Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2.0 Staff Report PC 01.08.92{t-t PC U8t92 PROJECT INFORMATION AND STAFF COMMENTS REQUEST:Sketch Plan review of the Wooden Deer Subdivision Carbondale Land DeveloPment Corporation Schmueser Gordon MeYer, lnc. Resource Engineering, lnc. CTl/Thompson, Inc. A parcel of land located in the SW% of Section 24 and Lot 3 and the NW% NW% Section 25, T7S, R88W; more practically described as a pard located aPProximatelY 1.5 milesnortheast of Carbondale offof C.R. 103 and 104. APPLICANT: ENGINEERS: LOCATION: SITE DATA' A l}l'72acre parcel to be split into 22 single family lots WATER: Central water sYstem SEWER: Individual Sewage Disposal Systems ACCESS: C.R' 104 or C'R' 103 -oNINGl N[VRD I. REI ATIONSHIP TO THF COMPRFHF'NSIVF PLAN The parcel of land is located in the fiollowing Comprehensive Plan Management Districts: District A - Carbondale Urban Area of Influence; District c - Rural Areas/Minor Environmental constraints; District E - Rural Areas/Severe - Moderate Environmental Constraints; and District F - Rural Areas/Severe Environmental Constraints. lt appears that a majority of the property in located in Management District F. II.DF'SCRIPTTON OF THI] PROPOS ' I A. Site Descrintion: The subject property is located at northeast corner of the intersection of C.R. 103 (Crystal Springs) and 104 (Blue Road)' The property is essentially a north/south trencling rectangle running parallel to C'R' 103' There is approximately 300 feet of relief over the length of the property' The property is divi<led into two (2) basic topographic areas. The southern one- thircl of the property consists of moderately sloping (5 to 20%d hillsides' One minor intermittent {rainage traverse this portion of the property and is tributary to crystal Springs creek. Soils in this area vary in depth from six (6) to eighteen (18) feet and consist of clay mixed with sands an{ gravel' This portion is vegetated primarily with grasses and sage' The northern two-thirds of the property consist of moderate to severely sloped (25 to 4O%) hillsicles. This portion of the subject property is heavily wooded with pinon/juniper vegetation, typical of a southern exposure' Soils in this portion of tfre proposed subdivision are shallow and laden with basaltic cobbles and boulders. Themajority of this portion of the property slopes steeply to the south from the high point of the property. The very northern portion of the property slopes downward to the north, in the opposite direction as the remainder of the Parcel. There are no perennial streams on the property, and only one intermittent drainage on the southern half of the property. Groundwater is located at considerable depth on this property. 'fhere are no improvements on the subject property. The property has historically been used for cattle grazing' REVIEW AGENCY COMMENTS A. Torrography: A considerable portion of the property is steeply sloped' This will influence road and drivewaydesign, home sil.ing, erosion and drainage and aesthetic impacts. This will be particularly an issue on Lots 6 through I I and 14 through 17. The remaincler of the lots have nrore moderately sloped building sites. B. Sorls: The geotechnical report submitted with the application indicates certain concerns about soils conditions. Due to presence of shrink-swell clays, limitations on foutdation design may occur. Construction of retaining walls will be necessary on steeper cut slopes. Soils should provide fair to good subgrade for road construction. Acceptable percolation rates occurred on test holes in the southern portion of the site. C. I ot Design/Layout: The applicants are proposing twenty-two (22) residential lots on approximately 105 acres or a grass density of one (l) home llf,;r 4.62acres. Lots rangl in size lrom 9.29 acres to 2.00 acres in size. The majority of lots will have a southern orientation with Sopris/Elk Range views. All lots have direct roadway frontage. Two (2) lots are bisected by the ctrl-de-sac. Cut and frll driveway cuts will be required on approximately half the lots. III. F. D. E. G. H. Utilities: The applicants are proposing to serve each lot with electric and telephone service. They have indicated that cable television and natural gas service are being considered but no determination has been made to tlate. All utilities are proposed to be underground. Roads: The proposed 22lot subdivision would be served by a cul-de-sac approximately one-halff (ll2) mile in length. Two (2) options for the cul-de-sac have been proposed, one entering from CR 103 and the other from CR 104. The proposed cul-de-sac exceeds the 600 foot maximum length requirement. This standard may be waived if the Carbondale Rural Fire Protection District consents. An emergency/fire roadway has been proposed entering the subdivision from the adjacent property to the north. The proposed roadway may exceed the l0% maximum gradient now allowed and the 12% :rr.the proposed regulations for subdivisions of this size. Gradient reduction might require additional switchbacks, longer transverses or a new alignment. The applicant's geotechnical report indicates that the roadway would be surfaced with asphalt. Current County standards require a chip and seal surface. Water: The applicants are proposing to supply the subdivision with a conrmunity water system consisting of one ( I ) or more wells and a 40,000 gallon storage tank. Water would be pumped from the well(s) to the storage tank located at the proposed subdivision's highest point and then distributed via2" and 3" piping. One test well has been drilled on the property and reached water at 155 feet. A pump test wassubsequently conducted which indicated that the test well could sustain a 50 gpm flow, adequate for the subdivision's needs. Five (5) additional well sites have been identified in the water right application and permits have been hled. Thesewellswould provide back-up watersupply to the subdivision. The legal source of water for the proposed subdivision will be a water service contract with the Basalt Water Conservancy District in the amount of 4.2 acre feet to augment depletions associated with domestic waterusage. Theproposed contract would account lbr in-house use, limited irrigation and hre protection. Sewer: The applicants are proposing to service individual lots with conventional ISDS systems. Sample perc tests performed on the south half of the property indicate acceptable rates lor conventional leach fields. Some problems may be incurred on steeper slopes. Roundary Disfrutes: The boundaries of the subject property are cturently in question with hve (5) adjacent landowners. Clear title or consent from any affected landowners within the subdivision boundaries would be aprerequisite of a Preliminary Plan application. Zoning: The proposed lots appear to conform with the requirements of the A/zuRD zone district. The applicant has indicated in the application text that caretaker's units are being proposed in conjunction with each of Lhe22 single lamily residences. The A\R\RD zoning allows agriculture-related housing as a use by right. However, the applicants have indicated that farm animals will not be allowed. Therefore, any second dwelling unit could be permitted as a guest J. house through the Special Use Permit process' Comfrehensive Planning Issues: A signiticant portion of the Wooden Deer property is located in District F - Rural Areas with Severe Environmental Constraints. The severe environmental constraints label is based largely on topography, i.e. slopesexceeding 25 percent. Theplan discourages development of areas of severe environmental constraints' There are culrently a number of existing platted lots or approved preliminary plans in the vicinity. Approved preliminary plans include Cedar Ridge Farms 18 totr;, Sun MesaiZO single-family and l6 multi-family lots) and Goose Creek (5 lots). Zoningapproval for l7 single-family and I I cluster homes have been approved for Preshana Farms. The plan encourages the buildout of existing platted subdivisions. Potential conflicts may develop with existing land uses an adjacent parcels, namely cattle ranching ancl gravel batch plant. Noise, dust, traffrc and odors may impact potential lot buyers. The Comprehensive Plan discourages residential development without adequate separation from incompatible uses'