HomeMy WebLinkAbout2.0 Staff Report PC 05.11.05PROJECT INFORMATION AND STAFF COMMENTS
F<-
-BO€e 0flru05
FJ
Preliminary Plan review of the Story
Subdivision
Kevin and Sandra Story
0193 Sweetwater Road (CR 150) immediately to
the west of the county line of Eagle and Garfield
Counties.
lndividual Wells
Individual Sewage Disposal Systems (ISDS)
CR 150 (Sweetwater Road)
A/R/RD
A/R/RD and OS
REOUEST
APPLICANT
LOCATION
WATER
SEWER
ACCESS
EXISTING ZONING
ADJACENT ZONING
The photograph above was taken from the south of the property looking in a north easterly
view showing the existing single-family dwelling and general propere layout.
ffi
I. PROJBCT INFORMATION
A. Site Desuiption
The subject property is presently improved with a single-family dwelling and various
horticultural out-buildings. The Applicant has recently installed a pond immediately to the
south of the residence. The Gannon Ditch traverses the property from west to east, and is
located north of the residence and all existing improvements. No improvements are
proposed north of the ditch. Along side the ditch is a well-defined road used for the
purpose of ditch maintenance. The property contains significant slopes in excess of 4OtTo on
the north and east portions of the property sloping in a southerly direction. These slopes
become much less severe towards the west and southern portions of the property. There are
two very distinct gullies that pass through the property; one gully being located above l-ot 1
and the other gully being located between Lots 2 and 3. Currently, access to the property
(l-ot- 2) is via a gravel drive off of County Road 105 (Sweetwater Road). The Applicant
proposes each lot to have its own access directly from CR 150.
B. Development Proposal
The Applicant proposes to subdivide the lS-acre property into three lots which all access
from CR 150 resulting in the following configuration:
The agricultural uses on the property will consist of uses such at gardens, greenhouses,
nursery, and orchards which are uses that are allowed by right in the A/R/RD zone district.
C. Adjacent Land Uses
The following land uses surround the subject site:
BLM
Vacant, however, associated with the development across
Sweetwater Road.
West: Single family residence
North: Associated with the private property to the west.
II. REVIEW AGENCY AND OTHER COMMENTS
Staff sent the application to the following agencies and departments for comment. Their
specific comments are attached as well as incorporated within the text of this
memorandum.
East:
South:
A.
B.
C.
D.
E.
F.
Eaqle RE - 50 School District: No Comments Received
Colorado State Forest Service: (Exhibit N)
Colorado Division of Wildlife: (Exhibit Q)
Garfield County Vegetation Manasement: (Exhibit I)
Sheriff Department: (Exhibit R)
Colorado Division of Water Resources: (Exhibit J)
G.
H.
L
J.
Colorado Geologic Survey: (Exhibit H)
Garfield County Road and Bridge: (Exhibit K)
Resource Engineerins: (Exhibit P)
Eagle County Plannine Department: (Exhibits L and M)
III. STAFF COMMENTS
The following is an analysis of the proposal that includes referral comments provided from
the entities listed above and a review of the proposal against the County's Zoning
Resolution, Subdivision Regulations, and Comprehensive Plan.
A. Comprehensive Plan
Section 4:33 of the subdivision regulations requires the Board shall make its decision
regarding a Preliminary Plan based on the recommendation of the Planning Commission
and on the conformity or compatibility of the proposed subdivision wittr the
Comprehensive Plan. The Comprehensive Plan is consists of two main components: 1) the
plan map and 2) goals and objectives.
l) Studv Area 4
The property is located in Study Area 4 which consists of almost r/ath of the total
county land area, located in the northern and eastern most regions of Garfield County.
It contains approximately 665 square miles (22Vo of the County), and all but
approximately 60 squa.re miles are located on the White River and Routt National
Forests. Approximately one third of the remaining land area is under BLM
management. As a result, privately owned lands that are currently zoned as something
other than O/S (Open Space) total only about 40 square miles, or six percent of the
Study Area.
2) The Plan Map
The map for Study Area 4 does not contain specifically proposed densities; however,
the underlying zoning minimum lot size of two acres per lot (dwelling unit) shall serve
as the default density calculation for a property. In this case, the proposed density is
approximately 3.0 acres per dwelling unit which is less dense than the 2-acres per
dwelling unit required by zoning. Therefore, this proposal is not only consistent with
the required density of the area but also with the land use of residential and agricultural
uses and therefore conforms to and is compatible with the Comprehensive Plan.
B. Zonins
The zoning map to
the right shows
(black box) the
general location of
the property in the
Sweetwater area. As
explained above, the
Applicant proposes
to subdivide the
property into 3 (three) lots designated for single-family dwellings. A single family
dwelling is a use by right in the A/R/RD zone district. The proposed lot sizes comply with
the minimum lot size (2 acres) for single family units. The minimum lot size / density of
the A/R/RD zone district is 2 acres a dwelling unit. The proposed project includes lot sizes
that range from 4 to 8.8 acres with an average overall density of 3.0 acres per dwelling unit
(which includes 3 ADUs). In addition, the Applicant proposes building envelopes on all of
the lots which are more restrictive than the A/R/RD setbacks. In some cases, the building
envelopes only cover a portion of the lot. The proposal complies with the uses and
dimensional requirements of the A/R/RD zone district.
ADUs
The Applicant proposes to obtain the right to develop ADUs on all three lots as part of the
subdivision review. In order to do so, each lot needs to be at least 4 acres containing a
building site of at least 2 acres with slopes less than 4OVo.However, due to the significant
debris flow hazards and slopes that exists on Lot 3, Staff suggests that no ADUs be
allowed on this lot. Otherwise, it appears that the proposed site plan meets these
requirements and a plat note shall be provided on the final plat that indicates the ability to
construct an ADU on Lots 1 and 2 so long as they meet the following requirements
pursuant to Section 5.03.02I of the Zoning Resolution of 1978, as amended:
(1) The gross floor area for residential use occupancy shall not exceed 1,500 sq.
ft.
(2) Compliance with the County individual sewage disposal system regulations or
proof of a legal ability to connect to an approved central sewage treatment
facility.
(3) Only leasehold interests in the dwelling units are allowed.
(4) That all construction complies with the appropriate County building code
requirements.
C. Water
The Applicant plans to provide domestic (potable) water to each of the lots via individual
wells (Story Wells 1-3) supported by an approved augmentation plan including two on-site
ponds (Story Ponds) and by releases from Wolford Mountain Reservoir and Reudi
Reservoir pursuant to a contract with the Colorado River Water Conservation District. The
decree does not allow for any outside irrigation use from any of the three wells.
The Division of Water Resources reviewed the proposal and determined that according to
the decree in Case No.03CW247,"Well permits issued pursuant to Section 37-90-13l(2),
10 C.R.S (2003) and the augmentation plan must be obtained prior to the construction and
/or operation of the Story Wells...No such well permits shall be issued until the Story
Ponds Nos. 1 and/ or 2 have been constructed and filled with adequate replacement water
and written notice shall include an as-built stage capacity table and estimate of the active
capacity of the pond(s), and confirmation that a permanent power supply and permanent
pump system have been installed for making the augmentation releases." Three well
permit applications were filed with the State Engineer's office; however, since no proof
that notification was provided indicating that the above-mentioned work had been
completed, the applications were returned to the Applicant.
The Division Engineer states that based on the production of the existing well (on
proposed Lot 2) and the proximity of the well to the alluvium of Sweetwater Creek; it
appears that the plan will be physically adequate. However, because well permits have not
been issued and the plan for augmentation has not operated as decreed, the Division
Engineer stated that the proposed water supply will cause material injury to decreed water
rights.
Staff contacted the Division Engineer on the issue and the Engineer explained that once
well permits have been issued to the Applicants, the water supply plan will not cause
material injury and would be approved by the Division of Water Resources.
Regarding irrigation water supply, Section 9:51 of the Subdivision Regulations require that
an adequate irrigation water supply shall be available to all lots within the subdivisir:n. In
this case, the individual wells do not include the provision of outside water usage which
includes irrigation water. The Applicant was granted a decree (Case No. 03CW247)
which included conditional water rights that included raw irrigation water from two ponds
(Story Ponds 1 and 2) and the Gannon Ditch (Story Enlargement). In this way, irrigation
water rights are to be provided through these conditional water rights to the parent
property; however, it remains unclear how these rights are to be transferred to each new lot
in order to satisfy Section 9:51 above.
Resource Engineering Comments
Resource Engineering reviewed the water plan and stated that "a new well permit for Lot 2
will be required pursuant to the decree in Case No. 03CW247 along with permits for Lots
1 and 3. Well permit applications for these wells were submitted in December 2004." In
addition, the "the submittal does not address the requirements of Section 4.9I.a or for
4.91.d regarding evidence of a water supply sufficient in terms of quality, quantity and
dependability. However, the existing well has a reported yield of 15 gpm and the property
is in close proximity to Sweetwater Creek."
D. Wastewater
The existing dwelling on proposed Lot 2 presently uses a conventional septic tank and
leach-field system. The Applicant proposes that the same Individual Sewage Disposal
Systems (ISDS) will be utilized for each lot. The HP Geotech report indicates that the soils
on l,ots 1 and 3 are suitable for such systems; however, site specific percolation tests shall
be required for appropriate design of the ISDS at the time of building permits. The
Applicant did provide an adequate ISDS Operation and Maintenance Plan that shall be
required to be incorporated in the protective covenants for the subdivision.
E. Soils/ Geolosy/ Radioactivitv
A substantial portion of the property contains steep slopes well in excess of 407o- Garfield
County prohibits development on slopes of 407o or steeper. Associated with the slopes are
three debris fans where debris flows are a potential threat to life and property in certain
areas. The Applicant provided a report prepared by HP Geotech (HP) containing an
analysis of the soils and geology present on the subject property. This report specifically
indicates that the property does contain certain geologic conditions that shou,ld be
considered in project planning and design which include potential debris flow hazards,
moisture sensitive soils, construction related slope instability, radiation, and earthqual,les.
Debris Flow: According to the HP report, there are two relatively large
drainage basins that are tributary to the project site that have deeply incised
debris flow channels that run into the property from the north. Parts of Lots
1 - 3 could be affected by debris flows on Fans F4, F5, and F6. The repoft
goes on to state that given the regional setting, debris flow recurrence in
the project area is probably in the range of 50 to 100 years. A debris flow
could result in damage to buildings and possibly harm to their occupants=
If this risk is not acceptable. then feasibility of mitigation should bg
considered as part of the stormwater runoff and drainage plan for the
subdivision.
The stormwater runoff and drainage control plan prepared by Gamba &
Associates should also include an evaluation of the existing diversion
structures on the site to determine if they have the capacity to convey
potential debris flows and if the channels will be stable during future
debris flow events.
Moisture Sensitive Soils: Due to expansive and hydro-compressive soils,
the HP report suggests when building sites have been determined, it is
recommended that site specific soil and foundation studies at the proposed
building sites be conducted to evaluate the settlement / heave potential of
the foundation soils and to develop appropriate design recommendations.
Construction Related Slope Instability: When building sites have been
determined, it is recommended that a geotech engineer evaluate the
proposed grading and develop appropriate design criteria
recommendations as pafi of the soil and foundation studies for the nelv
homes.
Radiation: No radiation hazards, but the property is in an area where radon
gas could be expected. Testing for radon could be done when the dwellings
have been constructed. Also, new residential dwellings could be designed
with provisions for appropriate ventilation of lower enclosed areas to
mitigate the levels.
related ground shaking. Occupied structures should be designed to
withstand moderately strong ground shaking with little or no damage and
not to collapse under stronger ground shaking. The region is in the 1997
Uniform Building Code Seismic Risk Zone l. As required in the 19917
UBC and 2003 IBC, all construction already contemplates designe<l
specifications to meet the Seismic Zone I or the Seismic Category B.
Colorado Geologic Survey (CGS) Comments
Regarding debris flow, CGS makes the following points regarding debris fans where: they
indicate that debris fans indicate disperse, unpredictable pathways and flows that trarrsport
rock, mud, and water. Construction in these areas could cause serious damage to
improvements. More specifically, CGS states:
1. On Lot 1, home construction would be feasible, but the access and leach field
would be in the (debris) fan; and
There is no area on Lot 3 that is both less than 407o slopes and not within ra
debris fan area. Debris flow mitigation could be designed to increase the sizr:
of acceptable building envelopes / sites; and
If it is decided to allow future lot purchasers to address the debris flow
problem, a plat note should state that homes on Lots 1 and 3 would require ;a
debris flow mitigation Plan. Obtaining a building permit should be contingent
on the preparation of an acceptable plan, and a County Engineer shoulj
confirm the correct implementation of this plan;
The peak flows presented by Gamba & Associates for the drainages should b,:
checked by the County Engineer;
5. Drainage report should include an evaluation of stability of channels during
future debris flow events;
6. Any new culverts under CR 150 should be designed with a bulking factor for
debris.
Regarding soils on the property, the CGS analysis concurs with the HP report indicating
that due to expansive and hydro-compressive soils, the HP report suggests when building
sites have been determined, it is recommended that site specific soil and foundation studies
at the proposed building sites be conducted to evaluate the settlement / heave potential of
the foundation soils and to develop appropriate design recommendations. In addition,
ISDS can be accommodated on the lots and their functioning should not be jeopardized by
future debris flow. In summary, CGS states that the primary concern at the property is the
drainages that convey debris flows. Future construction would require debris flow
mitigation on Lot 3 and part of Lot 1.
2.
a
4.
Resource En gineerin g Comments
The proposed subdivision is subject to debris flow (as indicated in the drainage analysis),
and hydro-compactive and expansive soils. Site specific soil and foundation studies at the
proposed building sites should be conducted to evaluate the settlement / heave potential of
the foundation soils. A plat note should be included on the final plat that requires such a
study for residential development on Lots 1 and 3 to be conducted by a professional
engineer licensed to practice in the State of Colorado.
Staff finds that due to the significant debris flow hazards and slopes that exists on Lot 3, no
ADUs shall be allowed on this lot.
F. Drainase / Floodplain Issues
The property is not located within any regulated / mapped floodplain areas. There are two
drainages located on the property which are discussed in the HP Geotech report, by Gamba
and Associates (the Gamba report), CGS, and by Resource Engineering.
The Gamba report concludes the "proposed improvements on the site will have no
measurable impact on downstream property owners in the form of increased runoff.
However, care must be taken with positioning of new buildings which will be occupied.
Ideally, the location should avoid debris flow completely, otherwise mitieation can be
desiened. The report suggests examples of mitigation to include a robust wall which would
deflect the debris flow. Alternatively, integrating a heavy reinforced concrete wall into the
exposed face of the building and ensuring there are no openings (windows / doors) which
would allow a mudflow to enter. Lastly, during the development stage of the lots, the
location of any occupied buildings be optimized and, if needed, specific mitigation be
designed by an engineered registered in Colorado as part of the detailed preparation of
building plans."
Resource Engineering reviewed the report and agrees with the analysis and states that the
debris flow areas identified by the Gamba report and an appropriate note should be added
to the final plat to disclose the debris flow hazard and that mitigation shall be required as a
part of the building permit process. Resource Engineering also states that the drainage
report examines only the 100 year event and concludes that the culvert under CR 150 is not
adequate. The analysis actually needs to include a 25 year event analysis to determine if
the culvert is adequate to pass the 25 year flood without overtopping the road.
G. Internal Road /Access
The property presently has one access from CR 150 to provide access to the existing
improvements on proposed Lot 2. The Applicant proposes to provide separate access to
Lots 1 and 3 via separate driveways from CR 150. The Applicant did not submit a traffic
study with the application; however, it can be assumed that the entire project (3 single-
family dwellings and 3 ADUs would generate approximately 57 average daily trips. As a
practical matter, the approximate trip generation may be somewhat lower due to the remote
location of the lots to urban areas. The 2OO2 traffic counts collected by the County indicate
that 215 average daily vehicles were counted at the intersection of CR 150 and the county
line. If fully built out with ADUs, the resulting 57 ADT would constitute a277o increase to
that road.
Because the Applicant proposes separate access points to all three lots and the fact that
they would serve as shared access to two dwelling units, they shall be designed to the
"primitive residential" standard which requires a 30 foot right-of-way with a 12 foot
driving lane of natural material (gravel or dit).
County Road and Bridge Department Comments
The County Road and Bridge Department conducted a site visit to the property and provide
the following comment:
1. All culverts beneath access points should be of Corrugated Steel Pipe.
2. All culverts should extend beyond the edge of the access roadway sfficiently
to prevent sloughfrom congesting the inlet or outlet.
All culverts should be 12 inches or larger.
All culverts should have a minimum cover equal to half the diameter of the
pipe. i.e. an 18 inch culvert would require nine inches of cover to finish
grade.
All culverts should have a minimum of 17o Jlow.
All ditches entering to and exiting from culverts should be chased to daylight
in order to facilitate flow.
Access' should be constructed with a compacted sub-grade, then filled with
a compacted six inch lrft of three inch minus, then topped with at least a
three inch layer of compacted 3A road base (class 6) material. Compaction
should test at not less than 957o of modified proctor.
8. Access' should be flared where they meet the counQ road and should be of
sfficient width to conform with sub-division standards.
9. All areas of county road which encroach into or pass through private
property should have right of way deeded to the county at 30 foot from
centerline.
10. Stop signs should be placed where the subdivision accesses the county road.
11. AU accesses should be graded to follow 27o slope from crown, to a point at
or beyond the location of the culvert. Were super-elevation is used the
access grade shall be at 27o from edge of road to a point at or beyond the
culvert.
12. Access' should provide a minimum of 200 feet visibility in either direction,
from a point l0feet backfrom the edge ofthe county road.
13. Access' should meet the county road at a 90 degree angle for a minimum
distance of 30feet.
14. Access' should b.e inspected by Road and Bridge for compliance upon
completion.
Lastly, it has been noted by the Road and Bridge Department that the motorcycle atop the
mailbox represents a hazard to proper sight distance and suggests that it be removed to
eliminate that risk.
5.
6.
7.
3.
4.
Pursuant to Section 4.94 of the Subdivision Regulations, a part of the County's Capital
Improvement Plan, the Board has established traffic study areas. The subject property lies
within Traffic Study Area 12 of the Capital Improvements Plan. Since a base road cost per
average daily trips for Study Area 12 has not been established, the Applicant will not be
subject to road impact fees for this project. Note, future lot owners shall be responsible for
obtaining the proper driveway permits from the Road and Bridge Department at the time
building permits are sought for Lots 1 and 3.
H. Fire Protection
The subject property is not located within any fire protection district in Garfield County.
Wright Water Engineers' (WWE) submitted a letter on behalf of the Applicants dated
January 20,2005letter, which states that the 40,000 gallons of storage in the pond system
om the property can also be reserved for fire protection. The water decree also requires that
a pump and'permanent power supply be located at the pond which will aid in fire
suppression. The WWE letter also references the Glenwood Springs Fire Department Wild
Land Fire Guidelines.
The application also includes a "Petition for Inclusion" where the Applicant has requested
to be annexed into the Gypsum Fire Protection District. As of the drafting of this
memorandum, no affirmative response was received indicating that the District has
annexed the property.
Resource Engineering stated that "the fire protection plan should be consistent with the
International Fire Code (IFC) adopted by the County, incorporated into the covenants to be
developed for the subdivision, and referenced on a plat note." As you may not be aware,
the County Commissioners have recently discussed delegating enforcement of the IFC to
the County Sheriff's Office and the Building and Planning Department. However, this
delegation of duties has not been officially implemented. Ultimately, the 40,000 gallon
pond with a permanent power supply and pump can function as fire flow supply rrvhich,
according to WWE, is much more than many isolated residential homes.
Colorado State Forest Service Comments
The property has been mapped as "moderatehazard" on Garfield County's Wildfire Hazard
Maps contained in the Comprehensive Plan based on predominant vegetation on the
property which includes a mix of pinyon-juniper woodland, oakbrush, and cottonwood
vegetation as well as slopes that average l5-207o in the proposed building envelopes. The
Forest Service states that "The overall wildfire hazard has been reduced signiflcantly by
the clearing and thinning of vegetation below the existing structure and greenhouse
operations. The existing dwelling is a wood-framed, 2-story house with a non-flammable
metal roof. As a result, the Forest Service rates the wildfire hazard low to moderate for this
property."
Understanding that the property is currently outside of a fire protection district and the fact
that emergency response and the time involved could be an issue in the event of a wildfire,
several water sources exist on the property that potentially mitigate wildfire hazard so long
as a dry hydrant is constructed to provide direct access to fire department vehicles.
t0
Th State Forest Service specifically recommendations to further mitigate wildfire hazard
on this proposal, the Applicant should enhance the defensible space zone around the
existing dwelling by thinning the pinyon-juniper woodland to an average 10 foot clearance
between tree crowns in order to break up the tree canopy on the west side of the structure.
Additional structures built on the property should incorporate defensible space clearing
and thinning as outlined in Colorado State Forest Service publication 6.302, "Creating
Wildfire Defensible Zones ".
I. Vegetation / Weed Management
The County Vegetation Manager reviewed the proposal and has requested the Applicant
submit a noxious weed inventory and a weed management plan that would address any
noxious weeds detected on the property. In addition, the revegetation issues mentioned in
the memo by the Vegetation Manager do not need to be addressed as this project appears
to be a "lot-split" and there are no surface disturbance issues (at least now) that would
require revegetation.
J. Wildtife
The application contains a Division of Wildlife WRIS checklist prepared by the County IT
Department which indicates that the property lies within Black Bear, Elk Winter, Severe
Winter, and Overall Range, and Mule Deer Winter, Summer, and Overall Range. The
Applicant states that the potential development of the three lots will have a near zero or no
significant impact on the local wildlife or big game.
The Division of Wildlife (DOW) reviewed the proposal and stated that the property lies
within deer and elk winter range. As a result, fencing should be planned to facilitate
wildlife movements, optimize habitat availability and reduce wildlife mortality. The DOW
can provide additional information on wildlife friendly fencing. Due to bear and mountain
lions in the area, the DOW suggests that proper trash containers are essential to reduce
bear issues as well as problems with raccoons, skunks, and other small mammals.
K. Additional Comments
Comments were received from Cliff Simonton of the Eagle County Community
Development Department. Mr. Simonton noted that "lacking improvements to Sweetwater
Road, we would prefer to not increase traffic on this rural travel route by any significant
amount. It would appear, however, that impacts from a project of this scale should be
minimal. Pursuant to our earlier comments listed below, we trust that your office will
work with the Applicant to protect wildlife, the riparian corridor and water quality in the
stream as they move towards final plat." The memo from Eagle County during sketch plan
provided the following points:
1. The ability of Sweetwater Road to adequately and safely handle the trffic
anticipated from the proposed development.
2. Safe sight distance requirements at the intersection of the proposed driveway and
Sweetwater Road.
3. A requirement for engineered septic systems, given the apparent proximity of the
project to Sweetwater Creek.
II
The response time of the Gypsum Fire Department to the site, and the nee:d for
both an on-site fire fightiny water supply, and the application of sitinSl and
construction practices designed to minimize wildfire hazard.
Impacts to wildlife, and that fact that Eagle County Master Plan map intlicate
this area as deer and elk winter rang,e, elk severe winter range, and a likely
locationfor Golden Eagle nest sites.
The general compatibility of the project with adjacent dwelling unit den,sities,
and the possibly setting of precedence for similar development along Sweetwater
Creek.
IV. RECOMMENDED FINDINGS
1. That proper publication, public notice, and posting was provided as required by law
for the hearings before the Planning Commission.
2. That the hearing before the Planning Commission was extensive and complete; all
pertinent facts, matters and issues were submitted; and that all interested parties were
heard at those hearings.
3. That the application is in compliance with the standards set forth in Section 4:00 of
the Garfield County Subdivision Regulations of 1984, as amended.
4. That the proposed subdivision of land is in compliance with the recommendations set
forth in the Comprehensive Plan of 2000 for the unincorporated areas of the County.
5. The proposed subdivision of land conforms to the Garfield County Zoning Resolution
of 1978, as amended.
6. The proposed use is in the best interest of the health, safety, morals, convenience,
order, prosperity and welfare of the citizens of Garfield County.
V. STAFFRECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends the Planning Commission forward a recommendation of approrral to the
Board of County Commissioners for the Preliminary Plan of the Story Subdivision with
conditions.
VI. PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION
The Planning Commission recommends the Board of County Commissioners approve the
proposed Preliminary Plan with the following conditions:
1. That all representations made by the applicant in the application and as testimony provided
at the public hearing before the Planning Commission shall be considered conditions of
approval, unless specifically altered by the Board of County Commissioners.
2. The following notes shall be placed on the final plat as well as be includod in the
protective covenants:
4.
5.
6.
t2
a.
b.
One ( 1) dog will be allowed for each residential unit and the dog shall be required
to be confined within the owners' property boundaries.
No open hearth solid-fuel fireplaces will be allowed anywhere within the
subdivision. One (l ) new solid-fuel burning stove as defied by C.R.S. 25-7-401, et.
sew., and the regulations promulgated thereunder, will be allowed in any dwelling
unit. All dwelling units will be allowed an unrestricted number of natural gas
burning stoves and appliances.
All exterior lighting will be the minimum amount necessary and all exterior
lighting will be directed inward and downward, towards the interictr of the
subdivision, except that provisions may be made to allow for safety lighting that
goes beyond the property boundaries.
d. No further divisions of land within the Subdivision will be allowed.
Colorado is a "Right-to-Farm" State pursuant to C.fi.S. 35-3-101, et seq.
Landowners, residents and visitors must be prepared to accept the activities, sights,
sounds and smells of Garfield County's agricultural operations as a normal and
necessary aspect of living in a County with a strong rural character and a healthy
ranching sector. All must be prepared to encounter noises, odor, lights, ntud, dust,
smoke chemicals, machinery on public roads, livestock on public roads, storage
and disposal of manure, and the application by spraying or otherwise of chemical
fertilizers, soil amendments, herbicides, and pesticides, any one or more of which
may naturally occur as a part of a legal and non-negligent agricultural operations.
All owners of land, whether ranch or residence, have obligations under ,State law
and CounQ regulations with regard to the maintenance of fences and irrigation
ditches, controlling weeds, keeping livestock and pets under control, using property
in accordance with loning, and other aspects of using and maintaining property.
Residents and landowners are encouraged to learn about these rights and
responsibilities and act as good neighbors and citizens of the County. A good
introductory source for such information is "A Guide to Rural Living & Small
Scale AgricultLtre" put out by the Colorado State University Extension Office in
Garfield Counry.
,,
One Accessory Dwelling Unit (ADU) may be constructed on Lots I and 2 of the /
Story Subdivision so long as they meet the following requirements pursuant to p/
Section 5.03.021 of the Zoning Resolution of 1978, as amended:
( 1) The gross floor area for residential use occupancy shall not exceed 1,500 sq.
f"t.
(2) Compliance with the County individual sewage disposal system regulations or
proof of a legal ability to connect to an approved central sewage treatment
facility.
c.
e.
f.
o6'
l3
(3) Only leasehold interests in the dwelling units are allowed.
t.
(4) That all construction complies with the appropriate County building code
requirements.
Foundations and Individual Sewage Disposal Systems for all new re:sidential
structures on Lots I - 3 of the Story Subdivision shall be engineered by a
Professional Registered Engineer licensed to practice within the State of Colorado.
The engineered design shall be submitted with any building permit application.
Site specific percolation tests shall be required for appropriate design of the ISDS
at the time of building permits.
j. Individual driveways for Lots I - j of the Story Subdivision shall be improved to
the primitive residential standard pursuant to Section 9:35 of the Subdivision
Regulations of 1984, as amended.
Lots I - 3 of the Story Subdivision are not located within an establis'hed Fire
Protection District.
l. All residential development on Lots I and 3 shall require the submittal oJ'a Debris
Flow Mitigation Plan prepared by a Professional Engineer licensed in th,g State of
Colorado and qualffied to prepare such a plan. This plan shall be submitted as part
of building permit applications.
wells that are to tre dril
ater
Resources in public
hearin issioners, Once proper approved well permits
have been issued, and prior to the signing of the final plat, all physical water supplies shall
demonstrate the following:
a) That a four (4) hour pump test be performed on the well to be used;
b) A well completion report demonstrating the depth of the well, the
characteristics of the aquifer and the static water level;
c) The results of the four (4) hour pump test indicating the pumping rate in
gallons per minute and information showing drawdown and recharge;
d) A written opinion of the person conducting the well test that this well should
be adequate to supply water to the number of proposed lots;
e) An assumption of an average of no less than 3.5 people per dwelling unit,
using 100 gallons of water per person, per day;
f) If the well is to be shared, a legal, well sharing declaration which discusses all
easements and costs associated with the operation and maintenance of the
system and who will be responsible for paying these costs ancl how
assessments will be made for these costs;
h.
/
t/
14
4.
5.
g) The water quality be tested by an independent testing laboratory and meet
State guidelines concerning bacteria and nitrates.
The Applicant shall incorporate the ISDS Operation and Maintenance Plan in the
covenants which shall be submitted with the final plat documents.
Based on the geotech I drainage analyses conducted by HP Geotech, Gamba & Associates,
and the Colorado Geologic Survey, Lots 1 and 3 containssiggificafifiebris flow issues. As
a result, the Applicant shall delin is flow areas on a newly submitted
Preliminary Plan so
on those lots so that
be determined and delineated
6.
1.
is restrlFd from being located in the debris
flow areas. This information shall be submitted to Staff prior to scheduling the hearing
before the Board of County Commissioners.
The drainage report submitted by Gamba & Associates examines only the 100 year event
and concludes that the culvert under CR 150 is not adequate. The Applicant shall submit a
25 year event analysis to determine if the culvert is adequate to pass the 25 year flood
without overtopping CR 150.
Due to the fact that wildlife does travel through the area, all fencing should be constructed
to be consistent with wildlife friendly fencing standards used by the Division of Wildlife
which includes, but is not limited to, the following:
For wire fencing, a maximum height of 48" with no more than 4 strands and a 12"
kickspace between the top two strands is sufficient.
Rail fencing should be held to a maximum height of 42" with at least 18" between
two of the rails.
c. Mesh fencing is strongly discouraged, as it significantly impairs wildlife
movement.
8. The Applicant should incorporate the following items in the protective covenants:
a. Dogs should not be allowed to roam and homeowners should also be advised that
dogs chasing wildlife is illegal and can lead to legal action. The Colorado
Division of Wildlife will issue fines for dogs harassing or chasing wildlife. If a
dog is observed chasing or harassing wildlife it may be shot.
b. Bear/human conflicts have the potential to be a reoccurring problem in this area.
As a result, all homeowner shall use an approved bear-proof container for storing
all trash/garbage;
9. The Applicant shall remove the motorcycle fixed atop the mailbox to facilitate sight
distance prior to final plat.
a.
b.
l5
10. The Applicant shall provide the Garfield County Vegetation Manager the following items
for approval as part of the final plat submittal application to the Building and Planning
Department:
a. A map and inventory of noxious weeds for the property using the Garfield County
noxious weeds list.
b. A weed management plan for the inventoried noxious weeds.
11.The Applicant shall submit a fire protection plan that demonstrates compliance with the
applicable provisions of the 2003 Intemational Fire Code (FC) adopted by the County.
This plan shall be included within the protective covenants to be developed for the
subdivision. This plan shall be submitted to the Planning Department for review prior to
scheduling the hearing before the Board of County Commissioners.
I2.T-he Applicant shall construct a dry hydrant to be connected to the 40,000 pond that is
properly designed to specifications of the Gypsum Fire Protection District. This hydrant
shall be constructed prior to final plat.
13. The Applicant shall include the Colorado State Forest Service publication 6.302, "Creating
Wildfire Defensible Zones" in the protective covenants of the subdivision.
14. The Applicant was granted a decree (Case No. 03CW247) which included conditional
water rights that included raw irrigation water from two ponds (Story Ponds 1 and 2) and
the Gannon Ditch (Story Enlargement). In this way, irrigation water rights are to be
provided through these conditional water rights to the parent property; however, it remains
unclear how these rights are to be transferred to each new lot. The Applicant shall
demonstrate to the Planning Staff how irrigation water is to be provided to the three lots
prior to the hearing before the Board of County Commissioners.
15. The stormwater runoff and drainage control plan prepared by Gamba & Associates should
alsb include an evaluation of the existing diversion structures on the site to determine if
they have the capacity to convey potential debris flows and if the channels will be stable
during future debris flow events. This analysis shall be provided to the Planning Staff prior
to the hearing before the Board of County Commissioners.
\ "J o*h
L rla n;;?tL,
\u-4lo) *'l n'l7l''u
L 11 -* tul
J,.B,l,l hn ,*a]
l6
COLORADO GEOLOGICAL SURVEY
Division of Minerals & Geology
Department of Natural Resources
1313 Sherman Street, Room 71 5
Denver, Colorado 80203
Phone (303) 866-261 1
FAX (s03) 866-2461
Aprrl25,2005
swNw24 T3S R87W
DEPARTMENT OF
NATURAL
RESOURCES
Bussell George
Executive Director
Ronald W. Cattany
Division Director
Vincent Matthews
State Geologist
Bill Owens
Governor
Mr. Fred Jarman
Garfield County Planning
108 8th St Suite 201
Glenwood Springs, CO 81601
Re:Sweetwater Perennials
CGS Review No. GA-05-0006
Dear Mr. Jarman:
In response to your request and in accordance with Senate Bill 35 (1972) I visited this property to review
the plat. The Preliminary Plan application included a Preliminary Geologic Review prepared by HP
Geotech (4120104), a Percolation Testing report prepared by HP Geotech (5128104) and a Drainage
Report prepared by Gamba & Associates (4/22/04). The site consists of 18 acres to be divided into 3
lots.
Debris flows. The site is crossed by two incised drainages. The western drainage is aboutl0 ft deep
where it enters the site from the north. Debris ranging to boulder size can be observed on the sides of
the drainage. Boulders are also present on the south side of Sweetwater Rd, where previous flows from
the southern drainage onto the road have been bulldozed. HP states after flows leave the defined
channels (on lots 1 and 3, this would be about the location of the ditch), they disperse to debris fans.
They estimated a thickness of 20 ft of debris fan deposits. The cache of boulders on Sweetwater Rd
suggests that flows occur more frequently than the 50 yr recurrence period mentioned in the report.
Gamba outlined the debris fans on the drainage analysis plan that accompanied the drainage report.
Their map shows that all of the area below the ditch on lot 3 is fan deposit. Lot I contains about 16,000
sf below the ditch that is not covered with debris fan material (this would be in the vicinity of the
existing cold frames).
Debris fans indicate disperse, unpredictable pathways and flows that transport rock, mud, and water.
Construction in these areas could cause serious damage to improvements. On lot 1, home construction
would be feasible, but the access and leach field would be within the fan. There is no area on lot 3 that
is both less than 40 percent slopes and not within a debris fan area. Debris flow mitigation could be
designed to increase the size of acceptable building sites. If it is decided to allow future lot buyers to
address the debris flow problem, a plat note should state that homes on lots 1 and 3 would require a
debris flow mitigation plan. Obtaining a building permit should be contingent on the preparation of an
Sweetwater Perennials, p. I
acceptable plan. and a county engineer should confirm the correct implementation of this plan. Under
no circumstances should a plan create or increase the magnitude of a problem associated with debris
flows to adjacent property.
The peak flows presented by Gamba (20,24 cfs) for the drainages should be checked by the county
engineer.
HP mentions that the drainage report should include an evaluation of stability of the channels during
future debris flow events. We agree with that recommendation.
Any new culverts under Sweetwater Rd should be designed with a bulking factor for debris.
Soil. Debris flow/fans material is deposited quickly and often the resultant sediment contains a low
density structure after it dries. This material could be subject to collapse (hydrocompaction) when
loaded and wetted. For new construction, the subsurface soils from the building envelope should be
sampled and tested for geotechnical characteristics so that foundations could be designed appropriately.
Mitigation of hydrocompactive soils for foundations and flatwork could be to presoak and load the soils,
or to overexcavate and recompact the soil.
Hydrocompactive soils require strict management of surface and subsurface water. Grading should
provide good positive slope and downspouts should not discharge close to structures. A subsurface
drainage system that daylights should be included with any subgrade construction.
Large cobbles and boulders should be removed from the building envelope because of the difficulty in
achieving uniform compaction.
ISDS. The soil percolation rates are suitable for standard wastewater disposal systems. ISDS design
should be coordinated with the Garfield County Health Department. With continuing development near
Sweetwater Creek, the health department might consider engineered systems desirable. Regardless of
the design of the systems, their functioning should not be jeopardized by future debris flows.
Erosion. After grading and earth movement at the site has stabilized, bare areas should be seeded to
limit erosion and sedimentation.
In summary, the chief concern at the site is the drainages that convey debris flows. Future construction
would require debris flow mitigation on lot 3 and part of lot 1.
Please call me if there are any questions.
Yours truly,
Celia Greenman
Geologist
Sweetwater Perennials, p. 2
exHtglr
--1
Fred Jarman
From: Santhony1029@aol.com
Sent: Tuesday, April 26, 2005 10:58 PM
To: Fred Jarman
Subject: sweetwater perennials
Fred,
my apologies for getting this to you in email format. My home computer is having "issues" doing Word at the
moment.
ln my memo of 5128103, which is in the submitted prelim plan, I requested a noxious weed inventory and a
weed mgt. plan that would address any noxious weeds detected. This still needs to be done. lf the applicant
feels they don't have any noxious weeds, they need to state that.
The revegetation issues that I mentioned in the same memo don't need to be addressed as this project
appears to be a "lot-split" and there are no surface disturbance issues (at least now) that would require
revegetation.
Steve
4t28t2005
EXHIBITs
OFFICE OF THE STATE ENGINEER
Division of Water Resources
Department of Natural Resources
1 3 1 3 Sherman Street, Room 81 B
Denver, Colorado 80203
Phone (303) 866-358.1
FAX (303) 866-3s89
STA|E OF CO
RECEIVED
APR I I 2005
iiARFiELD COUNTY
BUILDING & PLANNING
April6,2005
Fred Jarman
Garfield County Planning Dept
108 8th St Ste 201
Glenwood Springs CO 81601
Re:Story Subdivision Pretiminary Plan
Section 24, T3S, R87W, 6TH PM
W. Division 5, W. District 53
Dear Mr. Jarman:
We have reviewed the above-referenced proposal to subdivide a parcel of approximately
18.203 acres into 3 residential lots with one single-family dwelling and one accessory dwelling unit
on each lot. An existing residence on the property is currently supplied by an existing exempt well
(Permit No. 158441). The applicants propose the construction of two new wells to supply water
for domestic uses to the residences on the new lots. Sewage disposal is to be through individual
septic systems. lrrigation water will be provided through conditional water rights as decreed in
Water Court Case No. 03CW247.
Review of the decree in Case No. 03CW247 shows that the applicants were granted an
absolute water right for the existing well (Story Well No. 1), in the amount of 15 gpm, for domestic
use in a single-family dwelling. Conditional rights were granted as follows: for the Story Well No.
1, 15 gpm for domestic use in an accessory dwelling; for the Story Well Nos. 2 and 3, 15 gpm
(each well) for domestic use in a single-family dwelling and an accessory dwelling unit; for the
Story Pond Nos. 1 and 2, a total surface area (all ponds) of 1 .1 acres and total storage capacity
(all ponds) of 4.0 acre-feet for supplemental and new irrigation of 7 acres, augmentation, aesthetic
purposes and stockwater; and for the Gannon Ditch Story Enlargement, 1.0 cfs for supplemental
and new irrigation of 7 acres and fill and refill rights for the Story Ponds. Note that the decree
does not allow any outside uses (e.9., irrigation)for water from the wells. The decree also
approved a plan for augmentation, under which the Story Well Nos. 1-3 will be augmented by the
Story Ponds, and by releases from Wolford Mountain Reservoir and Ruedi Reservoir pursuant to
a contract with the Colorado River Water Conservation District for 0"3 acre-feet of annual
augmentation and exchange releases. An approved copy of the contract was included with the
submittal package.
According to the decree in Case No. 03CW247,"\Nell permits issued pursuant to $37-
90-137(2).10 C.R.S. (2003) and this plan for augmentation must be obtained prior to the
construction and/or operation of the Story Well Nos. 1 , 2 and 3 pursuant to this plan for
augmentation...No such well permits shall be issued untilthe Story Pond Nos. 1 and/or 2have
been constructed and filled with adequate replacement water and written notice has been
provided to the Division Engineer. Such notice shall include an as-built stage capacity table
and estimate of the active capacity of the pond(s), and confirmation that a permanent power
Bill Owens
Covernor
Russell Ceorge
Executive Director
Hai D. Simpson, PE.
State Engineer
Fred Jarman
Story
Page 2
April 6, 2005
supply and permanent pump system have been installed for making the augmentation
releases." Three well permit applications were received by the Division 5 office on December 1,
2004, but were returned to the applicants on March 24" 2005. The lack of the above-referenced
notification was cited as the reason for the return, and the applicants were advised to supply
this information to the Division 5 office by May 24,2005 to retain active status of the
applications. Based on production information in our records for the existing exempt well and
the proximity of the subdivision to the alluvium of Sweetwater Creek, it appears that the plan will
be physically adequate.
Based on the above, and pursuant to CRS 30-28-136(1XhXl), it is our opinion that the
proposed water supply will cause material injury to decreed water rights, unless the applicants
obtain and maintain valid well permits and the plan for augmentation is operated according to its
decreed terms and conditions. lf you or the applicant has anv questions concerning this matter,
please contact me.
CMUCJUstory.doc
cc: Alan Martellaro, Division Engineer, Division 5
Frank Schaffner, Water Commissioner, District 53
Sincerely,
Water Resource Engineer
EXHIBIT
!.ooa
Garfield County
Road and Bridge, District I
7300 Hwy 82, Glenwood Springs, CO 81601
970-945-1223 ph' 945-1318 fax
Date: 05-27-03
To: Tamara Pregl
Building and Planning
From: Bobby Branham
Road and Bridge Dist. 1
Re: SweetwaterPerennials
Please take into consideration the following conditions.
1. All culverts beneath access points should be of Comrgated Steel Pipe.
2. All culverts should extend beyond the edge of the access roadway sufficiently
to prevent slough from congesting the inlet or outlet.
3. All culverts should be 12 inches or larger.
4. All culverts should have a minimum cover equal to half the diameter of the
pipe. i.e. an l8 inch culvert would require nine inches of cover to finish grade.
5. A11 culverts should have a minimum of loZ flow.
6. All ditches entering to and exiting from culverts should be chased to daylight
in order to facilitate flow.
7. Access' should be constructed with a compacted sub-grade, then filled with a
compacted six inch lift of three inch minus, then topped with at least a three
inch layer of compactedt/n road base (class 6) material. Compaction should
test at not less than95Yo of modified proctor.
8. Access' should be flared where they meet the county road and should be of
sufficient width to conform with sub-division standards.
9. All areas of county road which encroach into or pass through private property
should have right of way deeded to the county at 30 foot from centerline.
10. Stop signs should be placed where the subdivision accesses the county road.
1 l. All accesses should be graded to follow 2Yo slope from crown, to a point at or
beyond the location of the culvert. Where super-elevation is used the access
grade shall be at2o/o from edge of road to a point at or beyond the culvert.
12. Access' should provide a minimum of 200 feet visibility in either direction,
from a point 10 feet back from the edge of the county road.
13. Access' should meet the county road at a 90 degree angle for a minimum
distance of 30 feet.
14. Access' should be inspected by Road and Bridge for compliance upon
completion.
With regards to this particular sub-division the motorcycle atop the
mailbox will need to be removed to facilitate sight distance.
Bobby Branham
Dist. 1 Road and Bridge
EXHIBIT
L
l^oA-bc
Mr. Fred Jarman
Garfield County Planning Department
108 Sth Street, Suite 201
Glenwood Springs, CO 81601
April25,2005 RESPONSE BY E-MAIL w/ attachment
Re: Proposed Sweetwater Perennial (Story) Subdivision Preliminary Plan
Dear Fred,
Thank you for the opportunity to comment on the proposed Preliminary Plan for Sweetwater
Perennials, which would subdivide an 18.2 acre property located just west of Eagle County -
Garfield County line on Sweetwater Road.
We have noted that the current proposal is essentially the same as that we reviewed at Sketch
Plan. As such, we would offer the same response comments that were sent to you in our letter of
May 23,2003 (also attached). Lacking improvements to Sweetwater Road, we would prefer to
not increase traffic on this rural travel route by any significant amount. It would appear,
however, that impacts from a project of this scale should be minimal. Pursuant to our earlier
comments, we trust that your office will work with the applicant to protect wildlife, the riparian
corridor and water quality in the stream as they move towards final plat.
Should you have any questions, please don't hesitate to contact me at (970) 328-815I.
Sincerely,
Cliff Simonton, AICP
Senior Planner
filexc:
EXHIBIT
Ms. Tamera Pregl
Garfield County Planning Department
108 8th Sffeet, Suite 201
Glenwood Springs, CO 81601
}lf.ay 23,2003
Re: Proposed Sweetwater Perennial Subdivision Sketch Plan
Dear Tamera,
Please be advised that Eagle County, as an adjacent property owner, is in receipt of a referral
regarding the development of a18.2 acre property located on Sweetwater Road just west of the
Eagle County - Garfield County line.
The property currently accommodates a single family residence and agricultural uses. The
applicants, Sweetwater Perennials, propose to subdivide the property into three lots ranging in
size from four (4) to nine (9) acres, which is consistent with present Garfield County zoning, and
which would allow for the construction of two additional dwelling units. Present Garfield
zoning also allows accessory dwelling units, bringing the total potential density for the
development to six units. The property has agricultural water rights, and historic agricultural
uses are proposed to continue, to include greenhouses. No commercial uses are proposed.
Access to the property originates in Eagle County via Sweetwater Road, and the three lots would
be connected to this road by a single driveway. Domestic water would be provided by private
wells, sewage disposal would be by ISDS.
Lands to the east of this site in Eagle County are presently zoned Resource, allowing for lots of
35 acres or larger. Eagle County's Master Plan Future Land Use Map (FLUM), indicates a
designation for this area of "Rural", which also contemplates densities no greater than 1 unit (+ 1
accessory unit) per 35 acres. However, the "Rural" designation does provide for "small
concentrations of homes surrounded by relatively large tracts of undeveloped lands".
As such, Eagle County would ask that the following be considered during the review of this
proposal:
l
1) The ability of Sweetwater Road, in its present condition, to adequately and safely handle
the traffic anticipated from the proposed development.
2) Safe sight distance requirements at the intersection of the proposed driveway and
Sweetwater Road.
3) A requirement for engineered septic systems, given the apparent proximity of the project
to Sweetwater Creek.
4) The response time of the Gypsum Fire Department to this site, and the need for both an
on-site fire fighting water supply, and the application of siting and construction practices
designed to minimize wildfire hazards.
5) Impacts to wildlife, and the fact that Eagle County Master Plan maps indicate this area as
deer and elk winter range, elk severe winter range, and a likely location for Golden Eagle
nest sites.
6) The general compatibility of the project with adjacent dwelling unit densities, and the
possible setting of precedence for similar development along Sweetwater Creek.
Thank you for the opportunity to review and comment on the referenced proposal. Should you
have any questions, please don't hesitate to contact me at (910) 328-8751.
Sincerely,
Cliff Simonton
Planner
xc: file
EXHIBIT
",i?f",::"::.Hii;f(970) 248-7325
April 5, 2005
Fred Jarman
Garfield County Building and Planning Department
108 8th st., Suite 201
Glenwood Springs, CO 81601
RE: Sweetwater Perennials/ Story Subdivision
Fred,
I have read the Preliminary Plan submitted for the Story property, and visited the site on April 5, 2005.
Kevin Story was present during my site review of the property. I have the following comments regarding
wildfire hazard on this proposal:
The property has been mapped as "moderate hazard" on Garfield County's Wildfire Hazard Maps. The
property is covered by a mix of pinyon-juniperwoodland, oakbrush, and cottonwood vegetation. Slopes
average 15-20o/o in the proposed building envelopes. Most of the vegetation on the property covered by
this proposal has been modified significantly by various past activities such as terracing, driveway
construction, pond construction, and placement of greenhouses. Overallwildfire hazard has been
reduced significantly by the clearing and thinning of vegetation below the existing structure and
greenhouse operations. The existing dwelling is a wood-framed, 2-story house with a non-flammable
metal roof. Currently, I would rate the wildfire hazard low to moderate for this property.
This property is currently outside of a fire protection district. Emergency response and the time involved
could be an issue in the event of a wildfire. However, several water sources occur on the property that
potentially mitigate wildfire hazard. A large pond has been constructed directly below the existing
structure, and the applicant has stated that, once completed, the pond will be accessible by a dry hydrant
to fire department vehicles. ln addition, an irrigation ditch runs directly above and to the north of the
structure. Several small ditches also provide water that supports the groMh of cottonwoods and other
riparian vegetation directly to the west of the structure. During summer, this cottonwood vegetation would
act as an effective fuelbreak to limit fire spread.
My specific recommendations to further mitigate wildfire hazard on this proposal would be to enhance the
defensible space zone around the existing dwelling bythinning the pinyon-juniperwoodland to an
average 10 foot clearance between tree crowns, in order to break up the tree canopy on the west side of
the structure. Additional structures built on the property should incorporate defensible space clearing and
thinning as outlined in Colo;'ado State Forest Service publication 6.302, "Creating V/ildfire Deferrsibie
Zones". A copy of this publication was left with the applicant.
Thanks forthe opportunity to review this proposal. Please call me with any questions.
Sincerely,{fi2-G-
Kelly Rogers
District Forester
Cc: Kevin Story
RECUIVED
APR 0 7 2005
GARFiELO COUNTY
BUILDING & PLANNiNG
EXHIBITto
Fred Jarman
From: Lis, Craig [Craig.Lis@dwr.state.co.us]
Sent: Thursday, April 14, 2005 7:50 AM
To: Fred Jarman
Subiect RE: Story Subdivision Letter
Fred.
That's correct - we were a bit wordy with that one.
Craig
---Original Message-----
From : Fred Ja rma n I ma i lto : f redja rman@ ga rfield -cou nty.com]
Sent: Wednesday, April 13, 2005 6:19 PM
To: Lis, Craig
Subject: Story Subdivision Letter
Hi Craig, am I to understand you correctly, in that, if they get new well permits pursuant to the court
decree, there will be no material injury??
Thanks.
Fred A. Jarman, AICP
Assistant Planning Director
Garfield County Building and Planning Department
108 8th Street, Suite 201
Glenwood Springs, Colorado 81601
970.945.8212
www. ga rfield-cou nty. com
411412005
IT'EIIITIIITIIIIIIIIITITT
FIESOUFICE
ENGINEEFIING
Mr. Fred Jarman
Garfield County Building and Planning Department
108 Eighth Street, Suite 201
Glenwood Springs CO 81601
EXHIBIT*P
'ffCEIvED
APR 2 I 2005
GARFIELD COUNTY
BUILDING & PLANNING
April27,2005
RE: Review of the Preliminary PIan Submittal for the Story Subdivision
Dear Fred:
At the request of Garfield County, Resource Engineering, lnc. (RESOURCE) has reviewed the
preliminary plan submittal forthe proposed Story Subdivision located at 0193 Sweetwater Road.
The submittal includes a package with cover letter dated March 25, 2005. We reviewed the
technical issues related to water rights and water supply, wastewater, drainage, geology/soils,
wetlands and road. Our comments are presented below.
WATER RIGHTS AND WATER SUPPLY
The project is proposed to be served by individual wells on each of the three lots. The decree in
Water Court Case No. 03CW247 provides for three wells and two ponds on the property. The
case includes a plan for augmentation which provides for in-house potable uses for up to 6
dwelling units. lrrigation within the project will be with existing irrigation rights in the Gannon
Ditch. The plan for augmentation relies on 0.3 acre feet of contract water from the Colorado
River Water Conservation District and releases from one or both of the proposed ponds. An
existing house with an existing well is located on Lot 2. A new well permit for Lot 2 will be
required pursuant to the decree in Case No. 03CW247 along with permits for Lots 1 and 3. Well
permit applications for these wells were submitted in December 2004.
The submittal does not address the requirements of Section 4.91.a or for 4.91.d regarding
evidence of a water supply sufficient in terms of quality, quantity and dependability. However, the
existing well has a reported yield of 15 gpm and the property is in close proximity to Sweetwater
Creek.
The Story property is not located within a fire protection district. According to the Wright Water
Engineers' (\ A//E) January 20, 2005 letter, 40,000 gallons of storage in the pond system will be
reserved for fire protection. The \AME letter also references the Glenwood Springs Fire
Department Wild Land Fire Guidelines. The fire protection plan should be consistent with the
lnternational Fire Code adopted by the County, incorporated into the covenants to be developed
for the subdivision, and referenced on a plat note.
WASTEWATER
ISDS systems are proposed for the subdivision. The existing house on Lot 2 utilizes a
conventional septic tank leachfield system. The HP Geotech analysis indicates that the soils are
appropriate for a conventional infiltration disposal system on Lots 1 and 3. Site specific
percolation tests will be required for appropriate design of the ISDS system at building permit. An
appropriate ISDS operation and maintenance plan has been included in the submittal. The ISDS
operation and maintenance plan should be incorporated into the covenants.
DRAINAGE
Two smalldrainages are located within the subdivision which convey off-site and on-site drainage
to Sweetwater Creek. These drainage features are subject to debris flow as indicated in the
Gamba and Associates April 22, 2004 drainage report. The Gamba report recommends that
Consulting Engineens and Hydnologists
9OS Colonado Avenue I Glenwood Spnings, CO A1 601 I (97O) 945-6777 a Fax [97O) 945-1137
Mr. Fred Jarman
Page 2
April27,2005
buildings be located outside of the designated debris flow area or otherwise shall require debris
flow mitigation designed by a Colorado Registered Professional Engineer. The debris flow area
and appropriate plat note should be added to the final plat.
The drainage report analyzes only the 100 year event and concludes that the existing County
Road culvert is not adequate. The analysis should include the 25 year storm event to assess
whether the culvert is adequate to pass the 25 year flood without overtopping the road.
SOILS/GEOLOGY
The proposed subdivision is subject to debris flow (as indicated in the drainage analysis), hydro-
compressive soils, and expansive soils. Due to the potential for relatively large differential
settlement or heave, site specific soil and foundation studies at proposed building sites are
recommended. The standard county plat note requiring a s:ite specific geotechnical investigation
to be submitted with the building permit application should be added to the final plat.
WETLANDS
There does not appear to be any Section 404 permitting issues for this project.
TRAFFIC/ROADS
We did not find a traffic study in the submittal. Since the subdivision consists of two new lots, the
impacts are assumed to be minimal. The road impact fee will be based on a residential vehicle
trip generation of 9.57 ADT per unit. This equates to 48 vehicle trips per day for 5 new units. The
staff report for the Sketch Plan meeting indicates that there will be only one access point onto
Sweetwater Road. A shared access road and easement must be shown on the plat. Such road
must be designed in accordance with County Road standards in Section 9.35 of the subdivision
regulations.
Please call if you have any questions or need additional information.
Sincerely,
RESOURCE ENGINEERING, INC.
.4r:' .u -.a .---ru'//4:.22"-'
tvlichaei.l. €rion, P.f. 4
Water Resource Engineer
MJE/mmm
885-29.0
E:\Client\885$ story prelim plan 885.doc
:!!i: R ESO U RC EaaallIIIIIE N G N E E R I N G I N C
STATE OF COLORADO
Bill Owens, Govemor
DEPARTiJIENT OF NATURAL RESOURCES
ForWldlife-
For People
APR 2 7 2005
GARFIELD COUNTY
BUILDING & PLANNING
Garfield County Building and Planning
1Og 8th Street, Suite 201
Glenwood Springs, CO 81601
RE: Sweetwater Perennials/Story Subdivision
Dear Mr. Jarman:
The Division of Wildlife has reviewed this proposal and offers the following comments and
recommendations for your consideration.
'After
reviewing the application, the Division of Wildlife
understands there currently is no plan for development of the lots and therefore the application does not
delineate actual dwellings on the iots. Ho*ever, we would like to bring the following to your attention for
future use if needed.
The Sweetwater area is mapped as deer and elk winter range. The DOW continues to document the
use of this area by both deer'and elk during our seasonal age and sex ratio flights during the winter
months. Big gam-e animals can be expected to be in this area. For this reason, fencing should be
ptanned to tlititate wildlife movemenis, optimize habjtat availability and reduce wildlife mortality' The
bOOW can provide additional information on wildlife friendly fencing if needed.
The area has experienced both bear and mountain lion conflicts in the past. The Division has much
information on how to reduce or prevent these problems and can provide them if needed. We would
suggest that proper trash containers are esseniial to reduce bear issues as well as problems with
raccoons, skunks and other small mammals as well.
Thank you for the opportunity to comment. Please contact District Wildlife Manager Sonia Mazec at
(970) 947-2934 if you need additional information.
Sincere{y,
ldul_.-
Pat Tucker
Area Wildlife Manager
Cc: Ron Velarde, John Bredehoft, Sonia Mazec, file
DEPARTMENT OF NATURAL RESOURCES, RussdlGeorge, Executive Director
WILDLIFE COMMISSION, Jeffiey Crar,vbrd, chair o Tom Burke, Vice chair. Ken Tones, Secretary
Mamherc Rnheri Flrav r Rink Fnqtrnm r Philin .lamec r Claira O'Naal r Richard Rav r Rnhart Shnamaker
DIVISION OF WILDLIFE
AN EQUAL OPPORTUNITY EMPLOYER
Bruce McCloskey, Director
6060 Broadway
Denver, Colorado 80216
Telephone: (303) 297 -1 1 92
April26, 2005
RECEIVED
EXHIBIT
REFERRAL FORM
Garfield County Building and Planning Department
108 Sth Street, Suite 201, Glenwood Springs, CO 81601
(970) 945-8Zl2Fax: (970) 384-3410
Date Sent: Marc
Return Req
File Name(s)Project Name(s)Type of Application(s)
Sweetwater Perennials / Story Subd. I Same Preliminary Plan
Staff Planner: Fred Jarman (fredj arman @ garfield-county.com)Phone: (970) 945-8212
Applicant: Sandra N. & Kevin P. Story Phone: (910) 524-1519
Contact Person: Engineer is Wright Water Engineers, Bill Lorah Phone: (970) 945-7755
Location: 0193 Sweetwater Rd. Gypsum, CO. Sec. 24,T 35, R 87W
Summary of Request: Request is to subdivide 18.203 acres into 3 lots with all lots requesting ADU's for a total of 6
units.
The Garfield County Planning Department has received a land use request as referenced above. Your comments
are an important part of the evaluation process. In order to review all appropriate agency comments and
incorporatethemintotheStaffReport,werequestyourresponseby@
CARFIEI.D COUNTY
(ahml Di
Road & Bridee
Counw Attomey
\hrs)L/'" Y\e.fidF,'{lr3los- FrRE,(oDc.€ds4 .a\b?-{?641 p. 15)l-a15, L\61
Ub,I crttlde Qlnsncct€lS 6, U,q lnntl
COLORADO STATE 7
Wafer R RIM
Geological Survey (Fee)
Health Depanment
Forest Service (Fee)
Wildlife Division
SERVICE DISTRICT
1 Q Wpcr
Public Service
Holv Cross Electric
G-S./Carbondale Fire District
SilrtJew Ca-stle/Rifl e Fire District
Soil Conservation District
Planning Commission
BOCC
Exhibits for PC 05llll05
Exhibit
A Proof of Mail Receipts and Postine
B Proof of Publication
C Garfield County Zonrng Regulations of 1978, as amended
D Garfield County Comprehensive Plan of 2000
E Garfield County Subdivision Regulations of 1984, as amended
F Staff Memorandum
G Application Materials submitted by the Applicant
H Letter from the Colorado Geolosic Survey to B&P dated 4125105
I Email from the County Vegetation Manager dated 4126105
J Letter from the Division of Water Resources to the B&P dated 416105
K Letter from the Road and Bridge Department dated 5/27103
L Letter from Eagle County Community Development Department dated 4125/05
M Letter from Eagle County Community Development Department dated 5123103
N Letter from Colorado State Forest Service dated 4/5105
o Email from the Division of Water Resources dated 4ll4l05
P Letter from Resource Engineering dated 4121lO5
o Letter from the Division of Wildlife dated 4126105
R Referral Form from Sheriff s Department dated 4ll3l05
S Lut- 4r* 4- V,A- l^rtw {l wl ot
MAY-r t -05 FR0M-Colo Div of l{atsr Res
OFFICE OF THE STATE ENGINEER
Dlvisbn of Water Rgsources
Dopartmonl of Na!ural Resoulcss
1313 Sherman Streal, Room E18
a----^- A-l--r^ Onr^eugnvclr t ul(Jlduu w4vJ
Prone (303) 8E6-3s81
FAx (303) 866-3589
hilP:riffi .unltor,6l6t3- co, uE
FAX GOVER SHEET
PLEA6E DELIVER TI{E FOLLOWING PAGE$ TO:
Fr€d Jarman
OFFOE:
5/11'200s FN(: 970-i84€470
T-168 P 00r/003 F-520
]OLORADOttwW
CL C-e^P<l"r
Bill OwonB
Golarnor
Rugssll Geomo
6(eculiv6 Diloclor
tral0, Slmp6on. P.E.
Slate Engincor
TO:
DATE:
FROM:
PHOIIE: 303€663581 FAX: 3m4663509
TOTAL NUMBER OF PAGES hlCtUDlNG COVER SHEET: 3
A Urgent E For Your lntormatlon El Pteass Reply E As Requeeted
qrilhla ^t, %
lf you do not tGcelyc all oJ the pggcs ar fudlceted orths quallty ls ruacccptablor
Ptaa3o call us back aa $oon al poselblo'
TeteDhone (3031865.3581 Far number: (300) a66-358s
MEISS3AGE:
MAY I I 2OO5
3,fffiffP,',:H^I[J
IIAY-I l-05 02:58PM FROllt-Colo Div of ltlator Rarources +3038663589 T-168 P 002/003 F-520
STArEOF@
OTTICE Of THT STATE ENGINEER
Oivision of Wnrer Resource$
Deporunent of Nalural RPSouIceJ
1 3l I Shcrrnan Streot. Room 8.1E
Oenver, Colorado 80203
Plrone (303) 866'35n1
FAX t]03) 86&1589
sm,iw.watel,Stille -co, us
Bill owrx
Covv,,)o,
May 1 1, 2005
R!ssL.ll Cst6r
Exccud"e D[o<tor
t{il D.shnp5on, ltE.
strte Engirccr
Fred Jarman
Garfield County Planning DePt
108 8th St Ste 201
Glenwood SPrings CO 81601
Re: Story Subdivision Preliminary Plan
Section 24, T3S, R87W,6TH PM
W. Division 5, W' District 53
Dear Mr. Jarman:
We have reviewed the above-referenced proposalto subdivide a parcelof approximately
1g.203 aqres into 3 residentiat lots with one single-family dwelling and one accessory dwelling unit
on eaci lot. An existing residence on the profrty is cunently supplied by an existing exempt well
ii"irit No. 15M41). ihe appticants propose the construction of two new wslls to supply water
ioidomestic uses to ttre resro'ences oh tha new lots. sewage disposal is to be through individual
*upt'" systems. lrrigation water will be provided through conditional water rights as decreed in
Water Couri Case No. 03CW247.
Review of the decree in case No, 03CW247 shows that the appliCants were granted an
absolute water right tor ttre exixing woll (story well No. 1 ), in the amounl of 15 gpm, for domestic
,;;il a singte-fa-mily dwelting. Cinditionat riiHs were grante^d as follows: for the Story Well No'
i, i5 gd f[r Oorneitic use in an accessory d-welling; for the Story Well Nos' 2 and 3, '15 gpm
(eachiel) for aomesiic use in a single-family Owettrirg and-1n.accessory dwelting unit; for the
btory ponU Nos. 1 and 2,a total surfice are; (all ponds; of 1.1 acres and total slorage capacity
(alr 6onos) of 4.0 acro-feetfor supplemental and new inigatron of 7 acrss, augtnentation' aesthetic
p;;[r;;;"U stoitn,,ater; and foi ihe Gannon Ditch Story Enlargement, 1.0 cfs for supplemental
lnO ne, irrigation of 7 acres and fill and refill rights for the Story Ponds. Note that the decree
does not allow any outside uses (e.g., irrigatiorr] for water frgm lfe wells. The decree also
appi.reO a ptan for autmentation, inderlvhichthe Story Welt.Nos. 1-3 witl be augmented by the
Siiry ponas, and by re-l"r""s from Wolford Mountain Reservoirand Ruedi Reservoir pursuant to
a contract with the (Xtorado River Water Conservation Distric{ for 0.3 acre-feet of annual
augmentation and exchange releases. An approved copy of the contracl was inc-luded with the
submittal Package.
According to the decree in Case No. 03CW247, ''Well permits issued pursuant to $37-
g0-137(2). 1O C.R.S. (2003) and this plan for augmentation must be obtained prior to the
construaion and/or oieration of the Story We[ Nos. 1, 2 and 3 pursuant to this plan for
augmentation...No such well permits shall be issued until the Story Pond Nos. 1 .and/or 2 have
UiEn constructed and filled with adequate replacement water and written notice has been
provided to the Division Engineer. Such notice shall includa an as-built stage capacity table
and estimate of the active Capaclty of the ponct(s), and confirmation that a permanent power
llAY-ll-05 02:58PM FROiil-Colo Div ol tlatsr Roaources
Fred Jarman
Story
+303866 3589 T-168 P 003/003 F-520
Page 2
May 1 1, 2005
supply and permanent pump system have been installed for making ihe augmentation
r*l'elder.' inree well permit applications were received by the_Division 5 office on December 1,
2094, but were retumdU to tne'dpplicants on March 24,2005. The lack of the above-referenced
notification was cited as the reason for the retum, and the applicants were advised to supply
this information to the Division 5 office by May 24,2005 to retain sctive status of the
applacations. Based on production lnformation in our records for the existing exempt well and
ttid proximity of ths subdlvhion to the alluvlum of Sweetwater Creek, it appears that the plan will
be physically adequate.
Based on th6 above, and pursuant to CRS 3G'2&136(1XhXl), it is our oplnion that the
proposed watar supply wlll not cause materlal injury to decreed water rights, so long as the
ipdrcants obtain and maintain valid well permits and the planlor augmentation is operated
accordirrg to its decreed tarms and conditions. lf you or the applicant has any questiotts
concerning this matter, please contact me.
CMUCJUSIoT la.doc
cc: Alan Martelloro, Division Engineer, Division 5
Frank Schaffner, Water Commissioner, Distrlct 53
Sincerely,
Water Rosource Englnear
[,!AY-I 1-05 02:58PM FR0M-Colo Div of llatar Rorourcee + 303 866 35 89 T-168 P 002/003 F-520
STATE OF COLOT(ADC
OFFICE Of THT STATT ENGINEER
Divislon of Water Resoutces
Deparunent of Nltural Resourcos
1313 Sherman Strctlt, Room 818
Denver, Colorado 80203
Plronu (303) 866.3581
FAX B0l) 86&1t89
sn A r.watef'fl ile'Co.trs
May 1 1, 2005
Bill Ow/tr
Covril)oa
Rlslell C.sr6?
Exscud"€ Dhftlor
lral D. Slrnpton, l?f
Stue Erqhrcr
Fred Jarman
Garfreld County Planning DePt
108 8th St Ste 201
Glenwood SPrings CO 81601
Re: StorySubdivisionPreliminaryPlan
Section 24. T3S, R87W,6TH PM
W. Division 5, W. District 53
Dear Mr. Jarman:
We have reviowed the above-referenced propGalto subdivide a parcelof apProximately
1g.203 acres into 3 rosidentiat lots with one singl;family dwelling and one acoessory dwelling unit
on eaci lot. An existing residence on tha Proddy is cunently supplied by an -existing
exampt well
(permit No. 158441). fhe appticants propose the construction ottwo new wells to supply water
for domestrc uses to he residences on ths n"* rotr. Sewage disposal is to be ihrough individual
septic systems. tgigation water will be provided through conditionalwater rights as decreed in
Water Courl Case No. 03CW247.
Raview of the decre€ in case No, 03cw247 shows that the appltcants were granted an
absolute water right for tne exLstlng well (Story Well No' 1), in the amount of 15 gpm' for domestic
use ln a single-famity dwelling. Conditional riifnswerg glgnt"i asfollows: for the Story Well No'
i, i5 gd f6rComeitic use in an accessoryawefing; f* q" Story Well Nos' 2 and 3'.15 gpm
(each wel) tor aomesii"-ruein a singte-famity Owetting and an.accessory dwelling unit for the
blory poni Nos. 1 and 2,a total surface arui 1aU pongsl of 1.1 acres ard totalstorage capacity
(all pondS) of 4.0 acre-feet for supplementat and new inigatnn of 7 acr€s, augmentation' aesthetic
ourDoses and stockwatei ina toi ine Gannon Ditch story Enlargernent, 1.0 cfs for suppbmental
["i^J* i"i;;tiil; 7 acies and fitt and refill righrs for theStory Ponds. Note that the decree
does not allorr any outside usas (e.g., irrigatiorr) forwater fromthe wells. The decree also
appi"-,eO a plan f6r augmerrtation, Inder whictrthe Story Well l'.los. 1-3 witl be augnented by the
Siiry ponOs, and by re"l"r"us from Wolford Mor.rntain Reservoirand RuediRe-servoir pursuant to
a contract with the CoforaUo nfver Water Conservation Oistric{ for 0.3 acre-feet of annual
augmentation and erchange releases. An approve d capy of lhe contract was induded wilh the
submiti;al package.
According to the decree in Case No. 03C:W247, "Well permits issued pursuant to $37-
g0-137(2). 1o C.R.S. (2003) and this plan fOr augmentation must be obtained prior to the
construction and/or oi,Lt"ti6n of the Story Well Nos. 1, 2 and 3 pursuant.to.this-plan.for
"rgment"tlon...No
t,i"n *.fi p"rmits snall be issued until the Story Pond Nos' 1 .andlor 2 have
Uiin construeJed and fitted with adequate replacement water and Mitten notice has been
piovideO to the Division Engineer. Such notice shall includa an as-buih strage capacity table
ind estimate of the aAnve &paclty of lhe ponct(s), and confirmation that a permanent power
tu
MAY-I1-05 0Z:58PM FR0M-Colo Div of $iatsr Rarources +303 866 3589 T-168 P 003/003 F-520
Fred Jarman
Story
supply and permanent pump system have been installed for making the augmentation
releases.' inree well permit applications were received by the Division 5 office on December 1,
2004, but were retumdO to tre'dpplicants on March 24,2OO5. The lack of the above-referenced
notification was cited as the reason for the retum, and the applicants were advised to supply
this inforrnation to the Division 5 office by May 24,2005 to retain aclive status of the
applications. Based on production lnformation in our records for the existing exempt well and
dd proximity of the subdlvlsion to the alluvlum of Sweetwaler Craok, it appears that the plan will
be physically adequate.
Based on the above, and pursuant to CRS 3G'28-136(1XhXl), it is our oplnion that the
proposed water supply wlll not cause materhl injury to decreed water rights, so long as the
ipplicants obtain and maintain valid well permits and the plan lor augmentation is operated
actording to its decreed terms and conditions. lf you or ttrc applicant has any questions
concerning this matter, please contad me.
CMUcJUStoT ii.doc
cc: Alan Martellaro, Division Engineer, Division 5
Frank Schaffner, Water Commissioner, Distrlct 53
Page 2
May 1 1, 2005
Sincerely,
Water Resource Englnear
+ 303 86635 B9 T-?68 P 001/003 F-520
MAY-I 1'05 02:58PM FR0M-Colo Div of tlatsr RrsourcossrArEoF@
"D'Ji"Jffi ; ;ilttural Rosourcos
H*iiffif#j.#?83""u
rN< (so3) 866'358e
hirP:rr\rrww.$,ator'datRGo uE
FA)( GOVER SHEET
PLEA6E DELIVER TI{E FOLLOWTI{G PAGE$ TO:
TO: Fred Jarman
Brll Owena
Go!aftror
Rus0etlGeoI0o
exocl/llvt Otodor
HolO, SlmP6on' P'e'
SlalB Enginoor
OFFOE:
DATE:5/1112005
FAX: 970'3843470
FROM: q/nrhh '-" %
PHONE; 303886€581 FAX 3038664589
TOTAL NIJI/IBER OF PAGES hICLUDNG COVER SHEEI: 3
BUrgentDForYourlnforrnattonIPleaseReplyBAsRequested
$youdo,,*,*"r,'jl"T".ll,r::f":l'si"iffffiH:H.naocoPtabro'
,r.oll'i.',iffi ;ilEi i"r "'1" -l" r: (303) 866'350e
ME$SAGE:
MAY I 1 2OO5
GARFIELD COUNTY
BUILDING & PLANINING
[4AY-Il-05 02:S8Pltl FR0M-Colo Drv of l{atar Rcrourcas +303866358 I T-768 P 002/003 F-520
STATE OF COLOMDO
OTFICE OF THE STATE ENGINEER
Divislon of Water Resource,
Deportment of Natural Resou'cas
t3Il Sherman Strl,,ot, Roorn 8'18
Denver, Colorado 80203
Phonc {}03) 866.1581
FAX t303) 06&3589
sn \^i,.watet Sttle -cO.tis
May 1 1, 2005
Eill Ou€rb
Covio)ot
Russcll C.mrEF
Exocudve Dkeaor
ltal O. Slrnpson, llE
SLlre En8h(sr
Fred Jarman
Garfield County Planning DePt
108 8th St Ste 201
Glenwood Springs CO 81601
Re: StorysubdivisionPreliminaryPlan
Section 24, T3S, R87W,6TH PM
W. Division 5' W' Distilct 53
Dear Mr. Jarman:
We have reviewed the above-referenced proposalto subdivide a parcelof approximately
1g.203 acres into 3 rasidentiallots with one singlB-family dwelling and one accessory dwelling unit
on each lot. An existlng residence on the profrty is cunently supplied by an existing exampt Well
tpo|lli No. 158441)- fne ippticants propose the construction of two new wslls to supply water
for domestic uses to tne resro'ences oh tha new lots. Sewage disposalis to be through individual
u"piic systems. rrigation waier will be provided through conditimal water rights as decreed in
Water Court Case No. 03CW247.
Review of u1e decrea in Case No, 03CW247 shor,rs that the appllcants_were granted an
absolute water right for the existing well (Story Well No' 1), in the amounl of 15 gpm' for domestic
,i* fn a single-fa-mity dwelling. CinUitionat riifrts werg grantel as follows: for the Story Well No'
i, iS gp, f6rOorneitic use in an accessory Owelling; for tfre Story Well Nos' 2 and 3, 15 gpm
(6acnien) for aomesiic use in a single-famity owetting and an.accessory dwelling unit for the
btory poni Nos. 1 and 2,a total surflce arei 6n pon{s) of 1.1 ases ard tolal storage capacity
iari i"nost of a.0 acre-f*itor supptenrental and new irrigatlon of ? acres, augtnentation. aesthettc
irriootlnA stocfn"at"i ana foiine Gannon Dttch Story Enlargement, 1.0 cfs for suppbmental
lnf,ne* irrtgation of 7 acies and lill and refill rights for the Story Ponds. Note that the decree
does nol allow any outside uses (e.g., inigation) forwater frory-rfhe rnlells' The decree also
app.reO a plan f6r argrnlntatioir, inOer-wnicfrthe Story Welt Nos. 1-3 witl be augmented by the
6i6ry ponds, and by re"l".""s from Wolford Mountain Reservoirand RuediResennir pursuant to
a contract Wth the Cotorado RivEr Water Conservation District for 0.3 acre-feet of annual
augmentation and erchange releases. An approved copy of lhe contrac{ was induded wiltt the
submittal Package.
According to the decree in Case No. 03Cil/247, "Well permits issued pursuant to $37-
g0-137(2), 1O C.h.S. (2003) and this plan for augmentation must be obtained prior lo the
consfiuc*ion andlor oieration of the Story Well Nos. 1, 2 and 3 pursuant to this plan for
augrnentatfon...No r,iJn wett p"rmits shall be issued until the Story Pond Nos. 1 .andlor 2have
beEn construcied and fitted with adequate replacement water and written notice has been
provided to the Divislon Engineer. Such notice shal! includa an as-built stage capactty table
and estimate of the active capaclty of lhe pond(s), and confirmation that a permanent power
IIAY-Il-05 02:58PM FR0M-Colo Div of [/ator Rssources +3038663580 T-168 P 003/003 F-520
Fred Jarman
Story May 1 1,
supply and permanent pump system have been installed for making the augmentation
releases." ihree well permit applications were received by the Division 5 office on December 1,
2004, but were retumdO to tfre.applicants on March 24,2OO5. The lack of the above'referenced
notification was cited as the reason for the rehrm, and the applicants were advised to supply
this inforrnation to the Division 5 office by May 24,2005 to retain active status of the
applications. Based on productbn lnformation in our records for the existing exempt well and
tid proximity of the subdlvlsion to the alluvlum of Sweetwater Craok, it appears that the plan will
be physically adequate.
Based on th6 above, and pursuant to CRS 3&.2&136(1XhXl), it is our oPlnion that the
proposed watar supply wlll not cause materlal injury to decreed water rights, so long as the
applicants obtain and maintain valid well permits and the planlor augmentatlon is operated
according to hs decreed terms and conditions. lf you or the applicant has any questiorts
conceming this matter, please contad me.
CMUCJUSIoT ii.doc
cc: Alan Martellaro, Division Engineer, Division 5
Frank Schaffnar, Water Commissioner, Distrlct 53
Page 2
,2005
Sincorely.
Water Resource Englnear
UIAY-I l-05 02:58PM FR0lfi-Colo Div of l{ator Rsrources +303866358S T-168 P 002/003 F-520
STArE oF coLoRADc
OTTICE OF THE STATE ENCINEER
Division of Water Resources
Deponment of Natural ResourcsJ
't 3I I Sherman Strcot. Room 81 I
Denvet Colorado 80203
Plrone (3O3) 866'3581
FAX t]03) 86&3589
sn i^,.watef,fl tle.cO.tti
Bill Oerri
Covi0)oa
May 1 1, 2005
Ru$L.ll CsrBF
[rccud"e Dheaor
llal D. Slrnp5m, [8.
Sltre Erqhtcr
Fred Jarman
Garfield County Planning DePt
108 8th St Ste 201
Glenwood Springs CO 81601
Re: Story Subdivision Prelirnin?{ Plan
Section 24, T3S, R87W,6TH PM
W. Division 5, W. District 53
Dear Mr. Jarman:
We have reviewed the above-refarenced propealto subdivide a parcelof approximately
1g.203 acres into B residential lots with one singlB-family dwelling and one acoessory dwelling unit
on eac-h lot. An existing residence on the Property is cunently supplied by an -existing
exampt well
leermit No. 15M41)- fne appticants propose the construction of two new wells to supply water
for domestrc uses to the residences on the new lots. Sewage disposal is to be through individual
""piic
systems- lnigation water will be provided through conditionalwater rights as decreed in
Water Court Case No. 03CW247-
Raview of the decre€ in case No, 03cw247 shors that the applicants were granted an
absolute water rightfor the existing woll(Story Well No' 1), in the amount of 15 gpm' for domestic
,i"ln " single-fa;iry dwetting. C&rditionat riglrts were grante^d as fotlows: for the Story Well No'
i, f S gpm f6r Oomeitic use i; an accessory awefing; for tfre Story Well Nos' 2 and 3, 15 gpm
1da*lvefll 161 aomeslic use in a singte-famity Owetnlig and-qn.arcessory dwelling unit; for the
Story poni Nos. 1 and 2, a total surface arei, latt ponds) of 1.1 acres ard totalstorage capaeity
(alr ionos) of +.0 acro-f&tfor supplenrental and new inigatnn of 7 acres, augrnentation. aesthetic
ilrfilt5-;"0 itoctnrvater and foi ihe G"nnon Ditch Story Enlargennnt, 1.0 c'fs for suppbmental
i[j;e* inigation of 7 acies and fill and refill rights for the Story Ponds. Note that the deoee
does nol allow any outside uses (e.g., inigatiorr) forwater frroqrfhe urells' fie decree also
ippi"*O a ptan f6r argmernatioi''', inOer urt icfiihe Srory Well Nos. 1'3 will be augmented by the
Siiry ponds, and by rei"ors from Wolford Mor.rntain Reservoirand RuediResenoir pursuant to
a contract with the botorado River Water Conservation District for 0'3 acre-feet of annual
augmentation and erchange releases. An approved copy of lhe contrac{ was inc'luded wilh the
suhmital Package.
According to the decree in Case No. 03C:W247, "Well permits issued pursuant to $37-
g0-137(2). 10 C.R,S. (2003) and this plan for augmentation must be obtained Prior to the
construaion andlor oieration of the dtory We1 Nos. 1, 2 and 3 pursuant to this plan.for
augmentaflon...No r,icf, wefi p"rmits shill be issued until the Story Pond Nos-. 1 .andlor 2have
beEn construeted and fitted with adequate replacement water and wriften notlce has been
piovided to the Divislon Engineer. Such notice shall includa an as-built stage capacity table
and estimate of the actave clpaclty of the pond(s), and confirmation that a permanent power
MAY-I 1-05 02:58PM FROM-Colo Div of $latsr Rosources
Fred Jarman
Story
+30386635 B9 T-168 P 003/003 F-520
Page 2
May 1 1, 2005
supply and permanent pump system have been installed for making the augmentation
releaies.' ihree well permit applications were received by the€ivision 5 office on December 1,
20O4, but were retumdO to tne'dpplicants on March 24,2005. The lack of the above-referenced
nolification was cited as the reason for the retum, and the applicants were advised to supply
this inforrnation to the Division 5 office by May 24,2005 to retain active status of the
applications. Based on production lnformation in our records for the existing exempt well and
Uid proximity of the subdlvEion to the alluvlum of Sureetwater Craek, it appears ihat the plan will
be physically adequale.
Based on the above, and pursuant to CRS 3G'2&136(1XhXl), it is our oplnion that the
proposed watar supply wlll not cause materlal injury to decreed water rights, so long as the
bpdfcants obtain and maintain valid well permits and the plan for augmentation is operated
according to its decreed terms and conditions. lf you or $re applicant has any questions
conceming this mafter, please contact me.
CMUGJUSIoT ti.doc
cc: Alan Martellaro, Division Engineer, Division 5
Frank Schaffner, Water Commissionsr, Distrlct 53
Sincorely.
Water Rssource Englneer
[tlAY-11-05 02:58PM FR0li'l-Colo Div of lilator Rcsourcss +303866358S T-768 P 002/003 F-520
STATE OFCOLOMDC
OTTICE Of THT STATC ENGINEER
Oivislon of Water Resourcet
Deportment of Naluril Resourca';
t313 Sherman Streot, Room 818
Denver, Colorodo 80203
Plrooe (]03) 866.3581
FAX t303' 86F1509
www.wetet'5tlle -co.tr5
May 1 1, 2005
Bill Ownr
Covqfr)or
Rusrcll C6IBE
Excsud"e Dhxror
Hi{ D.Sirnprm, liE.
Sutte Enghcur
Fred Jarman
Garftald County Planning DePt
108 8th St Ste 201
Glenwood SPrings CO 81601
Re:Story Subdivision Prelirninary llan
Seaion 24, T3S, R87W,6TH PM
W. Division 5, W. Distilct 53
Dear Mr. Jarman:
we have reviBwed the above-referenced propGalto subdivide a parcelof approximately
1g.zo3 acres into 3 residentiatlots with on"
"ingi6-f"'.ily
dwelling and one accessory dwelling unit
on eacfi lol An exisgng residence on the pr;p"-rty is cunentiy supplied by an -existing
exempt well
(permit No. 158441)- ihe appticants propose the construction of two new wells to supply water
for domestrc uses to the residences on the ""* iott. Sewage disposal is to be through individual
septic systems. rnigalion water will be provided through conaitonalwater rights as decreed in
Water Court Case No. 03CW247.
Raview of the decree in Case No. 03CW247 shouus that the applicants_were granted an
absolute water right for the exisfing wen (story wllt No. 1), in the amount of 15 gpm' for domestic
use ln a single-family dwelling. Condiiional ,i6m" **t" gtlnt"j as follows: for the Story Well No'
i, iS gp, f6r Oomeitic use i; an accessory O;wetting; f* q. Story Well Nos' 2 and 3' '15 gpm
(each we1) tor oonreslic-use tn a single-fam1y Owerririg and an.accessory dwelling unit: for the
Story Pond Nm. 1 and 2,a total surtlce a# (* ponqs) of 1'1 acres and totalstorage capacity
(alt ponds) ot +.0 acrelf*t tor-trppttrnent"i tnJ n"* inigalT of 7 acres, augmentation' aesthetic
purposes and stockwafi;a-fffhe C."n1on Oitcfr St"nl Enlargernent, 1'0 c'fs for supplamental
;i;r* irrigation of 7 acies and fill and refill nSlts for nb-Story.eonds' Note that the decree
does not allo* any outside usas (e.g., irrigatiorti forwatet fryT.Te wells' fie decree also
appro\€d a plan for augn;rrtatioil, InOer-orn't"n'tne Sbry Welt.Nos- 1-3 will be augmented by the
Story ponds, and by r"Lr"". from Wolford Mor.rntain Riservoirand Ruedi Reserwir pursuant to
a contract wth the cororao" nrver water conservation oistrict for 0.3 acre-feet of annual
augmentation and erchange releases. An approved copy of lhe contracl was induded with the
suhmittal Package.
According to the decree in Case No. 03C1ff247. "Well permits issued pursuant to $37-
g0-137(2). ro c.n.s. iToosi'ano this plan for augmentation must be obtained prior to the
construction and/or d;"tdilitne Story Well NIos 1, 2 and 3 pursuant to.this-plan.for
augmentation...No t,Ln *Jip"rmits snattbeissued untilthe sby l:11 !::]:11o':t 2have
Uiin construcied and filted with adequate replacement waler and wrttten notice nas been
provided to the Divislon Engineer. Srlch notice shall includa an as-built stage capacrty table
ind estimate of the ,.t u" i"prcfty of the ponct(s), and confirmation that a permanent power
IIAY-Il-05 02:58PM FR0M-Colo Div sl llator Rorourcss
Fred Jarman
Story
+303 8653589 T-168 P 003/003 F-520
Page ?
May 1 1, 2005
supply and permanent pump system have been installed for making the augmentation
releases.n Three wel'permiiaiplications were received by the_Division 5 office on December 1,
2O(M, but were returned to the applicants on March 24, ?ri}', The lack of the above-referenced
notification was cited as the reaion for the retum, and lhe applicants were advised to supply
ini" iniorrrtion to the Division 5 office by May 24,2005 to retain active status of the
.ppfi6tiJnr. Based on production tnformation in our records for the existing exempt well and
tfJr;rpty of the subdtv6ion to the attuvlum of srreetwater Creek, it appears that the plan will
be physicallY adequate.
Based on the above, and pursuant to CRS 30-28-136(1XhXl), it is our oplnion that the
propofiGtar supply wlll noi *u." materlal injury to decreed urater rights, so long as the
Spfii*nts obtain anOhainAin valid well permits and the planfor.augmentation is op.erated
a;brAing to its decreed terms and conditions. lf you or the applicant has any questiotts
conceming this matter, please contad me.
Craig M. Lis, P.E.
Water Resource Englnear
CMUCJUSIoT ii.doc
cc: Alan Martellaro, Division Engineer, Division 5
Frank Schaffner, Water Commissionor, Distrlct 53
Sincorely,
29409
PROOF OF PUBLICATION
iTATE OF COLORADO )
lor.]NrY oF EAGLE i tt'
' Kathy Heicher, do solemnly swear that I am a.qualified represent?liv9 of rhe Eagle valley Enterprise,Pltlt same weekly newspaper printed, in rvhole "; i; ;il;; published in tne C"ourty of Eagle, staterf Colorado, and has a geniril circulation therein; tnat jaiJ ,"*rpup.r
-has been published continuouslyLnd unintemrptedly in said co-unty of Eagle_for a period;i;;. than fifty-two consecutive weeks nextrrior to the first publication of the annexEd legal ,i"ti.. oiuou.rtisement;'thut .uiJ n.*spaper has beenrdmitted to the united s^tates.mails as a perioiicat uil;r1d;;;risions oi tr,. e"1j nrarch 3, 1g79, ormy amendments thereof, and that said niwspaper is a *eet iy newspaper duly qualified for publishingegal notices and advertisements within the meaning ortt" ra*s'ofin" s,ut" of colorado.
lhat the annexed legal notice or advertisement was published in the regular and entire issue of every
tumber of said weekly newspaper for the period of 1 consecutive insertions; and that the first publication
rf said notice was in the issue of said newspaper dated March 24 A.D. 2005 and that the Iast publication
rf said notice was in the issue of said newspaper dated March 24 A.D. 200s.
n witness whereof I have here unto set my hand this 0lst day of April, 2005 ,
tlst day of April, 2005.
My Commission expires: November 1,2007
gu;5***ffi
Legal Dscriplion: A psrcel ol tand located in the
i!: fr:uit!*,,,r fi
.H*:,djt.5.,,1[
l&Te'ft Y.t] s:iT:e:'*I,;',1*,1 il:l','ilpend€nt Fesuryey ot saio Townsnif"a;;;;;d;X
l'#,;:'."i,?",'ff .ff ff fn:* :t":i:ili:.::'*i
1) N 49"37'13"W. 395.42':
Z; tt SS.tS,at" W. rOO.OO, j
*.l1fl :IFL:}fti.,I.iilti'jlii#il$iii
me- of said-Southwest Ouarler irf tf," f,forii,il"ie_uarttr of -saction 24; thence atong siio Er.i'iii-",
Hi:13-"i?,:i;5::1,J,,::"r.3::.,J:.#::k;"g
$i#ll'fixi"trif,lll*:*f,:,*;;$
Ei.li!ll1!""!'"ll. l[",JJi,ff,y t".J:i"ii. ;:
il'.Ty"i:!+ff,:? sec,on 2a' Townsh'p as"'ii
lii*rl&r=,l,trJl#"rffi*-.il'x'-
['::'-'jifi '!"',::: :*' "l; f '"iiru' #
trfll'll',{T{:,Ti#i{*fi:;#ffi i,:,tT
lll ryr:"lt aflected by rhe proposed subdtvisionare-rnvited. lo€ppear a,id stat6 tni, ,i"*i, pioil"j.
ihilE:?d,fJ, "il,!,. ifr# [.:,:P[;:vt6ws by.telter, as the planning- Co;.ia;;;"r;;tigrve consideralion to lhe comm€-nts of sunounOinoproperty.owners, and orhers
"tt..r"o, ln J"".iiii.Xwn-e-rher to grant or d€ny rhe r€quesi, t i iri,i iii:p.osed subdivi*n. The application may be re-
:l1y9q ll !!p-olic_e or rhe ptinnins Dep"itr"^t ii_:1lT ar 10^8 8th streer, suite 2o1l rod at|,6iru"i,
;tr:HH5Tffi ,"";:ffi
::.XiT,'fl JX?[iF;5nffi
planning Oepartment
Gartield County
Published in lhe Eagle Valey Enterpilse March a4,
j
Manager/Publi sher/Editsr
29409
PROOF OF PUBLICATION
iTATE OF COLORADO )) ss.
loLiNTY OF EAGLE )
, Kathy Heicher, do solemnly swear that I am a qualified representative of The Eagle Valley Enterprise,
h^a1t!e same weekly newspaper printed, in whole or in partind published in the iounty of Eagle, Staterf Colorado, and has a general circulation therein; that iaid ne*qpup.r has been published coniinuously
rnd unintemrptedly in said County of Eagle for a period of more-thin fifty-two ionsecutive weeks nextrrior to -the first publication of the annexed tegal notice or advertisement; that said newspaper has beenrdmitted to the United States mails as a periodical under the provisions of the Act of Maich 3, 1g79, or
rny amendments thereof, and that said newspaper is a weekly newspaper duly qualified for publishing
egal notices and advertisements within the meaning of the laws of ilre Staie of CotoiaOo.
lhat the annexed legal notice or advertisement was published in the regular and entire issue of every
tumber of said weekly newspaper for the period of I consecutive insertions; and that the first publication
rf said notice was in the issue of said newspaper dated March 24 A.D. 2005 and that the last publication
rf said notice was in the issue of said newspaper dated March 24 A.D. zoos,
n witness whereof I have here unto set my hand this 0rst day of April, 2005 '
,lst day of April, 2005.
My Commission expires: November 112007
, eulre truilt,E.
IllijloJtgF thar K€vin and Sandra Slory haw
33t'.1il l?",y"", ?ilJIE" i;lll?,..i3l, d,g"x
T1_1._9lllo]' 9t,:pqruar ror the pretiminary ptan fora otvtston ot land lo be know as tt e S,ireetwaiel
fifl ii1lil::'3?*:y,:o#",f, :n:i,#ji,:i1,.,",",.,iaam.end€d, in connmtion wiriitrre toltowing ielciil
3ffi "'JiEJy":::?:1
jn the countv or -earrLri'
!::ii--iT,"A?:H,1,'il:"l""liill,,ffi :..."1",3ffiy1t Nw-_t{1) ot sffrion z+, i"*"i,NJ b't,lJtirlHang€ 87 wsst of th6 sixtr prtncipJ rvre;iii;.Garfield County, Cotorado aftording'i" ih; i;Ap€ndent.Rosuruey ot uta fownstrip"anO ia-njeL
1gpr.oy-eg ry tha Departmeil of lnterior o" A"r;,;21, 1933; (being moie particularty described as"fot.tows):
1) N 49"37'13"W 39s.42':
e1 N SS"tS'er"w. too.oo':
[.ll]fl ::xril]i:',]: iliiiiii#iljfl [me or said_ Soulhwest Ouarler of ttre ttortfrwesieuarttr of _Section 24: thonce along said East tinosilth 00.19,37" Easl 710.76 t€€t tdths West Cen_rer srxteenlh Corn€r of said Scction 24; thencealong. the. South line of Eaid Southw€st Or"rt", "ff.'.#jJiil::l .?.:3t%.,"1" fnT't1t, ii ;:;jfnmg.
Pracli.cal^Location: Th6 property is located onvounry Hoad lS0 (Sweotwatei Road) in rhcuweerwater Ar6a in Section 24, Townshid 3 Soui;and Range 87 Wast
.T!e^ nroqg3-ea request truotv€s Bubdividing rhe
l1..j^ ..ac..e_ p.rcpg.ry cunenily z6nedAgnilfiurat/Bastdentiaimursl oensity lennOjrn-to- 3 tots^with Lot t hrving 4.004 aci,e;, Loil
llll9_.s:314 a.crE6,, and Lor O having'6.054acres.. r ho.Appflcant also roquesta appr6vaf ioi
:::f,,t9i_th: have an acceeiory ow"'rrrng-unii(AUU, tor a totsl of two rasld6ndal uniis oneach lot-
llL per:ols atected by the proposed subdtvisionare tnvtted to appaar and slate their views, protesisor support. ll you can not appear personally atsu-ch hearing, then you are u;ged to state vourviaws by letter, as ths planning- Corrii.ion,*lligrve consideralion to the cmme;ts of suroundindproperty owners, and others atteaeo, in JrciJiniwn_erner to grant or deny the requesl lor ttre proip-osed subdivision. The appticatoo may be ro_vrswed at the ollice ot the planning Department to_
f99.:!]0^s Brh Srreer. suite 2otl tori etn St,"€i,Erenwood Springs, Colorado betwmn the hours oiu:JU a.m. and 5:00 p.m., Monday thrcugh Friday.
l_?lb-11"- h:".ritlg- on rhe pretimtnary pran hss!ffffi!
!ii[1i3;X,1?jL 1o0' r08 8th srr€6t' crenwood
planning Depsrtment
Garrield County
ft8l:n"o in rhe Easl€ Valey Enrerprise March a4,
Srsx*
: PAi'ELAJ. i.. SCHULTZ i
ftir*#
Schultz, Notary
r Complete items 1, 2, urd 3. Also complete
item 4 if Restricted Delivery is desired.I Print your name and address on the reverse
so that we can r€tum the card to you.I Attach this card to the back of the mailpiece,
or on the front if space permits.
E Agent
El Aodrassee
C. Date ot Delivery
Yes
ENo
7-r!
E R€glst€r€d El Retum R€colpt for Merchandlso
El lnsured Mail E C.O.D.
1. Article Addressed to:D. ls delfuery address different fom item 1?
lf YES, enter delivery address bslow:
2. Artlcle Number
(fransferfmm sn
biti Rofoers
DD}+ Srlee'l"n+<rPet
SWorrr Co tlW+3. ServjCeType(e*nn*ua El ExpressMall
4. Restricted Delivery? (Ertm Fee)
?0Br+ e51,0 n0Db B?qh qlsI
B. Received by (Printed Name)UJ, {LoL Lr
PS Form 381 1, reoruary 2OC4 Dom€stic Return Rece,pt
E yes
COMPLETE TH'S SECr/ON ON DELIVERY
10259s{2-M-1540
r ComDlete items 1, 2, and 3- Also complete
item 4 if Restricted Delivery ls desired'
r Print vour name and addr€ss on the reverse
so thit we can retum the card to You'
r Attach this card to the back of the mailpiece,
or on the front if sPace Permits.
1. Article Addr€ssed to:
Type
'C"ttmtO ffall E gxPress tvtatt
E Registercd E Raum Recelptfor Merchandise
EI lnsured Mall E c'o.D.
4. Restricted Delivery4 (E fia fue)E ves
tilu-illn u.out u?qb qsbb
ll YES, enter delivery address below:
.liirir#r, o/ -6r Mplyr\
3si .Surce*'o d$ fb
6qosrt,'r- oJ ttutt
2. Ardcle Number
fratrsletlun sc,tvh
PS Form 381 1, feuruary 2oo4 Domestic R€tum Recsipt 10259@-M-1540
COMPLETE THIS SECT'ON ON DELIVERY
Dato of Delivery
ls delivery frcm item 1?Yes
trl No
7 -zz--of
r Complete items 1, 2, and 3. Also complete
item 4 if Restricted Delivery is desired.r Print your name and address on the reverse
so that we can retum the card to you.r Attach this card to the back of the mailpiece,
or on the front if space permits.
1. Article Addr€ss€d to:
E egent
E Addressee
C. Date of Delivery
D. ls deltuery addrcss diferent ltom item 1? E Y6s
lf YES, enter delivery addres below: E No
4. Restricted De,lvery4 (Ex'a fue)EI Yes
fultn*.1 orJsnar R.w-ra-
0z; Suee;l''.:d'rR''
6.1 pSu n^" Co
2. Artlclo Number
(fnnsfer from servle w,
3. ServJgeType
p4erfifie<t [aa[ tr Express Mall
E negbtor€d E RAum Rocelpt lbr Merchandls€
El lnsur€d Mall trl c,O.D.
700r, Est0 boos ozlg rt 173
PS Form 381 1, feUruary 2OO4 DomesUc Retum Recelpt 102595{2-M-1540
COMPLETE IH'S SECI'OA' ON DELIVERY
A" Slgnature
x l hrut ': '''
"i,,-)
PUBLIC NOTICE
TAKE NOTICE that Kevin and sandra Story have applied to the planning commission, Garfield
Co,nty, State of Colorado, to request u roo-*"ndation of approval for the Preliminary Plan for a
division of tand to be known a, trr" s*eet rater perennials / siory suMivision p,rsuant to section
4:00 ofthe subdivisionRegulationsortqta, as amende4 inconnectionwiththe followingdescribed
p;;"ny situated in the County of Garfield, State of Colorado; to-wit:
Leeal DescriPtion: (See Exhibit A attached)
practical Location: The property is located on cotrnty Road 150 (sweetwater Road) in the
Sweetwater Area in Section 24, Township 3 South and Range 87 West'
The proposed request involves subdividing the 18'2-acre property currently zoned
Agricultural / Resiiential / Rural rlensity (ARRD) into_3 lots with Lot t having 4'004 acres,
Lotlhaving S}Macr*s, and Lot 3 having bSSl scre!. The Applicant also requests approval
for each lot to have an accessory dwerting unit (ADLr) for a total of two residential units on
each lot.
All persons affected by the proposed subdivision are invited to appear and state their views, protests
or support. Ifyou can not appear personally at such hearing, then you are urged to state your views
by letter, as the planning iommirsior, *itt give consideration to the comments of surroturding
property owners, and otf,ers affected, in deciding whether to grant or deny the request for the
p-irr"a subdivision. The application may be reviewed at the office of the Planning Departrnent
located at l0g gth Stree! suiie zot, 108 8di Street, Glenwood Springs, Colorado between the hours
of 8:30 am. and 5:00 p.m., Monday through.Friday'
A public hearing on the Preliminary Plan has Ueen at
6:30 p.M. inthe County Commissioners Chambers, Room 100, 108 8th Street, Glenwood Springs,
Colorado.
Planning Departrnent
Garfield CountY
Er\;h{- k
PROPERfi DESCRIPT]ON
A porcel of lond locoted in the Southwest
r.fWf /+) of Section 24, Township 3 South'
Gorfield County, Colorodo occording to the
Ronge os opproved by the Deportment of
porticulorly described os follows):
Quorter of the Northwest Quorter (Swtr/+,
Ronge 87 West of the Sixth Principol Meridior
lndJpendent Resurvey of soid. Township ond
lnterior on August 21, 1933; (Oeing more
Beginning ot o point on the Northerly-right of 1vo,y boundory line of Sweetwoter Rood o
on the South line of soid Soutnweit'Qu6rter of the Northwest Quorter of Section 24
from which soid West Quorter Corner of Section 24 beors: South 88'35'22" West 745'5t
feet distont; thence olong soid Northerly right of woy the following two (2) courses:
1)
2)
N 49'37'13" W.
N 55'19'2',1" W.
395.42';
100.00';
thence deportinq soid Northerly right of woy North. 00'04'50" West 685'00 feet; thence
South 74'43'11" Eost 1032.69 feet" to o point on the Eost line of soid Southwest Quort
of the Northwest euorter of Section 24; thence,oiong soid EosJ line south oo19'J7'
Eost 710.76 feet to the West Cenlu.li*t"unth Cornei of soid Section 24; thence olonq
the South tine of soid southwest
'duo.t". of the Nortnwest ouorter of Section 24 Soutl
88'35'22" West 616.00 feet to the Point of Beginning'