No preview available
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1.0 Applicationf{ECEIVED FE Sketch ?lin Preliminary Plan x Final Plat SUBDIVISION APPLICATION FORM SUBDIVISION NAME: Blue Creek Ranch PUD OWNER: Blue Creek Holdings, LLC 22 ENGINEER/PLANNER/SURVEYOR: LOCATION: Section Sopris Engineering/Davis Horn Inc. Township 7S Range 67 W WATER 'SOURCE: Joint System withAspen Equestrian Estates SEWAGE DISPOSAL METHOD: On -Rite Systpm PUBLIC ACCESS VIA: ik CR 100 EXISTING ZONING: h 1R11afl EASEMENTS: Utility - - holy Crass Rocky hit.. Natural Gas__see Ttile Pthlicy Ditch TOTAL DEVELOPMENT AREA: (1) Residential Single Famiy Duplex Multi -family Mobile Home (2) Commercial (3) Industrial (4) Public/Quasi-Public (5) Open Space/Common Area TOTAL: PARKING SPACES: Residential 133 Commercial Number 46 Acres 81.33 Floor Area Acres 0 0 sq. ft. sq. ft. (1 (1 54.q RECEIVED FEB n r Garfield County, Colorado ::br^ueAry 22 19_2t4i' APPLICANT: i nr' i ver Dev I oFr*wn t LLC: o Davis horn Enc. 215 S. Monarch 104 Aspen Co. 81611 ADDRESS OF APPLICANT: c Proposed Zone District Amendment from: A/RI D Lo: PUD Lot Size: 81.33 acres Applicant's Signature 9 h r i L in-(' P. -e . re In support of this zone district amendment application, the petitioner must submit all of the. following information: 1. Zone District snap of subject property 2. Letter from the applicant staling the proposed zone district amendment and the reasons justifying the zone district amendment 3. List of owners ofadiacent property and their addresses as listed in the County Assessors office, including owners of property separated by public right-of-way 4. Fee of 5450.00 - payable to the "Garfield County Treasurer" 5. Vicinity map showing relative location of the property 6. Legal description or copy of the deed to the property 7. Letter of consent from owner(s) of property if other than applicant DAVIS HORN INC. PLANNING & REAL ESTATE CONSULTANTS 215 S. MONARCH, SUIT€. 104 ASPEN, CO 81611 to f OrderPay ofthe c.. r F I e l c,„ NATIONAL ASSOC$A11O VECTRABANK is 514E liC O rs1411•VV A5PEN CQ Ol Hi1A RUM RESPONSE SU 64,8 ISSRI {24 MOJ ACCOUW1 L•310AUA11ortp , r'rl — � � •� 11 o all ars 8 4740130095 For ti C (Ce r\-147 I LO 2003 X1541:4740 L 300950 750 2 Gt1ARONNOSAFETY ULU[ CG[ Dili DAVIS HORN INC. PLANNING & REAL ESTATE CONSULTANTS 215 S. MONARCH, SUITE 104 ASPEN, CO 81611 Pay to the 1 Order of L OI Lar o b e ■ IFAT1ORAL ASSOCIATION VECTRABA,N.ASPEN COK � 610 RE DI* 'S?CWS 118$4440.7850 RAMOUS ACC CUNT wµF;,u1A1A1YL , For LL 20703 L541:4 740 14 3009 So 7503 Date 7503 23-315/1020 474 CLA- CJe 1 $ c11 c,_ U Dollars 4740130095 8 GIWWa,7,109 SAFETY DUXaepgy RECEIVED FEB 2 2002 BLUE CREEK RANCH PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT: PRELIMINARY PLAN SUBMITTED BY: WINDRIVER DEVELOPMENT, LLC 19351 Highway 82 Carbondale CO 81623 (970) 704-1165 February, 2002 PLANNING TEAM APPLICANT WindRiver Development LLC Ace Lane Robert M. Cumming, Jr. 19351 State Highway 82 Carbondale CO 81623 (970) 704-9007 (Phone) (970) 704-9006 (Fax) (866) 502-6000 (Cell) PLANNING Davis Hom Inc. Glenn Horn AICP 215 S. Monarch, Suite 104 Aspen CO 81611 (970) 925-6587 (Phone) (970) 925-5180 (FAX) CIVIL ENGINEERING AND SURVEYING Sopris Engineering LLC Mark Butler, P.E. Yancy Nichol P.E. 502 East Main Street Suite A3 Carbondale, CO 81623 (970) 704-0311 (Phone) (970) 704-0313 (FAX) WETLANDS ANALYSIS Andrew Antipas LLC Ecological & Environmental Consulting 0285 Crystal Circle Carbondale CO 81623 (970) 963-8297 WILDLIFE Naturetech Consulting Services Corp. Steve Dahmer 2128 Railroad Avenue Rifle CO 81650 (970) 625-8553 (Phone) (970) 625-8073 (FAX) ENGINEERING CONSULTANTS Zancanella & Associates Tom Zancanella, P.E. POB 1908 Glenwood Springs CO 81601 (970) 945-5700 (Phone) (970) 945-1253 (FAX) GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERS HP Geotech 5020 County Road 154 Glenwood Springs, CO 81601 (970) 945-7988 (Phone) (970) 945-8454 (FAX) LEGAL COUNSEL Patrick, Miller & Krofp, P.C. Scott Miller, Esq. 730 E. Durant Avenue, Suite 200 Aspen, Colorado 81611 (970) 920-1028 (Phone) (970) 925-6847 (FAX) Larry Green, Esq. Balcomb & Green 818 Colorado Avenue Glenwood Springs CO 81601 (970) 945-6546 141-4-kPLAA- 30� vYT-s TABLE OF CONTENTS Page Table of Contents List of Figures List of Sheets List of Tables List of Appendices INTRODUCTION 1 ii v vi 1 I. EXISTING CONDITIONS 2 PROJECT DESCRIPTION 3 Lot Plan 3 Open Space Plan 8 Circulation Plan 9 III. LAND USE APPROVALS PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS PRELIMINARY PLAN SUBDIVISION 12 12 45 LIST OF FIGURES Page Figure 1 Blue Creek Ranch PUD: Illustrative Site Plan 4 Figure 2 Blue Creek Ranch PUD: Illustrative Lot Plan 5 Figure 3 Blue Creek Ranch PUD: Open Space Plan 9 Figure 4 Blue Creek Ranch PUD: Circulation Plan 11 Figure 5 Garfield County Comprehensive Plan: Creative Design Approach 14 Figure 6 Blue Creek Ranch: Conventional Development Pattern 16 Figure 7 Proposed Land Use Districts, Study Area I 25 Figure 8 Garfield County Comprehensive Plan Slope Hazard Profile, 28 Garfield County Study Figure 9 Garfield County Comprehensive Plan Soil Hazard Profile, 30 Garfield County Study Area 1 Figure 10 Garfield County Comprehensive Plan Septic System Constraints, 31 Garfield County Study Area I Figure 11 Garfield County Comprehensive Plan Flood Plain Profile, 32 Garfield County Study Area I Figure 12 Garfield County Comprehensive Plan Existing Subdivisions, 34 Garfield County Study Area 1 Figure 13 Garfield County Comprehensive Plan Transportation Profile, 35 Garfield County Study Area I 1 1 1 t 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 LIST OF SHEETS (separately bound) Sheet 1 Blue Creek Ranch PUD: Cover Sheet Sheet 2 Blue Creek Ranch PUD: Preliminary Plan Map - Survey Adjoincr Sheet 3 Blue Creek Ranch PUD: Preliminary Plan Map - Total Subdivision Layout Sheet 4 Blue Creek Ranch PUD: Sheet 5 Blue Creek Ranch PUD: Sheet 6 Blue Creek Ranch PUD: Preliminary Plan Map Preliminary Plan Map Preliminary Plan Map - 1 " = 40' Scale Area Detail - 1" = 40' Scale Area Detail - 1" = 40' Scale Area Detail Sheet 7 Blue Creek Ranch PUD: Existing Topo. Wetland and Flood Plain Delineation Sheet 8 Blue Creek Ranch PUD: Existing Conditions North Sheet 9 Blue Creek Ranch PUD: Existing Conditions Center Sheet 10 Blue Creek Ranch PUD: Existing Conditions South Sheet 11 Blue Creek Ranch PUD: Site Dimensional Plan & Signage Sheet 12 Blue Creek Ranch PUD: Grading and Drainage North Sheet 13 Blue Creek Ranch PUD: Grading and Drainage South Sheet 14 Blue Creek Ranch PUD: Ponderosa Pass Plan & Profile Beginning to Station 14+00 LIST OF SHEETS (continued) (separately bound) Sheet 15 Blue Creek Ranch PUD; Ponderosa Pass Plan & Profile Station 14+ to End Sheet 16 Blue Creek Ranch PUD: Bristlecone Drive Plan & Profile Sheet 17 Blue Creek Ranch PUD: Aspen Way, Pinyon Lane and Cottonwood Court Plan & Profile Sheet 18 Blue Creek Ranch PUD: Master Utility North Sheet 19 Blue Creek Ranch PUD: Master Utility South Sheet 20 Blue Creek Ranch PUD: Sewer A Plan & Profile Beginning to Station 14+00 Sheet 21 Blue Creek Ranch PUD: Sewer A Plan & Profile Beginning to Station 14+00 Sheet 22 Blue Creek Ranch PUD: Sewer B Plan and Profile Sheet 23 Blue Creek Ranch PUD: Sewer C & D Plan & Profile Sheet 24 Blue Creek Ranch PUD: Erosion Control Plan Sheet 25 Blue Creek Ranch PUD: Water Detail Sheet 26 Blue Creek Ranch PUD: Sewer Detail Sheet 27 Blue Creek Ranch PUD: Grading and Drainage Detail -iv- LIST OF TABLES Page Table 1 Copy of "Table 30 Proposed Land Use Districts and Methodology" 24 from the Garfield. County Comprehensive Plan Table 2 Development Constraints and Land Use Characteristics of Land 26 in the Low Density Residential District Table 3 Development Constraints and Land Use Characteristics of Land 26 in the High Density Residential District Table 4 Blue Lake Ranch PUD: Development Constraints and Land Use 27 Characteristics -v- LIST OF APPENDICES APPENDIX 1 APPENDIX 2 APPENDIX 3 APPENDIX 4 APPENDIX 5 APPENDIX 6 APPENDIX 7 APPENDIX 8 APPENDIX 9 APPENDIX 10 APPENDIX 11 APPENDIX 12 APPENDIX 13 APPENDIX 14 APPENDIX 15 Land Title Guarantee Company Title Policy dated October 9, 2000 for Blue Creek Land Holdings, LLC for property located at 3220 County Road 100, Carbondale, Colorado June 22, 2001 Letter from Arthur J. Schiller, Senior Vice President and General Counsel for Blue Creek Land Holdings granting WindRiver Development LLC and Davis Hom, Inc. permission to submit the Blue Creek Ranch PUD Land Use Application and to represent Blue Creek Land Holdings, LLC in the review process January 17, 2002 letter from Yancy Nichol, P.E. of Sopris Engineering, LLC addressing Water Supply and Sanitary Sewer System October 24, 2001 letter from Andrew Anitipas of Ecological & Environmental Consulting, LLC regarding plant communities at Blue Creek Ranch September 7, 2000 letter from Steve D. Dahmer of NatureTech Consultant Services Corp. regarding Wildlife Impacts January 24, 2002 letter and report from Zancanella and Associates, Inc., Engineering Consultants regarding Water Supply and Water Quality January 17, 2001 letter and report from Scott C. Miller of Patrick, Miller & Krofp, P.C. regarding Water Supply and Sewer Service November 21, 2001 letter from J. David Holm, Water Quality Control Division. of the Colorado Department of Public Health and Environment for the State of Colorado regarding Wastewater Treatment Facilities Declaration of Covenants, Conditions and Restrictions for Blue Creek Ranch PUD List of Property Owners to receive Public Notice and Affidavit ofJanet Raczak Drainage Study for Blue Creek Ranch prepared by Sopris Engineering, LLC dated October 10, 2001 January 8, 2002 letter from Timothy P. Beck, P.E. of Zancanella and Associates, Inc., Engineering Consultants regarding the Floodplain Special Use Permit Appl ication Preliminary Geotechnical Study for Blue Creek Ranch Subdivision prepared by Hepworth-Pawlak Geotechnical, Inc. dated September 11, 2000 September 7, 2002 letter from Scott C. Miller of Patrick & Stowell, Attorneys at Law, regarding Legal Access for Blue Creek Ranch Garfield County Planning Department GIS Resources: Colorado Division of Wildlife WRIS Data Checklist for Blue Creek Ranch PUD -vi- LIST OF APPENDICES continued APPENDIX 16 APPENDIX 17 APPENDIX 18 APPENDIX 19 APPENDIX 20 APPENDIX 21 APPENDIX 22 January 8, 2002 letter from Timothy P. Beck, P.E., of Zancaneila and Associates, Inc., Engineering Consultants regarding Wetlands Encroachment Soil Survey ofAspen-Gypsum Area, Colorado parts ofEagle, Garfield and Pitkin Counties, Sheet No. 20 January 22, 2002 Memorandum and attachment of relative portions of draft Church & Associates On -Site Wastewater System Design Report May 31, 2001 letter from Michael Johnson, Construction Coordinator for Solaris Engineering, LLC regarding AT&T Broadband. January 22, 2002 letter from Gary Gibson, Senior Design Engineer for Quest regarding telephone facilities for Blue Creek Ranch PUD January 2, 2002 letter from Jeffrey A. Franke, Staking Engineer, Holy Cross Energy regarding Holy Cross Electric Service for Blue Creek Ranch PUD February 8, 2002 letter from Mark Butler, Sopris Engineering -vii- INTRODUCTION This application requests Planned Unit Development (PUD), Preliminary Plan approval for the Blue Creek Ranch which is located at 3220 Catherine Store Road (CR 100). Sheets 1 and 2, Blue Creek Ranch: PUD -Vicinity Map, depicts the location of the Blue Creek Ranch and shows improvements in the area. WindRiver Development LLC (applicant) is seeking land use approvals for 39 single family detached free market dwelling units and nine single family detached affordable housing units. The subject site is currently owned by Blue Creek Land Holdings, LLC (owner) as demonstrated by a current title policy which appears as Appendix 1. Appendix 2 is a letter from Blue Creek Land Holdings, LLC authorizing WindRiver Development, LLC (applicant) and Davis Horn Incorporated to prepare and submit a land use application for the subject site. This application is addressed in the following sections. I. Existing Conditions; 11. Project Description; and III. Land Use Approvals. Frequent references are made within this application to "Sheets". The Sheets are technical drawings prepared by Sopris Engineering which are contained in a separate 11"x 1 7" booklet. Additional larger 24"x36" sheets will be provided to Garfield County. References to "Figures" mean non- technical illustrative drawings contained in this booklet within the text. Page -1- 1.. EXISTING CONDITIONS This section of the application addresses existing conditions. As depicted by Sheet 3, Blue Creek Ranch Planned Unit Development: Preliminary Plan Map, the subject site contains approximately 81.33 acres and is improved with a single-family house, accessory dwelling unit and agricultural buildings. The site is bordered by the State Highway 82 (SAH 82) frontage road and SH 82 to the north, the Cerise property to the east, the Roaring Fork River to the south, the St. Finnbar and Aspen Equestrian Estates Subdivisions and the Catherine Store to the west. The property is currently zoned Agricultural/Residential/Rural Density (A/RAD). Agricultural uses, guiding and outfitting, parks and single family dwelling units are uses by right in the zone. The minimum lot area permitted in the AIRIRD zone is two acres_ Sheet 7, Blue Creek Ranch PUD: Existing Topo, Wetland and Floodplain Delineation depicts site topography, improvements and floodplain information. Sheet 7 shows the northern third of the property is generally a flat irrigated pasture. The center third of the property is heavily wooded and is partially developed with a house, pond and accessory buildings. There is a pond located just to the southeast of the existing buildings. The southern third of the site is also heavily wooded and includes open space, wetlands and floodplain. Page -2- PROJECT DESCRIPTION Sheets 2 through 6 are the Blue Creek Ranch PUD: Preliminary Plan technical drawings prepared in compliance with Section 4.08.05(2). The Preliminary Plan, shows Lots and Tracts proposed within the PUD. Figure 1, Blue Creek Ranch PUD: Illustrative Site Plan also depicts the site plan for the PUD. The following sections of the application describe the Blue Creek Ranch PUD in more detail. Lot Plan The data on Sheet 3 show that 39 single family detached free-market residential lots and nine single family detached affordable lots are proposed within the PUD. Lot 1 also includes an existing accessory dwelling unit. All of the proposed residential development is setback at least 650 feet to the south of SH 82. Figure 1, the Illustrative Plan, shows the large conifers on the property and the lot plan has been designed to preserve the trees. Figure 2, Blue Creek Ranch PUD: Illustrative Lot Plan, shows the lots are planned to form four neighborhoods or hamlets. Front yards and porches are oriented to the interior streets and courts as depicted. The back yards of most of the residences will be oriented to the open space in the PUD. The data on Sheet 3 shows that approximately 54.9 acres or 67.5 percent of the site will be common open space. Additionally, approximately 16.9 acres or 20.1 percent of the site will be privately owned open space on fee simple lots. All development with the exception of front porches will be restricted to designated building envelopes. A total of approximately 72 acres or 88.3 percent ofthe property will be restricted as open space. Most ofthe lots are small, varying between approximately 10,000 square feet and 20,000 square feet, however Lots 1, 23, 24 and 25 are significantly larger. As noted above, approximately 16.9 acres Page -3- OM M I MN NM E MI ME MN NM EM MI E IMI MI MI MN E NM M 111111 ME MN M ME ME ME MN I I E IIM NM MB MN E +�111lE1ffl�AI1IFlNf 'iln1.11011fil1•111111ilsWS.11110M. of land within private lots will be restricted as open space. A total of 9.2 acres of land within private lots may be improved with single family residences. Overall, development density will be approximately one unit per 1.6 acres. The application refers to road names. Road names are for descriptive purposes only and will be changed as required by Garfield County. Unique road names will be used to assist in the provision of emergency services.. Ponderosa Pass Road is the primary access to the PUD. Sheet 3 shows Lot 1 is located on Ponderosa Pass Road and encompasses the existing homestead, accessory dwelling unit, and agricultural outbuildings. Lot 1 is the largest Lot in the PUD (4.8 acres). Lot 1 is bordered to the north by Tract 3, 16.7 acres of common open space. Ponderosa Pass Road accesses Aspen Way and Pinion Lane. These local streets provide access to free market Lots 2-14 and affordable housing Lots 40 through 48 and Tract 7 an open space and barn parcel. Lot sizes vary between approximately 10,000 and 18,000 square feet in this portion of the PUD. Lots 9-14 border Tract 4, 12.3 acres of common open space. Lots 2-4, and 47 and 48, which are accessed via Aspen Way, border Tract 3, 16.7 acres of common open space. A total of nine affordable housing units are proposed. Four units will be built by the applicant. The remaining five lots will be sold to local qualifying families to build their own houses. The proposed affordable housing exceeds County requirements. Ponderosa Pass Road also provides access to Lots 15-22 which vary in size between approximately 19,600 and 27,000 square feet. Building envelopes on these Lots have been carefully designed to avoid encroachment on wetland areas. Each Lot borders upon Tract 4, 12.2 acres of common open space. Page -6- Lots 23, 24, and 25 are larger lots accessed via Bristlecone Drive. These larger lots border upon Tract 5, 19.1 acres of common open space. Future development of Tract 5 will be restricted by the dedication of a conservation easement to a local land trust. Bristlecone Drive, to the east of Ponderosa Pass Road, provides access to Lots 26 to 32, which vary in size between approximately 20,400 and 35,000 square feet. Tract 5, common open space also borders the rear boundary of these lots. The far east side of Bristlecone Drive accesses Lots 28-30, 38, 39 and Tract 8. Lots 28-30 are bordered by Tract 4, common open space. Tract 8 is comprised of open space and will be improved with a barn to be shared by the owners of lots in the neighborhood. Bristlecone Drive has been designed to intersect County Road 100 (CR 100) at the entrance to the St. Finnbar Subdivision. Cottonwood Court accesses Lots 33-36 and Lot 37. Lots 33-36 border on Tract 5, common open space. Tract 6, a 2.2 acre public recreational open space parcel, will be dedicated to a local conservation trust as a park. The park will be utilized for boaters and fisherman to access the Roaring Fork River. The applicant will dedicate a fisherman's easement within the highwater mark of the Roaring Fork River for the entire length of the property. Tract 1 will be dedicated to the Colorado Department of Transportation to be improved with a park and ride transit facility. Tract 2 will be dedicated to Garfield County for a bicycle and pedestrian Trail. The Trail will extend for the entire length of the property contiguous with CR 100 and Old Highway 82. Tract 2 has been designed to accommodate railroad tracks in the event a railroad is ever developed in the Roaring Fork Valley. The applicant will reserve a railroad easement which will be dedicated if a railroad is developed. Page -7- Open Space Plan Figure 3 depicts the Blue Creek Ranch PUD: Open Space Plan. The residential lots in the PUD are clustered so that approximately 55 acres or 67 percent of the site will be restricted as common open space. Approximately 1.5 acres of the open space is a pond. Common open space will be owned and maintained by the Blue Creek Ranch PUD Homeowners Association. Sheet 3 shows that the common open space is comprised of Tracts 3, 4, 5, 7, 8 and 9. Tract 3, which contains approximately 16.8 acres, is located on the north side of the PUD adjacent to State Highway 82. This tract will remain in agricultural use and preserve the agricultural character of the Blue Creek property as viewed from the Highway. Tract 4 is also common open space. The 12.3 acre parcel is primarily within the center of the PUD. Lands within Tract 4 are comprised of environmentally sensitive lands to be preserved from development. Tracts 7, 8 and 9 are useable common open space located adjacent to lots proposed for development. An additional 16.9 +1- acres or 20 percent of the site will be privately owned open space on fee simple lots. This open space will serve as undeveloped yards for individual lots. As previously indicated, future development of open space Tracts 5 and 6 will be restricted by the dedication of a conservation easement to a local land trust, Tract 5 contains approximately 19 acres of environmentally sensitive land located adjacent to the Roaring Fork River. Use of this area will be limited to trails and passive recreation (see Sheet 3). Tract 6, which contains approximately 2.2 acres, will be open space dedicated for public use. The applicant will develop a six car gravel parking lot on Tract 6 to provide river access for fisherman and boaters. The remaining open space parcels, Tracts 1, 2 and 10 will be used for different functions. Tract 1 will be dedicated to the Colorado Department of Transportation and may be developed as a mass Page -8- i - - I I NM MI -= M I - - - - - M MN c NYId 3ZJVdS N3cd0 `Clftd HJMdII )1I13 31r`1e N011V:71030 _LO )I1VAb_ISNOO PRIVATELY OWNED OPEN SPACE II I>F.� i! 1 1 Int Iamwin= wood 1r 1151 MEIf ~'!1. Sl:�ixFfvf.• l��aa! i transit park and ride facility. Tract 2 will be reserved for a rail line and public trail. Tract 10 will be utilized for the wastewater disposal system. Circulation Plan Figure 4, Blue Creek Ranch PUD; Circulation Plan depicts paved roads, trails and bicycle and pedestrian paths in the PUD. There will be two ingress and egress points to the PUD from CR 100. A bike and pedestrian path will be dedicated contiguous with old SH 82 and CR 100. Additionally, the applicant will dedicate a Park and Ride Facility in the northwest corner of the Property on Tract Page -10 OM MN NMI MI NM MN EMI =I ME NMI MI NM all EMI MN MINI MN NM =I - __-- _ �_ III. LAND USE APPROVALS The applicant is seeking PUD, Preliminary Plan approvals and a Master/Comprehensive Plan Amendment. This section demonstrates compliance with the PUD Standards and Requirements, Sketch and Preliminary Plan Subdivision standards. First the PUD Standards and Requirements are addressed and then the Preliminary Plan Subdivision standards. PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS This section of the land use application demonstrates compliance with the Garfield County PUD standards, section 4 of the Garfield County Zoning Resolution. Section 4.02 Purposes and Objectives of Development Section 4.03 Scope Section 4.04 Consistency with the Master/Comprehensive Plan Section 4.02 of the Garfield County Zoning Resolution states that: "The purpose of a PUD is to permit greater design flexibility and, consequently more creative and imaginative design for development than generally possible under conventional zoning and subdivision regulations. It is intended that PUDs shall be planned to insure general conformity both in substance and location, with goals and objectives of the master comprehensive plan through integrated development. (emphasis added). Section 4.04 of the Zoning Resolution indicates that "no PUD shall be approved unless it is found by the County Commissioners to be in general conformity with the County's Master/Comprehensive plan(s)" (emphasis added). The subject site is located within the Garfield County Comprehensive Plan Study Area 1. The Proposed Land Use Districts, Study Area 1 map designate the Blue Creek Ranch area within the Low Page -12- Density Residential District. Land use densities of one dwelling unit per ten acres are proposed for the District. Section IV of the Comprehensive Plan notes that "the Land Use Map does not have the same regulatory authority or legal implications of a traditional land use map." It is further noted that "County Comprehensive Plans are advisory only, neither legislative nor judicial in nature, nor the equivalent of zoning, and not binding upon the zoning discretion ... It is important to consider the Garfield County Comprehensive Plan in its entirety when evaluating the Blue Creek Ranch PUD for "general conformity" with the Plan. This means the PUD must be evaluated based upon the concepts proposed in the plan in addition to the goals, objectives and policies as well as the land use map. Section 8.4 Traditional Open Space Approaches / Subdivision Requirements / Design Approaches (p.11 -48 -I1-50). (Refer to Figure 5, Garfield County Comprehensive Plan: Creative Design Approach. Design Approaches. Design approaches are based on developing standards and review procedures that attempt to address the need to carefully plan areas adjacent to, or composed of, important visual resources. As discussed earlier, the sprawling nature of subdivisions in Garfield County is costly economically, environmentally and aesthetically. Teller County, Colorado was faced with similar issues during the 1989 update of that County's Comprehensive Plan. The Teller County Team prepared illustrations of the existing residential landscape (Figure 9), development under conventional development patterns (Figure 10), and creative residential siting (Figure 11). Figures 9, 10 and 11 refer to Figures in Plan. The creative approach relies on clustering development where the topography and vegetation are used to screen new housing and form (or retain) rangelands as visual community park land. The need to develop strategies similar to those depicted in Figure 9 through Figure 11 is based directly on the transitioning nature of land uses within the County. Policies such as these were arguably never needed because areas sensitive to development have only recently been experiencing development pressure. The following points form the basis for policy development to encourage and retain open space approaches: Page -13- N r 111111 s N — — NM — — W — — — — E Ora Mw C) C Figure 9 - Existing Residential Landscape Existing large -lot, low-density agricultural uses Open meadows protected by grazing or hay production ,4.!• Figure 10 - Conventional Development Pattern Figure 11 - Creative Residential Siting Subdivision design based oaa maximizing dwelling unrls with similar/identicallot sues and configuration Visual impacts not a consideration GAIUTELD COUNTY CO.A TREH.EWSIYE PLAN Design based as clustering development to minimize impact on adjacent properties Lot design and configuration cencitive to unique site characteristics Figures 9, 10 and 11 Creative Design Approaches ► Subdivision developments should be designed in such a manner as to minimize the disruption of the land from its natural state. Development sites should be located in order to have minimal visual impacts on the scenic amenities or rural character of the area; Developments should be designed to preserve the majority of the open space within the site; ■ Development should minimize the amount of land required by clustering residential uses. This section demonstrates that the Blue Creek Ranch PUD is in general conformity with the Plan concepts, goals and objectives of the Master Plan. Plan concepts, goals, objectives and policies appear in bold followed by discussion. The Blue Creek Ranch PUD is designed to be consistent with the Garfield County Comprehensive Plan: Creative Design Approaches. The Blue Creek Ranch PUD proposes to maintain the existing residential landscape by clustering development and configuring lots in a manner which preserves the existing trees, meadows and riparian areas. Lots are proposed to be located within the canopy of existing trees. Most of the lots are designed to avoid environmentally sensitive areas. Figure 6, Blue Creek Ranch: Conventional Development Pattern illustrates a theoretical Blue Creek Ranch site plan given a conventional development pattern. Figure 1 graphically illustrates the consistency of the Blue Creek Ranch PUD plan with the site planning goals and objectives established in the Garfield County Comprehensive Plan and the advantages ofa PUD development as opposed to conventional development pursuant to AJRIRD zoning. Section 10.4 Visual Resources (p. 1I-66) Visual resources in the County are defined as those "viewshed corridors" that are particularly valuable to residents and visitors of the area. These areas are typically defined by the relationship between major roadways and specific topographic features. The definition of these areas is purely subjective, but serve to identify areas where land use policies may have considerable impact on the visual character important to the residents and visitors of the County. Page -15- 1_I GRAPHIC SCALE 1l 1111+111I111I°l 1111111111111111 1°111 r (w Eau Y 1 lash . 100 R I_t 1 1 11114° t 1 t I 1 yy,, 1 I 1IbNi; p° 1111 I 1 1111111°° 1111_ 1,1,1111 111111 1111 111111°1° °11 1 111 1 1 LOT/ LOT7 LOT, QL 01-S LOT1s LOTI( LOT4 LOTS EDLOT Io LOTl7 [OF EXISTING CONDITIONS LEGEND 0 0 E3C5N4G GUAtm RAIL ID:ISTIN0 FENCE DIMING 04110001)S TREE Q7011MG C3NeI11 PEE COSMIC EDGE Cr 4E0141,110n AEpPI03013ATE HOLM sITE 700 AT RAMS ILLVELL p4i7S BORN /AC /LIC[Ni CIS £ HORN C RADE CREW, LAND 90LP/NCS 1/S S: N07 8/6I SU/TE !Of C/O A7NP RIPER DtrtLOPNENT JSPEN. CV E!6// 8860 CON/Tr ROAD (97'4 915-6Sd7 CAREONALLE r.7p 81683 MAP PREPJRED /N COMPLIANCE 1178 &l/WIELD COUA7Y EONI#C RESOALTR0NS SiY77CN 40e1 LOS (If EETLANOS AREA 0/ .00-1EAR PIOOD AEON /YRir PAW /LW (CAR//ELP CO(/$YY F4/141 P880 O/ /9617, JAN. 8. IESS) ram" At CIAL I/37 .PERIIIT Rtt pU/REP !ORA ANT CONSIRULTIO.Y ,MMX I I 114 TH/S AREA (SJR//ALP AVOWY PANEL AFRO OT /S00, JAN, 7 IS") iONE_AY AREA O/ 1.00-YLIIE fLOOn KITE Jrt ICK DEPTB LASS TELL COT /'OPT PER //RN /SFS NAP (CUr//ELP COI/7177' PANTE A8E0 OF 1904. JAN. 4 /9d6) :ONE C ALL AREA A8/127 NO B/1rL: 480IT /00 YEAR PLILL NO DA TR MOTE: _ 1. 03000111000.1 -PASSERS THE AILLUSTRATED Slit .I R/pC 7pKN A 017L REY'SfON B GARFIELD COUNTY. COLORADO BLUE CREEK RANCH CONVENTIONAL DEVELOPMENT PATTERN FIGURE 6 SOARIS ENGINEERING, LLC I IYIL CONSULTANTS' SO2 *AIM STREET. 'al.0TE A} CARBb.PA .. CO 111E2.1 (9701 70$.0711 BES. WAD DR. MAB CL DATE 0?/a/O FILE N4. K8T teoea.ar SRar FIGURE The Blue Creek Ranch PUD is designed to be consistent with the preceding visual resource guidelines. Figure 1 depicts a buffer between adjoining roadways and the proposed lots_ All of the lots have been clustered on the property within existing trees outside of riparian and agricultural areas. The protective covenants for the subdivision include lighting guidelines to help minimize the impacts of lighting in the site. Housing Objective 2.1 - To encourage adequate, integrated housing at a reasonable cost to residents throughout Garfield County The Blue Creek Ranch PUD proposes to develop nine hots for deed restricted dwelling units deed restricted to comply with the Garfield County affordable housing guidelines for sale units. Housing Objective 2.5 - Residential development should respect the natural characteristics of a particular site, including topography, vegetation, water features, geology and visual relationships with surrounding land uses and view sheds. The Blue Creek Ranch PUD site plan is designed to preserve undeveloped land surrounding the proposed development. Sheet 3 and Figure 3 show that approximately 21 acres of undeveloped land will be preserved to the south of the residential area and approximately 20 acres open space land will surround the residential development on the other three sides. The existing pasture will be preserved to separate the clustered residential development from the commercial uses located on the northwest corner of SH 82 and CR 100. Housing Policy 2.1- The County, through the development of regulations, shall provide for low and moderate income housing types by allowing for mixed multi -family and single-family housing in appropriate areas throughout the County. As noted in the preceding section, nine of the proposed dwelling units will be deed restricted in compliance with the Garfield County affordable housing guidelines. The affordable housing units will be sold to qualifying local residents. The units will be single family detached dwelling units. Page -17- Program 2.1 - The County, by encouraging developers and landowners to use the Planned Unit Development regulations and other innovative tools, shall establish housing standards appropriate for the proposed scale of development which provide a wide range of housing types and costs. The Blue Creek Ranch PUD utilizes Garfield County PUD standards to offer various lot sizes to preserve open space and to offer small lot deed restricted detached single family housing. Such detached single-family housing, deed restricted to maintain affordability, will be a valuable contribution to the community's housing stock while still being appropriate for the scale at the Blue Creek Ranch development. Transportation Objective 3.1 - To encourage the development of a regional public transit system that respects the interaction between emerging land use patterns and travel behavior in the Valley. The Blue Creek Ranch is an ideal location for transit oriented residential development consistent with this transportation objective_ The site is located at the intersection of two major roads and adjacent to a RFTA park and ride lot. Land will be dedicated to CDOT to increase the size of the park and ride lot. Land will be reserved for the development of a railroad should one be developed. Blue Creek Ranch PUD residents will be able to walk or ride bicycles to the RFTA stop on a trail to be developed through the PUD. Transportation Objective 3.2 - To encourage the use of modes other than the automobile. The Blue Creek Ranch PUD will encourage other modes of transportation by developing a bicycle/pedestrian trail on the east side of CR 100 and dedicating the trail to Garfield County. The proximity of Blue Creek Ranch PUD to the RFTA bus stop will encourage residents to utilize transit. As previously mentioned, the applicant will dedicate land to CDOT for a RFTA park and ride lot, and will landscape the parking lot. Additionally, land is reserved for the development of a railroad line. Page -18- Transportation Policy 3.2 - Developments are encouraged to integrate bikeways, pedestrian circulation patterns and transit amenities into project design. The applicant is proposing to develop and dedicate a bicycle/pedestrian path on the east side of CR 100. Transportation Policy 3.6 - Development proposals will be required to mitigate traffic impacts on County roads proportional to the development's contribution to those impacts. Mitigation may include, but not be limited to the following: A. Physical roadway improvements; B. Intersection improvements; C. Transit amenities; D. Signage requirements; E. Alternative traffic flow designs; F. Funding mechanism to implement necessary mitigation. The Blue Creek Ranch PUD is consistent with the preceding policy. The PUD will include improvements to the existing Park and Ride facility and reserve right-of-way for railroad construction as proposed in current plans for a Roaring Fork Valley railroad. Transportation Program 3.7 - In cooperation with local governments, the Colorado Department of Transportation and private transportation providers, Garfield County will pursue the development of a County -wide Transit Program to include the following components: A. B. C. Fixed -based transit service; Park -and -Ride Program; Potential rail service. As previously indicated, the PUD will reserve right-of-way for railroad construction as proposed in current plans for a Roaring Fork Valley railroad. Recreation and Open Space Goal - Garfield County should provide adequate recreational opportunities for County residents, ensure access to public lands consistent Page -19- with BLMIUSFS policies and preserve existing recreational opportunities and important visual corridors. The applicant is proposing the dedication of a fisherman's easement along the entire Roaring Fork River frontage (approximately 2,100 feet). This easement is in an ideal location for fisherman because it is easily accessible to CR 100. A park will be dedicated to a conservation trust next to the County bridge which will provide easy access to the river. The applicant will improve a small six car gravel parking lot for river access. Recreation and Open Space Objective 5.2 - The County will support and encourage the creation of open space, through the development and implementation of zoning, subdivision and PUD regulations designed to retain and enhance existing open space uses. The applicant has identified environmentally sensitive lands on the property and preserved these areas as open space through the utilization of the flexibility available in the PUD regulations. Additionally, approximately 17 acres of land will be maintained by the homeowners' association in agriculture. The open space and agriculture on the subject site would not be preserved if the site is developed as a conventional subdivision. Recreation and Open Space Objective 5.4 - Rafting and fishing access will be strongly encouraged during the development review process. As noted in the project description, the applicant is proposing to dedicate and develop a small community park near the river. Recreation and Open Space Objective 5.5 Visual corridors are considered and important physical attribute of the County and policies will reflect the need to carefully plan these areas. The Garfield County Comprehensive Plan Study Area I: Visual Corridor Map identifies the subject site as being located within a significant visual corridor. Figure 1 and 3 shows the applicant has planned the PUD so the scenic views from SH 82 are not compromised. The cluster residential development will be partially screened from SH 82 by Tract 3, an open space parcel. The existing pastoral appearance of the property from SH 82 will be preserved. The large lot residential area is Page -20- located approximately 1,6001i neal feet from SH 82. The residences will be screened by the by open space and the large trees on the property. Development of the site as a PUD is far more consistent with this objective than as a traditional subdivision. Recreation and Open Space Objective 5.6 In order to encourage public access to rivers, streams and public lands, the County will be receptive to incentives, consistent with an overall program approved by the Board of County Commissioners, for developments that propose public access to these amenities. As noted, the applicant will dedicate a fisherman's casement and a small community park. Open Space and Trails Goal - Garfield County shall develop, adopt and implement policies that preserve the rural landscape of the Roaring Fork Valley, existing agricultural uses, wildlife habitat and recreational opportunities in a mutually beneficial manner that respects the balance between private property rights and the needs of the community. The Blue Creek. Ranch PUD proposes a balance between private property rights and preserving the rural landscape of the Roaring Fork Valley. Environmentally sensitive Iands on the site are preserved, recreational opportunities are enhanced and the applicant is still capable of utilizing private property rights. Policy 5.1(A) - All projects approved adjacent to existing agricultural uses shall be required to mitigate any adverse impacts. These mitigation measures shall include some or all of the following: a) Appropriate buffering of building envelopes from common property boundaries; b) The use of open space to provide additional buffering; Dog restrictions, including limiting the number of dogs and requiring kenneling, prior to issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy. The Blue Creek Ranch PUD will provide landscape screening between the site and adjoining properties. All dogs will be controlled. The applicant has identified environmentally sensitive lands. On-site development will be clustered to avoid environmentally sensitive areas. The applicant proposes prohibiting development of 20 Page -21- acres along the Roaring Fork River and 16 acres along SH 82. Water and Sewer Services Objectives 7.1, 7.5 and Policy 7.1 Objective 7.1 - Development in areas without existing central water and sewer service will be required to provide adequate and safe provisions for these services before project approval. Policy 7.1 -All development proposals in rural areas without existing central water and/or sewer systems will be required to show that legal, adequate, dependable and environmentally sound water and sewage disposal facilities can he provided before project approval. The applicant is proposing to develop a private water and waste water disposal and to maintain streets and open space. Natural Environment Goal - Garfield County will encourage a land use pattern that recognizes the 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. Objective 8.2 - Proposed projects will be required to recognize the physical feature of the land and design projects in a manner that is compatible with the physical environment. Objective 8.3 - Garfield County will ensure that natural drainages are protected from alteration.. Objective 8.4 - River -fronts and riparian areas are fragile components of the ecosystem and these areas require careful review in the planning process. Objective 8.6 - Garfield County will ensure that natural, scenic and ecological resources and critical wildlife habitats are protected. Policy 8.3 - Natural drainage patterns will be preserved so the cumulative impact of public and private land use activities will not cause storm drainage and flood -water patterns to exceed the capacity of natural or constructed drainage -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. Policy 8.4 - The County will require development with river frontage to address the issue through physical design in a way which will protect fragile wetlands and scenic resources and protect floodplains from encroachment. The applicant has identified natural drainages, wetlands, and environmentally sensitive areas Page -22- consistent with the preceding goal, objective and policies. These areas are protected as part of the PUD Plan. The prior sections of this land use application have demonstrated conformity of the glue Creek PUD with Garfield County Comprehensive Plan's concepts, objectives and policies and met the standard of"general conformity with the County/Comprehensive Plan" in compliance with Section 4.04 of the Zoning Resolution. Figure 7, Proposed Land Use Districts, Study Area I shows land on the south side of SH 82 at the CR 100 intersection is within "Low Density Residential Land Use District". The applicant seeks to exceed the minimum compliance standards of the Zoning Resolution by amending the Garfield County Comprehensive Plan Proposed Land Use Districts, Study Area 1 to show the subject site within the "High Density Residential District". According to Section 4.04, Comprehensive Plan amendment requests are evaluated based upon "criteria for establishing land use designations contained in the Master/Comprehensive Plan." This section of the land use application demonstrates that the subject site is best suited to be located in the "High Density Residential District." Section IV of the Garfield County Comprehensive Plan explains the methodology used by the County to establish the proposed Land Use Districts. According to the Plan, the Districts were established based upon consideration of the previously discussed goals and objectives and land suitability analysis. Table 1 of this land use application, is a copy of "Table 30 Proposed Land Use Districts and Methodology" from the Garfield County Comprehensive Plan. The Table evaluates land based upon slope, soil, ISDS and floodplain Development Constraints. Land use considerations include land use compatibility, road considerations, infrastructure needs and distance from urban uses. Table 2, shows the development constraints and land use considerations for land within the Low Density Residential Land Use Classification as shown in the Garfield County Comprehensive Plan. Page -23- INN NMI MI MI Ili OM MI 1111111 MB MIN MI UM IND MI 11•11 ert MIN TABLE 1 TABLE 30 PROPOSED LAND USE DISTRICTS AND METHODOLOGY LAND USE CLASSIFICATION DEVELOPMENT CONSTRAINTS LAND USE CONSIDERATIONS Classification General Description Slope ' Constraints Soil Constraints ISLS Constraint Floadpieln Conrtrainta Land Use Road Infrastructure Compatiblliry Conditions Needs Distance from Urban Uses Low Denrtry Resrdenrial 10+ acres+DlU Mt jar Malar Major Maior Mwor Moderate Moderate Minor Mentum OensiyResidential 6-9 acres/DU Moderate Moderate Moderate Moderate Moderate Moderate Moderate Minor AiediunrNigh Residential 3-5 actesiDLJ r Minor Minor Minor Moderate Crliical Cnttcal Cniicai Maiera' c High Density Residential 2 or less acres Minor 1 Minor Minor Minor Critical Critical Critical Modrrate General Commercial Retail/5ervices' Moderate .Moderate Moderate Moderate Cniical Critical Moderate Critical Light fnduntrad Warehouse' ! Wholesale Moderate Moderate Moderate Moderate Moderate Moderate Moderate Ma:eratc Heavy ncharrral Fabncauoo/ Ivianufictur ing Modcraic Moderate Minor Minor Cnitcal Critical Criitcal Minor Resource Farr action Miaittg Activities N/A NrA NIA No Critical Moderate Moderate NIA Open Space Federal Land NIA MA NA MA NIA NIA N/A NIA Notts: Minor, Moderate and Critical designations within Ihe'Development Constraints' are consistent with the classifications used by Lincoln-Del/ore Testing Laboratory natural hazards mapping for Garfield County. Fcr example, arc= with the moist severe natural hazards arc identified on the Land Use Map as 'Low Ocustty'. Iviinar, Moderate and Critical designations within the 'Land 1J5c Considerations refer to the level of concern based on differential impact levels for each land use classilicauoa OM W I ■r r-- r— in MI W I M E ill r— r Proposed Land Use Districts, Study Area 1, Garfield County, Colorado �.,... w. auNe.. e ... OtraNa WC..HaaS 5,13.51 w 7 Mt t=3 C1M r 1%W, MI5 -13.2212 Co motaw a DM - 1414 IMAMS +6.711 _ C*7*4 Spots aMfHN Li.IDs. aiA1. LISP 51 D 4" pw1e MY.51,n fCMC F IIIperreosorn rt C.O n4 .6 W Gammas. 01.4 ararago D 884 11044ta4M akin W.1Mt PLtat 585 7A0M4 155111 R55Aa5tal Low 0051,5 ff0. AGflVl N774_ ibtaaiaY MMO 4.13011 r6 to .10 A6L7UD D1118 Rwlfanea. MMttootta 10.45 1^110513 AUOUJ 0 O a Aawurca Ea1Pi00, 77114 &mirro. =w1On$ .,.d11b...01.12.551 'ACTT. Af iJU . Attie AO.OMftn2 Lrr ►1101.0840 LAND W1 CRIT1lCT11 tOWCl. afe5.a c=..1 va,r,% n,..n....;1 YOE MAP *VOCE Iowao. Gwa. a Cs Low ces... r... Noon Swop 1,w Mt tom Do 5.2 two Art 15.ro5n J 5 G 6 •1 •1. Dn 444.04,14. 4.414 Si Dew. d ,Ya.C41.. ot an......tr...w 13.755011 1+ 4.071106/1 o atOt1 6.+.H CO",as � L1.r, >r�a.fa1G07f, KM A The data in Table 2 show land located in the Low Density Residential District generally has major slope, soil, ISDS and floodplain constraints. Land use compatibility and distance from urban areas are minor considerations and road conditions and infrastructure needs are moderate considerations for land located in the Low Density Residential District. TABLE 2 DEVELOPMENT CONSTRAINTS AND LAND USE CHARACTERISTICS OF LAND IN THE LOIN DENSITY RESIDENTIAL DISTRICT* Land Use Classification Development Constraints Land Use Considerations Classifications General Slope Soil ISDS Floodpplain Land Use Road Infrastructure Distance Description Constraints Constraints Constraints Constraints Compatibility Conditions Needs Urban Uses Law Density 10+ acres/DU Major Major Major Major Minor Moderate Moderate Minor Residential *Source: Garfield County Comprehensive Plan: Table 30, Proposed Land Use Districts and Methodology (adapted by Davis Horn Incorporated), February, 2002. The data in Table 3 show land located in the High Density Residential District generally has minor slope, soil, ISDS and floodplain constraints. Land use compatibility and road conditions and infrastructure needs are critical considerations and distance from urban areas is a moderate consideration for land located in the High Density Residential District. TABLE 3 DEVELOPMENT CONSTRAINTS AND LAND USE CHARACTERISTICS OF LAND IN THE HIGH DENSITY RESIDENTIAL DISTRICT* Land Use Classification Development Constraints Land Use Considerations Classifications General Slope Soil ISI)S Floodpplain Land Use Road Infrastructure Distance Description Constraints Constraints Constraints Constraints Compatibility Conditions Needs Urban Uses High Density 2 or less acres Minor Minor Minor Minor Critical Critical Critical Moderate Residential *Source: Garfield County Comprehensive Plan: Table 30, Proposed Land Use Districts and Methodology (adapted by Davis Horn Incorporated), February, 2002. Table 4, Blue Creek Ranch PUD: Development Constraints and Land Use Characteristics, summarizes development constraints and land use characteristics of the subject site. A review of Table 4 shows the development constraints and land use considerations of the Blue Creek Ranch Page -26- PUD more closely resemble lands located in the High Density Residential District than the Low Density Residential District. TABLE 4 BLUE CREEK RANCH PUD: DEVELOPMENT CONSTRAINTS AND LAND USE CHARACTERISTICS Land Use Classification Development Constraints Land Use Considerations Classifications General Slope Soil ISDS Floodpplain Land Use Road Infrastructure Distance Description Constraints. Constraints Constraints Constraints Compatibility Conditions Needs Urban Uses Blue Creek 2 acres or less Minor Minor Minor Minor Critical Critical Critical Moderate Ranch PUD *Source: Davis Horn Incorporated, February, 2002. The following sections justify how Table 4 was prepared by elaborating upon development constraints and land use considerations affecting the subject site. Land Development Constraints Land development constraints affecting the Blue Creek Ranch PUD are addressed in this section. Slope Constraints. Figure 8, Garfield County Comprehensive Plan Slope Hazard Profile, Garfield County Study Area I, shows the Blue Creek Ranch PUD site is not subject to slope hazards. Sheet 7, Existing Topo, Wetland and Floodplain Delineation shows the subject site is generally flat. Both Garfield County's general land use suitability analysis and the applicant's site specific analysis of slopes shows development constraints are minor and the subject site is highly suitable for development. Page 27- I IN OM UM n E IMM NM MI MMI UM M E NM M — PET a orad a3A0ddN1Hn kik -crrto a co G 0 -t a1,..4- rn rri NO]SIAFaens as 'HNol 'Alii YR 3SY8 A 4.49 0 0 Y3aV AORIS OI901030 !0 6Y rn -n Can m.Hr r^# wc'f 4+1 C✓+ --r z. >- 0 es X00 f), -�- n7x7, mm s.:r" gam.W n 2g n7i - T C=CY2 K-4- 2 -iv- y'`^s�v�z �s.x�oya i����9_�yy�w QCW�;,=.: an;aT rn-Zsn G?, 20 E n mem - 0 AYiAm an l3. x xT, r,1�-�Nyzs=�mmmpC=dv�C"�ti;C���''O� �� __ ���cs s. ,r..g -.vee rCi Tri a -mac •_C�.��C�G7�44' := , . "t> 7,7 m : yy M: - f+114]^C r awn :,7, � �iMI w coq',rc 0 m 4 = I I SOdVZYS 3d01S tZzi yl 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 Soil Constraints. Figure 9, Garfield County Comprehensive Plan Soil Hazard Profile, Garfield County Study Area 1, shows the Blue Creek Ranch PUD site is not subject to soil hazards. Similarly, Steven Pawlak, P.E. ofHepworth-Pawlak Geotechnical, Inc., finds in his Preliminary Geotechnical Study of the Proposed Blue Creek Ranch Subdivision (Appendix 13) that soils on the site are suitable for development. Both Garfield County's general land use suitability analysis and the applicant's site specific analysis of soils shows constraints are minor and the subject site is highly suitable for development. ISDS Constraints. Figure 10, Garfield County Comprehensive Plan Septic System Constraints, Garfield County Study Area 1, generally shows a high water table on the southern portion of the Blue Creek Ranch PUD. Similarly, Steven Pawlak, P.E. of Hepworth-Pawlak Geotechnical, Inc., finds in his Preliminary Geotechnical Study of the Proposed Blue Creek Ranch Subdivision (Appendix 13) groundwater is typically encountered between 1.5 and 4 feet in the northern part of the property. However, septic system constraints are no longer applicable to the Blue Creek Ranch PUD because the State of Colorado has approved a Site Application for a waste water treatment plant (see Appendix 8, November 21, 2001 letter from J. David Holm, Director Water Quality Division). Therefore, ISDS constraints are now identified as "minor" for the Blue Creek Ranch PUD, Floodplain Constraints. Figure 11, Garfield County Comprehensive Plan Flood Plain Profile, Garfield County Study Area 1, generally shows the southern portion of the Blue Creek Ranch PUD within the designated 100 year floodplain. Sheet 7 of the Blue Creek Ranch PUD delineates the 100 floodplain on the Blue Creek Ranch PUD. The PUD has been designed to avoid encroachments within the 100 year floodplain. There is no residential development proposed within the floodplain. Consequently, the floodplain represents only a minor constraint to site development. Page -29- ma um on — — ma ma Ns o EN um um r — l _ i i NM es �a� r fi 9 -r-r#40 -4=k,„ 22 " • ir" EAGLE CO. • EAGLE COUNTY g _ 1. r4. - -� `1 : Z. -x - -• iirw = .� ' "i. - z . B a I. L r 3-v � LE i ]g.. on N. x ii o rn .— 33 33 rn r N. 1. a -. r.' 20 r _ w_ s e 6 = b GQ ki 02 20 t .a , a '.> r .,, u =. T - rncf ca=® rn as 2 C.y+ O rip.. _ ':1 P— a^ � 20 a _w Sr, crn=fpa-.,-...mll �2,I..cx .n .�c�v"''a-.� �`v�.n r occ _mz �a�s �[- G C6 -O® ��..6 +. Gsne~-01 2. Ca.p .ib va. 1,0 '' srs`'22�r.. )Ci oX p a 2A.-.n����p � �I^. r-ar.y e.1 �Cyia+ I.y _ OY�7. TKen�cS 22 .g ]Oy� 'u9 r-.n cr'2.E v-. Cana'-aVmr. SE -r omox�y�asCa2"48.spMi� Q QCp rn SCv.n ; Vr9�''fT VS v }' K0....... -",c SA -—`""L�c K �`arca-r fi�x cL- = r 2 ra MI 4,4 SOIL HAZARD PROFILE, GARFIELD CO. STUDY" AREA 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 v ' arr • • .1, ,`,• —fs, i ra PITKCN COLT? TY z 0 0 SEPTI(' SYSTEM CONSTRAINTS, GARFIELD CO. STUDY AREi 1 SEPTIC SYSTEM CONSTRAINTS IN SLOW PERCOLATION RATE ME NIGH WATER TABLE SOLUTION EVAPORITE MINERALS BASE YAP FEATURES AREA OUTSIDE Of GEOLOGIC STUOY AREA FAZ 11 a. • C 11 CITY, TOWN OR SUBDIVISION EXTENT OF GEOLOGIC STUDY FEDERAL or STATE HIGHWAY PAYED ROAD GRAVEL ROAD UNIMPROVED ROAD JEEP ar PACK TRAIL PERENNIAL STREAM INTERMITTENT STREAM RAILROAD UTILITIES COUNTY LINE 1lrlrr ititil ;1ri1,m11 Ion 111.,4M PPP, In., •IµrlN 1. 1...M. 14Iri.1 CIh,I,I,,a . SIM " 1.4..11 n1,+,:1s, 44 Pa CMre11 tool+ 44.••••1111.11 111.1 Or MM. If 41MI it Nl,. tM114N1, {nth (,nil, 114114,1. •nY1. 1114. 11 is M. P41IMr r,n..Il ll11a ,11. 1:1:41 U 1# IO$ ry44 4q, Inlalr. 1I Pr,N d 1111140.44enl l,rine. P414p114al 11df G4 Nle 171,111 UPPP). al c. hrld 011411 loin! 1 i, 41, 14Mm,1 are 111111. 111, •11 11 1 11/141111 emillit11lu1 11 IMI f111it$I 11/Ietld 441 Ie 441 4 1,1,1 1111.111. 111 I/I1lIt1 11 11,14101 Pp Or 4111114..11 n 114141111 will 111111 111 ,1111 !f IMI IIl11r, 11414• Pilfer 11 111 411f tie 11111 hr 111 11111111 4,e.1114!, - !i 4141 t1 1111111 f11, 41q. lllr X41 H4 11111tH 41141 Ittliabil C,111.1'l PC 1r41dr h..S. ALOT riu emu 11-1,-11 •IL 'ORT ma C]LLi1N51R:11r15140114 IC rot > Car field County PM PIM PK PI Land Use Compatibility. Figure 12, Garfield County Comprehensive Plan Existing Subdivisions, Garfield County Study Area 1, shows existing subdivisions in 1995 in the site vicinity of the proposed Blue Creek Ranch PUD, Figure 12 shows, in 1995, there were three subdivisions in the site vicinity with a density of less than one dwelling unit per three acres (Ranch at Roaring Fork, Lions Ridge and Te -Ke - Ki). Since the publication of the Garfield County Comprehensive Plan Study Area 1 revision 3 in 1995, two additional subdivisions in the site vicinity have been developed; Aspen Equestrian Estates (one dwelling unit per 1.2 acres) and St. Finnbar (one dwelling unit per 6.7 acres). Figure 12, Garfield County Comprehensive Plan Existing Land Use, Garfield County Study Area 1, shows the southwest corner of SH 82 and CR 100 is improved with a commercial facility. The southeast corner of SH 82 and CR 100 is improved with a transit park and ride facility. Based upon the land use characteristics in the vicinity of the proposed Blue Creek Ranch PUD described in this section, it is apparent that the proposed development of the Blue Creek Ranch PUD at a density of 1.6 dwelling units per acre is compatible with land uses in the site vicinity, Road Conditions. Figure 13 Garfield County Comprehensive Plan Transportation Profile, Garfield County Study Area I, shows the Blue Creek Ranch PUD is located adjacent to CR 100 and SH 82. County Road 100 is depicted as a road in "Good Condition" on Figure 13. State Highway 82 is a recently upgraded State Highway. Additionally, a transit park and ride facility has been developed adjacent to the subject site. The Comprehensive Plan indicates that road conditions are a critical consideration for a property to be designated High Density Residential. Blue Creek Ranch PUD is well served by the existing road system which is capable of accommodating the proposed density of development on the site. Page -33_ I r ® = MI all I IM MI z r - RV3V1S 1N3111f183INI 538(11Y33 dYR 3SYB AY*H01H RYA 9NI113lG/5383Y r9 911P113I0/S3DY 11Nn PNI113110/S3a7Y CYD E— w EPA NW WI MK M MB r■ O r— r NM w 1E In N! 3 ao u _. z LI U1If10I3 — 4 rn 0 m v r 0 t 1.1 o ` 0- e • o e a wo leo�o g 2 0 c 70 d MCI 0 c 0 . x 0 m 1 1 1 1 i 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 Infrastructure Needs. The Comprehensive Plan indicates that infrastructure is a critical consideration for a site to be designated High Density Residential. This land use application demonstrates infrastructure in the site vicinity is capable of accommodating High Density Residential development. Refer to Appendices for technical reports addressing infrastructure. Distance from Urban Uses. According to the Comprehensive Plan, proximity to urban uses is a moderate land use consideration fora site to be designated High Density Residential. The proposed Blue Creek Ranch PUD is located just over two miles from the Carbondale town limits and El Jebel. Most urban necessities are located in Carbondale and El Jebel. Additional urban conveniences are located in the commercial facility in Catherine across the street from the subject site. Section 4.05 Relationship to Zoning and Subdivision Section 4.05.01. This application demonstrates comp] iance with applicable sections ofthe Garfield County Subdivision Regulations and Zoning Resolution. Section 4.05.02. This section of the Zoning Resolution recognizes that PUD's are unique and empowers the Board of County Commissioners to "waive or modify the specifications standards and requirements which would be otherwise applicable, as requested by the applicant." The Resolution. further states that "any waiver or modification of specifications, standards and requirements will only be approved if it can be demonstrated that the proposed waiver(s) is consistent with best engineering practices as recommended by an engineer retained by the County." This land use application identifies which standards and requirements are to be waived or modified. Section 4.06 Internal Compatibility of Planned Unit Developments The Blue Creek Ranch PUD includes residential and open space land uses which are compatible with each other. The existing irrigated pasture will serve as a 650 foot wide, 16 acre buffer between cluster residential land uses to the south. Page -36- 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 Section 4.07 Standards and Requirements Section 4.07.02 Off Street Parking (1) It is anticipated that each free-market dwelling unit will have two or three cars and that the affordable housing dwelling units will each have one or two cars. Sheet 3 identifies off-street parking to be provided for each lot with in the PUD. Generally, each free-market lot shall be provided with four off-street parking spaces and the affordable housing units shall be provided with three off-street parking spaces per unit. (2) Joint use of the parking spaces is not proposed. Section 4.07.03 Site Plan. Criteria (1) The proposed agricultural and residential land uses in the PUD are consistent with the agricultural/residential land uses m the site vicinity. Open space along the public roads, will screen dwelling units and from SH 82. The proposed transit park and ride lot is located in the northwest corner of the property adjacent to the existing park and ride lot. The. Catherine store is located across CR 100 from the park and ride. (2) The streets in the Blue Creek PUD will be private roads classified as Rural Access roads. All roads will meet the Garfield County Street and Roadway design standards. Refer to Appendix 1, a January 17, 2002 letter from Mark Butler P.E., of Sopris Engineering. Appendix 1 addresses road design. Sheets 14-17 depict the plan profile of the internal road system. Due to the limited traffic in the PUD, it will be easy for bicycle riders to ride their bikes on the local streets. A bicycle and pedestrian trail is proposed for the east side of CR 100.. (3) Parking areas are depicted and quantified on Sheet 3. The number of parking spaces has been addressed in a preceding section. Sheet 3 shows there will be adequate circulation and separation of parking for safety. (4) Approximately 54 acres or 67 percent of the site will be common open space. An additional 16 acres +1- of land will be restricted as open space on the private lots. The applicant has identified Page -37- 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 i 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 environmentally sensitive lands and the site plan has been designed to avoid such areas as defined by the applicants environmental consultants. Refer to Appendix 4, a October 24, 2001 letter from Andrew Antipas which addresses wetlands areas on the site and Appendix 5, a September 6, 2000 letter from Steve Dahmer of Nature Tech Consultant Services Corp. which presents an evaluation of the on site wildlife. (5) The applicant is proposing free-market single-family detached housing and affordable housing. As indicated in # 4, there will be ample open space. (6) Sheet 3 shows that housing will be clustered outside of environmentally sensitive areas. Setbacks are proposed on all lots to insure adequate privacy and separation between structures. (7) The PUD includes a trail system which incorporates internal and external pedestrian and bicycle trails. A bicycle and pedestrian trail is proposed on CR 100. (8) The applicant proposes centralized water and waste water facilities to serve the PUD. Water supply is addressed in a January 24, 2002 letter from Zancanella and Associates, Inc (see Appendix 6) and a January 17, 2002 letter from Scott Miller of Patrick, Miller & Kropf, P.C. (See Appendix 7). Blue Creek Ranch PUD and Aspen Equestrian Estates have entered into a Water Service Agreement to provide potable water. A copy of the agreement is included in Scott Miller's January 17, 2002 letter. (9) (10) Waste water disposal service will be provided by constructing an on-site waste water treatment facility. The applicant has obtained Site Application approval from the State of Colorado as demonstrated in a November 21, 2001 letter from J. David Holm, Director Water Quality Control Division, to Robert Cumming (see Appendix 8). No slopes in excess of 40 percent will be disturbed. Community facilities within Blue Creek Ranch will be comprised of open space, common barns, roads and utility systems. The community facilities shall be maintained by the Homeowners Association. Roads Utility systems shall be paid for and developed by the applicant. Page -38- Section 4.07.04 Height Maximum building height will be limited to 25 feet as defined by the Garfield County Zoning Resolution. Section 4.07.05 Setbacks Sheets 4, 5 and 6 establish building envelopes for all lots. All structures with the exception of front porches will be restricted to the designated building envelopes. Porches may be as close as 10 feet from internal roads. Section 4.07.06 Residential Density The applicant is proposing an overall density of one dwelling unit per 1.6 gross acres. Section 4.07.07 Minimum Acres in PUD) The PUD includes 81.33 acres which is in excess of the minimum number of acres which may comprise a PUD. Section 4.07.08 Land Uses Permitted Single-family dwelling units are uses permitted in the A/R/RD zone district (Section 3.02.01) Section 4.07.09 Common Open Space As previously noted, approximately 54 acres or 67 percent of the PUD will be designated as common open space. Section 4.07.10 Timeshare Fractional Fee Timeshare and fractional fee ownership is not proposed. Section 4.07.11 - 4.07.15 Affordable Housing The subject site is located within Garfield County Comprehensive Plan's Study Area I. Therefore, affordable housing requirements are applicable. The applicant proposes that nine of the proposed Page -39- dwelling units will be subject to affordable housing sale unit deed restrictions. A total of 49 dwelling units are proposed to be located in the PUD. Section 4.07.15.01(1) requires a minimum of 10 percent of the housing mix in the PUD to be affordable housing units. The applicant proposes nine affordable housing units which is 18.3 percent of the housing mix. The applicant will build four deed restricted single-family dwelling units and sell five deed restricted lots to qualifying local families, who can build their own houses. Section 4.08.05 (1) Statement of Ownership and Written Consent to Submit Refer to Appendices 1 and 2. Section 4.08.05 (2)(a) Number of Dwelling Units and Overall Area As depicted on Sheet 3 a total of 49 dwelling units are proposed. The concept is addressed in the Project Description section of this application. The site includes approximately 81 acres. Section 4.08.05 (2)(b) Common Open Space As previously noted, approximately 54 acres or 67 percent of the PUD will be designated as open space. Sheet 3 identifies lands designated as open space. Section 4.08.05 (2)(0) Land Uses and Acreage Sheet 3 shows land uses and acreage devoted to each use in the PUD. Section 4.08.05 (2)(d) Major Internal Circulation Systems Sheet 3 depicts the internal vehicular and pedestrian circulation system for the Blue Creek PUD. Section 4.08.05 (2)(e) Land for School Sites "I he applicant is not proposing to dedicate land for a school site at Blue Creek Ranch. The applicant will pay cash in lieu of land. Section 4.08.05 (2)(f) Commercial and Industrial Uses Commercial and industrial uses are not proposed within the PUD. Page -40- Section 4.08.05 (2)(g) Utilities Provision of utilities is addressed in Appendix 3, a January 17, 2002 letter from. Sopris Engineering, LLC. The Blue Creek Ranch PUD: Utility Plan appears on Sheets 18-26 of the plans prepared by Sopris Engineering. Section 4.08.05 (2)(h) Development Restrictions Uses by Right: Greenhouse, orchard, customary accessory uses and buildings including buildings for shelter or enclosure of persons, single-family dwelling and customary accessory uses, park and ride lots. Large Lots Minimum Setbacks: All structures shall be located in building envelopes identified on the Final Plat. Final Plat building envelopes shall be based upon the building envelopes depicted on Sheet 4 through 6. Lots Minimum Setbacks (1) Front Yard (facing courtyard commons): 5 feet (2) Rear Yard (facing parking open space): 10 feet (3) Side Yard: 5 feet Maximum Height of Buildings: 25 feet Section 4.08.05 (2)(I) Phasing The applicant plans to develop the property in one phase. It is anticipated road and utility installation will begin sometime between the summer of 2002 and 2003 and be completed by Fall of 2003. Lots will be developed following the completion of site development. Section 4.08.05 (3) Vicinity Map Refer to Sheet 1, Vicinity Map. The map shows the relationship of the site to connecting roadways, public facilities, commercial and cultural facilities and surrounding land uses. Page -41- Section 4.08.05 (4) Site Map Refer to Sheets 2 through 6, Blue Creek Ranch Preliminary Plan Map. The Map depicts site boundaries, acreage, existing structures and existing zoning. Section 4.08.05 (5) Site Topographic Map Refer to Sheet 7, Blue Creek Ranch PUD: ExistingTopo, Wetland and Floodplain Delineations. The map shows topography, major vegetation elements, streams, rivers, ditches and areas subject to 100 year flooding. Section 4.08.05 (6) Legal Description Refer to Appendix 1, Title Policy. Section 4.08.05 (7)(a) PUD Objectives The Blue Creek Ranch PUD objectives are listed below. 1. Identify and preserve environmentally sensitive lands unsuitable for development such as wetlands and areas prone to flooding. 2. Enhance the SH 82 visual corridor by preserving the existing irrigated pasture located adjacent to SH 82. 3. Develop clustered housing surrounding common courtyards separated from motor vehicle traffic. 4. Limit single-family detached housing to building envelopes which are carefully selected to avoid environmentally sensitive areas and existing trees. 5. Preserve land along the Roaring Fork River as common open space. 6. Work with RFTA and CDOT to develop a well landscaped park and ride lot on the site. 7. Develop and dedicate a bicycle pedestrian trail along CR 100 from Catherine's Store to the Roaring Fork River and along old SH 82. 8. Improve public access to the Roaring Fork River for fisherman and boaters. 9. Create a street system with low traffic volumes which provides safety for pedestrians and bicycle riders. Page -42 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 Section 4.08.05 (7)(b) Development Schedule The applicant anticipates developing the subject site in one phase. Development will be initiated by the summer of 2003 with completion of site development by Fall of 2003. The applicant anticipates installing roads and utilities to all lots, then selling lots. Section 4.08.05 (7)C ) Covenants, Conditions and Restrictions Appendix 9 is a copy of draft Declaration of Covenants, Conditions and Restrictions for Blue Creek Ranch PUD. Section 4.08.05 (7)(d) List of Owners within 200 Feet Appendix 10 is a copy of the owners of properties within 200 feet of the subject site as listed in the Garfield County Assessor's Office records. Section 4.08.05 (7)(e)(I) Legal & Physical Water Source Refer to Appendix 6, letter dated January 24, 2002 from Zancanella and Associates, Inc. concerning documentation of a legal and physical water supply. Refer to Scott Miller's January 17, 2002 letter (Appendix 7) that describes the legal water supply. The Blue Creek Ranch water supply system will be linked with the Aspen Equestrian Estates system. Section 4.08.05 (7)(e)(ii) Waste Water Treatment Blue Creek Ranch will develop an independent waste water treatment system. Refer to Appendix 8, a November 21, 2002 letter from the State of Colorado Department of Public Health and the Environment which grants approval to the Blue Creek Ranch PUD site application. Section 4.08.05 (7)(e)(iii) Storm Drainage Refer to Appendix 11, a October 10. 2001 Drainage Study for Blue Creek Ranch. Page -43- Section 4.08.05 (7)(e)(1v) Natural Hazards Floodplain hazards are the only natural hazards affecting the subject site. The site plan has been developed predominantly to avoid all mapped floodplain areas. Appendix 12, a January 8, 2002 letter from Zancanella and Associates requests Garfield County approval for Flood Plain Development Permit for Blue Creek Ranch PUD. The application seeks approval for roads to cross the floodplain in two locations. Appendix 13 is a Preliminary Geotechnical Study of the subject site prepared by HP Geotech. The site plan has been developed to avoid geologic hazard areas. Section 4.08.05 (7)(f) Legal Access Appendix 14 is a September 7, 2000 letter from Patrick & Stowell which demonstrates legal access to the Blue Creek Ranch from CR 100. The applicant has reserved a right-of-way for the potential development of a railroad serving the Roaring Fork Valley. Refer to Sheet 3, Tract 2. Section 4.08.05 (7)(g) Wildlife As noted in this application, the applicant is seeking to ;preserve environmentally sensitive portions of the site. Appendix 4 is a wetlands investigation prepared by Andy Antipas and Appendix 5 is a wildlife assessment prepared by Steve D. Dahmer of NatureTech Consultant Services Corp. Appendix 15 is a Colorado Division of Wildlife WRIS Data Checklist which provides an inventory of on-site wildlife. Appendix 16 is a January 8, 2002 wetlands encroachment request addressed to Grady McNare, U.S. Army Corps of Engineers. The applicant will follow Antipas' and Dahmer's recommendations. Page -44 PRELIMINARY PLAN SUBDIVISION This section demonstrates compliance with Section 4:00 of the Subdivision Regulations of Garfield County. Section 4:50 Preliminary Plan Map A. The name of the proposed subdivision, Blue Creek Ranch Planned Unit Development appears on all sheets submitted with the land use application. B. Date of preparation of the map, graphic scale, basis of bearing and symbol designating North, certification by a Colorado professional surveyor appear on Sheet 2. Boundary lines with bearings and distances, survey ties and legal description of the proposed subdivision appear on Sheet 2. D. Names, addresses and phone numbers of the owner(s), applicant(s), planner(s), and engineer(s) for the proposed subdivision; names and addresses of owners of lessees of mineral owners of record for the proposed subdivision appear on Sheet 2. A vicinity map from U.S.G.S. quadrangle at a scale of 1" = 2000` depicting the location of streets, highways and adjacent utility systems within a minimum of one-half (1/2) mile of the proposed subdivision and showing the natural drainage courses for streams flowing through the proposed subdivision with the limits of tributary areas shown where reasonable appear on Sheet 2. Departing property lines, names and addresses of owners of record of all parcels adjoining and within two hundred (200) feet of the proposed subdivision, including those separated by a public right-of-way appear on Sheet 2. Page -45- G. Street, block, and lot layout within the proposed subdivision including the approximate area of each lot appears on Sheet 3. H. Proposed easements for drainage, irrigation and access appear on Sheet 3. I. Standard lot setbacks indicated by a map note appear on Sheets 4, 5 and 6. Setbacks are denoted by building envelopes. J. The land use breakdown is as follows: 1. Existing zoning and proposed zoning change appears on Sheet 3. 2. Total development area appears on sheet 3. 3. Total number of lots proposed appears on sheet 3. 4. Total number of dwelling units proposed appears on sheet 3. 5. There is not any non-residential floor area. 6. Forty nine single family detached dwelling units are proposed as shown on sheet 3. 7. The total number of off-street parking spaces appears on sheet 3. 8. The total gross density per acres appears on sheet 3. K. One foot topographic contours appear on sheet 3. A note documenting the origin and datum of topography appears on sheet 3. L. Sheet 3 depicts common open space not reserved or dedicated to the public. M. Sheet 3 depicts Tract 5, which will be dedicated as a public park. N. Approximate street grades and road centerline radii of curvature data appear on sheets 14 to 17. 0. Existing easements, along with the name(s), and address(es) of the entity having an easement and legal description of easements appear on Sheets 2 through 5. Page -46- Section 4:60 Additional information A. The applicant will dedicate Tract 6 to a local land trust. Tract 1 will be dedicated to the Colorado Department of Transportation to develop additional mass transit park and ride facilities. Tract 2 will be reserved for a railroad right-of-way in the event a railroad is developed in the Roaring Fork Valley. A public bicycle and pedestrian trail will be dedicated within Tract 2. B. It is anticipated that utilities and roads will be developed by the summer o03 with completion by Fall of 2003. C. A review of Sheet 3 shows that all proposed lots will have access to CR 100 via the Blue Creek Ranch PUD road system. D. The PUD will include 183 off-street parking spaces as indicated on sheet 3. There will be no non- residential parking spaces. E. Appendix 13 is the Preliminary Geotechnical Study of Proposed Blue Creek Ranch Subdivision prepare by HP Geotech. Standard mitigation will be required as recommended in the report. F. Radiation hazards are addressed in Appendix 13, The Preliminary Geotechnical Study. Radon gas is sometimes a hazard in the Roaring Fork Valley. Standards procedures will be followed to test for radon gas. Mitigation may be necessary and will be provided as necessary. G. A title commitment for the property appears in Appendix 1. 11. Work sheet information is reflected in the notes on the Preliminary Plan. Section 4:70 Supplemental Information: Geology, Soil, Vegetation and Wildlife A. Appendix 13 is a Preliminary Geotechnical Study of Proposed Blue Creek Manch Subdivision prepared by HP Geotech. Page -47- 13. Appendix 17 is a soils map and description of soil types based on the U.S.D.A Soil Conservation Service. The table of interpretations was previously submitted to the Garfield County Planning Department. C. Appendix 4 is a October 24, 2001 report prepared by Andrew Antipas describing Blue Creek Ranch Plant Associations. D. Appendix 5 is a September 6, 2000 letter prepared by Steve Dahmer of Nature Tech Consultant Services addressing wildlife. Section 4:80 Supplemental Information Drainage Plan The drainage plan for Blue Creek Ranch PUD is presented graphically on Sheets 12 and 13 and in written form in Appendix 11, Drainage Study for Blue Creek Ranch Garfield, Colorado prepared by Sopris Engineering, LLC. The drainage plan addresses the standards of Section 4:80. Section 4:90 Supplemental Information: Utility Plan Section 4:91 Water Supply Plan The water supply plan is depicted graphically on sheets 18, 19 and 26. The physical and legal water supply is addressed in Appendices 6 and 7, prepared by Zancanella and Associates Inc, and Patrick, Miller and Kropf, P.C. A.1. Blue Creek Land Holdings has entered into a Water Service Agreement with Aspen Equestrian Estates to provide domestic and treated potable water supply to the subdivision. Evidence of the legal water supply is provided in Scott Miller's January 17, 2002 letter which is in Appendix 7. A.2. The Blue Creek Ranch property is served by ditch irrigation water rights from the Basin Ditch, Middle Ditch and Lower Ditch. The historic use and estimate yield of claimed water rights appears Page -48- in Scott Miller's January 17, 2002 letter which appears as Appendix 7. A.3. Scott Miller finds in his letter which appears in Appendix 7 that Blue Creek's ownership amounts in the Middle and Lower Ditch are more than legally and physically sufficient for the continued irrigation of open space in and around the residential subdivision. Additionally, Miller states in his letter that the applicant has secured a BWCD Allotment Contract to cover and augment the water use demand on Blue Creek Ranch PUD. A copy of the contract appears in the Zancanella report Appendix 6. A.4. Appendix 6, a January 24, 2002 letter prepared by Zancanella and Associates Inc. identifies the water requirements of the proposed PUD, addresses the legal water supply and the physical water supply. As previously mentioned, Aspen Equestrian Estates (AEE) and the applicant have entered into a Water Service Agreement to share domestic water service from wells and related facilities on the AEE property. The data in Appendix 6, project the combined water demands for the AEE and Blue Creek systems to be 70.9 gallons per minute (gpm). Legal water supply to meet the projected demand was addressed in the previous section of this application. Appendix 6 explains that potable water for Blue Creek PUD will be supplied from the Arabian and Appaloosa Wells. The Arabian Well will serve as a back-up to the Appaloosa Well. This well was drilled by Shelton Drilling Corporation on November 29, 2001. A pump test of the Arabian Well shows the well would be able to pump continuously at the rate of 110 gpm. The Appaloosa Well has been the primary water source for AEE. A 1999 pump test showed, the Appaloosa Well produced at a sustained rate of 100 gpm. The water supply system includes a 200,000 gallon storage tank. All water facilities serving AEE have been approved by the Colorado Department of Public Health and Environment. Page --49- A.5. Appendix 6, Zancanella's January 21, 2002 letter explains that water samples were collected when the Arabian Well was pump tested. Water quality tests indicate that the Arabian Well is a safe source for drinking water. B.1. As indicated, the applicant will join with AEE to serve the neighboring developments with a common centralized water distribution system. A master water association will be created for both subdivision. The master water association will be the legal entity which owns the water distribution facilities. B.2 The financing of the water system will be provided by the applicant. C. Appendix 7, a report prepared by Scott Miller dated January 17, 2002, and Appendix 6, a report prepared by Zancanella And Associates, Inc. Dated December 12, 2001, indicate that AEE and the applicant have entered in to a water service agreement. Miller documents the legal rights of the AEE water system in his letter. The system is capable of supplying water to both subdivisions. D. Individual water systems shall not be provided by iot owners, therefore this standard is not applicable. E. As indicated by Scott Miller in Appendix 7, a water augmentation plan is not required. The applicant has secured Basalt Water Conservancy District Water Allotment Contract No. 383. This contract is attached to Appendix 6, the Zancanella report. Section 4:92 Sanitary Sewage Disposal Plan A. A private sanitary sewage disposal system is proposed to serve the Blue Creek PUD. The proposed system will comply with state and local laws. Appendix 8 demonstrates that the Stare of Colorado has approved a site application for a waste water treatment facility to serve Blue Creek Ranch PUD. Page - 5 0 1 Preliminary Plan Sheets 19-23 depict the plan profile of the sanitary sewage disposal system. Additionally, the system is addressed in Appendix 3, a report prepared by Sopris Engineering, LLC and Appendix 18 a portion of Church and Associates' report which presents design information for the waste water system. B.1 A complete copy of the approved Colorado Department of Health Waste Water Treatment Plant Site Location Approval Application has previously been submitted to Garfield County. The applicant will submit a duplicate copy if requested. B.2 The sewage treatment facility will be operated by the Blue Creek Homeowners Association. B.3. The sewage disposal system will be financed by the applicant. C. The sewage treatment facilities will not be associated with an existing district. This standard is not applicable. D. Individual sewage disposal systems are not proposed, therefore this standard is not applicable. Section 4:93 All road and utility plans are marked "Not for Construction." Section 4:94 Off -Site Road Impacts It is the applicant's understanding that the requirements for an off-site road impact study and payment of road impact fees are not applicable to the Blue Creek Ranch PUD. Section 4:94 of the Garfield County Zoning Ordinance provides that an applicant will not be obligated to provide an analysis of off-site road impacts if the Board of County Commissioners have not established a base road cost per ADT for the area Page -51- 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 in question. In Resolution 97-111, the Board of County Commissioners adopted a portion of the Garfield County capital improvements program establishing road impact districts and the associated costs of road impacts. It is the applicant's understanding that County Road 100 and Highway 82 were not included in any road district set forth in Resolution 97-111, nor in any other subsequent resolution, and therefore no cost of road improvements have been calculated and no road impact fee established for the area of the Blue Creek Ranch PUD. Page -52-