART HEREOF The easement is 50 feet in width. The side boundary lines of the easement shall be lengthened and shortened as necessary to encompass a continuous strip of not less than the above width at all points on Grantor's property crossed by the above described easement and extending to the boundaries of adjacent properties. Together with the right to enter upon said premises, to survey, construct, maintain, operate, repair, replace, control, and use said pipelines and related fixtures and devices, and to remove objects interfering therewith, including the trimming of trees and bushes, and together with the right to use so much of the adjoining premises of Grantor during surveying, construction, maintenance, repair, removal, or replacement of said pipelines and related fixtures and devices as may be required to permit the operation of standard pipeline construction or repair machinery. Company shall pay Grantor(s) for actual damages to land and growing crops occasioned by any future installations, construction, maintenance, alteration, repairing, replacing, reconstruction and removal of any of Company's facilities. The Grantor reserves the right to use and occupy the easement for any purpose consistent with the rights and privileges above granted and which will not interfere with or endanger any of the said Company's facilities therein or use thereof. Such reservations by the Grantor shall in no event include the right to erect or cause to be erected any buildings or structures upon the easement granted or to locate any mobile home or trailer units thereon. In case of the permanent abandonment of the easement, all right, privilege, and interest granted shall terminate. The work of installing and maintaining said lines and fixtures shall be done with care; the surface along the easement shall be restored substantially to its original level and condition. Signed this day of ,2003. (Type or print name below each signature line with official title if corporation, partnership, etc.): GRANTOR(S): EDWARD J. HOAGLUND IDA LEE HOAGLUND STATE OF COLORADO COUNTY OF ) )ss. The foregoing Instrument was acknowledged before me this by [Grantor name(s) from above]: EDWATD J. HOAGLUND and IDA LEE HOAGLUND day of ,2003 Witness my hand and official seal. My commission Expires Notary Public NORTHEAST SIXTEENTH CORNER, SECTION 18 S 89 47 02 E • EXHIBIT A V J \ SHEET 1 OF 2 BATTLEMENT MESA PARKWAY L18 L5 0 0 „8£,££.00 N 4- L14 L1 L15 L2 0 C4 SCALE: 1" = 200' LINE TABLE LINE LENGTH BEARING L7 135.00' N 88'24'45" E L2 188.00' S 84'40'15" E L3 92.88' S 52'29'15" E L4 30.94' N 0013'38" E L5 511.07' N 89'46'22" W L6 40.00' N 00'33'38" W L7 957.38' 5 89'31'29" W L8 219.95' N 00'33'38" W L9 73.56' 5 84'50'03" E L10 350.62' S 57'44'57" E L11 386.77' S 26'59'50" E L12 778.18' S 67'08'44" E L13 35.05' S 00'33'38" E L14 57.51' S 84'50'03" E L15 16.05' S 84'50'03" E L16 26.15' S 26'59'50" E L17 360.62' S 26'59'50" E L18 31.46' S 55'04'53" E L19 40.00' S 89'59'15" E L7 1280.85' "3 2407-181-00-001 Board Of County Commesioners of Garfield County C5 109 8th Street, Suite 300 Glenwood Springs, CO 81601 L16 108,026 SQ. FT. ± 2.480 ACRES ± POINT OF BEGINNING 50' HIDE GAS EASEMENT 0 h CENTERLINE PROPOSED 50' WIDE GAS EASEMENT BASED ON LOCATION OF EXISTING GAS LINE 0 2407-181-00-002 Edward J. Hoaglund and Ida Lee Hoaglund 4064 County Rood 309 Parachute, CO 81635 1,556,132 SQ. FT ± 35.724 ACRES ± CURVE TABLE CURVE RADIUS LENGTH CHORD BEARING CHORD DELTA C1 201.27' 164.99' N 23'42'38" E 160.41' 46'58'06" C2 151.27' 124.00' N 23'42'38" E 120.56' 46'58'05" C3 1350.00' 297.53' N 84'09'41" W 296.93' 12'37'39" C4 201.27' 61.11' N 08'55'31" E 60.88' 17'23'51" C5 201.27' 103.88' N 32'24'34" E 102.73' 29'34'15" in 3 „6S,6Z.00 0 03 A 2 3 b N 89'59'15" W SEE SHEET 2 FOR LEGAL. DESCRIPTION BY' FRANK W. HARRINGTON, L.S.#19598 /7/COY i�CJ!/NT/P ENG/NEE.P7NG 1279.39' EAST QUARTER CORNER OF SECTION 18 DATE: JANUARY 20, 2003 JOB NO.: 2021056.00-0450 HIGH COUNTRY ENGINEERING, INC. 14 INVERNESS DRIVE EAST, STE D-136 1517 BLAKE AVENUE, SURE 101 ENGLEWOOD, CO 80112 GLENWOOD SPRINGS. CO 81601 (303) 925-0544 (970) 945-8676 • SHEET 2 OF 2 50' GAS LINE EASEMENT A 50 FOOT WIDE STRIP OF LAND SITUATED IN THE SE1/4NE1/4 SECTION 18, TOWNSHIP 7 SOUTH, RANGE 95 WEST OF THE SIXTH PRINCIPAL MERIDIAN, COUNTY OF GARFIELD, STATE OF COLORADO SAID STRIP LYING 25' EACH SIDE OF THE FOLLOWING DESCRIBED CENTERLINE: COMMENCING AT THE NORTHEAST SIXTEENTH CORNER OF SAID SECTION 18 (WHENCE THE EAST QUARTER CORNER OF SAID SECTION 18 BEARS S45'09'57"E A DISTANCE OF 1,878.79 FEET); THENCE S00'33'38"E ALONG THE WESTERLY BOUNDARY OF SAID SE1/4NE1/4 SECTION 18 A DISTANCE OF 35.05 FEET TO THE POINT OF BEGINNING; THENCE LEAVING SAID WESTERLY BOUNDARY S84'50'03"E ALONG SAID CENTERLINE A DISTANCE OF 57.51 FEET TO THE POINT OF TERMINUS. WHENCE THE EAST QUARTER CORNER OF SAID SECTION 18 BEARS S44'46'58"E A DISTANCE OF 1809.61 FEET. 50' GAS LINE EASEMENT A 50 FOOT WIDE STRIP OF LAND SITUATED IN THE SE1/4NE1/4 SECTION 18, TOWNSHIP 7 SOUTH, RANGE 95 WEST OF THE SIXTH PRINCIPAL MERIDIAN, COUNTY OF GARFIELD, STATE OF COLORADO; SAID STRIP LYING 25' EACH SIDE OF THE FOLLOWING DESCRIBED CENTERLINE: COMMENCING AT THE NORTHEAST SIXTEENTH CORNER OF SAID SECTION 18 (WHENCE THE EAST QUARTER CORNER OF SAID SECTION 18 BEARS. S45'09'57"E A DISTANCE OF 1,878.79 FEET); THENCE S00'33'38"E ALONG THE WESTERLY BOUNDARY OF SAID SE1/4NE1/4 SECTION 18 A DISTANCE OF 35.05 FEET; THENCE LEAVING SAID WESTERLY BOUNDARY S84'50'03"E ALONG SAID CENTERLINE A DISTANCE OF 73.56 FEET: THENCE S55'04'53"E ALONG SAID CENTERLINE A DISTANCE OF 31.46 FEET; THENCE S57'44'57"E ALONG SAID CENTERLINE A DISTANCE OF 350.62 FEET; THENCE S26'59'50"E ALONG SAID CENTERLINE A DISTANCE OF 26.15 FEET TO THE POINT OF BEGINNING; THENCE CONTINUING ALONG SAID CENTERLINE S26'59'50"E A DISTANCE OF 360.62 FEET; THENCE S67'08'44"E ALONG SAID CENTERLINE A DISTANCE OF 778.18 FEET TO A POINT ON THE EASTERLY BOUNDARY OF SAID SE1/4NE1/4; THENCE S00'29'59"E ALONG SAID EASTERLY BOUNDARY A DISTANCE OF 431.02 FEET TO THE POINT OF TERMINUS. WHENCE THE EAST QUARTER CORNER OF SAID SECTION 18 BEARS S89'59'15"E A DISTANCE OF 40.00 FEET. �c G�.rry ENC/NEE•P�NC DATE: JANUARY 20, 2003 JOB NO.: 2021056.00-0450 HIGH COUNTRY ENGINEERING, INC. 14 INVERNESS DRIVE EAST, STE D-136 1517 BLAKE AVENUE, SUITE 101 ENGLEWOOD, CO 80112 GLENWOOD SPRINGS, CO 81601 (303) 925-0544 (970) 945-8676 • • EXHIE3IT d a Agreement to Exchange Real Estate Interests THIS AGREEMENT is made and entered into this day of July, 2003, by and between EDWARD J. and IDA LEE HOAGLUND, whose address is 4064 County Road 309, Parachute, CO 81635 (collectively the "Hoaglunds"), and PUBLIC SERVICE COMPANY OF COLORADO, whose address is 621 17'" Street, Denver, CO 80293 ("PSCO"). WHEREAS, the Hoaglunds own property in the SE1I4 NE1/4 of Section 18, Township 7S, Range 95W of the 6''' P.M., Garfield County generally depicted on Exhibit B_ WHEREAS, PSCO currently owns an easement for a right of way fifty (50) feet in width, to install, construct, and maintain a pipeline(s) for the transportation of oil and gas on or under the property owned by the Hoaglunds, which easement is more thoroughly described in the documents recorded in the Office of the Garfield County Clerk and Recorder on April 25, 1962 in Book 340 at Page 538 as Reception No. 217350 and subsequently amended on May 2, 1963 in Book 349 at Page 58 as Reception No. 221322. WHEREAS, PSCO constructed a pipeline(s) over or under the property owned by the Hoaglunds but outside of the easement(s) described above; PSCO's pipeline(s) therefore constitute a trespass on the Hoaglunds' property. WHEREAS, the Hoaglunds' property will soon be subdivided and developed which will require that certain utility improvements occur on, over, or under the area where PSCO's pipeline(s) is built. WHEREAS, the parties desire to legitimize the as -built location of PSCO's pipeline(s) and facilitate the subdivision and development of the Hoaglunds' property. THEREFORE, in consideration of the mutual promises set forth herein and other good and valuable consideration, the receipt and sufficiency of which is hereby acknowledged, the parties agree as follows: 1. PSCO hereby agrees to quit claim to the Hoaglunds any and all interest in any easement(s) granted as described in the documents recorded in the Office of the Garfield County Clerk and Recorder on April 25, 1962 in Book 340 at Page 538 as Reception No. 217350 and subsequently amended on May 2, 1963 in Book 349 at Page 58 as Reception No. 221322. The form of the quit claim deed is attached as Exhibit A. 2. The Hoaglunds hereby agree to grant PSCO an easement, fifty (50) feet in width, to construct, operate, maintain, repair, and replace pipeline(s) and all fixtures and devices, used or useful in the operation of said pipeline(s), for the transportation of oil and gas, in the location described on Exhibit B. The form I:\Z003IGI •MiWraca Hono\AgrevneonWoaggiw,d BccYcnpc Agrccmcne wpd Jury 13, 2003 RECEIVED JUL 2 5 2003 GARFIELD COUNTY BUILDING & PLANNING • • of easement to be granted by the Hoaglunds is attached as Exhibit C. 3. PSCO hereby agrees and consents that the easement granted by the Hoadlunds shall be a non-exclusive easement, which easement shall be available for the installation of utilities as generally depicted on Exhibit D, including but not limited to water, wastewater, electric, cable -TV, high speed data, drainage facilities or other such utilities as may become expedient or required in the subdivision review process with Garfield County, so long as the installation and use of said utilities does not interfere with the purpose of PSCO's easement. PSCO acknowledges that the utilities shown on Exhibit D will not cause any such interference. 4. The parties agree that this Agreement shall survive closing and will be recorded together with Exhibits B and D, together with the executed quit claim deed (Exhibit A) and the executed grant of easement (Exhibit C), in the public records of Garfield County, Colorado. IN WITNESS THEREOF, the parties have executed this Agreement on the date set forth above. EDWARD J. HOAGLUND By: IDA LEE HOAGLUND STATE OF Co IQret. do ) ) ss. COUNTY OF Gard ekl ) Subscribed and sworn to before (SEAL) My commission expires: te�d7/v.} - ay of Tµry,2003by rylSu� c / 'O 164-1- • ` PUBLIC SERVICE COMPANY OF COLORADO By: 1 t2003,Cliente Cirsee Homte,Agre.taoatoWotglufd Enc00n/a Agnamool.w Dd July I8, 2003 STATE OF • • COUNTY OF } ) ss Subscribed and sworn to before me this day of , 200_ by (SEAL) My commission expires: Notary Public 1.\2D6]'C.I,cn,.tpsece Hon,c.\Asr<cm cn,.'Aoaelwa E.chan(le ABreeroent rod fury I4, 5009 Jul 29 03 02:33p 7-29-2003 2 33P FROM rWATER ENGR 970 241 7097 r WestWater Engineering • 2516 FORESIGHT CIRCLE, Al GRANO JUNCTION, COLORADO 81505 (970) 241-7076 FAX (970) 241-7097 July 29, 2003 Bruce Smith, District Manager Battlement Mesa Consolidated Metro District P.O. Box 6116 Battlement Mesa, Colorado 81636 RE: Third Formal Review and Comments for Valley View Village PUD Proposed Water and Sewer System Extensions Dear Mr. Smith, Our office is in receipt of revised Preliminary Plans and water report, submittal #3 that was hand delivered on July 21, 2003, and submittal #4 that includes subsequent modifications. The fourth submittal was hand delivered on July 25, We were advised that the Petitioner is requesting the District's acceptance of the Preliminary Plan on or before Wednesday, July 30, 2003. The water system has been modified to connect to the District's high pressure system, at an existing, valved 8 -inch stub -out located at the intersection of Battlement Mesa parkway and Stone Quarry Road near the northeast property comer. The existing high pressure system apparently does not extend further south to 302 Road as previously believed. HCE has obtained a copy of as -built utility plans from the District for the basis of the current design, and the proposed water connection has apparently been verified by the District's distribution system operating personnel. With the water connection relocated, and also with consideration of system velocities during fire flow scenarios,.HCB proposes to extend two separate 8 -inch water mains from the new PRV vault, one along Battlement Mesa Parkway, and the second along Stone Quarry Road to form a loop to each end of Valley View Drive in the subdivision, This new water line alignment requires an air and vacuum relief valve at the high point near Stone Quarry Road and Valley View Drive, which has been included in the current set of Plans. Also, water and sewer alignments along Angelica Circle have been tnodified per our July 1, 2003 comments. The water line is now located in the street, south of the existing high pressure gas line, with water service lines extended across the gas line to the 6- and 4-plex units north of Angelica Circle. The sewerline has been realigned to the north side of the gas line, behind the curb and gutter, but is still within the street right-of-way. Manholes have been located in paved parking areas. The following are our comments on the Preliminary Plans and water report. In general, the Plans provide conceptual alignments and appurtenances necessary for the water and sewer systems. Our review is prefaced on the general layout and design for preliminary plan approval, and do not constitute review comments for construction approval. Detailed comments on the final Construction Plans will be reserved until such time that the Preliminary Nan is approved by Garfield County. Jul 29 03 02:33p 7-29-2003 2-33PM FROM i!WATER ENGR 970 241 7097 Bruce Smith July 29, 2003 Page 2 Water report, Revised July 24, 2003 • 1. We would recommend that fire hydrants be flow tested by the Fire Department once installed as a part of initial acceptance testing for each phase of construction, to verify that the required fire flow at each hydrant (or at each group of adjacent hydrants within reach of the needed fire flow) can be achieved. Revised Plans - Water Distribution System 1. All water line crossings should be shown on the sewerline profiles. Crossings have not been shown on Sheets 20 and 21. Also, there are two water line crossings shown in the profile on Sheet 25 near M1 -1-D5, but only one crossing is shown in plan view. 2. The plan and section of the PRV vault on Sheet 33 should include the direction of flow arrow. Also, these two connections of the PRV vault inconsistently show the inlet pipe as 12 -inch diameter (plan) and 8 -inch diameter (section), which should be corrected. 3. The air/vac valve manhole vault at Stone Quarry Road and Valley View Drive should be revised so that the air/vac valve is installed directly on the waterline We would suggest the waterline profile be described to provide the high point in Valley View Drive to avoid the manhole being placed in higher traffic volume of Stone Quarry Road. The vent pipe can be extended behind the sidewalk or back of curb. Unless there is groundwater in the area the valve vault should be a manhole barrel section with a gravel drain bedding (Standard Air/Vac Vault), Revised Plans - Sanitary Sewer System I. We would question whether additional separation can be provided between the sewerline and the proposed buried gas, electric, telephone, and cable lines (GETC) along Angelica Circle. 2. The sewer service lines for multi -family cots should be identified by unit number of the lot on construction drawings and as-builts of the sewer system for the District's future reference. In addition, if the building envelopes are better defined at the time construction plans arc developed, the sewer service lines should be aligned with the individual units_ 3. Sewer service lines should be stationed on the Utility Composite. This comment is repeated, since the District will reference the Utility Composite in the future when locating service lines. 4. Manholes should be stationed on the Utility Composite. This comment is repeated from our July 1 comments, since the ties to service lines for field locating will be from manholes_ 5. The sewerlines have been realigned at Valley View Drive, Angelica Circle and Gregory Lane to the street, and several manholes have been added to accommodate the current alignments. It would appear that by relocating MH -A9 to the street centerline and approximately 5 -feet Jul 29 03 02:33p 7-29-2003 2:3aPM Bruce Smith July 29, 2003 Page 3 FROM *WATER ENGR 970 261 7097 • north (downstream), that MH -B 1 could be eliminated, and MH -A8 relocated to the center of lane approximately 65 -feet downstream from MH -A4. This would still provide for the minimum direction of flow deflection of 90° at MH -A4. In addition, the sewerline profile for Gregory Lane has not been revised to show the new manhole (MH -Al per Sheet 18 or MH - C4 per Sheet 25). 6. Manhole numbering is inconsistent between the Utility Composite sheets and Plan and Profile sheets for the sewerlines along Cliff View Court, Gregory Lane, Cliff View Lane and Angelica Circle, and should be corrected. Also, each manhole should have a unique number, i.e. the designation MH -C 1 should be used only once for one manhole. 7. A profile should be provided for the sewerline stub -out to the east of MH -A5. Also, future extension of the stub -out will require a new manhole if the grade and alignment of the stub - out does not match future design grade and alignment. Also concrete encasement of the sewerline at the waterline crossing should be called out for this section of sewerline The aforementioned comments should be fairly easy to address for the District's consideration of the Preliminary Plan. Should you have any questions or comments on the current water and sewer system conceptual design, please do not hesitate to call our office. Respectfully, Stephen T. LaBonde cc: Pamara Prefl, Garfield County Planning Department Darin Carei, Darter LLC Ron Weidler, High Country Engineering P a P.5 Jul 29 03 02:21p • • CONSOLIDATED METROPOLITAN DISTRICT 109 TAMARISK TRAIL / P.O. BOX 6116 / BATTLEMENT MESA, CO 81636 (970) 285-9050 / FAX (970) 285-9631 July 29, 2003 Tamara Pregl, Staff Planner Garfield County Planning Department 108 8th Street, Suite 201 Glenwood Springs, CO 81601 Re: Valley View Village PUD EXHIBIT Dear Ms. Pregl: Although I have not seen the latest version of the PUD water and wastewater plans, as discussed in the attached letter from Steve LaBonde of WestWater Engineering, the Valley View Village Subdivision water and wastewater plans are approved for the Preliminary Planning process. The District has capacity and will serve the proposed development subject to the terms and conditions expressed by Mr. LaBonde, and the additional conditions of Garfield County and the Grand Valley Fire Protection District. Very truly yours, /ri"? R. Bruce Smith District Manager cc: WestWater Engineering CMD Board of Directors • 1 OCti.V.5) 0_ 3 �,� 105 Juniper Lane p° � Parachute, CO 81635 �„p1NG July 28,2003 To: President Terry Lawrence To: Darin Carei, V.P. Grace Homes Real Estate & Construction Inc. EXHIBIT .441a - To: Battlement Mesa Partners Inc. President Tom Beard Battlement Mesa Homes Inc. President William Wilde Battlement Mesa Partners Inc. Vice President Lynn Shore Battlement Mesa Service Association President Chuck Hall Chairman of Battlement Mesa Architectural Committee Charles Haberman Garfield County Commissioners John Martin, Tresi Houpt & Larry McGowan Garfield County Planning Commission This letter is in answer to Mr. Carei's letter sent to Battlement Mesa Grace Homes Real Estate, Construction Inc., Subcontractors, Employees and delivered to Peggy Rawlins, Battlement Mesa Service Association member representing Monument Creek & the Battlement Mesa Architect Committee Inspector. When the foundation was laid for the home on Juniper Lane and the home on Ponderosa in Monument Creek by Grace Home Builders there were complaints that the foundation wall was too high and during the rainy season water would pour down the steep slope and cause the neighbors problems. After several calls concerning this problem, the wall was lowered and the neighbors were pleased. However, there was much construction mess around and no dumpster in sight. After phone calls, a dumpster and a porta potty were installed. Then during the most windy week of the summer, the men laid tar paper on the roof and went home. Nothing was protecting the paper from the wind , so for weeks the tar paper has blown all over our neighborhood. To this day, July 27, 2003 the tar paper is still blowing off of the house on Ponderosa. • • A truck arrived, parked on Ponderosa and proceeded to make ruts in the pavement. Other trucks have dripped large round circles of oil on both Juniper and Ponderosa. I have taken pictures of this unnecessary damage and called Mr. Carei about this. The result was the afore mentioned letter sent out June 23, 2003. The problem also concerned the loud swearing, yelling , urinating on site and trash not put in the dumpster. So the letter stated the sites would either be cleaned up by the end of the week, or the workers would be fined $50.00. The next problem concerned the workers smoking around the house at 2:00a.m. At the Ponderosa site, the truck was left on the street all night, the air compressor ran all night and the cooler was left on the sidewalk for two days and two nights. We understand Mr. Carei talked to the workers on Ponderosa and they indicated they did not sleep overnight. However, the sheriff was called previously for the same issue and workers were warned that they could not sleep overnight in the house. It is the neighbors contention that after the sheriff left, the workers did sleep overnight. This house construction is shoddy, poorly built with cheap material and not up to standards of other homes in the surrounding area. It is our contention that if this construction continues in this vein, our home values will drop and more importantly, will affect all Battlement Mesa homes when the builders begin their planned Valley View homes on Battlement Mesa, located off of Battlement Mesa Parkway and Stone Quarry Road. Sincerely, Peggy Rawlins 1,13 \ -2,0j • Grace Home: 105 Ponderosa Cir. General comments: From the start there seems to be very little co-ordination of the work plan. Weeks go by without any activity. The site continues to be unorganized. My concern is that this builder does not meet the standards of the other builders in this area. Potential buyers could be turned off with this area because of the messy site and our home values could be affected_ Problem items: 1. The garage opening was too high for proper access. I called the Garfield County inspection department. t see what could done. The inspection depart ent said they had no responsibility for this. 2. I called the Rifle Road and Bridge department and was informed that they had no responsibility for this_ They suggested that I contact the Battlement Mesa Management for their input. 3. I called Bill Wilde and was told that they had no responsibility for this item. Bill referred me to the architectural committee. 4. I called Grace Homes and talked with Terry Lawrence and informed him of the problem. He came out and agreed to correct the problem by cutting out foundation opening to improve access. The foundation was finally cut out to improve access. 5. Framers: The framers were using so much foul language that we home owners had to request them to tone it down. 6. Trash container: Trash and scrap lumber were left in front of the structure for several weeks causing a severe eye sore. I contacted Grace Homes to request that a trash container be put on site. Thery said that there should have been one a week ago. Finally a trash container was put on site. I had to make another call to Terry Lawrence to see who would be picking up the trash and putting it into the container. Terry said that he would send up a cleaning crew to do this. A crew was sent out and the trash picked up. 7. Roofers: A crew of three men and one woman arrived early in the day and did nothing until late in the day. They used a lot of foul language and had to be requested to tone it down. One of the men urinated on the side of the house instead of using the port -a -potty on site. The roofers had a pick-up truck with a camper on it. They asked the owner at 89 Ponderosa if they could borrow an extension cord so they could have coffee in the morning. The neighbor refused and told them they should not be staying over night on site. I contacted the Garfield County Sheriffs department to report the foul language and the fact that the roofers planned to stay over night on site. The sheriff's department reported that the roofers didn't intend to spend the night. How ever they did spend the night. 8. Roofing paper: The wind ripped off all of the paper. Since then the shingles have been delivered and stacked on the roof. Concern: will new paper be put down before the shingles are installed?? 9. Building wrap: Partially installed_ Very little action occurring on site. Siding material has been delivered but no further action taking place. Signed: Neil Fechner, 98 5� Ponderosa ,cir. Parachute, Co • July 14, 03 What's Wrong with Grace Homes/114 Ponderosa Cir: They excavated three times for the foundation and backfilled twice. Although they tamped it both times with a robot tractor, that is not sufficient for foundation footings. Since the periphery was not tamped with a pneumatic tamper, it is very likely that the house will develop far more than normal cracks from settling. The house is too high on the lot. (One of the owners himself was heard to say that.) One result is that the original level intended for the garage would have created a drive -way with a dangerous 20 to 25% slope. A vehicle backed out of that garage onto an icy or snow packed drive could have slid directly across the street and almost into the garage of 110 Ponderosa. To (partially) correct the driveway problem, they cut out a piece of the foundation to lower the garage floor approximately 2 1/2 feet, and then backfilled the garage to that level. But there is no evidence so far that they are going to tamp that fill, and if they do not, the garage floor is almost guaranteed to cave in. The crew who put the tarpaper underlay on the roof were indecently foul- mouthed, yelling profanity and obscenities which could be heard a half block away, and one of the men urinated on the neighbor's property. They camped there overnight illegally. And they used such cheap material and installation that 90% of it blew off the next couple days and all over the neighborhood -- winds that were not at all unusual for this area. Most recently, they have loosely installed what is supposed to be an exterior vapor barrier, using a very thin plastic film that no reputable contractor would ever use; and it too has started to blow off. Their equipment has made gauges in the street and partially blocked the sidewalk. Their construction area has been cluttered and cleaned up only after neighbors have registered complaints. I have never in my life seen such disorganization and ineptitude in a construction job. If I were in the market for a new house, I wouldn't give 50 cents for that house. I have seen no county inspectors on this construction, and Grace Homes apparently has no que:lity control. One of the men on the roofing debacle asked me if my house was built by Grace Homes. I consider that as an insult. , Rollin Ives 110 Ponderosa Circle • Renata & Sonny Busch / / /X / C - ;j Following are just some of the unacceptable practices we have witnessed during the building of the new house next door. Granted, we cannot prove that cigarette butts and stolen items from our property are a direct result of the workers on that site - but, what a coincidence... • Trash • Noticeable amount of cigarette butts in our yard after workers have been there. • Workers were there attempting to put tar paper on roof; they spent the night in a camper on the property - they were very foul mouthed noticeable alcohol smell on worker when he came to our house to want to hook up to our electric - worker urinated on the side of house being built (there is a porta-potty located on that property) • Items have been stolen out of the back of our truck parked in our driveway since work has started • Tar paper comes off roof and several times we have had to remove it from our yard • House wrap is incomplete and is not secure, thus making loud noises when windy • An air compressor was left on and made loud noises through out the night • Progress on this house has been very slow and shoddy and the lack of quality is apparent all around. They should be called DIS -Grace Homes. As homeowners, we are very disappointed, to say the least, with what has taken place next to our home. • 411 MASTER DECLARATION OF COVENANTS, CONDITIONS AND RESTRICTIONS FOR VALLEY VIEW VILLAGE SUBDIVISION EXHIBITPAL a THIS DECLARATION OF COVENANTS, CONDITIONS AND RESTRICTIONS FOR VALLEY VIEW VILLAGE is made and entered into this day of , 2003, by DARTER, LLC ("Declarant"). RECITALS WHEREAS, Declarant is the owner of certain property in the Southeast 1/4 of the Northwest 'A, Section 18, Township 7 South, Range 95 West of the 6th Principal Meridian, Garfield County, Colorado which is more particularly described on Exhibit "A" attached hereto; and WHEREAS, Declarant deems it desirable to impose a general plan for the improvement, development and maintenance of such property and to adopt and establish covenants, conditions and restrictions upon that property for the purpose of enhancing, maintaining and protecting the value and attractiveness thereof; and WHEREAS, Declarant deems it desirable to set aside a portion of the Property as common areas for the use of the owners of such property and to establish a Colorado nonprofit corporation known as the VALLEY VIEW VILLAGE HOMEOWNERS ASSOCIATION to which shall be responsible for the management and maintenance of the development referred to herein. NOW, THEREFORE, Declarant hereby declares Covenants, Conditions, Restrictions and Easements to be imposed on and for the benefit of Valley View Village and in furtherance of the purposes stated below, Declarant makes the following declarations: ARTICLE I GENERAL PURPOSE OF COVENANTS, SUBMISSION, DEFINED TERMS, DESCRIPTION 1.1 Purpose. This Declaration of Covenants, Conditions and Restrictions (hereinafter "Covenants") shall govern and be applicable to that certain real property located within Garfield County, Colorado, known as the Valley View Village Subdivision (hereinafter "Subdivision"), as more particularly described on the initial Final Plat thereof relating to Phase of the Subdivision, which Plat is recorded as Reception No. in the office of the Garfield County Clerk and Recorder, which Final Plat is incorporated herein by reference, and as will be shown on the respective Final Plats for Phases through , inclusive, to be recorded at such times as such Phases of the Subdivision obtain final approval, as contemplated in Article X of these Covenants. It is the intention of the owner of the Declarant, expressed by its execution of this instrument, that the lands within the Subdivision be developed and maintained as a highly desirable affordable scenic residential area. It is the purpose of these Covenants to preserve the present natural beauty and character of the property along with the views and setting of the Subdivision to the greatest extent reasonably possible, and the lots therein shall always be protected as much as possible with respect to uses, structures, landscaping, and general development as permitted by this instrument. I:\2003\Clients\Grace Homes \Documents \Covenants - VVV Master.wpd -1- • • 1.2 Property Submission. Declarant hereby submits the Valley View Village Subdivision as now shown on the Final Plat together with all easements, rights-of-way, and appurtenances thereto and any buildings, fixtures, and improvements thereon (hereinafter "Property") pursuant to the provisions of the Colorado Common Interest Ownership Act, which is set forth at C.R.S. §38-33.3-101 et seq. (hereinafter "Act") and to these Covenants. In the event the Act is repealed, the provisions of the Act on the effective date of these Covenants shall remain applicable hereto. Declarant further declares that the Property shall be held, leased, mortgaged, sold, and conveyed subject to the following terms, easements, reservations, restrictions, covenants, and conditions. Declarant further declares that these Covenants shall run with the land and shall be binding upon all parties having any right, title, or interest in the Property or any part thereof, their heirs, devisees, legal representatives, successors, and assigns and shall inure to the benefit of each and every Owner. All streets and roads located within the Subdivision shall be dedicated to the public, except for those private roads and driveways within the multi -family lots (i.e. Angelica Circle, Jessica Lane and Bryan Loop). Repair and maintenance of the streets and roads within the Subdivision shall be the sole responsibility of the Association (as hereinafter defined). 1.3 Defined Terms. Each capitalized term not otherwise defined in these Covenants shall have the meaning specified or used in the Act. 1.4. Name of Common Interest Community. The name of the Common Interest Community is "Valley View Village." 1.5 Type of Common Interest Community. The type of Common Interest Community is a planned community. 1.6. Association Name. The name of the Association is the "Valley View Village Homeowners Association," a Colorado nonprofit corporation (hereinafter "Association"). 1.7. Property Location. The Property constituting the Common Interest Community is located within the County of Garfield, State of Colorado. 1.8 Property Description. The Property shall consist of one hundred forty-nine (149) single-family lots (hereinafter "Lot" or "Lots") which are more particularly described on the Final Plat for Valley View Village. ARTICLE II DEFINITIONS 2.1 "Additional Land" shall mean and refer to additional real property subject to Declarant's unilateral right of annexation as provided elsewhere in this Declaration, which property is more particularly described as Future Filing Nos. through , Valley View Village Subdivision, Garfield County, Colorado on the Final Plat. I:\2003\Clients\Grace Homes\Documents\Covenants - V V V Master.wpd -2- • • 2.2 "Association" shall mean and refer to VALLEY VIEW VILLAGE HOMEOWNERS ASSOCIATION, its successors and assigns. The Association shall be responsible for the common areas and common elements of the development, but shall have no responsibility or duty toward the limited common areas and limited common elements. 2.3 "Attached Single Family Home" shall mean those structures comprised of two (2) single family Units sharing a common party wall, and located only on Lots 23, 24 and 25 of the Property. 2.4 "Townhome Association" shall mean and refer to VALLEY VIEW VILLAGE TOWNHOME HOMEOWNERS ASSOCIATION, its successors and assigns and shall function as a sub -association within the scope of the Association. The Townhome Association shall be responsible only for the limited common areas, the limited common elements related to the Townhome units and such other property or elements as such terms may be defined and elements declared in the Valley View Village Townhome Homeowners Association Declaration of Covenants, Conditions and Restrictions. 2.5 "Common Area" shall mean all real property (including the improvements thereto) owned or maintained by the Association for the common use and enjoyment of all the Owners. Common Area shall be owned, as tenants in common, by the Owners of the separate Units, each Unit having an undivided fractional interest in such Common Area as hereinafter provided. 2.6 "Common Elements" shall mean the outdoor lighting of the Common Area, landscaping on common areas and such other improvements as the Association may cause or accept. Common Elements shall be owned, as tenants in common, by the Owners of the separate Units, each Unit having an undivided fractional interest in such Common Elements as hereinafter provided. Any references to "common elements" appearing on the Plat (except references to limited common elements) shall be deemed solely for purposes of general information and shall not be limiting in any way, nor shall any such reference define the common elements in any way. 2.7 "Limited Common Areas" shall mean the parts of the common areas dedicated to the use and enjoyment of less than all of the Owners of Valley View Village. The "Limited Common Areas" may be defined in the Declaration of Covenants, Conditions and Restrictions to be filed by the Townhome Homeowners Association, and shall be subject to the control of the Townhome Homeowners Association. 2.8 "Limited Common Elements" shall mean the elements and components of each of the Townhome buildings as may be defined in the Declaration of Covenants, Conditions and Restrictions to be filed by the Townhome Homeowners Association, and shall be subject to the control of that Association. 2.9 "Lot" shall mean and refer to any plot of land shown upon any recorded Subdivision map or plat of the Properties with the exception of the Common Area, and where required by the context, shall include or mean the Unit. I:\2003\Clients\Grace Homes\Documents\Covenants - V V V Master.wpd -3- • • 2.10 "Mortgage" shall mean any mortgage or deed of trust or other conveyance of a Unit, or any interest therein, including but not limited to the improvements thereon, to secure the performance of an obligation, which Unit will be reconveyed upon completion of such performance. 2.11 "Mortgagee" shall mean and include mortgagees, trustees, beneficiaries and holders of deeds of trust, and the holders of any indebtedness secured by a Mortgage. 2.12 "Mortgagor" shall mean and include mortgagors and trustors under deeds of trust. 2.13 "Owner" shall mean and refer to the record owner, whether one or more persons or entities, of a fee simple title to any Lot or Unit which is a part of the Properties, including contract sellers but excluding those having such interest merely as security for the performance of an obligation. 2.14 "Properties" shall mean and refer to the certain real property hereinabove described, and such additions thereto as may hereafter be brought within the jurisdiction of the Association. 2.15 "Unit" means, as the context requires, a single family lot, one portion of an Attached Single Family Home or a single Townhome unit in a Townhome building. ARTICLE III OWNERS - HOMEOWNERS ASSOCIATION 3.1 Formation and Membership. The Association shall be a nonprofit Colorado corporation charged with the duties and vested with the powers prescribed by law and as set forth in its Articles of Incorporation, Bylaws and this Declaration of Covenants, Conditions and Restrictions Neither the Articles nor Bylaws of the Association shall, for any reason, be amended or otherwise changed or interpreted so as to be inconsistent with these Covenants. This Association shall be a membership association without certificates or shares of stock. All Owners, including Declarant, who own or acquire the title in fee to any of the Lots in the Subdivision by whatever means acquired shall automatically become members of Association. Membership in the Association shall automatically terminate when an Owner of one of the Lots ceases to be an Owner of such Lot. Each Unit within the Subdivision shall be entitled to one (1) vote. In addition to all duties imposed upon it by the laws of the State of Colorado, by its Articles of Incorporation, its Bylaws and by this Declaration of Covenants, Conditions and Restrictions, the Association shall have the sole responsibility, at its sole cost and expense, to maintain all common Open Areas and open space corridors. For the benefit of wildlife indigenous to the area of the Subdivision, the Association shall see that wildlife cover and forage is property maintained in these open areas. 3.2 Executive Board and Officers. The affairs of the Association shall be governed by an Executive Board consisting of at least three (3) and no more than seven (7) members elected by the Owners. The initial Board shall be comprised of three (3) members. The Executive Board I:\2003\Clients\Grace Homes\Documents\Covenants - VVV Master.wpd -4- • • may elect or appoint officers in accordance with its Articles and Bylaws as the same may be amended from time to time. The Executive Board may also appoint various committees and hire employees as may be required. The Board shall determine the compensation to be paid to any employee of the Association. 3.3 Purpose. The Association, through its Executive Board, shall be authorized and empowered to take each and every step necessary or convenient for the implementation and enforcement of the Covenants contained in this Declaration. The Association shall have the right and responsibility to maintain, preserve, repair, insure, and otherwise protect and promote the interests of the Owners with respect to all common properties and interests of the Owners and the Association. The Association shall be governed by its Articles of Incorporation and Bylaws as may be amended from time to time. 3.4 Common Elements. The Association shall own, operate, and maintain all Common Elements within the Subdivision. These common elements shall include, among other things, the potable water system, the raw water irrigation system, the internal trail system, the sewage lines located within the Subdivision until such time as Garfield County requests said lines be dedicated to it, any sidewalks within the Subdivision, and any landscaping undertaken by Declarant or the Association in accordance with the provisions hereof. 3.5 Declarant Control. The Declarant shall have the reserved power, pursuant to the Act, to appoint and remove officers and members of the Executive Board. This period of Declarant control ("period of Declarant Control") terminates no later than the earlier of (a) sixty (60) days after conveyance of seventy-five percent (75%) of the Lots to Owners other than the Declarant or (b) two (2) years after the last conveyance of a Unit by the Declarant in the ordinary course of business to an Owner other than Declarant. During the period of Declarant Control, the Declarant's Control shall be subject to the following limitations: a. Not later than sixty (60) days after conveyance of twenty-five percent (25%) of the Units that may be created to Owners other than the Declarant, at least one (1) member and not less than twenty-five percent (25%) of the members of the Executive Board must be elected by Owners other than the Declarant. b. Not later than sixty (60) days after conveyance of fifty percent (50%) of the Units that may be created to Owners other than the Declarant, not less than thirty-three and one-third percent (33 1/3%) of the members of the Executive Board must be elected by Owners other than the Declarant. 3.6 Limited Liability and Indemnification. To the fullest extent permitted by law, neither the Association nor its past, present or future officers, directors, nor any employee, agent or committee member of the Association, nor the Declarant shall be liable to any Owner or to any other person for any damage, act, omission to act, simple negligence or other matter of any kind or nature, except gross negligence. Without limit to the foregoing, the Association, the Board and the Declarant shall not be liable to any party for any action or for any failure to act, in good faith and without malice. Acts taken upon the advice of legal counsel, certified public accountants, registered or licensed engineers, architects or surveyors shall conclusively be deemed to be in good faith and without malice. To the extent insurance carried by the Association for such purposes I:\2003\Clients\Grace Homes\Documents\Covenants - VVV Master.wpd -5- • • shall not be adequate, the Owners severally agree to indemnify the Association, the Board and the Declarant against all loss resulting from such action or failure to act, including expenses and liabilities, attorneys' fees, reasonably incurred by or imposed upon them in any proceeding to which they may be a party, or in which they may become involved. The foregoing limitations of liability shall extend to the officers, agents, legal representatives and owners of Declarant. 3.7 Notice to Owners. Notice to an Owner of matters affecting the Subdivision by the Association or by another Owner shall be sufficiently given if such notice is in writing and is delivered personally, by courier, or private service delivery or on the third business day after deposit in the mails for registered or certified mail, return receipt requested, at the address of record for real property tax assessment notices with respect to that Owner's Lot. ARTICLE IV EASEMENTS AND LICENSES 4.1 Unit Owners' Easements. Every Owner shall have a right of enjoyment and easement for access to their Lot through or over the Common Elements, and such easement shall be appurtenant to and shall pass with the title to every Lot, subject to the following provisions: a. The right of the Association to promulgate and publish rules and regulations with which each Owner and their guests shall strictly comply. b. The right of the Association to suspend the voting rights and rights to use the Common Elements by any Owner for any period during which any assessment against their Lot remains unpaid and for a period not to exceed sixty (60) days for any infraction of its rules and regulations. c. The right of the Association to grant easements, leases, licenses, and concessions through or over the Common Elements. d. The right of the Association to convey or subject a Common Element to a Security Interest in accordance with and to the extent permitted by the Act. e. The right of the Association to close or limit the use of the Common Elements while maintaining, repairing, or replacing such Common Elements. f. Any Owner may delegate their right of enjoyment to the Common Elements and facilities to the members of their family, their tenants, or guests who reside on or rent their Lot. g. The terms and conditions of these Covenants. 4.2 Easements Shown on Final Plat. The Association is entitled to use such easements as are reflected on the Final Plat for the Subdivision. Except by agreement with a property Owner, the Association shall have no obligation to pay any amount for the use and enjoyment of such easement. The Association shall pay for the cost of maintaining and repairing any improvements which it places on any easements. I:\2003\Clients\Grace Homes \Documents \Covenants - V V V Master.wpd -6- • • In addition, maintenance of the twenty -foot (20') Buffer, Pedestrian and Utility Easement, approved previously as part of the Planned Unit Development, shall be the sole responsibility and at the sole expense of the Association. No development of any kind, including without limitation fencing, shall be allowed in the Buffer, Pedestrian and Utility Easement. 4.3 Easements for Access and Repairs. The Association shall be entitled to an easement across any of the Lots within the Subdivision for the purposes of accessing any of the Association's property, protecting any Association property, or for necessary repairs or emergency circumstances. The Association may access all Lots within the Subdivision at reasonable times to determine compliance with the conditions of approvals of the Subdivision granted by the County of Garfield and to determine and enforce compliance with all of the provisions of these Covenants. ARTICLE V USE RESTRICTIONS 5.1 General Restriction. The Property shall be used only for the residential dwelling purposes subject to the applicable rules and regulations of all governmental authorities having jurisdiction. Permanent occupancy of any Lot shall be limited to two (2) adults or three (3) children per bedroom. 5.2 Limited Business Activities. Subject to all applicable governmental regulations, and in addition to residential purposes, in-home business activities or occupations not involving the provision of on site services for customers or use of employees on site (other than Owners) shall be allowed, provided such activities; (i) are conducted solely within the Lot, (ii) do not materially increase motor vehicle traffic on the Property, (iii) do not create any external indication of an in home business, and (iv) do not generate any noise, smoke, dust, odors, heat or other offensive or noxious emanations on the Property. Notwithstanding the foregoing, business activities associated with the sale of Lots shall be allowed. 5.3 Construction and Alteration of Improvements. No Owner shall construct, erect, place any structure or replace, repair, reconstruct, refinish or alter any part of the exterior of any Lot or other Improvement upon, under or above any part of the Property without the written consent of the Architectural Committee and compliance with the provisions of this Declaration. However, improvements and alterations which are completely within the interior of a Lot's structure may be undertaken without such approval. No towers, exterior radio, television or communication antennae or dish receivers larger than twenty-four inches (24") in diameter, nails, holes, or other punctures on deck membranes, sheds, fences, outbuildings or other structures shall be permitted without the prior written approval of the Architectural Board. Dish receivers twenty-four inches (24") in diameter or less are permitted only on the side of the building and not on the roof. In the event of any requested addition or alteration, the Architectural Committee may require that the applicant (i) submit plans and specifications showing the nature, kind, shape, heights, color, materials and location of the proposed addition or alteration in sufficient detail for the Architectural Committee to properly review same and (ii) pay for processing and review costs, which may include any professional fees the Association may incur in retaining architects or engineers to review the plans and specifications. The review by the Executive Committee shall specifically consider the impact of the addition or I:\2003\Clients\Grace Homes\Documents\Covenants - VVV Master.wpd -7- • • alteration on the harmony of external design and location with surrounding structures and topography. Any approval may impose such terms and conditions as the Architectural Committee deems appropriate. No building or improvements shall contain exterior roofs or siding materials which are reflective or shiny. Any construction activity on any Lot in the Subdivision shall be completed, fully cleaned up, and landscaped within twelve (12) months from the issuance of a building permit, unless the Owner shall first obtain a variance from the Architectural Committee to allow for a longer period of construction upon proof of due diligence. In the event a variance is not secured and twelve (12) months from issuance of a building permit has passed, the Association may assess penalties in any amount it deems appropriate. Upon commencement of any construction on any Lot in the Subdivision, the Owner shall complete said construction with reasonable diligence. 5.4 Subdivision or Change in Boundaries of Lots. No Lot may be subdivided nor shall the boundaries of any Lot be altered or relocated except as provided by the Act. A relocation of a boundary of a Lot maybe approved by the Association in its sole discretion, subject to the provisions of Section 5.3; provided, however, that Declarant reserves the right to resubdivide Lots as set forth in the Plat of the Subdivision recorded as set forth above, as and when such resubdivision is appropriate and feasible. 5.5 No Partition of Common Elements. The Common Elements shall be owned by the Association, and no Owner shall bring any action for partition or division of the Common Elements. By acceptance of a deed or other instrument of conveyance or assignment, each Owner shall be deemed to have specifically waived such Owner's rights to commence or maintain a partition action or any other action designed to cause a division of the Common Elements. This Section may be pleaded as a bar to any such action. Any Owner who commences or maintains any such action shall be liable for and agrees to reimburse the Association for its costs, expenses and reasonable attorneys' fees in defending any such action. 5.6 Compliance with Laws. Subject to the rights of reasonable contest, each Owner shall promptly comply with the provisions of all applicable laws, regulations and ordinances with respect to the Property, including, without limitation, all applicable environmental laws and regulations. 5.7 Nuisance. No obnoxious or offensive activity shall be carried on within the Property, nor shall anything be done or permitted which shall constitute a public nuisance. 5.8 Prohibition of Increases in Insurable Risks. Nothing shall be done or kept on the Property or in any Lot which would result in the cancellation or reduction of insurance on all or any part of the Property or in an increase in the cost of such insurance, but for such activity, without the prior written approval of the Association. 5.9 Prohibition against Damage or Waste. No damage to or waste of the Property, including any portion of the Common Elements, shall be committed by any Owner. Each Owner hereby agrees to indemnify and hold the Association and the other Owners harmless against any damage or waste caused by such Owner and agrees to pay for or reimburse the Association for any I:\2003\Clients\Grace Homes\Documents\Covenants - VVV Master.wpd -8- • • and all costs and expenses resulting from any damage or waste caused by an Owner or that Owner's family, tenants, guests, pets, employees, contractors, agents, licensees, and invitees. 5.10 Obstructions. No person shall obstruct or interfere with the free use of walkways, driveways, drainage structures or other Common Elements, except as may be reasonably required for repairs. The Association shall take such action as may be necessary to abate or enjoin any interference with or obstruction of walkways, paths and drainage courses. 5.11 Leasing and Restrictions on Alienation. A Lot may not be owned or occupied pursuant to a time-sharing arrangement described in Sections 38-33-110 to 113, Colorado Revised Statutes. An Owner shall have the right to lease a Lot, provided that such lease shall be in writing and subject to the reasonable requirements of the Executive Board, and provided further that no lots may be leased on a daily or weekly basis. Any lease shall be made expressly subject to this Declaration and all Association Rules. Any failure of a tenant to comply with this Declaration shall be a default under the lease and the Owner shall be liable for any violation of this Declaration committed by the Owner's tenant, without prejudice to the Owner's rights against the Owner's tenant. 5.12 Vehicles. Not more than three (3) motor vehicles may be kept on the Property for each Unit. No guest of an Owner shall use a parking space designated for visitors for more than three (3) days without the consent of the Executive Board, which may impose a fee for such use. No trucks, recreational vehicles, motor homes, motor coaches, snowmobiles, campers, trailers, boats or boat trailers or similar vehicles (other than passenger automobiles or pickup or utility trucks with a capacity of one ton or less) or any other vehicles shall be parked, stored or kept on any portion of the Property. This restriction shall not prohibit occasional parking of commercial, service and construction vehicles, in the ordinary course of business, from making deliveries or otherwise providing service to the Property. No work on vehicles, including repairs, shall be performed on any portion of the Property, except in emergencies. Abandoned or inoperable vehicles shall not be stored or parked on any portion of the Property. An abandoned or inoperable vehicle is any vehicle which has not been driven under its own propulsion for three (3) weeks or longer and which appears incapable of operation. A written notice describing the abandoned or inoperable vehicle and requesting its removal shall be personally served upon the Owner or posted on the vehicle. If such vehicle has not been removed within seventy-two (72) hours after notice is given, the Association may remove the vehicle without liability and the expense of removal shall be charged against the Owner. The Association shall have the right to assess and enforce penalties against Owners violating these restrictions applying to vehicles as follows: One Hundred Dollars ($100.00) for the first violation and One Hundred Dollars ($100.00) plus an additional Fifty Dollars ($50.00) for each subsequent violation, such that the fine increases in Fifty Dollar ($50.00) increments for each succeeding violation. 5.13 Animals and Pets. Each Owner may keep a reasonable number of common household pets; provided, however, that only one (1) dog and/or two (2) cats will be allowed for each new residential Unit and the animals shall be required to be confined within the Owner's property boundaries. Dogs and cats shall be neutered or spayed. The type of behavior of permitted pets shall be regulated by the Association Rules. Pets shall not be kept in the Common Elements or in the I:\2003\Clients\Grace Homes \Documents\Covenants - V V V Master.wpd -9- • • parking area. No pet shall cause any nuisance by noise or otherwise. Any animal waste deposited on the Common Elements shall be immediately removed by the Owner and placed in a trash receptacle. Other than common household pets, no livestock or poultry of any kind shall be kept, raised or bred on any portion of the Property. Notwithstanding the foregoing, no animal(s) may be kept within a Lot or a dwelling which, in the good -faith judgment of the Executive Board, result(s) in any annoyance to residents in the vicinity or to Owners within the Subdivision. Except as expressly limited herein, domestic animals shall be permitted subject to any rules and regulations which may be promulgated by the Executive Board. The Association shall have the right to assess and enforce penalties against Owners violating these restrictions applying to dogs and cats as follows: One Hundred Dollars ($100.00) for the first violation committed by an Owner's dog, and One Hundred Dollars ($100.00) plus an additional Fifty Dollars ($50.00) for each subsequent violation, such that the fine increases in Fifty Dollar ($50.00) increments for each succeeding violation. If any dog or cat commits four (4) violations or any dog is caught chasing or molesting deer, elk, or any domestic animals, the Association shall be authorized to prohibit the property Owner from continuing to maintain the offending animal on the Owner's property. 5.14 Signs. No signs of any kind shall be displayed to the public view on or from any portion of the Property except those signs approved by the Executive Board, business signs of Declarant or its affiliates, or signs required by law. 5.15 Solid Waste. No trash, ashes, garbage, rubbish, debris or other refuse shall be thrown, dumped or otherwise accumulated on the Property. There shall be no burning of refuse. Each Owner shall use the central receptacles for the temporary storage and collection of solid waste, which shall be screened from public view and protected from wind, animals and other disturbances. Each Unit shall be kept in a sanitary condition, free of offensive odors, rodent and insect infestations at the Owner's sole cost. 5.16 Outside Burning. There shall be no exterior fires except in propane or charcoal grill. No Owner shall allow any condition upon such Owner's Lot which creates a fire hazard or violates fire prevention regulations. 5.17 Yard Maintenance. Each Owner shall keep and maintain the yard within the Lot so as to be free from trash, debris, and weeds. Grass shall be kept mowed during the summer months, and landscaping shall be watered, trimmed, pruned as necessary to maintain a clean and attractive appearance. Any backyard storage must be kept within a well-maintained shed. The open storage of junk automobiles, machinery, appliances, junk piles, scrap piles and other materials which may be used by mammals such as skunks and raccoons for denning sites is strictly prohibited. 5.18 Noxious Weeds. All Owners of vacant Lots within the Subdivision shall be required to manage noxious weeds as provided by Colorado law. In the event an Owner shall fail to fulfill this requirement, the Association shall be authorized to enter the Lot and remove the noxious weeds, with an appropriate charge to the Owner thereof as set forth herein. I:\2003\Clients\Grace Homes \Documents \Covenants - V V V Master.wpd -10- • • 5.19 Noise. No exterior horns, whistles, bells or other sound devices, except security devices approved in writing by the Executive Board, shall be placed or used on any portion of the Property. Owners shall not allow any noise or disturbance in or on their respective Units which is offensive, disturbing or otherwise detrimental to any other person. 5.20 Lighting. No flood lighting, security lighting or other type of high intensity lighting shall be permitted without the approval of the Executive Board. 5.21 Underground Utility Lines. With respect to the new construction or extension of any utilities, all water, sewer, gas, electrical, telephone, cable television, and other utility pipes or lines within the limits of Valley View Village shall be buried underground and not be carried on overhead poles or above the surface of the ground. Any areas of natural vegetation or terrain in the Subdivision disturbed by the burying of utility lines shall be revegetated by and at the expense of the Owner or Owners causing the installation of the utilities no later than the next growing season following installation. 5.22 Mining, Drilling, or Quarrying. Mining, quarrying, tunneling, excavating, or drilling for any substance within the earth, including oil, gas, minerals, gravel, sand, rock, and earth, shall not be permitted within the limits of the Subdivision. Individual wells shall not be permitted on any Lot, and no Owner shall be permitted to drill for water on his Lot, unless prior approval shall have been obtained from the Architectural Committee. 5.23 Trees. Each Owner shall be required to plant the minimum number of trees on their respective Lots as specifically required by the Design Guidelines and Standards developed by the Architectural Committee. No Owner shall remove any healthy, living trees without first having obtained the approval of the Architectural Committee. All construction, landscaping, and development on any Lot shall seek to minimize the removal of trees and to preserve the natural trees and vegetation to the greatest extent possible while bearing in mind wildfire considerations. 5.24 Hunting and Wildlife Control. Hunting shall be prohibited within the Property. With the approval of the Association, and, when appropriate, after consultation with the Colorado Division of Wildlife, an Owner may, consistent with the requirements of law, destroy or remove wildlife which constitutes a nuisance or which may die on their property. In the event bears become a nuisance with respect to trash containers kept on any Lot within the Subdivision, the Association will require Owners to install bear -proof garbage containers. The Colorado Division of Wildlife is not responsible for the removal of bears and mountain lions just because they are spotted or seen in or near the Subdivision. It shall be the sole responsibility of the Owner of any Lot within the Subdivision to remove and dispose of the carcass of any animal (e.g., deer or racoon) found on such Lot. It shall be the sole responsibility of the Association to dispose of the carcass of any such animal found on any of the Common Areas within the Subdivision. 5.25 Addresses, Number, and Location of Buildings. No buildings shall be placed, erected, altered, or permitted to remain on any Lot except as approved by the Architectural Committee. All addresses shall be posted in conspicuous locations for ease of identification I:\2003\Clients\Grace Homes \Documents \Covenants - V V V Master.wpd -11- • • 5.26 Enclosure ofUnsightly Facilities and Equipment. All unsightly structures, facilities, equipment, and other items, including but not limited to those specified below, shall be enclosed within a solid structure sufficient to screen such things from view from the common roads and neighboring homes to the greatest extent possible. Any motor home, trailer, boat, tractor, motorcycle, snow removal or garden equipment, and any similar item shall be kept at all times, except when in actual use, in an enclosed garage. Any refuse or trash containers, utility meters, propane tanks, fuel storage tanks, or other facilities, service area, or storage pile shall be enclosed within a structure or appropriately screened from view by planting or fencing approved by the Architectural Committee and adequate to conceal the same from neighbors, streets, and private roads. No lumber, metals, bulk materials, scrap, refuse, or trash shall be kept, stored, or allowed to accumulate on any Lot except building materials during the course of construction and only for such reasonable periods of time as are necessary prior to the collection of or disposal thereof. 5.27 Common Areas and Open Space. All common areas and open space within the Subdivision shall be restricted to recreational, irrigation, and utility uses only, and shall not be used for residential purposes. 5.28 Unauthorized Vehicles. No snowmobiles or all -terrain vehicles (ATVs) shall be operated within the Subdivision. 5.29 General Restriction. All Lots in the Subdivision shall comply with restrictions contained in any other section of these Protective Covenants. ARTICLE VI ARCHITECTURAL COMMITTEE 6.1 Architectural Committee. The Architectural Committee shall be composed of between three (3) and five (5) persons. During the period of Declarant Control, Declarant may appoint the members of the Architectural Committee which may include officers, directors, or shareholders of Declarant, in Declarant's sole discretion, and the Executive Board of the Association shall have no authority to remove any member so appointed. Upon the sale of the last Lot in the Subdivision, or at an earlier time as determined by Declarant, the members of the Architectural Committee shall be appointed by the Executive Board of the Association. The persons serving on the Architectural Committee shall serve at the pleasure of the Executive Board which may remove a member of the Architectural Committee, except a member appointed by Declarant, and appoint a new member at any time, provided there shall at all times be at least three (3) persons serving on the Architectural Committee. The members of the Architectural Committee may also be directors of the Association and need not be Owners. The Architectural Committee shall have and exercise all the powers, duties, and responsibilities set out in this instrument. 6.2 Approval by Architectural Committee. No improvements of any kind, including but not limited to dwelling units, garages, accessory buildings, swimming pools, ponds, parking areas, fences, walls, driveways, antennae, satellite dishes, and walks shall be constructed, erected, altered, or permitted to remain within the Subdivision, nor shall any excavating, tree cutting, and clearing or landscaping be done within the Subdivision, unless the complete architectural plans and specifications, and a site plan showing the location and orientation thereof, for such erection or I:\2003\Clients\Grace Homes\Docunents\Covenants - V V V Master.wpd -12- IP r alteration and landscaping are approved by the Architectural Committee prior to the commencement of such work, except as Declarant may be specifically permitted to do by these Covenants or required to do by any subdivision improvements agreement between the Declarant and Garfield County. Revegetation of all infills and cuts will be required. Plans addressing the revegetation of infills and cuts will be submitted to the Architectural Committee prior to any excavation. At least three (3) complete sets of the architectural and site development plans and specifications shall be submitted to the Architectural Committee along with a complete list of all exterior materials and colors to be used. All copies of the complete plans and specifications shall be signed and dated for identification by the Owner or the Owner's architect. The Architectural Committee shall have the right to request whatever additional specification information, plans, reports, and the like it deems necessary to evaluate the development proposal throughout the approval and construction process. In addition, the Architectural Committee may adopt rules and regulations which shall specify the information, reports, plans, specifications, and the like required to be submitted to the Architectural Committee. In the event the Architectural Committee fails to take any action within forty-five (45) days after three (3) copies of the complete architectural and site development plans, specifications, materials, and colors have been submitted to it and the submittal has been certified in writing by the Architectural Committee as complete, then all of such submitted architectural plans shall be deemed to be approved. The Architectural Committee shall not unreasonably disapprove the architectural plans. The majority vote of the members of the Architectural Committee shall be required for approval of plans. In the event the Architectural Committee shall disapprove any architectural plans, the person or entity submitting such architectural plans may appeal the matter to the next annual or special meeting of the members of the Association where a vote of seventy-five percent (75%) of the members' votes entitled to be cast at said members' meetings shall be required to change the decision of the Architectural Committee. 6.3 Improvements - Site Location. Site review for any and all structures and improvements must be undertaken by the Architectural Committee. 6.4 Building Permits. An Owner may apply for a building permit from the Garfield County Building Department at any time; provided, however, the plans approved by the Building Department shall not differ in any substantial way from the plans approved by the Architectural Committee. If the plans approved by the Building Department differ in any substantial way as determined by the Architectural Committee, then all approvals of the Architectural Committee shall be deemed automatically revoked. Owners must comply with all Garfield County zoning and subdivision regulations relating to off-street parking. 6.5 Variances. The Architectural Committee may, by an affirmative vote of a majority of the members of the Architectural Committee, allow reasonable variances as to any of the covenants and restrictions governing architectural control contained in this instrument and/or policies or rules promulgated by the Architectural Committee, on such terms and conditions as it shall require. No variance shall be granted which contravenes any provisions of these Covenants required by an approval obtained by Declarant from Garfield County for the Subdivision or which violates the Garfield County Land Use and Building Codes. No variance shall be granted without written notice of the request for such variance provided ten (10) days prior to the hearing for said I:\2003\Clients\Grace Homes\Documents\Covenants - VVV Master.wpd -13- • • variance to all Owners within the Subdivision. Notice to such Owners shall be deemed complete when placed in the United States Mail, first-class postage prepaid, to the last known address for each Owner as provided to the Association. 6.6 General Requirements. The Architectural Committee shall exercise its best judgment to see that all improvements, construction, landscaping, and alterations within the Subdivision harmonize to the greatest extent possible with the surroundings and with other structures as to design, materials, color, height, grade, finished ground elevation of neighboring lots, and other design features. The Architectural Committee shall strive to protect the visual quality of each Lot insofar as possible (taking into account final buildout of all Lots in the Subdivision) in the development of the Subdivision pursuant to these Covenants and shall endeavor to protect and preserve the visual character of the property and preserve and maintain any trees in the Subdivision. (a) Soils and Foundation Report, and Grading and Drainage Plan. Grading for conveyance of storm water away from structures shall be the responsibility of each Owner. All Owners shall allow for conveyance of storm water through their Lot. Due to the expansive and compressible soils, the Owner of each Lot shall conduct additional esign level geotechnical studies once building locations are finalized, to characterize soil and engineering properties beneath each planned structure for the purpose of a site-specific development plan and whether footings with a minimum load will be needed to counteract expansive clays. (b) Materials and Landscaping. In its review of any proposed development activity, the Architectural Committee shall evaluate, among other things, the materials to be used on the outside of buildings or structures, including exterior colors, location with respect to topography and finished grade elevations, and harmony of landscaping with the natural setting and native trees and other vegetation within the Subdivision. In addition, the Architectural Committee shall review all irrigation systems proposed to be installed on any Lot. With regard to landscaping, each Lot Owner shall deposit with the Association, prior to the commencement of construction, the sum of Eight Hundred Dollars ($ 800.00) as security for proper landscaping of the Lot. Upon approval of the final landscaping as completed by the Architectural Committee, such deposit shall be refunded to the Lot Owner. (a) Site Location. In reviewing the proposed location of any structure to be placed or built on any Lot, the Architectural Committee shall exercise its judgment so as to maximize the view plane of each Lot while preserving to the greatest extent possible the natural characteristics of each Lot and all natural vegetation, including trees and bushes and the natural setting of each building site. The Architectural Committee must approve the location of all structures and improvements to be located on each Lot. I:\2003\Clients\Grace Homes\Documents\Covenants - V V V Master.wpd -14- • • (d) Fencing. The Architectural Committee must approve all fencing prior to installation. The type and location of all fencing must be approved by the Architectural Committee. Wildlife fencing shall be encouraged; privacy fencing shall be on a limited basis, at the sole discretion of the Architectural Committee. One basis for consideration by the Architectural Committee of fencing will be how it affects the movement of wildlife throughout the Subdivision. Fencing shall be constructed to Colorado Division of Wildlife specifications, shall be of a round or split rail variety, shall not exceed forty-eight (48) inches in height, shall not have more than three (3) horizontal poles, the bottom pole of which shall be at least eighteen (18) inches off the ground, and no two poles shall be less than eighteen (18) inches apart. The Colorado Division of Wildlife shall not be liable to any Owner for any damage to gardens, flowers, shrubs, trees, or any other greenery caused by the actions of any wild animal. 6.7 Lighting. All exterior lighting shall be the minimum amount necessary and all exterior lighting shall be directed inward, toward the interior of the Subdivision, except that provisions may be made to allow for safety lighting that goes beyond the Unit's boundaries. 6.8 Preliminary Approvals. Owners who anticipate constructing improvements on lands within the Subdivision may submit preliminary sketches of such improvements to the Architectural Committee for informal and preliminary approval or disapproval. All preliminary sketches should be submitted in at least three (3) sets and should contain sufficient general information on those matters required to be in the complete architectural and site development plans and specifications to allow the Architectural Committee to grant an informed preliminary approval or disapproval. The Architectural Committee shall never be finally committed or bound by any preliminary or informal approval or disapproval until such time as complete architectural and site development plans, specifications, materials, and colors are submitted and approved or disapproved. The preliminary approval is offered as an accommodation only, and the Architectural Committee may set fees for this service. 6.9 Architectural and Site Development Plans. The Architectural Committee shall disapprove any architectural and site development plans submitted to it which do not contain sufficient information for it to exercise the judgment required of it by these Covenants. 6.10 Architectural Committee Not Liable. The Architectural Committee shall not be liable for damages to any person or entity submitting any plans for approval, or to any Owner or Owners of land within the Subdivision, by reason of any action, failure to act, approval, disapproval, or failure to approve or disapprove with regard to such plans. The Architectural Committee shall have no liability or responsibility for any representations made to any Owner or prospective Owner by any third parties. The decisions of the Architectural Committee shall be governed by these Covenants and any rules or regulations duly adopted by the Architectural Committee pursuant to these Covenants. 6.11 Written Records. The Architectural Committee shall keep and safeguard for at least five (5) years complete permanent written records of all approved applications, including one (1) set of the final approved architectural and site development plans, and of all actions of approval or disapproval and all other formal actions taken by it under the provisions of this instrument. I:\2003\Clients\Grace Homes\Documents\Covenants - VVV Master.wpd -15- • • 6.12 Authority to Promulgate Design Guidelines, Rules and Regulations. The Architectural Committee may promulgate and adopt additional design guidelines and rules and regulations necessary to implement these Covenants. The design guidelines may include requirements relating to acceptable building materials, architectural styles, allowable colors for home exteriors, and the like. The rules and regulations may include submission requirements concerning the type of information, reports, plans and specifications, and other information necessary to make an informed decision regarding requests for development, modifications to buildings, and the like ARTICLE VII COLLECTION OF ASSESSMENTS - ENFORCEMENT 7.1 Assessments. All Owners, by acceptance of a deed to a Lot or Townhome or Attached Single Family Unit, including without limitation public trustee, sheriff's or similar deed, are deemed to covenant and agree and shall be obligated to pay any and all assessments lawfully imposed by the Executive Board of the Association. To the extent the Association is responsible therefor, assessments may be lawfully imposed for any items of common expense which may include, among other things: expenses and costs of maintaining, repairing, and plowing of roads within and accessing the Subdivision; expenses for maintaining, improving, and preserving the Association's common property; expenses of the Architectural Committee; and insurance, accounting, and legal functions of the Association. Such assessments shall be deemed general assessments and shall be borne pro rata by all Owners. The Executive Board may establish contingency and reserve funds for the maintenance and improvement of the Association's common property and any other anticipated costs and expenses of the Association to be incurred in pursuit of its purpose. Contingency and reserve funds shall be in such an amount as the Executive Board may deem necessary and appropriate for the aforesaid purposes. Each Owner shall be required to pay his pro rata portion of these funds. The pro rata allocation shall be calculated as shown on Exhibit B, attached hereto and incorporated herein. The Executive Board shall have the right during any calendar year to levy and assess against all of the Owners a special assessment for such purpose or purposes, in accordance with these Covenants, or the Articles or Bylaws of the Association, as may be necessary. Such special assessment shall be paid for in equal portions by the Owners obligated to pay such assessment and shall be due and payable as determined by the Executive Board. All Owners specifically acknowledge and agree that an assessment will be levied against them and their Unit by the Battlement Mesa Service Association for the maintenance of the common elements that serve the entire Battlement Mesa PUD, including certain common elements of the Property, at rate established from time to time by the Battlement Mesa Service Association. Any default in the payment of such assessments shall constitute a default under these Covenants and shall be subject to enforcement hereunder. 7.2 Lien for Non -Payment of Assessments. All sums assessed by the Executive Board, including without limitation the share of common expense assessments chargeable to any Owner, any fines which may be levied on an Owner, and unpaid utility fees and assessments charged to an Owner shall constitute a lien against such Lot superior (prior) to all other liens and encumbrances, excepting only: I:\2003\Clients\Grace Homes \Documents \Covenants - V V V Master.wpd -16- • • (a) Tax and special assessment liens on the Lots in favor of any governmental assessing unit. (b) All sums unpaid on a first mortgage of record, including any unpaid obligatory sums as may be provided by encumbrance. Each Owner hereby agrees that the Association's lien on a Lot for assessments as hereinabove described shall be superior to any Lot exemption as is now or may hereafter be provided by state or federal law and each Owner hereby agrees that the acceptance of the deed or other instrument of conveyance in regard to any Lot within the Property shall signify such grantee's waiver of the any such exemption. (d) Any recorded lien for non-payment of the common expenses may be released by recording a release of lien executed by a member of the Executive Board. (c) If any assessment shall remain unpaid after thirty (30) days after the due date thereof, such unpaid sums shall bear interest from and after the due date thereof at the maximum rate of interest permitted by law, or at such rate as is determined by the Executive Board, and the Executive Board may impose a late charge on such defaulting Owner as may be established by the Board. In addition, the Executive Board shall be entitled to collect reasonable attorneys' fees incurred in connection with any demands for payment and/or collection of delinquent assessments. To evidence such lien, the Executive Board shall prepare a written notice setting forth the amount of such unpaid indebtedness, the name of the Owner of the Lot, and its legal description. Such a notice shall be signed by one (1) member of the Executive Board and shall be recorded in the Office of the Clerk and Recorder of the County of Garfield, Colorado. Such lien may be enforced by foreclosure of the defaulting Owner's Lot by the Association in like manner as a mortgage on real property, upon the recording of a notice of claim thereof. In any such foreclosure, the Owner shall be required to pay the costs and expenses of such proceedings, the costs and expenses for filing the notice or claim of lien, and all reasonable attorneys' fees. The Owner shall also be required to pay to the Association any additional assessments against the Lot during the period of foreclosure, and the Association shall be entitled to the appointment of a receiver to collect the same. The Executive Board, for the Association, shall have the power to bid on the Lot at foreclosure sale and acquire and hold, lease, mortgage, and convey same. The Association, at its election, and in addition to any other remedies it may have at law or in equity, may also sue an Owner personally to collect any monies owed the Association. 7.3 Enforcement Actions. The Association, acting by and through its Executive Board, shall have the right to prosecute any action to enforce the provisions of all of these Covenants by injunctive relief, on behalf of itself and all or part of the Owners of the lands within the Subdivision. In addition, each Owner of land within the Subdivision, including the Association, shall have the right to prosecute any action for injunctive relief and for damages by reason of any violation of these Covenants. The prevailing party in any enforcement action shall be entitled to an award of its reasonable costs and attorneys' fees. The Executive Board shall be entitled to assess penalties for late payment of assessments due the Association and to collect interest thereon at rates to be determined from time to time by the Executive Board but not to exceed 1.5 percent I:\2003\Clients\Grace Homes\Documents\Covenants - VVV Master.wpd -17- • • per month. After thirty (30) days, written notice to any Owner of a violation of these Covenants, and the Owner's failure to eliminate or cure said violation, the Association may levy, in addition to the other remedies set forth herein, a penalty of $25.00 per day for every day the violation exists or continues after the expiration of said 30 -day period. 7.4 Enforcement of Non -Assessment Provisions. In the event of the violation of the provisions of these Covenants which do not relate to monetary assessments, the violating Owner shall be given written notice of such violation, requiring such violation to be cured within one (1) calendar day of receipt of such notice (or within such reasonable time as is necessary in order for the owner to correct the violation). If such violation is not cured within such time frame, of if a second violation of the same nature occurs, a fine in the amount of One Hundred Dollars ($100.00) shall be assessed against such Owner. In the event of a third violation of the same nature, a fine in the amount of One Hundred Fifty ($150.00) shall be assessed. Should a fourth violation of the same nature occur, a fine in the amount of Three Hundred Dollars ($300.00) shall be assessed, and the Association may also take such action as is reasonably necessary to cause the violation to cease, including entry on the property of the Owner. ' Violations involving dogs or cats shall be enforced as set forth in Paragraph 5.13 hereof. For each additional recurrence of the same type of violation, or if a violation continues beyond sixty (60) days after an owner receives notice, an additional fine will be assessed against such owner in an amount equal to double the amount of the previous fine. With respect to such a continuing violation, the additional fine will be assessed every four (4) calendar days beyond the sixty (60) day period during which the violation continues. The aggregate amount of fines which may be charged against an Owner for the recurrence or continuation of one type of violation shall not exceed the sum of Five Thousand Dollars ($5,000.00). Each violation of these Covenants, the Declaration and/or the Rules and Regulations of the Subdivision shall be deemed a separate offence for the purpose of enforcement. All fines levied in accordance with this Paragraph 7.5 shall be enforced as set forth in Paragraph 7.2 above. 7.5 Limitations on Actions. In the event any construction or alteration or landscaping work is commenced upon any of the lands in the Subdivision in violation of these Covenants and no action is commenced within one (1) year thereafter to restrain such violation, then injunctive or equitable relief shall be denied, but an action for damages shall still be available to any party aggrieved. This one-year limitation shall not apply to injunctive or equitable relief against other violations of these Covenants. ARTICLE VIII RIGHTS OF LENDERS 8.1 Filing Notice; Notices and Approvals. A Mortgagee shall not be entitled to receive any notice which this Declaration requires the Association to deliver to Mortgagees unless and until such Mortgagee, or its mortgage servicing contractor, has delivered to the Executive Board a written notice stating that such Mortgagee is the holder of a Mortgage encumbering a Unit within the Property. Such notice need not state which Unit or Units are encumbered by such Mortgage, but shall state whether such Mortgagee is a first Mortgagee. Wherever the approval of all or a specified percentage of Mortgagees is required pursuant to this Declaration, it shall be deemed to I:\2003\Clients\Grace Homes\Documents\Covenants - VVV Master.wpd -18- • • mean the vote or approval of all or a specified percentage only of those Mortgagees which have delivered such notice to the Executive Board. Notwithstanding the foregoing, if any right of a Mortgagee under this Declaration is conditioned on a specific written request to the Association, in addition to having the notice provided in this Section, a Mortgagee must also make such request, either in a separate writing delivered to the Association or in the notice provided above in this Section, in order to be entitled to such right. Except as provided in this Section, a Mortgagee's rights pursuant to this Declaration, including, without limitation, the priority of the lien of Mortgagees over the lien of assessments levied by the Association hereunder shall not be affected by the failure to deliver a notice to the Executive Board. Any notice or request delivered to the Executive Board by a Mortgagee shall remain effective without any further action by such Mortgagee for so long as the facts set forth in such notice or request remain unchanged. 8.2 Relationship with Assessment Lien. (a) The lien provided for in Article VII hereof for the payment of assessments shall be subordinate to the lien of any Mortgage which was recorded prior to the date any such assessment becomes due. (b) If any Unit subject to a monetary lien created by any provision hereof shall be subject to the lien of a Mortgage: (1) the foreclosure of any lien created by anything set forth in this Declaration shall not operate to affect or impair the lien of such Mortgage; and (2) the foreclosure of the lien of said Mortgage, or sale under a power of sale included in such Mortgage ("Events of Foreclosure") shall not operate to affect or impair the lien hereof, except that any persons who obtain an interest through any of the Events of Foreclosure, and their successors in interest, shall take title free of the lien hereof or any personal obligation for said charges as shall have accrued up to the time of any of the Events of Foreclosure, but subject to the lien hereof for all said charges that shall accrue subsequent to the Events of Foreclosure. (c) Any Mortgagee who obtains title to a Unit by reason of any of the Events of Foreclosure, or any purchaser at a private or judicial foreclosure sale, shall take title to such Unit free of any lien or claim for unpaid assessments against such Unit which accrue prior to the time such Mortgagee or purchaser takes title to such Unit, except for liens or claims for a share of such assessments resulting from a pro rata reallocation of such assessments to all Units within the Property. (d) Nothing in this Section shall be construed to release any Owner from his obligation to pay for any assessment levied pursuant to this Declaration. 8.3 Seventy -Five Percent (75%) Vote of Institutional Mortgagees. Except upon the prior written approval of at least seventy-five percent (75%) of institutional Mortgagees, based on one (1) vote for each first Mortgage held, neither the Association nor the members of the Association shall be entitled to do any of the following: I:\2003\Clients\Grace Homes \Documents \ Covenants - VVV Master.wpd -19- • • (a) Abandon or terminate by any act or omission the Common Area, or any part thereof, except for abandonment or termination provided by law and/or this Declaration in this case of substantial destruction by fire or other casualty or in the case of a taking by condemnation or eminent domain; or (b) Dissolve the Association or abandon or terminate the maintenance of the Common Area by the Association; or (c) Amend a material provision of this Declaration, the Bylaws or the Articles, and without limiting the generality of the foregoing, the provisions of Article IX hereof, this Article, any other rights granted specifically to Mortgagees pursuant to any other provision of this Declaration; or (d) Abandon, partition, sell, alienate, subdivide, release, transfer, hypothecate, or otherwise encumber the Common Area; provided, however, the granting of easements for public utilities or other public purposes consistent with the intended use of the Common Area shall not require such approval; or (e) Partition or subdivide a Lot. 8.4 Other Rights of Institutional Mortgagees. Any institutional Mortgagee or its mortgage service contractor, shall, upon written request to the Association, be entitled to: (a) Inspect the books and records of the Association during normal business hours; (b) Receive the annual financial statement of the Association ninety (90) days following the end of the Association's fiscal year; (c) Receive written notice of all annual and special meetings of the members of the Association or of the Executive Board, and institutional Mortgagees shall further be entitled to designate a representative to attend all such meetings in order to, among other things, draw attention to violations of this Declaration which have not been corrected or made the subject of remedial action by the Association; provided, however, nothing contained in this Section shall give an institutional Mortgagee the right to call a meeting of the Executive Board or of the members of the Association for any purpose or to vote at any such meeting. 8.5 Distribution of Insurance and Condemnation Proceeds. No Owner nor any other party, shall have priority over any right of first Mortgagees of Units pursuant to their Mortgages in the case of a distribution to Owners of insurance proceeds or condemnation awards for losses to or a taking of the Common Area. Any provision to the contrary herein or in the Bylaws or other documents relating to the Property is to such extent void. All applicable fire and all physical loss or extended coverage insurance policies shall contain loss payable clauses acceptable to the affected Mortgagees naming the Mortgagees, as their interests may appear. I:\2003\Clients\Grace Homes\Documents\Covenants - V V V Master.wpd -20- • • 8.6 Notice to Mortgagees of Record. In the event that any Owner is in default under any provision of these Covenants, or under any provision of the Bylaws or the Rules and Regulations adopted by the Association, which default is not cured within thirty (30) days after written notice thereof to such Owner, the Association shall give to the Mortgagee of record of such Owner written notice of such default and of the fact that said thirty (30) day period has expired. 8.7 Voting Rights on Default. In the event of a default by the Owner of Owners of any Unit in any payment due under the terms of any first Mortgage encumbering such Unit, or the promissory note secured thereby, the Mortgagee, or his representative, shall have the right, upon giving written notice to such defaulting Owner or Owners, and placing of record a notice of default, to exercise the voting rights of such defaulting Owner or Owners attributable to such Unit at any regular or special meeting of the members of the Association held during such time as such default may continue. 8.8 Effect of Breach Hereof. No breach of any provision of these covenants, conditions and restrictions shall invalidate the lien of any Mortgage in good faith and for value, but all of said provisions hereof shall be binding upon any Owner whose title is derived through foreclosure sale, trustee's sale or otherwise. 8.9 Non -Curable Breach. Any Mortgagee who acquires title to a Unit by foreclosure or by deed in lien of foreclosure or assignment in lieu of foreclosure shall not be obligated to cure any breach of this Declaration which is non -curable or of a type which is not practical or feasible to cure. 8.10 Loan to Facilitate. Any Mortgage given to secure a loan to facilitate the resale of a Unit after acquisition by foreclosure or by a deed in lieu of foreclosure or by assignment in lieu of foreclosure shall be deemed to be a loan made in good faith and for value and entitled to all of the rights and protections of this Article VIII. 8.11 Right to Furnish Information. Any Mortgagee shall have the right to furnish information to the Executive Board concerning the status of any Mortgage. 8.12 Inapplicability of Right of First Refusal to Mortgagee. No right of first refusal or similar restriction upon the right of an Owner to sell, transfer or otherwise convey the Owner's Unit shall be granted to the Association without the consent of the Mortgagee, of any, of such Unit. Any right of first refusal or option to purchase a Unit which may be granted to the Association (or other person, firm or entity) shall not apply to any conveyance or transfer of title to such Unit, whether voluntary or involuntary, to a Mortgagee which acquires title to or ownership of sais Unit pursuant to the remedies provided in its Mortgage or by reason of foreclosure of the Mortgage or deed (or assignment) in lieu of foreclosure. ARTICLE IX INSURANCE 9.1 Types of Insurance. The Association shall obtain and keep in full force and effect the following insurance coverage, if appropriate: I:\2003\Clients\Grace Homes\Documents\Covenants - V V V Master.wpd -21- • • (a) Public liability and property damage insurance, including medical payments insurance, in an amount to be determined by the Board, covering all occurrences commonly insured against for death, bodily injury and property damage arising out of or in connection with the ownership, operation, maintenance or other use of Association property. This policy shall also cover operation of automobiles or other vehicles or equipment on behalf of the Association. (b) Worker's compensation and employer's liability insurance in the amounts and in the forms required by law. (c) Coverage for members of the Board and officers of the Association, including committee members, against libel, slander, false arrest, invasion of privacy, errors and omissions, and other forms of liability generally covered in officers and directors liability policies. (d) Coverage against such other risks of a similar or dissimilar nature as the Board deems appropriate. 9.2 Fidelity Coverage. The Executive Board, at its discretion, may elect to secure fidelity coverage against the dishonesty of employees, destruction or disappearance of money or securities, and forgery. This policy shall also cover persons who serve the Association without compensation. ARTICLE X ANNEXATION OF ADDITIONAL PROPERTY Notwithstanding any other provisions of this Declaration, the Declarant shall have the rights recited in this Article X. 1. Annexation without Approval of Members. As the owner thereof, or if not the owner, with the consent of the owner thereof, Declarant shall have the unilateral right, privilege and option, from time to time at any time until a�vcn (7)twelve (12) years from the date this Declaration is first recorded in the real property records of the County to subject to the provisions of this Declaration and the jurisdiction of the Association all or any portion of the Additional Land, whether in fee simple or leasehold, by filing in the real property records of the County an amendment annexing such property. Such amendment to this Declaration shall not require the vote of Members. Any such annexation shall be effective upon the filing for record of such amendment unless otherwise provided therein. Declarant shall have the unilateral right to transfer to any other person the said right, privilege and option to annex the Additional Land which is herein reserved to Declarant, provided that such transfer is memorialized in a written recorded instrument. The rights reserved upon Declarant to subject Additional Land to the Declaration shall not be implied or construed so as to impose any obligation upon Declarant to subject any of such Additional Land to this Declaration or to the jurisdiction of the Association. If such I:\2003\Clients\Grace Homes \Docurnents\Covenants - VVV Master.wpd -22- • • Additional Land is not subjected to this Declaration, Declarant's reserved rights shall not impose any obligation on Declarant to impose any covenants and restrictions similar to those contained herein upon such Additional Lane, nor shall such rights in any manner limit or restrict the use to which such Additional Land may be put by Declarant or any subsequent owner thereof, whether such uses are consistent with the covenants and restrictions imposed hereby or not. 2. Acquisition of Additional Common Elements. Declarant may convey to the Association additional real estate, improved or unimproved, located with the Additional Land which upon conveyance or dedication shall be accepted by the Association and thereafter shall be maintained by the Association at its expense for the benefit of all its Members. 3. Amendment. Notwithstanding any other provision of this Declaration, this Article shall not be amended while the Declarant retains the right to exercise the rights defined in this Article X without the written consent of Declarant, so long as the Declarant owns any of the Additional Land. ARTICLE XI GENERAL PROVISIONS 11.1 Covenants to Run. All of the covenants contained in this instrument shall be a burden on the title to all of the lands within the Subdivision, and the benefits thereof shall inure to the Owners of the lands in the Subdivision and the benefits, and burdens of all said covenants shall run with the title to all of the lands in the Subdivision. 11.2 Termination of Covenants. In the event these Covenants have not been sooner lawfully terminated pursuant to any applicable laws of the State of Colorado and the County of Garfield, Colorado, and the provisions herein contained, these Covenants may be terminated on January 1 of the year 2038 by a vote of seventy-five percent (75%) of the votes entitled to be cast by the members of the Association. If these Covenants are not so terminated, then they shall continue to be in full force and effect for successive twenty-five (25) year periods unless, at the close of a 25 -year period, the Covenants are terminated by a vote of seventy-five percent (75%) of the votes entitled to be cast by the members of the Association at a meeting of the members duly held. In the event of any such termination by the members, a properly certified copy of the resolution of termination shall be placed on record in Garfield County, Colorado, not more than six (6) months after the meeting at which such vote is cast. 11.3 Amendment of Covenants. These Covenants may be amended by a vote of seventy-five percent (75%) of the votes entitled to be cast by the members of the Association, said vote to be cast at a meeting of the members duly held, provided a properly certified copy of the resolution of amendment be placed on record in the County of Garfield, Colorado, no more than six (6) months after said meeting. 11.4 Notice. All notices or requests required shall be in writing. Notice to any Lot Owner shall be considered delivered and effective upon personal delivery, or three (3) days after posting when sent by certified mail, return receipt requested, to the address of the Lot Owner on file in the records of the Association at the time of the mailing or if no such address is available, then to the address shown by the County Assessor. Notice to the Executive Board or the I:\2003\Clients\Grace Homes\Documents\Covenants - V V V Master.wpd -23- • . Association shall be considered delivered and effective upon personal delivery, or three (3) days after posting when sent by certified mail, return receipt requested, to the Association, at the address as shall be established by the Association from time to time by notice to the Lot Owners. General notices to all Lot Owners need not be certified, but may be sent by regular first class mail. The First Mortgagees (or insurer or guarantor of the mortgage) shall receive written notice of those matters set forth in Article VIII hereof. 11.5 Waiver or Delay in Enforcement. No failure by the Association or the Executive Board to give notice of default or any delay in enforcement of any provision or in the exercise of any right or remedy shall operate as a waiver. No waiver shall be effective unless it is in writing signed by the President or Vice President of the Executive Board on behalf of the Association. 11.6 Severability. Should any part or parts of these Covenants be declared invalid or unenforceable by any court of competent jurisdiction, such decision shall not affect the validity of the remaining covenants. 11.7 Paragraph Headings and Underlining. The paragraph headings and underlining within this instrument are for convenience only and shall not be construed to be a specific part of the covenants contained herein. 11.8 County as Third -Party Beneficiary. The County of Garfield shall be a third -party beneficiary to this Declaration and may, at its option and in its sole discretion, enforce any provision of Sections 5.13, 6.6 and 6.7 of this Declaration, as amended, which affects City residents or property within Garfield County. 11.9 Rule Against Perpetuities. If any of the terms, covenants, conditions, easements, restrictions, uses, limitations or obligations created by these Covenants shall be unlawful or void for violation of (a) the rule against perpetuities or some analogous statutory provision, (b) the rule restricting restraints on alienation, or (c) any other statutory or common law rules imposing like or similar time limits, such provision shall continue only for the period of the life of the representative of Declarant executing these Covenants, his now living descendants, and the survivor of them, plus twenty-one (21) years. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, this Declaration of Covenants, Conditions and Restrictions for Valley View Village has been executed as of the day and year first written above. I:\2003\Clients\Grace Homes\Documents\Covenants - VVV Master.wpd By -24- DECLARANT: DARTER, LLC Terry Lawrence STATE OF COUNTY OF • ) ss. • Acknowledged, subscribed, and sworn to before me this day of , 2002, by Terry Lawrence, of Darter, LLC. WITNESS my hand and official seal. My Commission expires: I:\2003\Clients\Grace Homes\Documents\Covenants - V V V Master.wpd -25- Notary Public • EXHIBIT I W SUPPLEMENTAL DECLARATION OF COVENANTS, CONDITIONS AND RESTRICTIONS FOR VALLEY VIEW VILLAGE SUBDIVISION FOR VALLEY VIEW VILLAGE TOWNHOMES THIS DECLARATION OF COVENANTS, CONDITIONS AND RESTRICTIONS FOR VALLEY VIEW VILLAGE TOWNHOMES is made and entered into this day of , 2003, by DARTER, LLC ("Declarant"). RECITALS WHEREAS, Declarant is the owner of certain property in the Southeast 1/4 of the Northwest 1/4, Section 18, Township 7 South, Range 95 West of the 6th Principal Meridian, Garfield County, Colorado which is more particularly described on Exhibit "A" attached hereto (the "Property"); and WHEREAS, Lots Nos. within the Subdivision will be comprised of multi -family residential buildings (the "Townhomes); and WHEREAS, the Townhomes are a part of the larger Valley View Village Subdivision (the "Subdivision"); and WHEREAS, a Master Declaration of Covenants, Conditions and Restrictions for the Subdivision was recorded in the office of the Clerk and Recorder of Garfield County, Colorado on , 2003 at Book , Page , Reception No. (the "Master Declaration"); NOW, THEREFORE, Declarant hereby declares Covenants, Conditions, Restrictions and Easements to be imposed on and for the benefit of Valley View Village Townhomes and in furtherance of the purposes stated below, Declarant makes the following declarations: ARTICLE I GENERAL PURPOSE OF COVENANTS 1.1 Purpose. This Declaration of Covenants, Conditions and Restrictions (hereinafter "Covenants") shall govern and be applicable to that certain real property located within Garfield County, Colorado, known as Lots Nos. of the Subdivision, as more particularly described on the Final Plat thereof recorded as Reception No. in the office of the Garfield County Clerk and Recorder, which Final Plat is incorporated herein by reference. It is the intention of the owner of the Declarant, expressed by its execution of this instrument, that the lands within the Subdivision be developed and maintained as a highly desirable affordable scenic residential area. It is the purpose of these Covenants to preserve the present natural beauty and character of the property along with the views and setting of the Subdivision to the greatest extent reasonably possible, and the lots therein shall always be protected as much as possible with respect to uses, structures, landscaping, and general development as permitted by this instrument. I: \2003\Clients\Grace Homes \Documents\Covenants-V V V -Condo. wpd -1- • • 1.2 Incorporation of Master Declaration. The Master Declaration recorded as set forth above is hereby incorporated by reference to the extent that its provisions relate to the Townhomes. 1.3 Defined Terms. Each capitalized term not otherwise defined in these Covenants shall have the meaning specified or used in the Colorado Common Interest Ownership Act, Sections 38-33.3-101 et seq., Colorado Revised Statutes, as it may be amended from time to time (the "Act"). 1.4 Association Name. The name of the Association is the "Valley View Village Townhome Homeowners Association," a Colorado nonprofit corporation (hereinafter "Townhome Association"). 1.5 Property Location. The Property constituting the Common Interest Community is located within the County of Garfield, State of Colorado. 1.6 Property Description. The Property shall consist of single-family lots and multi -family lots (hereinafter "Lot" or "Lots") which are more particularly described on the Final Plat for Valley View Village. ARTICLE II DEFINITIONS 2.1 "Common Elements" shall be all portions of the Valley View Village Townhomes portion of the Subdivision other than Units and are designated by this Declaration for the common use and enjoyment of the Unit Owners and their families, tenants, guests and invitees and not for the public. The Townhome Association, subject to the rights and obligations of the Unit Owners set forth in this Declaration, shall be responsible for the management and control of the Common Elements. Every Unit Owner shall have a perpetual right and easement of access to and from a Unit from public ways for both pedestrian and vehicular travel, which right and easement shall be appurtenant to and pass with the transfer of title to such Unit; provided, however that such right and easement shall be subject to (a) the covenants, conditions and easements contained in this Declaration, in the Master Declaration and the Plat of the Subdivision; and (b) the right of the Townhome Association to adopt, from time to time, rules and regulations for vehicular traffic and other passage across the Common Elements to facilitate the optimum and most convenient use of the Units and Common Elements by Unit Owners. 2.2 "Townhome Association" shall mean and refer to VALLEY VIEW VILLAGE TOWNHOME HOMEOWNERS ASSOCIATION, its successors and assigns and shall function as a sub -association within the scope of the Association. The Townhome Association shall be responsible only for the limited common areas, the limited common elements related to the Townhome units and such other property or elements as such terms may be defined and elements declared in the Valley View Village Townhome Homeowners Association Declaration of Covenants, Conditions and Restrictions. I:\2003\Clients\Grace Homes \Documents\Covenants-V V V-Condo.wpd -2- • • 2.3 "Limited Common Elements" shall mean a portion of the Common Elements of the Subdivision designated in this Declaration, or on a plat, or on the contract documents for the sale and purchase of any such property, or by the Colorado Common Interest Ownership Act, Sections 38-33.3-101 et seq., Colorado Revised Statutes, as it may be amended from time to time (the "Act"), for the exclusive use or one more but fewer than all of the Lots. The following portions of the Property, in addition to the portions described in Sections 38-33.3-202(1)(b) and (d) of the Act are designated as Limited Common Elements, to wit: none. ARTICLE III OWNERS - HOMEOWNERS ASSOCIATION 3.1 Formation and Membership. The Townhome Association shall be a nonprofit Colorado corporation charged with the duties and vested with the powers prescribed by law and as set forth in its Articles of Incorporation, Bylaws and this Declaration of Covenants, Conditions and Restrictions Neither the Articles nor Bylaws of the Townhome Association shall, for any reason, be amended or otherwise changed or interpreted so as to be inconsistent with these Covenants. This Townhome Association shall be a membership association without certificates or shares of stock. All Owners, including Declarant, who own or acquire the title in fee to any of the Lots in the Subdivision by whatever means acquired shall automatically become members of Townhome Association. Membership in the Townhome Association shall automatically terminate when an Owner of one of the Lots ceases to be an Owner of such Lot. Each Unit within the Townhomes shall be entitled to one (1) vote. 3.2 Executive Board and Officers. The affairs of the Townhome Association shall be governed by an Executive Board consisting of at least three (3) and no more than seven (7) members elected by the Owners. The initial Board shall be comprised of three (3) members. The Executive Board may elect or appoint officers in accordance with its Articles and Bylaws as the same may be amended from time to time. The Executive Board may also appoint various committees and hire employees as may be required. The Board shall determine the compensation to be paid to any employee of the Townhome Association. 3.3 Purpose. The Townhome Association, through its Executive Board, shall be authorized and empowered to take each and every step necessary or convenient for the implementation and enforcement of the Covenants contained in this Declaration. The Townhome Association shall have the right and responsibility to maintain, preserve, repair, insure, and otherwise protect and promote the interests of the Owners with respect to all common properties and interests of the Owners and the Townhome Association. The Townhome Association shall be governed by its Articles of Incorporation and Bylaws as may be amended from time to time. 3.4 Maintenance of Common Elements. The Townhome Association shall own, operate, and maintain all Limited Common Elements within the Subdivision as defined above, including the roofs and exterior surfaces of the structures in order to keep them in good, clean, attractive and sanitary condition and repair, except as follows: I:\2003\Clients\Grace Homes \Documents\Covenants-V V V-Condo.wpd -3- • • (a) Except as provided otherwise in this Declaration, in the Master Declaration or by written agreement with the Association, all maintenance of individual Units, including, without limitation, all interior surfaces, structural and nonstructural members, utility systems, utility lines from the point of departure from a shared usage, glazing, doors, patios, yards, decks and other fixtures designed to serve a single Lot, shall be the sole responsibility of the respective Lot Owners. Each Lot shall be maintained in a good, clean, attractive and sanitary condition and repair consistent with the requirements of a first class residential development. (b) The Owner of a Lot to which any Limited Common Element is allocated shall be solely responsible for removal of snow, leaves and debris from same. Fencing of such allocated Limited Common Element shall be permitted, provided, however, that the maintenance of any such fenced area shall be the sole responsibility of the Owner of such Lot. Any other Common Expense associated with the maintenance, repair or replacement of a Limited Common Elements shall be assessed equally against the Lots to which the Limited Common Element is assigned. 3.5 Declarant Control. The provisions of Section 3.5 of the Master Declaration are incorporated herein in their entirety. 3.6 Limited Liability and Indemnification. To the fullest extent permitted by law, neither the Townhome Association nor its past, present or future officers, directors, nor any employee, agent or committee member of the Townhome Association, nor the Declarant shall be liable to any Owner or to any other person for any damage, act, omission to act, simple negligence or other matter of any kind or nature, except gross negligence. Without limit to the foregoing, the Townhome Association, the Board and the Declarant shall not be liable to any party for any action or for any failure to act, in good faith and without malice. Acts taken upon the advice of legal counsel, certified public accountants, registered or licensed engineers, architects or surveyors shall conclusively be deemed to be in good faith and without malice. To the extent insurance carried by the Townhome Association for such purposes shall not be adequate, the Owners severally agree to indemnify the Townhome Association, the Board and the Declarant against all loss resulting from such action or failure to act, including expenses and liabilities, attorneys' fees, reasonably incurred by or imposed upon them in any proceeding to which they may be a party, or in which they may become involved. The foregoing limitations of liability shall extend to the officers, agents, legal representatives and owners of Declarant. 3.7 Notice to Owners. Notice to an Owner of matters affecting the Townhomes by the Townhome Association or by another Owner shall be sufficiently given if such notice is in writing and is delivered personally, by courier, or private service delivery or on the third business day after deposit in the mails for registered or certified mail, return receipt requested, at the address of record for real property tax assessment notices with respect to that Owner's Lot. 1:\2003\Clients\Grace Homes \Documents\Covenants-V V V-Condo.wpd -4- • • ARTICLE IV EASEMENTS AND LICENSES 4.1 Incorporation By Reference. The provisions of Sections 4.1 through and including 4.3 of Article IV of the Master Declaration are incorporated herein by reference in their entirety. ARTICLE V USE RESTRICTIONS 5.1 Incorporation by Reference. The provisions of Sections 5.1, 5.2, 5.3, 5.5 through and including 5.10, and 5.13 through and including 5.29 of Article V of the Master Declaration are incorporated herein by reference in their entirety. 5.2 No Partition of Limited Common Elements. The Limited Common Elements shall be owned by the Townhome Association, and no Owner shall bring any action for partition or division of the Limited Common Elements. By acceptance of a deed or other instrument of conveyance or assignment, each Owner shall be deemed to have specifically waived such Owner's rights to commence or maintain a partition action or any other action designed to cause a division of the Limited Common Elements. This Section may be pleaded as a bar to any such action. Any Owner who commences or maintains any such action shall be liable for and agrees to reimburse the Townhome Association for its costs, expenses and reasonable attorneys' fees in defending any such action. 5.3 Vehicles. There are two (2) designated parking spaces assigned to each Unit. Each vehicle parked in a designated parking space shall be registered with the Townhome Association by type, year, color, license number and such other identification as is appropriate. No guest of a Owner shall use a parking space designated for visitors for more than three (3) days without the consent of the Executive Board, which may impose a fee for such use. No trucks, recreational vehicles, motor homes, motor coaches, snowmobiles, campers, trailers, boats or boat trailers or similar vehicles (other than passenger automobiles or pickup or utility trucks with a capacity of one ton or less) or any other vehicles shall be parked, stored or kept on any portion of the Property. This restriction shall not prohibit occasional parking of commercial, service and construction vehicles, in the ordinary course of business, from making deliveries or otherwise providing service to the Property. No work on vehicles, including repairs, shall be performed on any portion of the Property, except in emergencies. Abandoned or inoperable vehicles shall not be stored or parked on any portion of the Property. An abandoned or inoperable vehicle is any vehicle which has not been driven under its own propulsion for three (3) weeks or longer and which appears incapable of operation. A written notice describing the abandoned or inoperable vehicle and requesting its removal shall be personally served upon the Owner or posted on the vehicle. If such vehicle has not been removed within seventy-two (72) hours after notice is given, the Townhome Association may remove the vehicle without liability and the expense of removal shall be charged against the Owner. The Townhome Association shall have the right to assess and enforce penalties against Owners violating these restrictions applying to vehicles as follows: One Hundred Dollars ($100.00) for the first violation and One Hundred Dollars ($100.00) plus an additional Fifty Dollars ($50.00) for each subsequent violation, such that the fine increases in Fifty Dollar ($50.00) increments for each succeeding violation. I:\2003\Clients\Grace Homes \Documents\Covenants-VVV-Condo.wpd -5- • • ARTICLE VI ARCHITECTURAL COMMITTEE 6.1 Incorporation by Reference. The provisions of Sections 6.1 through and including 6.12 of Article VI of the Master Declaration are incorporated herein by reference in their entirety. ARTICLE VII PARTY WALLS 7.1 General Rules of Law to Apply. Each wall which is built as a part of the original construction of the structures and improvements within the Townhomes and which is located between Units shall constitute a party wall, and, to the extent not inconsistent with the provisions of this Article, the general rules of law regarding party walls and liability for property damage due to negligence or willful acts or omissions shall apply thereto. 7.2 Sharing of Repair and Maintenance. The cost of normal repair and maintenance of any party wall shall be shared by the Owners who make use of the wall in proportion to such use and shall be considered a Limited Common Element. 7.3 Destruction by Fire or Other Casualty. If a party wall is destroyed or damaged by fire or other casualty, the policy of the respective Unit Owners benefitting therefrom shall cover such damage to the maximum extent of available insurance. Deficiencies in insurance proceeds for damage to party walls shall be paid in proportion to such use by affected Owners, without prejudice, however, to the right of any such Owners to call for a larger contribution from the other Owner under any rule of law regarding liability for negligent or willful acts or omissions. 7.4 Weatherproofing. Notwithstanding any other provision of this Article, an Owner who by his negligent or willful act causes the party wall to be exposed to any elements, shall bear the whole cost of furnishing the necessary protection against such elements, and if such wall shall be damaged by such elements, such Owner shall pay the entire cost of repair of the same. 7.5 Right to Contribution Runs with Land. The right of any Owner to contribution from any other Owner under this Article shall be appurtenant to and shall pass to such Owner's successors in title. ARTICLE VIII COLLECTION OF ASSESSMENTS - ENFORCEMENT 8.1 Assessments. All Owners, by acceptance of a deed to a Townhome Unit, including without limitation public trustee, sheriff's or similar deed, are deemed to covenant and agree and shall be obligated to pay any and all assessments lawfully imposed by the Executive Board of the Townhome Association. To the extent the Townhome Association is responsible therefor, assessments may be lawfully imposed for any items of common expense which may include, among other things: expenses and costs of maintaining, repairing, and plowing of roads within and accessing the Subdivision; expenses for maintaining, improving, and preserving the I:\2003\Clients\Grace Homes \Documents \Covenants-VVV-Condo.wpd -6- • • Townhome Association's common property; expenses of the Architectural Committee; and insurance, accounting, and legal functions of the Townhome Association. Such assessments shall be deemed general assessments and shall be borne pro rata by all Owners. The Executive Board may establish contingency and reserve funds for the maintenance and improvement of the Townhome Association's common property and any other anticipated costs and expenses of the Townhome Association to be incurred in pursuit of its purpose. Contingency and reserve funds shall be in such an amount as the Executive Board may deem necessary and appropriate for the aforesaid purposes. Each Owner shall be required to pay his pro rata portion of these funds. The pro rata allocation shall be calculated as shown on Exhibit B, attached hereto and incorporated herein. The Executive Board shall have the right during any calendar year to levy and assess against all of the Owners a special assessment for such purpose or purposes, in accordance with these Covenants, or the Articles or Bylaws of the Townhome Association, as may be necessary. Such special assessment shall be paid for in equal portions by the Owners obligated to pay such assessment and shall be due and payable as determined by the Executive Board. All Owners specifically acknowledge and agree that an assessment will be levied against them and their Unit by both the Valley View Village Homeowners Association and the Battlement Mesa Service Association for the maintenance of the Common Elements that serve Subdivision and the entire Battlement Mesa PUD, including certain common elements of the Property, at the rate to be determined from time to time by the Valley View Homeowners Association and the Battlement Mesa Service Association. Any default in the payment of such assessments shall constitute a default under these Covenants and shall be subject to enforcement hereunder. 8.2 Incorporation by Reference. The provisions of Sections 7.2 through and including 7.5 of Article VII of the Master Declaration are hereby incorporated by reference in their entirety. ARTICLE IX RIGHTS OF LENDERS 9.1 Incorporation by Reference. Sections 8.1 through and including 8.12 of Article VIII of the Master Declaration are hereby incorporated by reference in their entirety. ARTICLE X INSURANCE 10.1 Incorporation by Reference. Sections 9.1 and 9.2 of Article IX of the Master Declaration are hereby incorporated by reference in their entirety. I:\2003\Clients\Grace Homes \Documents\Covenants-V V V-Condo.wpd -7- • • ARTICLE XI GENERAL PROVISIONS 11.1 Incorporation by Reference. Sections 10.1 through and including 10.9 of the Master Declaration are hereby incorporated by reference in their entirety. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, this Declaration of Covenants, Conditions and Restrictions for Valley View Village Townhomes has been executed as of the day and year first written above. STATE OF ) ss. COUNTY OF By DECLARANT: DARTER, LLC Terry Lawrence Acknowledged, subscribed, and sworn to before me this day of , 2002, by Terry Lawrence, of Darter, LLC. WITNESS my hand and official seal. My Commission expires: I:\2003\Clients\Grace Homes \Documents \Covenants-VVV-Condo.wpd -8- Notary Public • July 28,2003 105 Juniper Lane Parachute, CO 81635 • To: President Terry Lawrence To: Darin Carei, V.P. Grace Homes Real Estate & Construction Inc. To: Battlement Mesa Partners Inc. President Tom Beard Battlement Mesa Homes Inc. President William Wilde Battlement Mesa Partners Inc. Vice President Lynn Shore Battlement Mesa Service Association President Chuck Hall Chairman of Battlement Mesa Architectural Committee Charles Haberman Garfield County Commissioners John Martin, Tresi Houpt & Larry McGowan Garfield County Planning Commission This letter is in answer to Mr. Carei's letter sent to Battlement Mesa Grace Homes Real Estate, Construdtion Inc., Subcontractors, Employees and delivered to Peggy Rawlins, Battlement Mesa Service Association member representing Monument Creek & the Battlement Mesa Architect Committee Inspector. When the foundation was laid for the home on Juniper Lane and the home on Ponderosa in Monument Creek by Grace Home Builders there were complaints that the foundation wall was too high and during the rainy season water would pour down the steep slope and cause the neighbors problems. After several calls concerning this problem, the wall was lowered and the neighbors were pleased. However, there was much construction mess around and no dumpster in sight. After phone calls, a dumpster and a porta potty were installed. Then during the most windy week of the summer, the men laid tar paper on the roof and went home. Nothing was protecting the paper from the wind , so for weeks the tar paper has blown all over our neighborhood. To this day, July 2?, 2003 the tar paper is still blowing off of the house on Ponderosa. • • A truck arrived, parked on Ponderosa and proceeded to make ruts in the pavement. Other trucks have dripped large round circles of oil on both Juniper and Ponderosa. I have taken pictures of this unnecessary damage and called Mr. Carei about this. The result was the afore mentioned letter sent out June 23, 2003. The problem also concerned the loud swearing, yelling , urinating on site and trash not put in the dumpster. So the letter stated the sites would either be cleaned up by the end of the week, or the workers would be fined $50.00. The next problem concerned the workers smoking around the house at 2:00a.m. At the Ponderosa site, the truck was left on the street all night, the air compressor ran all night and the cooler was left on the sidewalk for two days and two nights. We understand Mr. Carei talked to the workers on Ponderosa and they indicated they did not sleep overnight. However, the sheriff was called previously for the same issue and workers were warned that they could not sleep overnight in the house. It is the neighbors contention that after the sheriff left, the workers did sleep overnight. This house construction is shoddy, poorly built with cheap material and not up to standards of other homes in the surrounding area. It is our contention that if this construction continues in this vein, our home values will drop and more importantly, will affect all Battlement Mesa homes when the builders begin their planned Valley View homes on Battlement Mesa, located off of Battlement Mesa Parkway and Stone Quarry Road. Sincerely, Peggy Rawlins • • July 14, 03 What's Wrong with Grace Homes/114 Ponderosa Cir: They excavated three times for the foundation and backfilled twice. Although they tamped it both times with a robot tractor, that is not sufficient for foundation footings. Since the periphery was not tamped with a pneumatic tamper, it is very likely that the house will develop far more than normal cracks from settling. The house is too high on the lot. (One of the owners himself was heard to say that.) One result is that the original level intended for the garage would have created a drive -way with a dangerous 20 to 25% slope. A vehicle backed out of that garage onto an icy or snow packed drive could have slid directly across the street and almost into the garage of 110 Ponderosa. To (partially) correct the driveway problem, they cut out a piece of the foundation to lower the garage floor approximately 2 1/2 feet, and then backfilled the garage to that level. But there is no evidence so far that they are going to tamp that fill, and if they do not, the garage floor is almost guaranteed to cave in. The crew who put the tarpaper underlay on the roof were indecently foul- mouthed, yelling profanity and obscenities which could be heard a half block away, and one of the men urinated on the neighbor's property. They camped there overnight illegally. And they used such cheap material and installation that 90% of it blew off the next couple days and all over the neighborhood -- winds that were not at all unusual for this area. Most recently, they have loosely installed what is supposed to be an exterior vapor barrier, using a very thin plastic film that no reputable contractor would ever use; and it too has started to blow off. Their equipment has made gauges in the street and partially blocked the sidewalk. Their construction area has been cluttered and cleaned up only after neighbors have registered complaints. I have never in my life seen such disorganization and ineptitude in a construction job. If I were in the market for a new house, I wouldn't give 50 cents for that house. I have seen no county inspectors on this construction, and Grace Homes apparently has no quality control. One of the men on the roofing debacle asked me if my house was built by Grace Homes. I consider that as an insult. Rollin Ives 110 Ponderosa Circle Grace Home: 105 Ponderosa Cir. General comments: From the start there seems to be very little co-ordination of the work plan. Weeks go by without any activity. The site continues to be unorganized My concern is that this builder does not meet the standards of the other builders in this area. Potential buyers could be turned off with this area because of the messy site and our home values could be affected. Problem items: 1. The garage opening was too high for proper access. I called the Garfield County inspection department to see what could be done. The inspection department said they had no responsibility for this. 2. I called the Rifle Road and Bridge depaztmuent and was informed that they had no responsibility for this. They suggested that I contact the Battlement Mesa Management for their input. 3. I called Bill Wilde and was told that they had no responsibility for this item. Bill referred me to the architectural committee. 4. I called Grace Homes and talked with Terry Lawrence and informed him of the problem. He came out and agreed to correct the problem by cutting out foundation opening to improve access. The foundation was finally cut out to improve access. 5. Framers: The framers were using so much foul language that we home owners had to request them to tone it down. 6. Trash container Trash and scrap lumber were left in front of the structure for several weeks causing a severe eye sore. I contacted Grace Homes to request that a trash container be put on site. Thery said that there should have been one a week ago. Finally a trash container was put on site. I had to make another call to Terry Lawrence to see who would be picking up the trash and putting it into the container. Terry said that he would send up a cleaning crew to do this. A crew was sent out and the trash picked up. 7. Roofers: A crew of three men and one woman arrived early in the day and did nothing until late in the day. They used a lot of foul language and had to be requested to tone it down. One of the men urinated on the side of the house instead of using the port -a -potty on site. The roofers had a pick-up truck with a camper on it. They asked the owner at 89 Ponderosa if they could borrow an extension cord so they could have coffee in the morning. The neighbor refused and told them they should not be staying over night on site. I contacted the Garfield County Sheriff's department to report the foul language and the fact that the roofers planned to stay over night on site. The sheriff's department reported that the roofers didn't intend to spend the night. How ever they did spend the night. 8. Roofing paper: The wind ripped off all of the paper. Since then the shingles have been delivered and stacked on the roof. Concern: will new paper be put down before the shingles are installed?? 9. Building wrap: Partially installed. Very little action occurring on site. Siding material has been delivered but no further action taking place. Signed: Neil Fechner, 98 Ponderosa ,cir. Parachute, Co Jul 29 03 02:32p • • CONSOLIDATED METROPOLITAN DISTRICT 109 TAMARISK TRAIL / P.O. 130X 6116 / BA1'1LEMENT MESA, CO 81636 (970) 285-9050 / FAX (970) 285-9631 July 29, 2003 Tamara Pregl, Staff Planner Garfield County Planning Department 108 8th Street, Suite 201 Glenwood Springs, CO 81601 Re: Valley View Village PUD Dear Ms. Pregl: Although I have not seen the latest version of the PUD water and wastewater plans, as discussed in the attached letter from Steve LaBonde of WestWater Engineering, the Valley View Village Subdivision water and wastewater plans are approved for the Preliminary Planning process. The District has capacity and will serve the proposed development subject to the terms and conditions expressed by Mr. LaBonde, and the additional conditions of Garfield County and the Grand Valley Fire Protection District. Very truly yours, ,k3.4? R. Bruce Smith District Manager cc: WestWater Engineering CMD Board of Directors p.1 • WestWater Engineering 2516 FORESIGHT CIRCLE, #1 GRAND JUNCTION, COLORADO 81505 (970) 241-7076 FAX (970) 241-7097 July 29, 2003 AUG 11 2003 GARFIELD COUNTY Bruce Smith, District Manager BUILDING & PLANNING Battlement Mesa Consolidated Metro District P.O. Box 6116 Battlement Mesa, Colorado 81636 RE: Third Formal Review and Comments for Valley View Village PUD Proposed Water and Sewer System Extensions Dear Mr. Smith, Our office is in receipt of revised Preliminary Plans and water report, submittal #3 that was hand delivered on July 21, 2003, and submittal #4 that includes subsequent modifications. The fourth submittal was hand delivered on July 25. We were advised that the Petitioner is requesting the District's acceptance of the Preliminary Plan on or before Wednesday, July 30, 2003. The water system has been modified to connect to the District's high pressure system, at an existing, valved 8 -inch stub -out located at the intersection of Battlement Mesa parkway and Stone Quarry Road near the northeast property corner. The existing high pressure system apparently does not extend further south to 302 Road as previously believed. HCE has obtained a copy of as -built utility plans from the District for the basis of the current design, and the proposed water connection has apparently been verified by the District's distribution system operating personnel. With the water connection relocated, and also with consideration of system velocities during fire flow scenarios, HCE proposes to extend two separate 8 -inch water mains from the new PRV vault, one along Battlement Mesa Parkway, and the second along Stone Quarry Road to form a loop to each end of Valley View Drive in the subdivision. This new water line alignment requires an air and vacuum relief valve at the high point near Stone Quarry Road and Valley View Drive, which has been included in the current set of Plans. Also, water and sewer alignments along Angelica Circle have been modified per our July 1, 2003 comments. The water line is now located in the street, south of the existing high pressure gas line, with water service lines extended across the gas line to the 6- and 4-plex units north of Angelica Circle. The sewerline has been realigned to the north side of the gas line, behind the curb and gutter, but is still within the street right-of-way. Manholes have been located in paved parking areas. The following are our comments on the Preliminary Plans and water report. In general, the Plans provide conceptual alignments and appurtenances necessary for the water and sewer systems. Our review is prefaced on the general layout and design for preliminary plan approval, and do not constitute review comments for construction approval. Detailed comments on the final construction Plans will be reserved until such time that the Preliminary Plan is approved by Garfield County. • • Bruce Smith July 29, 2003 Page 2 Water Report, Revised July 24, 2003 1. We would recommend that fire hydrants be flow tested by the Fire Department once installed as a part of initial acceptance testing for each phase of construction, to verify that the required fire flow at each hydrant (or at each group of adjacent hydrants within reach of the needed fire flow) can be achieved. Revised Plans - Water Distribution System 1. All water line crossings should be shown on the sewerline profiles. Crossings have not been shown on Sheets 20 and 21. Also, there are two water line crossings shown in the profile on Sheet 25 near MH -D5, but only one crossing is shown in plan view. 2. The plan and section of the PRV vault on Sheet 33 should include the direction of flow arrow. Also, these two connections of the PRV vault inconsistently show the inlet pipe as 12 -inch diameter (plan) and 8 -inch diameter (section), which should be corrected. 3. The air/vac valve manhole vault at Stone Quarry Road and Valley View Drive should be revised so that the air/vac valve is installed directly on the waterline. We would suggest the waterline profile be described to provide the high point in Valley View Drive to avoid the manhole being placed in higher traffic volume of Stone Quarry Road. The vent pipe can be extended behind the sidewalk or back of curb. Unless there is groundwater in the area the valve vault should be a manhole barrel section with a gravel drain bedding (Standard AirNac Vault). Revised Plans - Sanitary Sewer System 1. We would question whether additional separation can be provided between the sewerline and the proposed buried gas, electric, telephone, and cable lines (GETC) along Angelica Circle. 2. The sewer service lines for multi -family lots should be identified by unit number of the lot on construction drawings and as-builts of the sewer system for the District's future reference. In addition, if the building envelopes are better defined at the time construction plans are developed, the sewer service lines should be aligned with the individual units. 3. Sewer service lines should be stationed on the Utility Composite. This comment is repeated, since the District will reference the Utility Composite in the future when locating service lines. 4. Manholes should be stationed on the Utility Composite. This comment is repeated from our July 1 comments, since the ties to service lines for field locating will be from manholes. 5. The sewerlines have been realigned at Valley View Drive, Angelica Circle and Gregory Lane to the street, and several manholes have been added to accommodate the current alignments. It would appear that by relocating MH -A9 to the street centerline and approximately 5 -feet • • Bruce Smith July 29, 2003 Page 3 north (downstream), that MH -B 1 could be eliminated, and MH -A8 relocated to the center of lane approximately 65 -feet downstream from MH -A4. This would still provide for the minimum direction of flow deflection of 90° at MH -A4. In addition, the sewerline profile for Gregory Lane has not been revised to show the new manhole (MH -B 1 per Sheet 18 or MH - C4 per Sheet 25). 6. Manhole numbering is inconsistent between the Utility Composite sheets and Plan and Profile sheets for the sewerlines along Cliff View Court, Gregory Lane, Cliff View Lane and Angelica Circle, and should be corrected. Also, each manhole should have a unique number, i.e. the designation MH -C 1 should be used only once for one manhole. 7. A profile should be provided for the sewerline stub -out to the east of MH -A5. Also, future extension of the stub -out will require a new manhole if the grade and alignment of the stub - out does not match future design grade and alignment. Also concrete encasement of the sewerline at the waterline crossing should be called out for this section of sewerline. The aforementioned comments should be fairly easy to address for the District's consideration of the Preliminary Plan. Should you have any questions or comments on the current water and sewer system conceptual design, please do not hesitate to call our office. Respectfully, --2,_ Stephen T. LaBonde -,9t_ cc: Pamara Prefl, Garfield County Planning Department Darin Carei, Darter LLC Ron Weidler, High Country Engineering CONSOLIDFED METR P O OLIT ISTRICT 109 TAMARISK TRAIL / P.O. BOX 6116 / BATTLEMENT MESA, CO 81636 (970) 285-9050 / FAX (970) 285-9631 RECEIVED JUL 31 2003 GARFIELO COUNTY BOLDING & PLANNING Tamara Pregl, Staff Planner Garfield County Planning Department 108 8th Street, Suite 201 Glenwood Springs, CO 81601 Dear Ms. Pregl: July 29, 2003 Re: Valley View Village PUD Although I have not seen the latest version of the PUD water and wastewater plans, as discussed in the attached letter from Steve LaBonde of WestWater Engineering, the Valley View Village Subdivision water and wastewater plans are approved for the Preliminary Planning process. The District has capacity and will serve the proposed development subject to the terms and conditions expressed by Mr. LaBonde, and the additional conditions of Garfield County and the Grand Valley Fire Protection District. Very truly yours, R. Bruce Smith District Manager cc: WestWater Engineering CMD Board of Directors LOYAL E. LEAVENWORTH SANDER N. KARP DAVID H. McCONAUGHY JAMES S. NEU JULIE C. BERQUIST SUSAN W. LAATSCH NICOLE D. GARRIMONE ANNA S. ITENBERG MICHAEL J. SAWYER TERESA L. HOCK JOSLYN V. WOOD* *Of Counsel LEAVENWORTH & KARP, P.C. ATTORNEYS AT LAW 1011 GRAND AVENUE P. O. DRAWER 2030 GLENWOOD SPRINGS, COLORADO 81602 Telephone: (970) 945-2261 Facsimile: (970) 945-7336 swl@lklawfirm.com July 30, 2003 Ms. Tamara Pregl Senior Planner Garfield County Building and Planning Office 108 Eighth Street Glenwood Springs, CO 81601 Re: Valley View Village Dear Tamara: DENVER OFFICE:* WAZEE EXCHANGE BUILDING 1900 WAZEE STREET, STE. 203 DENVER, COLORADO 80202 Telephone: (303) 825-3995 Facsimile: (303) 825-3997 *(Please direct all correspondence to our Glenwood Springs Office) Hand Delivered RECEIVED JUL 3 0 2003 GARFIELD COUNTY DI,ILL.DING & PLANNING Enclosed you will find revised Covenants for Valley View Village Homeowners Association and the Valley View Village Townhome Homeowners Association. We believe that they now meet the conditions imposed by the Planning Board. However, they are not final at this point; we also contemplate that the Commissioners may impose further conditions on the Covenants, which we will address at the appropriate time. Also enclosed is a copy of the Agreement to Exchange Real Estate Interests. It is my understanding that you have a copy of this document, but we are providing another to you in the event we did not understand that correctly. Please do not hesitate to contact me if you have any questions or would like to discuss any aspect of this matter in greater detail. Very truly yours, LEAVENWORTH & KARP, P.C. Susan W. Laatsch SWL:bsl Enclosures I:\2003\Clients\Grace Homes\Letters\tamara-1.wpd • • Agreement to Exchange Real Estate Interests THIS AGREEMENT is made and entered into this day of July, 2003, by and between EDWARD J. and IDA LEE HOAGLUND, whose address is 4064 County Road 309, Parachute, CO 81635 (collectively the "Hoaglunds"), and PUBLIC SERVICE COMPANY OF COLORADO, whose address is 621 17th Street, Denver, CO 80293 ("PSCO"). WHEREAS, the Hoaglunds own property in the SE1/4 NE1/4 of Section 18, Township 7S, Range 95W of the 6th P.M., Garfield County generally depicted on Exhibit B. WHEREAS, PSCO currently owns an easement for a right of way fifty (50) feet in width, to install, construct, and maintain a pipeline(s) for the transportation of oil and gas on or under the property owned by the Hoaglunds, which easement is more thoroughly described in the documents recorded in the Office of the Garfield County Clerk and Recorder on April 25, 1962 in Book 340 at Page 538 as Reception No. 217350 and subsequently amended on May 2, 1963 in Book 349 at Page 58 as Reception No. 221322. WHEREAS, PSCO constructed a pipeline(s) over or under the property owned by the Hoaglunds but outside of the easement(s) described above; PSCO's pipeline(s) therefore constitute a trespass on the Hoaglunds' property. WHEREAS, the Hoaglunds' property will soon be subdivided and developed which will require that certain utility improvements occur on, over, or under the area where PSCO's pipeline(s) is built. WHEREAS, the parties desire to legitimize the as -built location of PSCO's pipeline(s) and facilitate the subdivision and development of the Hoaglunds' property. THEREFORE, in consideration of the mutual promises set forth herein and other good and valuable consideration, the receipt and sufficiency of which is hereby acknowledged, the parties agree as follows: 1. PSCO hereby agrees to quit claim to the Hoaglunds any and all interest in any easement(s) granted as described in the documents recorded in the Office of the Garfield County Clerk and Recorder on April 25, 1962 in Book 340 at Page 538 as Reception No. 217350 and subsequently amended on May 2, 1963 in Book 349 at Page 58 as Reception No. 221322. The form of the quit claim deed is attached as Exhibit A. 2. The Hoaglunds hereby agree to grant PSCO an easement, fifty (50) feet in width, to construct, operate, maintain, repair, and replace pipeline(s) and all fixtures and devices, used or useful in the operation of said pipeline(s), for the transportation of oil and gas, in the location described on Exhibit B. The form I:\2003\Clients\3race Homes \AgreementMHoaglund Exchange Agreementwpd July 18, 2003 • • of easement to be granted by the Hoaglunds is attached as Exhibit C. 3. PSCO hereby agrees and consents that the easement granted by the Hoadlunds shall be a non-exclusive easement, which easement shall be available for the installation of utilities as generally depicted on Exhibit D, including but not limited to water, wastewater, electric, cable -TV, high speed data, drainage facilities or other such utilities as may become expedient or required in the subdivision review process with Garfield County, so long as the installation and use of said utilities does not interfere with the purpose of PSCO's easement. PSCO acknowledges that the utilities shown on Exhibit D will not cause any such interference. 4. The parties agree that this Agreement shall survive closing andwill be recorded together with Exhibits B and D, together with the executed quit claim deed (Exhibit A) and the executed grant of easement (Exhibit C), in the public records of Garfield County, Colorado. IN WITNESS THEREOF, the parties have executed this Agreement on the date set forth above. EDWARD J. HOAGLUND IDA LEE HOAGLUND By: STATE OF ColorQcic ) ) ss. COUNTY OF GarF e (ci ) Subscribed and sworn to before m- • 01-, day of Tu/y , 200 3 by (SEAL) My commission expires: t p 7/o ma SHI'16``d • BREWE=rys , c • ,I L/F CO PUBLIC SERVICE COMPANY OF COLORADO By: L•\ 2003\Clients\Grace Homes\ Agreements\Hoaglund Exchange Agreement. wpd July 18, 2003 STATE OF • • COUNTY OF Subscribed and sworn to before me this day of , 200_ by (SEAL) Notary Public My commission expires: 1:\ 20031Clients\Grace Homes \Agreementalloaglmd Exchange Agreement.wpd July 18, 2003