No preview available
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1.0 Application• GARFIELD COUNTY Building & Planning Department 108 8th Street, Suite 401 Glenwood Springs, Colorado 81601 Telephone: 970.945.8212 Facsimile: 970.384.3470 www_„:,garfi el d-cou nty. com c( -i0 -o7 SUBDIVISION APPLICATION (CHECK THE BOX THAT APPLIES) ❑ SKETCH PLAN (optional) • CONSERVATION SUBDIVISION IX PRELIMINARY PLAN • PRELIMINARY PLAN AMENDMENT ❑ FINAL PLAT • FINAL PLAT AMENDMENT / CORRECTION PLAT • COMBINED PRELIMINARY PLAN & FINAL PLAT GENERAL INFORMATION (Please print legibly) Y Name of Property Owner: Ce -Mar -Sam Co, LLLP c/o Sam Marquis Mailing Address: 567 Fairfield Lane Telephone: (303 ) 665-2327 City: Louisville State:co Zip Code: 80027 Cell: (72o ) 206-8111 y E-mail address: sammarquisjr:U'aol . corn FAX: ( 303) 938-5520 Name of Owner's Representative, if any, (Attorney, Planner, Consultant, etc): Davis Farrar - Western Slope Consulting, LLC Mailing Address: 0165 Basalt Mt Dr City: Carbondale Telephone: (970 ) 963-7172 State: Co Zip Code: 81623 Cell: ( ) y E-mail address: wsconsult ing:sopris , net FAX: ( ) Location of Property: Section 23 Township 7S Range 88W Y Assessor's Parcel Number: 23 _ - 231 - 00 - 279 Practical Location / Address of Property: Cnty Rd 112 Approx_. 1 Mile from the intersection of Cnty Rd 103 Current Size of Property to be Subdivided (in acres): 50.7 r Number of Tracts / Lots Created within the Proposed Subdivision: 2 ,..ge 5 kji&4'fr/7 R� ce nZ Last Revised 92124/08 • GENERAL INFORMATION continued... ➢ Proposed Water Source: Individual Domestic Exempt Well Proposed Method of Sewage Disposal: Individual Sewage Disposal System • Proposed Public Access VIA: Easements: County Rd. 112 Utility: Electric, Gas, Cable TV Ditch: Existing • Total Development Area (fill in the appropriate boxes below): Residential Units f Lots Size (Acres) Parking Provided Single-Famil Du 2 45.7 & 5 4 Multi -Family'' Mobile HomE 01 2 50.7 4 Size Acres 2) Commercial:, (4) Public'. 5) Open Space ! Common Area 0 The following general application materials are required for all types of subdivisions in Garfield County. Application materials that are specific to an individual application type (Conservation Subdivision, Preliminary Plan, etc.) are detailed in Section 5-501 of Article V of the Unified Land Use Resolution (ULUR) of 2008. 1. Submit a completed and signed Application Form, an application fee, and a signed Agreement for Payment form. 2. A narrative explaining the purpose of the application and supporting materials that address the standards and criteria found in Article VII of the Unified Land Use Resolution of 2008. 3. Copy of the deed showing ownership. Additionally, submit a letter from the property owner(s) if the owner is being represented by another party other than the owner. If the property is owned by a corporate entity (such as an LLC, LLLP, etc.) please submit a copy of recorded " Statement of Authority" demonstrating that the person signing the application has the authority to act in that capacity for the entity. Page - 6 • • • 4. Submit a copy of the appropriate portion of a Garfield County Assessor's Map showing the subject property and all public and private landowners adjacent to your property (which should be delineated). In addition, submit a list of all property owners, private and public, and their addresses adjacent to or within 200 ft. of the site. This information can be obtained from the County Assessor's Office. You will also need the names (if applicable) of all mineral interest owners of the subject property, identified in the County Clerk and Recorder's records in accordance with §24-65.5-101, et seq. (That information may be found in your title policy under Exceptions to Title). 5. Vicinity map: An 8 1/2 x 11 vicinity map locating the parcel in the County. The vicinity map shall clearly show the boundaries of the subject property and all property within a 3 -mile radius of the subject property. The map shall be at a minimum scale of 1"=2000' showing the general topographic and geographic relation of the proposed exemption to the surrounding area for which a copy of U.S.G.S. quadrangle map may be used. 6. A copy of the Pre -Application Conference form. 7. Submit 3 copies of this completed application and all the required submittal materials to the Building and Planning Department. Staff will request additional copies once the application has been deemed technically complete. The following section outlines and describes the subdivision processes for the variety of subdivision actions that are govemed by the Board of County Commissioners by the Unified Land Use Resolution of 2008 (U LUR). Please refer to Article V in the regulations themselves for a higher level of detail. I. THE SKETCH PLAN The sketch plan process (more fully defined in Article V, Section 5-301 of the ULUR) is an optional plan review process intended to review at a conceptual level the feasibility and design characteristics of the proposed division of land. The Yield Plan Review process, set forth in Section 5-309, may be combined with Sketch Plan Review for applications proposing Conservation Subdivision. A. Process: The Sketch Plan Review process shall consist of the following procedures and as more fully described in Article V, Section 5-301 of the ULUR: 1. Application 2. Determination of Completeness 3. Evaluation by Director/Staff Review 4. Review by Planning Commission B. Application Materials: The Sketch Plan review process is set forth in Article V, Section 5-301 of the ULUR, Sketch Plan Review and requires the following materials. 1. Application Form and Fees 2. Vicinity Map (5-502(C)(2)) 3. Yield Plan (required for Conservation Subdivision) 4. Sketch Plan Map (5-502(C)(2)) 5. Land Suitability Analysis (4-502(D)) 3 Page - 7 1 r II. THE CONSERVATION SUBDIVISION The Conservation Subdivision (as described in Article V, Section 5-308 of the ULUR) is a clustered residential development option that allows reduced lot size and provides density bonuses in exchange for preservation of rural lands through provision of open space. A Conservation Subdivision shall be designed as a Density Neutral Development Plan or an Increased Density Development Plan. The design standards for each development Plan option are set forth in Article VII, Section 7-501 of the ULUR. A. Process: Conservation Subdivision Review process is the same as the general subdivision process with the addition of the Yield -Plan Review. The overall Conservation Subdivision Process shall consist of the following procedures and as more fully described in Article V, Section 5-301 of the ULUR: 1. Pre -Application Conference 2. Sketch Plan (optional) 3. Yield Plan Review (Can be reviewed concurrently with Preliminary Plan) 4. Preliminary Plan Review 5. Final Plat Review B. Application Materials: The Conservation Subdivision review requires the following application materials that can found more fully described in Article V, Sections 5-502 and 7-501 of the ULUR: 1. Application Form and Fees 2. Sketch Plan (Optional) (5-501(J)) 3. Yield Plan (5-502(CX8)) 4. Preliminary Plan (5-501(G)) 5. Final Plat (5-501(E)) 6. Narrative addressing Design Standards (7-501 through 7-503) III. THE PRELIMINARY PLAN The preliminary plan review process will review the feasibility and design characteristics of the proposed subdivision based on the standards set forth in Article VII, Standards. The preliminary plan process will also evaluate preliminary engineering design. The Director may allow the preliminary plan and the final plat process to be combined if the proposed subdivision has seven (7) parcels or less and development of the lots does not require extensive engineering. Page - 8 A. Process: Preliminary Plan Review process shall consist of the following procedures and as more fully described in Article V, Section 5-303(B) of the ULUR: 1. Pre -Application Conference 2. Determination of Completeness 3. Evaluation by Director/Staff Review 4 • 1 • 4. Public Hearing and Recommendation by Planning Commission 5. Public Hearing and Decision by Board of County Commissioners B. Application Materials: The Preliminary Plan review requires the following application materials as more fully described in Article V, Section 5-502: 1. Application Form and Fees 2. Preliminary Plan Map 3. Yield Plan (Conservation Subdivision only) 4. Open Space Plan, preliminary 5. Open Space Management Plan 6. Landscape Plan (Common Ownership Areas) 7. Impact Analysis 8. Land Suitability Analysis 9. Lighting Plan consistent with standards in 7-305 10.Visual Analysis 11. Preliminary Engineering Reports and Plans a) streets, trails, walkways and bikeways b) engineering design and construction features for any bridges, culverts or other drainage structures to be constructed c) identification and mitigation of geologic hazards d) sewage collection, and water supply and distribution system e) Erosion and Sediment Control Plan f) Water Supply Plan g) Sanitary Sewage Disposal Plan 12. Draft Improvements Agreement, Covenants and Restrictions and By-laws IV. THE PRELIMINARY PLAN AMENDMENT Any proposal to change a preliminary plan approved under these Regulations shall require application to the Director for Amendment of an Approved Preliminary Plan. The Director shall review the application to determine whether the proposed change constitutes a substantial modification to the approved plan as more fully described in Article V, Section 5- 304. (A substantial modification is defined as a Substantial Change in Article XVI: Definitions) A. Outline of Process. The review process for a proposed Amendment of an Approved Preliminary Plan shall consist of the following procedures. 1. Pre -Application Conference 2. Application 3. Determination of Completeness 4. Evaluation by Director/Staff Review 5. Decision by Director B. Application Materials: The Preliminary Plan Amendment review requires the following application materials as more fully described in Article V, Section 5-501(H): Page - 9 5 • 1. Application Form 2. Written Statement of proposed amendment(s) 3. Supporting documents necessary to evaluate the proposed revision(s) V. THE FINAL PLAT REVIEW Unless otherwise provided by these Regulations, the applicant must receive preliminary plan approval before beginning the final plat process. The final plat review is to formally finalize the actions resultant from the preliminary plan in order to complete the subdivision process. A. Outline of Process. The Final Plat Review process shall consist of the following procedures: 1. Application 2. Determination of Completeness 3. Evaluation by Director/Staff Review 4. Review and Action by Board of County Commissioners 5. Recordation of Plat B. Application Materials: The Final Plat review requires the following application materials as more fully described in Article V, Section 5-502: 1. Application Form and Fee 2. Final Plat 3. Final Engineering Reports and Plans a) Streets, trails, walkways and bikeways b) Engineering design and construction features for any bridges, culverts or other drainage structures to be constructed c) Mitigation of geologic hazards d) Sewage collection, and water supply and distribution system e) Soil suitability information f) Groundwater drainage g) Erosion and Sediment Control Plan (4-602 C. 4.) h) Final cost estimates for public improvements i) The certification listing all mortgages, liens judgments, easements, contracts, and agreements of record regarding the land to be platted and the Board of County Commissioners may require, at its discretion, that the holders of such mortgages, liens, judgments, easements, contracts or agreements shall be required to join in and approve the application for Final Plat approval before such Final Plat is accepted for review. All other exceptions from title shall be delineated. 4. Landscape Plan (Common Area) (4-602 5.) 5. Open Space Plan (if applicable) 6. Open Space Management Plan (If applicable) Page - 10 6 • • s 7. Improvements Agreement, if applicable [include record drawings in digital format, (4-602 J.)] 8. Letter of Intent for service from all of the utility service providers a) Contract for Service, required prior to Final Plat recordation. 9. Final Declarations of Covenants and Restrictions, HOA articles of incorporation and bylaws 10. Final Fees to be paid (School -Land Dedication / Traffic Impact Fees) VI. THE FINAL PLAT AMENDMENT / CORRECTION PLAT REVIEW The purpose of the Final Plat Amendment review is to allow for certain amendments to an approved Final Plat. An amendment may be made to a recorded Final Plat if such amendment does not increase the number of subdivision lots or result in a major relocation of a road or add one or more new roads (pursuant to Section 5-306). A correction can be made to a recorded plat in order to correct an engineering error, mislabeling issue, etc. that does not affect the substance of the plat. A. Outline of Processes. The review processes for amending a Final Plat or an Exemption Plat shall consist of the following regardless of whether the division was initially approved as a subdivision or an Exemption: 1. Four (4) Subdivision Lots: The Administrative Review Process, detailed in Section 4-104 of Article IV, shall be used for review of a request to amend or correct a Final Plat modifying lot lines, building envelopes, easement locations or other interests affecting up to four (4) subdivision lots. An Amended Final Plat or an Amended Exemption Plat which modifies lot lines or easements affecting not more than two (2) adjacent lots or Exemption Lots or a single building envelope shall be subject to the Administrative Review Process set forth in Section 4-104 of Article IV, with the addition of presentation of the Amended Plat to the Board of County Commissioners for signature, prior to recording with the Office of the Clerk and Recorder. 2. More Than Four Lots: The Major Exemption Review Process, detailed in Section 5-403, shall be used to amend a Final Plat or an Exemption Plat modifying lot lines, building envelopes, easement locations or other interests affecting more four (4) subdivision lots or Exemption Lots. An Amended Final Plat which modifies lot lines or easements affecting more than four (4) subdivision lots or more than one (1) building envelope shall be subject to the Major Exemption Review Process set forth in Section 5-403. B. Application Materials: The Final Plat Amendment / Corrected Plat review requires the following application materials as more fully described in Article V, Section 5-502: 1. Application Form and Fee 2. Preliminary Plan (5-501(G)) Page - 11 7 s 3. Final Plat, Amended Final Plat 4. Subdivision improvement Agreement, if necessary The Director may allow the Preliminary Plan and the Final Plat process to be combined if the proposed subdivision has seven (7) parcels or less and development of the lots does not require extensive engineering. (Section 5-303) No submittal of a combined application shall be allowed until the Director has made a determination after holding a pre -application conference. I have read the statements above and have provided the required attached information which is correct and accurate to the best of my knowledge. /1441 (Signature of Property O>6Srner) Page - 12 8 MP Y/0 ,g Date • GARFIELD COUNTY BUILDING AND PLANNING DEPARTMENT PAYMENT AGREEMENT FORM (Shall be submitted with application) GARFIELD COUNTY (hereinafter COUNTY) and Ce -Mar -Sam Co, LLLP Property Owner (hereinafter OWNER) agree as follows: 1. OWNER has submitted to COUNTY an application for Prel iminary Plan (hereinafter, THE PROJECT). 2. OWNER understands and agrees that Garfield County Resolution No. 98-09, as amended, establishes a fee schedule for each type of subdivision or land use review applications, and the guidelines for the administration of the fee structure. 3. OWNER and COUNTY agree that because of the size, nature or scope of the proposed project, it is not possible at this time to ascertain the full extent of the costs involved in processing the application. OWNER agrees to make payment of the Base Fee, established for the PROJECT, and to thereafter permit additional costs to be billed to OWNER. OWNER agrees to make additional payments upon notification by the COUNTY when they are necessary as costs are incurred. 4. The Base Fee shall be in addition to and exclusive of any cost for publication or cost of consulting service determined necessary by the Board of County Commissioners for the consideration of an application or additional COUNTY staff time or expense not covered by the Base Fee. If actual recorded costs exceed the initial Base Fee, OWNER shall pay additional billings to COUNTY to reimburse the COUNTY for the processing of the PROJECT mentioned above. OWNER acknowledges that all billing shall be paid prior to the final consideration by the COUNTY of any land use permit, zoning amendment, or subdivision plan. PROPERTY OWNER (OR AUTHORIZED REPRESENTATIVE) Sam Marquis for Ce -Mar -Sam Co, LLLP Print Name Mailing Address: Page - 13 567 Fairfield Lane /0749 Date Louisville, CO 80027 Page 4 Marquis Subdivision Preliminary Plan Application Prepared by: Western Slope Consulting LLC 0165 Basalt Mt. Drive Carbondale, CO 81623 970-963-7172 wsconsultin1 sopris.nct November 9, 2009 NOV 1 62009 GAR9,_.; a COUNTY BUILDING & PLANNING • • Table of Contents Item Page Application Submittal Letter 4 Garfield County Subdivision Application Form 5 Agreement For Payment Form 13 Authorization Letter 15 Ce -Mar -Sam, LLLP Authorization Letter(s) 16 Pre -Application Conference Report 19 Ce -Mar -Sam Partnership Agreement 21 Vicinity map 27 Application Description 28 Compliance with Zone District Use Restrictions 28 Compliance with Comprehensive Plan 29 Compatibility 31 Sufficient Legal & Physical Source of Water 31 Sanitary Sewage Disposal Plan 37 Land Suitability Analysis 42 Impact Analysis 52 Garfield County Assessor Ownership Map 54 Traffic 69 Erosion Control Plan 74 Project Phasing Schedule 90 Lighting Plan 90 Visual Analysis 90 School Dedication 90 Existing Permits 90 Page - 2 • • • Title Commitment 90 Appendix A - Wildlife & Ecological Assessment And Weed Plan 100 Appendix B - Geotechnical Investigation 145 Separate Preliminary Engineering Reports & Plans Submittal with application Separate Preliminary plan submittal with application Page - 3 • Application Submittal Letter • • November 9, 2009 Mr. Fred Jarman Garfield County Planning Director 108 8th Street, Suite 401 Glenwood Springs CO 81601 Dear Mr. Jarman: I am pleased to submit herewith a Preliminary Plan application for the Marquis Subdivision This application conforms to the requirements of Articles IV, V, and VII of the Garfield County Unified Land -Use Regulations and the Garfield County Comprehensive Plan for Study Area 1. The Marquis Subdivision is designed to create one new five -acre lot out of the existing 50.07 acre property to be occupied by members of the family. The new lot is laid out to fit the characteristics of the site in a manner that protects the site's natural features, provides safe access and offers a quality living environment. I look forward to reviewing this application with the County at the earliest convenience. After the submittal has been deemed technically compliant, please schedule the application with the planning commission. If you have any questions about the application, please do not hesitate to contact me at (970-963-7172) wsconsulting(a),sopris.net . Page - 4 Sincerely, Davis Farrar Western Slope Consulting LLC Demonstration of both production capability and water quality from the new well will be made at the time of Final Plat application. This evidence will be submitted in conformance with Article 7-104 B of the Garfield County Unified Land -Use Resolution of 2008 (ULUR). In conformance with the staff interpretation of the ULUR for demonstrating the likelihood of an adequate water source in conjunction with a preliminary plan application, the following evidence from the Colorado Division of Water Resources Aqua Maps show that there are wells within 1/4 mile of the site that produce at least 5 gallons/minute water production. Wildflower Enterprises, LLC - Well Yield 15 GPM AQUAMAP Colorado Division of Water Resources Department of created Natural Resources M;3. • Wa Page - 33 MAP NAVIGATION �, ` CCIIJ mole Infittmde UTM X. Zone 13: 312318 UTM V Zone 13:4367726 Long. -107' 10' 51 V' Lat 39' 26' 19.1" UTM and GeographiciLL) coordinates In NAD 83 DATA DISPLAY C3 Background El Counties ' 2005 Aerials • LEI PLSS E] Roads CV Low O High Hydrography L Water Well Appllca ❑ DWR Parcels ID EPA Well Notiticat, ❑ Oil/Gas Well Local. Transparency L County Parcels (No Public Access) More Data 1 LOCATION ▪ Section Township Range Meridian 23V1 17 •i S.•1 88 1VJlwSiathY�i PLSS Locator l Quick Zoom ] Spacing PRINTING Output Scale Page Size User 5,479 Y1 8 5x11 IIII -ddre55 locator A0ualvlap Version 3,0 1 July 5. Title Create PDF DATA ENTRY Authorized Users Only CDSS Irrigated Acres DETAILS Name: WILDFLOWER ENTERPRISES LLC Receipt: 0373454 Permit: 181908 Permit Suffix: Use 1: H Permit Replace: Use 2: Aquifer: GW Use 3: Activity Code: NP WDID: Yield: 15 Depth: 150 Accuracy: Spotted from section lines property. The closest river is the Roaring Fork River approximately 1.7 miles to the south and Cattle Creek lies approximately 1.8 miles to the north. Drainage Features. There are no significant existing drainages or water impoundments on the property. Water generally sheet flows to the south across the property and through the meadows. Generally, the water infiltrates into the soil before it leaves the site. Water. Historic irrigation consists of the Park Ditch that traverses the northern and westerly portions of the original parcel. There are a couple of lateral irrigation ditches that deliver flood irrigation to the meadow on the property. Irrigation water in existing property includes three shares of the Park Ditch. A proportionate share of the water will remain available to the new five -acre lot. The ownership partners will be negotiating the detailed terms and conditions of the allocation of these water shares. It is anticipated that a final resolution of the water allocation will be made at the time of final plat. Floodplain. There are no flood plains or flood fringe delineations on or near the property. Soils. The following soils information was obtained from the Natural Resources Conservation Service for the subject property. There are no significant development constraints or percolation constraints on the site. Additionally a geotechnical report completed by CTL Thompson Inc. is included as Appendix B in this application. There are no conditions that exist on the property that would preclude subdivision or development of the site. W26'I Page - 43 Hydrodoge Sod Croup--ASten+3so aen Area, Cdoted°, Pada o(Eegle, Gsrield, and Pitkin C000000 (09021.0400040) 18 Y 30660 Yap aue_ 1329.0 Opn10011...0 @s[ n?entt were a 50 103 200 300 I:tiDA MU,*Resour[ee MIMI Conservation Service 260 500 1010 reed 1200 0 Web Sod Survey Nation* CocperW 5e Sae Save , R b 8 100)2009 P No1054 WESTERN SLOPE CONSULTING LLC March 16, 2010 Kathy Eastley, AICP Senior Planner Garfield County Building & Planning 108 8th Street, #401 Glenwood Springs, CO 81601 Dear Kathy: I am requesting with this letter a continuation of the public hearing on the Marquis Subdivision to the April 14, 2010 Planning Commission meeting. Additional information and a clarification of issues have been requested. The continuation will allow adequate time for the applicant to submit the material to the County staff for review in advance of that hearing. I will attend the March 24, 2010 hearing to provide proof of publication and document proper notice, so the hearing can be opened and continued. Please let me know if you have any questions or if you need any additional materials. Sincerely, Davis Farrar Project Planner Cc: Sam Marquis, Karl Hanlon 0165 BASALT MT DR • CARBONDALE, COLORADO • 81623 PHONE: 970-963-7172 • FAX: 970-963-7172 L WESTERN SLOPE CONSULTING LLC March 25, 2010 Kathy Eastley, AICP Senior Planner Garfield County Building & Planning 108 8th Street, #401 Glenwood Springs, CO 81601 Dear Kathy: In response to the requirement of the Planning Commission and in conjunction with the continued March 24th public hearing on the Marquis Subdivision Preliminary Plan, I offer the following waiver of timelines. I Davis Farrar representing Ce -Mar -Sam Co, LLLP and the Marquis Subdivision hereby waive any applicable timelines specified in the Garfield County Unified Land Use Resolution of 2008, as amended and in the Colorado Revised Statutes for scheduling and/or conducting a public hearing before the Garfield County Planning Commission and/or the Board of County Commissioners for the subdivision application for Ce -Mar -Sam Co, LLLP. Please let me know if you have any questions or if you need any additional information. Sincerely, Davis Farrar Project Planner Cc: Sam Marquis, Karl Hanlon 0165 BASALT MT DR • CARBONDALE, COLORADO • 81623 PHONE: 970-963-7172 • FAX: 970-963-7172 1111 MI P r riili\RI, T 'i' C I41#1CMI AI1iii,IN1i 11111 Reception#: 781381 02/01/2010 11:48:56 AM Jean Alberico 1 of 1 Rec Fee:$6.00 Doc Fee:0.00 GARFIELD COUNTY CO STATEMENT OF AUTHORITY Pursuant to C.R.S. §38-30-172, the undersigned hereby executes this Statement of Authority on behalf of Ce -Mar -Sam Co, LLLP a, Limited Liability Limited Partnership an entity other than an individual, capable of holding title to real property (the "Entity"), and states as follows: The name of the Entity is Ce -Mar -Sam Co, LLLP a Colorado Limited Partnership (state type ofcntity and state, country, or other governmental authority under whose laws such entity is formed) The mailing address for the Entity is 567 Fairfield Lane, Louisville, CO 80027 The name or position of the person authorized to execute instruments conveying, encumbering, or other affecting title to real property on behalf of the Entity is: Samuel Austin Marquis Jr. The lirnitations upon the authority of the person named above or holding the position described above to bind the Entity are as follows: All authority and actions associated with processing a subdivision Preliminary Plan and Final Plat with Garfield County, CO. (if no (imitations, insert "None") Other matters concerning the manner in which the Entity deals with any interest in real property are: EXECUTED this f 1+% day of January (if no other matters, leave this section blank) , 2010 Signature: Name (typed or printed): Title (if any): STATE OFC I-11rvg,-Ch(- ) t� ) ss. COUNTY OF N¢.td r iG•w� ) The foregoin instrument w acknowledged before me this f ( day of - t' -r ID by Cie-, ,onbehalfof L L L I.:, `i c, ':, [ e.(„ Witness my band and official seal. My commission expires: kii j 31 i c) -a ]o [SEAL] DPW 116 02/07/02 Notary Public 411 SCOTT SANCHO Notary Public State of Connecticut Commission Expires Ju 31, 2010 • • COLORADO GEOLOGICAL SURVEY SUBMITTAL FORM FOR LAND -USE REVIEWS County Garfield Project Name Marquis Subdivision Name Date 10/13/09 APPLICANT (or Applicant's Authorized Representative responsible for paying CGS -review fee) Ce -Mar -Sam Co, LLLP Address 567 Fairfield Lane Louisville, CO 80027 Ph. No. 303-938-5534 Fax No. 303-938-5520 114112, 0,1,41/4 NE 1 / 4 , NE Section(s) 2 3 Township 7S Range 8 8W DecLatN39°26' 17' Dec Long W107° 10' 5 1/4 FEE SCHEDULE (effective June 1, 2009) Reviews for Counties Small Subdivision (> 3 dwellings and < 100 acres) $950 Large Subdivision ( 100 acres and < 500 acres) .. $1,550 Very Large Subdivision (500 acres or more) $2,500 Very small residential subdivisions (1-3 dwellings and < 100 acres) $600 Reviews for Municipalities At hourly rate of reviewer Special Reviews At hourly rate of reviewer School Site Reviews $855 CGS LAND USE REVIEWS Geological studies are required by Colorado counties for all subdivisions of unincorpo- rated land into parcels of less than 35 acres, under State statute C.R.S. 30-28-136 (1) (i) (Senate Bill 35, 1972). Some Colorado municipalities require geological studies for sub- division of incorporated land. In addition, local governments are empowered to regu- late development activities in hazardous or mineral -resource areas under C.R.S. 24-65.1- 101 et seq. (House Bill 1041, 1974) and C.R.S. 34-1-301 et seq. (House Bill 1529, 1973), respectively. Local -government agencies submit proposed subdivision applications and supporting technical reports to the Colorado Geological Survey "...for evaluation of those geologic factors which would have significant impact on the proposed use of the land/' in accor- dance with State statutes. The CGS reviews the submitted documents and serves as a technical advisor to local -government planning agencies during the planning process. Since 1984, the CGS has been required by law to recover the hill direct cost of perform- ing such reviews. The adequate knowledge of a site's geology is essential for any development project. It is needed at the start of the project in order to plan, design, and construct a safe devel- opment. Proper planning for geological conditions can help developers and future owners/users reduce unnecessary maintenance and/or repair costs. Colorado Geological Survey, 1313 Sherman Street, Room 715, Denier, CO 60203 • Ph: 303-866.2611, Fax: 303866-2461 4tpJlgeosurvey. slate, co.us Pae- 14 1.9" created 3116198. revised 4123.09 • • Authorization Letter CE -MAR -SAM CO. LLLP October 14, 2009 Mr, Fred Jarman Garfield County Planning 108 86 St., Suite 201 Glenwood Springs, Colorado 81601 Dear Mr. Jarman: 1 the undersigned, Samuel A. Marquis, Jr., authorized agent for Ce -Mar -Sam Co. LLLP with this letter consent to and authorize the processing of a Subdivision Preliminary and Final Plan application for the Marquis Subdivision before Garfield County, Colorado, by Davis Farrar of Western Slope Consulting LLC, Carbondale, Colorado. Further, Mr. Farrar is to represent our interests in processing this application. Yours truly, j A. /-7 171/7.,7", Samuel A. Marquis, Cc: Davis Farrar - Western Slope Consulting LLC Austin Marquis Page - 15 567 FAIRFIELD LANE • LOUISVILLE, COLORADO .80027 • PHONE: 303-665-2327 • • Ce -Mar -Sam Co, LLLP Authorization Letter CE -MAR -SAM CO. LLLP October 14, 2009 Mr. Fred Jarman Garfield County Planning 108 8th St., Suite 201 Glenwood Springs, Colorado 81601 Dear Mr. Jarman: I the undersigned, Samuel A. Marquis, Jr., am the authorized agent for Ce -Mar -Sam Co. LLLP with regard to the subdivision of the Ce -Mar -Sam Co. LLLP property. This letter represents consent and authorization from the other members of the Partnership for me to handle the affairs and represent all interests associated with a Subdivision Preliminary and Final Plan application for the Marquis Subdivision with Garfield County, Colorado. Yours truly, ' 7(( /vl Samuel A. Marquis, Jr. Celia Marie Snapp — Dated this day of 2009 Marcia Pierson Marquis — Dated this day of 2009 Page - 16 State of County of The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this (date) by (Name) (Notary's official signature) (Commission expiration date) 567 FAIRFIELD LANE • LOUISVILLE, COLORADO. 80027 • PHONE: 303-665-2327 • CE -MAR -SAM CO. [ALP October 14, 2009 Mr. Fred Jarman Garfield County Planning 108 8dSt., Suite 201 Glenwood Springs, Colorado 81601 Dear Mr. Jarman: 1 the undersigned, Samuel A. Marquis. Jr., am the authorized agent for Ce -Mar -Sam Co. LLLP with regard to the subdivision of the Ce -Mar -Sam Co. 1.1.1.,P property. This letter represents consent and authorization from the other members of the Partnership for me to handle the affairs and represent all interests associated with a Subdivision Preliminary and Final Plan application for the Marquis Subdivision with Garfield County, Colorado. Yours truly, Samuel A. Marqnis, Jr. Celia Marie Snapp — Dated this day of 2009 do,./ Marcia Pierson Marquis — Dated th is 10Sday of 2009 State of C3 -r" County of ‘\ ve(' The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this (date) by iTttA c„; c, e -Siff\ (Name) otary's official signature) t Official Soot 1E GARRETSON ubi+C - Connecticut My Commission • Juno 30, 2013 (Comnissiod ex iration date) 567 FARM D LANE • LOUISVILLE, COLORADO • 80027 • P1 IONE: 303-665-2327 Page - 17 CE -MAR -SAM CO. LLLP Mr. Fred Jarman Garfield County Planning 108 8`h St., Suite 201 Glenwood Springs, Colorado 81601 Dear Mr. Jarman: 1'191.009 October 15, 2009 1 the undersigned, Samuel A. Marquis, jr., am the rintliOri'ited 'agent: for Ce -Mar -Sam Co. LLLP with regard to the subdivision of the Ce-tvlar-Sam Co. LLLP property. This letter represents consent and authorization from the other members of the Partnership for me to handle the affairs and represent all interests associated with a Subdivision Preliminary and Final Plan application for the Marquis Subdivision with Garfield County. Colorado. Yours truly, Samuel A. Marquis. Jr. re*Noto..., Celia Marie Marquis - Dated this day of 2009 Marcia Pierson Marquis - Dated this day of 2009 Page - 18 State of County of, The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this (date) by (Commission expiration date) 567 FAIRFIELD LANE • LOUISVILLE, COLORADO • 80027 • PF1ONE: 303-665-2327 • • • GARFIELD COUNTY Building & Planning Department 108 8"' Street, Suite 401 Glenwood Springs, Colorado 81601 Telephone: 970.945.8212 Facsimile: 970.384.3470 www.garfieid-county.com PRE -APPLICATION CONFERENCE SUMMARY TAX PARCEL NUMBER : 239323100279 APPLICANTS PLANNER: Davis Farrer PROJECT: Two lot Subdivision OWNER: CE MAR SAM CO. LLLP PRACTICAL LOCATION: 955 CR 112 TYPE OF APPLICATION: Preliminary Plan DATE: May 8, 2009 L GENERAL PROJECT DESCRIPTION Two lot subdivision of a 5o.7 -acre parcel subdivide into a 4.7 - acre lot and 43 -acre lot in the Rural Zone District. SF home exists on site, new lot will have frontage on CR 112. Well permit in process for new lot/existing permit on SF home. II. REQUIRED REGULATORY PROVISIONS Garfield County Unified Land Use Resolution Sections: Article IV (4-101 thru 4-103) General Review Process and Common Review Procedures for all land use change applications. Article V 5-303 Preliminary Plan Review (process) 5-501 G Preliminary Plan (listing of submittal requirements) 5-502 Description of Submittal Requirements Page - 19 Article VII — Divisions, through 4 • • • Comprehensive Plan Designation - Medium (6< 10 acidu) Analysis of Goals, Objectives and Policies 111. REVIEW PROCESS A. Outline of Process. The Preliminary Plan Review process shall consist of the following procedures: 1. Application 2. Determination of Completeness 3. Evaluation by Director/Staff Review 4. Public Hearing and Recommendation by Planning Commission 5. Public Hearing and Decision by Board of County Commissioners Public Hearing(s): Planning Commission Board of County Commissioners Referral Agencies: See attached form - other agencies may be required based upon review of the submittal materials IV. APPLISATION REVIEW FEES Planning Review Fees: $ 675 Referral Agency Fees: $ 590 Total Deposit: $ 1,265 (additional hours are billed at hourly rate of $40.50 hr) GerteeraLApp k tion Processing Planner reviews case for completeness and sends to referral agencies for comments. Case planner contacts applicant and sets up a site visit. Staff reviews application to determine if it meets standards of review. Case planner makes a recommendation of approval, approval with conditions, or denial to the appropriate hearing body. PissJaimer The foregoing summary is advisory in nature only and is not binding on the County. The summary is based on current zoning, which is subject to change in the future, and upon factual representations that may or may not be accurate. This summary does not create a legal or vested right. Page - 20 Date • Ce -Mar -Sam Partnership Agreement Please include a typed self-addressed envelope MUST BE TYPED FILING FEE: $50.00 MUST SUBMIT TWO COPIES Mail to: Secretary of State Corporations Section 1560 Broadway, Suite 200 Denver, CO 80202 (303) 894-2251 Fax (303) 894-2242 F�r office use only ° frea SlC71t4,9 4 N•9.4 CERTIFICATE OF LIMITED PARTNERSHIP FOR A COLORADO LIMITED PARTNERSHIP liWe the undersigned general partner(s), intending to form a Colorado Limited Partnership under the Colorado Uniform Limited Partnership Act of 1981, execute the following Certificate of Limited Partnership: FIRST: SECOND: The name of the Limited Partnership is CE -MAR -SAM CO. The address in Colorado of the agent for service of process is 0956 112th Road, Carbondale, Colorado 81623 and the name of the registered agent at such address is S. Austin Marquis THIRD: There are at least two (2) partners in the partnership and there is at least one (1) limited partner. FOURTH: The name and business, residence or mailing address of each general partner is: NAME S. Austin Marquis Anne P. Marquis Celia M. Snapp SIGNATURES OF GENERAL PARTNER(S) Page - 21 ADDRESS 0956 112th Road, Carbondale, CO 81623 0956 112th Road Carbondale, CQ 81623 Rte. 2. Sox 3078 Lopez Island, WA 98261 (-1Aulf<, e Please include a typed self-addressed envelope MUST BE TYPED FILING FEE: $50.00 SUBMIT TWO COPIES Mail to: Secretary of State Corporations Section 1560 Broadway, Suite 200 Denver, CO 80202 (303) 894-2251 Fax (303) 894-2242 iLEa For office use only ..CRETAiS Y OF STATE M%� D e 44 REGISTRATION STATEMENT FOR REGISTRATION AS A REGISTERED LIMITED LIABILITY PARTNERSHIP OR A REGISTERED LIMITED LIABILITY LIMITED PARTNERSHIP Pursuant to section 7-60-144, Colorado Revised Statutes, the undersigned partnership* has approved this registration statement in the manner provided in its partnership agreement or, if not so provided, such statement has been approved by all of its general partners as follows: The name of the partnership is CE -MAR -SAM Co. If different, the name which it proposes to register and under which it proposes to transact business in Colorado is CE -MAR -SAM Co. LLLP The jurisdiction of its formation (if other than Colorado) is The street address of its principal office is 0956 112th Road, Carbondale, CO 81623 If the principal office of a general partnership or a foreign limited liability partnership is not in Colorado, the name and street address of its Colorado registered agent for service of process on such general or foreign partnership is Last Name of an individual or full name of an entity First and middle name of an individual Street address of registered agent named above CE -MAR -SAM Co. LLLP Name of partnership By: !U General Partner As used in this statement, partnership refers to a general partnership or a limited partnership formed in Colorado or a foreign limited liability partnership or limited liability limited partnership formed and registered in a jurisdiction other than Colorado. If formed in Colorado, a limited partnership must first or simultaneously file a Certificate of Limited Partnership, and if formed elsewhere, it must also file an Application for Registration as a foreign limited partnership with the Colorado Secretary of State. Page - 22 Revised: 6-95!96 • CONSENT BY PARTNERS TO TRANSFER OF PARTNERSHIP INTERESTS AND APPROVAL OF NEW GENERAL PARTNERS We, the undersigned, being all of the general and limited partners of CE -MAR -SAM CO. LLLP, in accordance with the requirements of Articles 6.1, 8.1, and 8.2 of the Agreement of Limited Partnership dated December 26, 1995, hereby anaanimously consent to the transfers of general partnership interests and limited partnership interests to be made by S. AUSTIN MARQUIS and ANNE P. MARQUIS unto CELIA MARIE MARQUIS, MARCIA PMRSON MARQUIS, and SAMUEL AUSTIN MARQUIS, JR. As required by Article 5.2[c] of the Agreement, we hereby unanimously consent to and approve of the appointment of CELIA MARIE MARQUIS, MARCIA PIERSON MARQUIS, and . SAMUEL AUSTIN MARQUIS, JR. as the new General Partners of CE -MAR -SAM CO., effective • as Ite date of such transfers. S. AUSTIN MARQUIS, as Generaik artner and Limited Partner ANNE P. MARQUIS, asGcPartner and Limited Partner CELIA MARIE MARQUIS, as Limited Partner CU -LA- fr_trevi CIA PIERSON MARQI 44-, /A/4- 0-0 , as L mited Partner SAMUEL AUSTIN MARQ�., as Limited Partner Page - 23 • • r TREVOR TOWNSEND SNAPP, as L nited Partner COLIN SAMUEL SNAPP, as Lintlid Partner ELISA.BE:I"H ANN SNAPP, minor child, Limited Partner By: ��.Q 4 `s\ -- k,c; CELIA MARIE MARQUIS, Parent and Guardian ALEXAND MARIA OSBORNE, minor child, Limited Partner By: & / 'Zia' CIA PIERSON MARQUI area acid Guardian SAMUEL TECUMSEH MARQUIS, minor child, Limited Partner By: 4.1 Ntruzi,01-, SAMUEL AUSTIN MAR ,Parent and Guardian CLAP+TTOON�DESTRY MARQUIS, minor child, Limited Partner By: �"- -`^ 7/4/#21- J, SAMUEL AUSTIN MARQUIS,Paregf 9lnd Guardian Page - 24 • • DESIGNATION OF MANAGING GENERAL PARTNER WE, CELIA MARIE MARQUIS, MARCIA PIERSON MARQUIS, and SAMUEL AUSTIN MARQUIS, JR., as all of the General Partners of CE -MAR -SAM CO. LLLP, hereby make the following designation of Managing General Partner: WHEREAS, Section 5.5 of the Partnership Agreement of CE -MAR -SAM CO. LLLP provides as follows: 1) The General Partners may delegate their day-to-day duties and responsibilities under this Agreement to a managing General Partner; 2) The Managing General Partner will be selected, and may be removed by, majority vote of the General Partners; 3) Upon the selection of a managing General Partner, the General Partners may set forth in writing [a] areas of Partnership business in which the Managing General Partner is to have authority to act on behalf of the Partnership and [b] the limits on the Managing General Partner=s authority; 4) The Managing General Partner agrees to consult and confer with each other General Partner before taking any steps that would effect any substantial matter or change in the ordinary and usual operation or policies of the Partnership=s affairs, it being the intent of General Partners that any important or extraordinary Partnership action will only be undertaken upon majority vote of the General Partners. WHEREAS, the General Partners desire to designate SAMUEL AUSTIN MARQUIS, JR. as Managing General Partner pursuant to Section 5.5 of the Partnership Agreement, and to delegate to him the authority to take the following actions with respect to the partnership property: 1. To deposit money into and withdraw money from partnership accounts at Schwab and Wells Fargo in order to pay partnership expenses incurred in the normal course of operations, including legal fees, accounting fees, state fees and other expenses, and insurance premiums on life insurance policies owned by the partnership. In accordance with the requirements of Section 5.5 of the Partnership Agreement, the Managing General Partner agrees to consult and confer with each • other General Partner before taking any steps that would effect any substantial matter or change the ordinary and usual operation or policies of the Partnership=s affairs. While this designation is in effect, any of the delegated powers may be exercised or action may be taken by the Managing General Partner with the same force and effect as if the delegating General Page - 25 r Partners had personally joined in the exercise of such power or the taking of such action. Dated and signed thisc:Fi day of cJ lA.`y , 2 cznc,') Page - 26 CE -MAR -SAM CO.'LLLP By: r-Q.��►- YYt oma- t 4r. r'r\ CELIA MARIE MARQUIS, General Partner 2U� r c sed • IA PIERSON MARQUIS UQ feral Partner EL AUS IN MARQUIS JR., eneral Partner Page - 27 Marquis Subdivision Vicinity Map • • Application Description The Marquis Subdivision is a simple 2 lot/2 unit subdivision located on County Road 112 approximately 1 mile north of the intersection of County Rd. 103 and County Rd. 112. This application is being processed as a full subdivision because a subdivision exemption was granted a number of years ago on the same property, thereby, eliminating that option to create this lot. The total acreage of the site 50.7 acres. The proposed new lot is 5.0 acres. The larger parcel includes the residence originally owned by the Marquis parents. The existing home is served by a "late registered" well and an individual sewage disposal system (ISDS). Access to the existing home is by a private driveway extending from County Rd. 112. The new lot will be served by a new domestic exempt well and separate driveway access off County Road 112 south of the existing driveway. The new lot will be served by a new ISDS. The lot is being created for a member of the family. Submittal Contents The Marquis Subdivision application is submitted in conformance with the requirements of the Garfield County Unified Land Use Resolution (ULUR) and includes the following information: 1. Application Form and Fees. 2. Vicinity map. 3. Preliminary Plan Map in conformance with the requirements of Articles IV, V, and VII of the Garfield County Unified Land -Use Resolution and the Garfield County Comprehensive Plan for Study Area 1. 4. Open space plan - None proposed. 5. Open space management plan - None proposed. 6. Landscape plan. 7. Land suitability analysis. 8. Lighting plan. 9. Visual analysis. 10. Preliminary engineering reports and plans. Including, but not limited to, driveways, engineering designs, water supply, sewage collection, water supply plan, sanitary sewage disposal plan. 11. Proposed name of the subdivision - Marquis Subdivision. 12. Location, boundaries and legal description of the project - Attached. 13. Names, addresses and phone numbers of the owner(s), applicant(s), planner(s) and engineer(s) - Attached. 14. Date of preliminary plan preparation, map scale and a symbol designating true North - Attached. 15. Topography of the proposed subdivision - Attached. 16. Location and dimensions of all existing and proposed lots, streets, alleys, easements, road rights- of-way, irrigation ditches and watercourses - Attached. Compliance with Zone District Use Regulations. The subject property is zoned "Rural". The new five -acre parcel will meet the minimum two -acre zone district requirement. The remaining 47.5 -acres also exceeds the minimum two -acre zone district size. Lot coverage on both parcels will not exceed the 15% maximum. Any new structure will be 25 feet or Page - 28 • less in height in conformance with the zone district standards. All setbacks will conform to the specified front, rear and side yard setbacks. Compliance with the Garfield County Comprehensive Plan and Interj'overnmental Aj'reements. There are no intergovernmental agreements affecting the subject property. COMPREHENSIVE PLAN DESIGNATIONS: The Marquis Subdivision is located in the 2000 Comprehensive Plan Study Area 1 in the Medium Density Residential Land -Use District. The average project density of 25.35 acres per dwelling unit conforms to the recommended average density range of 6 to less than 10 acres per dwelling unit. HOUSING: The proposed single lot and associated single-family dwelling is compatible with the land use in the area and more specifically with Table 19 that identify single-family housing as "generally compatible use in A/R/RD", now known as the "Rural" zone district. This two lot subdivision is exempt from the Garfield County affordable housing requirements. The new lot will be owned and occupied by the son (and his family) of the original property owner. The housing site has a southern orientation and offers excellent solar access. The future owner anticipates constructing an energy-efficient home that will be designed to fit into the natural characteristics of the site. No architectural plans have been completed at this time. The new structure will be constructed at the base of an existing small hill on the property and will be carefully designed to fit into the existing pinion juniper vegetation. The site will be hidden from the existing home on the property and visual impacts of the polling site will be minimized when viewed from the Northwest, North, Northeast and East. The structure also will be kept on the very edge of the existing open meadow to preserve the natural characteristics of the site and to leave that portion of the property open for potential grazing of horses and/or livestock. TRANSPORTATION: The proposed new lot is located approximately 1.5 miles from Highway 82 East of Carbondale. The closest public transit corridor to the property is Highway 82 and the closest bus stop is the RFTA transit hub located just south of Highway 82 on Highway 133 in Carbondale approximately 3 miles away. No public transportation routes exist in the rural areas in proximity to the property. The single-family lot will generate approximately 9.57 vehicle trips also known as average daily traffic (ADT). This additional traffic load will have a minimum impact on County Road 112, County Road 103 and Highway 82. Vehicle trips generated by the proposed single-family lot will fall well below the 20% CDOT traffic impact analysis threshold at the State Highway 82 intersection. A single driveway will access the new lot thereby minimizing the number of access points. The horizontal spacing of the new driveway intersection from other driveways will minimize any roadway conflicts. The proposed driveway intersection with County Road 112 offers adequate and safe sight distance. There are no existing pedestrian or bicycle access routes on County Road 112, County Road 103 or Highway 82. It does not make sense for this single lot to provide a non -motorized trail from the property to the county road or points beyond because there would be no sidewalks or trails to connect to and such improvements would serve no useful function. RECREATION AND OPEN SPACE: The proposed five -acre lot and the open nature of the property offer the future owners adequate recreation and open space on the property. The open and rural nature of the new lot will maintain and respect for the rural character of the surrounding area. The subject property is approximately 3 miles from the BLM Red Hill Special Recreation Management Area and other recreation amenities in and around Carbondale. Page - 29 IS • These existing recreation opportunities are adequate to support a new single-family lot on the proposed site without overtaxing those facilities or requiring on-site recreation. The subject property does not directly abut BLM lands and therefore cannot offer access to these public lands. OPEN SPACE AND TRAILS: The comments under Recreation and Open Space apply to this section. In addition, a Wildlife and Weed Management Assessment is included as an appendix to the submittal. It is noted in that report that development on this site will have "no effect" on bald eagle -habitat, black bears, greater sage -grouse, and Townsend's Big -eared bat. The analysis similarly found that development on the property "may affect, but is not likely to adversely affect elk, mule deer and raptors. The proposed development will have "no effect on any native vegetation." A noxious weed inventory and control analysis was completed. Some noxious weeds were found on the property primarily in the vicinity of the irrigation ditch. The applicant will utilize chemical, biological and/or mechanical control techniques to manage and/or eradicate the identified noxious weeds on the property. The applicant proposes to only minimally impact the existing pinion juniper vegetation on the new lot by carefully locating the house adjacent to the existing trees. Very few if any live -healthy trees will be removed during construction. Some pruning of the trees will occur to maintain adequate defensible space around the structure. A proposed driveway and septic system will be located in the meadow south of the dwelling unit. All disturbed areas will be revegetated and maintained in a predominantly weed free condition. Development on the property will only minimally impact existing desirable mature vegetation. AGRICULTURE: The general character of the area surrounding the proposed two lot subdivision is rural with some open meadows. Few, if any, bovines are raised on adjoining properties. The predominant agricultural uses in the area are hay crops and horses. The proposed new lot will retain the existing meadow and open land. The site is very compatible with surrounding properties and uses. Development of the site will not `jeyl adversely affect any agricultural uses in the area. C r ,r WATER AND SEWER SERVICES: Va,(/ Central water and wastewater services are not available anywhere near the proposed development. The 491)(6 closest central water/wastewater facilities are in Carbondale approximately 3 miles southwest. The applicant has an approved domestic exempt well permit (Permit #281493). This new well will serve the proposed lot. Wells within a quarter -mile of the proposed new well site all yield amounts greater than 5 gallons per minute production. The proposed septic system on the property is engineered and will meet all of the Garfield County ISDS requirements. Percolation tests and soils analysis have been completed on the property to ensure that the design wastewater system will function properly in the existing soil conditions. These safe and adequate water and wastewater utility services will not adversely impact adjoining wells or water supplies. NATURAL ENVIRONMENT: The proposed subdivision has been designed and the building site located in a manner that respects the natural contours, drainage patterns, vegetation and view sheds on the property. There are no floodplains or natural streams or river corridors on the property. During construction and prior to complete revegetation of the site, drainage and erosion control measures will be implemented to minimize adverse effects of storm water runoff on the site. Natural topographic features on the property will be preserved in all construction will be carefully managed to protect vegetation and natural features from adverse impacts. As noted in the wildlife assessment report, development of the property will have "no affect" or "not likely to adversely affect" wildlife on the property. Page - 30 • • • There are no severe soils, rockfall, floodplain, wetlands, or geotechnical constraints on the property that would preclude or limit development of the site. Air quality impacts will be minimal and will be those associated with a single family dwelling and associated uses. A well-designed energy-efficient home will also minimize the potential adverse air- quality impacts on the site. Air quality impacts will consist of exhaust from two automobiles, small motors associated with lawn mowing, furnace emissions, charcoal grills and like uses. SUMMARY: The Marquis Subdivision will create a single new five -acre single-family lot. The housing type, lot layout, utilities and overall impacts are nominal. The lot size and use is compatible with surrounding rural densities and uses. The approved domestic exempt well should be adequate in terms of both quantity and quality based on well production/quality information from nearby wells. The engineered ISDS is designed based on soil percolation rates and with a maintenance program, will provide effective long-term wastewater treatment for the property. There is adequate area on the lot to place a relocated leach field should that become necessary in the future. There is no central water or wastewater system to serve the property within a reasonable cost effective distance. The Marquis Subdivision conforms to the provisions of the 2000 Garfield County Comprehensive Plan for Study Area 1 and will be a positive addition to the neighborhood. Compatibility. The large lot configuration, single-family use, ample open space and careful site design of the Marquis Subdivision will not result in an adverse impact to adjacent land. Support for this representation is noted above in the section on the comprehensive plan as well as other sections of this application. Su acient Le ' al and sical Source o Water. Water to serve the ew lot i o be supplied from a new domestic exempt well (Permit #281493). The new well with a m. ' • pumping rate of 15 gallons per minute, is anticipated to draw water from sources tributary to t Roaring Fork River. The new well will provide water for up to three single- family dwellings, w ering of poultry, domestic animals and livestock and irrigation of not more than 1 acre of home gard- s and lawns. A portion of the irrigation rights associated with the original 50.7 acre property will be c nveyed to the new lot to supplement outside irrigation. Page - 31 By EXPIRATION DATE 08-20-2011 , Form No. GWS -25 APPLICANT OFFICE OF THE STATE ENGINEER COLORADO DIVISION OF WATER RESOURCES 818 Centennial Bldg., 1313 Sherman St., Denver, Colorado 80203 (303) 866-3581 LIC WELL PERMIT NUMBER 281493 DIV. 5 WD 38 DES. BASIN MD SAMUEL AUSTIN MARQUIS JR 567 FAIRFIELD LANE LOUISVILLE, CO 80027- (303) 938-5534 PERMIT TO CONSTRUCT A WELL APPROVED WELL LOCATION GARFIELD COUNTY NE 1/4 NE 1/4 Section 23 Township 7 S Range 88 W Sixth P.M. DISTANCES FROM SECTION LINES 805 Ft. from North 424 Ft. from East Section Line Section Line UTM COORDINATES (Meters,Zone:13,NAD83) Easting: Northing: ISSUANCE OF THIS PERMIT DOES NOT CONFER A WATER RIGHT CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL 1) This well shall be used in such a way as to cause no material injury to existing water rights. The issuance of this permit does not ensure that no injury will occur to another vested water right or preclude another owner of a vested water right from seeking relief in a civil court action. 2) The construction of this well shall be in compliance with the Water Well Construction Rules 2 CCR 402-2, unless approval of a variance has been granted by the State Board of Examiners of Water Well Construction and Pump Installation Contractors in accordance with Rule 18. 3) Approved pursuant to CRS 37-92-602(3)(b)(II)(A) as the only well on a tract of land of 46.51 acres described as that portion of the NE 1/4 of the NE 1/4, Sec. 23, Twp. 7 South, Rng. 88 West, 6th P.M., Garfield County, more particularly described on the attached exhibit A. 4) The use of ground water from this well is limited to fire protection, ordinary household purposes inside not more than three (3) single family dwellings, the watering of poultry, domestic animals and livestock on a farm or ranch and the irrigation of not more than one (1) acre of home gardens and lawns. 5) The pumping rate of this well shall not exceed 15 GPM. 6) The return flow from the use of this well must be through an individual waste water disposal system of the non -evaporative type where the water is returned to the same stream system in which the well is located. 7) This well shall be constructed not more than 200 feet from the location specified on this permit. NOTE: Parcel Identification Number (PIN): 23-2393-231-00-279 NOTE: Assessor Tax Schedule Number: R111625 (totaling 50.7 acres) } APPROVED DMW State Eng ,Receipt No. 9503278C -401 DATE ISSUED 08-20-2009 Page - 32 • • Demonstration of both production capability and water quality from the new well will be made at the time of Final Plat application. This evidence will be submitted in conformance with Article 7-104 B of the Garfield County Unified Land -Use Resolution of 2008 (ULUR). In conformance with the staff interpretation of the ULUR for demonstrating the likelihood of inadequate water source in conjunction with a preliminary plan application, the following evidence from the Colorado Division of Water Resources Aqua Maps show that there are wells within 1/4 mile of the site that produce at least 5 gallons/minute water production. Wildflower Enterprises, LLC - Well Yield 15 GPM AQUAMAP Colorado Division of Water Resources Department of Natural Resources n tai,.. : trazrns MAP NAVIGATION Rased on work dloped at tire: ttw ann+,carto. Page - 33 A.Odress iccatien Dy Yar:oo Maps Aw'cirvlap Version 3.0.1 July 5, 2009 K.i M i e. Inf0mvde UTM X, Zone 13: 312318 UTM Y. Zone 13:4367726 Long: -107" 10' 51.1" Lai: 39` 26' 19.1" UTM and Geographic(LL) coordinates in NAD 83 DATA DISPLAY Background 0 Counties 0 Water WWI Applica 30As Aesoix ,♦ i PLS$ 0 DWR t'arcetk Low High GI Roads EPA Wall Natiricati 1 0Hydrography 0 OitIGas Well Locati Transparency County Parcets (No PuMic Accessi_ , More Data LOCATION Section Township 3 Y 7 Y S ? 9s �7 l PLS S Leca for 1 - Quick Z0*01e, PRINTING Output Scan! Page Size 6,479 Y' a 5,01 IP Title Meridian SPactng ,J User DATA ENTRY l Authorized Usara Only j CDS S irrigated Acres DETAILS Name: WILDFLOWER ENTERPRISES LLC Receipt: 0373454 Permit: 181908 Permit Suffix: Use 1: H Permit Replace: Use 2: Aquifer: GW Use 3: Activity Code: NP WDID; Yield: 15 Depth: 150 Accuracy: Spotted from section lines • Helen B. Hotchkiss - Well Yield 10 GPM. AQUAMAP Colorado Division of Water Resources Department of Natural Resources creatctf i> 114,2009 MAP NAVIGATION • 3.250 ft lased 8e ped d? 1-", /1. Gatto 01µh. Page - 34 .,;;1t'iess In Ver: ron by Yahoo Maps 3.0 .1 July b, 2009 -�I I ute. in:7rrooe UTM X, Zone 13: 312362 UTM Y. Zone 13:4367624 Long: -107& 10' 49,1" Lat 3Er 26' 15.9" UTM and Geographic(LL) coordinates in NAD 83 DATA DISPLAY Z Background 0 Countiva 0 Water Well Appeca ED P155 © DWR Parcels 0 Roads EPA Well Notlficae Cl'3 Love 0 High Hydrography 0 O/Bae Well Locaa Transparency C7 County Parcels (No Public,Access) More Data LOCATION ectiran Township„ Range Range Meridian T T S T es 1E pW [sixth ' PLS5 Lo;:ator 1 OuarP room .� Spacin;a ) PRINTING Output Scare Paye Size 5,479 T_1 Ac 11 `'4' Title i. Create PDF User DATA ENTRY i Authorized Users Only J ;; CDSS Irrigated Acres 1 DETAILS Name. HOTCHKISS HELEN B Receipt: 9113818 Permit. 27496 Permit Suffix: Use 1: 8 Permit Replace: Use 2: Aquifer: GW Use 3: Activity Code: NP WDID: Yield: 10 Depth: 250 Accuracy: Spx tted f om section lines • Joel and Cassandra Davenport - Well Yield 15 GPM AQUAMAP Colorado Division of Water Resources Department of Natural Resources IVIAP NAVIGATION • 7.118 fl E.71 n work developed at Ottplimww.carto net. Page - 35 o.flartug irromc,de UTM X. Zone 13: 312360 UTM Y. Zone 13:4367796 Long: -107 10' 49.4' Lat 39' 26' 21.4" , . UTM and GeographiLL) coordinates in NAD 83 DATA DISPLAY 0 Background 0 Counties 0 Water Wen Appnce PLSS 0 DWR Parcels 2005AatiaiN LIP GI EPA Weil Notificatt Low 0 High L.,3 Roads 0 Hydrography 0 OdiGas Well Loess Transparency 0 County Paresis No Public Access!. More Data LOCATION Section Township Range Meridian, r-) 23.1! 7 YYi EC .v.v...ej Lr!! PLSS Locator) Quick Zoom k Spacing PRINTING 1,11t2iOutputeoml S o av Paa57, 1Sizive User Creat PDT DATA ENTRY Authorized Users Only COSS Irrigated Acres DETAILS Name: DAVENPORT CASSANDRA GREIG and JOEL F Receipt 0371385 Permit: 180533 Permit Suffix: Use 1: 11 Permit Replace: Use 2: Aquifer: GW Use 3: . Activity Code: NP W0113; Mzip$ Yield: 16 0 i !iiii!!!!!! 5. 2009 Depth: 130 Accuracy: Spotted from section lines Ce -Mar -Sam Co, LLLP - Well Yield 15 GPM AQUAMAP Colorado Division of Water Resources Department of Natural Resources m.to 2=10. P I:: ivori4 developed M nttp Page - 36 . . . . • 3 0.1 2009 MAP NAVIGATION WCED§it)U: Mode: Intomode UTM X, Zone 13: 312134 UTM Y Zone 13:4367712 Long: -107" 10' 58.8" Lat 39" 26' 18.5" UTM and Geographic(LL) coordinates in NAD 83 DATA DISPLAY 8tvound 0 Counties J Water Weil Applica art LyitZi PLS6 0 DWR Parcels Li Roads 0 EPA Well Notificati ow 0 Mph o Hydrography 0 OiltGas Well Lotter Transparency 0 County Parcels No Pub59).s") MOM DOW LOCATION Section Township Range Meridian 7 V S V 84 V 11W Sixth iV I PLSS ()cater . Quick Zoom J Spacing PRINTING Output scale Page Size .1.2°.41 nue Create PDF User DATA ENTRY . Authorized Users Only COSS ngated Acres ) DETAILS Name: E.MAR-SAM CO LLLP Receipt: 950327813 Permit 281492 Permit rniit SRueffple: Aquifer: GW Activity Cade: NP Yield: 15 Depth: 260 Accuracy: Spotted from section lines Use 1: 8 Use 2: Use 3: WDID: • • • Sanitary Sewage Disposal Plan. Domestic wastewater treatment will be provided by a new (ISDS) located on new lot. BOUNDARIES UNLIMITED INC. Consulting & Civil Engineers Marquis Subdivision ISDS DESIGN AND PERFORMANCE STANDARDS Page 1 of 2 October 8, 2009 The Preliminary Plat Geotechnical Study by CTL -Thompson, Inc. indicated that the soil conditions of the property consist of approximate one foot of topsoil overlying clay with the possibility of encountering cobbles and boulders. Three percolation tests were performed in the proposed location of the septic field on Lot ib. Each test resulted in a percolation rate of 50 minutes/inch. Based on the available information and test results, site conditions are workable for the installation of and engineered ISDS's on each lot. Each ISDS installed within the Subdivision shall comply with the Garfield County ISDS Regulations and the following additional requirements: A. each system shall be designed by a professional engineer registeredin the State of Colorado pursuant to Colo. Rev. Stat. §12-25-111 (1999); B. each system design shall adequately address the soil percolation conditions present at the Lot site, which percolation rates shall be verified through appropriate on-site testing of at least three (3) test pits at least twenty (20) feet apart and within ten (10) feet of the leach field footprint. C. each system shall be designed to adequately service the number of bedrooms within the residence, but no less than three (3) bedrooms; D. the tops of all tanks or risers extending there -from shall be surface accessible to facilitate system maintenance, monitoring and inspections; E. trench segments with at least (6) feet of separation shall be used whenever practically feasible. Monitoring pipes shall be installed at each end of each trench segment (minimum of two monitoring pipes) to allow inspection of field conditions. If a bed must be utilized, a single zone shall be acceptable. If mounding is required to establish (4) feet of suitable soil, a single pressure dosed zone shall be acceptable. If a bed or mound is used, minimum of (2) monitoring pipes shall be installed at ends of the bed or mound; F. absorption fields or trenches shall adhere to minimum setbacks as regulated by the Colorado Department of Health, Guidelines on Individual Sewage Disposal Systems, most recent edition; G. proper mitigation (diversion) of drainage and flood irrigation for the absorption field or trench areas shall be included in the design and construction; 23 Blake Avenue I Suite 102 1 Glenwood Springs I Colorado 81601 1 Ph 970.945.5252 I Fax 970.384.2833 Page - 37 • BOUNDARIES Marquis Subdivision • • UNLIMITED INC. ISDS DESIGN AND PERFORMANCE STANDARDS Page 2 of 2 October 8, 2009 Consulting & Civil Engineers H. each system shall be designed with sufficient area specifically allocated for a reserve leach field to ensure that a future replacement is possible. The reserve leach field shall meet the same design criteria as the primary field and shall not be constructed over with driveways, buildings or other permanent structures; and I. discharges from in-house water treatment devices (water softeners, reverse osmosis systems, etc) shall not be disposed of through the ISDS system and septic tanks shall be fitted with an effluent filter. Following ISDS installation, each Owner shall provide the Association and Garfield County Department of Building and Planning with as -built drawings in relation to the other improvements on the Lot, to scale, depicting the location and dimensions of the ISDS facilities including the absorption field and monitoring pipes, all applicable design, operation and maintenance specifications of the system's manufacturer and written certification from the design engineer that the ISDS was installed in conformance with the requirements above stated and all applicable design specifications of the manufacturer. In the event the Association fails to properly implement and enforce the design and performance standards set forth in this paragraph, the Board of County Commissioners for Garfield County, Colorado and its duly authorized representatives and agents, shall have all the right to enter upon the property and implement and enforce such standards at the expense of the Association or exercise any other right or power afforded under this Restatement including, but not limited to, the initiation of appropriate proceedings in the District Court for Garfield County, Colorado, to compel enforcement of the same. The provisions of this paragraph shall not be amended or repealed by the Homeowners Association or Lot Owners without the written consent of the Board of County Commissioners for Garfield County, Colorado. 323 Blake Avenue Suite 102 I Glenwood Springs I Colorado 81601 I Ph 970.945.5252 I Fax 970.384.2833 Page - 38 • • • ISDS Management Plan BOUNDARIES Marquis Subdivision UNLIMITED INC. Consulting & Civil Engineers ISDS MANAGEMENT PLAN Page 1 of 3 October 8, 2009 In order to ensure that each ISDS installed within the Subdivision is inspected on a regular basis and properly maintained, the responsibility and authority for such inspection and maintenance shall be vested exclusively within the Association. This management plan is not intended to provide for common ownership of the ISDS(s) or to provide common funding for the construction, repair or replacement thereof, such ownership and responsibility for construction, repair and maintenance to remain with the Owner. A. In accordance with the above, the Association shall: 1. retain at all times, the services of qualified personnel to inspect the ISDS(s) and to perform all maintenance and repairs necessary to ensure that same are installed properly, remain in good operating condition and comply with the performance requirements set forth within the ISDS DESIGN AND PERFORMANCE STANDARDS. 2. inspect the operating components of each ISDS within (30) days of being placed into operation; thereafter, each ISDS shall be inspected every year and the septic tank pumped at the time that the solids (settled and floating) accumulate to a level of -20- 30 percent of the effective capacity of the tank. 3. maintain at all times written or other permanent records documenting the date each ISDS was inspected or tested, the results of such inspections or tests and the extent of all maintenance and/or repairs performed. All documents maintained by the Association pursuant to this provision shall at all times be available for inspection by Lot Owners and/or authorized representatives Garfield County. B. The following provisions shall apply in the event the estimated maintenance or repair costs required of any ISDS exceed in total during any one calendar year, $1000.00: 1. the Association shall give the Lot Owner and Garfield County Department of Building and Planning written notice of the nature and extent of the work necessary, to return the ISDS to good operating condition and/or bring the ISDS System within the performance requirements set forth within the ISDS DESIGN AND PERFORMANCE STANDARDS; and 2. within (10) days of receipt of such notice, Owner shall at his or her own expense submit an application for an ISDS Permit to Garfield County to repair or replace the ISDS; and 823 Blake Avenue Suite 102 I Glenwood Springs I Colorado 81601 I Ph 970.945.5252 Fax 970.384.2833 Page - 39 • • • BOUNDARIES Marquis Subdivision UNLIMITED INC. Consulting & Civil Engineers ISDS MANAGEMENT PLAN Page 2 of 3 October 8, 2009 3. within (30) days of receipt of such Permit, Owner shall at his or her own expense cause to be completed, the repairs set forth within the notice. In the event Owner fails to complete such repairs within this the period to the satisfaction of the Association, the Association shall have the authority, in addition to any other remedy provided within this Restatement, to take any of the following actions: a. to impose against Owner, a fine not to exceed $200.00 for each day in which the ISDS System remains unrepaired; b. to complete on behalf of the Owner the required repairs to the ISDS. All costs included by the Association in connection with the restoration shall be reimbursed to the Association by the Owner of the Lot, upon demand. All un - reimbursed costs shall be a lien upon the Lot until reimbursement is made which may be enforced in accordance with the provisions of this Restatement; and/or C. In the event the Association fails to properly implement and enforce the provisions of this management plan set forth in this Article, the Board of County Commissioners for Garfield County, Colorado and its duly authorized representatives and agents, shall have all the right to enter the Subdivision and implement and enforce such provisions at the expense of the Association or exercise any other right or power afforded under this Restatement including, but not limited to, the initiation of appropriate proceedings in the District Court for Garfield County, Colorado, to compel enforcement of the provisions of this management plan. 0. To encourage the health and longevity of the ISDS system, the Owner shall consider the following; 1. Minimize the amount of water that goes down the drain, the better your system will work. 2. Minimize solids going down the drain. 3. Eliminate garbage disposals or keep the use of garbage disposals to a minimum. 4. Minimize grease and oils that go down the drain. 5. Use lint filters on laundry machine drains. 6. Keep sand and dirt out of the building drain. 7. Avoid flushing sanitary napkins or paper products other than toilet paper. 8. Do not use lye -based drain unclogging chemicals such as Draino, Oven -Off, or other strong cleaning agents 9. Do not put any "root deterrents" down the drain. 823 Blake Avenue I Suite 102 ( Glenwoocl Springs 1 Colorado 81601 1 Ph 970.945.5252 ( Fax 970.384.2833 Page - 40 • • • BOUNDARIES Marquis Subdivision UNLIMITED INC. ISDS MANAGEMENT PLAN Page 3 of 3 October 8, 2009 Conetltir g & Civtl Engineers 10. Do not pour paint thinner, pesticides, paints or photo lab chemicals down the drain 11. Minimize use of chlorine bleach and toilet additives. (from The Septic System Owner's Manual, 2000, Shelter Publications, Inc., Bolinas, CA 92924) E. The provisions of this ISDS MANAGEMENT PLAN shall not be amended or repealed by the Homeowners, Association or Lot Owners without the written consent of the Board of County Commissioners for Garfield County, Colorado. 823 Blake Avenue I Suite 102 I Glenwood Springs I Colorado 81601 I Ph 970.945.5252 I Fax 970.384.2833 Page - 41 • Land Suitability Analysis. Public access to site. Public access to the property historically has been directly off County Road 112. The new Lot 1-B will also access directly off County Road 112 approximately 430 feet south of the historic access. • • EX. GRAVEL DRIVEWAY;' Access to Adjoining Roadways. As noted above, all access is directly to County Road 112 a publicly dedicated roadway. Easements. All easements are noted on the preliminary plan and site plan. The existing easements are prescriptive in nature and apply to the overhead power line and irrigation ditch. These easements do not adversely affect development of the property and do not limit use types or access. Topography and Slope. A small hill in the northerly portion of Lot 1-B is the only topographic feature of note on the new parcel. The balance of the property consists of meadows that gently slope to the south at an average slope of approximately 3%. The remaining portion of the property includes some steeper slopes on the west and northwest. This property will not change from its existing single-family use and the steeper slopes will remain in their natural condition. Significant Natural Features On -Site and Off -Site. They significant natural features on-site are the existing gently sloping pasture/meadow and the Pinon/Juniper covered slopes to the west and north. There are no large water bodies or rivers near the Page - 42 • • • property. The closest river is the Roaring Fork River approximately 1.7 miles to the south and Cattle Creek lies approximately 1.8 miles to the north. Drainage Features. There are no significant existing drainages or water impoundments on the property. Water generally sheet flows to the south across the property and through the meadows. Generally, the water infiltrates into the soil before it leaves the site. Water. Historic irrigation consists of the Park Ditch that traverses the northern and westerly portions of the original parcel. There are a couple of lateral irrigation ditches that deliver flood irrigation to the meadow on the property. Irrigation water in existing property includes three shares of the Park Ditch. A proportionate share of the water will remain available to the new five -acre lot. The ownership partners will be negotiating the detailed terms and conditions of the allocation of these water shares. It is anticipated that a final resolution of the water allocation will be made at the time of final plat. Floodplain. There are no flood plains or floods fringe delineations on or near the property. Soils. The following soils information was obtained from the Natural Resources Conservation Service for the subject property. There are no significant development constraints or percolation constraints on the site. Additionally a geotechnical report completed by CTL Thompson Inc. is included as Appendix B in this application. There are no conditions that exist on the property that would preclude subdivision or development of the site. 39' 36 36' Page - 43 333?l0 Hydrologic Soil Group--Aspen.Gypsum Area, Colorado, Parts of Eagle, Garfield, and Pitkin Counties (09021 -Marquis) 3121011 31y0:1 3 urn 1500 332'60 11 4110 31160 ,11'210 3131m tap saal:S390 marked 01.4[6e t6s•x 11D61eet Mears 0 50 100 200 000 coalaoei0nResources eat 250 500 1000 1500 Web Soil Survey National Cooperative Sail Survey ,fm 01 #a 0 101032009 Page -1014 39 3616' 39.363' • • • Hydrologic Soil Group—Aspen-Gypsum Area, Colorado. Parts of Eagle. Garfield. and Pitkin Counties (09021 -Marquis) MAP LEGEND MAP INFORMATION Area of Interest (AOI) Soils Soli Ratings Q A A10 u EA) ,:o rivl rated ur nut avrafabld Political Features Water Features :erenns and Canals Transportation .� Rails -ti Interklare V lrghways 11' kottreS Mair Roads 1 oral Reads Map Scale. 1:5,290 tr printed on A size 18.5" k 11") sheet. The soli surveys that comprise your AOI were mapped at 124.000. Please rey on the bar scale on each map sheet for accurate map measurements. Source of Map: Natural Resources Conservation Service Web Solt Survey URL• http:Owebsollsurvey nres.usda.gov Coordinate System: UTM Zone 13N NAD83 This product is generated from the USDA-NRCS certified date as of the version date(s) listed below Soil Survey Area: Aspen -Gypsum Area, Colorado. Parts of Eagle. Garfield. and Pitkin Counties Survey Area Data: Version 5. Jun 9. 2008 Date(s) aerial images were photographed: 7/10/2005 The orthophoto or other base map on which the soil fines were compiled and digitized probably differs from the background Imagery displayed on these maps. As a result. some minor shifting of map unit boundaries may be evident. Natural Resources Conservation Service Page - 44 Web Soil Survey 10/8/2009 National Cooperate Sot Survey Page 2 of 4 • • • Hydrologic Soil Group—Aspen-Gypsum Area, Colorado, Parts of Eagle, Garfield, and Pitkin Counties 09021 -Marquis Hydrologic Soil Group Hydrologic Solt Group— Summary by Map Unit — Aspen -Gypsum Area, Colorado, Parts of Eagle, Garfield, and Pitkin Counties Map unit symbol Map unit name Rating Acres in AOI Percent of AOl 35 Empedrado loam, 6 to 12 percent slopes B 8.0 7.8% 36 Empedrado loam, 12 to 25 percent slopes B 54.6 53.7% 43 Forelle-Brownsto complex. 610 12 percent slopes 6 0.4 0.4% 95 Showalter-Morval complex, 15 to 25 percent slopes C 1.0 1.0% 106 Tridell-Brownsto stony sandy looms, 12 to 50 percent slopes, extremely stony B 37.7 37.1% Totals for Area of Interest 101.6 100.0% rte{ Natural Resources Web Soil Survey 10/8/2009 r7+ Conservation Service National Cooperative Soil Survey Page 3 of 4 Page - 45 • • • Hydrologic Soll Group—Aspen-Gypsum Area, Colorado, Parts of Eagle, 09021 -Marquis Garfield, and Pitkin Counties Description Hydrologic soil groups are based on estimates of runoff potential. Soils are assigned to one of four groups according to the rate of water infiltration when the soils are not protected by vegetation, are thoroughly wet, and receive precipitation from long -duration storms The soils in the United States are assigned to four groups (A, B, C, and D) and three dual dasses (A/D, B/D, and C/D). The groups are defined as follows: Group A. Soils having a high infiltration rate (low runoff potential) when thoroughly wet. These consist mainly of deep, well drained to excessively drained sands or gravelly sands. These soils have a high rate of water transmission. Group B. Soils having a moderate infiltration rate when thoroughly wet. These consist chiefly of moderately deep or deep, moderately well drained or well drained soils that have moderately fine texture to moderately coarse texture. These soils have a moderate rate of water transmission. Group C. Soils having a slow infiltration rate when thoroughly wet. These consist chiefly of soils having a layer that impedes the downward movement of water or soils of moderately fine texture or fine texture. These soils have a slow rate of water transmission. Group D. Soils having a very slow infiltration rate (high runoff potential) when thoroughly wet. These consist chiefly of clays that have a high shrink -swell potential, soils that have a high water table, soils that have a claypan or clay layer at or near the surface, and soils that are shallow over nearly impervious material. These soils have a very slow rate of water transmission. If a soil is assigned to a dual hydrologic group (A/D, BID, or C/D), the first letter is for drained areas and the second is for undrained areas. Only the soils that in their natural condition are in group D are assigned to dual Basses. Rating Options Aggregation Method: Dorninant Condition Component Percent Cutoff' None Specified Tie-break Rule: Lower 3. Natural Resources Web Soll Survey 10/8/2009 ✓ Conservation Service National Cooperative Soil Survey Page 4 of 4 Page - 46 • • • Hazards. No geologic hazards exist on-site or adjacent to the site that would preclude development of the property or represent a hazard to the general public. For more detail on geotechnical issues, see the "Soils and Foundation Investigation and Geologic Hazard Evaluation" completed by CTL Thompson identified as Project GS 05406-120 dated September 21, 2009 and attached to this application as Appendix B. Wildfire Hazard. The subject property has a range of wild fire hazard exposure. The majority of the site is a large irrigated meadow with light fuels that would be rated a low hazard. The west and the northerly periphery of Lot 1- A are moderate to steep Pinon/Juniper vegetated hillsides. These edges are rated moderate to severe hazard. These portions of the property will remain undeveloped open space. A large irrigated lawn area around the existing home is low hazard rated. The small hill in the northerly portion of Lot 1-B is covered by Pifion/Juniper vegetation but is an island surrounded by irrigated pasture with light fuels. The small hill has a moderate wild land fire rating but remains isolated within the low hazard rating meadow. The owner of Lot 1-B will comply with the recommendations of the Carbondale and Rural Fire Protection District on wild land fire mitigation measures and will utilize the applicable portions of Colorado State Forest Service brochure "Creating Wildfire -Defensible Zones" no. 6.302. Page - 47 • • • Page - 48 Wildfire Hazard, Garfield County, Colorado = `"""" ""'" es -_ or. "�,s�.m,.. ,,,... .ena C7 '.asp o• ► Garfield Gounly..... ' 7: 77. :t: F. . + . P!TKIN COUNTY • • • Letter from Bill Gavette — Carbondale & Rural Fire Protection District. Page - 49 REDsr tf'• ::;;. 1111 FIRE • EMS • RESCUE October 21. 2009 Davis Farrar Western Slope Consulting. LLC 0165 Basalt Mt Dr, Carbondale, CO 81623 RE: Marquis Subdivision, County Road 112 Dear Davis: 1 have reviewed the site plan for the proposed Marquis Subdivision and would offer the following continents. Access Access to the proposed new lot appears to be adequate off County Road 112. t\ aier Supplies for Fire Protection Water supplies for fire protection would be provided by tanker shuttle. The nearest year round water supply is located at the intersection of County Road 112 and County Road 103. Impact Fees The development is subject to development impact fees adopted by the District. The developer will be required to enter into an agreement with the District for the payment of development impact fees. 'Execution of the agreement and payment of the fees are due prior to the recording of the final plat. Fees are based upon the impact fees adopted by the District at the time the 6D agreement is executed. The current fee for residential development is 5704.00 per unit/lot.( p C LV V Please contact me if you have any questions or if 1 may be of any assistance. Sincerely. Bill Gavette Deputy Chief Carbondale & Rural Fire Protection District. 300 Meadowood Drive • Carbondale. CO 81623 • 970-963-2491 Fax 970-963-0569 • • • Resource Areas. There are no identified protected or registered archaeological, cultural, paleontological and historic sites on or adjacent to this property. The attached letter from John R. Welch PhD and the accompanying search of the Colorado Inventory of Cultural Resources completed by the Colorado Historical Society document this finding. School of liesourec and Environmental Management emit Yet. Email : ',Joke - 77t 2.672n Fax. : 7 8.782.5666 maE= REM 8888 Univcnitty brine -Burnaby. HC Camila V5A IS6 Page - 50 John R. Welch Canada Research Char & Associate Processor Faculty of Arts & Social Scicncet Faculty of Environment Garfield County Planning Department 108 8th Street Suite 401 Glenwood Springs, Co 81601 19 October 2009 Re: Marquis Subdivision—No Adverse Effect on Areas with Archeological, Paleontological or Historical Importance Dear Madame or Sir: This letter presents my finding that the proposed subdivision (approximately 5 -acres located in the NE 1/4, Sec. 23, T. 7 South, R. 88 West) of the family- owned Ce -Mar -Sam Ranch (approximately 51 acres ) located on 112 Road contains no previously identified archeological, paleontological or historical resources. I find, further, that there is little if any potential for the proposed subdivision to affect such areas. These findings are based on the attached communication from the Colorado State Office of Archaeology and Historic Preservation and my personal visits to the Ce -Mar -Sam Ranch. Please contact me if I can offer further information. Sincerely, John R. Welch, PhD, Registered Professional Archaeologist • • • COLORADO HISTORICAL SOCIETY Office of Archaeology and Historic Preservation 1300 Broadway Denver, Colorado 80203 Ur. jc,hn R. Welch Simon Fraser l.Jnivcrsity Department of Anthropology 8888 University Drive Burnaby, I3 C.., Canada \ 5A 156 Re: iaarquis $ua div rain.. File Search No, 15451 ;1 r y, Aar rcqucst, the• Office of :\rchaeol stn and i tistoric Preservation has conducted a search of the Colorado inventor+ of Rcsr,urccs tor the following locations: PM Township Range Section 6th 75 88\\ 23 (N1 /4) f) sites and t) surveys were located in the designated area(s). If information on sites in the project area was found, detailed information follows the summary. If no sites or districts were found, but surveys are known to have leen conducted in the per>fect area, survey information follows the summary. \\'e do not have complete information on surveys conducted in Colorado. and our site files cannot be considered complete because most of the state has not been surveyed for cultural resources. There is the possibility that as vet unidentified cultural resources exist within the proposed unpacr arca, Therefore, to the event there is Federal or State invr,lventent, we recommend that a professional surycy be conducted to identity any cultural resources in the project arca, which are eligible to be listed in the National Register of 13istoric Places. We look forward to consulting with you regarding the effect of the proposed project on any eligible cultural resource in accordance with the \dvison' Council on I listoric Preservation Procedures and the Preservation and Protection of Historic toric and Cultural Resources (36 (:i R NO). Please provide this office kith the results of the cultural ..r .-v for our review c,# l ...:cs.±::u..i adequacy. and compliance with regulations. If you have any questions, please: contact the C)ftice taf .\rehacology and Historic Preservation at (303) 8(3(0-3395 or 3392. Thank you for your interest in Colorado's cultural heritage. Susan M. Collins Deputy State 1 listoric Preservation Office r for Archaeology Information regarding significant archaeological resources is excluded from the Freedom of Inform atiean Act. "therefore, legal locations of these resources trust not be included in documents .for public distribution, Page - 51 • • o ( Impact Analysis. Adjacent Property. The following is the address list of real property owners of land wit n 250 feet i f the subject property and their mailing addresses. Information Obtained from Garfield County Assessor's Record 10/5/09. First JOEL F & CASSANDRA BARBARA 0 & RUDOLPH/VIRGINIA MICHAEL & ROBERTA JOHN TIM & MARCEE STAFFAN & MARCI ROBERT & JOYCE ELEANOR W TRUST RICHARD & KATHY KIRK & LISA ELLEN STEPHEN ASHLEY D MOSHER REVOCABLE TRUST KATHY WEISS NAN • Page - 52 Last GREIG- DAVENPORT PRESTON & SMITH Address 1020 COUNTY ROAD 112 0900 COUNTY ROAD 112 ORTIZ/CUNNIN 840 COUNTY GHAM ROAD 112 NYSTROM HOBBS NORDQVIST RANKIN SPENCE STEPHENSON & WEISS GEBERT WOODS HALLISEY NAEGELE STEPHENSON KELLY PO BOX 1889 769 COUNTY ROAD 112 City St Zip CARS' DALE CO 81623 CARB• PALE CO 81623 CARB • •ALE CO 81623 GLEN OOD SPGS CO 81602 CARB •NDALE CO 81623 Parcel # 239323100364 239323100363 239323100373 239323100182 239323100281 2457 S BAYSHORE COCO T GROVE FL 33133-4751 239323100283 DRIVE 773 COUNTY ROAD 112 PO BOX 111 1609 COUNTY ROAD 112 1217 COUNTY ROAD 112 1219 COUNTY ROAD 112 1041 COUNTY ROAD 112 1104 COUNTY ROAD 112 1609 COUNTY ROAD 112 1022 COUNTY ROAD 112 CARB •NDALE CO 81623 CARB 1 NDALE CO 81623 CARB (NDALE CO 81623 CARB NDALE CO 81623 CARB I NDALE CO 81623 CARB I NDALE CO 81623 CARB I NDALE CO 81623 CARB I NDALE CO 81623 CARBNDALE CO 81623 239323100280 239323100320 239323100174 239314400082 239314400080 239314400079 239314400199 239314300202 239324200339 • FRANK & DONALD Garfield County CE MAR SAM CO. LLLP • • Page - 53 HART & DAWSON PO BOX 12310 COLU BIA SC 29211 239313300059 109 8th St. Suite 300 Glenwo.d Springs CO 81601 County ROW 567 FAIRFIELD LOUIS ILLE CO 80027 239323100279 LANE Garfield County Assessor Ownership Map Marquis Subdivision Ce -Mar -Sam Co, LLLP Property • • Page - 54 Adjacent Land Use. The following map shows the existing use of adjacent property and neighboring properties within a minimum 1,500 foot radius. • Page - 55 • • • Site Features. As noted previously in this application, the site features on the property are described as follows. There are no major rivers, drainages or water bodies on the property. Topographically the West end northwesterly portions of the site consist of moderately steep hillsides ranging between 100 and 300 feet elevation above a large meadow that gently slopes in a southerly direction. There is an existing house and accessory building on the property. The existing residence includes a tennis court, landscaped yard, and a variety of agricultural out -buildings. An existing well is located in the north -central portion of the property near the single-family residence. There is a small hill along the easterly property boundary that rises in elevation approximately 35 feet above the meadow. This hill will serve as a backdrop to the proposed single-family residential structure on the new Lot 1-B and will serve to screen the structure from properties to the north and northeast. Vegetation consists primarily of Pifon/Juniper forest on the hillsides and areas above the meadows. The central feature of the property is a large irrigated meadow with pasture grasses including crested wheat grass, smooth brome, and timothy. The vegetation, wildlife and other ecological characteristics of the property are described in detail in the Wildlife & Ecological Assessment of Residential Development for County Subdivision dated October 28, 2009 completed by Colorado Wildlife Science, LLC and included in this application as Appendix A. The site is located at an elevation 6,782 feet above sea level. The site gets abundant annual sunshine that provides an excellent opportunity for the use of solar energy to minimize the energy impacts of the site. County Road 112 boarders the East side of the property and offers direct access to the entire property. This is also a benefit for fire/emergency access by the fire district and/or sheriffs department. Soil Characteristics. Soil characteristics were described previously in this application and pose no significant limitations to development of the property. Additional detail about soils and geotechnical characteristics of the property are included in Appendix B of this application in the geotechnical analysis completed by CTL Thompson. In summary, there were no soils or geotechnical limitations on the property that would preclude development of the new Lot 1-B for single-family residential purposes. Geology and Hazard. The geologic characteristics of the property and discussion of geotechnical characteristics of the site are described in detail in Appendix B of this application in the geotechnical analysis completed by CTL Thompson. Effect on Existing Water Supply and Adequacy of Supply. As noted previously in this application, a copy of the approved domestic exempt well permit for new Lot 1-B is included in this submittal. The Colorado Division of Water Resources approved and issued this permit under the assumption that there will be no material injury to downstream users. The following is an analysis of the pump test completed by Samuelsson Pump Company and a copy of the pump test results on the existing well on the property. Page - 56 • • • Page - 57 Cameron -Cale Ms. Kathy Eastley, AICP Senior Planner Garfield County Building & Planning 108 8th Street, Suite 401 Glenwood Springs, CO 81601 Dear Kathy: This letter is to inform you that the groundwater production capability, or sustainable yield, of the proposed Sam Marquis 5 -acre parcel subdivision property well (Colorado Division of Water Resources (CDWR] approved well permit 14281493) located at 0956 112th Road in Carbondale, Colorado, is anticipated to be in the 12 to 20 gallon per minute (gpm) range, which would easily meet the water demands of single or multiple family use. This finding is based on the water production at the existing Ce -Mar -Sam Ranch property well (CDWR approved well permit #281492, less than 500 feet from the well #281493 location) of greater than 12 gallons per minute based on a pumping test conducted in August 2007 (see attached August 15, 2007 letter). The sustainable yield of the fractured and weathered basalt bedrock at the Marquis 5 -acre subdivision is expected to be 15-20 gpm based on the 4 -hour pumping test conducted less than 500 feet away. The pumping test at well location #281492 was conducted during the "high water" season, but still given the small (less than 1 ft) drawdown at just under 12 gpm, it is expected that production would never be Tess than 10 gpm even during an extended drought period. There is more than 40 ft of available drawdown and a similar amount will be made available in the new Marquis well. The current well is a great producer and similar water production is expected at the planned Marquis 5 -acre subdivision property well (permit #281493). If you require further information, please contact Davis Farrar at 970-963-7172. Re pectfully Yours, amue A. Marquis, Jr. Assistant Vice -President, Geosciences Senior Manager-Hydrogeologist Registered Professional Geologist: Arizona #29818; California, #5110; Florida #2533, Georgia #1886, Illinois #196001242; Missouri, #0354; Oregon, #1676; Tennessee, #5345; Texas, #10243; Wyoming #2477 5777 Central Avenue, Suite 200, Boulder, CO 80301 P. 303.938.5500 F. 303.938.5520 www.cameron-coie.corm • Page - 58 August 15, 2007 Sam Marquis 0956 County Road 112 Carbondale, Co. 81623 ATTN; Sam On 8/14/07, a well test was conducted on a well on the Marquis Property at 0956 County Road 112. The following information was obtained; Well Depth --- 157' Casing Size 6" Standing water level 1()2.45' Total test time -- 4 Hours Drawdown to 102.9' Production is greater than 12 GPM This test was conducted with the existing 3/4 Hp pump. The well water level recovered back to 102.45' in 5 Minutes. If you have any questions please call me, Raun Samuelson At 970-945-6309. Sincerely; Raun E Samuelson Samuelson Pump Co. P.O. Box 297 • Glenwood Springs, CO 81602 • (970) 945-6309 • Fax (970) 947-9448 Water Systems • Sales, Service & Installation • • • Page - 59 0 4. 4— WELL TEST REPORT Marne Address I L4,- 41 Ta150101143 1Noll Log Depth Cooing Elm Pump 8e5in 1CV, Test Porno Water Level ' 43- 0ravi Down 0+ f•q" V4 PrOduotIon l a cal") 3/4-14° lb C('- 'leo/ • DRAWDOWN . RECOVERY TIME MIN. _ LEVEL GPM TIME . MN. — Lam fon b iCi'..(4, , (0.11 0 OR, r? 1 0 , es , 1 /Ca, `Cr 2 _ • • LZ.:. 3-7. 2 3 4 roa. $0 1 . 4 6 i oa,ti% . 5 n -r,41 1 6 e J 0 Q. ......- 8 ----,' 10 [(1:1 . 9 lirli .15-(6 (nR,Rc 10,11,- 02 . 9 I t_ 12 . 16 20 .2e ' —.3.1' nee 1 02. , 11, r3 30. 40444 /0, 1 .so SO 72, f () GOi'› 1CP,-i $0 30 4 120 -,- *83O 1 OM .9 . 11/0 /02. 5-0 .t 0; .5 . Go /o 1 0A.4 17 o iI)Q.9 O' 1 o2' 'U) j na .‘1 • , .,.. .. . • • • A previous section of this application identifies existing wells within 1/4 mile of the proposed subdivision and the well yield information obtained from the Colorado Division of Water Resources. All of the adjacent wells produce between 10 and 15 gallons per minute; well above the minimum County standard of 5 gallons per minute. Water quality and quantity testing will be completed on the new well after it is drilled and submitted to the County in conjunction with the final plat application. Effect on groundwater and aquifer recharge areas. The new single-family residence will utilize an engineered ISDS system. This properly engineered system will be installed in conformance with County requirements and maintained by the property owner. Project engineer Deric Walter of Boundaries Unlimited, Inc. prepared the following ISDS standards and management plan that describes the system and recommends a long-term maintenance program to ensure long-term function of the system. Page - 60 • • • BOUNDARIES UNLIMITED INC. Consulting & Civil Engineers Marquis Subdivision ISDS DESIGN AND PERFORMANCE STANDARDS Page 1 of 2 October 8, 2009 The Preliminary Plat Geotechnical Study by CTL -Thompson, Inc. indicated that the soil conditions of the property consist of approximate one foot of topsoil overlying clay with the possibility of encountering cobbles and boulders. Three percolation tests were performed in the proposed location of the septic field on Lot ib. Each test resulted in a percolation rate of 50 minutes/inch. Based on the available information and test results, site conditions are workable for the installation of and engineered ISDS's on each lot. Each ISDS installed within the Subdivision shall comply with the Garfield County ISDS Regulations and the following additional requirements: A. each system shall be designed by a professional engineer registered in the State of Colorado pursuant to Colo. Rev. Stat. §12-25-111 (1999); B. each system design shall adequately address the soil percolation conditions present at the Lot site, which percolation rates shall be -verified through appropriate on-site testing of at least three (3) test pits at least twenty (20) feet apart and within ten (10) feet of the leach field footprint. C. each system shall be designed to adequately service the number of bedrooms within the residence, but no less than three (3) bedrooms; D. the tops of all tanks or risers extending there -from shall be surface accessible to facilitate system maintenance, monitoring and inspections; E. trench segments with at least (6) feet of separation shall be used whenever practically feasible. Monitoring pipes shall be installed at each end of each trench segment (minimum of two monitoring pipes) to allow inspection of field conditions. If a bed must be utilized, a single zone shall be acceptable. If mounding is required to establish (4) feet of suitable soil, a single pressure dosed zone shall be acceptable. If a bed or mound is used, minimum of (2) monitoring pipes shall be installed at ends of the bed or mound; F. absorption fields or trenches shall adhere to minimum setbacks as regulated by the Colorado Department of Health, Guidelines on Individual Sewage Disposal Systems, most recent edition; G. proper mitigation (diversion) of drainage and flood irrigation for the absorption field or trench areas shall be included in the design and construction; 323 Blake Avenue I Suite 102 I Glenwood Springs I Colorado 81601 I Ph 970.945.5252 I Fax 970.384.2833 Page - 61 • • • BOUNDARIES UNLIMITED INC. Consulting & Civil Engineers Marquis Subdivision ISDS DESIGN AND PERFORMANCE STANDARDS Page 2 of 2 October 8, 2009 H. each system shall be designed with sufficient area specifically allocated for a reserve leach field to ensure that a future replacement is possible. The reserve leach field shall meet the same design criteria as the primary field and shall not be constructed over with driveways, buildings or other permanent structures; and I. discharges from in-house water treatment devices (water softeners, reverse osmosis systems, etc) shall not be disposed of through the ISDS system and septic tanks shall be fitted with an effluent filter. Following ISDS installation, each Owner shall provide the Association and Garfield County Department of Building and Planning with as -built drawings in relation to the other improvements on the Lot, to scale, depicting the location and dimensions of the ISDS facilities including the absorption field and monitoring pipes, all applicable design, operation and maintenance specifications of the system's manufacturer and written certification from the design engineer that the ISDS was installed in conformance with the requirements above stated and all applicable design specifications of the manufacturer. In the event the Association fails to properly implement and enforce the design and performance standards set forth in this paragraph, the Board of County Commissioners for Garfield County, Colorado and its duly authorized representatives and agents, shall have all the right to enter upon the property and implement and enforce such standards at the expense of the Association or exercise any other right or power afforded under this Restatement including, but not limited to, the initiation of appropriate proceedings in the District Court for Garfield County, Colorado, to compel enforcement of the same. The provisions of this paragraph shall not be amended or repealed by the Homeowners Association or Lot Owners without the written consent of the Board of County Commissioners for Garfield County, Colorado. 823 Blake Avenue I Suite 102 I Glenwood Springs I Colorado 81601 I Ph 970.945.5252 Page - 62 Fax 970.384.2833 • BOUNDARIES Marquis Subdivision UNLIMITED INC. Consulting & Civil Engineers ISDS MANAGEMENT PLAN Page 1of3 October 8, 2009 In order to ensure that each ISDS installed within the Subdivision is inspected on a regular basis and properly maintained, the responsibility and authority for such inspection and maintenance shall be vested exclusively within the Association. This management plan is not intended to provide for common ownership of the ISDS(s) or to provide common funding for the construction, repair or replacement thereof, such ownership and responsibility for construction, repair and maintenance to remain with the Owner. A. In accordance with the above, the Association shall: 1. retain at all times, the services of qualified personnel to inspect the ISDS(s) and to perform all maintenance and repairs necessary to ensure that same are installed properly, remain in good operating condition and comply with the performance requirements set forth within the ISDS DESIGN AND PERFORMANCE STANDARDS. 2.. inspect the operating components of each ISDS within (30.) days of being placed into operation; thereafter, each ISDS shall be inspected every year and the septic tank pumped at the time that the solids (settled and floating) accumulate to a level of 20- 30 percent of the effective capacity of the tank. 3. maintain at all times written or other permanent records documenting the date each ISDS was inspected or tested, the results of such inspections or tests and the extent of all maintenance and/or repairs performed. All documents maintained by the Association pursuant to this provision shall at all times be available for inspection by Lot Owners and/or authorized representatives Garfield County. B. The following provisions shall apply in the event the estimated maintenance or repair costs required of any ISDS exceed in total during any one calendar year, $1000.00: 1. the Association shall give the Lot Owner and Garfield County Department of Building and Planning written notice of the nature and extent of the work necessary, to return the ISDS to good operating condition and/or bring the ISDS System within the performance requirements set forth within the ISDS DESIGN AND PERFORMANCE STANDARDS; and 2. within (10) days of receipt of such notice, Owner shall at his or her own expense submit an application for an ISDS Permit to Garfield County to repair or replace the ISDS; and 823 Blake Avenue Suite 102 ( Glenwood Springs Colorado 81601 Ph 970.945.5252 1 Fax 970.384.2833 Page - 63 • • • BOUNDARIES Marquis Subdivision UNLIMITED INC. Consulting & Civil Engineers ISDS MANAGEMENT PLAN Page 2of3 October 8, 2009 3. within (30) days of receipt of such Permit, Owner shall at his or her own expense cause to be completed, the repairs set forth within the notice. In the event Owner fails to complete such repairs within this the period to the satisfaction of the Association, the Association shall have the authority, in addition to any other remedy provided within this Restatement, to take any of the following actions: a. to impose against Owner, a fine not to exceed $200.00 for each day in which the ISDS System remains unrepaired; b. to complete on behalf of the Owner the required repairs to the ISDS. All costs included by the Association in connection with the restoration shall be reimbursed to the Association by the Owner of the Lot, upon demand. All un - reimbursed costs shall be a lien upon the Lot until reimbursement is made which may be enforced in accordance with the provisions of this Restatement; and/or C. In the event the Association fails to properly implement and enforce the provisions of this management plan set forth in this Article, the Board of County Commissioners for Garfield County, Colorado and its duly authorized representatives and agents, shall have all the right to enter the Subdivision and implement and enforce such provisions at the expense of the Association or exercise any other right or power afforded under this Restatement including, but not limited to, the initiation of appropriate proceedings in the District Court for Garfield County, Colorado, to compel enforcement of the provisions of this management plan. D. To encourage the health and longevity of the ISDS system, the Owner shall consider the fol lowing; 1. Minimize the amount of water that goes down the drain, the better your system will work. 2. Minimize solids going down the drain. 3. Eliminate garbage disposals or keep the use of garbage disposals to a minimum. 4. Minimize grease and oils that go down the drain. 5. Use lint filters on laundry machine drains. 6. Keep sand and dirt out of the building drain. 7. Avoid flushing sanitary napkins or paper products other than toilet paper. 8. Do not use lye -based drain unclogging chemicals such as Draino, Oven -Off, or other strong cleaning agents 9. Do not put any "root deterrents" down the drain. 823 Blake Avenue I Suite 102 I Glenwood Springs I Colorado 81601 I Ph 970.945.5252 I Fax 970.384.2833 Page - 64 • • • BOUNDARIES Marquis Subdivision UNLIMITED INC. Con sultng & Civil Engineers ISDS MANAGEMENT PLAN Page 3 of 3 October 8, 2009 10. Do not pour paint thinner, pesticides, paints or photo lab chemicals down the drain 11. Minimize use of chlorine bleach and toilet additives. (from The Septic System Owner's Manual, 2000, Shelter Publications, Inc., Bolinas, CA 92924) E. The provisions of this ISDS MANAGEMENT PLAN shall not be amended or repealed by the Homeowners, Association or Lot Owners without the written consent of the Board of County Commissioners for Garfield County, Colorado. 823 Blake Avenue! Suite 102 1 Glenwood Springs ( Colorado 81601 I PIS 970.945.5252 1 Fax 970.384.2833 Page - 65 • The engineered drawings with this preliminary plan application include detailed designs of the ISDS system and its location on the site. In addition, the geotechnical report (Appendix B) prepared by CTL Thompson describes the geologic and geotechnical characteristics of the site. There are no floodplains near the property. Good soil percolation characteristics will adequately handle waste disposal effluents without contaminating groundwater. The gentle slope of the large meadow supports good percolation of any surface waters on the site. The following drainage report prepared by Boundaries Unlimited, Inc. describes the drainage and mitigation design and standards associated with development of this property. Compliance with these designs will minimize or eliminate any erosion or runoff impacts associated with development of the property. • • Page - 66 • BOUNDARIES UNLIMITED INC. • • CIVIL ENGINEERS & LAND SURVEYORS October 14, 2009 Re: Drainage Analysis for Marquis Subdivision, Garfield County, Colorado The proposed Marquis Subdivision is located off County Road #112 approximately 2.0 miles north of Highway 82 near Carbondale, Colorado. The 50.7± acre site currently consists of a single family residence, storage buildings, a central flood irrigated pasture and outlying native pinion and junipers. The proposed development will in essence consist of a lot split into one 45.7 acre parcel (Lot la) and one 5.0 acre parcel (Lot 1b). Improvements appear to be limited to a building site with a short driveway which will require minimal disturbance and allow the subdivision to remain rural in nature. The majority of the site is gently sloping pasture with shallow irrigation ditch laterals down the center and along the perimeter. Site soils consist of Emperdrado Loams which are Type B hydrologic soils. It appears that the property has been maintained well and that existing vegetation has curtailed the often erosive effects of stormwater runoff. Based on the condition of the property, the rural nature and the limited amount of proposed improvements, stormwater detention does not appear to be needed. Page - 67 The proposed location of the new driveway will require the installation of a culvert to maintain positive drainage from the north to the south and to convey historic drainage. The drainage basin for this culvert is approximately 0.90 acres comprised of the southerly portion of the existing tree covered knoll, approximately 400' of the west half of the County Road and the proposed driveway for this basin which shows that the 100 -yr storm runoff should only be approximately 0.08 cfs. This flow can easily be accommodated by a 12" culvert installed at 1.0% minimum slope and flared end sections as indicated on the Grading, Drainage, Erosion and Utility Plan prepared by Boundaries Unlimited Inc. An NRCS WebSoil Survey and a NOAA Altas-II precipitation table have also been attached as supporting documentation. Erosion control measures and Best Management Practices (BMPS) should be followed during construction to insure that the property and the adjacent sites are not impacted from sedimentation. During construction activities and until vegetation can be established, sediment control fencing should be installed along the lower limits of the excavation. Certified weed free hay bales, check dams, silt dikes or erosion control logs should be installed in drainage swales and around culvert entrances in accordance with Colorado Department of Transportation M -Standards. Riprap should be installed at culvert outlets. The Grading, Drainage, Erosion and Utility Plan more specifically locates many of these erosion control features. This plan is a good representation of the site requirements, but may not be all inclusive. The contractor shall be responsible for complying with all local and state guidelines and permitting issues. 823 Blake Avenue I Suite 102 1 Glenwood Springs I Colorado 81601 I Ph 970.945.5252 I Fax 970.384.2833 • • Page - 68 Drainage Analysis for Marquis Subdivision, Garfield County, Colorado October 14, 2009 Page 2 of 2 Sediment and mud should be prevented from leaving the construction site by immediate placement of a stabilized construction entrance off County Road #112. The contractor should be responsible for cleaning and general upkeep of the public road. As an effective dust control measure, water trucks may be utilized to minimize uprising of dust. Good housekeeping BMPs should be followed throughout the entire life of the project. These include but are not limited to: - refuge receptacles should be regularly emptied and equipped with lids, - keeping machinery in good operating condition to prevent leakage, and - apply appropriate (not excessive) amounts of fertilizer to the landscaping. - scheduled maintenance cleaning of any downstream culverts and ditches. - general site cleanliness and proper training of employees. - grading must be performed (but not in excess) to ensure that drainage is directed away from all structures in all directions. Once construction activities are completed, final stabilization of the disturbed areas should begin. Within one growing season of the project completion, uniform vegetative site coverage should be equal to or greater than 70% of the pre -disturbance levels, or equivalent permanent, physical erosion reduction methods should be employed. When the site is determined to have reached the final stabilization stage, erosion control structures can be removed. If you have any questions or comments, please feel free to contact Deric Walter, PE at (970) 945-5252. 823 Blake Avenue Suite 102 Glenwood Springs j Colorado 81601 I Ph 970.945.5252 I Fax 970.384.2833 • • • Environmental Effects. Existing environmental conditions on the parcel to be developed that relate to long/short term effects on flora and fauna, effects on designated environmental resources including critical wildlife habitat, existing weeds and weed control measures are described in detail in Appendix A "Wildlife & Ecological Assessment of Residential Development for County Subdivision". Effects on significant archaeological, cultural, paleontological and historic resources do not exist on the site as discussed in the letter from Registered Professional Archaeologist John R. Welch PhD and a search of the Colorado Historical Society Inventory of Cultural Resources. No potential radiation hazards have been identified on the site or in the general area by the Colorado Department of Public Health and Environment and/or the Garfield County Health Department. No chemicals or other materials and quantities above those typically used by residential homeowners will be stored or utilized on the property. Therefore, a spill prevention control and countermeasure plan is unnecessary for this project. Traffic. The proposed new single-family lot will generate approximately 9.57 average daily vehicle trips to and from the site. These few trips will not impact any county roads or state highways by reducing levels of service (LOS) (not below a LOS of C) or significantly increasing traffic volumes. The following report was prepared by project engineer Deric Walter from Boundaries Unlimited, Inc. Page - 69 • October 8, 2009 BOUNDARIES UNLIMITED INC. CIVn . ENGINEERS & LAND SURVEYORS Re: Traffic Analysis for Marquis Subdivision, Garfield County, Colorado The following calculations have been used to determine the average daily traffic volume that can be expected to be generated at build out of Seaton Subdivision. Number of Existing Primary Residences: 1 Number of New Primary Residences: 1 Total Number of Primary Residences: 2 Number of Vehicles per Weekday generated by each single-family detached residential per the ITE Trip Generation Manual, 6th Edition Vol. 1 Code 210: 9.57 1 Existing Primary Residences X 9.57 trips/day/residence = 9.57 1 New Primary Residences X 9.57 trips/day/residence = 9.57 Total trips/day = 19.14 Based on the Capital Improvements Plan as adopted by the Board of County Commissioners, The Marquis Subdivision is located in Traffic Study Area 11 (sub -zone 23). This area is subject to a road impact fee of $384.00/ADT which results in an impact fee of $3,674.88/new residence for a total fee of $3,674.88. Due to the small scale of this subdivision (1 additional lot at 9.57 trips/day), a detailed traffic study is not necessary. Per the 2002 Average Daily Traffic, County Road System, Garfield County, Colorado map, the site is accessed via County Road #112 which is a branch of County Road #103. The map indicates that the average daily traffic (ADT) is 459 for CR#112 and 1373 for CR#103. The development of one additional single family residence will essentially increase the traffic on CR#112 by 2% and CR#103 by less than 1%. A copy of the pertinent portion of the County map has been attached. 823 Blake Avenue j Suite 102 I Glenwood Springs Colorado 81601 I Ph 970.945.5252 I Fax 970.384.2833 Page - 70 • • • 2002 Average Daily Traffic, County Road System, Garfield County, Colorado Page - 71 • • • Nuisance. The proposed single-family use and project design is compatible with and essentially identical to the surrounding uses and parcels. There will be no significant impacts to adjacent land from generation of vapor, dust, smoke, noise, glare or vibration or other emanations. Reclamation Plan. The reclamation plan is described in this application in the engineered drawings and the following drainage letter and "Erosion Control Plan" prepared by Boundaries Unlimited, Inc. Page - 72 BOUNDARIES UNLIMITED INC. CIVIL ENGINEERS & LAND SURVEYORS October 14, 2009 Re: Drainage Analysis for Marquis Subdivision, Garfield County, Colorado The proposed Marquis Subdivision is located off County Road #112 approximately 2.0 miles north of Highway 82 near Carbondale, Colorado. The 50.7± acre site currently consists of a single family residence, storage buildings, a central flood irrigated pasture and outlying native pinion and junipers. The proposed development will in essence consist of a lot split into one 45.7 acre parcel (Lot la) and one 5.0 acre parcel (Lot 1b). Improvements appear to be limited to a building site with a short driveway which will require minimal disturbance and allow the subdivision to remain rural in nature. The majority of the site is gently sloping pasture with shallow irrigation ditch laterals down the center and along the perimeter. Site soils consist of Emperdrado Loams which are Type B hydrologic soils. It appears that the property has been maintained well and that existing vegetation has curtailed the of -ten erosive effects of stormwater runoff. Based on the condition of the property, the rural nature and the limited amount of proposed improvements, stormwater detention does not appear to be needed. The proposed location of the new driveway will require the installation of a culvert to maintain positive drainage from the north to the south and to convey historic drainage. The drainage basin for this culvert is approximately 0.90 acres comprised of the southerly portion of the existing tree covered knoll, approximately 400' of the west half of the County Road and the proposed driveway for this basin which shows that the 100 -yr storm runoff should only be approximately 0.08 cfs. This flow can easily be accommodated by a 12" culvert installed at 1.0% minimum slope and flared end sections as indicated on the Grading, Drainage, Erosion and Utility Plan prepared by Boundaries Unlimited Inc. An NRCS WebSoil Survey and a NOAA Altas-II precipitation table have also been attached as supporting documentation. Erosion control measures and Best Management Practices (BMPS) should be followed during construction to insure that the property and the adjacent sites are not impacted from sedimentation. During construction activities and until vegetation can be established, sediment control fencing should be installed along the lower limits of the excavation. Certified weed free hay bales, check dams, silt dikes or erosion control logs should be installed in drainage swales and around culvert entrances in accordance with Colorado Department of Transportation M -Standards. Riprap should be installed at culvert outlets. The Grading, Drainage, Erosion and Utility Plan more specifically locates many of these erosion control features. This plan is a good representation of the site requirements, but may not be all inclusive. The contractor shall be responsible for complying with all local and state guidelines and permitting issues. 823 Blake Avenue I Suite 102 I Glenwood Springs I Colorado 81601 I Ph 970.945.5252 I Fax 9 ,70.384.2833 • • • Page - 73 Drainage Analysis for Marquis Subdivision, Garfield County, Colorado October 14, 2009 Page 2 of 2 Sediment and mud should be prevented from leaving the construction site by immediate placement of a stabilized construction entrance off County Road #112. The contractor should be responsible for cleaning and general upkeep of the public road. As an effective dust control measure, water trucks may be utilized to minimize uprising of dust. Good housekeeping BMPs should be followed throughout the entire life of the project. These include but are not limited to: - refuge receptacles should be regularly emptied and equipped with lids, - keeping machinery in good operating condition to prevent leakage, and - apply appropriate (not excessive) amounts of fertilizer to the landscaping. - scheduled maintenance cleaning of any downstream culverts and ditches. - general site cleanliness and proper training of employees. - grading must be performed (but not in excess) to ensure that drainage is directed away from all structures in all directions. Once construction activities are completed, final stabilization of the disturbed areas should begin. Within one growing season of the project completion, uniform vegetative site coverage should be equal to or greater than 70% of the pre -disturbance levels, or equivalent permanent, physical erosion reduction methods should be employed. When the site is determined to have reached the final stabilization stage, erosion control structures can be removed. If you have any questions or comments, please feel free to contact Deric Walter, PE at (970) 945-5252. 823 Blake Avenue I Suite 102 I Glenwood Springs I Colorado 81601 I Ph 970.945.5252 970.384.2833 • • • Erosion Control Plan Page - 74 EROSION and SEDIMENT CONTROL PLAN Marquis Subdivision Garfield County, Colorado IT d 1 ti g% ,P... i ci 3' . w . 7i,1: Google. PROJECT N0. 09021-Marq,ils Prepared October 14, 2009 Prepared hy: BOUNDARIES UINLIMITED INC. MI Consulting Civil Engineers 823 BLAKE AVENUE, STE. 102 GLENWOOD SPRINGS, CO 81 601 TELE: 970.945.5252 / FAX: 970.384.2833 Prepared for: Ce -Mar -Sam, LLLP 567 Fairfield Lane Louisville, CO 80027 Page - 74 • • • TABLE OF CONTENTS SECTION PAGE A. Site Plan 1 B. Drainage Structures 1 C. Topography 1 D. Grading Plan 1 E. Soil Stockpile and Snow Storage Areas 1 F. Drainage Plan 1 G. Equipment Storage Areas 1 H. Temporary Roads 2 1. Areas of Steep Slopes 2 J. Construction Schedule 2 K. Permanent Stabilization 3 L. Erosion Control Measures 3 M. Estimated Cost 3 N. Calculations 3 O. Neighboring Areas 3 P. Stormwater Management 3 Q. Hydrology & Hydraulics 3 R. Maintenance of BMPs 3 S. Stormwater Management Plan 3 T. Additional Information 3 U. Signature Blocks 4 APPENDIX • Grading, Drainage, Erosion Control & Utilities Plan • Google Earth Images • Letter: Drainage Analysis for Marquis Subdivision, Garfield County, Colorado • HydroCAD v.8 Calculations • Hydraflow Calculations • NRCS Web Soil Survey • NOAAAtlas II Precipitation Frequency Data Page - 75 • The proposed Marquis Subdivision is located off County Road #112 approximately 2.0 miles north of Highway 82 near Carbondale, Colorado. The 50.7± acre site currently consists of a single family residence, storage buildings, a central flood irrigated pasture and outlying native pinion and junipers. The proposed development will in essence consist of a lot split into one 45.7 acre parcel (Lot la) and one 5.0 acre parcel (Lot 1b). Improvements appear to be limited to a new building site on Lot 1Bwith a short driveway which will require minimal disturbance and allow the subdivision to remain rural in nature. The majority of the site is gently sloping pasture with shallow irrigation ditch laterals down the center and along the perimeter. Site soils consist of Emperdrado Loams which are hydrologic Type B soils. The following information has been outlined to match the requirements of the Garfield County Land Use Regulations, 2009. A. Site Map: Acopy of the Grading, Drainage, Erosion Control & Utilities Plan and aerial photographs from Google Earth have been enclosed depicting the existing conditions, proposed improvements and surrounding lands. There are no bodies of water or distinguishable hydrologic features, wetlands or 100 -yr flood plain boundaries on this site. B. Drainage Structures: The property exists within a drainage basin which extends only a few hundred feet to the north. Therefore, there is no major source of offsite runoff affecting the subdivision. The property does not contain any significantly defined drainage ways which require drainage structures other than typical culvert crossings under roads and driveways. As shown on the Grading, Drainage, Erosion Control & Utilities Plan, there is an existing 15"0 culvert just south of the exist ng driveway to Lot 1A and another at the southeast corner of the property under a neighboring driveway. A shallow ditch exists along County Road #112 which is used to transfer runoff from the road and onsite irrigation waters to the south. This ditch should be realigned along the new driveway for Lot 1B and an 18" 0 should be installed under the driveway at the location shown. C. Topography: Contours have been provided on the Grading, Drainage, Erosion Control & Utilities Plan for Lot 1B. Grading Plan: Proposed grading and topography for the driveway and realigned ditches on Lot 1B have been provided on the Grading, Drainage, Erosion Control & Utilities Plan. A centerline prof le has also been included for the driveway. E. Soil Stockpile and Snow Storage Areas: Topsoil will need to be stripped from the new driveway and building site. These soils should be temporarily stockpiled along the edge of the driveway and then placed over the septic field after the field has been installed. Snow from the driveways (existing and proposed) should be stored along the south edges of each drive. There are no public roads proposed, so public snow storage is not necessary. F. Drainage Plan: Drainage patterns for Lot 1B are shown on the Grading, Drainage, Erosion Control & Utilities Plan and a letter (Drainage Analysis for Marquis Subdivision, Garfield County, Colorado) has been attached which discusses the hydrology for the subdivision. G. Equipment Storage Area: This is avery minor development that only involves the construction of a driveway, one single family home and septic system. Earthwork equipment should only need to be onsite for a couple of weeks and onsite fuel storage should not be necessary. Therefore an equipment storage area should not be necessary. Page - 76 D. Page 1 • • • H. Temporary Road: No temporary roads are needed for this subdivision. During construction of the new residence on Lot 1B, the driveway entrance should be constructed with a runoff track strip to remove dirt and mud from the wheels of vehicles before they leave the site. This strip can then be graveled over the road base when construction has been completed. I. Areas of Steep Slopes: Areas steeper than 20% are located within the existing juniper and pinion areas of the property. Only minor excavation will occur within the south side of the existing knoll on Lot 1B to allow for the future home to be tucked back into the hillside. No roads are proposed on any slopes steeper than 20%. J. Construction Schedule: Since no public improvements are required for this subdivision, the construction schedule will be dependent on the when the building permit for Lot 1B is applied for. K. Permanent Stabilization: Soil stabilization will only be required during and after the construction of the new residence on Lot 1B. This should include proper soil compaction, rerouting of road and irrigation ditches, sloping catch grades at slopes shallower than 4:1, placement of siltation fencing and erosion logs/hay bales, and revegetation of disturbed areas with a native seed mix. L. Erosion Control Measures: Erosion control measures and Best Management Practices (BMPS) should be followed during construction to insure that the property and the adjacent sites are not impacted from sedimentation. During construction activities and until vegetation can be established, sediment control fencing should be installed along the lower limits of the excavation. Certified weed free hay bales, check dams, silt dikes or erosion control logs should be installed in drainage swales and around culvert entrances in accordance with Colorado Department of Transportation M -Standards. Riprap should be installed at culvert outlets. The Grading, Drainage, Erosion and Utility Plan more specifically locates many of these erosion control features. This plan is a good representation of the site requirements, but may not be all inclusive. The contractor shall be responsible for complying with all local and state guidelines and permitting issues. Sediment and mud should be prevented from leaving the construction site by immediate placement of a stabilized construction entrance off County Road #112. The contractor should be responsible for cleaning and general upkeep of the public road. As an effective dust control measure, water trucks may be utilized to minimize uprising of dust. Good housekeeping BMPs should be followed throughout the entire life of the project. These include but are not limited to: Page - 77 - refuge receptacles should be regularly emptied and equipped with lids, - keeping machinery in good operating condition to prevent leakage, and - apply appropriate (not excessive) amounts of fertilizer to the landscaping. - scheduled maintenance cleaning of any downstream culverts and ditches. - general site cleanliness and proper training of employees. - grading must be performed (but not in excess) to ensure that drainage is Page 2 • Page - 78 directed away from all structures in all directions. Once construction activities are completed, final stabilization of the disturbed areas should begin. Within one growing season of the project completion, uniform vegetative site coverage should be equal to or greater than 70% of the pre -disturbance levels, or equivalent permanent, physical erosion reduction methods should be employed. When the site is determined to have reached the final stabilization stage, erosion control structures can be removed. M. Estimated Cost: Since there are no public improvements, there are no associated costs for temporary soil erosion and sediment control. Erosion control and revegetation will be required when the home and driveway are construction on Lot 1B, but those will be addressed during the building permit application. N. Calculations: HydroCAD v8 calculations have been attached modeling the stormwater runoff along with the drainage analysis letter. O. Neighboring Areas: Neighboring areas are rural hayfields, native trees and individual home sites. The property is bordered by County Road #112 on the east and a driveway along the southeast. Irrigation waters flow through the site and to neighboring properties, but these waterways are located on Lot 1A (existing residence) and will not be impacted by the new lot. P. Stormwater Management: See the attached letter (Drainage Analysis for Marquis Subdivision, Garfield County, Colorado) for a description of the stormwater management concept and best management practices for this site. Q. Hydrology & Hydraulics: Hydraflow calculations have been attached modeling the proposed culvert. R. Maintenance of BMPs: See Item L -Erosion Control Measures, for a description of maintenance requirements for all BMPs. Ditch laterals should be maintained by the individual properties owners whose property the lateral runs through. The Builder/Contractor for Lot 1B should be responsible for implementing and maintaining BMPs on that lot. S. Stormwater Management Plan: Since there are no public improvements, no Stormwater Management Plan (SWMP) is required. T. Additional Information: None Page 3 • • • U. Signature Blocks: Page - 79 "I have reviewed this Erosion Control Plan and accept responsibility for its implementation." Signed Sam Marquis, Managing Partner Ce -Mar -Sam, LLLP Date "This Erosion and Sediment Control Plan was prepared by me or under my direct supervision." Signed Deric Walter, PE # 37110, Boundaries Unlimited Inc. Date Page 4 • • • Page - 80 Appendix • • Terrain view Google Earth image to the North Page - 81 Terrain view Google Earth image to the West 'Subcatt Reach on Link. Drainage Diagram for HydroCAD-Marquis Prepared by Boundaries Unlimited Inc. 10/8/2009 HydroCAD® 8.00 s/n 004414 © 200E HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC • • Page - 82 • • • N:\PROJ ECTS12009109021-Marquis\documentslcalcsl 09021 -Marquis HydroCAD-Marquis Type 11 24 -hr 100 -yr Rainfall=2.59" Prepared by Boundaries Unlimited Inc. Page 2 HydroCAD® 8.00 sin 004414 C) 2006 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC 10/812009 Subcatchment Basin: Runoff = 0.08 cfs @ 12.17 hrs, Volume= 0.014 af, Depth= 0.20" Runoff by SCS TR -20 method, UH=SCS, Time Span= 5.00-48.00 hrs, dt= 0.05 hrs Type II 24 -hr 100 -yr Rainfall=2.59" Area (sf) CN Description 9,090 98 Paved parking & roofs 19,200 41 Pinyon/juniper range, Good, HSG B 8,360 61 Pasture/grassland/range, Good, HSG B 36,650 60 Weighted Average 27,560 Pervious Area 9,090 Impervious Area Tc Length Slope Velocity Capacity Description (min) (feet) (ft/ft) (ft/sec) (cfs) 15.3 100 0.1600 0.11 Sheet Flow, Woods: Light underbrush n= 0.400 P2= 1.20" 1.1 160 0.1250 2.47 Shallow Concentrated Flow, Short Grass Pasture Kv= 7.0 fps 16.4 260 Total 0.085 0.08- 0.075 0.07 0.065= 0.06. 0.055= 0.05: 0.045. 0.04; 0.035- 0.034 0.025 0.02- 0.0151 0.011 0.005 0 Page - 83 Subcatchment Basin: Hydrograph lace of l , --r ;-rii 1 1 1 4 1! 1 1 1 1 1 1- -i - r 1— r — ' ' ' I— 7 — r —! r i i I 1 i --1— , , t I 1 11 1 1 1 t 1 1 1 1. I L... I... i .1 1 ... !_ Type : il�;...y 1. 1 1 1 I I 1 ,.0�, ... _L 11.._1 yr, I 1 1 1 1 1! i i I� I I I f f RaInfaII 2L59!'; - 1 1 1 ! I l i , i t 1 IR�nof-Aktea=-36. 'OT $f t I s 1 1,. _.1_ J J_. , , I I 1 1 , r I V i 1 1 1 1 11 F ulnoff Vplume-04 , a ; . e� O 1 _Runoff DpthF21 FloeI i L=erigth! r ! lt.260'1 I I I 1 Tc=1'6:4 ;miff; I 1 l i 1 1 1 1 1 - -- ->_1_t. a_p_?_y _1_3 ;1 i_1_I-1_!..1_L ! 41 iiiil i 1 1 I I I 111 I I 11 5 6 7 8 9 101112131415161718192021222324252627282930313233343536373039404142434445464740 Time (hours) p Runoff • • Culvert Report Hydraflow Express Extension for AutoCAD® Civil 3D0 2009 by Autodesk, Inc. Cir Culvert Invert Elev Dn (ft) Pipe Length (ft) Slope (%) Invert Elev Up (ft) Rise (in) Shape Span (in) No. Barrels n -Value Inlet Edge Coeff. K,M,c,Y,k = 6759.70 = 30.00 = 1.00 = 6760.00 = 12.0 = Cir = 12.0 = 1 = 0.024 = Mitered = 0.021, 1.33, 0.0463, 0.75, 0.7 Embankment Top Elevation (ft) = 6762.60 Top Width (ft) = 16.00 Crest Width (ft) = 100.00 ME pp Calculations Qmin (cfs) Qmax (cfs) Tailwater Elev (ft) Highlighted Qtotal (cfs) Qpipe (cfs) Qovertop (cfs) Veloc Dn (ft/s) Veloc Up (ft/s) HGL Dn (ft) HGL Up (ft) Hw Elev (ft) Hw/D (ft) Flow Regime Thursday, Oct 8 2009 = 0.00 = 5.00 = (dc+D)/2 = 0.50 = 0.50 = 0.00 = 0.93 = 1.62 = 6760.35 = 6760.42 = 6760.44 = 0.44 = Outlet Control Page - 84 —a4) Pexh:M .9, Hydrologic Soil Group—Aspen-Gypsum Area, Colorado, Parts of Eagle, Garfield, and Pitkin Counties (09021 -Marquis) 31 19., 3 31 000 312000 312100 312.200 312.300 31200 31200 312600 1 31163 N -A 3111700 31100 31100 Map Scale. 1'.5,290 if printed onA sze (8.5' x 11") sheet 0 50 100 200 31h00 M eters 300 31 00 SDA Natural Resources Conservation Service Page - 85 250 500 feet 1,000 1,500 311200 Web Soil Survey National Cooperative Soil Survey 31 hoo 31A 00 312500 re 10!912009 Page 1 of 4 39' 26' 27" 39' 25 3" Hydrologic Soil Group—Aspen-Gypsum Area, Colorado, Parts of Eagle, Garfield, and Pitkin Counties (09021 -Marquis) MAP LEGEND Area of Interest (AOI) Area of Interest (A01) Soils Soil Map Units Soil Ratings A I 0 ND I] B/D I I I C CID D MAP INFORMATION Map Scale 1:5,290 if printed on A size (8.5" x 11") sheet. The soil surveys that comprise yourAOl were mapped at 1.24,000. Please rely on the bar scale on each map sheet for accurate map measurements Source of Map: Natural Resources Conservation Service Web Soil Survey URL. http://websollsurvey.nres.usda.gav Coordinate System UTM Zone 13N NAD83 This product is generated from the USDA-NRCS certified data as of the version date(s) listed below. Soil Survey Area: Aspen -Gypsum Area, Colorado, Parts of Eagle, Garfield, and Pitkin Counties Survey Area Data Version 5, Jun 9, 2008 Date(s) aerial images were photographed 7/10/2005 Not rated or not available The orthophoto or other base map on which the soil lines were compiled and digitized probably differs from the background Political Features imagery displayed on these maps. As a result, some minor shifting p Cities of map unit boundaries may be evident. Water Features Oceans Streams and Canals Transportation +4+ Rails ti Interstate Highways US Routes Major Roads Local Roads • orrlNatural Resources Conservation Service Page - 86 Web Soil Survey 10/8/2009 National Cooperative Soil Survey Page 2 of 4 • • • Hydrologic Soil Group–Aspen-Gypsum Area, Colorado, Parts of Eagle, Garfield, and Pitkin Counties 09021 -Marquis Hydrologic Soil Group Hydrologic Soil Group— Summary by Map Unit— Aspen -Gypsum Area, Colorado, Parts of Eagle, Garfield, and Pitkin Counties Map unit symbol Map unit name Rating Acres in AOI Percent of A01 35 Empedrado loam, 6 to 12 percent slopes B 8.0 7 8% 36 Empedrado loam, 12 to 25 percent slopes B 54.6 53.7% 43 Forelle-Brownsto complex, 6 to 12 percent slopes B 0.4 0.4% 95 Showalter-Morval complex, 15 to 25 percent slopes C 1.0 1.0% 106 Tridell-Brownsto stony sandy loams, 12 to 50 percent slopes, extremely stony B 37.7 37.1% Totals for Area of Interest 101.6 100.0% 1/Natural Resources Web Soil Survey 10/812009 Conservation Service National Cooperative Soil Survey Page 3 of 4 Page - 87 • • • Hydrologic Soil Group—Aspen-Gypsum Area, Colorado, Parts of Eagle, 09021 -Marquis Garfield, and Pitkin Counties Description Hydrologic soil groups are based on estimates of runoff potential. Soils are assigned to one of four groups according to the rate of water infiltration when the soils are not protected by vegetation, are thoroughly wet, and receive precipitation from long -duration storms. The soils in the United States are assigned to four groups (A, B, C, and D) and three dual classes (A/D, BID, and CID). The groups are defined as follows: Group A. Soils having a high infiltration rate (low runoff potential) when thoroughly wet. These consist mainly of deep, well drained to excessively drained sands or gravelly sands. These soils have a high rate of water transmission. Group B. Soils having a moderate infiltration rate when thoroughly wet. These consist chiefly of moderately deep or deep, moderately well drained or well drained soils that have moderately fine texture to moderately coarse texture. These soils have a moderate rate of water transmission. Group C. Soils having a slow infiltration rate when thoroughly wet. These consist chiefly of soils having a layer that impedes the downward movement of water or soils of moderately fine texture or fine texture. These soils have a slow rate of water transmission. Group D. Soils having a very slow infiltration rate (high runoff potential) when thoroughly wet. These consist chiefly of clays that have a high shrink -swell potential, soils that have a high water table, soils that have a claypan or clay layer at or near the surface, and soils that are shallow over nearly impervious material. These soils have a very slow rate of water transmission. If a soil is assigned to a dual hydrologic group (ND, BID, or CID), the first letter is for drained areas and the second is for undrained areas. Only the soils that in their natural condition are in group D are assigned to dual classes. Rating Options Aggregation Method: Dominant Condition Component Percent Cutoff: None Specified Tie-break Rule: Lower Natural Resources Web Soil Survey 10181 roil 2009 Conservation Service National Cooperative Soil Survey Page 4 of 4 Page - 88 • • • Colorado Precipitation Frequency Data -- OU TPUT PAGE Precipitation Frequency Data Output NOAA Atlas 2 Colorado 39.440N 107.160W Site-specific Estimates Page 1of1 Map Precipitation (inches) Precipitation Intensity (in/hr) 2 -year 6 -hour 0.89 0.15 2 -year 24 -hour 1.18 T� 0.05 100 -year 6 -hour 1.99 0.33 100 -year 24-hour 2.59 0.11 Hydrometeorological Design Studies center - NOAA/National weather Service 1025 East -Nest Highway - Silver spring, MD 20910 - (301) 713-1669 7!N Oct 8 12:51;09 2009 http://hdsc.nws.noxa.gov/cgi-bin/hdsc/na2.per1?g1at=39.44&qlon=-107.16&submit=Submit 10/8/2009 Page - 89 • • Phasink Schedule The Marquis Subdivision will be developed in a single phase. Source of Electricity, Natural Gas, Telephone and Cable TV Services. Electricity to the site will be provided by Holy Cross Electric from existing distribution lines on County Rd. 112 and on the existing property. Telephone service is provided by Qwest from existing distribution lines on County Rd. 112 and on the existing property. Total Number of Proposed Off -Street Parkinj' Spaces. Each lot in Marquis Subdivision includes adequate space for the required two off-street parking spaces. LiPubin2 Plan. Exterior lighting in the Marquis subdivision will conform to the lighting standards detailed in Section 7- 305 (B) of the Garfield County ULUR-2008. Generally, exterior lighting will be minimal and fixtures will be shielded and/or arranged in a manner so light will not shine directly onto other properties. Visual Impact. As noted in various parts of this application, the visual impact of the Marquis subdivision on adjacent properties will be minimal. The new home is proposed to be on the south side of the existing hill on the northerly portion of new Lot 1-B. The size of the lot will physically separate the proposed new unit from other nearby residential structures. The hill on the property will completely screen the new proposed single-family structure from views from the northwest, north and northeast. The new structure will be back -dropped by the hill that will eliminate any ridge -lining of the building or accessory structures. School Dedication. The applicant proposes to pay a fee in lieu of land dedication in conformance with the applicable section of 7-405 (D) for school impacts. Existing Permits. Communication was made with the Garfield County Road and Bridge Department in an attempt to research and obtain existing County driveway permits and/or access permits. The date that the original 50.7 acre parcel was created was before the County started issuing driveway access permits. Therefore, none exist. No CDOT access permits were required or issued for the property. No other permits or documentation are available pursuant to Section 44-502 of the Garfield County ULUR. Discussions took place during the pre -application conference about access to the property. There was no staff identified need for future access locations. Title Commitment. A copy of a current title policy completed by Stewart Title of Glenwood Springs identified as Order Number 20070355-C3 with an effective date of October 15, 2009 is attached below. Page - 90 • • • ALTA Commitment (6117106) ALTA Commitment Form COMMITMENT FOR TITLE INSURANCE Issued by stewart •title guaranty company Stewart Title Guaranty Company, a Texas Corporation ("Company"). for a valuable consideration, commits to issue its policy or policies of title insurance, as identified in Schedule A, in favor of the Proposed Insured named in Schedule A, as owner or mortgagee of the estate or interest in the land described or referred to in Schedule A, upon payment of the premiums and charges and compliance with the Requirements; all subject to the provisions of Schedules A and B and to the Conditions of this Commitment. This Commitment shall be effective only when the identity of the Proposed Insured and the amount of the policy or policies committed for have been inserted in Schedule A by the Company. All liability and obligation under this Commitment shall cease and terminate six months after the Effective Date or when the policy or policies committed for shall issue, whichever first occurs, provided that the failure to issue the policy or policies is not the fault of the Company. The Company will provide a sample of the policy form upon request. This commitment shall not be valid or binding until countersigned by a validating officer or authorized signatory. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, Stewart Title Guaranty Company has caused its corporate name and seal to be hereunto affixed by its duly authorized officers on the date shown in Schedule A. Countersigned: For Informational Purposes Only Stewart Title 1620 Grand Avenue Glenwood Springs. Colorado 8160I Phone Number: (970) 945-5434 ALTA Commitment (6/17/06) stewart --- title guaranty company Senior Chairman of thh e Board President Page - 91 • • • CONDITIONS 1. The term mortgage, when used herein, shall include deed of trust, trust deed, or other security instrument. 2. If the proposed Insured has or acquired actual knowledge of any defect, lien, encumbrance, adverse claim or other matter affecting the estate or interest or mortgage thereon covered by this Commitment other than those shown in Schedule B hereof, and shall fail to disclose such knowledge to the Company in writing, the Company shall he relieved from liability for any loss or damage resulting from any act of reliance hereon to the extent the Company is prejudiced by failure to so disclose such knowledge. If the proposed Insured shall disclose such knowledge to the Company, or if the Company otherwise acquires actual knowledge of any such defect, lien, encumbrance, adverse claim or other matter, the Company at its option may amend Schedule 13 of this Commitment accordingly, but such amendment shall not relieve the Company from liability previously incurred pursuant to paragraph 3 of these Conditions and Stipulations. 3. Liability of the Company under this Commitment shall be only to the named proposed Insured and such parties included under the definition of Insured in the form of policy or policies committed for and only for actual loss incurred in reliance hereon in undertaking in good faith (a) to comply with the requirements hereof, or (b) to eliminate exceptions shown in Schedule B, or (c) to acquire or create the estate or interest or mortgage thereon covered by this Commitment. In no event shall such liability exceed the amount stated in Schedule A for the policy or policies committed for and such liability is subject to the insuring provisions and Conditions and Stipulations and the Exclusions from Coverage of the forum of policy or policies committed for in favor of the proposed Insured which are hereby incorporated by reference and 'are made a part of this Commitment except as expressly modified herein. 4. This Commitment is a contract to issue one or more title insurance policies and is not an abstract of title or a report of the condition of title. Any action or actions or rights of action that the proposed Insured may have or may bring against the Company arising out of the status of the title to the estate or interest or the status of the mortgage thereon covered by this Commitment must be based on and are subject to the provisions of this Commitment. 5. The policy to be issued contains an arbitration clause. All arbitrable matters when the Amount of Insurance is $2,000,000 or less shall be arbitrated at the option of either the Company or the Insured as the exclusive remedy of the parties. You may review a copy of the arbitration rules at< hup://www.alta.ore>. stewart title guaranty company All notices required to be given the Company and any statement in writing required to be furnished the Company shall be addressed to it at P.O. Box 2029, Houston, Texas 77252. Page - 92 • • COMMITMENT FOR TITLE INSURANCE SCHEDULE A 1. Effective Date: October 15. 2009 at 8:00 a.m. Order No.: 20070355-C'3 2. Policy or Policies To Be issued: Amount of Insurance (a) A.L.T.A. Owner's (6/17/06) (Standard) $ TBD Proposed Insured: To Be Determined (b) A.L.T.A. Loan (6/17/06) (Standard) S TBD To Be Determined, its successors and/or assigns 3. The estate or interest in the land described or referred to in this Commitment and covered herein is: Fee Simple 4. Title to the Fee Simple estate or interest in said land is at the effective date hereof vested in: CE -MAR -SAM Co, LLLP, a Colorado limited liability limited partnership 5. The land referred to in this Commitment is described as follows: SEE ATTACHED LEGAL DESCRIPTION Purported Address: 956 County Road 112 Carbondale, Colorado 81623 STATEMENT OF CHARGES These charges are due and payable before a Policy can be issued: TO BE DETERMINED ALTA Commitment (WI 7/00 - Schedule A I- Ste y V a t Pag 1 of 2 L title guaranty company Page - 93 • • • Order No.: 20070355-C3 SCHEDULE A LEGAL DESCRIPTION Lot 1 MARQUIS/WALLBANK BOUNDARY ADJUSTMENT PLAT, Recorded June 29, 1987 as Reception No. 383220. County of Garfield State of Colorado ALTA Commitment (6 170(0 Schedule A Page 2 of 2 Page - 94 - Stewart title guaranty company • COMMITMENT FOR TITLE INSURANCE SCHEDULE B — Section 1 REQUIREMENTS Order Number: 20070355-C3 The following are the requirements to be complied with: 1. Payment to or for the account of the grantor(s) or mortgagor(s) of the lull consideration for the estate or interest to be insured. 2. Proper instrument(s) creating the estate or interest to be insured must be executed and duly filed for record. 3. Evidence satisfactory to Stewart Title Guaranty Company of payment of all outstanding taxes and assessments as certified by the County Treasurer. 4. Execution of affidavit as to Debts and Liens and its return to Stewart Title Guaranty Company. 5. Payment of any and all Homeowners assessments and expenses which may be assessed to the property. 6. Execution of an acceptable survey affidavit certifying that there have been no new improvements constructed or major structural changes made on the subject property. 7. Release by the Public Trustee of Garfield County of the Deed of Trust from CE -MAR -SAM Co., LLLP for the use of Austin Marquis to secure $642,270.00, dated June 5, 2007 recorded August 6, 2007 as Reception No. 730131. 8. Deed from vested owner, vesting fee simple title in purchaser(s). 9, Deed of Trust from the Borrower to the Public Trustee for the use of the proposed lender to secure the loan. Order No.; 20070355-C'3 ALTA Commitment (0/l7JO(i)... Sch Page l of l Page - 95 ie 131 stewart titte guaranty company • • • COMMITMENT FOR TITLE INSURANCE SCHEDULE 13— Section 2 EXCEPTIONS Order Number: 20070355-C3 The policy or policies to be issued will contain exceptions to the following unless the same are disposed of to the satisfaction of the Company: 1. Rights or claims of parties in possession, not shown by the public records. 2. Easements, or claims of easements, not shown by the public records. 3. Any encroachment, encumbrance, violation, variation, or adverse circumstance affecting the title that would be disclosed by an accurate and complete land survey of the Land and not shown by the public records. 4. Any lien, or right to a lien, for services, labor or material heretofore or hereafter furnished, imposed by law and not shown by the public records. 5. Defects, hens, encumbrances, adverse claims or other matters, if any, created, first appearing in the public records or attaching subsequent to the effective date hereof, but prior to the date the proposed insured acquires of record, for value, the estate or interest or mortgage thereon covered by this commitment. 6. Unpatented mining claims, reservations or exceptions in patents, or in acts authorizing the issuance thereof. 7. Water rights, claims or title to water. 8. Any and all unpaid taxes and assessments and any unredeemed tax sales. 9. The effect of inclusions in any general or specific water conservancy, fire protection, soil conservation or other district or inclusion in any water service or street improvement area. 10. Right of way for ditches or canals constructed by the authority of the United States, as reserved in United States Patent recorded August 27, 1917 in Book 112 at Page 482 as Reception No. 58470. 11. Right of way for ditches or canals constructed by the authority of the United States, as reserved in United States Patent recorded July 14, 1920 in Book 112 at Page 526 as Reception No. 71792. 12. Resolution 80-316 recorded December 23, 1980 in Book 562 at Page 533 as Reception No. 310598. 13. Matter disclosed in Marquis/Wallbank Boundary Adjustment Plat recorded June 29, 1987 as Reception No. 383220. 14. Declaration of Protective Covenants recorded and Restrictions recorded October 1, 1987 in Book 722 at Page 272 as Reception No. 386393, and the Amendment recorded August 17, 1988 in Book 739 at Page 454 as Reception No. 394599. Order No.: 20070355.0 ALTA Cotmnitmcnt «)117/0 6) - Schedule E3 2 Page I of 1 Page - 96 stewart -- • the guaranty company • DISCLOSURES Order Number: 20070355-C3 Note: Pursuant to C.R.S. 10-11-122, notice is hereby given that: A. The subject real property may be located in a special taxing district; 13. A certificate of taxes due listing each taxing jurisdiction shall be obtained from the county treasurer or the county treasurer's authorized agent; C. information regarding special districts and the boundaries of such districts may be obtained from the board of county commissioners, the county clerk and recorder, or the county assessor. Note: Colorado Division of Insurance Regulations 3-5-1, Subparagraph (7) (E) requires that "Every title insurance company shall be responsible to the proposed insured(s) subject to the terms and conditions of the title insurance commitment, other than the effective date of the title insurance commitment, for all maners which appear of record prior to the time of recording whenever the title insurance company, or its agent, conducts the closing and settlement service that is in conjunction with its issuance of an owners policy of title insurance and is responsible for the recording and filing of legal documents resulting from the transaction which was closed." Provided that Stewart Title of Colorado — Glenwood Springs Division conducts the closing of the insured transaction and is responsible for recording the legal documents from the transaction, exception number 5 will not appear on the Owner's Title Policy and the Lender's Title Policy when issued. Note: Affirmative Mechanic's Lien Protection for the Owner may be available (typically by deletion of Exception No. 4 of Schedule 13, Section 2 of the Commitment from the Owner's Policy to be issued) upon compliance with the following conditions: A. The land described in Schedule A of this commitment must be a single-family residence, which includes a condominium or townhouse unit. B. No labor or materials have been furnished by mechanics or materialmen for purposes of construction on the land described in Schedule A of this Commitment within the past 6 months. C. The Company must receive an appropriate affidavit indemnifying the Company against unfiled mechanic's and Matetialmen's Liens. D. The Company must receive payment of the appropriate premium. E. If there has been construction, improvements or major repairs undertaken on the property to be purchased or mortgaged, within six months prior to the Date of the Commitment, the requirements to obtain coverage for unrecorded lines will include: disclosure of certain construction information; financial information as to the seller, the builder and/or the contractor; payment of the appropriate premium; fully executed Indemnity agreements satisfactory to the company; and, any additional requirements as may be necessary after an examination of the aforesaid information by the Company. No coverage will be given under any circumstances for labor or material for which the insured has contracted for or agreed to pay. Note: Pursuant to C.R.S. 10-11-123, notice is hereby given: A. That there is recorded evidence that a mineral estate has been severed, leased or otherwise conveyed from the surface estate and that there is a substantial likelihood that a third party holds some or all interest in oil, gas, other minerals, or geothermal energy in the property; and 13. That such mineral estate may include the right to enter and use the property without the surface owner's permission. This notice applies to owner's policy commitments containing a mineral severance, leasing, or other conveyance instrument exception, or exceptions, in Schedule B, Section 2. NOTHING HEREIN CONTAINED WILL BE DEEMED TO OBLIGATE THE COMPANY TO PROVIDE ANY OF THE COVERAGES REFERRED TO HEREIN UNLESS THE ABOVE CONDITIONS ARE FULLY SATISFIED. Order No. 20070355-C3 Stewart Title Disclosures Page - 97 • • • Page - 98 EXHIBIT 1 Stewart Title Guaranty Company Privacy Policy Notice PURPOSE OF THIS NOTICE Title V of the Gramm -Leach -Bliley Act (GLBA) generally prohibits any financial institution, directly or through its affiliates, from sharing nonpublic personal information about you with a nonaffiliated third party unless the institution provides you with a notice of its privacy policies and practices, such as the type of information that it collects about you and the categories of persons or entities to whom it may be disclosed. In compliance with the GLBA, we are providing you with this document, which notifies you of the privacy policies and practices of Stewart Title Guaranty Company . We may collect nonpublic personal information about you from the following sources: • Information we receive from you, such as on applications or other forms. • Information about your transactions we secure from our files, or from our affiliates or others. • Information we receive from a consumer reporting agency. • Information that we receive from others involved in your transaction, such as the real estate agent or lender. Unless it is specifically stated otherwise in an amended Privacy Policy Notice, no additional nonpublic personal information will be collected about you. We may disclose any of the above information that we collect about our customers or former customers to our affiliates or to nonaffiliated third parties as permitted by law. We also may disclose this information about our customers or former customers to the following types of nonaffiliated companies that perform marketing services on our behalf or with whom we have joint marketing agreements: • Financial service providers such as companies engaged in banking, consumer finance, securities and insurance. • Non-financial companies such as envelope stuffers and other fulfillment service providers. WE DO NOT DISCLOSE ANY NONPUBLIC PERSONAL INFORMATION ABOUT YOU WITH ANYONE FOR ANY PURPOSE THAT IS NOT SPECIFICALLY PERMITTED BY LAW. We restrict access to nonpublic personal information about you to those employees who need to know that information in order to provide products or services to you. We maintain physical, electronic, and procedural safeguards that comply with federal regulations to guard your nonpublic personal information. • EXHIBIT 2 Stewart Title Privacy Policy Notice PURPOSE OF THiS NOTICE Title V of the Gramm -Leach -Bliley Act (GLBA) generally prohibits any financial institution, directly or through its affiliates, from sharing nonpublic personal information about you with a nonaffiliated third party unless the institution provides you with a notice of its privacy policies and practices, such as the type of information that it collects about you and the categories of persons or entities to whom it may be disclosed. In compliance with the GLBA, we are providing you with this document, which notifies you of the privacy policies and practices of Stewart Title . We may collect nonpublic personal information about you from the following sources: • Information we receive from you, such as on applications or other forms. • Information about your transactions we secure from our files, or from our affiliates or others. • Information we receive from a consumer reporting agency. • Information that we receive from others involved in your transaction, such as the real estate agent or lender. Unless it is specifically stated otherwise in an amended Privacy Policy Notice, no additional nonpublic personal information will be collected about you. We may discloseany of the above information that we collect about our customers or former customers to our affiliates or to nonaffiliated third parties as permitted by law. We also may disclose this information about our customers or former customers to the following types of nonaffiliated companies that perform marketing services on our behalf or with whom we have joint marketing agreements: • Financial service providers such as companies engaged in banking, consumer finance, securities and insurance. • Non-financial companies such as envelope stuffers and other fulfillment service providers. WE DO NOT DISCLOSE ANY NONPUBLIC PERSONAL INFORMATION ABOUT YOU WITH ANYONE FOR ANY PURPOSE THAT IS NOT SPECIFICALLY PERMPITED BY LAW. We restrict access to nonpublic personal information about you to those employees who need to know that information in order to provide products or services to you. We maintain physical, electronic, and procedural safeguards that comply with federal regulations to guard your nonpublic personal information. Page - 99 • • • Appendix A Wildlife & Ecological Assessment of Residential Development for County Subdivision Marquis Property Garfield County, Colorado October 28, 2009 Report for: Samuel Marquis Jr. 567 Fairfield Lane Louisville, Colorado 80027 Page - 100 Report By: Colorado Wildlife Science, LLC Jonathan Lowsky, MS 0100 Elk Run Drive, Suite 128A Basalt, CO 81621 • Wildlife Assessment — Marquis Property Table of Contents November 9, 2009 1.0 INTRODUCTION 1 2.0 METHODS 1 3.0 SITE DESCRIPTION & VEGETATION 1 4.0 LAND SUITABILITY ANALYSIS: NATURAL HABITAT & MIGRATION ROUTES §4-502(D) 1 1 3 4.1 THREATENED AND ENDANGERED SPECIES 4.1.1 Bald Eagle (ST) 4.2 OTHER SPECIES OF INTEREST 3 4.2.1 Ungulates 3 MULE DEER (ODOCOILEUS HEMIONUS) 3 ROCKY MOUNTAIN BIGHORN SHEEP (OVIS CANADENSIS) 3 ROCKY MOUNTAIN ELK (CERVUS ELAPHUS NELSONI) 3 4.2.2 Other Species of Interest 4 4 RAPTORS - INCLUDING PEREGRINE FALCONS (FALCO PEREGRINUS) 4 GREATER SAGE -GROUSE (CENTROCERCUS UROPHASIANUS) 4 MERRIAM'S TURKEY (MELEAGRIS GALLOPAVO MERRIAM!) 5 TOWNSEND'S BIG -EARED BAT (CORYNORHINUS TOWNSENDII PALLESCENS) 5 5.0 IMPACT ANALYSIS §4-502(E) 5 THREATENED AND ENDANGERED SPECIES 5 6 BLACK BEARS (URSUS AMERICANUS) 5.1.1 Bald Eagle (ST) 5.2 OTHER SPECIES OF INTEREST 6 5.2.1- Ungulates 6 5.2.2 Black Bears 6 5.2.3 Raptors 7 5.2.4 Greater Sage -Grouse 7 5.2.5 Merriam's Turkey 7 5.2.6 Townsend's Big -Eared Bat 7 5.3 ALTERATION OF EXISTING NATIVE VEGETATION 7 6.0 PROTECTION OF WILDLIFE HABITAT AREAS §7-202 7 5.4 SITE PLANNING 6.1 Native vegetation 6.2 Domestic Animal Controls 6.3 Other Measures to Minimize Impacts 9 7.0 NOXIOUS WEED INVENTORY & CONTROL 9 VEGETATION & SOIL CHARACTERISTICS 9 WEEDS 10 7.3 Noxious Weed Descriptions & Integrated Management Methods I I 8.0 LITERATURE CITED 18 MAPS 20 PHOTOS 28 APPENDIX A: CDOW NDIS UNGULATE SEASONAL ACTIVITY AREA DEFINITIONS 36 APPENDIX B: STATE OF COLORADO THREATENED & ENDANGERED VERTEBRATES 38 APPENDIX C: GARFIELD COUNTY NOXIOUS WEED LIST 40 APPENDIX D: COLORADO NOXIOUS WEED LIST 41 7 8 8 COLORADO WILDLIFE SCIENCE, LLC 1 101 • I '' Wile Assessment — A4argt is Properly November 9, 2009 Maps Map 1. Aerial view 21 22 Map 3. CDOW mapped bald eagle habitat 23 Map 4. CDOW mapped mule deer seasonal habitats 24 Map 5. CDOW mapped elk seasonal habitats 25 Map 6. Field verified elk seasonal habitats 26 Map 7. Noxious weed locations 27 Map 2. Topography & Vegetation Photos Photo 1. Topography 29 Photo 2. Two -needle pifion-Utah juniper woodland habitat 29 Photo 3. Merriam's turkey in the hayfields 30 Photo 4. Well managed hayfields 30 Photo 5. Hayfields are in excellent condition 31 31 Photo 7. Absinth wormwood 32 Photo 8. Absinth wormwood, Canada thistle, common tansy, and houndstongue along ditch32 Photo 9. Heavily browsed serviceberry 33 Photo 10. Plumeless thistle in southwest hayfield 33 Photo 11. Canada thistle 34 Photo 12. Oxeye daisy 34 Photo 13. Houndstongue 35 Photo 14. Common mullein 35 Photo 6. Pinon-juniper woodlands at west side of the Property COLORADO WILDLIFE SCIENCE, LLC 102 • • • IN ldttle Assessment — Marquis Property 1.0 INTRODUCTION November 9, 2009 This report presents an evaluation of the wildlife, wildlife habitat, and ecological resources of Marquis Property (the Property) in unincorporated Garfield County and assesses the effects of the proposed action on those resources. This analysis addresses significant, present wildlife use of the Property, evaluates potential effects of development on wildlife and other important ecological resources, and recommends actions to reduce ecological impacts. This report provides all wildlife and wildlife habitat information required by the Garfield County Land Use Code (LUC) — specifically, Land Suitability Analysis, Impact Analysis, and Section 7-202 Protection of Wildlife Habitat Areas. 2.0 METHODS This assessment is based on: 1) An evaluation of the Property and surrounding area; 2) GIS analysis of current Colorado Division of Wildlife (CDOW) Natural Diversity Information Source (NDIS) Species Distribution Maps (CDOW 2009b); (3) on-site consultation with Travis Trant, CDOW District Wildlife Manager, Basalt; and (4) the author's experience in recognizing, avoiding, minimizing, and mitigating potential impacts of development and recreation on wildlife and other ecological resources in the Roaring Fork Valley and western Colorado. 3.0 SITE DESCRIPTION & VEGETATION The Property is situated in the North-Central Highlands and Rocky Mountain Section of the Southern Rocky Mountains Steppe - Open Woodland - Coniferous Forest - Alpine Meadow Physiographic Province (Bailey 1976, 1995; Bailey et al. 1998; Omernik 1987). Elevation of Marquis Property ranges from approximately 6,752 to 7,087 feet above mean sea level. The Property consists of the relatively flat to gently rolling hayfields to moderate and steep slopes with west to south aspects (Map 2; Photo 1). The hayfields are dominated by common pasture grasses such as crested wheatgrass, smooth brome, and timothy. Vegetation on the slopes can be accurately described as a two -needle pinon-Utah juniper (Pinus edulis Juniperus osteosperma) woodland (Photo 2) with a relatively sparse understory of native grasses such as Indian ricegrass (Achnatherum hymenoides) and needleandthread (Hesperostipa comata) and (orbs. Gambel oak (Quercusgambelia) occurs in patches as well. 4.0 LAND SUITABILITY ANALYSIS: Natural Habitat & Migration Routes §4-502(D) 4.1 Threatened and Endangered Species1 There are no federally listed Endangered or Threatened (T&E) amphibians, birds, mammals, or reptiles known or suspected to occur on the Property. T&E (and Candidate) species addressed in this evaluation are those included on the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS) Garfield County T&E list (U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service 2009). Also included are species listed as Endangered or Threatened by the State of Colorado that occur in Garfield County. Some of the species listed below are typically found within habitats that do not occur within the project area or within areas that cannot be affected by actions associated with the project. There will be no effect on these off-site species. A brief rationale for the "no effect" determination for each of these species is included in the following paragraphs. Table 1. Threatened or Endangered Species that may occur in Garfield County, Colorado or may be affected b the project. Potential Status` Habitat in Common Name Latin Name Occurrence 1 See Appendix B for the list of Colorado Threatened and Endangered species Surveys Conducted? COLORADO WILDLIFE SCIENCE, LLC 1 061.0 INTRODUCTION 1 1 In Colorado, statewide along rivers, lakes, reservoirs. All of the conterminous United States and Alaska. Two-thirds of breeding sites west of Continental Divide. Concentrations include the Yampa. White, and Colorado Rivers (Kingery g Bald Eagle 1998). ........_._ .................._.._.................................................................................................._................................................................._............................ Haliaeetus leucocephalus Open water bodies, prairie dog colonies important food source during the winter. I Breeding: Usually nests in tall trees or on cliffs near water. Winter: Preferentially I roosts in conifers or other sheltered sites in winter in some areas; typically selects the larger, more accessible trees. Perching in deciduous and coniferous trees is equally common in other areas (NatureServe 2005). I British Columbia east to Saskatchewan south through most of western US, 1 Mexico, Central America, and South America. Found primarily in eastem Colorado as a summer resident but also on west slope, primarily in Mesa County, 1 but also Delta, Garfield, Montrose, and Montezuma (Kingery 1998). Burrowing Owl Athene cunicularia Nest primarily in near prairie dog and other ground squirrel burrows. Prefer 3 sparsely vegetated habitat particularly shortgrass prairie in eastern Colorado and semi -desert shrubland on the west slope (Kingery 1998). ST ST Effect Yes No No No Effect No No Effect Mexican Spotted Owl . Strix occidentalis lucida Southern Utah and Colorado, through Arizona, New Mexico, and west Texas, to the mountains of central Mexico (Rinkevich et al. 1995). Complex forest or rocky canyons that contain uneven -aged, multi-level and old- FT, ST aged, thick forests. below 9,500 feet elevation. Nests in standing snags and 1 hollow trees (Rinkevich et al. 1995) No No No Effect ':, In Colorado west of the Continental Divide, the species was probably never common (Bailey & Niedrach 1965; Kingery 1998) and is now extremely rare I (Kingery 1998). One confirmed nesting observation occurred along the Yampa River near Hayden during the Breeding Bird Atlas surveys conducted from 1987 - Western Yellow -Billed 1994 (Kingery 1998) and one cuckoo, representing a probable nesting pair in Cuckoo surveyed lowland river riparian habitat along six rivers in west -central Colorado 1 (Dexter 1998). FC, SC Coccyzus americanus Nest in deciduous woodlands associated with wetlands or I streams. Require combination of dense willow understory for nesting, a cottonwood overstory for foraging, and large patches of habitat (Gaines & 1 Laymon 1984; Kingery 1998; Laymon 1980). Feed on grasshoppers, caterpillars, beetles and other insects (Dillinger 1989). No No No Effect i Historic and current breeding status of the southwestem willow flycatcher in Colorado is unclear (USF&WS 1995; USFWS 1995). Breeding willow flycatchers Southwestern Willow ` with genetic characteristics of the southwestern ssp. occur at Alamosa NWR and Flycatcher 1McIntire Springs (USFWS 2002). Empidonax traillii extimus I Breeds in patchy to dense riparian habitats along streams or other wetlands, near or adjacent to surface water or underlain by saturated soil. Occupied sites usually I consist of dense vegetation in the patch interior, or an aggregate of dense patches interspersed with openings (USFWS 1995). FE, SE No No No Effect MAMMALS Wildlife Assessment — Marquis Properly' November 9, 2009 Canada lynx Lynx canadensis Black -footed ferret Mustela nigripes Once ranged from AK to northern NM, west into CA, and east to ME. By early 11970s were all but eliminated from the S. Rockies due to trapping, shooting, and habitat degradation. CDOW reintroduced 218 lynx in San Juan mountains between 1999 and 2007. Have since spread throughout the region, including the RF Valley and Elk Mountains. Engelmann spruce/subalpine fir is the habitat used by lynx with a mix of spruce, I fir and aspen second. Riparian and riparian -mix areas used heavily too. Lynx in I Colorado increasingly using riparian areas beginning in July, peaking in November, and dropping off December through June (Shenk 2009). Never abundant in Colorado. Historically occupied more than 100 million ac of western grasslands, from Rocky Mountains eastward throughout Great Plains, now reduced to handful of reintroduction sites in wild. Reintroduced to less than 12 sites, including Wolf Creek in NW CO near Rangely. Large prairie dog towns in the Great Plains, montane basins, and semi -arid grasslands. 2003 CDOW statewide river otter survey found 3 viable populations: Gunnison, Piedra, and Green river populations. In addition, evidence of otters was on the Cache la Poudre, South Platte, Michigan, and Illinois rivers and also reported No North American river otter 1 additional individual sightings. River otters are found occasionally in the Roaring Fork and Crystal River. Lontra canadensis ST No Water bodies and riparian areas within a broad range of ecosystems from semi- : desert shrubland to montane and subalpine forest. The primary habitat requirement for river otters is permanent water with abundant fish or crustacean I prey and relatively high water quality (Boyle 2006). $Status: T = Threatened ; E = Endangered; P = Proposed; FC = Candidate for federal listing; SC = State species of concern FT, SE No FE, SE No No No Effect No No Effect No Effect 1 J Of the 8 state and federally listed, candidate, and proposed species potentially occurring or potentially affected by actions within the project area only bald eagles have habitat within close proximity of the project area. COLORADO WILDLIFE SCIENCE, LLC 13BLAND SUITABILITY ANALYSIS: Natural Habitat & Migration Routes §4-502(D) 2 Wildlife Assessment — Marquis Property November 9, 2009 4.1.1 Bald Eagle (ST) Background Bald eagles were listed as endangered under the ESA in 1978 but had recovered sufficiently by 1995 to be downlisted to threatened status. This species is also state -listed as threatened. Because of its successful recovery, there is a current proposal to delict bald eagles from the ESA, but protections would remain under the Migratory Bird Treaty Act (MBTA), and the Bald Eagle Protection Act. Bald eagles are listed as Threatened by the state of Colorado (CDOW 2009a). According to CDOW data, in 2001 there were 51 known nesting pairs in Colorado, and approximately 1,000 bald eagles winter in the state (CDOW 2007). Bald eagles depend on large roost trees that allow them a wide field of vision for prey. Food sources include fish, small mammals, waterfowl, and carrion. Known sensitive habitats in the project area include winter range, winter foraging habitat (Map 3). No known bald eagle nests occur in or adjacent to the project area. Effects of Proposed Action The closest active nest is at Aspen Glen, more than 3.9 miles to the west and there are no active roost sites within close proximity to the Property. Winter forage and winter range are broadly defined habitat areas that occupy very large areas (CDOW 2009c): Winter Forage: Foraging areas frequented by wintering bald eagles between November 15 and March 15. May be a large area radiating from preferred roosting sites. In westem Colorado preferred roosting sites are within dominant riparian zones. Winter Range: Those areas where bald eagles have been observed between November 15 and April 1. 4.2 Other Species of Interest This section addresses present use of the study area by significant wildlife not listed by the state or federal government. The `significant' wildlife use described herein refers to those wildlife species that are of ecological, economic, regulatory, social, and/or political importance. 4.2.1 Ungulates Mule Deer (Odocoileus hemionus) Mule deer are present within the project area throughout the year. Recent observation and CDOW NDIS data (CDOW 2009f) reveal that the entire study area is within active mule deer summer and winter range2 (Map 4). The project area is situated approximately 0.4 miles from the nearest severe winter range and 0.5 miles from the nearest winter concentration area. Densities of mule deer are greatest within the project area when migratory animals join resident herds on winter range for the season. Preferred forage shrubs on the Property are lightly to moderately browsed and mule deer sign (i.e., pellets, tracks, etc.) is present and in density appropriate to the CDOW mapping. The proposed lot contains no significant mule deer habitat. Rocky Mountain Bighorn Sheep (Ovis canadensis) There is no mapped (CDOW 2009d) or field verified bighorn sheep habitat on or immediately adjacent to the study area. Rocky Mountain Elk (Cervus elaphus nelsoni) 2 See Appendix C for CDOW seasonal habitat definitions COLORADO WILDLIFE SCIENCE, LLC 1 3BLAND SUITABILITY ANALYSIS: Natural Habitat & Migration Routes §4-502(D) 3 Wildlife Assessment — Marquis Properly November 9, 2009 The Property is mapped by the CDOW as within elk winter range, severe winter range and winter concentration area (Map 5) (CDOW 2009e). CDOW defines WC and SWR as follows (CDOW 2009d, e): SEVERE WINTER RANGE: That part of the overall range where 90% of the individuals are located when the annual snowpack is at its maximum and/or temperatures are at a minimum in the two worst winters out of ten. WINTER CONCENTRATION: That part of the winter range where densities are at least 200% greater than the surrounding winter range density during the same period used to define winter range in the average five winters out of ten. CDOW includes the following disclaimer with all of its NDIS digital data: "Care should be taken in interpreting these data. Written documents may accompany this map and should be referenced. The information portrayed on these maps should not replace field studies necessary for more localized planning efforts. The data are gathered at a variety of scales; discrepancies may become apparent at larger scales. The areas portrayed here are graphic representations of phenomena that are difficult to reduce to two dimensions. Animal distributions are fluid; animal populations and their habitats are dynamic." The seasonal elk habitats are mapped at a 1:24,000 scale and often need to be confirmed and/or modified (i.e., field verified) to reflect more micro -scale conditions. Colorado Wildlife Science conducted a detailed field study of the Property. This site assessment revealed that although the SWC and surrounding properties do indeed contain elk winter range and winter concentration, the NDIS mapping was very coarse. The southerly -facing pifion juniper dominated slopes on the west and north sides of the Property are indeed potential severe winter range and winter concentration habitat Travis Trant, CDOW District Wildlife Manager confirmed that the Property is not within active elk severe winter range or a winter concentration area (T. Trant, personal communication, 22 October 2009). Mr. Trant did, however, agree that the Property is within elk winter range but stated that winter use is relatively light (Map 6). 4.2.2 Other Species of Interest Black Bears (Ursus americanus) Black bears can be found throughout the study area. The CDOW maps much of the Property as within a black bear fall concentration area and human conflict area (CDOW 2009e). Although no bears or bear sign was observed during the site reconnaissance, it is likely that that the mapping is accurate given the landscape level habitat types and the reported human -bear conflicts in the area. Raptors - including Peregrine Falcons (Falco peregrinus) CWS conducted a raptor nest search. No raptor nests were found. No breeding or nesting activity was observed. No peregrine falcon activity areas, nests, or potential nesting areas are located in the vicinity of the Property (CDOW 2009g). Greater Sage -Grouse (Centrocercus urophasianus) Missouri Heights historically supported greater sage -grouse. Unfortunately, these large grouse have been extirpated from the Roaring Fork Watershed. The major threat to greater sage -grouse is the continued degradation and destruction of sagebrush habitats across the West. Agriculture has completely eliminated millions of acres of native shrub -steppe habitat dominated by sagebrush, while additional millions of hectares of shrub -steppe have been stripped of their sagebrush vegetation. Overgrazing and urban development also contribute to the COLORADO WILDLIFE SCIENCE, LLC 13BLAND SUITABILITY ANALYSIS: Natural Habitat & Migration Routes §4-502(D) 4 ldlife Assessment — Marquis Property November 9, 2009 degradation of shrub -steppe habitat. Three separate petitions for listing the greater sage -grouse range -wide as Threatened or Endangered under the Endangered Species Act were submitted between July of 2002 and December of 2003. Merriam's Turkey (Meleagris gallopavo merriami) A popular game species, Merriam's turkeys were historically found in the ponderosa pine forests of Colorado, New Mexico, and northern Arizona. They have been transplanted into a variety of pine forests of Colorado, Utah, Idaho, Washington, Oregon, California, Montana, Wyoming, Nebraska and South Dakota. In the Roaring Fork Valley, Merriam's turkeys or most commonly found pifion pine woodlands and lower elevation riparian areas but at elevations ranging from 3,500 to about 8,000 feet. The Property is within an area known to support high densities of turkeys throughout the year (Photo 3). Wild turkeys are susceptible to many infectious and non-infectious diseases and parasites. Those most commonly found in birds located early enough to diagnose include: avian pox; several viruses associated with domestic poultry — mycoplasmosis, salmonellosis, histomoniasis (blackhead), coccidiosis, and numerous other diseases and parasites. Townsend's Big -Eared Bat (Corynorhinus townsendii pallescens) This bat of western North America, ranging from southern British Columbia to southern Mexico is a State Species of Concern and is ranked "Imperiled" (G4T4/S2 by CNHP. Townsend's big -eared bat can be found throughout Colorado except on the eastern plains. Townsend's big -eared bat can be found in mines, caves and structures in woodlands and forests to elevations above 9,500 feet (Ellison et al. 2003; Siemers 2002). The animals do not make major migrations and appear relatively sedentary. Hibernacula have low and stable temperatures during late October to April (Gruver & Keinath 2006; Sherwin et al. 2000). The primary threats to this ecologically valuable bat include the loss, modification, and disturbance of roosting habitat resulting from the closure of abandoned mines, recreation activity at roosts (particularly recreational exploration of caves and mine interiors), and renewed mining at historical sites (Ellison et al. 2003; Gruver & Keinath 2006). Also significant in the decline of Townsend's big -eared bat is the loss of important foraging habitat. Foraging habitat has been reduced via the elimination or reduction of forest canopy, elimination or alteration of wetland habitat, and conversion of native shrublands and grasslands to urban or agricultural uses (Ellison et al. 2003; Gruver & Keinath 2006). 5.0 IMPACT ANALYSIS §4-502(E) The physical removal of vegetation or other habitat features is known as direct habitat loss. Disturbance resulting from human activity associated with each home site or infrastructure will decrease the effectiveness of habitat that remains physically undisturbed. This is known as indirect habitat loss. As with development of most ranch or agricultural properties in western Colorado, the implementation of the proposed project will have some direct and indirect effects on wildlife and wildlife habitat. Both direct and indirect impacts of the current proposal, however, are limited to hayfields and will not affect any native habitats. Threatened and Endangered Species As discussed above, there are no ESA listed or Candidate species known to occur in the vicinity of Marquis Property. As such, it is highly unlikely that the proposed development will have any effect on federal Threatened, Endangered, or Candidate vertebrate species (See Table 1, above). COLORADO WILDLIFE SCIENCE, LLC 1 4BIMPACT ANALYSIS §4-502(E) 5 Wildlife Assessment — Marquis Property November 9, 2009 5.1.1 Bald Eagle (ST) The portion of the Property proposed for development occupies an infinitesimal acreage of the CDOW mapped bald eagle winter forage area and bald eagle winter range. The winter forage area and winter range in which the Property is situated are 76,010 acres and 460,326 acres, respectively. As such, it is unlikely that the proposed development will have significant impacts on these habitat areas. Given that there are no active or historic nest sites or roosts within close proximity to the Property and the area occupies negligible portions of the winter range and winter foraging areas, the project will have no effect on bald eagle habitat. 5.2 Other Species of Interest 5.2.1 Ungulates As stated above, the Marquis Property is mapped by the CDOW as within mule deer winter range and elk winter range, severe winter range (SWR) and an elk winter concentration area (WCA). These habitat types are considered limiting habitats for elk herds in the Roaring Fork watershed. Consequently, they are some of the seasonal ungulate habitats CDOW is most protective of regarding residential development. Both elk and mule deer on winter range continuously seek the most moderate ambient weather conditions. Other factors influencing habitat selection are secondary. In winter, elk move between foraging and bedding sites in response to changing ambient temperatures, increasing snow depths, and to enhance control of body temperature. On the coldest days and/or when snow depths are greatest, both species seek southerly and westerly facing slopes where snows typically melt quickly. Snow depths greater than 12 inches begin to reduce the winter range (USFWS 1982). In general, mule deer and elk do not tolerate snow depths greater than chest height and are impeded when snow is knee-deep (Loveless 1967; Kelsall & Prescott 1971; Parker 1984; Toweill et al. 2002; Ungulate Winter Range Technical Advisory Team 2005). Consequently, winter range of larger elk covers a greater areal extent of lands with greater snow depths than that of mule deer (Parker 1984). The Proposal may affect, but is not likely to adversely affect elk or mule deer. The site assessment revealed that the project area does not, in fact, serve as elk severe winter range nor is it within an elk winter concentration area. Although there is some evidence of use of the Property by elk in winter, there is a paucity of evidence that elk concentrate in significant numbers and/or densities sufficient to meet the definition of these habitat types. The large numbers of elk that gather in an area identified by the CDOW as a WCA typically leave significant and long-lasting sign of their presence. The Property is largely devoid of native plant communities with few preferred forage shrubs such as Gambel oak, Saskatoon or Utah serviceberry. Game trails and pellet piles are present on the slopes on the north and west sides of the Property but not in the densities that typically occur within SWR and WCAs. The relatively flat hayfields hold deep snow in winter that precludes use as SWR and WCA. 5.2.2 Black Bears The proposed development will not result in the direct or indirect loss of black bear habitat and will have no effect on black bears. COLORADO WILDLIFE SCIENCE, LLC 1 4BIMPACT ANALYSIS §4-502(E) 6 Wildlife Assessment— Marquis Property November 9, 2009 5.2.3 Raptors Residential development at Marquis Property as proposed will not result in the loss of any known raptor nests, nest stands, or any unique habitat attributes. Loss of anthropogenic grasslands (i.e., hayfields) will reduce hunting acreage for some generalist species such as American kestrels, great -horned owls (Bubo virginianus) and red-tailed hawks. The proposed amendment may affect, but is not likely to adversely affect raptors. 5.2.4 Greater Sage -Grouse Greater sage -grouse have been extirpated from the area. Consequently, there will be no effect on greater sage -grouse. 5.2.5 Merriam's Turkey During winter Merriam's turkeys congregate in the pinon pine -oak habitats with aspects that range from westerly to southerly. Deep snow forces them to move to lower elevations. During spring snow melt they again move up slope following the snow line and breeding activity begins. The Marquis application does not propose development within or adjacent to the pinon juniper dominated slopes on the Property. Although turkeys do use the hayfields in summer, this use is not a limiting factor. As such, the proposal may affect, but is not likely to adversely affect Merriam's turkeys. 5.2.6 Townsend's Big -Eared Bat The Proposal will have no effect on Townsend's big -eared bats. Development of the Property as proposed will not result in the loss of any Townsend's big -eared bat habitat. 5.3 Alteration of Existing Native Vegetation The Proposal will have no effect on any native vegetation. 6.0 PROTECTION OF WILDLIFE HABITAT AREAS §7-202 The following measures will reduce the impacts of the proposed development on wildlife. 5.4 Site planning 1. Fencing — Fencing that is incompatible with wildlife movements can result in direct wildlife mortality, restricted or blocked movement, and reduction of habitat effectiveness. a. Fences should meet or exceed CDOW fence standards (except fences used to contain dogs): (1) Wood rail fencing should employ three rails or less, be the round or split rail type, should not exceed 52 inches in height above mean ground level and 2 inches in width (top view), and should have at least 18 inches between two of the rails. (2) Wire fences should consist of smooth wire with a maximum height of 42 inches above mean ground level. The middle wire should be 30 inches above mean ground level, providing an 18 inch kick -space below the top strand. COLORADO WILDLIFE SCIENCE, LLC I 5BPROTECTION OF WILDLIFE HABITAT AREAS §7-202 7 Wildlife Assessment—[Marquis Property November 9, 2009 The bottom strand should be 18 inches above mean ground level to facilitate movement of fawns and elk calves as well as other wildlife. 6.1 Native vegetation 1. Native vegetation should be preserved to the maximum extent possible except where management is necessary to reduce wildfire hazards. 2. Native vegetation should be preserved within all residential lots except within a designated landscape area or envelope that should encompass no more than 1/4 of the lot. 3. An orange safety fence should be required around building envelopes during construction to prevent any unnecessary vegetation disturbance during construction. 4. Building envelopes and any areas disturbed outside the building envelope should be immediately restored according to Garfield County Vegetation Management Reclamation Standards. 5. Following construction, it should be prohibited to disturb naturally occurring vegetation outside building envelopes of each lot. 61 Domestic Animal Controls Dogs running at large pose a significant threat to wildlife. Although dogs are rarely successful in catching the many animals they chase, they do occasionally kill wildlife. More often, they injure the wildlife enough to cause their eventual death. Packs of dogs are much more efficient hunters, and have been known to kill adult mule deer and elk. When dogs are unsuccessful in catching the object of their chase, the potential prey has had to expend significant energy in order to evade the dog. This expenditure of energy, particularly in winter when food is scarce, threatens the survival of that animal (or group of animals). In particular, pregnant wildlife and newborn animals do not have the reserves to repeatedly expend in avoiding dogs. 1. When outside, all dogs should be leashed or restricted to a fenced enclosure (i.e., kennel or run) adjacent to the residence. 2. Leashes should be required whenever a dog is on common roads, open space, or other common property. 3. Dogs of guests should be required to comply with these restrictions. 4. Contractors should be prohibited from bringing their dogs on site during construction even if kept within their vehicles. 5. Residences should be limited to a maximum of 2 dogs except litters less than 6 months old. In order to prevent the spread of disease from domestic fowl to wild turkeys, the CDOW recommends that the keeping of domestic fowl should be prohibited on the Marquis Subdivision (T. Trant, personal communication). COLORADO WILDLIFE SCIENCE, LLC 1 5BPROTECTION OF WILDLIFE HABITAT AREAS §7-202 h Wildlife Assessment — Marquis Property November 9, 2009 6.3 Other Measures to Minimize Impacts 1. Black Bears - As discussed above, black bears are common in the Spring Park area in the non -winter months. Increasingly, residential development is causing conflicts with bears by introducing them to garbage, barbecue grills, bird feeders, and other attractants which results in habituation and occasional aggression toward people. a. All refuse containers should meet bear -proof specifications set by the Living with Wildlife Foundation (http://www.lwwf.org/Bear- resistant%20products%20testing.htm) or kept in a bear -proof enclosure or garage until the day of pickup. b. No fruit -bearing trees and shrubs should be included in landscaping. c. Pets should not be fed outside. d. Wherever possible, lever style door handles will be avoided on the exterior of the house. e. Bird feeders should be avoided from April through November. f. Composting should be restricted to yard waste (e.g., leaves and grass clippings). Food waste should be prohibited within compost. 2. Education - Residents should be provided with educational material pertaining to local wildlife (e.g., CDOW brochures entitled "Living with Wildlife in Bear Country" and "Developing with Wildlife in Mind). 3. Construction Timing - In order to reduce the effects of construction activity on wintering animals, construction activity should be limited to the period between April 1st and November 30th 4. CDOW Indemnification - Owners of lots at Marquis Property should be required to indemnity the CDOW from any and all wildlife damage claims 7.0 NOXIOUS WEED INVENTORY & CONTROL The purpose of the following vegetation and weed management plan is to ensure that the proposed development does not result in: (i) erosion and dust generation, (ii) the propagation of noxious weeds, (iii) the excessive loss of wildlife habitat and food sources, and (iv) long-term visual eyesores. Vegetation & Soil Characteristics As described above, most of the Property (approximately 29.6 acres) is occupied by well managed flood - irrigated hayfields dominated by crested wheatgrass (Agropyron cristatum) and smooth brome (Bromus inermis) (Photos 4, 5), approximately 17.9 acres of the Property are occupied native two -needle pifion-Utah juniper woodland (Photo 6), and approximately 1.6 acres are occupied by residential landscaping (Map 7). The vegetation composition largely reflects the soil composition of the site (Map X SOIL). For the most part, the hay fields occupy the Empedrado loam while the pifion-juniper woodland occupies Tridell-Brownsto stony sandy loams. Empedrado loam is particularly well suited for hay and pasture. Water erosion hazard in both of these soil types is moderate. Runoff is moderate in the Empedrado loam and rapid in the Tridell-Brownsto. The only significant soil erosion located on the Property is along the Park Ditch that runs east to west and then north to south on the northern and then western sides of the Property (Map 1). COLORADO WILDLIFE SCIENCE, LLC 16BNOXIOUS WEED INVENTORY & CONTROL 9 • • Wildlife Assessment - Marquis Property November 9, 2009 Weeds A noxious weed survey was completed on the Marquis Property on 12 October 2009. The following weeds included on the current State of Colorado and/or Garfield County Noxious Weed Lists are listed below with common and Latin names plus location of infestations in UTM (NAD1983) coordinates. Table 2. Noxious weed species occurring on the Property with locations of significant infestations Common Name Latin Name State Cate eed UTM ory' Zone Easting Northing Absinth wormwood Artemisia absinthium L. B 13 311967.5621 4367553.1635 Absinth wormwood Artemisia absinthium L. B 13 312047.4946 4367761.2251 Absinth wormwood Artemisia absinthium L. B 13 311986.2272 4367745.5386 Absinth wormwood Artemisia absinthium L. B 13 311972.0151 4367691.4642 Absinth wormwood Artemisia absinthium L. B 13 311956.2188 4367613.5432 Absinth wormwood Artemisia absinthium L. 13 312253.9535 4367718.2916 Canada thistle Cirsium arvense B 13 311967.5621 4367553.1635 Canada thistle Cirsium arvense 13 312047.4946 4367761.2251 Canada thistle Cirsium arvense B 13 311986.2272 4367745.5386 Canada thistle Cirsium arvense B 13 311972.0151 4367691.4642 Canada thistle Cirsium arvense B 13 311956.2188 4367613.5432 Canada thistle Cirsium arvense B 13 312253.9535 4367718.2916 Common mullein Verbascum thapsus C 13 311967.5621 4367553.1635 Common mullein Verbascum thapsus 13 312003.7570 4367762.4259 Common mullein Verbascum thapsus C 13 311986.2272 4367745.5386 Common tansy Tanacetum vulgare L. 13 312047.4946 4367761.2251 Common tansy Tanacetum vulgare L. B 13 311986.2272 4367745.5386 Common tansy Tanacetum vulgare L. B 13 311972.0151 4367691.4642 Common tansy Tanacetum vulgare L. B 13 311956.2188 4367613.5432 Common tansy Tanacetum vulgare L. B 13 312047.4946 4367761.2251 Houndstongue Cynoglossum officinale B 13 311967.5621 4367553.1635 Houndstongue Cynoglossum officinale 13 312047.4946 4367761.2251 Houndstongue Cynoglossum officinale B 13 312003.7570 4367762.4259 Houndstongue Cynoglossum officinale B 13 311972.0151 4367691.4642 Houndstongue Cynoglossum officinale B 13 311956.2188 4367613.5432 Musk thistle Carduus nutans B 13 311967.5621 4367553.1635 Oxeye daisy Leucanthemum vulgare B 13 311967.5621 4367553.1635 Oxeye daisy Leucanthemum vulgare B 13 311986.2272 4367745.5386 Plumeless thistle Carduus acanthoides B 13 311967.5621 4367553.1635 Plumeless thistle Carduus acanthoides 13 312047.4946 4367761.2251 Plumeless thistle Carduus acanthoides B 13 311986.2272 4367745.5386 Plumeless thistle Carduus acanthoides B 13 311972.0151 4367691.4642 Plumeless thistle Carduus acanthoides B 13 311956.2188 4367613.5432 COLORADO WILDLIFE SCIENCE, LLC 1 6BNOXIOUS WEED INVENTORY & CONTROL 10 Wildlife Assessment — Marquis Property November 9, 2009 Common Name Latin Name State Weed UTM Categor Zone Plumeless thistle Carduus acanthoides B 1 Easting Northing 3 311958.0906 4367519.2113 *List B weed species for which the Colorado Commissioner of Agriculture, in consultation with the state noxious weed advisory committee, local governments, and other interested parties, develops and implements state noxious weed management plans designed to stop the continued spread of these species. List C weed species are species for which the Commissioner, in consultation with the State Noxious Weed Advisory Committee, local governments, and other interested parties, will develop and implement state noxious weed management plans designed to support the efforts of local governing bodies to facilitate more effective integrated weed management on private and public lands. The goal of such plans will not be to stop the continued spread of these species but to provide additional education, research, and biological control resources to jurisdictions that choose to require management of List C species. 7.3 Noxious Weed Descriptions & Integrated Management Methods Integrated management techniques include cultural, mechanical, biological and chemical strategies. The optimum method or methods for weed management vary depending on a number of site specific variables. These factors include soil type and stability, grade, associated vegetation, existing and proposed land use, proximity to water, availability of irrigation water, weed type and stage of growth, and severity of infestation. The management method selected should be the least environmentally damaging, yet practical and reasonable in achieving the desired results. Weed management on the Property should prioritize areas that may transport weed seeds. These areas include ditches, streams, roadsides, driveways, trails, livestock concentrated areas, and equipment storage sites. The weeds are listed in order of the size of the infestation on the Property. ABSINTH WORMWOOD (Artemisia absinthium L.) Garfield County List B - Noxious Weeds Designated for Eradication Description: Absinth wormwood is a member of the Sunflower family (Photos 7, 8). It is a robust perennial that grows 16 to 48 inches tall with large light gray leaves which are oblong in shape. Stems arise from a taproot and branch from the base. Stems are 1/2 inch or greater in diameter, and reddish in color. Flowering occurs in late summer. It is frequently found near streams, lakes or irrigation ditches. Biological control: No known biological controls at this time. Chemical control: Several herbicides are effective at label rates with an adjuvant helping to penetrate hairs to leaf surface. Herbicides commonly used to control absinth wormwood include Milestone (aminopyralid), Banvel (dicamba), 2,4-D, Tordon (picloram) and Roundup (glyphosate). These herbicides should be applied when the plant is at least 12 inches tall and actively growing. Herbicides applied from late June until mid August have given better residual control the following growing season than either spring or fall treatments. Re -treatments in late June to mid-August have given better control the following season than spring or fall treatments. Cultural control: Good perennial grass cover resists infestation. Mechanical control: Summer fallow and fall tillage prevent establishment on cultivated land, but spring tillage is less effective. Cutting or mowing reduces seed production. COLORADO WILDLIFE SCIENCE, LLC 1 6BNOXIOUS WEED INVENTORY & CONTROL 11 Wildlife Assessment — Marquis Property November 9, 2009 COMMON TANSY (Tanacetum vulgare L.) Garfield County List B - Noxious Weeds Designated for Eradication Description: Common tansy (Photo 9) is a member of the Aster family. Originally imported from Europe as an ornamental, it is a perennial plant that grows from 11/2 to 6 feet tall with yellow button -like flowers and fern -like leaves. Reproducing by both seed and rootstock, tansy is difficult to control. Tansy is particularly aggressive when growing along irrigation ditches where it can restrict water flow. Comments: Common tansy is found throughout the US. Also, widespread in Garfield County, usually in small dense patches in sub -irrigated areas along roads, ditches, and in waste areas and pastures. Alternatives to planting tansy include tall yellow yarrow and wooly cinquefoil. Biological control: No known biological controls at this time. Chemical control: Several herbicides are effective. Escort or Telar (Chlorsulfuron) are the most effective herbicides for controlling common tansy when applied to actively growing plants before bloom at 0.5 ounces/acre. Cultural control: Competitive vegetative cover helps but does not completely prevent infestation of common tansy. Mechanical control: Repeated mowing or cutting will inhibit seed production. Pulling or digging is ineffective. PLUMELESS THISTLE (Carduus acanthoides) Garfield County List B - Noxious Weeds Designated for Eradication Description: Plumeless thistle (Photo 10) is a member of the Aster family. Introduced from Eurasia, it is a winter annual or biennial. This plant can be distinguished from musk thistle by its smaller flowers from 1/2 to 1 inch in diameter. The leaves of plumeless thistle lack the prominent white margin present on musk thistle leaves. The plant may grow to a height of 5 feet or more. Flowers are reddish -purple and are either solitary or clustered. Taproots are large and fleshy. Plumeless thistle is an extremely prolific seed producer. It is found in pastures, river valleys, and along roadsides. Comments: Plumeless thistle is primarily found in the tri -county areas of Eagle, Garfield and Pitkin Counties. It has been classified by the Colorado Department of Agriculture as a "list B" eradication species. Biological control: The seed -head weevil (Rhinocyllus conicus) which attacks musk thistle, also feeds on plumeless thistle seeds. Another musk thistle weevil (Trichosirocalus horridus) has been released on plumeless thistle in Garfield County. This weevil appears to be ineffective on plumeless thistle. (For additional information please contact the Colorado Department of COLORADO WILDLIFE SCIENCE, LLC 1 6BNOXIOUS WEED INVENTORY & CONTROL 12 IVildlifeAssessment — Marquir Property November 9, 2009 II/ Agriculture/DPI Biological Pest Control Program.) Chemical control: There are several herbicides effective at label rates. Apply herbicide at the vegetative stage either in the first or second year of the lifecycle (spring/fall). Applications of Milestone in the spring when plumeless thistle is in the rosette to early bolting growth stage or to rosettes in fall are effective. Spring applications are preferred. Cultural control: Plumeless thistle seedlings are not competitive with established forage grasses. Maintaining a healthy pasture can help prevent invasion by plumeless thistle. Plumeless thistle also does not tolerate regular cultivation of digging. Mechanical control: Mowing can be effective if plants are mowed at late bloom, but before seed production occurs. • CANADA THISTLE (Cirsium arvense) Garfield County List B - Noxious Weeds Designated for Eradication Description: Canada thistle (Photo 11) is a member of the Aster family. Canada thistle was introduced from Europe. It is. a_.perennial which reproduces by. seeds and fleshy, horizontal roots. The erect stem is hollow, smooth and slightly hairy, 1 to 5 feet tall, simple, and branched at the top. The color is primarily lavender, pink, or purple. Comments: Canada thistle emerges in May in most parts of Garfield County. It is one of the most widespread and economically damaging noxious weeds in Colorado. Infestations are found in cultivated fields, riparian areas, pastures, rangeland, forests, lawns and gardens, roadsides, and in waste areas. Because of its seeding habits, vigorous growth, and extensive underground root system, control or eradication is difficult. Canada thistle is best managed through an integrated management system that emphasizes competitive, desirable plants. Biological control: There are currently three types of insect available: • The Thistle Stem Weevil (Ceutorhvncus litura) is a weevil that stresses the crown of the plant. C. litura alone will not effectively control Canada thistle. It must be combined with other methods to be successful. • The Thistle Defoliating Beetle (Cassida rubiginosa) is a leaf eating beetle, which will also eat the foliage of plumeless and musk thistles. • The Thistle Stem Gall Fly (Urophora cardui) is a fly which attacks the primary and lateral stems of Canada thistle, reducing seed production. Chemical control: Some herbicides are effective at label rates if strict attention is paid to timing (usually at bud stage and/or fall) which helps promote translocation to the extensive root system. Make sure to use appropriate herbicide if working in or around wet areas. Chemical control is most effective when combined with cultural or mechanical control. There have been reports of Canada thistle resistance to synthetic auxins in Hungary and Sweden, but no reports of COLORADO WILDLIFE SCIENCE, LLC 1 6BNOXIOUS WEED INVENTORY & CONTROL 13 Wildlife Assessment — Marquis Property November 9, 2009 resistance in the United States. Research at Colorado State University shows that Tordon 22K (picloram), Milestone, Transline (clopyralid), Banvel/ Vanquish/Clarity (dicamba) and Telar (chlorsulfuron) are effective against Canada thistle. Cultural control: Maintain soil disturbances, and encourage desirable plant growth. Mechanical control: Canada thistle is very difficult to mechanically control because each time a root is cut, it serves to increase the number of plants; regular cutting or tillage can wear down plant reserves and reduce population and vigor but results are often erratic. OXEYE DAISY (Leucanthemum vulgare) Garfield County List B - Noxious Weeds Designated for Eradication Description: Oxeye daisy (Photo 12) is a perennial weed in the sunflower family (Asteraceae). Plants develop many stems 1 to 3 feet tall. Stems are slender and erect and can develop from upturned rhizomes or from a root crown. Oxeye daisy has two types of leaves. Basal leaves are stalked, spoon shaped, and broadly toothed. They grow 2 to 5 inches long and 2 inches wide. Stem leaves are alternate, smooth and dark green. Leaf stalks are short and clasp the stem. Stems produce solitary flower heads each with 15 to 30 white ray florets and a compact yellow disc with a depressed center. Seeds are flat, 1/10 inch long, dark gray at maturity, have 10 ribs, and have no pappus. The rhizomes are shallow and unbranched. Comments: Originally planted intentionally in Garfield County in wildflower mixes, this escaped ornamental has spread throughout the County. Alternatives to planting oxeye daisy include native daisies, black-eyed Susan, Shasta daisy, and blanket flower. Biological control: There are no insect or pathogen biological control agents for oxeye daisy. Horses, goats, and sheep will graze oxeye daisy. Confining goats and sheep to infestations before oxeye daisy flowers and removing them when half of the grass is utilized can control oxeye daisy. Chemical control: Several herbicides are effective at label rates. Commercial nitrogen alone is nearly as effective at sufficient rates. Escort, Tordon (Picloram) and 2,4-D are effective at reducing canopy cover of oxeye daisy. However, based on Roche research, application of nitrogen fertilizer was almost as effective as the herbicides at reducing canopy cover of oxeye daisy. Cultural control: Nitrogen fertilizer greatly enhances ability of grasses to out -compete this weed. Mechanical control: Small infestations can be hand pulled or dug up before flowering occurs, however, care must be taken to remove as much of the rhizome as possible. Tillage practices that clean crop fields of weeds generally prevent oxeye daisy from becoming problematic in crops fields, but tilling can spread rhizome fragments and move seed around and between fields. Competition with other species can reduce the invasiveness of oxeye daisy. Fertilization can offer some control in pastures as well because competing grasses respond more COLORADO WILDLIFE SCIENCE, LLC 6BNOXIOUS WEED INVENTORY & CONTROL 14 Wildlife Assessment — Marquis Property November 9, 2009 favorably to the fertilizer than oxeye daisy does, therefore competition increases. Education: The key to oxeye daisy management is to create an awareness among homeowners, nurseries, landscapers, and landscape architects that oxeye is a noxious weed and therefore should not be specified in plantings, sold in nurseries, or planted in home gardens or large- scale landscape projects. HOUNDSTONGUE (Cynoglossum officinale) Garfield County List B - Noxious Weeds Designated for Eradication Description: Houndstongue (Photo 13) is a member of the Borage family. It is a biennial introduced from Europe. It reproduces by seeds and appears as a leafy rosette in its first year. The stem is erect, stout, heavy, 11/2 to 3 feet high, usually branched above. The leaves are alternate, the basal and lower ones are broad, and oblong to lance -shaped. The upper leaves are narrow and pointed, almost clasping. The flowers are terminal and reddish -purple in color. The fruit consists of four nut -lets (seeds), each about 1/3 inch long. The seeds are covered in short, barbed prickles, which are rapidly scattered by animals. Houndstongue is toxic to horses and cattle. The weed contains alkaloids that may cause liver cells to stop reproducing. Comments: Houndstongue is widespread throughout Garfield County, particularly in areas of past or current livestock grazing. Houndstongue is a prolific seed producer, and the seeds are readily spread by their ability to stick to wildlife and domestic animals. Biological control: No classical biological control agents have been released in the U.S. However, two agents have been released in Canada, the root -mining flea beetle (Longitarsus quadriguttatus) and the houndstongue root -mining beetle (Mogulones cruciger). Chemical control: There are several effective herbicides at label rates. Apply Escort (Metsulfuron methyl) when houndstongue is in the rosette to pre -bud stage. Using an adjuvant is helpful due to hairy leaf structure. Cultural control: Re -seed disturbed sites with fast growing native grasses. Maintain range and pasture in good condition. Promote healthy grass growth through proper irrigation and fertilization. Do not overgraze. Mechanical control: Physical removal of the plant at flowering or early seed formation, by pulling or digging, will break the cycle of the plant. Regular cultivation, digging, pulling and cutting are effective if done frequently; if done after flowering, plants need to be removed from site and disposed of to prevent seed spread. MUSK THISTLE (Carduus nutans L.) Garfield County List B - Noxious Weeds Designated for Eradication Description: COLORADO WILDLIFE SCIENCE, LLC 16BNOXIOUS WEED INVENTORY & CONTROL 15 IVildlife Assessment — Marquis Property November 9, 2009 • Musk thistle is a member of the Aster family. Introduced from Eurasia, it is a winter annual or biennial which reproduces by seed. The first year's growth is a large, compact rosette from a large, fleshy, corky taproot. The second year stem is erect, spiny, 2 to 6 feet tall and branched at the top. The waxy leaves are dark green with a light green midrib and mostly white margins; flowers are purple or occasionally white. Musk thistle is also known as "nodding thistle" and is commonly found in pastures, roadsides, and waste places. It prefers moist bottomland soil, but also can be found on drier uplands. Biological control: The musk thistle seed head weevil (Rinocillus conicus) is widespread in Colorado. Larvae of this insect destroy developing seeds but are not 100 percent effective by themselves. The weevil normally impacts seed production by about 50 percent. Herbicides can be combined with weevils if the insects are allowed to complete their life cycles. Another weevil (Trichosirocalus horridus) attacks the crown area of musk thistle rosettes and weakens the plant before it bolts. This weevil has reduced stand density in areas where it has become well established. A leaf -feeding beetle (Cassidia rubiiginosa) causes considerable damage by skeletonizing leaves. It is recommended to release more than one type of insect on a weed since each type may work on different parts of the plant. Chemical control: There are several herbicides effective at label rates. The best timing is when plants are in the r_ osette stage or early bolt stage. Effective control may require applications in the spring and again in fall to new rosettes. Apply Milestone in the spring and early summer to rosette or bolting plants or in the fall to seedlings and rosettes. Apply at 4 to 5 fl oz when plants are • at the late bolt through early flowering growth stages. 2,4-D at 1 lb ae/acre should be tank - mixed with Milestone starting at the late bud stages. Mechanical control: Musk thistle will not tolerate tillage and can be removed easily by severing its root below ground with a shovel or hoe. Mowing can effectively reduce seed output if plants are cut when the terminal head is in the late -flowering stage. Gather and burn mowed debris to destroy any seed that has developed. Maintaining pastures and rangeland in good condition is a primary factor for musk thistle management. To favor pasture and rangeland grass growth, do not overgraze. Fertilize only when necessary and according to soil testing recommendations. To successfully manage musk thistle, prevent seed formation. • COMMON MULLEIN ( Verbascum thapsus L.) Garfield County List C - Noxious Weeds Designated for Suppression Description: Common mullein (Photo 14) is a member of the Figwort family. It was introduced from Europe, but is a native of Asia. Common mullein is a deep tap -rooted biennial growing up to 7 feet tall with large, soft, very hairy leaves; yellow flowers are borne in large terminal spikes; produces a large rosette up to 2 feet in diameter the first year. Dipped in tallow, mature stalks made good torches in ancient times; called "witch's -stick". Comments: It can be found throughout Pitkin County along dried-up river bottoms, pastures, meadows, fencerows and disturbed areas. It is especially prevalent on gravelly soils. COLORADO WILDLIFE SCIENCE, LLC 1 6BNOXIOUS WEED INVENTORY & CONTROL 16 Wildlife Assessment — Marquis Property November 9, 2009 Biological control: A weevil (Gymnaetron tetrum) has been introduced to North America and is capable of reducing seed production by 50%. Chemical control: A few are effective. A surfactant to aid in penetration past the hairs. The most effective herbicides for controlling common mullein are Escort, Milestone, and Telar. Any of these herbicides should be applied in early spring before desirable perennial grasses break dormancy. Cultural control: Good vegetative cover and management are the best means to avoid proliferation of mullein. Mechanical: Small stands can be hand pulled prior to seeding. Common mullein can be cut or mowed to prevent seed production, but stems must be cut below the root crown to avoid re -bolting. COLORADO WILDLIFE SCIENCE, LLC 1 6BNOXIOUS WEED INVENTORY & CONTROL 17 Wildlife Assessment — Marquis Property November 9, 2009 8.0 LITERATURE CITED Bailey, A. M., and R. J. Niedrach 1965. Birds of Colorado. Denver Museum of Natural History, Denver, CO. Bailey, R. G. 1976. Ecoregions of the United States. Page Color Map. USDA Forest Service, Washington, D.C. Bailey, R. G. 1995. Description of the ecoregions of the United States. U.S. Dept. of Agriculture, Forest Service, Washington, DC. Bailey, R. G., United States Geological Survey, and United States Forest Service. 1998. Ecoregions of North America. U.S. Dept. of Agriculture, Forest Service, Washington, D.C. Boyle, S. 2006. North American River Otter (Lontra canadensis): a technical conservation assessment. Available online at http:/ /wvxwfs.fed.us/r2/projects/scp/assessments/northamericanriverotter.pdf, USDA Forest Service, Rocky Mountain Region.. CDOW. 2007. Colorado Wildlife Species Profiles. Available online at http://wildlifestate.co.us/WildlifeSpecies/Profiles/. Natural Diversity Information Source, Colorado Division of Wildlife, Fort Collins, CO. CDOW. 2008a. Colorado Species Distribution Maps Metadata - Elk. Available online at http://ndis.nrel.colostate.edu/ftp/data/sam/meta/elk.htrnl. Natural Diversity Information Source, Colorado Division of Wildlife, Fort Collins, CO. CDOW 2008b. Colorado Species Distribution Maps Metadata - Mule Deer. Available online at http://ndis.nrel.colostate.edu/ftp/data/sam /theta/deer.html. Natural Diversity Information Source, Colorado Division of Wildlife, Fort Collins, CO. CDOW 2009a. Colorado Listing of Endangered, Threatened and Wildlife Species of Special Concern — Species Pages. Available online at http: / /wildlife. state. co.us /WilcllifeSpecies /SpeciesOfConcern /'ThreatenedEndangeredList /ListOfThreat enedAndEndangeredSpecies.htrn. CDOW.. 2009b. Colorado Species Distribution Digital Data. Available online at http:/ /ndis.nrel.colostate.edu/. Natural Diversity Information Source, Colorado Division of Wildlife, Fort Collins, CO. CDOW.. 2009c. Colorado Species Distribution Maps - Bald Eagle. Available online at http://ndis.nrel.colostate.edu/ftp/data/sam/bald eagle.zip. Natural Diversity Information Source, Colorado Division of Wildlife, Fort Collins, CO. CDOW. 2009d. Colorado Species Distribution Maps - Bighorn Sheep. Available online at http://ndis.nrel.colostate.edu/ftp/data/sarn/bighorn.zip. Natural Diversity Information Source, Colorado Division of Wildlife, Fort Collins, CO. CDOW. 2009e. Colorado Species Distribution Maps - Black Bear. Available online at http://nclis.nrel.colostate.edu/ftp/data/sam/blackbear.zip Natural Diversity Information Source, Colorado Division of Wildlife, Fort Collins, CO. CDOW. 2009f. Colorado Species Distribution Maps - Mule Deer. Available online at http://ndis.nrel.colostate.edu/ftp/data/sam/mule deer.zip. Natural Diversity Information Source, Colorado Division of Wildlife, Fort Collins, CO. CDOW.. 2009g. Colorado Species Distribution Maps - Peregrine Falcons. Available online at http://ndis.nrel.colostate.edu/ftp/data/sam/peregrine.zip. Natural Diversity Information Source, Colorado Division of Wildlife, Fort Collins, CO. Dexter, C. 1998. River survey of west -central Colorado, for yellow -billed cuckoo and riparian weeds. Report prepared for the Bureau of Land Management. Bureau of Land Management, Grand Junction, CO. 26 pp. Ellison, L. E., M. B. Wunder, C. A. Jones, C. Mosch, K. W. Navo, K. Peckham, J. E. Burghardt, J. Annear, R. West, J. Siemers, R. A. Adams, and E. Brekke. 2003. Colorado bat conservation plan. Colorado Committee of the Western Bat Working Group. Available online at: http://ww\a,.wbwg.org/colorado/colorado.htm. Gaines, D., and S. A. Laymon. 1984. Decline, status and preservation of the yellow -billed cuckoo in California. Western Birds 15:49-80. Gruver, J. C., and D. A. Keinath. 2006. Townsend's Big -eared Bat (Corynorhinus townsendiz): a technical conservation assessment [Online]. USDA Forest Service, Rocky Mountain Region. Available: http://www.fs.fed.us/r2/projects/ scp/assessments/townsendsbigearedbat.pcif. Kingery, H. E. 1998. Colorado breeding bird atlas. Colorado Bird Atlas Partnership : Colorado Division of Wildlife, Denver, Colo. COLORADO WILDLIFE SCIENCE, LLC 1 768.0 LITERATURE CITED 18 Wildlife Assessment — Marquis Property November 9, 2009 Laymon, S. A. 1980. Feeding and nesting behavior of the yellow -billed cuckoo in the Sacramento Valley. Wildlife Management Branch Administration Rep. 80-2, California Department of Fish and Game, Sacramento, CA. McKelvey, K. S., K. B. Aubry, and Y. K. Ortega. 2000. History and distribution of lynx in the contiguous United States. Pages 207-264 in L. F. Ruggiero, K. B. Aubry, S. W. Buskirk, G. M. Koehler, C. J. Krebs, K. S. McKelvey, and J. R. Squires, editors. Ecology and conservation of lynx in the United States. University Press of Colorado, Denver, CO. NatureServe. 2005. NatureServe Explorer: An online encyclopedia of life [web application]. Version 4.1. NatureServe, Arlington, Virginia. Available online at http://www.natureserve.org/explarer. Omernik, J. M. 1987. Ecoregions of the conterminous United States. Map (scale 1:7,500,000). Annals of the Association of American Geographers 77:118-125. Rinkevich, S. E., J. L. Ganey, J. L. W. Jr., G. C. White, D. L. Urban, A. B. Franklin, W. M. Block, and E. Clemente. 1995. General biology and ecological relationships of the Mexican Spotted Owl,. Pages 19-35 in K. J. Cook, editor. Recovery plan for the Mexican Spotted Owl. Vol. I. USDI Fish and Wildl. Serv., Albuquerque, NM. Shenk, T. 2009. Lynx Update, May 25, 2009. Available: http:/ /wildlife.state.co.us/NR/rdonlyres/1E7C95D0- 53F3-41EB-82DD-261.34C0FF261 /0/Lynx1 pdateMay252009.pdf. Colorado Division of Wildlife, Fort Collins, CO. Sherwin, R. E., D. Stricklan, and D. S. Rogers. 2000. Roosting affinities of Townsend's big -eared bat (Corynorhinus townsendiz) in northern Utah. Journal of Mammalogy 81:939-947. Siemers, J. 2002. A survey of Colorado's caves for bats. Prepared by Colorado Natural Heritage Program. Prepared for Colorado Division of Wildlife. Available: http://v,-ww.cnhp.colostate.edu/documenrs/2002/Cave Inventory report.pdf. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. 2009. Endangered, Threatened, Proposed and Candidate Species - Colorado Counties (Updated June 2009). United States Department of the Interior Fish and Wildlife Service, Western Colorado Field Office. Available online at http://w w.fws.gov/mount:ain- prairie/endspp/countvlists /colorado.pdf. USF&WS. 1995. Final rule determining endangered status for the southwestern willow flycatcher (Empidonax traillii extimus). Federal Register 60:10694 (February 27, 1995). USFWS. 1995. Final rule determining endangered status for the southwestern willow flycatcher (Empidonax traillii extimus). Federal Register 60:10694 (February 27, 1995). USFWS. 2002. Southwestern Willow Flycatcher Recovery Plan. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Department of the Interior, Albuquerque, New Mexico. 210 pp. COLORADO WILDLIFE SCIENCE, LLC 788.0 LITERATURE CITED 19 Wildlife Assessment — Marquis Property November 9, 2009 WILDLIFE ASSESSMENT OF RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT FOR COUNTY SITE PLAN REVIEW MAPS MARQUIS PROPERTY immaair COLORADO WILDLIFE SCIENCE, LLC 18BMAPS 20 Two -needle pirlon-Utah juniper Woodland COLORADO WILDLIFE SCIENCE, LLC COLORADO 0100 Elk Run Dr, Ste 129A WILDLIFE Rasett GO A1F21 9/092/ 4049 SCIENCE 'Mo@ColcradoWldifeScionce.com www :olow Idsci corr Aerial View Marquis Property Garfield County Colorado Marquis Subdivision Dr Iy J. Lowsky Map No. 1 Stab. 1 inch equals 304 feet 2009 1029 311750"'"' 312000 '°'" 312250'000°0 31 Residential Landscaping Two -needle pinion -Utah juniper Woodland Irrigated Hayfields 311750""" COLORADO WILDLIFE SCIENCE, LLC COLORADO 0100 Elk Run Dr, Ste 128A WILDLIFE Basalt CQ 81F21 9/0 92/ 449 SCIENCE Info@Color3doWldifeScionce.com vAvvi coIow Idscl corr 312000 "`n"n 312250m"rn Vegetation & Topography Marquis Property Garfield County. Colorado Map No. 2 312500 ""'°' Marquis Subdivision Dnwn By. J. Lowsky 1 inch equals 304 feet D. 2009 10 29 0 . 312000°m" a • Absinth wormwood Canada thistle Absinth wormwood, Canada thistle, plumeless thistle, common tansy Absinth wormwood Canada thistle, plumeless thistle, common tansy, houndstongue Canada thistle, plumeless thistle, musk thistle Houndstongue Plumeless thistle 1=1 Parcel Boundary 3120010 312250 0 —o COLORADO WILDLIFE SCIENCE, LLC COLORADO 0100 Elk Run Dr, Ste 125A Rasalt()1f21 WILDLIFE 9/0 92/ 4D4W SCIENCE info@ColoradoW,IdlifeScianoc com www :olow Idsci core Noxious Weeds Marquis Property Garfield County Colorado Marquis Subdivision 5"wr. Ir J. Lowsky Map No. 7 1 inch equals 206 feet o. 2009 10 29 311750 "'" 312000"' 3122503°' •\,‘ \. iroF"\\:\\\Neet:',ZN. ...\ ‘\ \'''\\\‘'-'\'‘ , \''' \44 \ ,....o. \\ N1/4,:\ \N \ Ns \ N,N .k.S,‘ \ N Si1.7\ *••••,:\ \.,N \ \ \ ..\\ \\N \ N.\ lr fia\k, \\:\ \\,\;',‘'NeN, 7 -\ \ , \ .,,, -\., -N. N.. . \ , \ :N* \ •t,,:\ cN...L -N\ 1., \ ••• - \\ N \\ \ *%\: \ \ ‘4Z44° \\'‘ \\ \ \ -1, •, • \ • \s.... * \ \\ Iii116* * ' \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ 31 0300 k•IC:\\\JAZ\ .I.SPN,NV \\ \:\\•..'. \\ \\* \'14. \ , \"' N. -• \ \ •„. . )10, 44, , \ .. ,I,,,. \ ;\;\.:\N:S4 \N• N1 Itik\N Ns'\... .‘,t, .\\ N` \ ' *v>,c. \ \\,.4% \ N \ • \NS *\\, ' •.a‘.4. \ ' \ \ '\\* \\N\ \ t.. \ N. \ a, .4.... Ns.S; N. , -, •,,, k \ A \ , \ .1;‘,. , \.1,„ 1,.:1 \ \ ik. \\„ 1,k,"1 \.1.kk.. N.,i, ._ \ N„,, •!, . 1,‘ •1'N, 04% \‘' . \\\ \\\\ . \\:1\14,:\ N., .,:...\.. \\• \* \., \y4: , 4: , ' N.,.A '1, \ ,' N, \ 1, \ • \ "a '4. t '‘t, N .\\ \\ \ ''• • \ \ '\. 0 t-00 - . N‘\ N,7 Aic \ N., \ NN, \ \ N \N \ \ \ \ / 7 „ N'%Ni sk\A\z\\• 311750 0)0") \ \\,1\ \\*\ -\ 1/4 ,.411 0 0 00 cr 1-4C ' . 4t4k41.4 * 4" • \\., "VA.% Writer Range Winter Forage Habitat I 312000'"' 312250 ' COLORADO WILDLIFE SCIENCE, LLC COLORADO 0100 Elk Run Dr, Ste 128A ,,RaiusavIt2/C.04:081821 W I l_DLIFE SCIENCE Info@ColoradoW IctikScrenco.com www :;31ow Idsi corr CDOW Mapped Bald Eagle Habitat Garfield County Colorado 312500000)0 Marquis Subdivision Dr••. Br J. Lowsky 1 inch equals 304 feet e 2009 10 29 F 5 0 r 311750`"'' 312000'00°"' \ f\y 1. '\ •\ \ \`' 312250 \ a 311750 COLORADO WILDLIFE SCIENCE, LLC COLORADO 0100 Elk Run Dr, Ste 129/. WILDLIFE RasaltCOR1F21 uro 921 4a4s SCIENCE info@ColcradoW IdldCSclence com MAY aloW IdscI Com 312000 312250'' CDOW Mapped Mule Deer Seasonal Habitat Marquis Property Garfield County Colorado Winter Range Severe Winter Range Summer Range VVinter Concentration Migration Corridor 0 Parcel Boundary Map No. 4 312500 "" Marquis Subdivision onW^ Br J. Lowsky 1 inch equals 304 feet 2009 10 29 0 0 cl 311750°' 312000 312250'3" 31 0000 311750 ,Y. ✓t L Winter Range Severe Winter Range Summer Range Winter Concentration P Migration Corridor Parcel Boundary 312000 312250 """ 312500"'"' COLORADO WILDLIFE SCIENCE, LLC COLORADO 0100 EIk Run Dr. Ste 129P WILDLIFE Basalt C() Rif 71 9/0 9"),"4o4Y SCIENCE info@ColcradoWldlifeScience corn WWW Idsci corr CDOW Mapped EIk Seasonal Habitat Marquis Property Garfield County. Colorado 0 0) n Marquis Subdivision Map No. 5 Drawn6Y' J. Lowsky 1 inch equals 304 feet 2009 10.29 Winter Range Severe Winter Range Summer Range Winter Concentration Migration Corridor 0 Parcel Boundary COLORADO WILDLIFE SCIENCE, LLC COLORADO 0100 Elk Run Dr, Ste 125A WILDLIFE RsMtCAR1E21 9/U. 927 449 SCIENCE 'nfo@ColoradoWldIfcSciercecom www oolow Idsci corr Field Verified EIk Seasonal Habitat Marquis Property Garfield County. Colorado Marquis Subdivision D"*" Br J. Lowsky Map No. 6 1 inch equals 304 feet 2009 10 29 It ildlife Assessment — Marquis Property November 9, 2009 WILDLIFE ASSESSMENT OF RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT FOR COUNTY ACTIVITY ENVELOPE & SITE PLAN REVIEW PHOTOS Marquis Property COLORADO WILDLIFE SCIENCE, LLC 1 9BPHOTOS 28 U'7ld11P ,1sressment — Marquis Property Nocember 9, 2009 Photo 1. Topography Photo 2. Two -needle pinon-Utah juniper woodland habitat COLORADO WILDLIFE SCIENCE, LLC 1 9BPHOTOS 29 Uildti%Assessment —Marrpiis Proper/y November 9, 21109 Photo 3. Merriam's turkey in the hayfields Photo 4. Well managed hayfields COLORADO WILDLIFE SCIENCE, LLC 1 9BPHOTOS 30 I►""rldli/k Assessment — Marquis P/oprrlp November 9, 2111)9 Photo 5. Hayfields are in excellent condition Photo 6. Pinon-juniper woodlands at west side of the Property COLORADO WILDLIFE SCIENCE, LLC 19BPHOTOS 31 11' //dlij : Isseunrrnt — Alargsuis Proprrfp November 9, 2009 Photo 7. Absinth wormwood Photo 8. Absinth wormwood, Canada thistle, common tansy, and houndstongue along ditch COLORADO WILDLIFE SCIENCE, LLC 1 9BPHOTOS 32 I1 iI[Ili/'e , l sres mint — Alarquis Pro/ e, h Norcmber 9, 2009 Photo 9. Heavily browsed serviceberry Photo 10. Plumeless thistle in southwest hayfield COLORADO WILDLIFE SCIENCE, LLC 1 9BPHOTOS 33 W xldlife Assessmod — A1nigWis Prope'Ir Nuvember 9, 2009 Photo 11. Canada thistle Photo 12. Oxeye daisy COLORADO WILDLIFE SCIENCE, LLC 19BPHOTOS 34 W ildli/e Assessment — Alarquis Property November 9, 2009 Photo 13. Houndstongue Photo 14. Common mullein COLORADO WILDLIFE SCIENCE, LLC 1 9BPHOTOS 35 • • Wildlife Assessment — Marquis Property APPENDIX A: CDOW NDIS ungulate seasonal activity area definitions ROCKY MOUNTAIN ELK November 9, 2009 HIGHWAY CROSSING: Those areas where elk movements traditionally cross roads, presenting potential conflicts between elk and motorists. MIGRATION CORRIDORS: A specific mappable site through which large numbers of animals migrate and loss of which would change migration routes. PRODUCTION AREA: That part of the overall range of elk occupied by the females from May 15 to June 15 for calving. (Only known areas are mapped and this does not include all production areas for the DAU). RESIDENT POPULATION: An area used year-round by a population of elk. Individuals could be found in any part of the area at any time of the year; the area cannot be subdivided into seasonal ranges. It is most likely included within the overall range of the larger population. SEVERE WINTER: That part of the range of a species where 90 percent of the individuals are located when the annual snowpack is at its maximum and/or temperatures are at a minimum in the two worst winters out of ten. The winter of 1983- 84 is a good example of a severe winter. SUMMER CONCENTRATION: Those areas where elk concentrate from mid-June through mid-August. High quality forage, security, and lack of disturbance are characteristics of these areas to meet the high energy demands of lactation, calf rearing, antler growth, and general preparation for the rigors offall and winter. SUMMER RANGE: That part of the range of a species where 90% of the individuals are located between spring green - up and the first heavy snowfall, or during a site specific period of summer as defined for each DAU. Summer range is not necessarily exclusive of winter range; in some areas winter range and summer range may overlap. WINTER CONCENTRATION: That part of the winter range of a species where densities are at least 200% greater than the surrounding winter range density during the same period used to define winter range in the average five winters out of ten. WINTER RANGE: That part of the overall range of a species where 90 percent of the individuals are located during the average five winters out of ten from the first heavy snowfall to spring green -up, or during a site specific period of winter as defined for each DAU. MULE DEER CONCENTRATION AREA: That part of the overall range where higher quality habitat supports significantly higher densities than surrounding areas. These areas are typically occupied year round and are not necessarily associated with a specific season. Includes rough break country, riparian areas, small drainages, and large areas of irrigated cropland. HIGHWAY CROSSING: Those areas where mule deer movements traditionally cross roads, presenting potential conflicts between mule deer and motorists. MIGRATION CORRIDORS: A specific mappable site through which large numbers of animals migrate and loss of which would change migration routes. RESIDENT POPULATION: An area that provides year-round range for a population of mule deer. The resident mule deer use all of the area all year; it cannot be subdivided into seasonal ranges although it may be included within the overall range of the larger population. COLORADO WILDLIFE SCIENCE, LLC 1 10BAPPENDIX A: CDOW NDIS ungulate seasonal activity area definitions 36 In!dlifeAssessment —Marquis Property November 9, 2009 SEVERE WINTER: That part of the overall range where 90% of the individuals are located when the annual snowpack is at its maximum and/or temperatures are at a minimum in the two worst winters out of ten. SUMMER RANGE: That part of the overall range where 90% of the individuals are located between spring green -up and the first heavy snowfall. Summer range is not necessarily exclusive of winter range; in some areas winter range and summer range may overlap. WINTER CONCENTRATION: That part of the winter range where densities are at least 200% greater than the surrounding winter range density during the same period used to define winter range in the average five winters out of ten. WINTER RANGE: That part of the overall range where 90 percent of the individuals are located during the average five winters out of ten from the first heavy snowfall to spring green -up, or during a site specific period of winter as defined for each DAU. COLORADO WILDLIFE SCIENCE, LLC 1 10BAPPENDIX A: CDOW NDIS ungulate seasonal activity area definitions 37 IVildllifeAssessment — Marquis Property November 9, 2009 APPENDIX B: State of Colorado Threatened & Endangered Vertebrates COMMON NAME LATIN NAME STATUS AMPHIBIANS Boreal Toad Bufo boreas boreas SE Northern Cricket Frog Acris crepitans SC Great Plains Narrowmouth Toad Gastrophryne olivacea SC Northern Leopard Frog Rana pipiens SC Wood Frog Rana sylvatica SC Plains Leopard Frog Rana blairi SC Couch's Spadefoot Scaphiopus couchii SC BIRDS Whooping Crane Grus americana FE, SE Least Tern Sterna antillarum FE, SE Southwestern Willow Flycatcher Empidonax traillii extimus FE, SE Plains Sharp -Tailed Grouse Tympanuchus phasianellus jamesii SE Piping Plover Charadrius melodus circumcinctus FT, ST Bald Eagle Haliaeetus leucocephalus ST Mexican Spotted Owl Strix occidentalis lucida FT, ST Burrowing Owl Athene cunicularia ST Lesser Prairie -Chicken Tympanuchus pallidicinctus ST Western Yellow -Billed Cuckoo Coccyzus americanus SC Greater Sandhill Crane Grus canadensis:tabida SC Ferruginous Hawk Buteo regalis SC Gunnison Sage -Grouse Centrocercus minimus SC American Peregrine Falcon Falco peregrinus anatum SC Greater Sage Grouse Centrocercus urophasianus SC Western Snowy Plover Charadrius alexandrinus SC Mountain Plover Charadrius montanus SC Long -Billed Curlew Numenius americanus SC Columbian Sharp -Tailed Grouse Tympanuchus phasianellus columbianus SC FISH Bonytail Gila elegans FE, SE Razorback Sucker Xyrauchen texanus FE, SE Humpback Chub Gila cypha FE, ST Colorado Pikeminnow Ptychocheilus lucius FE, ST Greenback Cutthroat Trout Oncorhynchus clarki stomias FT, ST Rio Grande Sucker Catostomus plebeius SE Lake Chub Couesius plumbeus SE Plains Minnow Hybognathus placitus SE Suckermouth Minnow Phenacobius mirabilis SE Northern Redbelly Dace Phoxinus eos SE Southern Redbelly Dace Phoxinus erythrogaster SE COLORADO WILDLIFE SCIENCE, LLC 1 11BAPPENDIX B: State of Colorado Threatened & Endangered Vertebrates 38 Brassy Minnow Hybognathus hankinsoni ST Common Shiner Luxilus cornutus ST Arkansas Darter Etheostoma cragini ST Mountain Sucker Catostomus playtrhynchus SC Plains Orangethroat Darter Etheostoma spectabile SC Iowa Darter Etheostoma exile SC Rio Grande Chub Gila pandora SC Colorado Roundtail Chub Gila robusta SC Stonecat Noturus flavus SC Colorado River Cutthroat Trout Oncorhynchus clarki pleuriticus SC Rio Grande Cutthroat Trout Oncorhynchus clarki virginalis SC Flathead Chub Platygobio gracilus SC MAMMALS Gray Wolf Canis lupus FE, SE Black -Footed Ferret Mustela nigripes FE, SE Grizzly Bear Ursus arctos FT, SE Preble's Meadow Jumping Mouse Zapus hudsonius preblei FT, ST Lynx Lynx canadensis FT, SE Wolverine Gulo gulo SE River Otter Contra canadensis ST Kit Fox Vulpes macrotis SE Townsend's Big -Eared Bat Corynorhinus townsendii pallescens SC Black -Tailed Prairie Dog Cynomys ludovicianus SC Botta's Pocket Gopher Thomomy bottae rubidus SC' Northern Pocket Gopher Thomomys talpoides macrotis SC Swift fox Vulpes velox SC REPTILES Triploid Checkered Whiptail Cnemidophorus neotesselatus SC Midget Faded Rattlesnake Crotalus viridis concolor SC Longnose Leopard Lizard Gambelia wislizenii SC Yellow Mud Turtle Kinosternon flavescens SC Common King Snake Lampropeltis getula SC Texas Blind Snake Leptotyphlops dulcis SC Texas Horned Lizard Phrynosoma cornutum SC Roundtail Horned Lizard Phrynosoma modestum SC Massasauga Sistrurus catenatus SC le'ildlife Assessment — Marquis Property November 9, 2009 411 COMMON NAME LATIN NAME STATUS Common Garter Snake Thamnophis sirtalis SC COLORADO WILDLIFE SCIENCE, LLC 1 11BAPPENDIX B: State of Colorado Threatened & Endangered Vertebrates 39 U ildlife Assersrenl — Marquis Property November 9, 2009 • APPENDIX C: Garfield County Noxious Weed List a,'S M VP .... , M ARS. W, • Comrnon name Leafy Spurge Scientific name Euphorbia esula Russian Knapweed 'Yellow Starthistle • Plumeless Thistle • Acroptilon repens Houndstongue • Common Burdock Scotch Thistle Canada Thistle I Spotted Knapweed Diffuse Knapweed Dalmatian Toadflax Yellow Toadflax • Hoary Cress Salt Cedar Centaurea solstitalis Carduus acanthoides Cynoglossum officinale Arctium minus Onopordum acanthium Cirsium arvense Centaurea maculosa Centaurea diffitsa Linaria dalmatica Linaria vulgaris Oxeye Daisy Jointed Goatgrass Cardaria draba Tamarix parviflora, Tamarix ramosissima Chrysanthemum leucantheum Aegilops cylindrica Chicory • Musk Thistle Purple Loosestrife Russian Olive Cichorium intybus Carduus nutans Lythrum salicaria Elaeagnus angustifolia COLORADO WILDLIFE SCIENCE, LLC 1 12BAPPENDIX C: Garfield County Noxious Weed List 40 %ildlie Assessment — Marquis Property November 9, 2009 APPENDIX D: Colorado Noxious Weed List List A species in Colorado that are designated by the Commissioner for eradication: African rue Camelthorn Common crupina Cypress spurge Dyer's woad Giant salvinia Hydrilla Meadow knapweed Mediterranean sage Medusahead Myrtle spurge Orange hawkweed Purple loosestrife Rush skeletonweed Sericea lespedeza Squarrose knapweed Tansy ragwort Yellow starthistle Peganum harmala Alhagi pseudalhagi Crupina vulgaris Euphorbia cyparissias lsatis tinctoria Salvinia molesta Hydrilla verticillata Centaurea pratensis Salvia aethiopis Taeniatherum caput -medusae Euphorbia myrsinites Hieracium aurantiacum Lythrum salicaria Chondrilla juncea Lespedeza cuneata Centaurea virgata Senecio jacobaea Centaurea solstitialis List B weed species are species for which the Commissioner, in consultation with the state noxious weed advisory committee, local governments, and other interested parties, develops and implements state noxious weed management plans designed to stop the continued spread of these species: Absinth wormwood Artemisia absinthium Black henbane Hyoscyamus niger Bouncingbet Saponaria officinalis Bull thistle Cirsium vulgare Canada thistle Cirsium arvense Chinese clematis Clematis orientalis Common tansy Tanacetum vulgare Common teasel Dipsacus fullonum Corn chamomile Anthemis arvensis Cutleaf teasel Dipsacus laciniatus Dalmatian toadflax, broad-leaved Linaria dalmatica Dalmatian toadflax, narrow -leaved Linaria genistifolia Dame's rocket Hesperis matronalis Diffuse knapweed Centaurea diffusa Eurasian watermilfoil Myriophyllum spicatum Hoary cress Cardaria draba Houndstongue Cynoglossum officinale Leafy spurge Euphorbia esula Mayweed chamomile Anthemis cotula Moth mullein Verbascum blattaria Musk thistle Carduus nutans Oxeye daisy Chrysanthemum leucanthemum Perennial pepperweed Lepidium latifolium Plumeless thistle Carduus acanthoides Quackgrass Elytrigia repens Redstem filaree Erodium cicutarium Russian knapweed Acroptilon repens Russian -olive Elaeagnus angustifolia Salt cedar Tamarix chinensis, T.parviflora, and T. ramosissima Scentless chamomile Matricaria perforata Scotch thistle Onopordum acanthium COLORADO WILDLIFE SCIENCE, LLC 1 13BAPPENDIX D: Colorado Noxious Weed List 41 Wildlife Assessment — Marquis Property Scotch thistle Spotted knapweed Spurred anoda Sulfur cinquefoil Venice mallow Wild caraway Yellow nutsedge Yellow toadflax November 9, 2009 Onopordum tauricum Centaurea maculosa Anoda cristata Potentilla recta Hibiscus trionum Carum carvi Cyperus esculentus Linaria vulgaris List C weed species are species for which the Commissioner, in consultation with the state noxious weed advisory committee, local governments, and other interested parties, will develop and implement state noxious weed management plans designed to support the efforts of local governing bodies to facilitate more effective integrated weed management on private and public lands. The goal of such plans will not be to stop the continued spread of these species but to provide additional education, research, and biological control resources to jurisdictions that choose to require management of List C species. Chicory Cichorium intybus Common burdock Arctium minus Common mullein Verbascum thapsus Common St. Johnswort Hypericum perforatum Downy brome Bromus tectorum Field bindweed Convolvulus arvensis Halogeton Halogeton glomeratus Johnsongrass Sorghum halepense Jointed goatgrass Aegilops cylindrica Perennial sowthistle Sonchus arvensis Poison hemlock Conium maculatum Puncturevine Tribulus terrestris Velvetleaf Abutilon theophrasti Wild proso millet Panicum miliaceum COLORADO WILDLIFE SCIENCE, LLC 113BAPPENDIX D: Colorado Noxious Weed List 42 • • • Appendix B • • SOILS AND FOUNDATION INVESTIGATION AND GEOLOGIC HAZARD EVALUATION MARQUIS MAJOR SUBDIVISION COUNTY ROAD 112 GARFIELD COUNTY, COLORADO Atten 'on. Mr. • Prepared For: CE -MAR -SAM, LLLP 567 Fairfield Lane Louisville. CO 80027 nue$ Marquis, R.G., P.G. Project No, GS05406-120 October 5, 2009 TABLE OF CONTENTS GCOPE--~--..--~.-.-.....~---'-~..--.-..'-_.---1 SUMMARY OFCONCLUSIONS. ~-~..-.~-.---~-.-_.__~_.~~-' 1 SITE CONDITIONS _---..-'-.,...�..-'~~._----.-..'.-.-.—......-...~.._-...._2 ANTICIPATED CONSTRUCTION ..__....... -....... ........... .... ------................ ........... ...... -3 SITEGE0LOGY-..... ....... ....... .-------''~---.~---........ ........ .~........... ... 2 GEOLOGIC HAZARDS .............. .... ~'--.-.—.... ..... '... ......... .......... _-...... ....... ............. ,4 Erooion...-.~..'....~~.~-~~.._^~.-..,_--'''.~...~~.~..--'..~-'---`-_-_---.-_4 Potentially Unstable S|opem....... ....-~.--._._...... .----_-.-__.--........... _-.4 Groundwmhor_-.--~~.........,~...~...._..-----_.---~..----.—~-.,. 4 RoodinQ_-.~.--._'-'.~..-_.~.-..._--.--'-' 5 Co|!opmo^PnoneSoi|s 5 Expansve Soils and Bedrock 5 Frost Heave 5 Seismicity-.....-.--..--...-.~.--...... ..... -..... ................. ................ ....... ..... ........... S Rad|omudvby---..... --.............. ---..,-_..-.-........ ...--,---_'---....... 6 Subsurface and Surface Mining --..__'-'..... ---._.'.'.-_.---..—....... ....... ... 7 SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS 7 EARTHWORK -... ........ 8 Excavations 8 Structural Fill 9 BACKFILL -........ 9 FOUNDATION--........ ...... ........ ..'—.—_--_.-.--...... --..---.... .-...... ........ .... 1Q Footings 11 Post -Tensioned Slab -on -Grade 12 FLOOR SYSTEM AND SLABS -ON -GRADE 13 BELOW -GRADE CONSTRUCTION 14 SUBSURFACE DRAINAGE -.................. .-........... ----.—........ -._.~..... .... ... '..15 EARTH RETAINNG WALLS 15 MSE Structures 15 Reinforced Concrete Walls -.----...... .----...-,-.----.--... ....... .... ......... -'--16 SURFACE DRAINAGE .-..-..._-..._..--'.'-.'_..-....-._..~_-.----..--'~..—.-1G CONCRETE—.-.._,.--.---_---._~''.'_--�_..~.....--._—.-.~_._..........17 DRIVEWAY RECOMMENDATIONS 18 CONSTRUCTION OBSERVATIONS -_.---.....~....-.....~....-----.—.,.,18 GEOTECHNICAL RISK --'.,...~..~.._._......-'_-~_'-''_—.-....~....,-'...--19 LIMITATIONS '-.... -_.............. ---__...--...-...^—'........... ........ ......... 19 CE -MAR -SAM, LLP MARQUIS MAJOR SU8DMSION CIL 1TPROJECT NO. uoos4os-12m • • • TABLE OF CONTENTS (continued) FIGURES 1AND 2 - LOCATIONS OFEXPLORATORY BORINGS FIGURES 3 AND 4- SUMMARY LOGS OF EXPLORATORY BORJNGS FIGURE 5 - EXTERIOR FOUNDATION WALL DRAIN FIGURE 6- TYPCAL EARTH RETAINING WALL DRAIN APPENDIX A -LABORATORY TEST RESULTS CE-MAR-SAM,u� MARQUIS MAJOR SUBDIVISION cr�|TPROJECT NO. oSom4oa',zo S•GS+55466 00.01120,>2. keportsGSOMOG 12e ��� • SCOPE This report presents the results of our soils and foundation investigation and geologic hazard evaluation for the Marquis Major Subdivision and residence and detached garage. The developmont s planned on the 5 acre parcel to be subd,vidod from the existing 51 acre parcel. The parcel (Number 239323100279) is located on County Road 112 in GarfieW County. Colorado. We conducted this investigation to evaluate site geology and topography, subsurface conditions, and provide geotechnical engineering recommendations for the proposed construction. Our report was prepared from data developed during our field reconnaissance, published geologic mapping, subsurface exploration, laboratory testing. engineering analysis and experience with similar conditions. This report includes a description of the site geology and subsurface conditions encountered in our exploratory borings. and presents geologic and geotechnical engineering recommendations for design and construction of driveways, the Youndodon, floor systern, below -grade walls, drain systems and for detaits influenced by the subsoits. Recommendations containod in this report were developed based on our understanding of the planned construction. If building plans will differ significantly from the descriptions contained in the report. we should be informed so that we can provide geotechnical engineering input and check that our recommendations and design criter;a are appropriate. A summary of our conclusions s presented betow. SUMMARY OF CONCLUSIONS 1No geotogic or geotechnicai conditions were identified which woutd preclude development of the site. Additional discussion is in the Z. Subsurface conditions encountered in our exploratory borings consisted mfabout 1foot o/sandy clay "topsoi['underlain byclay soil. Basatt cobbles and boutders were encountered near the hiti. Practical auger refusat occurred at multipte depths in our boring TH-2 on basait cobbles and boulders. Free ground water was not encountered in our exploratory borings during drilling. Cs•Mxx-SAM,Lup MARQUIS MAJOR suoowlsiow CTL |rPROJECT mftosu54mn*zo ".muopCH"mx,^maFie p,°"^aoWu`20n,""� • • 3. Our subsLlrface nforrnaton tndicates that the natural clay soi is likety present at most pianned foundation etevations for the residence and detached garage. Excavations into the hillside will likely encounter hard rock, boulders and cobbles ineclay matrix. The restdence can be constructed on footing foundations that are supported by the undisturbed cay soil or densely compacted structural fihl. A positive option to decrease the risk of foundation movernent is subexcavation of the clay and replacement with at east 3 feet of densely cornpacted fill or provisions of a post -tensioned slabs -on -grade foundation system. Design and construction critena for foundations are presented in the report. 4. Our information indicates that slab -on -grade construction can be supported by the natura clay soil or structural fill with low potential risk of differential movement. S. Surface drainage should be designed to provide for rapid removal of surface water away from the proposed buildings. An exterior foundation wall dram should be provided around below -grade areas in the building. Additional discussion is in the report. 6. The design and construction criteria for foundations and f)oor systems in this report were compiled with the expectation that all other recommendations presented related to surface and subsurface drainage. landscaping irrigation, backfill cornpacdon, etc. will be incorporated into the project and that homoowners will maintain the structure, use prudent irrigation practices and maintain surface dreinaQe. It is critical that all recommendations in this report are SITE CONDITIONS The parcel to be subdivided is located west of County Road 112 (Crystal Springs Mountain Road) in Garfield County. Colorado. An existing residence accessed via a gravel drive is located on the northern side of the property. Approximately 5 acres is planned to be subdivided off of the east side of the property adjacent to County Road 112. A smal! hiti about 30 feet high is tocated on the planned 5acre parcel. The property isprimarily a gently sloping irrigated pasture. Areas of scrub oak are present on sloping areas on the west, north and east of the property. o���M, LLP MARQUIS MAJOR SUBDVSiON CTL |TPROJECT NO, eeos^oo-oo • 1 • ANTICIPATED CONSTRUCTION We understand the new residence will be a two-story or tiered building. A dwCachmdgaragevvithusocondflnorstudioapartmentsecondf|oorisp|anned.Slab- on-grade floors are desired. Cutting into the hillside will likely be required to construct the residence and garage at the desired location. Below -grade areas are anticpated where the residence is constructed into the hiliside. We expect maximum vertical foundation excavation depths of about 10 to 15 feet will be required into the hillside, Foundaton oads are expected to vary betweon 1 .000 and 3.000 pounds por linear foot of foundation wall with maximum interior column loads of about 30 kips. We should be provided with construction drawings, when available. to check that our recommendations are appropriate. SITE GEOLOGY The geology of the site was investigated through review of mapping by Ellis and Freeman (Geologic Map and Cross Section of the Carbondale 30' x 60' Quadrangle, 1984). Our Mr. Craig Burger, P.E. visited the site to assess whether field conditions are consistent with the geologic mapping and reports, evaluate specific site features and to look for other geologic concerns. We also reviewed geologic hazards mnapping of Garfield County (Geologic -Hazards Map, by Soule & Stovver, Open -file Report 85-1. Colorado Geologic Survey. 1985) and "Collapsible Soils and Evaporite Karst Hazards Map of the Roaring Fork River Corridor" by Jonathan White. 2002. Geology was further evaluated through review of conditions found in exploratory borings and our experience in the area. The mapping, our site reconnaissance, and subsurface investigation indicates that surficial soils at the site consist of colluvial and sheetwash clay deposits. Near surface bedrock below the site include lava flows of basalt that are Pliocene and Miocene in age. The basat occurs in layers generaily 5 to 200 feet thick. The Upper Cretaceous Dakota Sandstone underfles basalt and surticia deposits, The Dakota cs.M«eaAm.up MARQUIS MAJOR SUBDIVISION cr�|TPROJECT NO. puo5'ma1a • • 1 Member of this forrnation is exposed in road cuts north of the sfte. Bedrock dip in the area iogenerally gentle. GEOLOGIC HAZARDS Our investigation did not identify geologic hazards critical to the planning and development phases of this pjmcL Geologic hazards will not preclude development of the property. Development plans are preliminary, Geologic hazards are not indicated on Garfield County Geologic -Hazards mapping of the property. A brief description ofgeologic hazards follows. Erosion We believe the overall erosion potential is low to moderate for this site. The erosion potential can be expected to increase during construction, but should decrease if proper grading practices, surface drainage design and re -vegetation efforts are implemented. Excavations into hillsides should consider global slope Potentially Unstable S|ope Naturat siopes on the property are typicaty ess than 30 percent. No natural steep cliffs or rock outcrops were observed. We did not observe any existing potential for rookfaU at this site. In our opinion the existing slopes are stable. We believe it is prudent to design cut and fill slopes to be as gentle as practical, to enhance stabitity and decrease erosion potential. Groundwater was not encountered during drilling. We do not expect current groundwater levels will affect site development, Groundwater may rise due to site development and may occur during extended periods of flow in nearby irrigation ditches and ftood irrigation practices. CE-MAn�«wup MARQUIS MAJOR uoamvwow CTL |TPROJECT NO, vxo.54o6,00 4 • • Flooding The site is not n an area generalty considered subject to flooding. CoUapse'PnnnoSoi|s The site is mapped as having cottuvial sots. Cofluvial solis can have potential for cornpression or coflapse upon loading and wetting. Some increase in subsurface moisture must be assumed due to the effects of site development, We compared moisture content and dry density verses collapse potential based on a rating system described in "Engineering Geology 14, Collapsible Soils in Colorado", Colorado Geologic Survey, 2008. The clay sotis at this site range from Iow to moderate coltapse potential (see Figure A-5). Based on our experience in the area. aboratory testing and published data, we consider the soils at this site to have a low collapse potential. Expansive Solis and Bedrock The soils at this site include clay. Samples tested exhibited behavior of low swell after wetting under a 1 ,000.psf toad. We betieve the risk from expansive soIs at the site is Iow. Frost Heave Our borings indicate the overburden soils at the site consist of materials that may be susceptible to frost heave. We expect that 36 inches of frost protection depth is required by Garfield County building codes for this site. If the foundations are constructed with the appropriate frost protection. we do not believe frost heave will affect the proposed structures. Slabs -on -grade may experience sorne movernent due to frost heave. If the buildings are insulated or heated. the potential for slab movernent due 10 trost heave is minim'aI, tfthe buitdings are not insutated or heated. stahson-grade shoutd he constructed with frost protection. Our experience is frost CE-MAR-$«m.up MARQUIS MAJOR sumoms/ow CTL PROJECT NO. Gs054wo.12u �'� • • • heave and ice build-up is more problematic on exterior slab -on -grade adjacent to the north side of buildings. Seismicity This area. like most of Colorado, is subject to a low degree of seismic risk. No indications of recent movements of an of the faults in the Garfield County area have been reported in the available geologic literature. As in most areas of recognized low seismicity. the record of the past earthquake activity in Colorado is somewhat incomplete. Based on the subsurface conditions encountered in our borings and our understanding of the geology, the site classifies as a Seismic Site Class C (2006 International Building Code). Only minor damage to relatively new, properly designed and constructed buildings would be expected. Wind loads, not seismic considerations, typically govern dynamic structural design in this area. Radioactivity Radon 222 gas is considered a health hazard and is one of several radioactive products in the chain of the natural decay of uranium into stable lead. Radioactive nuclides are common in the soils and sedimentary rocks underlying the subject site. Because these sources exist on most sites, there is potential for radon gas accumulation in poorly ventilated spaces. The amount of soil gas that can accumulate is a function of many factors, including the radio -nuclide activity of the soil and bedrock. construction methods and materials, pathways for soil gas and existence of poorly -ventilated accumulation areas. It is difficult to predict the concentration of radon gas in finished construction. We can perform a background radiation survey, if desired. We recommend testing to evaluate radon levels after construction is completed. If required, typical mitigation methods for residential construction may consist of sealing soil gas entry CE -MAR -SAM, LLP MARQUIS MAJOR SUBDSVISION CTL T PROJECT NO, G505406.120 GS05406 N)0,1202. Reports'GN0540€ 120 flr' 6 • • • areas and periodic ventilation of below -grade spaces and perimeter drain systems. It is relatively economical to provide for ventilation at the time of construction. compared to retrofitting a structure after construction. Radon rarely accumulates to significant levels in above -grade. heated and ventilated spaces. Subsurface and Surface Mining There are no indications of or records we know of for surface or subsurface mining in the site area. SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS Subsurface conditions at the site were investigated by drilling three exploratory borings (TH-1 through TH-3), a percolation profile pit, and 3 percolation holes at the approximate locations shown on Figures 1 and 2. Locations of exploratory borings were limited by site access constraints. Exploratory drilling was directed by our project engineer who logged the soils encountered in the borings and obtained samples. Graphic logs of the soils encountered in our exploratory borings are shown on Figures 3 and 4. Subsurface conditions encountered in our exploratory borings consisted of about 1 foot of sandy clay "topsoil" underlain by clay soil. Basalt cobbles and boulders were encountered near the hill. Practical auger refusal occurred at multiple depths in our boring TH-2 on basalt cobbles and boulders. Free ground water was not encountered in our exploratory borings during drilling. Our observations during drilling indicated the clay was stiff to very stiff. Borings were backfilled immediately after exploratory drilling operations were completed. Samples obtained in the field were returned to our laboratory where field classifications were checked and typical samples selected for laboratory testing. Samples of the soil selected for classification testing contained 86 to 94 percent clay and silt size particles (passing the No. 200 sieve) and exhibited liquid limits of 29 to 45 CEMAR,SAM, LLP MARQUIS MAJOR SUBDIVislom CTL T PROJECT NO. GS05406-120 s sGS05406 (300,12M2 Rawls CiSt)54ff 120 R1 dot 7 percent and plasticity indices of 14 to 24 percent. Samples of the clay were selected for one-dimensional, swell -consolidation testing. During the test procedure. the samples at in-situ moisture content were loaded with 1,000 psf and then flooded. The resulting volume change (Le.. swell or compression) was then measured. The clay samples tested exhibited 0.1 percent compression to 1.2 percent swell when wetted under an applied load of 1.000 psf. Our observations during drilling and experience at nearby sites indicate the subsoil contains cobbles and boulders near the hill area. Swell -compression test results are shown on Figures A-1 through A.4. Laboratory test results are summarized in Table A-1, EARTHWORK Excavations We understand that maximum vertical excavation depths for the new residence will be about 10 to 15 feet may be required. Our subsurface information indicates that excavation to construct the new residence will be predominantly in clay soils. Excavations into the hillside area will likely encounter cobbles and boulders in a clay matrix, We anticipate that excavations for the residence can be accomplished using conventional, extra heavy-duty excavation equipment. Large basalt boulders should be anticipated. These boulders may require blasting. Sides of excavations need to be sloped or braced to meet local. state and federal safety regulations. Where excavations cannot be laid back to safe slopes, retention systems will be required. The soils at this site will likely classify as Type B soils based on OSHA standards governing excavations. Temporary slopes deeper than 4 feet and above ground water should be no steeper than 1 to 1 (horizontal to vertical) in Type B soils. Contractors are responsible for site safety and providing and maintaining safe and stable excavations. Contractors should identify soils encountered and ensure that OSHA standards are met. CE -MAR -SAM, LLP MARQUIS MAJOR SUBDIVISION CTL T PROJECT NO. OSO$40612C $ ‘asourfi 000112032_ RoportsGSC4406 120 R1 (7 44 • • • Structural Fill Structural fill may be required to attain grades for interior slab -on -grade floors, exterior concrete flatwork or to re -attain grades from removal of boulders. A firm oubgradmvviU be required to place structural fill. We recommend that structural fi should consist of the on-site clay or sirnilar soit. The onsite day soll can be used for structural 0l provided it is free of organic matter, debris. and rocks larger than 3 inches in dsameter, Structurat fiH shouid be paced in loose tifls of 10 inches th;ck or less, moisture conditioned to within 2 percent of optimum moisture -content, and be compacted to at about 100 percent of standard Proctor (ASTM D 698) maximum dry density. Moisture content and density of structural fill should be checked bye representative of our firm during placement. BACKFILL COMPACTION Settlement of foundation wall and utility trench backfill can cause damage to concrete flatwork and/or result in poor drainage conditions. Compaction of backfill can reduce settlement. Attempts to compact backfill near foundations to a high degree can cause damage to foundation walls and window wells and may increase lateral pressures on the foundation walls. The potential for cracking of a foundation wall can vary widely based on many factors including the degree of compaction achieved. the weight and type of compaction equipment utilized, the structural design of the waU, thc strength of the concrete at the time of backfill cornpaction, and the presence of temporary or permanent bracing. Backfill placed adjacent to foundation wall exteriors should be free of organic matter, debris and rocks argerthan 3 inches in diarneter. Backfill should be rnoisture conditioned to within 2 percent of optimum moisture content and compacted to about 90 to 95 percent of standard Proctor (ASTM D 698) maximum dry density. We recommend that density and moisture content of backfill be tested. The top 1 to 2 feet of backfill should consist of a clay soil to limit surface water infiltration. cs'm^o•S*mup MARQUIS MAJOR SUBDIVISION CTL T PROJECT IO.n»nsms•ou • Proper moisture conditioning of backfill is as important as compaction, because settlement commonly occurs in response to wetting. The addition of water complicates the backfill process, especially during cold weather. Frozen soils are not considered suitable for use as backfill because excessive settlement can result when the frozen materials thaw. Precautions should be taken when backfilling against a basement wall. Temporary bracing of comparatively long, straight sections of foundation walls should be used to limit damage to walls during the compaction process. Waiting at least seven days after the walls are placed to allow the concrete to gain strength can also reduce the risk of damage. Compaction of fill placed beneath and next to window wells, counterforts, and grade beams may be difficult to achieve without damaging these building elements. Proper moisture conditioning of the fill prior to placement in these areas will help reduce potential settlement. Ideally, drainage swales should not be located over the backfill zone (including excavation ramps), as this can increase the amount of water infiltration into the backfill and cause excessive settlement. Swales should be designed to be a minimum of at least 5 feet from the foundation to help reduce water infiltration. Irrigated vegetation, sump pump discharge pipes, sprinkler valve boxes, and roof downspout terminations should also be at least 5 feet from the foundation. FOUNDATION Our subsurface information indicates that the natural clay soil is likely present at most planned foundation elevations for the residence and detached garage. The residence and detached garage can be constructed on footing foundations that are supported by the undisturbed clay soil or densely compacted structural fill. A positive alternative to reduce the risk of footing foundation system differential movement is to subexcavate, moisture condition, and recompact the soils below the footings to a depth of at least 3 feet below footings. Subexcavation should extend at least 2 feet from footing perimeters. We understand that slab -on -grade floors are CE-MAR,SAM, LLP MARQUIS MAJOR SU8D3VISION CTL T PROJECT NO. GSOM)C-12C sGSO4fiG.OGQv2Cx i+VP0116',G-SG54,)( 1;J, 4, 10 • • preferred. A positive option is to construct the foundation system as a post - tensioned slab -on -grade. A representative of our firm should be called to observe soils in the foundation excavation and check that conditions are suitable for support of the foundation as designed. Voids resulting from removal of boulders should be filled with properly compacted structural fill. We should observe and test structural fill placement. Recommendations for structural fill were presented in the Structural Fill section. Our experience indicates that maximum total settlement will be about 1 inch for footings designed and constructed as recommended. If less settlement and a more positive foundation system is desired a post -tensioned slab -on -grade is an alternative. We can provide foundation system and structural design. Recommended design and construction criteria for footings and post -tensioned slabs are presented below. Footings 1. Footing foundations should be supported by the undisturbed clay soil or densely compacted structural fill. Soils loosened during excavation or the forming process for the footings should be removed or the soils can be re -compacted prior to placing concrete. 2. Footings supported by the natural clay or structural fill can be designed for a maximum allowable soil pressure of 2.500 psf. 3. A friction factor of 0.35 can be used to calculate resistance to sliding between concrete footings and the soil. A sliding resistance calculation should be performed by the structural engineer. 4. Continuous wall footings should have a minimum width of at least 24 inches. Foundations for isolated columns should have minimum dimensions of 36 inches by 36 inches, Larger sizes may be required, depending upon foundation loads. Grade beams and foundation walls should be well reinforced, top and bottom, to span undisclosed loose or soft soil pockets. We recommend reinforcement sufficient to span an unsupported distance of at least 12 feet, Reinforcement should be designed by the structural engineer. CE.MAR-SAM, LLP MARQUIS MAJOR SUBDIVISION CTL 1 T PROJECT NO G505406.120 s 4054aL 00,1202 Repot16,G50$206 120 RI aoc 11 • 6. The soils under exterior footings should be protected from freezing. We recommend the bottom of footings be constructed at a depth of at least 36 inches below finished exterior grades for frost protection. The applicable building department should be consulted regarding required frost protection depth. Post -Tensioned Slab -on -Grade 1. The post -tensioned, slab -on -grade foundation can be founded on the natural soils or structural fill. 2. The foundations should be designed for a maxmum allowable soil pressure of 1,500 psf, Based on our subsurface information and assuming a depth of 3 feet for stiffening beams, we estimate the total settlement in the center of the building may be 1.0 inches. Differential settlement between the center and the edges may also be 1.0 inches. 4. We understand the PTI design method assumes the slab is somewhat flexible. Some of the above -grade construction is not as flexible, such as drywall and brick or stucco. We are aware of situations where minor differential slab movement has caused distress in finish materials. One way to enhance performance would be to place reinforcing steel in the bottom of stiffening beams. The structural engineer should evaluate the merits of this approach and other potential alternatives. 5. Stiffening beams may be poured "neat" into trenches excavated from the building pads. Soils may cave or slough during trench excavation for the stiffening beams. Disturbed soils should be removed from trench bottoms prior to placement of concrete. Formwork or other methods may be required for proper stiffening beam installation. 6. Exterior stiffening beams must be protected from frost action. The Garfield County building department should be consulted regarding required frost protection depth or alternative frost protection methods at this specific elevation. 7. For slab tensioning design. a coefficient of friction value of 0.75 or 1.0 can be assumed for slabs on a polyethylene sheeting or a sand layer; respectively. A coefficient of friction of 1.5 should be used for slabs on native soil. 8. A representative of our firm should observe the completed excavation. A representative of the structural engineer or our firm should inspect the placement of the reinforcing tendons and reinforcement prior to placing the slabs and beams. CE -MAR -SAM, LLP MARQUIS MAJOR SUBDIVISION CTL T PROJECT NO, OS05406.120 S'1650540E 600,1 20k2 Rept,rts;GS05406 In Riot, 12 • • 9. Unclerslab plumbing should be pressure tested before the slab is constructed. FLOOR SYSTEM AND SLABS -ON -GRADE Slab -on -grade floors are desired in parts of the residence and in the detached garage. If a post -tensioned slab is provided, the foundation system is the floor system. Our subsurface information indicates that slab -on -grade construction can be supported by the natural clay or structural fill with low potential risk of differential movement. Structural fill required below slabs should be placed and compacted as recommended in the Structural Fill section. Backfill below exterior slabs -on -grade will settle. In areas of deep backfill, a positive alternative to reduce exterior slab movement is provision of a structural slab. We recommend the following precautions for slab -on -grade construction at this site. Slabs should be separated from wall footings and column pads with slip joints which allow free vertical movement of the slabs. Underslab plumbing should be pressure tested for leaks before the slabs are poured. Plumbing and utilities which pass through slabs should be isolated from the slabs with sleeves and provided with flexible couplings to slab -supported appliances. Exterior patio and porch slabs should be isolated from the buildings. These slabs should be well -reinforced to function as independent units. 4. Frequent control joints should be provided, in accordance with American Concrete Institute (ACI) recommendations, to reduce problems associated with shrinkage and curling. The 2003 International Building Code (IBC) or 2003 International Residential Code (RC) may require a vapor retarder be placed between the base course or subgrade soils and the concrete slab -on -grade floors. The merits of installation of a vapor retarder below floor slabs and PT slabs depend on the sensitivity of floor coverings and building to moisture. A properly installed vapor retarder (10 mil minimum) is more beneficial below concrete slab -on -grade floors where floor coverings, painted floor surfaces or products stored on the floor will be sensitive to moisture. The vapor retarder is most effective when CE.MAR-SAM, LLP MARQUIS MAJOR SUBDIVISION CTL T PROJECT NO. GSOS406.,120 S tGS06,106 000'120,7, Reporia*S05404 120 doc 13 • concrete is placed directly on top of it. A sand or gravel leveling course should not be placed between the vapor retarder and the floor slab. The placement of concrete on the vapor retarder may increase the risk of shrinkage cracking and curling. Use of concrete with reduced shrinkage characteristics including minimized water content. maximized coarse aggregate content, and reasonably low slump will reduce the risk of shrinkage cracking and curling. Considerations and recommendations for the installation of vapor retarders below concrete slabs are outlined in Section 3.2.3 of the 2003 report of American Concrete Institute (ACI) Committee 302, "Guide for Concrete Floor and Slab Construction (ACI 302.R-96). BELOW -GRADE CONSTRUCTION Foundation walls which extend below -grade should be designed for lateral earth pressures where backfill.is not present to about the same extent on both sides of the wall. Many factors affect the values of the design lateral earth pressure. These factors include, but are not limited to. the type, compaction. slope and drainage of the backfill, and the rigidity of the wall against rotation and deflection. For a very rigid foundation wall where negligible or very little deflection will occur, an "at -rest" lateral earth pressure should be used in design. For walls which can deflect or rotate 0.5 to 1 percent of wall height (depending upon the backlitl types), lower °active" lateral earth pressures are appropriate. Our experience indicates that typical basement walls in residences deflect or rotate slightly under normal design loads, and that this deflection results in satisfactory wall performance. Thus, the earth pressures on the walls will likely be between the "active" and "at -rest' . conditions, If the on-site soils are used as backlit!, we recommend design of below -grade walls using an equivalent fluid density of at least 50 pcf for this site. This equivalent density does not include allowances for sloping backfill, surcharges or hydrostatic pressures. Backfill placed adjacent to foundation wall exteriors should be placed in accordance with the recommendations in the Backfill section. If below -grade walls are planned taller than about 12 feet, we should be contacted to provide appropriate recommendations. CE-MAR..$ANI, LLP MAROLItS MAJOR SLMO1VIS1ON CTL 1 PROJECT NO GS45406‘120 `,GS05404.0001,120`,4 R*porls`,C,SOWE 120 co: 14 • • SUBSURFACE DRAINAGE We recommend an exterior foundation drain be installed adjacent to below - grade interior foundation walls of the residence. The exterior foundation drams should consist of 4 inch diameter. slotted pipe encased in free draining gravel. The drain should lead to a positive gravity outlet. or to a sump pit where water can be removed by pumping. Dry wells do not appear to be appropriate at this site. Gravity outlets should not be susceptible to clogging or freezing. The drain outlets should be checked at least twice each year to verify they are not blocked. Installation of clean outs along the drain pipes is recommended. A typical foundation drain detail is presented on Figure 5. EARTH RETAINING WALLS Earth retaining walls may be constructed. We consider boulder walls to be landscaping features with little capacity to resist lateral earth loads and movements. We recommend other types of earth retaining systems, such as mechanically stabilized earth (MSE) structures or reinforced concrete retaining walls at this site. CTL j Thompson, Inc. can provide retaining wall designs. MSE Structures MSE structures consist of a reinforced soil zone comprised of horizontal layers of backfill and geogrid reinforcement. The reinforced zone of the structure then essentially acts like a gravity wall structure to retain soils behind the reinforced zone. This type of system is well-suited for the construction of fill embankments. Designs are dependent on specific material properties of the geogrid reinforcement and wall facing. CTL can provide designs for MSE structures. CE.MAR-SAM, LLP MARQUES MAJOR SUBDIVISION CTL T PROJECT NO, GS05406-12C: S .G.S0S-44)6 SMI12fkaporte,GS0406 1:Z0 Rtdo: 15 Reinforced concrete retaining walls that are attached to the building should be • constructed on the same foundation system that is used for the residence. Retaining resented in the FOUNDATIONS dations shall be designed with criteria o 0 Retaining walls which can rotate should be designed to resist "active" lateral calculated using an equivalent fluid density of at least 40 pcf. CL t Retaining walls with reinforcement that is tied into building foundation walls, that are not free to rotate, should be designed to resist "at rest" lateral earth pressure using an equivalent fluid density nces for sloping backfill or hydrostatic pressures. Backfill behind retaining and in front of retaining wall footings should be placed and compacted as outlined in the Backfill section. Drains are required to control hydrostatic pressures behind retaining walls. A • typical earth retaining wail dram detail is shown an Figure 6. The drains should lead gravity outlets or be provided with weep holes. 0 C. SURFACE DRAINAGE Surface drainage is critical to the performance of foundations, floor slabs and recommend the following precautions, at a minimum, be concrete flatwork. after the planned E -c E observed during construction and construction is completed: '" (0 0 4... ...., ..0 4... ,•X 0 -0 '- = tt) M 0 es:) 0 .... 0 Ta. o 737 ii oE - . o o 0 -c E .0 C 73 CD .p.. C 00- 0 • -c 3 .- .-8 c112 0) L.- = c ,,) 9:-•-• 0 m 0 • 0 • co ..0 O .- • .... • c c ..- ,_, ... • 0 c 0 • o c ... c o o 0 • 3 ..... ..... ,... ›... c ms a) x 0 0 O — c0 u. ..c c0 — .... t 0 13 = Ct. tn no M "0 1:3 0 x C 0 C ;0 = c..1 -C - ni +-, ,.., o E 0 -- 3 O o. 0 0g) coora ro ? 2 t.' . z _iou=4 3 41 x 5 ,_ ,,,g• 4 0 • • • hackfill soils after placement can result in settlement. This settlement is most common on north facing walls. 3. The building should be provided with roof gutters and downspouts. Roof downspouts and drains should discharge well beyond the limits of all backfill. Splash blocks and downspout extensions should be provided at all discharge points. 4. Landscaping should be carefully designed to minimize irrigation near foundation walls. Plants used near foundation walls should be limited to those with low moisture requirements: irrigated grass should not be located within 5 feet of the foundations. Sprinklers should not discharge within 5 feet of the foundation and should be directed away from the building. 5. Impervious plastic membranes should not be used to cover the ground surface immediately surrounding the building. These membranes tend to trap moisture and prevent normal evaporation from occurring. Geotextile fabrics can be used to control weed growth and allow some evaporation to occur, CONCRETE Concrete in contact with soil can be subject to sulfate attack. We measured water-soluble sulfate concentrations in one sample from this site. A concentration was measured of 0.01 percent. For this level of sulfate concentration. ACI 332-08 Code Requirements for Residential Concrete indicates there are no special requirements for sulfate resistance. In our experience, superficial damage may occur to the exposed surfaces of highly permeable concrete, even though sulfate levels are relatively low. To control this risk and to resist freeze -thaw deterioration, the water-to-cementitious materials ratio should not exceed 0.50 for concrete in contact with soils that are likely to stay moist due to surface drainage or high water tables. Concrete should have a total air content of 6% +1- 1.5%. We recommend all foundation walls and grade beams in contact with the subsoils (including the inside and outside faces of garage and crawl space grade beams) be damp -proofed. CENAR-SAM, LIP MARQUIS MAJOR SUBDIVISION CTL T PROJECT NO, GS05406.120 S G5i1S406,000t1 20,2 ReporyoGSOS406 ISO RI rloc 17 • • DRIVEWAY RECOMMENDATIONS Based on the borings. the near surface soils on this site after grading is completed will consist of natural clay or similar soils placed as fill. The clay soils will range from low to moderately plastic and will provide relatively poor subgrade support below the pavements compared to the gravel. The subgrade soils below the roads will be variable. The on-site clay soil will likely classify as AASHTO Group A-6 or A-7.6. We recommend over excavation of the clay soils to a depth of at least 1 foot below driveway surfaces and replacement with compacted fill. A geotextile separator fabric should be placed between the clay soils and aggregate base course. A typical driveway section consisting of aggregate base course or aggregate base with a chip and seal surface is appropriate. If better performance and less maintenance is desired. we can provide a recommended asphaltic pavement or portland cement pavement section. A primary cause of early driveway deterioration is water infiltration into the pavement system. The addition of moisture usually results in softening of base course and subgrade and the eventual failure of the surface. We recommend drainage be designed for rapid removal of surface runoff from drive surfaces. Final grading should be carefully controlled so that design cross -slope is maintained and low spots in the subgrade which could trap water are eliminated. Portland cement concrete drainage pans with subsurface drains should be considered in areas where water will be flowing across drive surfaces. CONSTRUCTION OBSERVATIONS This report has been prepared for the exclusive use of Ce -Mar -Sam, LLLP for the purpose of providing geologic and geotechnical design and construction criteria for the proposed project. The information, conclusions, and recommendations presented herein are based upon consideration of many factors including, but not limited to, the type of structures proposed. the geologic setting. and the subsurface conditions encountered. The conclusions and recommendations contained in the CE.MARSAM, LLP MAROUtS MAJOR SURDMSioN CTL 11 PROJECT NO. GS05406,120 s fiepwisoGS0540t 12c, RI.doc 18 • • report are not valid for use by others. Standards of practice continuously change in the area of geotechnical engineering. The recommendations provided are appropriate for about three years. If the proposed residence is not constructed within about three years, we should be contacted to determine if we should update this report. We recornmend that CTL Thompson. Inc. provide construction observation services to allow us the opportunity to verify whether soil conditions are consistent wth those found during this investigation. If others perform these observations, they must accept responsibility to judge whether the recommendations in this report remain appropriate. GEOTECHNICAL R|SK The concept of risk is an important aspect with any geotechnical evaluation primarily because the methods used to develop geotechnical recommendations do not comprise an exact science. We never have complete knowledge of subsurface conditions. Our analysis must be tempered with engineering judgment and experience. Thernfore, the recommendations presented in any geotechnical evaluation should not be considered risk-free. We cannot provide a guarantee that the interaction between the soils and a proposed structure will be as desired or intended. Our recommendations represent our judgment of those measures that are necessary to increase the chances that the structures will perform satisfactorily. It iscritical that all recommendations in this report are followed during construction. Home owners MUM assume responsibility for maintaining the structure and use appropriate practices regarding drainage and landscaping. LIMITATIONS Our exploratory borings were located to obtain a reasonably accurate picture of subsurface conditions. Variations in the subsurface conditions not indicated by our borings will occur. A representative of our firrn should be called to observe and CE -MAR -SAM, LLP MARQUIS MAJOR SUeDIVtSION CTL T PROJECT NO am05406-120 o°noopm5 001120unep""°oo05'612C,m*"" 19 • • • test fill placement and observe the completed foundation excavation to confirm that the exposed soils are suitable for support of the footings as designed, This investigation was conducted in a manner consistent with that level of care and skill ordinarily exercised by geotechnical engineers and geologists currently practicing under similar conditions in the locality of this project. No warranty, express or implied, is made. If we can be of further service in discussing the contents of this report, please contact the undersigned, CTL THOMPSON, INC. Craig A Burger. Project Manager )0 Review° y /' JohMe in , P. 'Brnc CAB:JM:RD:cd CE -MAR -SAM, LLP MARCLAS MAJOR SUBDIVISION CTL T PROJECT NO. GS05406-120 s '13505405 0-0120 2 fieport5,GSt7S41C120R ioc Robin Dornfest, PG Senior Engineering Geologist 20 -Percolation Profile borin I• •j • ~ 4 a` -0 o c qc 0 c W 004 z as 0 e Scale: 1"= 100 LEGEND: NOTE: Location of exploratory, percolation and profile borings are TH0-1 Exploratory boring approximate. • P— Percolation boring . Profile boring Profile CE -MAR -SAM, LLP Marquis Maio( Subdtvialon Project No. GS05406-120 Locations of Exploratory Borings Fig. 2 • 17/12 17/12 12/12 12/12 18/12 30/12 27/12 30/12 33/6 50/12 10/12 9/12 21/12 21/12 13/12 1 • • LEGEND: Sandy clay "topsoil", moist, brown. Clay, sandy with scattered basalt cobbles and boulders, stiff to very stiff, moist, brown, white. (CO Drive sample. The symbol 17/12 indicates that 17 blows of a 140 pound hammer falling 30 inches were required to drive a 2.5 inch O.D. California sampler 12 inches. 1111 Drive sample. The symbol 50/12 indicates that 50 blows of a 140 pound hammer failing 30 inches were required to drive a 2.0 inch 0.D. standard sampler 12 inches. NOTES: Indicates practical auger refusal. Symbols above the bottom of borings indicates that boring location was moved to advance auger farther. 1. Exploratory borings were drilled on September 2, 2009 with 4—inch diameter, solid—stem auger and a track—mounted drill rig. 2. Locations of exploratory borings shown on Figure 1 are approximate. 3. No free ground water was found in our exploratory borings at the time of drilling. 4. These exploratory borings are subject to the explanations, limitations and conclusions as contained in this report. SUMMARY LOGS OF EXPLORATORY BORINGS Project No. GS05406-120 Fig. 4 • SLOPE PER OSHA SLOPE PER REPORT BACKFILLAND' PER BELOW GRADE WALL ENCASE PIPE IN WASHED CONCRETE AGGREGATE (ASTM C33, NO. 57 OR NO. 67) EXTEND GRAVEL TO AT LEAST 1/2 HEIGHT OF FOOTING. COVER GRAVEL WTI'H FILTER FABRIC. NOTE: DRAIN SHOULD BE AT LEAST 2 INCHES BELOW BOTTOM OF FOOTING AT THE HIGHEST POINT AND SLOPE DOWNWARD TO A POSfl1VE GRAVITY OUTLET OR TO A SUMP WHERE WATER CAN BE REMOVED BY PUMPING. REINFORCING STEEL PER STRUCTURAL DRAWINGS PROVIDE POSITIVE SUP JOINT BETWEEN SLAB AND WALL. FLOOR SLAB 2 MINIMUM 8" MINIMUM ~�-~ OR BEYOND 1:1 SLOPE FROM BOTTOM OF FOOTING. (WHICHEVER IS GREATER) 4 -INCH DIAMETER PERFORATED DRAIN PIPE. THE PIPE SHOULD BE LAID IN A TRENCH WITH A MINIMUM SLOPE OF 0.5 PERCENT. FOOTING OR PAD PROVIDE POLYETHYLENE SHEETING GLUED TO FOUNDATION WALL TO REDUCE MOISTURE PENETRATION Exterior Foundation Wall Drain Project No. G 05406-120 Fig. 5 • SLOPE PER OSHA GALVANIZED SCREEN OR COARSE GRAVEL BEHIND WEEP HOLES BACKF1LL AND .141 PER * BACKFILL WITH ... SILT( OR CLAYEY SOL 2' ,40 • * , ---•*`••• ; 4.7, • „, RETAINING WALL PROVIDE GRAVEL LAYER BEHIND WALL, WASHED CONCRETE AGGREGATE (ASTM C33, NO. 57 OR 67). WEEP HOLE Project No. GS05406-120 FOOTING FOUNDATION REINFORCING STEEL PER STRUCTURAL DRAWINGS 4 -INCH DIAMETER PERFORATED DRAIN PIPE. THE PIPE SHOULD BE PLACED IN A TRENCH WITH A SLOPE RANGING BETWEEN 1/16 -INCH AND 1/8 -INCH DROP PER FOOT OF DRAIN. Typical Earth Retaining Wall Drain Fig. 6 • APPENDIX A LABORATORY TEST RESULTS CE•MAR-SAM, LLP MARQUIS MAJOR SUBDIVISION CTL I T PROJECT NO. GS05406-120 S q -',S1:35406,000,12(1:2, RevorisGS05406 12 l <loc. • COMPRESSION % EXPANSION EXPANSION UNDER CONSTAN- PRESSURE DUE TO \NETTING APPLIED PRESSURE - KSF Sompie c CLAY • Ram 'TH-1 AT 9 FIE'E. Ce -Mar -Sam, LLLP Marquts Major Subcliviston PROJECT NO. GS05406-120 s u.Gs4(it, 000ti2aw .•- TjRE CONTENT= 108 PCP 16.8 % SweII Consolidation Test Results • • • COMPRESSION E XPANSION EXPANSION UNDER CONSTANT PRESSURE DUE TO WET7iNG APPLIED PRESSURE - KSF San ?Pie 01 CLAY (C. ROM Ti Al 24 FEET Ce -Mar -Sam, LLLP Marquis Major Subdivision PROJECT NO. GS05406-120 ..5,65.t)54rA oovtina, Caics‘GSOS406SWELL.xis DRY UN ,,:'VEiGHT:z NICASTURE CONTENT. Swell Consolidation Test Results F -1G. A - 2 • • • COMPRESSION EXPANSION EXPANSION UNDER CONSTANT PRESSURE DJE TO \NETTING APPLIED PRESSURE - KSF 31 CLAYrOL TH-2 AT 14 FEET C-Mar-SarrL LLLP Marquis Maior Subdivisoll PROJECT NO. GS05406-12() s w.=sovior, Otgr.t2tAE- (.41k.s,P.:,M,N.c6S0g,L Swell Consolidation Test Results • • • COMPRESSION rV EXPANSION ADDITIONAL COMPRESSION UNDER CONSTANT PRESSURE DUE TO 'NE rING APPLIED PRESSURE - KSF ' • CLAY (CL) TH-3 AT 19 FEET Ce -Mar -Sam, LLLP Marquis IVIaior Subdivision PROJECT NO. G.505406-120 ,G.Sr',40e; ViOttinf> Csic-W,S05406SYYU...L.si, DRY UNIT WEIGHT= 100 PCS TRE(1)r.,;TE NTr- 16.9 % Swell Consolidation Test Results • • Q MD Data Over -Jaye(' on Prop 10 10 10 C) CO h - (pd) AT!sua Moisture Content ( - c4 17 - • • TABLE A - I SUMMARY OF LABORATORY TEST RESULTS ,) • PROJE(TNO OS0906-120 m ! NA0 URAL oRi frAOISILIREI NJ 1«} ) ! PC F m AIT !1 EF, 1'101,1111 HVR G Hem �1A r %DE [AIES Em \F\ ± C.T.ASSIT1UAT111144 Ha m PARK DITCH AND RESERVOIR COMPANY May 19, 2010 Garfield County Planning 108 8th Street, Suite 401 Glenwood Springs CO 81601 To Whom It May Concern: My name is Dick Stephenson and I am writing as president of the Park Ditch and Reservoir Company about the Marquis Subdivision and the operation of the Park Ditch. The ditch company was incorporated many years ago to provide water to properties in the County Road 112 area and other locations. We divert water out of Cattle Creek. There are approximately 99 ditch shares owned by various parties served by the ditch company. The other board members presently are Alex Schwaller - Vice President and Nan Kelly Secretary/Treasurer. The company operates by a majority vote of the membership. I am attaching a copy of the articles of incorporation and bylaws for your information. Water diverted out of Cattle Creek to the main ditch flows to County Road 112 where the ditch splits three ways. The Marquis property obtains its water from this split. Any change in the ditch configuration requires majority approval from the membership. Requested changes to the ditch are at the sole expense of the requesting party and must be completed in accordance with our specifications. I hope this letter provides the information requested by the Garfield County Planning Department. I would be happy to attend the Garfield County Commissioners Meeting that I understand is scheduled for June 7, 2010 to answer any additional questions. Sincerely, Dick Stephenson President Cc: Sam Marquis - Ce -Mar -Sam, Co. LLLP 1609 COUNTY ROAD 112 • CARBONDALE, COLORADO • 81623 PHONE: 970-963-3578 Karp NeueHAaonIonPC February 3, 2010 Via e-mail: wsconsulting@sopris.net Davis Farrar Western Slope Consulting 165 Basalt Mountain Drive Carbondale, CO 81623 RE: Marquis Subdivision Dear Davis: Sander N. Karp James S. Neu Karl J. Hanlon Michael J. Sawyer James F. Fosnaught Anna S ltenberg Cassia R. Furman Jennifer M. Smith T. Damien Zumbrennen Jeffrey J. Conklin 201 I4T" Street, Suite 200 P. 0. Drawer 2030 Glenwood Springs, CO 81602 Telephone: (970) 945-2261 Facsimile: (970) 945-7336 W Nvw.ntountainlawfi nn.com Karl J. Hanlon kih(i4mountainlawfirmcom At your request, I have reviewed the comments provided from the attorney's office at Garfield County regarding the above -referenced Subdivision. With regard to comment 3 of the e-mail from Kathy Eastley dated January 4, 2010, Lot I of the Marquis/Wallbank Boundary Adjustment Plat was specifically excluded from the operation of the Augmentation Plan in Case No. 87CW 100 (a copy of which is attached hereto). Please note Lot 1 was served by a late registered well which was adjudicated in Case No. 79CW79. Accordingly, the Augmentation Plan referenced on the Boundary Adjustment Plat has no bearing on the proposed Subdivision. The current proposed Subdivision would rely on an exempt well which was recently permitted for the property as well as continuing to rely on the late registered well. With regard to the effect of the Covenants, the cross-reference in paragraph 2 to the Augmentation Plan, simply eliminates from the operation of the paragraph the late registered well. As noted in the Augmentation Plan the remainder of the lots were augmented for domestic purposes pursuant to the Decree in Case No. 87CW100. As to the restriction on the number of residences, in the Covenants it restricts use on any given lot to residential purposes and cross references the Garfield County Land Use Code. The Covenants do not contain an express restriction as to number of units on any given lot. In addition, the Covenants do not expressly limit the property to no further subdivision as is often the case. Accordingly, it is my opinion that further subdivision under the Covenants is permissible provided that it is consistent with the Garfield County Land Use Code. Should you have any questions regarding any of the above, please do not hesitate to contact me. Very truly yours, KARP NEU HANLON, P.C. KJH:jac Enclosure(s) cc: Sam Marquis DISTRICT COURT, WATER DIVISION NO. 5, COLORADO Case No. 87CW100 RULING OE THE REFEREE CONCERNING THE APPLICATION EOR WATER RIGHTS OF: AUSTIN MARQUIS AND LINCOLN WALLBANK, in Garfield County, Colorado The above -entitled application was filed on April 30, 1987, and referred to the Water. Referee for Water. Division No. 5, State of Colorado, by the Water. Judge of said Court on May 11, 1987, in accordance with the provisions of Article 92 of Chapter. 37, Colorado Revised Statutes 1973, known as the Water. Rights Determination and Administration Act of 1969. The undersigned Referee having made such investigations as are necessary to determine whether or not the statements in the application are true and having become fully advised with respect to the subject matter in the application does hereby make the following deter- mination and Ruling of the Referee in this matter, to -wit: FINDINGS OF FACT 1. The name and address of the Applicants are Austin Marquis and Lincoln Wallbank, c/o Austin Marquis, 99 South Downing Street, Denver., Colorado 80209. 2. The underground water rights set forth below have been applied for by the Applicants and are to be augmented pursuant to the terms of this Decree. A. Marquis/Wallbank Well No. 2, located in the Southeast 1/4 of the Northeast 1/4 of Section 23, Township 7 South, Range 88 West of the 6th P.M., at a point whence the East 1/4 corner of Section 23, Township 7 South, Range 88 West of the 6th P.M. bears South 23°30' East a distance of 865 feet, for. 15 g.p.m., conditional, for domestic and irrigation purposes. The appropriation date is April 9, 1987. Said appropriation was ini- tiated by site visits, by formation of the intent to apply water to the beneficial uses decreed herein, and by engineering and subdivision development work. The source of water is groundwater tributary to the Roaring Fork River. B. Marquis/Wallbank Well No. 3, located in the Southeast 1/4 of the Northeast 1/4 of Section 23, Township 7 -1- South, Range 88 West of the 6th P.M., at a point whence the East 1/4 corner. of Section 23, Township 7 South, Range 88 West of the 6th P.M. bears South 60°30' East a distance of 590 feet, for 15 g.p.m., conditional, for domestic and irrigation purposes. The appropriation date is April 9, 1987. Said appropriation was ini- tiated by site visits, by formation of the intent to apply water to the beneficial uses decreed herein, and by engineering and subdivision development work. The source of water is groundwater tributary to the Roaring Fork River. C. Marquis/Wallbank Well No. 4, located in the Southeast 1/4 of the Northeast 1/4 of Section 23, Township 7 South, Range 88 West of the 6th P.M., at a point whence the East 1/4 corner. of Section 23, Township 7 South, Range 88 West of the 6th P.M. bears South 66°00' East a distance of 1010 feet, for 15 g.p.m., conditional, for domestic and irrigation purposes. The appropriation date is April 9, 1987. Said appropriation was ini- tiated by site visits, by formation of the intent to apply water to the beneficial uses decreed herein, and by engineering and subdivision development work. The source of water is groundwater tributary to the Roaring Fork River. D. Marguis/Wallbank Well No. 5, located in the Southeast 1/4 of the Northeast 1/4 of Section 23, Township 7 South, Range 88 West of the 6th P.M., at a point whence the East 1/4 corner. of Section 23, Township 7 South, Range 88 West of the 6th P.M. bears South 35°41'33" East a distance of 987.68 feet, for 15 g.p.m., con- ditional, for domestic and irrigation purposes. The appropriation -date is April 9, 1987. Said appropri- ation was initiated by site visits, by formation of the intent to apply water to the beneficial uses decreed herein, and by engineering and subdivision development work. The source of water is groundwater tributary to the Roaring Fork River. E. Marquis/Wallbank Well No. 6, located in the Southeast 1/4 of the Northeast 1/4 of Section 23, Township 7 South, Range 88 West of the 6th P.M., at a point whence the East 1/4 corner. of Section 23, Township 7 South, Range 88 West of the 6th P.M. bears South 42°40' East a distance of 1540 feet, for 15 g.p.m., conditional, for domestic and irrigation purposes. The appropriation date is April 9, 1987. Said appropriation was ini- tiated by site visits, by formation of the intent to apply water to the beneficial uses decreed herein, and by engineering and subdivision development work. The source of water is groundwater tributary to the Roaring Fork River_. -2- 3. The application filed herein also includes an applica- tion for approval of a plan for. augmentation. The structures to be augmented pursuant to the terms of this decree are the Marquis/Wallbank Well Nos. 2 through 6, inclusive, as set forth in Paragraph 2. The following water rights may be used for augmentation: A. The Applicant Austin Marquis is the owner of three shares in the Park Ditch and Reservoir Company. The Park Ditch and Reservoir Company diverts direct flow water from Cattle Creek under the following water. rights: Ditch Park Ditch Park Ditch Park Ditch Park Ditch Structure Con. Res. Con. Res. Con. Res. Decreed Amount 9.0 4.1 1.8 2.0 TABLE 1 PARK DITCH WATER RIGHTS Priority No. 221A 232 221A 232 Decreed Location Sec. 7 T7S, R87W NW/SW/SE NW/SW/SE NW/SW/SE NW/SW/SE Adjud. Date 06/26/1913 06/09/1916 04/16/1917 09/05/1918 Approp. Date 09/12/1904 07/01/1912 09/12/1904 07/01/1912 Direct flow diversions under the shares in the Park Ditch and Reservoir Company are supplemented by releases from Consolidated Reservoir. This reservoir operates under the following decreed priorities: TABLE I1 CONSOLIDATED RESERVOIR WATER RIGHTS Decreed Amoun t 595.0 AF 285.6 AF 401.0 AF Priority No. 8B 678 654 Decreed Location Sec. 19 T6S, R87W NE/NE NE/NE NE/NE Adjud. Date 02/15/1921 06/20/1958 11/05/1971 C.A. 1627 1821 1627 1973 Approp. Date C.A. 09/08/1898 09/01/1948 09/01/1948 B. The Applicants have obtained a contract for each of the wells to be augmented, with the Basalt Water Conservancy District for the release of water from Ruedi Reservoir, decreed in Civil Action No. 789 in the District Court in and for. Garfield County, State of -3- 2144 4613 5884 Colorado, on June 20, 1958, for 102,869 acre-feet for irrigation, municipal, industrial, domestic, generation of electric energy, stock watering, and piscatorial purposes with an appropriation date of July 29, 1957, and located in and near Sections 7-9, 11, 14-18, Township 8 South, Range 84 West of the 6th P.M. Each contract provides for the release of 0.04 acre-feet of water for each well, or a total of 0.20 acre-feet for the development. 4. The three shares in the Park Ditch and Reservoir Company owned by the Applicants have been used to irrigate —approximately 17 acres. Historically, as decreed in Case No. 79CW097 in'the District Court in and for Water Division No. 5, '-e_ach_share of the Park Ditch stock has entitled the owner to an annual average yield of approximately 2.4 acre-feet of water in storage in the Consolidated Reservoir and 31.44 acre-feet of water under the direct flow water rights adjudicated to the Park Ditch. Historic average year monthly depletions to the river system associated with the Applicants' interest in the Park Ditch Reservoir and Canal Company are shown below: Month TABLE III HISTORIC DEPLETIONS Average Year Consumptive Use May 3.74 June 6.12 July 7.31 August 5.27 September. 3.40 October 10 0.85 TOTAL 26.69 The historic irrigation season for shares under. the Park Ditch has been May 1 through October 10 of each year. 5. The Applicants propose to develop a residential sub- division located in Section 23, Township 7 South, Range 88 West of the 6th P.M., known as the Marquis/Wallbank Boundary Adjustment Plat, recorded on June 29, 1987, as Reception No. 383220 in the Office of the Clerk and Recorder of Garfield County, Colorado. The development will consist of six single- family dwelling units. Dwelling units on five lots (Lots 2-6) of the development will be supplied with water under this augmentation plan. The sixth lot (Lot 1) is approximately 50.70 acres, and' a dwelling unit thereon will be supplied from an exempt well, the Marquis Well No. 1 decreed in Case No. 79CW78 -4- in the District Court in and for Water. Division No. 5, Permit No. 104391. The water requirements and potential stream deple- tions associated with the five units provided for herein are based upon the following criteria: Five residences with 3.5 persons per residence utilizing 100 gallons per capita per day; 2500 square feet of outside lawn and garden irrigation for four of the residences and 5000 square feet of outside lawn and gar- den irrigation for the fifth residence; wastewater treatment to be through septic tank/leachfield systems; 15 percent consump- tive use for in-house uses; and 70 percent efficiency for out- side irrigation. Water requirements and calculated consumptive use for the proposed development are shown below: Month January February March April May June July August September. October November. December TABLE IV WATER REQUIREMENTS AND CONSUMPTIVE USE Water. Requirements Consumptive Use In -House In- PotableIrr. Total House Irr. Total (Values in AF) (Values in AF) 0.17 0.15 0.17 0.17 0.17 0.17 0.17 0.17 0.17 0.17 0.17 0.17 0.00 0.17 0.00 0.15 0.00 0.17 0.00 0.17 0.11 0.28 0.17 0.34 0.21 0.38 0.15 0.32 0.10 0.27 0.02 0.19 0.00 0.17 0.00 0.17 TOTAL 2.02 0.76 2.78 Population: 18 GPD/Capita: 100 In -House CU: 15 percent Irr. Eff.: 70 percent No. Irr. Ac.: 0.34 0.03 0.00 0.03 0.02 0.00 0.02 0.03 0.00 0.03 0.02 0.00 0.02 0.03 0.07 0.10 0.02 0.12 0.14 0.03 0.15 0.18 0.03 0.11 0.14 0.02 0.07 0.09 0.03 0.02 0.05 0.02 0.00 0.02 0.03 0.00 0.03 0.31 0.54 0.85 6. As a result of access road and building site construc- tion, the Applicants wi-1.1permanently retire from historic irri- gation a minimum of 0.43 acres of land under the Park Ditch. As a result, the Applicants will have available a credit associated with the historic depletion under its water rights which will offset any out -of -priority irrigation season depletions under the water rights to be augmented hereunder. During the irriga- tion season, 0.08 shares of the Park Ditch and Reservoir Company will be left in the Ditch and returned to the drainage of -5- historic use. A comparison of historic consumptive use asso- ciated with the irrigation of 0.43 acres of land with the con- sumptive use associated with the proposed development is shown below: TABLE V HISTORIC AND NEW CONSUMPTIVE USES Historic Consumptive Use Development Month (Average a.f.) C.U. (a.f.) May 0.10 0.10 June 0.16 0.14 July 0.19 0.18 August 0.13 0.14 September. 0.09 0.09 October. 10 0.02 0.02 TOTALS 0.69 0.67 7. During the historic non -irrigation season (October. 11 through April 30 of each year), the Applicants will replace out - of -priority depletions under the water rights to be augmented by releases of water under its contracts with the Basalt Water. Conservancy District from Ruedi Reservoir. The contracts total 0.20 acre-foot, and non -irrigation season consumptive use plus transit losses accounted for herein also will total 0.20 acre- foot (0.18 acre-foot for total non -irrigation season consumptive uses and 0.02 acre-foot for transit loss). The transit losses provided for herein equal approximately 11 percent of releases. Non -irrigation season consumptive use and required reservoir releases are shown below: TABLE VI NON --IRRIGATION SEASON CONSUMPTIVE USE AND RESERVOIR RELEASES Release Transit Loss Consumptive Use Month (af) Replacement (af) (af ) October. 11 0.033 November. 0.023 December 0.033 January 0.033 February 0.023 March 0.033 April 0.023 0.003 0.003 0.003 0.003 0.003 0.003 0.003 0.03 0.02 0.03 0.03 0.02 0.03 0.02 TOTALS 0.201 0.021 0.18 8. The Applicants propose to change the decreed use of the 0.08 shares of the Park Ditch and Reservoir. Company to be used hereunder to domestic purposes, including irrigation, by augmen- tation, replacement and exchange. CONCLUSIONS OF LAW 9. Timely and adequate notice of the filing of this appli- cation was given as required by law and no statements of opposi- tion were filed herein. 10. The Applicants have initiated valid appropriations of the water rights .for which application has been made herein as of the dates claimed in the application. 11. This plan for augmentation meets the statutory criteria for a plan for augmentation as set forth in C.R.S. 07--92-103(9), -302(1), and -305(8), is one contemplated by law and, if operated and administered in accordance with the con- ditions hereof, will not result in an increase in historic con- sumptive use of those water rights referenced herein and will not cause material injury to any vested water right or decreed conditional water right. DECREE 12. The Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law set forth above are incorporated herein by this reference. 13. The decreed use of the Applicants' interest in 0.08 shares of the Park Ditch and Reservoir Company are hereby changed to domestic purposes, including• irrigation, by augmen- tation, replacement, and exchange. -7- 14. The application for water rights for the Marquis/ Wallbank Well Nos. 2 through 6, inclusive, is hereby approved for 15 g.p.m., conditional, for each well, with appropriation dates for each well of April 9, 1987, at the location and from the sources listed above, for domestic and irrigation purposes. An application for quadrennial finding of reasonable dili- gence shall be filed in September. of 1991 and in September of every fourth calendar year thereafter for each well so long as the Applicants desire to maintain these conditional water rights or until a determination has been made that these conditional water rights have become absolute water rights by reason of completion of the appropriations. For purposes of diligence, the wells shall be considered as an integrated water system, and diligence on one well shall be considered diligence as to all wells. 15. Before any historic depletion credits under. the Applicants' water rights in the Park Ditch are available for augmentation purposes hereunder, the Applicants shall dry up a minimum of 0.43 acres of land historically irrigated under their interest in said Ditch and shall identify the location and number of acres of land dried up to the Division Engineer. When such lands are dried up and identified to the Division Engineer, the Applicants shall have available on a monthly basis an amount equal to the historic depletion credits shown on Table V, above. During the irrigation season, 0.08 shares of the Park Ditch and Reservoir Company will he left in the ditch and returned to the drainage of historic use. 16. The application for plan for augmentation contained herein is hereby approved and the operation thereof shall be conducted pursuant to the terms and conditions of this decree. 17. The Applicants shall install such measuring devices as may be required by the Division Engineer to facilitate the operation of this plan for augmentation and to secure compliance herewith. 18. The Office of the State Engineer is hereby ordered to issue well permits for the Marquis/Wallbank Well Nos. 2 through 6, inclusive, subject to the terms of this plan for augmentation. 19. The State Engineer shall curtail all out -of -priority diversions under the water rights described in Paragraph 2, the depletions from which are not so replaced as to prevent injury to vested water. rights. 20. It is accordingly ordered that this Ruling shall be filed with the Water. Clerk, subject to judicial review. It is further ordered that this Ruling will be filed with the appropriate Division Engineer and State Engineer.' -8- 0/zz Dated this 30 day of L fIAYc: 4 , 1987. /14_1) /4);1114,/ Watdr Referee Water. Division No. 5 State of Colorado J tc No protest was filed to this Ruling of the Referee. The foregoing Ruling is confirmed and approved and is made the judgment and decree of this Court; subject, however, to the reconsideration on the issue of injury to vested water rights for a period of two years commencing from the date of first operation of the plan for augmentation provided for by this decree and, in making such determination, the Court has con- sidered and found that there is no dispute as to the historic use of the subject water rights, that this decree involves a plan for augmentation which provides for a surplus of augmen- tation water over proposed depletions, and that the quantity of uses to be augmented is small. Dated this day of cr S1/et /f2-• 19 87 . -9- Marquis Subdivision Preliminary Plan - Supplemental Submittal Materials Prepared by: Western Slope Consulting LLC 0165 Basalt Mt. Drive Carbondale, CO 81623 970-963-7172 January 20, 2010 ISSUANCE OF THIS PERMIT DOES NOT CONFER A WATER RIGHT CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL This well shall be used m such a way as to cause no material injury to existing water rights. The issuance of this perm* does not ensure that no injury will occur to another vested water right or preclude antral owner of a vested water right hem seeking relief in a civil court action. Cans:truction details for this existing well have not been provided to this office: therelore, it is not known if the construction of this well is in campf/ance with the Water Wel Construction Rules, 2 CCR 402-2. The issuance of this permit does not relieve tate. welI oweor rA responsibility w liability m the event contamination of the groundwater source results from the construction or use of this well, nor does Me State Engineer assume any responsibility or liability should contamination OOCur. 3) This well is recorded and permit approved in aa:ordance with CRS 37-92.802(5) for historical use as indicated herein and described'in CRS 37-92-602(1)(b), being a wall producing 13.33 CDMA and used for ordinary household purposes inside one (1) single family dwelling, fire protectioi, the watering of domestic animals and poultry, and the irrigation of not more than one (1) acre of home gardens and lawns. 4) Approved as a well on a trans of laird of 4 19 acres described as that portion df the NE 1/4 PI the NE 1 r4, Sec. 23, Twp, 7 South, Rng. 88 West, 605 P.M., Garfield County, more panicutariy descriaed on the attached exhibit A. Further identified as 0955 County Road 112,. Carbondale, CO 81623. 5) Approved for 01 amended (clarified) legal description, the installation of a pump in, and the of use (verification of historic use) an existing well. constnrciod on June 30, 1966 to a depth of 157 feet. without a valid permit and tater recorded for use under permit no. 104391 (canceled). Issuance of this permit hereby cancels permit no.. 104391. 6) The date of first beneficial use. as claimed by the applicant, is June 30, 1966. NOTE: This well was decreed as Marquis Well no. lin Division 5 Water Court case no. 78CN0078. This well was decreed for 0.029 cis (13.33 gallons per minute), The total depth of this well is decreed as 157 feet. At the date of the entry of this decree with the court on October 14, 1979, the well owner was'. Austin Margins: 4503 Grape Street, Denver, CO. NOTE: Parcel Identification Number (PIN): 23-2393-231-00-279 . NOTE.: Assessor Assessor Tax Schedule Number. R111625 (rotating 50.7 acres) [ft 17".= 3/::ic,t, 7 Marquis Subdivision Preliminary Plan Suppleme tal Submittal Marquis Subdivision Preliminary Plan Supplemental Submittal Materials. This information is submitted in response to a request from County planner Kathy A. Eastle for additional information for the Marquis Subdivision Preliminary Plan application. In respons- to the request the following materials and information are provided. Water Supply for Lot lA Lot lA is served by an existing "late registered" well. This well produces 13.33 gallons per inute and is approved, in place and sufficient for the existing use. A copy of the well permit is included below. Form No. GWS -25 APPLICANT OFFICE OF THE STATE ENGINEER COLORADO DIVISION OF WATER RESOURCES Ott Centennta! 8ktg.- 1313 Sterman St. Ckrr,vee^, Caorado 8020'5 (3031886-3581 WELL PERMIT NUMBER 281492 Dry' 5 WD 38 DES. BASIN MD CE -MAR -SAM CO LLLP CIO SAMUEL AUSTIN MARQUIS JR 567 FAIRFIELD LANE LOUISVILLE, CO 80027- (303) 938-5534 PERMIT TO USE AN EXISTING WELL APPROVED WELL LOCATION GARFIELD COUNTY NE 1%4 NE 1/4 Section 23 Township 7 S Range 88 W Sixth P.M. DISTANCES FROM SECTION LINES 409 Ft. from North Section Line 930 FI. from East Section Line UTM COORDINATES (Meters.Zone:13 NAD83) Easting: Northing: APPROVED DMW Receipt No. 95032789 DATE ISSUED 08-20-2009 BY DATE Page - 1 • • Table of Contents Item Page Water Supply for Lot lA 4 Well Permit & Legal Description for Lot 1 B. 6 Explanation of Well Permit Acreages. 7 Wastewater & Septic Permits. 8 Revised ISDS Design and Performance Standards 16 Homeowners Association & Covenants. 21 Proposed Restrictive Final Plat Note 21 Revised Visual Impact Analysis 22 Road Impact Fees. 26 Re -1 School Impact Fees. 26 Fire District Impact Fees. 26 Fire Protection. 26 Mineral Ownership. 26 Recorded Statement of Authority. 27 Plan for Augmentation 31 Preliminary Plan Map. 52 Attachments - Items 12, 13 and 14 In Scheduled B, Stewart Title Commitment 52 Draft Marquis Subdivision Improvements Agreement 64 Page - 2 • • • Marquis Subdivision Preliminary Plan Supplemental Submittal Materials. This information is submitted in response to a request from county planner Kathy A. Eastley for additional information for the Marquis Subdivision Preliminary Plan application. In response to the request the following materials and information are provided. Water Supply for Lot 1 A Lot 1A is served by an existing "late registered" well. This well produces 13.33 gallons per minute and is approved, in place and sufficient for the existing use. A copy of the well permit is included below. Form No. GWS -25 APPLICANT PE 1) OFFICE OF THE STATE ENGINEER COLORADO DIVISION OFWATERRESOURCES Denver, o )303) 8863581 LR WELL PERMIT NUMBER 281492 DIV. 5 NO 38 DES.9ASIN MO CE -MAR -SAM CO LLLP CIO SAMUEL AUSTIN MARQUIS JR 567 FAIRFIELD LANE LOUISVILLE, CO 80027- (303) 938-5534 IT TO USE AN EXISTING WELL APPROVED WELL LOCATION GARFIELD COUNTY NE 1/4 NE 1/4 Section 23 Township 7 S Range 88 W Sixth P.M. DISTANCES FROM SECTION LINES 409 Ft from North Section Line 930 Ft. from East Section Line UTM COORDINATES (Meters,Zone:13,NAD33) Easling: Northing: ISSUANCE OF THIS PERMIT DOES NOT CONFER A WATER RIGHT CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL This well shall be used In such a way as to cause no material injury to existing water rights. The issuance of this permit does not ensure that no in)uy wilt occur to another vested water right or preclude another owner of a vested water right from seeking retial in a civil court action, Construction details for Ihls existing well have not been provided 10 this office: therefore, it is not known if the construction of this well is in compliance with Me Water Well Construction Rules, 2 CCR 402-2. The issuance of this perme does not relieve the well owner of responsibility or liability in the event contamination of the groundwater source results from the construction or use of this well, nor does the State Engineer assume any reaponsi.bitity or liability should contamination occur. 3) This well is recorded and permit approved in accordance with CRS 37-92.602(5) for historical use as indicated herein and described in CRS 37-92-602)1)(b), being a well producing 13.33 GPM and used for ordinary household purposes inside one (1) single family dwelling, fire protection, the watering of domestic an'vnals and poultry, and the inigation of not more than one (1) acre a1 home gardens and lawns. 4) Approved as a well on a trail of land of 4.18 acres described as that portion of the NE 114 of the NE 114, Sec. 23, Twp. 7 South, Rng, 88 West, eel P.M., Garfield County, more particularly described on the attached exhibit A. Further identified as 0955 County (toad 112, Carbondale, CO 81823, 5) Approved for en amended (clarified) legal description, the installation of a pump in, and the of use (verification of historic use) an existing well, constructed on June 30, 1966, to a depth of 157 feet, without a valid permit and later recorded for use under permit no, 104391 (canceled). Issuance of this permit hereby cancels permit no. 104391. 6) The dale of first beneficial use. as claimed by the applicant, is June 30, 1986. NOTE; This wail was decreed as Marquis Well no, 1 in Division 5 Water Court case no. 79CW0078. This well was decreed for 0.029 cls (13.33 gallons per minute). The total depth of this well is decreed as 157 feet. At the date of the entry of this decree with the court on October 14. 1979, the well owner was: Austin Marquis: 4500 Grape Street. Denver, CO. NOTE: Parcel Identification Number (PIN): 23-2393-231-00-279 NOTE: Assessor Tax Schedule Number: R111825 (totaling 50 7 acres) APPROVED DMW Receipt No. 950327$8 E DA ISSUED, 08-20-2009 BYEXPIRATION DATE Page - 3 re• • • #C 2.0 fs�yz '7C lj rel z T LEGAL DESCRIPTIO rr RECEIVED AUG 27 2009 ywncaa.T�OL��N`N is STA A tract of land located in the NEu4NEtra of Section 23, all in Township 7 South, Range 88 West of the 6''' Principal Meridian, Garfield County, Colorado, said tract of land being more particularly described as follows: Beginning at a point on the Northerly boundary line of said NEu4NEu4, whence a Garfield County Surveyor brass cap marked for the NE Comer of said Section 23 bears N 89°59'32" E, 741.76 feet; thence S 00°00'28" E, 508.37 feet; thence to S 89°59'32" W, 358.64 feet; thence N 00°00'28" W, 508.37 feet; N 89°59'32" E, 358.64 feet along the Northerly boundary line of said NEE/4NEt14 to the point of beginning, containing 4.19 acres more or less. Page - 4 • • • Well Permit & Legal Description for Lot 1 B. ,. Form'I o. GWS -25 APPLICANT OFFICE OF THE STATE ENGINEER COLORADO DIVISION OF WATER RESOURCES 818 Centennial Bldg-, 1113 Sherman St , Denver, Colorado 80203 (303)856-3581 SAMUEL AUSTIN MARQUIS JR 567 FAIRFIELD LANE LOUISVILLE, CO 80027- (303) 938-5534 PERMIT TO CONSTRUCT A WELL LIC WELL PERMIT NUMBER 281493 DIV. 5 WD 38 DES. BASIN MD APPROVED WELL LOCATION GARFIELD COUNTY NE 114 NE 1/4 Section 23 Township 7 S Range 88 W Sixth P.M. DISTANCES FROM SECTION LINES 805 Ft. from North Section Line 424 Ft. from East Section Line UTM COORDINATES (Meters,Zone:13,NAD83) Easting: Northing: ISSUANCE OF THIS PERMIT DOES NOT CONFER A WATER RIGHT CONDITIONS OF APPRQVAL 1) This well shall be used in such a way as to cause no material injury to existing water rights. The issuance of this permit does not ensure That no injury will occur to another vested water right or preclude another owner of a vested water right froin seeking relief in a civil court action. 2) The construction of this well shall be in compliance with the Water Weil Construction Rules 2 CCR 402-2, unless approval of a variance has been granted by the State Board of Examiners of Water Well Construction and Pump Installation Contractors in accordance with Rule 18. 3) Approved pursuant to CRS 37.92-602(3)(b)(li)(A) as the only well on a tract of land of 46.51 acres described as that portion of the NE 1/4 of the NE 1(4, Sec. 23, Twp. 7 South, Rng. 88 West, 6th P.M., Garfield County, mare particularty described on the attached exhibit A. 4) The use of ground water from this well is limited to fire protection, ordinary household purposes inside not more than three (3) single family dwellings, the watering of poultry, domestic animals and livestock on a farrn or ranch and the irrigation o1 not more than one (1) acre of home gardens and Lawns. 5) The pumping rate of this well shall not exceed 15 GPM. 6) The return flow from the use of this well must be through an individual waste water disposal system of tho nonevaporative type where the water is returned to the same stream system in which the well is located. 7) This well shall be constructed not more than 200 feet from the location specified on this permit. NOTE Parcel Identification Number (PIN): 23-2393-231-00-279 NOTE, Assessor Tax Schedule Number- R111625 (totaling 50.7 acres) .19 APPROVED DMW Receipt No. 9503278C 6./ . State En Ey DATE ISSUED 08-20-2009 EXPIRATION DATE 08-20-2011 Page - 5 • et AzirT i9 LEGAL DESCRIPTIQQ RECEIVED AUG 272009 WATER RES ES STATEC Ns Eft A tract of land being all of the ErnNWu4NE11a of Section 23 and all that part of the NEu4NEu4 of Section 23 and all that part of SEU4NErJ4 of Section 23, all in Township 7 South, Range 88 West of the 6th Principal Meridian, Garfield County, Colorado, lying westerly of and adjacent to the Westerly right-of-way line of Garfield County Road No. 112 as built and in place, said tract of land being more particularly described as follows: Beginning at a point on the Northerly boundary line of said NEu4NEr,a, also being a point on the Westerly right-of-way line of said County Road No. 112, whence a Garfield County Surveyor brass cap marked for the NE Comer of said Section 23 bears N 89°59'32" E, 379.65 feet; thence along said Westerly line on the following courses: S 13°23'00" W, 35547 feet; thence S 25°04'30" E 175.34 feet; thence S 15°01'30" E, 451.77 feet; thence S 26°34'00" W, 273.63 feet; thence 5 08°23'00" E, 17.38 feet; thence 412.85 feet along an. arc of a 321.35 foot radius curve to the left, the chord of which bears S 41°51'40" W, 385.04 feet; thence 5 05°03'21" W, 152.59 feet; thence S 90°00'04Y W, 199.83 feet; thence N 35°16'37" W, 400.20 feet; thence S 89°55'01" W, 260.15 feet along the Northerly boundary of the SW u4NEie to the Northwest Comer of said SEv4NEva; thence S 89°5510V W, 636.32 feet along the south boundary of the Ee2NW u4NEv4; thence N 01°02'34" E, €316.23 feet along the Westerly boundary line of said Et .N W114NErw; thence N 89°59'32" E, 863.80 feet along the Northerly boundary line of the E12NWv4NE1/4 and said NE1f4NEv4; thence S 00°0028" E, 508.37 feet; thence to N 89°59'32" E, 358.64 feet; thence N 00°0028° W, 508.37 feet; thence N 89°59'32" E, 362.11 feet along the Northerly boundary line of said NEtr4NEu4 to the point of beginning, containing 46.51 acres more or less. Explanation of Well Permit Acreages. County Attorney Quinn raised the question about the differences in the well permit acreages and the names on the permits. The following is an explanation of these permits. The applicant's attorney Karl Hanlon at Leavenworth & Karp P.C. worked with the Colorado Division of Water Resources to reissue the original "Late Registered Well" well permit for the existing home on Lot 1-A to cover the land area actually served by the well. This permit was reissued by the Division on August 20, 2009 as permit #281492 described on 4.19 acres which is a rectangular area around the existing structures on the lot. The purpose for requesting reissuance of the original "Late Registered" well on a smaller described portion of the lot was to allow issuance of a "Domestic Exempt Well" on a parcel of land equal to or greater than 35 acres. The applicant's attorney worked with Dwight Whitehead at the Division on this approach as a legal method of obtaining a separate well permit for proposed new Lot 1-B. In this case, the "Domestic Exempt Well" permit #281493 in the name of Samuel Austin Marquis Jr. was also issued on August 20, 2009 on the remaining 46.51 acres with the acreage covered by both wells totaling 50.7 acres. The Exempt well permit was issued in the name Samuel Austin Marquis Jr. because he intends to be the owner of Lot 1-B. Page - 6 • • Wastewater & Septic Permits. Lot 1A is served by an existing septic system that was approved and permitted by Garfield County. No change is proposed to this facility. Attached below are the septic permits issued for the property. GARFIELO COUNTY BUILDING AND SANITATION DEPARTMENT 2014 Blake Ayanue Glenwood Springs, Colorado 81601 Phone (303) 945.6241 INDIVIDUAL SEWAGE DISPOSAL PERMIT Owner Aust1 n .Marston 1244 This does not constitute a building or use permit. System Locetion _MSS_ 1n Licensed installer John Legg Conditional Construction approval is hereby granted fora 7 S gallon XX Septic Tank or Aerated treatment unit, n p r }(,p p Absorption area for dispersal area) computed as follows: V1�0 ne i"O-e0(-c,U f W n " "'t 1"A � } +t }t{ t, ..i ce_ Pere rate of one inch in �--� - minutes requires a minimum of 7 4 1 sq ft of absorption area pet bedroom, • j Therefore the no. of bedrooms 1—__ x Z-1 I sq ft minimum requirement a total of Z -Z sq. ft. of absorption area. May we suggest f X 3 {7 ' 15Z inspector V FINAL APPROVAL OF SYSTEM: No system shall be deemed to be in compliance with the Sewage Disposal Laws until the assembled system is approved prior to cover- ing any part, s e---' Septic Tank access for inspection and cleaning within 12" of ground surface or aerated access ports above ground surface. Proper materials and assembly. ✓:e4[.1• rade name of septic tank or aerated treatment unit.�t,C Adequate absorption for d,spersal) area. ___.___Lc— Adequate compliance with permit requirements. Date Adequate compliance with County and State regulationstrequ€rements. Other /( --xr-- Inspector RETAIN WITH RECEIPT RECORDS AT CONSTRUCTION SITE 'CONDITIONS: 1. All installation must comply with all requirements of the County Individual Sewage Disposal Regulations, adopted pursuant to au- thority granted in 66.444, CRS 1963. amended 66-3,14, CRS 1963. 2. This permit is valid only for connection to structures which have fully complied with County zoning and building requirements. Connection to or use with any dwelling or structures not approved by the Building and Zoning office shall automatically be a viola. tion of a requirement of the permit and cause for both legal action and revocation of the permit. 3. Section Ili, 3.24 requires any person who constructs, alters, or installs an individual sewage disposal system in a manner which in- volves a knowing and material variation from the terms or specifications contained in the application of permit commits a Class!, Petty Offense 55500.00 fine - 6 months en jail or both./. Applicant: Ctraan COPY 4apa.tmant: Pink Coot Page - 7 • • • tr.;N£R ,/ '73..d_ L'71-4: ter_ Ah RE SS __'--91;1_ c_ 7�/ 4- e r.O tie -3 APDL I CANT _�_, __.L ~ ADDRESS ! CONTRACTORiRe I .'e /ere ? :` ADDRESS /,, + 476 �'_..."`r.C.•;;G_r_. ,, PHONE _7 �? .r .'J ..> t IS PERMIT FOR_: ( ) New Installation ( ) Alteration ( ) Repair Attach separate sheets or report showing entire area with respect to surrounding areas, topography of area, habitable buildings, location of potable crater wells, soil percolation test holes, soil profiles in test holes. LOCATJON OF NkOPOSED, FACILITY: County ._A * 4 c=? rear what City or Totim1G:r_-x?.t"%1t :LIIL- - Lot Size j..._r Legal Description - ,..-421- 5__ 47,0 /7 A WASTES TYPE: ( Dwelling ( ') Transient Use �_ - - ( ) Cc,wjnercial 'or. Ins.titut.iunal ( ) lion -domestic Wastes ._ ( ) Other - Describe: _. __ __---------- BUILDING OR SERVICE TYPE: Number of Persons _ Member of Bedrooms _.__ !•___..-.__.....___— ( ) Garbage grinder ( ) Automatic wash r ( ) Dishwasher SOURCE AND TYPE OF WATER SUPPLY: ( well ( ) spring ( ) stream or creek Give depth of all wells within 180 feet of system: .._-_--_-- -- If supplied by community water, give name of supplier: ___ --- GROUND CONDITIONS: Depth to bedrock: _ s .42_ Depth to first Ground Water Table: _ Percent ground ground slope: /1 e �._ ------ DISTANCE TO NEAREST COhiUNITY EWER SYSTEM: __LP Was an effort made to connect to community system? _ 44 42 _.__ TYPE OF I!' VIDUAL SEWAGE DISPOSAL SYSTEM PROPOSED: ( Septic Tank ( ) Aeration Plant ( ) Vault ( ) Composting Toilet ( ) Recycling, potable use i ( ) Incineration Toilet ( . ) Recycling, other use i%' /� ( ) Other - Describe: w,., ,� • 1: ( ) Vault Privy ( ) Pit Privy • ( ) Chemical Toilet FIiiAL D1SP SAL BY: ( Absorption Trench, Bed ( ) Underground Dispersal ( ) Above Ground Dispersal ( ) Other - Describe; or Pit ( ) Evapotranspiration ( ) Sand Filter-. ( ) Wastewater Pond Page - 8 • • • -'!it ''...%1_..t1.1,1 -A. ri4C.TL1 .1% 3 i. $ OF F [.siAlE? _..._..... 'D.'1S LM 15 DtSja'.FD FOR 1-0_._.______..-- ` LL('-,$ I'i;R DAY If 1.!:e system is to be designed by 0 ;registered Professional Eegineer (RPE), state rate of absorption in test holes shown on the location map, in minutes Per Inch of drop in water level after holes Shave been soaked for 24 hours: ______I .__.e.__.._ SOIL PERCOLATION TEST RESULTS:11 .t:I 't;t . Minutes 'per inch in hole 11o. 1 Minutes per inch in hole No. 3 • Minutes ____ .- per inch in hole No. 2 Minutes _,__ per inch in hole No. Name, address, and telephone of RPE who made soil absorption tests: - -Nome, address, and telephone of RPE responsible for design of the system: Applicant + eknowledges._that_the_:co npleteness_of the application is conditional upon such further mandatory and additional tests and reports as may be required by the local health department,to b,e made and, furnished by the applicant or by the local health departrrrent,for purposes of the evaluation of the application; and'' the issuance of the permit is.subject to such terms and conditions as deemed. c necessary to insure compliance with rules and regulations adopted under Article 10, Title 25, C.R.S. 1973 as amended. The undersigned hereby certifies that all statements made, information and reports submitted herewith and required to be submitted by the applicant.are or will_be represented lo be true and correct to the best of my knowledge and belief and are designed to be relied on by the local department of health in evaluating the same for purposes issuing the permit app for herein. I further understand that any falsification or misrepresentation may result in the denial of the application or revocation of any permit granted based upon said application and in legal action for perju as.provided by�.law. Date Signed PLEASE DRAW AN ACCURATE MAP TO YOUR PROPERTY Page - 9 • • • Date • . Tester C, Address PERCOLATION TEST DATA Profile hole .4414. TEST HOLE #1 #2 #3 TIME (Min.) Level Drop Level Drop Level -f--if'-�_..__.. o_.4 it 1 f 1k �1 Drop fI zo I, __ lr6 i p ' S r---r—in---- q 5 f '4 1r ,l 6 % rt ga/'/ ' t ; i4/ .7 7z to )t /Ib 10 15, ` � 20 1�//g 7/4 t� KIP Xi' ry -7 7 / 6/Q �/ fr � d/ %6. 7 25 r, / . /.( ,� A 4.4 30 35 40 45 50 55 60 Percolation Rate minutes per inch. Page - 10 • • • GARFIELD COUNTY BUILDING AND SANITATION DEPARTMENT 109 8th Street Suite 303 Gierrwood Springs, Colorado 81601 Phone (303) 045-8212 INDIVIDUAL SEWAGE DISPOSAL PERMIT NR 1719 Owner Isutatin 1!kirgi.1111 System Location 0956 Ct:.• Rd. 132 Carborliala Licensed installer This does not constitute a building or use permit. • Conditions! Construction approval is hereby granted for a /2.-k, gallon _ Septic Tank or — _- Aerated treatment unit. Absorption area for dispersal areal computed as follows: Pere rete of one inch in - —f-- minutes requires a minimum of Therefore the no. of bedrooms p4 x 216 sq, ft, minimum requirement = a total (6)1/24111.A. of (6)1/24111.A. ft. of absorption area. May we suggest: / ( �� ': a / / ' p }l U i r/ ; > !k. 4 ('+ ` ._. r r ji Date / l tt �3— Inspector -�� ,� fly � t+�•�•�. �i f / e £- sq ft of absorption area per bedroom. FINAL APPROVAL OF SYSTEM: No system shall be deemed to be in compliance with the Sewage Disposal Laws until the assembled system is approved prior to cover. Ing any part. Septic Tank access for inspection and cleaning within 12" of ground surface or aerated access ports above ground surface. ,,K Proper materials and assembly. / tel% /2.5-0 r Gad, �"j/" L2 V.S,,, _._._ Trade name of septic tank or aerated treatment unite +I�f f 2 (i. a i a., G %^ C. -s' t. d l'//7 t� J /lei. c, Adequate absorption (or drspersali area../��j �C¢o r/j �%a s Adequate compliance with permit requirements. Adequate cornpiiance with County and State regulations/requirements. r 1 Othe Date '//��t f . I nspec RETAIN WITH RECEIPT RECORD AT CONSTRUCTION SITE 'CONDITIONS: 1. Ali installation must comply with all requirements of the Colorado State Board of Health Individual Sewage Disposal Systems Chapter 25, Article 10 C.R.S. 1973, Revised 1984. 2. This permit is valid only for connection to structures which have tuily complied with County zoning and building requirements. Connection to or use with any dwelling or structures not approved by the Building and Zoning office shall automatically be a violation of a requirement of the permit and cause for both regal action and revocation of the permit 3. Any person who constructs, alters, or installs an Individual sewage disposal system in a manner which involves a knowing and material variation from the terms or specifications contained In the application of permit commits a Class I, Petty Offense ($500.00 fine — 6 months in Jail or both.). Applicant: Green Copy Department: Pink Copy Page - 1 1 OWER ADDRESS INDIVIDUAL SEWAGE DISPOSAL SYSTEM APPLICATION PHONE q6,3- CONTRACTOR jlr3- CONTRACTOR ,4t (9 ADDRESS PHONE PERMIT REQUEST FOR: ( ) New installation (Y) Alteration Attach separate sheets or report showing entire area with respect topography of area, habitable building, location of potable water test holes, soil profiles in test holes. (See page 4.) LOCATION OF PROPOSED FACILITY: CountyCoed-6-ed Near what City of Town GpripAt)'a(Q Lot Size Legal Description Approval by County Official: ) Repair to surrounding areas, wells, soil percolation WASTES TYPE: (X ) Dwelling ( ) Transient Use ( ) Commercial or Institutional ( ) Non-domestic Wastes ( ) Other - Describe BUILDING OR SERVICE TYPE: retc,d.v. .( Number of bedrooms 4 -r 1 = Number of persons-eu.11- (X) Garbage grinder ()C) Automatic washer ('X) Dishwasher SOURCE AND TYPE OF WATER SUPPLY: ($ ) well ( ) spring ( ) stream or creek Give depth of all wells within 180 feet of system: If supplied by community water, give name or supplier: GROUND CONDITIONS: Depth to Depth to first Ground Water Table: (e,),-7 Ice). Percent ground slope: /A. DISTANCE TO NEAREST COMMUNITY SEWER SYSTEM: Was an effort made to connect to community system? TYPE OF INDIVIDUAL SEWAGE DISPOSAL SYSTEM PROPOSED: (✓) Septic Tank ( ) Aeration Plant ( ) Vault ( ) Vault Privy ( ) Composting Toilet ( ) Recycling, potable use ( ) Pit Privy ( ) Incineration Toilet ( ) Recycling, other use ( ) Chemical Toilet ( ) Other - Describe: FINAL DISPOSAL BY: (�) Absorption Trench, Bed or Pit ( ) Evapotranspiration ( ) Underground Dispersal ( ) Sand Filter ( ) Above Ground Dispersal ( ) Wastewater Pond ( ) Other - Describe: :ILL EFFLUENT BE DISCHARGED DIRECTLY INTO WATERS OF THE STATE? N o Page 2 Page - 12 • • • 54 .E P .$COLATIQN TEST RESULTS: (To be completed by Registered Professional Engineer.) Minutes per inch in hole No. 1 Minutes per inch in hole No. 3 Minutes per inch in hole No. 2 Minutes per inch in hole No._ Name, address and telephone of RPE who made soil absorption tests: Name, address and telephone of RPE responsible for design of the system: Applicant acknowledges that the completeness of the application is conditional upon such further mandatory and additional tests and reports as may be required by the local health department to be made and furnished by the applicant or by the local health department for purposes of the evaluation of the application; and the issuance of the permit is subject to such terms and conditions as deemed necessary to insure compliance with rules and regulations adopted under Article 10, Title 25, C.R.S. 1973, as amended. The undersigned hereby certifies that all statements made, information and reports submitted herewith and required to be submitted by the applicant are or will be represented to be true and correct to the best of my knowledge and belief and are designed to be relied on by the local department of health in evaluating the same for purposes of issuing the permit applied for herein. I further under- stand that any falsification or misrepresentation may result in the denial of the application or revocation of any permit granted based upon said application and in legal action for per- jury as provided by law, Date Signed PLEASE DRAW AND ACCURATE MAP TO YOUR PROPERTY Page 3 Page - 13 • PLOT PLAN AND DESIGN FEATURES: Include by measured distance location of wells, springs, potable water supply lines, cisterns, buildings, property lines, subsoil drains, lake, water course. stream, dry gulch and show location of proposed system by direction and distance from dwelling or other fixed reference object, and additional submissions in support of this application such as data, plans, specifications, statements and commitments. • Page 4 • Page - 14 • • • Revised ISDS Design and Performance Standards Eliminating References to Homeowners Association & Covenants BOUNDARIES UNLIMITED INC. Engineers Marquis Subdivision ISDS DESIGN AND PERFORMANCE STANDARDS Page 1 of 2 January 6, 2010 The Preliminary Plat Geotechnical Study by CTL -Thompson, Inc. indicated that the soil conditions of the property consist of approximate one foot of topsoil overlying clay with the possibility of encountering cobbles and boulders. Three percolation tests were performed in the proposed location of the septic field on Lot 1b. Each test resulted in a percolation rate of 50 minutes/inch. Based on the available information and test results, site conditions are workable for the installation of and engineered ISDS's on each lot. Each ISDS installed within the Subdivision shall comply with the Garfield County ISDS Regulations and the following additional requirements: A. each system shall be designed by a professional engineer registered in the State of Colorado pursuant to Colo. Rev. Stat. §12-25-111 (1999); B. each system design shall adequately address the soil percolation conditions present at the Lot site, which percolation rates shall be verified through appropriate on-site testing of at least three (3) test pits at least twenty (20) feet apart and within ten (10) feet of the leach field footprint. C. each system shall be designed to adequately service the number of bedrooms within the residence, but no less than three (3) bedrooms; D. the tops of all tanks or risers extending there -from shall be surface accessible to facilitate system maintenance, monitoring and inspections; E. trench segments with at least (6) feet of separation shall be used whenever practically feasible. Monitoring pipes shall be installed at each end of each trench segment (minimum of two monitoring pipes) to allow inspection of field conditions. If a bed must be utilized, a single zone shall be acceptable. If mounding is required to establish (4) feet of suitable soil, a single pressure dosed zone shall be acceptable. If a bed or mound is used, minimum of (2) monitoring pipes shall be installed at ends of the bed or mound; F. absorption fields or trenches shall adhere to minimum setbacks as regulated by the Colorado Department of Health, Guidelines on Individual Sewage Disposal Systems, most recent edition; G. proper mitigation (diversion) of drainage and flood irrigation for the absorption field or trench areas shall be included in the design and construction; 823 Blake Avenue I Suite 102 Glenwood Springs Colorado 81601 Ph 970.945.5252 !', Fax 970.384.2833 Page - 15 • • • BOUNDARIES UNLIMITED INC. Con ui ng Civii Engineers Marquis Subdivision ISDS DESIGN AND PERFORMANCE STANDARDS Page 2 of 2 January 6, 2010 H. each system shall be designed with sufficient area specifically allocated for a reserve leach field to ensure that a future replacement is possible. The reserve leach field shall meet the same design criteria as the primary field and shall not be constructed over with driveways, buildings or other permanent structures; and I. discharges from in-house water treatment devices (water softeners, reverse osmosis systems, etc) shall not be disposed of through the ISDS system and septic tanks shall be fitted with an effluent filter. Following ISDS installation, each Lot Owner shall provide the Garfield County Department of Building and Planning with as -built drawings in relation to the other improvements on the Lot, to scale, depicting the location and dimensions of the ISDS facilities including the absorption field and monitoring pipes, all applicable design, operation and maintenance specifications of the system's manufacturer and written certification from the design engineer that the ISDS was installed in conformance with the requirements above stated and all applicable design specifications of the manufacturer. The Board of County Commissioners for Garfield County, Colorado and its duly authorized representatives and agents, shall have all the right to enter upon the property and implement and enforce such standards at the expense of the Lot Owner or exercise any other right or power afforded under this Restatement including, but not limited to, the initiation of appropriate proceedings in the District Court for Garfield County, Colorado, to compel enforcement of the same. The provisions of this paragraph shall not be amended or repealed by the Lot Owners without the written consent of the Board of County Commissioners for Garfield County, Colorado. 823 Blake Avenue l Suite 102 I Glenwood Springs j Colorado 81601 I Ph 970.945.5252 I Fax 970.384.2833 Page - 16 • • • BOUNDARIES UNLIMITED INC. onsuf ting & C ivii gi n Marquis Subdivision ISDS MANAGEMENT PLAN Page 1 of 3 January 6, 2010 In order to ensure that each ISDS installed within the Subdivision is inspected on a regular basis and properly maintained, the responsibility and authority for such inspection and maintenance shall be vested with the Lot Owner. This management plan is not intended to provide for common ownership of the ISDS(s) or to provide common funding for the construction, repair or replacement thereof, such ownership and responsibility for construction, repair and maintenance to remain with the Lot Owner. A. In accordance with the above, the Lot Owner shall: 1. retain at all times, the services of qualified personnel to inspect the ISDS(s) and to perform all maintenance and repairs necessary to ensure that same are installed properly, remain in good operating condition and comply with the performance requirements set forth within the ISDS DESIGN AND PERFORMANCE STANDARDS. 2. inspect the operating components of each ISDS within (30) days of being placed into operation; thereafter, each ISDS shall be inspected every year and the septic tank pumped at the time that the solids (settled and floating) accumulate to a level of 20-30 percent of the effective capacity of the tank. 3. maintain at all times written or other permanent records documenting the date each ISDS was inspected or tested, the results of such inspections or tests and the extent of all maintenance and/or repairs performed. All documents maintained by the Lot Owners pursuant to this provision shall at all times be available for inspection by representatives of the Garfield County Building and Planning Department. B. The following provisions shall apply in the event the estimated maintenance or repair costs required of any ISDS exceed in total during any one calendar year, $1000.00: 1. the Lot Owner shall give the Garfield County Department of Building and Planning written notice of the nature and extent of the work necessary, to return the ISDS to good operating condition and/or bring the ISDS System within the performance requirements set forth within the ISDS DESIGN AND PERFORMANCE STANDARDS; and 823 Blake Avenue Suite 102 Glenwood Springs Colorado 81601 Page - 17 Ph 970.945.5252 Fax 970.384.2833 • • • BOUNDARIES Marquis Subdivision UNLIMITED INC. & Civil Engineers ISDS MANAGEMENT PLAN Page 2 of 3 January6, 2010 2. within (10) days of receipt of such notice, Owner shall at his or her own expense submit an application for an ISDS Permit to the Garfield County Building and Planning Department and obtain a permit to repair or replace the ISDS; and 3. within (30) days of receipt of such Permit, Owner shall at his or her own expense cause to be completed, the repairs set forth within the notice. In the event Owner fails to complete such repairs within this period to the satisfaction of the County, the Board of County Commissioners for Garfield County, Colorado and its duly authorized representatives and agents, shall have the authority, in addition to any other remedy provided within this Restatement, to take any of the following actions: a. to impose against Owner, a fine not to exceed $200.00 for each day in which the ISDS System remains unrepaired; b. to complete on behalf of the Owner the required repairs to the ISDS. All costs incurred by the County in connection with the restoration shall be reimbursed to the County by the Owner of the Lot, upon demand. All un - reimbursed costs shall be a lien upon the Lot until reimbursement is made which may be enforced in accordance with the provisions of this Restatement; and/or the Board of County Commissioners for Garfield County, Colorado and its duly authorized representatives and agents, may initiate proceedings in the District Court for Garfield County, Colorado, to compel enforcement of the provisions of this management plan. C. To encourage the health and longevity of the ISDS system, the Owner shall consider the following; 1. Minimize the amount of water that goes down the drain, the better your system will work. 2. Minimize solids going down the drain. 3. Eliminate garbage disposals or keep the use of garbage disposals to a minimum. 4. Minimize grease and oils that go down the drain. 5. Use lint filters on laundry machine drains. 323 Blake Avenue i Suite 102 Glenwood Springs Colorado 81601 Ph 970.945.5252 Fax 970.384.2833 Page - 18 • • • BOUNDARIES Marquis Subdivision UNLIMITED INC. nsutting & Civil Ennginee s ISDS MANAGEMENT PLAN Page 3 of 3 January6, 2010 6. Keep sand and dirt out of the building drain. 7. Avoid flushing sanitary napkins or paper products other than toilet paper. 8. Do not use lye -based drain unclogging chemicals such as Draino, Oven -Off, or other strong cleaning agents 9. Do not put any "root deterrents" down the drain. 10. Do not pour paint thinner, pesticides, paints or photo lab chemicals down the drain 11. Minimize use of chlorine bleach and toilet additives. (from The Septic System Owner's Manual, 2000, Shelter Publications, Inc., Bolinas, CA 92924) D. The provisions of this ISDS MANAGEMENT PLAN shall not be amended or repealed by Lot Owners without the written consent of the Board of County Commissioners for Garfield County, Colorado. 23 Blake Avenue [ Suite 102 Glenwood Springs Colorado 81601 j Ph 970.945.5252 Fax 970.384.2833 Page - 19 Homeowners Association & Covenants. No homeowners association or covenants are proposed for the Marquis Subdivision. The reference to a homeowners association and covenants in the ISDS Management Plan was an error. Long-term management of the ISDS system and maintenance of that obligation is proposed to be accomplished with the following plat note that obligates the property owners to long-term maintenance and operation of the ISDS systems. Proposed Restrictive Final Plat Note Language Requiring Compliance with ISDS Design and Performance Standards and ISDS Management Plan. The owners of Lot IA and Lot 1B shall comply with the Marquis Subdivision ISDS Design and Performance Standards and IDSD Management Plan prepared Boundaries Unlimited, Inc., dated January 6, 2009 and recorded as Reception # in the Office of the Garfield County Clerk and Recorder. This plat note shall not be rescinded or modified without the approval of the Garfield County Commissioners. Adjacent Ownership. The adjacent ownership information submitted with the application extended 250 feet from the boundary of the 50.7 acre parcel. This boundary includes the proposed new 5.0 acre parcel. The County regulations require identification of property owners within 200 feet of the subject property. The only change in the list of property from the original to the owners within 200 feet of the 50.7 acre parcel is the elimination of the Nan Kelly, 1022 County Rd. 112, Carbondale, CO 81623 - Parcel Number 239324200339. Page - 20 • Revised visual impact analysis on the 50.7 acre property. Visual Impact Analysis. As noted in various parts of this application, the visual impact of the Marquis subdivision on adjacent properties will be minimal. The existing Marquis home on proposed Lot -IA is situated directly south of a prominent hill that screens the residences from view from the properties to the north. The large meadow on the south physically separates the residences from adjoining properties south of the meadow. Similarly, the new home proposed on Lot -1B is to be on the south side of the existing hill on the northerly portion of new Lot 1-B. The size of the lot will physically separate the proposed new single-family structure from other nearby residential structures. The hill on the property will completely screen the new proposed single-family structure from views from the northwest, north and northeast. The new structure will be back -dropped by the hill that will eliminate any ridge -lining of the building or accessory structures. The physical size of both new Lot 1-A and Lot 1-B and separation from residential structures in the surrounding area will minimize any visual impacts to existing properties. The primary views in the area are to the south toward Mount Sopris. Exterior lighting on the existing Marquis house and outbuildings is minimal. All lighting on a new structure on Lot 1-B will be minimal and utilize downcast fixtures. There will be no adverse visual impacts to adjacent properties from this subdivision. No structures will be constructed on any ridge line. The structures on Lot 1-B will be constructed at the base of the slope on the south portion of the hill. The existing Pinon/Juniper vegetation on the property further screens the property thereby minimizing visual impacts. Hill Backdrop. Lot 1-A Existing House Lot I -B Proposed New I louse 5 '61C. NA 10 :15101:57Z00— Y1,1elv; Page - 21 i ".-107° 11 `i: r' J 'y Z3) L »M1 i Page - 22 Spr<1 r:Y 2 -107° 10' • • • Screening Hill Screening Ridge I Existing Structures View North Page - 23 View from existing house south southeast to the North side of the hill behind the proposed new residence on Lot I -B. View south from existing residence (Lot 1-A) showing physical separation, vegetation screening, and the lack of any visual impacts Page - 24 • • • s Visual Analysis Illustrations. The maps, 3-D simulation, photographs and illustrations of the proposed new lots, existing/proposed structures and other improvements shown above demonstrate the absence of any visual impacts of the proposed subdivision on adjoining properties and within the boundaries of the subdivision. Visual Analysis Map. The aforementioned photographs and graphical representations show the area proposed for development. No roads are proposed with the Marquis Subdivision other than a driveway from County Road 112 accessing the new lot. The engineered drawings and the landscaping plan submitted with the preliminary plan application also show roads, utilities and the area proposed for development. Visual Analysis Plans. The engineered drawings and the landscaping plan submitted with the preliminary plan application show grading and landscaping. Grading and landscaping on the site will be minimal and confined to the limited areas disturbed during construction. No street lights are proposed with the Marquis Subdivision. The only exterior lighting will be decorative exterior lighting on the new structures. The exterior lighting will have minimal impacts on adjoining properties. No architectural drawings or lighting plans have been created for the proposed new structures. Architectural designs with exterior lighting will be developed after the subdivision approval process is completed. Visual Analysis Written Statement. The maps, photographs, three-dimensional representations and written comments adequately demonstrate that the Marquis Subdivision will not have any visual impacts on any ridgelines. The Marquis Subdivision will not have any adverse visual impacts on the subdivision or adjoining properties. • Road Impact Fees. The required Garfield County Road Impact Fee will be paid by the applicant in conjunction with the approval process for the Final Plat. Re -1 School Impact Fees. The required Re -1 School Impact Fee in lieu of land will be paid by the applicant in conjunction with the approval process for the Final Plat. Fire District Impact Fees. The required Fire District Impact Fee estimated to be $704 per unit/lot will be paid by the applicant in conjunction with the approval process for the Final Plat. Fire Protection. The fire protection for the two lot Marquis Subdivision is to be furnished by the Carbondale and Rural Fire Protection District from their facilities in Carbondale, Colorado. The Fire District has an additional rural fire substation located near the intersection of County Road 100 and County Road 103. This facility can provide back up support if it is required. Deputy Fire Chief Bill Gavette in his October 21, 2009 letter about the Marquis subdivision (included in original application), notes that "Water supplies for fire protection would be provided by tanker shuttle." The Carbondale Fire District has not requested any additional on-site water storage or other facilities for firefighting purposes. Mineral Ownership. The minerals on the property are owned by the surface property owner who is also the applicant. Stewart title, the company that completed the property title confirmed that the surface owner also owns • the minerals in the following memo that was e-mailed to Western Slope Consulting, LLC on December 22, 2009. Page - 25 • • • Davis, this email is regarding the property described in Stewart Title File No. 20070355-C3. The Schedule B2 Exceptions do not disclose any documents that would have severed the minerals from the surface estate. Please let me know if you need anything further. Thanks, Melanie Lang Title Officer Stewart Title (970) 766-0233 direct (970) 926-0235 fax 97 Main Street, Suite W-201 Edwards, CO 81632 mlang(a,stewart. com Recorded Statement of Authority. The application includes signed and notarized consent documents from all of the partners in the Ce -Mar Sam Co. LLLP authorizing Samuel A. Marquis Jr. to handle the affairs and represent all interests associated with the Marquis Subdivision preliminary plan and final plat applications. In conformance with CRS 38-30-172 and the subdivision regulations of Garfield County and attached below, are recorded "Statements of Authority" signed and notarized by all of the partners in the Ce -Mar -Sam Co, LLLP authorizing Samuel Austin Marquis Jr. to submit and process the preliminary plan and subsequent final plat applications with Garfield County. Page - 26 • STA I Di ENT OF AUTHORITY 'l`HORITY Pursuant to C'.R.ti *38-30-172. the undersigned hereby exeeutes this StuI mtein of Authorityon hehalt of Ce_t+lar-Sam Co, LLLP .s�rz.ted Laahi:.lity Limited PatC:1ex ship anentity othutanindividual. capable of holding titre to real property (the "Entity -1_ and states as fi,illetti5: The name Or the Entity is r, (stalk' tsp _cutii). ur 1 :rte. Cvttr:tr The 1110ni address for the fanny is .r m c.taul aua CO8002'7 the narnc. or position of the person authorized to exccute instrnl nis conveying. encumbering. or other infecting title to real property 00 behalf' ofthe Entity is: Samuel A ;t in Mar s,is Jr. The i++nutcitions upon the authority oh the person named above or huldint. the positian described above to bind the Entity are as fol€otixs: 7,', :.t1. t_,. a , t.. a...._subdivision Preliminary Plan and F_rt,a. Plat. t ii :;;,z f _ ._ rty c:7.0 intimation tit no intimation . ui,ete "None t acettss. 119 Other matters concerning the IiU'mnet in which the Entity deals with any interest In real property are: EXECUTED this STALE OF COUNi'Y OF (if no cnl+srnum trrs ie4 etiu: s.^cti�tu: bi day of ...January Signature: Nat (typed or printed): Title ti f any): ) ss. } e fi rrgo n = instr anent was tcknottiledged txfore the this [ ;r Jay h` �t &i ..L 13z :fv1 f {G { . on behalfoI ..... .._ as.v Witness my hand and official seal. My cOtnnitxston expires: /7 [5E.AL1 DPW 116 02'07412 • Page - 27 Notary Public • STATEMENT OF ALJTIIORITY Pursuant to C.R.S. §31S-30-172. the undersigned hereby executes this Statement of Authority on behalf of Ce -Mar -Sam Co, LLLP a. Limited ed Liabi1ity Limited Patnershipanenthyother thantanindividual. capable of r. holding line to real property (the "Entity-"). and states as follerws. The name oi"tilt Entity is Ce -Mar -Sam Co, LLLP a Colorado Limited Partnership (state type of entity and stale, cnaa ry, or o•hrr ��overnnteetal an.ho otr uroi a' m hntio loos ss oh amlV t furtcd) The nt<tiingaddressi'urthe Entity i 567 Fairfield Lane, Louisville, CO 80027 The name or position of the person authorived to execute instruruents conveying. encumbering, or other affecting title to real property on behalf of the Entity is: Samuel. Austin liarguis Jr. The limitations upon tete authority tit' the person mined above or holding the position described above to bind the Entity are as hallows: All authority and actions associated with processing asubdivision Preliminary Plan and Final Plat with Garfield County,. CO. w no htritunoae, unto "Nom:"i Other matters concerning the manner in which the Entity deals with any interest no real property arc: ti(noo111BrIDa415,5 Ita`.p55 blank} EXECUTE/this t ? day of January_. STATE OF COUNTY OF t'., w The lore tom' by 4..L. Signature: Name (typed or printed): Title (Wally): taawlcd,exl before mrthis 7� .00h Witness my hand and official seal. My commission cxptre;t:....... ISLin1., DPW 16 02/07M2 Page - 28 20li) Notary Public / SCOTTrcSANCHO ��;�'� Notary Public State of Connecticut My Commission Eaures 31. 2010 STATEMENT OF AUTHORITY Pursuant to C.R.S. §38-30-172, the undersigned hereby executes this Statement of Authority on behalf of Ce -Mar -Sam Co, LLLP a, Limited Liability Limited Partnershipan entityother than an individual, capable of holding title to real property the "Entity'), and states as follows: The name of the Entity is Ce -Mar -Sam Co, LLLP a Colorado Limited Partnership i state )s. A (mtaeounuy, of othet governmental authority under whose laws such entity a conned) The mailing address for the Entity is 567 Fairfield LaneLouisville,, CO 50027 Me na1nC or position of the person authorized to execute instruments conveying, encumbering, or other affecting title to real property on behalf of the Entity is: Samuel Austin Marquis Jr The limitations upon the authority of the person named above or holding the position described above to bind she Entity areas follows: All authority and actions associated with processing a subdivision Preliminary Plan and,... FinalPlat with Garfield County.,CO. (if no limitations, insert "None") Other natters concerning the manner in which the Emity deals with any interest in real property are: :o other matters. leave this; section blank) • EXECUTED this day of.._January , 2010 Signature: c._. 'CN -Y\ -( STATE OF COUNTY OF Name (typed or printed): \ r Title (if any): ) ) ss, The foregojng instrument was acknowledged before me il b),`1• k,.a i Witness my hand and official seal. My commission expires [SF.Aeei ... DPW 116 _ ,1,01 Y 02107:02 Pt1801' J` . R?AY 11',�cs sem • Page - 29 is '„t ' day of, , on behalf of Notary Public • • • Application for Underground Water Rights, for Changes of Water Rights, and for Approval of Plan for Augmentation Case No. 87CW100 Austin Marquis and Lincoln Wallbank and Ruling of the Referee concerning the application for water rights of Austin Marquis and Lincoln Wallbank Case No. 87CW100. DISTRICT COURT, WATER DIVISION NO. 5, COLORADO Case No. 87CW WO 4WD i 01$171*T COM/ DiViSICN 5Cot 0:+v* mit 3 0 B7 APPLICATION FOR UNDERGROUND WATER RIGHTS, FOR CHANGES OF WATER RIGHTS, AND FOR APPROVAL OF PLAN FOR AUGME. TION CONCERNING THE APPLICATION FOR WATER RIGHTS OF: AUSTIN MARQUIS and LINCOLN WALLBANK, in Garfield County, Colorado 1. Name and address of Applicants: Austin Marquis Lincoln Wallbank c/o Austin Marquis 99 South Downing Street Denver, CO 80209 c/o Leavenworth, Lochhead & Milwid, P.C. 1011 Grand Avenue P. 0. Drawer 2030 Glenwood Springs, CO 81602 1,.!i' :Y1/37 FIRST CLAIM APPLICATION FOR UNDERGROUND WATER RIGHT 2. Name of structure: Marquis/Wallbank Well No. 2. CAH TAX _,.. 37CW.1 .. 315ri 1.; 3. Legal point of diversion: Marquis/Wallbank Well No. 2 will be located in the Southeast 1/4 of the Northeast 1/4 of Section 23, Township 7 South, Range 88 West of the 6th P.M., at a point whence the East 1/4 corner of Section 23, Township 7 South, Range 88 West of the 6th P.M. bears South 23°30' East a distance of 865 feet. 4. Source: Groundwater tributary to the Roaring Fork River. 5. A. Date of appropriation: April 9, 1987. B. Date water applied to beneficial use: N/A. C. How appropriation was initiated: By site visits, by formation of the intent to apply water to the benefi- cial uses claimed herein, by engineering and sub- division development work. -1- Page - 30 • • • 6. Amount claimed: 15 g.p.m., conditional. 7. Use or proposed uses: Domestic, including irrigation. Number of acres being irrigated: N/A. Historically irrigated: N/A. Number of acres proposed to be irrigated: 0.057 acres (2500 square feet). 8. Name and address of owner of land on which points of diver- sion and place of use are located: The Applicants. SECOND CLAIM APPLICATION FOR UNDERGROUND WATER RIGHT 9. Name of structure: Marquis/Wallbank Well No. 3. 10. Legal point of diversion: Marquis/Wallbank Well No. 3 will be located in the Southeast 1/4 of the Northeast 1/4 of Section 23, Township 7 South, Range 88 West of the 6th P.M., at a point whence the East 1/4 corner of Section 23, Township 7 South, Range 88 West of the 6th P.M. bears South 60°30' East a distance of 590 feet. 11. Source: Groundwater tributary to the Roaring Fork River. 12. A. Date of appropriation: April 9, 1987. B. Date water applied to beneficial use: N/A. C. How appropriation was initiated: By site visits, by formation of the intent to apply water to the benefi- cial uses claimed herein, by engineering and sub- division development work. 13. Amount claimed: 15 g.p.m., conditional. 14. Use or proposed uses: Domestic, including irrigation. Number of acres being irrigated: N/A. Historically irrigated: N/A. Number of acres proposed to be irrigated: 0.057 acres (2500 square feet). 15. Name and address of owner of land on which points of diver- sion and place of use are located: The Applicants. -2- Page - 31 • • 26 A. Date of appropriation: April 9, 1987. B. Date water applied to beneficial use: N/A. C. How appropriation was initiated: By site visits, by formation of the intent to apply water to the benefi- cial uses claimed herein, by engineering and sub- division development work. 27. Amount claimed: 15 g.p.m., conditional. 28. Use or proposed uses: Domestic, including irrigation. Number of acres being irrigated: N/A. Historically irrigated: N/A. Number of acres proposed to be irrigated: 0.114 acres (5000 square feet). 29. Name and address ot owner of land on which points of diver- sion and place of use are located: The Applicants. 30. Remarks: This well has been drilled pursuant to Permit No. 065967, but water has not been put to the beneficial uses claimed herein. FIFTH CLAIM APPLICATION FOR UNDERGROUND WATER RIGHT 31. Name of structure: Marquis/Wallbank Well No. 6. 32. Legal point of diversion: Marquis/Wallbank Well No. 6 will be located in the Southeast 1/4 of the Northeast 1/4 of Section 23, Township 7 South, Range 88 West of the 6th P.M., at a point whence the East 1/4 corner of Section 23, Township 7 South, Range 88 West of the 6th P.M. bears South 42°40' East a distance of 1540 feet. 33. Source: Groundwater tributary to the Roaring Fork River. 34. A. Date of appropriation: April 9, 1987. B. Date water applied to beneficial use: N/A. C. How appropriation was initiated: By site visits, by formation of the intent to apply water to the benefi- cial uses claimed herein, by engineering and sub- division development work. 35. Amount claimed: 15 g.p.m., conditional. -4- Page - 32 • • • 36. Use or proposed uses: Domestic, including irrigation. Number of acres being irrigated: N/A. Historically irrigated: N/A. Number of acres proposed to be irrigated: 0.057 acres (2500 square feet). 37. Name and address of owner of land on which points of diver- sion and place of use are located: The Applicants. SIXTH CLAIM APPLICATION FOR CHANGE OF WATER RIGHT AND FOR APPROVAL OF PLAN FOR AUGMENTATION 38. Name of structures to be augmented: A. Marquis/Wallbank Well No. 2 as set forth in the First Claim, above. Marquis/Wallbank Well No. 3 as set forth in the Second Claim, above. C. Marquis/Wallbank Well No. 4 as set forth in the Third Claim, above. D. Marquis/Wallbank Well No. 5 as set forth in the Fourth Claim, above. E. Marquis/Wallbank Well No. 6 as set forth in the Fifth Claim, above. 39. Water rights to be used for augmentation: A. The Applicant Austin Marquis is the owner of three shares in the Park Ditch and Reservoir. Company. The Park Ditch and Reservoir Company diverts direct flow water from Cattle Creek under the following water. rights: -5- Page - 33 • • • TABLE 1 PARK DITCH WATER RIGHTS Decreed Location Decreed PrioritySec. 7 Adjud. Approp. Ditch Amount No. T7S, R87W Date Date Park Ditch 9.0 NW/SW/SE 06/26/1913 09/12/1904 Park Ditch 4.1 232 NW/SW/SE 06/09/1916 07/01/1912 Park Ditch 1.8 221A NW/SW/SE 04/16/1917 09/12/1904 Park Ditch 2.0 232 NW/SW/SE 09/02/1918 07/01/1912 Direct flow diversions under the shares in the Park Ditch and Reservoir Company are supplemented by releases from Consolidated Reservoir. This reservoir operates under the following decreed priorities: TABLE II CONSOLIDATED RESERVOIR WATER RIGHTS Decreed Location Decreed Priority Sec. 19 Adjud. Approp. Structure Amount No. T6S, R87W Date Date Con. Res. 248.4 AF 88 NE/NE 02/15/1921 09/08/1898 Con. Res. 285.6 AF 678 NE/NE 06/20/1958 09/01/1948 B. The Applicants have applied for a contract with the Basalt Water Conservancy District for the release of water from Ruedi Reservoir, decreed in Civil Action No. 789 in the District Court in and for Garfield County, State of Colorado, on June 20, 1958, for 102,869 acre- feet for irrigation, municipal, industrial, domestic, generation of electric energy, stock watering, and piscatorial purposes with an appropriation date of July 29, 1957, and located in and near Sections 7-9, 11, 14-18, Township 8 South, Range 84 West of the 6th P.M. 40. Historic Use: The three shares in the Park Ditch and Reservoir Company owned by the Applicants have been used to irrigate approximately 17 acres. Summaries of diversion records for the Park Ditch are attached hereto as Exhibit "A" and incorporated herein by this reference. A map showing historically irrigated acreage under the three shares owned by the Applicants is attached hereto as Exhibit "B" and incorporated herein by this reference. Historically, as decreed in Case No. 79CW097 in the District -6- Page - 34 • Month treatment to be through septic tank/leachfield systems; 15 percent consumptive use for in-house uses; and 70 percent efficiency for outside irrigation. Water requirements and calculated consumptive use for the proposed development are shown below: TABLE IV WATER REQUIREMENTS AND CONSUMPTIVE USE Water_Re_c uirements Consumptive Use In -House In- Potab.le Irr. Total House Irr. Total (Values in AF) (Values in AF) January 0.17 0.00 0.17 0.03 0.00 0.03 February 0.15 0.00 0.15 0.02 0.00 0.02 March 0.17 0.00 0.17 0.03 0.00 0.03 April 0.17 0.00 0.17 0.02 0.00 0.02 May 0.17 0.11 0.28 0.03 0.07 0.10 June 0.17 0.17 0.34 0.02 0.12 0.14 July 0.17 0.21 0.38 0.03 0.15 0.18 August 0.17 0.15 0.32 0.03 0.11 0.14 September 0.17 0.10 0.27 0.02 0.07 0.09 October 0.17 0.02 0.19 0.03 0.02 0.05 November 0.17 0.00 0.17 0.02 0.00 0.02 December 0.17 0.00 0.17 0.03 0.00 0.03 TOTAL Population: GPD/Capita: In -House CU: Irr. Eff.: No. Irr. Ac.: 2.02 0.76 2.78 0.31 0.54 0.85 18 100 15 percent 70 percent 0.34 B. As a result of access road and building site construc- tion, the Applicants will permanently retire from historic irrigation a minimum of 0.43 acres of land under the Park Ditch. As a result, the Applicants will have available a credit associated with the historic depletion under its water rights which will offset any out -of -priority irrigation season depletions under the water rights to be augmented hereunder. During the irrigation season, 0.08 shares of the Park Ditch and Reservoir Company will be left in the Ditch and returned to the stream system. A comparison of historic consumptive use associated with the irrigation of 0.43 acres of land with the consumptive use asso- ciated with the proposed development is shown below: -8- Page - 35 • Month treatment to be through septic tank/leachfield systems; 15 percent consumptive use for in-house uses; and 70 percent efficiency for outside irrigation. Water requirements and calculated consumptive use for the proposed development are shown below: TABLE _IV WATER REQUIREMENTS AND CONSUMPTIVE USE Water Requirements Consumptive Use In -House In - Potable Irr. Total House Irr. Total (Values in AF) (Values in AF) January 0.17 0.00 0.17 0.03 0.00 0.03 February 0.15 0.00 0.15 0.02 0.00 0.02 March 0.17 0.00 0.17 0.03 0.00 0.03 April 0.17 0.00 0.17 0.02 0.00 0.02 May 0.17 0.11 0.28 0.03 0.07 0.10 June 0.17 0.17 0.34 0.02 0.12 0,14 July 0.17 0.21 0.38 0.03 0.15 0.18 August 0.17 0.15 0.32 0.03 0.11 0.14 September 0.17 0.10 0.27 0.02 0.07 0.09 October 0.17 0.02 0.19 0.03 0.02 0.05 November 0.17 0.00 0.17 0.02 0.00 0.02 December 0.17 0.00 0.17 0.03 0.00 0.03 TOTAL Population: GPD/Capita: In -House CU: Irr. Eff,: No. Irr. Ac.: 2.02 0.76 2.78 18 100 15 percent 70 percent 0.34 0.31 0.54 0.85 B. As a result of access road and building site construc- tion, the Applicants will permanently retire from historic irrigation a minimum of 0.43 acres of land under the Park Ditch. As a result, the Applicants will have available a credit associated with the historic depletion under its water rights which will offset any out -of -priority irrigation season depletions under the water rights to be augmented hereunder. During the irrigation season, 0.08 shares of the Park Ditch and Reservoir Company will be left in the Ditch and returned to the stream system. A comparison of historic consumptive use associated with the irrigation of 0.43 acres of land with the consumptive use asso- ciated with the proposed development is shown below: -8- Page - 36 • • • TABLE V HISTORIC AND NEW CONSUMPTIVE USES Historic Consumptive Use Development Month (Average a.f.) C.U. (a.f.) May 0.10 0.10 June 0.16 0.14 July 0.19 0.18 August 0.13 0.14 September 0.09 0.09 October, 10 0.02 0.02 TOTALS 0.69 0.67 C. During the historic non -irrigation season (October 11 through April 30 of each year), the Applicants will replace out -of -priority depletions under the water rights to be augmented by releases of water under its contract with the Basalt Water. Conservancy District from Ruedi Reservoir. The contract will be for 1.0 acre-foot, and non -irrigation season consumptive use plus transit losses accounted for herein will total only 0.20 acre-feet (0.18 acre-feet for total non - irrigation season consumptive uses and 0.02 acre-feet for transit loss). Therefore, the Applicants will have under their Ruedi contract 0.8 acre-feet of water available for other uses not provided for herein. The transit losses provided for herein equal approximately 11 percent of releases. Non -irrigation season consump- tive use and required reservoir releases are shown below: TABLE VI NON -IRRIGATION SEASON CONSUMPTIVE USE AND RESERVOIR RELEASES Release Month (af) October 11 0.033 November. 0.023 December 0.033 January 0.033 February 0.023 March 0.033 April 0.023 Transit Loss Consumptive Use Replacement (af) (af) 0.003 0.003 0.003 0.003 0.003 0.003 0.003 0.03 0.02 0.03 0.03 0.02 0.03 0.02 TOTALS 0.201 0.021 0.18 -9- Page - 37 • • • D. The Applicants propose to change the decreed use of the 0.08 shares of the Park Ditch and Reservoir Company to be used hereunder to domestic purposes, including irri- gation, by augmentation, replacement and exchange. 42. Before any historic depletion credits under the Applicants' water rights in the Park Ditch are available for augmen- tation purposes hereunder, the Applicants shall dry up a minimum of 0.43 acres of land historically irrigated under their interest in said ditch and shall identify the location and number of acres of land dried to the Division Engineer. When such lands are dried up and identified to the Division Engineer, the Applicants shall have available on a monthly basis an amount equal to the historic depletion credits shown in Table V, above. 43. The Applicants shall have available for use elsewhere 0.8 acre-feet of water from Ruedi Reservoir under their contract with the Basalt Water Conservancy District, subject to sub- sequent Water Court approval by appropriate application. 44. The Applicants shall install such measuring devices as may be required by the Division Engineer to facilitate the operation of this plan for augmentation and assure compliance herewith. 45. The Applicants request that the Court order the issuance of well permits for the Marquis/Wallbank Well Nos. 2 through 6, subject to the terms of this plan for augmentation. Respectfully submitted this 30th day of April, 1987. By LEAVENWORTH, LOCHHEAD & MILWID, P.C. Attorneys for Applicants +aures S. Lochhe 4401110., 1011 Gr. d Avenue P. 0 +rawer 2030 enwood Springs, CO 81602 Phone (303) 945-2261 Attorney Registration No. 9065 Name and Address of Applicants: Austin Marquis Lincoln Wallbank 99 South Downing Street Denver, CO 80209 -10- Page - 38 • • • VERIFICATION STATE OF COLORADO ) ss. COUNTY OF GARFIELD ) I, TOM ZANCANELLA of Wright Water Engineers, Inc., state under oath that I have read this Application and verify its content. Tow. �L cMro e E �q TOM ZANCANELLA Subscribed and sworn to before me this 30th day of April, 1987. WITNESS my hand and official seal. My Com rnU on Expires Nov. 8, 1988 My Commission expires: CCI; Notary Public -11- Page - 39 1(-4,W • • • EXHIBIT "A" PARK DITCH DIVERSIONS Number of Acre -Feet Year First Da_Used Last Day Used Days Used Diverted 1975 05/16/1975 10/14/1975 152 3922.5 1976 04/04/1976 10/30/1976 210 3324.5 1977 04/09/1977 10/31/1977 206 887.8 1978 05/10/1978 10/31/1978 175 3145.2 1979 05/01/1979 10/31/1979 184 5821.3 1980 05/14/1980 10/31/1980 171 3429.5 1981 05/01/1981 10/31/1981 184 2940.3 1982 05/15/1982 09/30/1982 139 3581.5 1983 05/30/1983 10/31/1983 155 4130.3 1984 05/15/1984 10/31/1984 170 5688.6 AVERAGE 174.6 3687.3 Page - 40 • • • EXHIBIT "8" re 3 1 "26 5r. 6! t'rtrbvndptdie i,'1As ,atsi Lilt 1-6 ; EV i_ ft&DS •, -3 35•,P,SAZ tZ of„,, 1FR\1 ‘9R-1 Page - 41 • DISTRICT COURT, WATER DIVISION NO. 5, COLORADO Case No. 87CW100 RULING OF THE REFEREE CONCERNING THE APPLICATION FOR WATER RIGHTS OF: AUSTIN MARQUIS AND LINCOLN WALLBANK, in Garfield County, Colorado The above -entitled application was filed on April 30, 1987, and referred to the Water Referee for Water Division No. 5, State of Colorado, by the Water Judge of said Court on May 11, 1987, in accordance with the provisions of Article 92 of Chapter. 37, Colorado Revised Statutes 1973, known as the Water Rights Determination and Administration Act of 1969. The undersigned Referee having made such investigations as are necessary to determine whether or not the statements in the application are true and having become fully advised with respect to the subject matter, in the application does hereby make the following deter- mination and Ruling of the Referee in this matter, to -wit: FINDINGS OF FACT 1. The name and address of the Applicants are Austin Marquis and Lincoln Wallbank, c/o Austin Marquis, 99 South Downing Street, Denver, Colorado 80209. 2. The underground water rights set forth below have been applied for by the Applicants and are to be augmented pursuant to the terms of this Decree. A. Marquis/Wallbank Well No. 2, located in the Southeast 1/4 of the Northeast 1/4 of Section 23, Township 7 South, Range 88 West of the 6th P.M., at a point whence the East 1/4 corner of Section 23, Township 7 South, Range 88 West of the 6th P.M. bears South 23°30' East a distance of 865 feet, for 15 g.p.m., conditional, for domestic and irrigation purposes. The appropriation date is April 9, 1987. Said appropriation was ini- tiated by site visits, by formation of the intent to apply water to the beneficial uses decreed herein, and by engineering and subdivision development work. The source of water, is groundwater tributary to the Roaring Fork River. B. Marquis/Wallbank Well No. 3, located in the Southeast 1/4 of the Northeast 1/4 of Section 23, Township 7 -1- Page - 42 • • • South, Range 88 West of the 6th P.M., at a point whence the East 1/4 corner. of Section 23, Township 7 South, Range 88 West of the 6th P.M. bears South 60°30' East a distance of 590 feet, for. 15 g.p.m., conditional, for domestic and irrigation purposes. The appropriation date is April 9, 1987. Said appropriation was ini- tiated by site visits, by formation of the intent to apply water to the beneficial uses decreed herein, and by engineering and subdivision development work. The source of water is groundwater tributary to the Roaring Fork River. C. Marquis/Wallbank Well No. 4, located in the Southeast 1/4 of the Northeast 1/4 of Section 23, Township 7 South, Range 88 West of the 6th P.M., at a point whence the East 1/4 corner of Section 23, Township 7 South, Range 88 West of the 6th P.M. bears South 66°00' East a distance of 1010 feet, for. 15 g.p.m., conditional, for domestic and irrigation purposes. The appropriation date is April 9, 1987. Said appropriation was ini- tiated by site visits, by formation of the intent to apply water to the beneficial uses decreed herein, and by engineering and subdivision development work. The source of water is groundwater tributary to the Roaring Fork River. D. Marquis/Wallbank Well No. 5, located in the Southeast 1/4 of the Northeast 1/4 of Section 23, Township 7 South, Range 88 West of the 6th P.M., at a point whence the East 1/4 corner. of Section 23, Township 7 South, Range 88 West of the 6th P.M. bears South 35°41'33" East a distance of 987.68 feet, for. 15 g.p.m., con- ditional, for domestic and irrigation purposes. The appropriation date is April 9, 1987. Said appropri- ation was initiated by site visits, by formation of the intent to apply water to the beneficial uses decreed herein, and by engineering and subdivision development work. The source of water is groundwater tributary to the Roaring Fork River. E. Marquis/Wallbank Well No. 6, located in the Southeast 1/4 of the Northeast 1/4 of Section 23, Township 7 South, Range 88 West of the 6th P.M., at a point whence the East 1/4 corner of Section 23, Township 7 South, Range 88 West of the 6th P.M. bears South 42°40' East a distance of 1540 feet, for 15 g.p.m., conditional, for domestic and irrigation purposes. The appropriation date is April 9, 1987. Said appropriation was ini- tiated by site visits, by formation of the intent to apply water to the beneficial uses decreed herein, and by engineering and subdivision development work. The source of water is groundwater tributary to the Roaring Fork River. -2- Page - 43 • • • 3. The application filed herein also includes an applica- tion for approval of a plan for. augmentation. The structures to be augmented pursuant to the terms of this decree are the Marquis/Wallbank Well Nos. 2 through 6, inclusive, as set forth in Paragraph 2. The following water rights may be used for augmentation: A. The Applicant Austin Marquis is the owner of three shares in the Park Ditch and Reservoir Company. The Park Ditch and Reservoir Company diverts direct flow water from Cattle Creek under the following water. rights: Ditch Park Ditch Park Ditch Park Ditch Park Ditch TABLE I PARK DITCH WATER RIGHTS Decreed Location Decreed Priority Sec. 7 Adjud. Approp. Amount No. T7S, R87W Date Date C.A. 9.0 221A NW/SW/SE 06/26/1913 09/12/1904 1627 4.1 232 NW/SW/SE 06/09/1916 07/01/1912 1821 1.8 221A NW/SW/SE 04/16/1917 09/12/1904 1627 2.0 232 NW/SW/SE 09/05/1918 07/01/1912 1973 Direct flow diversions under the shares in the Park Ditch and Reservoir. Company are supplemented by releases from Consolidated Reservoir. This reservoir operates under the following decreed priorities: TABLE II CONSOLIDATED RESERVOIR WATER RIGHTS Decreed Location Decreed Priority Sec. 19 Adjud. Approp. Structure Amount No. T6S, R87W Date Date C.A. Con. Res. 595.0 AF 88 NE/NE 02/15/1921 09/08/1898 2144 Con. Res. 285.6 AF 678 NE/NE 06/20/1958 09/01/1948 4613 Con. Res. 401.0 AF 654 NE/NE 11/05/1971 09/01/1948 5884 B. The Applicants have obtained a contract for each of the wells to be augmented, with the Basalt Water Conservancy District for the release of water from Ruedi Reservoir, decreed in Civil Action No. 789 in the District Court in and for Garfield County, State of -3- Page - 44 • • Colorado, on June 20, 1958, for 102,869 acre-feet for irrigation, municipal, industrial, domestic, generation of electric energy, stock watering, and piscatorial purposes with an appropriation date of July 29, 1957, and located in and near Sections 7-9, 11, 14-18, Township 8 South, Range 84 West of the 6th P.M. Each contract provides for the release of 0.04 acre-feet of water for each well, or a total of 0.20 acre-feet for the development. 4. The three shares in the Park Ditch and Reservoir. Company owned by the Applicants have been used to irrigate approximately 17 acres. Historically, as decreed in Case No. 79CW097 in the District Court in and for. Water. Division No. 5, each share of the Park Ditch stock has entitled the owner to an annual average yield of approximately 2.4 acre-feet of water in storage in the Consolidated Reservoir and 31.44 acre-feet of water under the direct flow water rights adjudicated to the Park Ditch. Historic average year monthly depletions to the river system associated with the Applicants' interest in the Park Ditch Reservoir and Canal Company are shown below: TABLE III HISTORIC DEPLETIONS Average Year. Month Consumptive Use May 3.74 June 6.12 July 7.31 August 5.27 September 3.40 October 10 0.85 TOTAL 26.69 The historic irrigation season for shares under, the Park Ditch has been May 1 through October 10 of each year. 5. The Applicants propose to develop a residential sub- division located in Section 23, Township 7 South, Range 88 West of the 6th P.M., known as the Marquis/Wallbank Boundary Adjustment Plat, recorded on June 29, 1987, as Reception No. 383220 in the Office of the Clerk and Recorder. of Garfield County, Colorado. The development will consist of six single- family dwelling units. Dwelling units on five lots (Lots 2-6) of the development will be supplied with water under this augmentation plan. The sixth lot (Lot 1) is approximately 50.70 acres, and a dwelling unit thereon will be supplied from an exempt well, the Marquis Well No. 1 decreed in Case No. 79CW78 -4- Page - 45 • in the District Court in and for Water Division No. 5, Permit No. 104391. The water requirements and potential stream deple- tions associated with the five units provided for herein are based upon the following criteria: Five residences with 3.5 persons per residence utilizing 100 gallons per capita per day; 2500 square feet of outside lawn and garden irrigation for four of the residences and 5000 square feet of outside lawn and gar- den irrigation for the fifth residence; wastewater treatment to be through septic tank/leachfield systems; 15 percent consump- tive use for in-house uses; and 70 percent efficiency for out- side irrigation. Water requirements and calculated consumptive use for the proposed development are shown below: TABLE IV WATER REQUIREMENTS AND CONSUMPTIVE USE Water Requirements Consumptive Use In -House In - Potable Ir.r.. Total House Ir.r.. Total Month (Values in AF) (Values in AF) January 0.17 0.00 0.17 0.03 0.00 0.03 February 0.15 0.00 0.15 0.02 0.00 0.02 March 0.17 0.00 0.17 0.03 0.00 0.03 April 0.17 0.00 0.17 0.02 0.00 0.02 May 0.17 0.11 0.28 0.03 0.07 0.10 June 0.17 0.17 0.34 0.02 0.12 0.14 July 0.17 0.21 0.38 0.03 0.15 0.18 August 0.17 0.15 0.32 0.03 0.11 0.14 September. 0.17 0.10 0.27 0.02 0.07 0.09 October 0.17 0.02 0.19 0.03 0.02 0.05 November 0.17 0.00 0.17 0.02 0.00 0.02 December. 0.17 0.00 0.17 0.03 0.00 0.03 TOTAL 2.02 0.76 2.78 0.31 0.54 0.85 Population: 18 GPD/Capita: 100 In -House CU: 15 percent Irr. Eff.: 70 percent No. Ir.r.. Ac.: 0.34 6. As a result of access road and building site construc- tion, the Applicants will permanently retire from historic irri- gation a minimum of 0.43 acres of land under the Park Ditch. As a result, the Applicants will have available a credit associated with the historic depletion under its water rights which will offset any out -of -priority irrigation season depletions under the water, rights to be augmented hereunder. During the irriga- tion season, 0.08 shares of the Park Ditch and Reservoir Company will be left in the Ditch and returned to the drainage of - 5 - Page - 46 • • • historic use. A comparison of historic consumptive use asso- ciated with the irrigation of 0.43 acres of land with the con- sumptive use associated with the proposed development is shown below: TABLE V HISTORIC AND NEW CONSUMPTIVE USES Historic Consumptive Use Development Month (Average a.f.) C.U. (a.f.) May 0.10 0.10 June 0.16 0.14 July 0.19 0.18 August 0.13 0.14 September 0.09 0.09 October 10 0.02 0.02 TOTALS 0.69 0.67 7. During the historic non -irrigation season (October 11 through April 30 of each year), the Applicants will replace out - of -priority depletions under_ the water rights to be augmented by releases of water under its contracts with the Basalt Water Conservancy District from Ruedi Reservoir. The contracts total 0.20 acre-foot, and non -irrigation season consumptive use plus transit losses accounted for herein also will total 0.20 acre- foot (0.18 acre-foot for total non -irrigation season consumptive uses and 0.02 acre-foot for transit loss). The transit losses provided for herein equal approximately 11 percent of releases. Non -irrigation season consumptive use and required reservoir releases are shown below: -6-- Page - 47 • • • TABLE VI NON -IRRIGATION SEASON CONSUMPTIVE USE AND RESERVOIR RELEASES Release Transit Loss Consumptive Use Month (af) Replacement (af) (af) October I1 0.033 0.003 0.03 November. 0.023 0.003 0.02 December. 0.033 0.003 0.03 January 0.033 0.003 0.03 February 0.023 0.003 0.02 March 0.033 0.003 0.03 April 0.023 0.003 0.02 TOTALS 0.201 0.021 0.18 8. The Applicants propose to change the decreed use of the 0.08 shares of the Park Ditch and Reservoir. Company to be used hereunder to domestic purposes, including irrigation, by augmen- tation, replacement and exchange. CONCLUSIONS OF LAW 9. Timely and adequate notice of the filing of this appli- cation was given as required by law and no statements of opposi- tion were filed herein. 10. The Applicants have initiated valid appropriations of the water rights for which application has been made herein as of the dates claimed in the application. 11. This plan for augmentation meets the statutory criteria for a plan for augmentation as set forth in C.R.S. 537-92-103(9), -302(1), and -305(8), is one contemplated by law and, if operated and administered in accordance with the con- ditions hereof, will not result in an increase in historic con- sumptive use of those water rights referenced herein and will not cause material injury to any vested water right or decreed conditional water right. DECREE 12. The Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law set forth above are incorporated herein by this reference. 13. The decreed use of the Applicants' interest in 0.08 shares of the Park Ditch and Reservoir Company are hereby changed to domestic purposes, including irrigation, by augmen- tation, replacement, and exchange. -7- Page - 48 • • • 14. The application for water rights for. the Marquis/ Wallbank Well Nos. 2 through 6, inclusive, is hereby approved for 15 g.p.m., conditional, for each well, with appropriation dates for each well of April 9, 1987, at the location and from the sources listed above, for domestic and irrigation purposes. An application for quadrennial finding of reasonable dili- gence shall be filed in September. of .1991 and in September of every fourth calendar year thereafter for each well so long as the Applicants desire to maintain these conditional water rights or until a determination has been made that these conditional water rights have become absolute water, rights by reason of completion of the appropriations. For purposes of diligence, the wells shall be considered as an integrated water system, and diligence on one well shall be considered diligence as to all wells. 15. Before any historic depletion credits under. the Applicants' water rights in the Park Ditch are available for augmentation purposes hereunder, the Applicants shall dry up a minimum of 0.43 acres of land historically irrigated under their interest in said Ditch and shall identify the location and number of acres of land dried up to the Division Engineer. When such lands are dried up and identified to the Division Engineer, the Applicants shall have available on a monthly basis an amount equal to the historic depletion credits shown on Table V, above. During the irrigation season, 0.08 shares of the Park Ditch and Reservoir. Company will be left in the ditch and returned to the drainage of historic use. 16. The application for plan for augmentation contained herein is hereby approved and the operation thereof shall be conducted pursuant to the terms and conditions of this decree. 17. The Applicants shall install such measuring devices as may be required by the Division Engineer to facilitate the operation of this plan for augmentation and to secure compliance herewith. 18. The Office of the State Engineer is hereby ordered to issue well permits for. the Marquis/Wallbank Well Nos. 2 through 6, inclusive, subject to the terms of this plan for augmentation. 19. The State Engineer shall curtail all out -of -priority diversions under the water rights described in Paragraph 2, the depletions from which are not so replaced as to prevent injury to vested water rights. 20. It is accordingly ordered that this Ruling shall be filed with the Water. Clerk, subject to judicial review. It is further ordered that this Ruling will be filed with the appropriate Division Engineer and State Engineer. -8- Page - 49 • • • tbitiV Dated this 3o day of , 1987. tiak Water- Referee Water Division No. 5 State of Colorado No protest was filed to this Ruling of the Referee. The foregoing Ruling is confirmed and approved and is made the judgment and decree of this Court; subject, however, to the reconsideration on the issue of injury to vested water rights for a period of two years commencing from the date of first operation of the plan for augmentation provided for by this decree and, in making such determination, the Court has con- sidered and found that there is no dispute as to the historic use of the subject water rights, that this decree involves a plan for augmentation which provides for a surplus of augmen- tation water over proposed depletions, and that the quantity of uses to be augmented is small. Dated this ,2f day of _ J .2-,/, 1987. -9- Page - 50 • • • Preliminary Plan Map. The applicant requests that the minor modifications required to the preliminary plan map be handled as a condition of approval to be addressed in the Final Plat application. All of the requested information is included in the application submittal documents in a high level of detail beyond that which is practical to place on the preliminary plan. 1. The property is located in the "Rural Zone District". 2. The "signature/certificate sheet" is not required. It will be removed from the final distribution set of copies submitted to the planning commission and County Commissioners. 3. Existing vegetation on the property is discussed in detail in Attachment A, the Wildlife and Ecological Assessment completed by Colorado Wildlife Science, LLC. "The property consists of relatively flat to gently rolling hayfields to moderate and steep slopes with west to south aspects. The hayfields are dominated by common pasture grasses such as Crested Wheatgrass, Smooth Brome, and Timothy. Vegetation on the slopes can be accurately described as a two -needle Pinon-Utah Juniper woodland with a relatively sparse understory of native grasses such as Indian Rice Grass and Needleandthread and forbs. Gamble Oak occurs in patches as well." 4. Existing covenants on the property will be modified if it is determined that the language legally and explicitly prohibits subdivision of the Ce -Mar -Sam, Co, LLLP property. Attachments. Items 12, 13 and 14 of Schedule B of the Stewart Title Commitment. The following attachments were obtained from the Garfield County Clerk and Recorder's Office to satisfy the request for items 12, 13 and 14 of Schedule B of the title commitment. Page - 51 • • • ATTACHM ENTS r s i,risiun°' and "subdi tdc3 } ( 1 Fd), sG arrendee, and t"rte Sz:h orado, adopt _c :lanuar; 7 197g in the Office of the Clrk and Rec+ olorado, :into 3 tracts oz approximate acres each, more sr ]asci:, 'ich prop nazticul<arly desc ri£,ed as c3 -.":d of Gar 5.17,5 d clivi s: A tract of land situated in the ?N1'NE of Section hi:{ 7 South, Range 88 West of the 6th 7racipal Garfield Count.,. i`:].oa .ls,,rrc- d.es-r .. ., t a point on th, `'orth�r1 li ss cap found in Oacc old ast Corner of _i.ii Ss -:ion ..S bears et; thence S urh :7.2.49 feet wry C` „ tence alut.g , zf d ci3.ts1 '58"30'34' W 887.:3? feet; the nce snce N 66°06 i' :. hence S 45'12'27' W hence le.aa,>.is< .. _ 222.00 feet; . boundary lin, f 548.36 rec. said Section Section 23; 3;t b's nda fl E Tract. 13: Ttnmsi:i7 Garfield ::oux�t' Westerly ri::'2',_ particularly d :• Beginnihg :7t. t' Section 21, si No. ].].2 °ilencc_ the N',:.!: !is -- 25r,' . line e i z:£f. dj. Saetl raF.er1 TM rked for tick.. 4'iift . 711.44 to-_l7nd of a ditch: 1lowing ec»rse.s: 1.1].58 feet; r5" 1 31-96 feet; d 93.68 fe. South *50.21" 7)t1E:s eontain to p • • • 10'4,0 '"dbes.not fall --1-t3fil' t' -'."'-' ----'4-'-, ReViSed'StatilteS 1013, s'not large enough to proceed thrOUgh the fu WHEREAS, the Petitioner has demonstrated to the..iatisfA of County Commissioners of Garfield County, Colorado, that Amable probability of Locating domestic water on each of said t is adequate ingress and egress to said tracts, that the locar tic tanks will be permitted by the Colorado Department of Health, lasted division is not part of an existing or larger development an fa1i within the general purposes and intent of the subdivision reg the State of Colorado and the County of Garfield, and should, theref exempted from the definition of ti"( "ce"..4,vsion" and "subdivided Set forel, . 1973, 1 ," ananded; NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that: the division of the above scribed tracts "A" and "B", from the above described 32J) acre tract is reby exempted from such definitions and said tract may be divided into tiaels and "B", all as is more fully described above, and said divided tract may conveyed in the form of such smaller tracts without further compliance with t: aforesaid subdivision statutes and regulations: provided, however, that this )uption is granted en the condition and with the express understanding and reement of the Petitioner that no further exemptions be allowed on said acts "A" and "B", and that a copy of the instrumeet or instruments of conveyance tilien recorded shall ht filed with this Resolution. A Deputy Clerk of the Board Covnty Commissioners Cunty, CAoradcJ C,OMM)=SSLONERS OF ('5 !U COUNTY, COLORADO Page - 53 Chairman -2C.)-16 (-1 ‘• ft , - ' 6 • • • 1)1a. OBI 0 1 1987 MILDRED ALSDOCIF, RECORDER GARFIELD COUNTY, COLORADO Ir"r DECLARATION OF PROTECTIVE COVENANTS AND RESTRICTIONS FOP THE MARQUWWALLb;,' PLAT 122 pg.,(2119 THIS DECLARATION is made on the date hereinafter set forth by Austin Marquis (hereinafter referred to as the "Declarantu); WITNESSErH: WHEREAS. the Declarant is the owner of all real property situate in the County of Garfield and State of Colorado described as the Marquis/Wallbank Boundary Adjustment Flat hereinafter referred to as the "Development") as the same appears upon the Plat thereof recorded for record on June 29, 1987, as Receptn No. 38372n tn che Offi.ce of the Clerk and Recorf 611-fi.eld COL WHEREAS, the Declarant, being desirous of protecting pro- perty and protecting the health, convenience, and welfare of the owners of the lots in the Development, does hereby publish and declare that the following terms, covenants, uses, conditions, restrictions, limitations, and obligations shall be deemed to run with the land located within the Development and shall be a burden upon and a benefit to any person or persons acquiring or owning any interest in the Development and the real property owned by such persons, their grantees, successors, heirs, devisees, personal representatives, and assigns. 1,0 DEFINITIONS. As 'n ,hese Protective Covenants, ollwing .wrds and th following meanings: 1.1 "ACC" shall mean the Architectural Control Committee for the Development. 1.2 "Got" shall mean any lot, tract, or parcel of land the Development. in 1.3 "Owner" shall mean the owner of a lot created within the Development and shall also mean the owner of water rights designated for use within the Development. j,4 "Development* shall mean the Marquis/Wallbenk Boundary Adjustment P1at, as, 1....:scribed above. 1.5 "Unit' shall mean a resioential dwelling unit. 2.0 PLAN FOR AUGMENTATION. The use of water on each lot shall comply with and be subject to the terms and conditions of the Plan for Augmentation decreed in Cass No. 87CW100 in the Water Court in and for Water Division No. 5, as the same may de amended and as recorded in the Office of the Clerk and Megatiet of Garfield County in Book at Page t Reception Ob. Page - 55 722 rof273 . The Decree entered in said case is incorporated herein i7)7y referenoe and shall be binding upon the owners. All owners shalL Oe respo. .:eantain contracts. with the Basalt Water orrvan t orce and effect; to drill wells and complete well drilling reports, pump reports, statements of beneficial use, and other matters necessary to malntain well permits in good standing; and to apply tc make absolute or to maintain reasonable diligence on the water rights owned by them. All sewage systems shall be of non -evaporative type approved by all appropriate health officials. 3.0 ENFORCEMENT OF PROTECTIVE COVENANTS. Any owner shall have the right to enforce all covenants herein imposed by a pro- ceeinq at law or in equity. Failure by any owner co enforce • covenant or restriction herein contained shall in no event • ..ieemed a waiver of the ri7.h.t. to enforce these covenants or trereafter 4.0 RESIDENTIAL PURPOSE. All lots shall be used only for residential purposes, provided that one barn, garage, or othei outbuilding may be constructed in addition to a residence on any lot, and provided further that no land within the Development shall be occupied or used for any commercial or business pur- pose. No barn or accessory structure may exceed fifteen percent (15%) of the total square footage of the principal structure, as measured from the outside of foundation walls, unless approved by the ACC. The barns and accessory structures shall be so desgned as to blend with and complement the general architec- t„.,ra: scheme of the principal structure. All barns anu • -soy stn.ctures shal te located entirely within the envlupe for te 1, applicable. Ne display, stock in trade, oc outside storage equipment, signs, or other external advertising shall be permitted. 5.0 STRUCTURES AND LANDSCAPING IN THE DEVELOPMENT. 5.1 Huildin_a_ Envelope. All structures in the Development shall be designed to blend into and complement the r.atural surroundings. All structures shall be sited on each lot by the owner and approved by the ACC. Unless varied by the provisions of Paragraph 13.7, infra, no strcture on Lots 2, 5, or 6 shall be constructed out- side the building envelopes for such lots as shown on Exhi,)it "A" attache sd ''Nereto and incorporated herein by tr'-eference-1rn; 1:,-ret.:re, the ACC shall approve its locatien as nea: to the spot selected by the owner as shall not impede or restrict the view plane of other owners and otherwise meet the criteria set forth in Paragraph 13.4, infra. 5.2 Minimum Size- Height. The minimum size of each single- TiMily structure shall be not less than 1000 square feet of habital floor area, exclusive of open porches, garages, or carports, as measvred from the external -2- Page - 56 • • • Wr 722 ptnefirn foundation walls. No structure shall be permitted on any i(t or tract which exceeds twenty-four (24) feet in ,7e11.A measure' '- - e natIlral finished grade Ln, L:7.media , Lhe foundation average roof height, unless exempted by the ACC upon review of plans based on the criteria set forth in Paragraph 13.4, infra. 5.3 Restrictions on Antennae. No electronic antennae or device of any type, other than an antennae for receiving normal television signals, shall be erected, constructed, or placed or permitted to remain on any lot. A television antenna may be attached to a struc- ture; provided, however, the antenna's location shall be restricted to the rear of the structure or to the rear of the ridgeline, gable, or centerline of the dwe-g as len from ght. No teision or dis shall be peraiitted unless approved by the ACC, which may condition any approval upon approprice screening. 5.4 New Construction. No structure shall be erected by means of other than new construction, it being the pur- pose of this covenant to insure that old buildings will not be moved from previous locations and placed upon a lot. Exteriors of all structures shall be constructed of either stone or lumber, or a combination thereof. The use of cinderblock shall not be allowed unless it is taced with another material herein approved. Landscaping shall blend with natural vegetation. No tree sall ,t_hout approval of ttie ACC, unle ee cT Lees are dead, dying, or diseased. All areas cut, filled, or disturbed by any construction or other activity shall be fully restored and revegetated. 6.0 UTILITY LINES AND EASEMENTS. No new gas lines, power lines, telephone lines, or television cables shall be permitted on Lots 2, 5, or 6 unless said lines are buried underground or overhead and out of sight of other lot owners' building site views from their primary source to the structure and at the owner's expense. Easements for installation and maintenance of Jtilities are reserved as shown on the Plat and no permanent structre shall be erected on any of said easements and no leria encrachments plate over such easements. Neitner the Declarant dr4 utility company or governmental entity using the easements shall bgs liable for any damages done by any of them or their assigns, agents, or employees to the shrubbery, trees, flowers, or improvements of the owner located on the land covered by satd easements. 7.0 LIMITATION ON CERTAIN STRUCTURE. No structure shell be placed on any lot which-rs or over has been or could be Ma* the subject of a specific ownership tax as now defined in T1tV6 *3 - Page - 57 • • • r^v '722 ?YAM 42 cf tee Colorado Revised Statutes, nor shall structures constructed in the manner fast of mobile houses be illowed. It. is the in cenants to prohibit the use of mobile houses as residences within the Development. No structure of a temporary character, trailer, basement, tent, or shack of any description shall be used on. any lot except on a temporary basis, not exceeding six months, by the construction company constructing a structure on a lot or tract. 8.0 FENCES. Architectural screen fences, limited to six (6) feet above eround level and constructed of natural wood, are allowed provided they are attached to the primary building. Open post and rail fences, limitee to four (4) feet above ground lovel and constructed of unfinished natural wood poles, are a:lowecl provided they are located so as to not unduly disrupt ne„toral ntn;sh tree venetn nor onse soil erosion and are appren by tne ACC, 9.0 LIVESTOCK. No horses, cows, pigs, chickens, poultry, rabbits, or other livestock shall be raised, grown, bred, main- tained, or cared for upon any lot other than as hereinafter pro- vided; provided, however, that nothing herein contained shall prevent any owner of any lot from mairtaining, keeping, and caring fur domestic, household pets not for commercial purposes. Said lots must be maintained in a clean and odor -free condition. Dogs must be kept on owner's property and maintained so as .lot to 7;:ieterl-) wildlife. 10.0 VEHiCLES. Vehicles whia are unlicensed shall not be sr,ore or ;naint,3Aned on t'ne ...)r,,ses for period in excess of fiten 1.5 :iays Lne expiraton oi such license, except such vehicle may be stored in a garage or otherwise screened from view from all other lots within the DevelopNent and from all commonly used roadways within the Development. Recreation vehicles, such as campieg vans or trailers, boats, siowmobiles, and other off-road devices shall be parked or stored out of sight. Motorcycles shall not be operated in the Development, except that they may be utilized for transportation in and out of the Development. No off-road vehicles, including snowmobiles, shall be operated in the Development. 11. STOAGE._ OF MATERIALS. Premises must be kept neat and orleHy. Except for pas,iC arkt pickups, no motor vehicles, construction equipment, or heavy equipment may he stored for more than twenty-four (24) hours. i.2 All trash containers and storage tanks must be enclosed in a structure or opaque fence. Escept for firewood, no lumber, metals, scrap, or building material may be stored except during cnnstruction. Page - 58 • • • Br-, 722 ritx276 L,HAR * FIREARMS. There shall be no discharge of ,"-01".. for sel.-defense or •kR,Ir.::YRAi CONTROL COMMITTEE (ACC). ot Plans. No improvements of any kind, tr.JAing but not limited to dwellings, drives, ;ara,3es, tennis courts, swimming pools, fences, barns, and .-)otbuildings may be constructed or alte.:ed on any lani within the Development unless three (3) complete • )1-: architectural plans and specifications for such -:crItion are submitted to the ACC prior: to the :)rnmndement of such work. Required drawings shall a site plan depicting structuras, yards, fence. e drainage, and land - all elevations of the str.cf,res); and a description of the exterio matils to be osed. The ACC will notify all adjacent iier f the time and place of their review of the All decisions of the ACC shall be in writnt,4. One set of such plans and specifications • a!,.,!miin on file and become a permanent record of In the event the WC fails to take any action thirty (30) days after complete architectural specifications for such work have been sub - t') tt, then all of such plans and specifications • De deemed to be approved. of ACC. "7:' ACC 55:nal' exercise its best r•.,,drovements, construction, • altarations on the land within the Development con- f•,rm tt and harmonize with the natural surroundings and -4,y% the existing structures as to external design, materlals, color, setting, height, topography, grade, aer7i finished ground elevation. Archltectural Plans. Plans and specifications sub- m!tred under Paragraph 13.1 hereof shall show the n,,itre, Kind, shape, height, materials, floor plans, 1,,-:afion, exterior color scheme, alterations, grading, and 411 other matters necessary for the ACC to properly onsider and make a determination thereon. The ACC isapprove any :7irhitectural plans submitted to ,t ace for; its to exercise the judgment required of it by these covenants. ls.4 Architectural StandArds. The ACC review and decisions shall be based upon the standards set forth in these covenants. In particular, it is the goal of thee* covenants that all dnits blind in with the natural Aurroundings and be hidden from view to the ext1ant practical. By becoming an owner, the owner agrO00 that he and all occupants of the lot shall be bound by requirements of these covenants. - 5 Page - 59 • • • 5 -v 722 ro,f271 1215 Construction Schedule. At any time that plans and specificationS, bro, ar,d location have been appr,?-:ed, ther i'he same shall carried out fortwit and comoletion effected witnin twelve (12) months from the date construction is com- mencedprovided, however, that the (Ante limit on completion of construction may be extended by the ACC if unusual circumstances or delay beyond the control of the owner occur. Failure to complete constitutes revo- cation of approval and such structure shall be removed within torty-fite (45) days of demand at the owner's expense. 13.6 Time of Construction. Clean up of the site must be complete by tme of occupancy. Landscaping and repair of sit. =,onstructi- rrnIt be completed within one - issuance of she Certificate of ,,)ocepancy. 13.7 Variance. The ACC may grant a reasonable variance or adjustment of these cooditions and restrictions, including modifications to a building envelope, in order to overcome practical difficulties and prevent unnecessary hardships arising by reason of the applica- tio;t of restrictions contained herein. Such variances or adjustment shall be granted only in case the granting thereof shall net be materially detrimental or inorious to other property or improvements of the neighborhood and shall not defeat the general intent of ',hes restrictions, 13.8 No Liability ot ACC. The ACC shall not be liable in damages to any person or assorAation submitting any architectural plans for approval or to any owner by reason of any action, failure to act, approval, disapproval, or failure to approve or disapprove with regard to such architectural plans. Any owner sub- mitting or causing to be submitted any plans and speci- fications to the ACC agrees and covenants that he will not bring an action or suit to recover damages against the ACC collectively, its memners individually, or its advisors or agents. Right of 1.nspectio1 The AC(' auk.its duly -appointed age, <-.,.r. empl.-.,,,,-- % enter .4;:on any property at any reasonable time or t.imes for inspection of any structure. 13.10 ACC Members. The initial members of the ACC shall bet Lincoln Wallbank Austin Marquis The ACC may be expanded by appointment by a majority of the then -constituted ACC. -6_ Page -60 • • 14: 722 pl227'S •R.eliacemt of ACC majnrity of the ACC may eesioeate a. reoeeeeoeive to aet ior it. Should a member resign or become unable to act, the other mem- bers shall appoint a successor. Subsequent to the sale of all lots and tracts, one or more members may be replaced by written designation recorded in the Garfield County Clerk and Recorder's office showing approval by a majority of the owners. 14.0 SiGNS. No signs of any kind shall be displayed to the public view, exoept one sign of not more than five (5) square feee ar!vertisng the property for sale or rent, or signs used by a :idIL:ler to advertise the property during the construction and ALOCS ACT. : Nc acities shall be con- ducted on any lot and no improvements constructed on any lot which are or might be unsafe or hazardous to any person or pro- perty. Without limiting the generality of the foregoing, no open fire shall be lighted or permitted on any lot excepting in a contained barbecue unit while attended and in use for cooking purposes or within a safe and well designed interior fireplace. 16.0 NO. ANNOYTNG,LIGHTS,_SOUNDS,_ORMOTORS. No light shall be emitted from any lot which is unreasonably bright or causes u.7,rasonable glare. No sound shall be emitted from any lot eeiee :is nreasonably loud or annoying. No odor shall be sm:,Hsd from any. lot ,,;hich is noxious or offensive to others. Dikir,KAY CON Ail driveways shall be constreceed so as to meet minimum Garfield County specifications and a!1 cut slopes for driveways shall not exceed one to one and one-half slopes and all areas disturbed shall be revegetated in conformance with the revegetation plan submitted by the deve- loper and approved by the County. 18.0 COVENANTS ,RUN_WITH THE LAND. These covenants are to ran with the land and shall be binding upon all parties and all persons claiming under them. 19.0 AMENDMENT. Subject to compliance with the applicable secto,ls of the Garfield County Land Use Code and so long as e./ wit 'arfleld County land use appro- valsfo tri s Developme.„ t::„e Prv.>tect:lve Covenants may be amended by an instrument signed by not less than seventy-five percent (75%) of the owners of the lots in the Development. Such amendments shall become effective upon the recordation thereof in Garfield County, Colorado. 20.0 SEVERABILITY. The invalidation of any one of these covenants by judgment or court order shall not affect any of the other provisions which shall remain in full force and effect. Page - 61 • • • divy ,,,, .1; I -2 -. 4 e., `-- ,../ UST IN MARQUIS /7/ STATE c* COLORADO ) ss. County of Garfield he foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this day of _.,5;014,.. 1987, by AUSTIN MARQUIS. WITNESS my hand and official seal, My Commission expires: Cdotir z6,±3$37.__• L / Page - 62 • • • Draft Subdivision Improvements Agreement. No public improvements are associated with the Marquis Subdivision. Privately owned improvements will consist of a gravel driveway consistent with the design submitted in the preliminary plan, improvements required by the Garfield County Road Bridge Department at the intersection of County Rd. 112 and the driveway, revegetation-weed control measures and minor drainage management consistent with the engineered drawings. The applicant anticipates completing these improvements prior to recordation of the Final Plat. The following attached Draft Subdivision Improvements Agreement and associated surety language is included with this supplemental submittal. The subdivision improvements agreement is to be finalized through negotiations with the County Attorney in association with the Final Plat. DRAFT MARQUIS SUBDIVISION IMPROVEMENTS AGREEMENT THIS MARQUIS SUBDIVISION IMPROVEMENTS AGREEMENT (SIA) is made and entered into this day of , 2010, by and between Ce -Mar -Sam Co. LLLP (Owner) and the BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF GARFIELD COUNTY, COLORADO, acting for the County of Garfield, State of Colorado, as a body politic and corporate, directly or through its authorized representatives and agents (BOCC). Recitals 1. Owner is the owner and developer of the Marquis Subdivision (the "Subdivision"), which property is depicted on the Final Plat of the Marquis Subdivision (Final Plat or Final Plat of the Subdivision). The real property subject to this SIA is described in that Final Plat, recorded at Reception Number reference. 2. On of the real estate records of Garfield County, Colorado and incorporated by this , 2010, the BOCC, by Resolution No. , recorded at Reception Number of the real estate records of Garfield County, Colorado and incorporated by this reference, approved a preliminary plan for the Subdivision which, among other things, would create two (2) single-family residential lots (Preliminary Plan Approval). 3. As a condition precedent to the approval of the Final Plat submitted to the BOCC as required by the laws of the State of Colorado and by the Garfield County Unified Land Use Resolution of Page - 63 • • • 2008, Owner wishes to enter into this SIA with the BOCC. 4. Owner has agreed to execute and deliver a letter of credit or other security in a form satisfactory to the BOCC to secure and guarantee Owner's performance under this Agreement and has agreed to certain restrictions and conditions regarding the sale of properties and issuance of building permits and certificates of occupancy within the subdivision, all as more fully set forth below. NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the foregoing recitals and the mutual covenants and promises contained herein, the BOCC and Owner agree as follows: Agreement 1. FINAL PLAT APPROVAL. The BOCC hereby accepts and approves the Final Plat of the Subdivision, on the date set forth above, subject to the terms and conditions of this SIA, the Preliminary Plan Approval, and the requirements of the Garfield County Unified Land Use Resolution of 2008 and any other governmental or quasi -governmental regulations applicable to the Subdivision (Final Plat Approval). Recording of the Final Plat in the records of the Garfield County Clerk and Recorder shall be in accordance with this SIA and at the time prescribed herein. 2. OWNER'S PERFORMANCE AS TO SUBDIVISION IMPROVEMENTS. a. Completion Date/Substantial Compliance. Owner has constructed and installed certain subdivision improvements, identified in the Exhibits defined in subparagraph 2.a.i, below (Subdivision Improvements) at Owner's expense, including payment of fees required by Garfield County and/or other governmental and quasi - governmental entities with regulatory jurisdiction over the Subdivision. The Subdivision Improvements, except for revegetation, shall be completed on or before the end of the first full year following execution of this SIA ( , 2011), in substantial compliance with the following: Page - 64 • • i. Plans marked Approved for Construction for all Subdivision Improvements prepared by Boundaries Unlimited Inc. and submitted to the BOCC on , 2010, such plans being summarized in the list of drawings attached to and made a part of this SIA by reference as Exhibit A; the estimate of cost of completion, certified by and bearing the stamp of Owner's professional engineer licensed in the State of Colorado (Owner's Engineer), attached to and made a part of this SIA by reference as Exhibit B, which estimate shall include an additional ten(10) percent of the total for contingencies; and all other documentation required to be submitted along with the Final Plat under pertinent sections of the Garfield County Unified Land Use Resolution of 2008 (Final Plat Documents). ii. All requirements of the Preliminary Plan Approval. iii. All laws, regulations, orders, resolutions and requirements of Garfield County and all special districts and any other governmental entity or quasi -governmental authority (ies) with jurisdiction. iv. The provisions of this SIA. b. Satisfaction of Subdivision Improvements Provisions. The BOCC agrees that if all Subdivision Improvements are constructed and installed in accordance with this paragraph 2; the record drawings have been submitted upon completion of the Subdivision Improvements, as detailed in paragraph 3(c), below; and all other requirements of this SIA have been met, then the Owner shall be deemed to have satisfied all terms and conditions of the Preliminary Plan Approval, the Final Plat Documents and the Garfield County Unified Land Use Resolution of 2008, with respect to the installation of Subdivision Improvements. Page - 65 • • • 3. SECURITY FOR SUBDIVISION IMPROVEMENTS (EXCEPT RE - VEGETATION). a. Prior to Recordation of the Final Plat the Owner Shall Demonstrate Completion of the Improvements on the Property to the Satisfaction of the County. As security for Owner's obligation to complete the Subdivision Improvements: Owner shall deliver to the BOCC, on or before the date of recording of the Final Plat of the Subdivision, written compliance of completion and proof of inspection by County personnel of the Subdivision Improvements and revegetation1 as set forth and certified by Owner's Engineer on Exhibit B. If one LOC used Page - 66 • b. Unenforceable Provisions. Should the timeframe within which the final plat must be recorded expire unless an extension is approved in writing by the BOCC without proof of completion of the improvements including Owner's Engineer's certification of completion of the Subdivision Improvements, this SIA shall become void and of no force and effect and the Final Plat shall be vacated pursuant to the terms of this SIA. c. Final Release of Security. Upon completion of all Subdivision Improvements, Owner shall submit to the BOCC, through the Building and Planning Department: 1) record drawings bearing the stamp of Owners Engineer certifying that all Subdivision Improvements have been constructed in accordance with the requirements of this SIA, including all Final Plat Documents and the Preliminary Plan Approval, in hard copy and digital format acceptable to the BOCC; 2) copies of instruments conveying real property and other interests which Owner is obligated to convey to the Homeowner's Association of the Subdivision [or any statutory special district or other entity] at the time of Final Plat Approval [, unless escrowed in accordance with paragraph _ below]; and 3) a Written Request for authorization to record the Final Plat, in the form attached to and incorporated herein as Exhibit E, along with Owner's Engineer's stamp and certificate of final completion of improvements. i. The BOCC shall authorize recordation of the Final Plat after the Subdivision Improvements are certified as final to the BOCC by the Owner's Engineer and said final certification is approved by the BOCC. If the BOCC finds that the Subdivision Improvements are complete, in accordance with the relevant specifications, the BOCC shall authorize release of the Final Plat, within ten (10) business days following submission of the Owner's Written Request for Page - 67 • • • Final Release of the Final Plat accompanied by the other documents required by this paragraph 3.h. ii. Notwithstanding the foregoing, upon Owner's Written Request for Final Release of the Final Plat for recordation, accompanied by Owner's Engineer's certificate of final completion of improvements, the BOCC may inspect and review the Subdivision Improvements certified as complete. If the BOCC does so review and inspect, the process contained in paragraph 3.f., above, shall be followed. iii. If the BOCC finds that the Subdivision Improvements are complete, in accordance with the relevant specifications, the BOCC shall authorize final release of the Final Plat for recordation within ten (10) days after completion of such investigation. iv. If the BOCC finds that the Subdivision Improvements are not complete, in accordance with the relevant specifications, the BOCC may withhold release of the Final Plat, or institute court action in accordance with the process outlined in paragraph 3.g., above. IF REVEGETATION IS REQUIRED... 4. SECURITY FOR REVEGETATION. a. Revegetation LOC and Substitute Collateral. $ of the face amount of the LOC, specified in Paragraph 3a above, shall he allocated to revegetation of disturbed areas within the Subdivision (Revegetation LOC), the cost for which is detailed as a subdivision improvement in Exhibit B.' Revegetation of disturbed areas in the 1 If one LOC used Page - 68 • • • Subdivision, the costs for which is detailed as a subdivision improvement in Exhibit B, shall be secured by delivery of a Letter of Credit from the Owner to the BOCC in the form agreed to be acceptable to the BOCC, attached to and incorporated in this SIA by reference as Exhibit C-1 (Revegetation LOC).2 The Revegetation LOC shall be valid for a minimum of two (2) years following recording of the Final Plat. The BOCC, at its sole option may permit the Owner to substitute collateral other than a Letter of Credit, in a form acceptable to the BOCC, for the purpose of securing the completion of revegetation. b. Revegetation LOC General Provisions. The provisions of paragraphs 3.b., 3.c. and 3.d., above, dealing with Letter of Credit requirements, extension of expiration dates, increase in face amounts, plat recording and plat vacating shall apply to the Revegetation LOC. 2 If C and C-1 used Page - 69 • • • c. Revegetation Review and Notice of Deficiency. Upon establishment of revegetation, the Owner shall request review of the revegetation work by the Garfield County Vegetation Management Department, by telephone or in writing. Such review shall be for the purpose of verification of success of revegetation and reclamation in accordance with the Garfield County Weed Management Plan 2000, adopted by Resolution No. 2002-94 and recorded in the Office of the Garfield County Clerk and Recorder as Reception No. 580572, as amended, and the revegetation/reclamation plan titled Marquis Subdivision Revegetation Plan and dated , 2010 for the Subdivision submitted as part of the Final Plat Documents for Preliminary Plan Approval. If the Vegetation Management Department refuses approval and provides written notice of deficiency(ies), the Owner shall cure such deficiency(ies) by further revegetation efforts, approved by the Vegetation Management Department, as such efforts may be instituted within the two (2) years following recording of the Final Plat. d. Single Request for Release of Revegetation LOC. Following receipt of written approval of the Vegetation Management Department, the Owner may request release of the Revegetation LOC and shall do so by means of submission to the BOCC, through the Building and Planning Department, of a Written Request for Release of Revegetation LOC, in the form attached to and incorporated herein by reference as Exhibit F, along with certification of completion by the Owner, or Owner's agent with knowledge, and a copy of the written approval of the Vegetation Management Department. It is specifically understood by the parties that the Revegetation LOC is not subject to successive partial releases, as authorized in paragraph 3.e., above. Further, the Revegetation LOC and the BOCC's associated rights to withdraw funds and bring a court action niay survive final release of the LOC securing other Subdivision Improvements, Page - 70 • • defined in paragraph 3.a., above. e. BOCC's Completion of Revegetation and Other Remedies. If Owner's revegetation efforts are deemed by the BOCC to be unsuccessful, in the sole opinion of the BOCC upon the recommendation of the Vegetation Management Department, or if the BOCC determines that the Owner will not or cannot complete revegetation, the BOCC, in its discretion, may withdraw and employ from the Revegetation LOC such funds as may be necessary to carry out the revegetation work, up to the face amount of the Revegetation LOC. In lieu of or in addition to drawing on the Revegetation LOC, the BOCC may bring an action for injunctive relief or damages for the Owner's failure to adhere to the provisions of this SIA related to revegetation. The BOCC shall provide the Owner a reasonable time to cure any identified deficiency prior to requesting payment from the Revegetation LOC or filing a civil action. 5. WATER SUPPLY AND WASTEWATER COLLECTION. As stated in paragraph 13, below, prior to issuance by the BOCC of any certificates of occupancy for any residences or other habitable structures constructed within the Subdivision, Owner shall install, connect and make operable a water supply and distribution system for potable water, fire protection, non -potable irrigation water, and a wastewater system in accordance with approved plans and specifications. All easements and rights-of-way necessary for installation, operation, service and maintenance of such water supply and distribution system(s) and wastewater system shall be as shown on the Final Plat. Owner shall deposit with the Garfield County Clerk and Recorder executed originals of the instruments of conveyance for easements appurtenant to the water and wastewater system(s), for recordation following recording of the Final Plat and this SIA. • 6. PUBLIC ROADS. There are no public roads within the Marquis Subdivision. Page - 71 • Private access easements for the use of single lots, if any, are depicted as such on the Final Plat. 7. PUBLIC UTILITY RIGHTS-OF-WAY. Whether or not utility easements exist elsewhere in the Subdivision, all road rights-of-way within the Subdivision shall contain rights- of-way for installation and maintenance of utilities. Public utility easements shall be dedicated by the Owner to the public utilities on the face of the Final Plat, subject to the Garfield County Road and Right -of -Way Use Regulations, recorded as Reception No. 643477, in the records of the Garfield County Clerk and Recorder, as amended. The Owner's of the Subdivision shall be solely responsible for the maintenance, repair and upkeep of said public utility easements, unless otherwise agreed to with the public utility company(ies). The BOCC shall not be obligated for the maintenance, repair and upkeep of any utility easement within the Subdivision. In the event a utility company, whether publicly or privately owned, requires conveyance of the easements dedicated on the face of the Final Plat by separate document, Owner shall execute and record the required conveyance documents. 1. INDEMNITY. The Owner shall indemnify and hold the BOCC harmless and defend the BOCC from all claims which may arise as a result of the Owner's installation of the Subdivision Improvements, including off-site improvements and revegetation, and any other agreement or obligation of Owner, related to development of the Subdivision, required pursuant to this SIA. The Owner, however, does not indemnify the BOCC for claims made asserting that the standards imposed by the BOCC are improper or the cause of the injury asserted, or from claims which may arise from the negligent acts or omissions of the BOCC or its employees. The BOCC shall notify the Owner of receipt by the BOCC of a notice of claim or a notice of intent to sue, and the BOCC shall afford the Owner the option of defending any such claim or action. Failure to notify and provide such written option to the Owner shall extinguish the BOCC's rights under this paragraph. Nothing in this paragraph shall be construed to constitute a waiver Page - 72 • • • of governmental immunity granted to the BOCC by Colorado statutes and case law. 2. ROAD IMPACT FEE. Pursuant to the Garfield County subdivision regulations, a Road Impact fee of ($ ) has been established for the residential units within the Subdivision. Owner shall pay fifty percent (50%), i.e., ($ ) of the Road Impact Fee to the Garfield County Treasurer at or prior to the time of recording of the Final Plat. The remaining 50%, i.e., ($ ), will be collected pro rata (i.e. $ _) from each lot owner at the time a building permit issues for a residence within the Subdivision. 3. FEES IN LIEU OF DEDICATION OF SCHOOL LAND. Owner shall make a cash deposit in lieu of dedicating land to the RE -1 School District, calculated in accordance with the Garfield County Unified Land Use Resolution of 2008 and the requirements of state law. The Owner and the BOCC acknowledge and agree that the cash in lieu payment for the Subdivision is calculated as follows: for the RE -1 School District: Unimproved per acre market value of land, based upon an appraisal submitted to the BOCC by Owner, i.e. $ ; and Land dedication standard: single-family dwelling units x acres equals acres. The Owner, therefore, shall pay to the Garfield County Treasurer, at or prior to the time of recording of the Final Plat, ($ ) as a payment in lieu of dedication of land to the RE -1 School District. Said fee shall be transferred by the BOCC to the school district in accordance with the provisions of 30-28-133, C.R.S., as amended, and the Garfield County Unified Land Use Resolution of 2008. The Owner agrees that it is obligated to pay the above -stated fee, accepts such obligations, and waives any claim that Owner is not required to pay the cash in lieu of land dedication fee. The Owner Page - 73 • • • agrees that Owner will not claim, nor is Owner entitled to claim, subsequent to recording of the Final Plat of the Subdivision, a reimbursement of the fee in lieu of land dedication to the RE -1 School District. 4. SALE OF LOTS. No lots, tracts, or parcels within the Subdivision may be separately conveyed prior to recording of the Final Plat in the records of the Garfield County Clerk and Recorder. 5. BUILDING PERMITS AND CERTIFICATES OF OCCUPANCY. As one remedy for breach of this SIA, the BOCC may withhold issuance of building permits for any residence or other habitable structure to be constructed within the Subdivision. Further, no building permit shall be issued unless the Owner demonstrates to the satisfaction of the Carbondale and Rural Fire Protection District (District), if the Fire District has so required, that there is adequate water available to the construction site for the District's purposes and all applicable District fees have been paid to the District. No certificates of occupancy shall issue for any habitable building or structure, including residences, within the Subdivision until all Subdivision Improvements, except revegetation, have been completed and are operational as required by this SIA. If applicable, Owner shall provide the purchaser of a lot, prior to conveyance of the lot, a signed copy of a form in substantially the same form as that attached to and incorporated herein by reference as Exhibit C, concerning the restrictions upon issuance of building permits and certificates of occupancy detailed in this SIA. 6. CONSENT TO VACATE PLAT. In the event the Owner fails to comply with the terms of this SIA, the BOCC shall have the ability to vacate the Final Plat as it pertains to any lots for which building permits have not been issued. As to lots for which building permits have been issued, the Plat shall not be vacated and shall remain valid. In such event, the Owner shall provide the BOCC a plat, suitable for recording, showing the location by surveyed legal description of any portion of the Final Plat so vacated by action of the BOCC. If such a Plat is Page - 74 not signed by the BOCC and recorded, or if such Plat is not provided by the Owner, the BOCC may vacate the Final Plat, or portions thereof, by resolution. 7. ENFORCEMENT. In addition to any rights provided by Colorado statute, the withholding of building permits and certificates of occupancy, provided for in paragraph 13, above, the provisions for release of security, detailed in paragraph 3, above, and the provisions for plat vacation, detailed in paragraph 14, above, it is mutually agreed by the BOCC and the Owner, that the BOCC, without making an election of remedies, and any purchaser of any lot within the Subdivision shall have the authority to bring an action in the Garfield County District Court to compel enforcement of this SIA. Nothing in this SIA, however, shall be interpreted to require the BOCC to bring an action for enforcement or to withhold permits or certificates or to withdraw unused security or to vacate the Final Plat or a portion thereof, nor shall this paragraph or any other provision of this SIA be interpreted to permit the purchaser of a lot to file an action against the BOCC. 8. NOTICE BY RECORDATION. This SIA shall be recorded in the Office of the Garfield County Clerk and Recorder and shall be a covenant running with title to all lots, tracts and parcels within the Subdivision. Such recording shall constitute notice to prospective purchasers and other interested persons as to the terms and provisions of this SIA. 9. SUCCESSORS AND ASSIGNS. The obligations and rights contained herein shall be binding upon and inure to the benefit of the successors and assigns of the Owner and the BOCC. 10. CONTRACT ADMINISTRATION AND NOTICE PROVISIONS. The representatives of the Owner and the BOCC, identified below, are authorized as contract administrators and notice recipients. Notices required or permitted by this SIA shall be in writing and shall be effective upon the date of delivery, or attempted delivery if delivery is Page - 75 • Marquis Subdivision Preliminary Plan Supplemental Submittal refused. Delivery shall be made in person, by certified return receipt requested U.S. Mail, receipted delivery service, or facsimile transmission, addressed to the authorized representatives of the BOCC and the Owner at the address or facsimile number set forth below: Owner: BOCC: w/copy to, Board of County Commissioners of Garfield County, Colorado C/o Building & Planning Dir. 108 8th Street, Suite 401 Glenwood Springs, CO 81601 Phone: (970) 945-8212 Fax: (970) 384-3470 11. AMENDMENT AND SUBSTITUTION OF SECURITY. This SIA may be modified, but only in writing signed by the parties hereto, as their interests then appear. Any such amendment, including, by way of example, extension of the Completion Date, substitution • of the form of security, or approval of a change in the identity of the security provider/issuer, Page - 76 • • • Marquis Subdivision Preliminary Plan Supplemental Submittal shall be considered by the BOCC at a scheduled public meeting. If such an amendment includes a change in the identity of the provider/issuer of security, due to a conveyance of the Subdivision by the Owner to a successor in interest, Owner shall provide a copy of the recorded assignment document(s) to the BOCC, along with the original security instrument. Notwithstanding the foregoing, the parties may change the identification of notice recipients and contract administrators and the contact information provided in paragraph 18, above, in accordance with the provisions of that paragraph and without formal amendment of this SIA and without consideration at a BOCC meeting. 12. COUNTERPARTS. This SIA may be executed in counterparts, each of which shall be deemed an original, and all of which, when taken together, shall be deemed one and the same instrument. 13. VENUE AND JURISDICTION. Venue and jurisdiction for any cause arising out of or related to this SIA shall lie with the District Court of Garfield County, Colorado, and this SIA shall be construed according to the laws of the State of Colorado. Page - 77 • • • Marquis Subdivision Preliminary Plan Supplemental Submittal IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties have signed this SIA to be effective upon the date of Final Plat Approval for the Subdivision. BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS ATTEST: OF GARFIE LD COUNTY, COLORADO By: Clerk to the Board Chairman Date: OWNER By: Samuel Austin Marquis Jr. Registered Agent (Name and Title) Date: STATE OF COLORADO ) )ss. COUNTY OF GARFIELD ) Subscribed and sworn to before me by , an authorized representative of , Owner of the Subdivision, this day of , 2010. WITNESS my hand and official seal. My commission expires: Page - 78 Notary Public Marquis Subdivision Preliminary Plan Supplemental Submittal Marquis Subdivision Preliminary Plan Supplemental Submittal Materials. This information is submitted in response to a request from County planner Kathy A. Eastley for additional information for the Marquis Subdivision Preliminary Plan application. In response to the request the following materials and information are provided. Water Supply for Lot lA Lot lA is served by an existing "late registered" well. This well produces 13.33 gallons per minute and is approved, in place and sufficient for the existing use. A copy of the well permit is included below. Form No. GWS -25 APPLICANT OFFICE OF THE STATE ENGINEER COLORADO DIVISION OF WATER RESOURCES 618 Centennial Eerie, 1313 Snennan51. Derner. Cods 10)243 (3.03t 566-3581 WELL PERMIT NUMBER 281492 DIV. 5 W038 DES. BASIN MD CE -MAR -SAM CO LLLP C/O SAMUEL AUSTIN MARQUIS JR 667 FAIRFIELD LANE LOUISVILLE, CO 80027- (303) 938-534 PERMIT TO USE AN EXISTING WELL APPROVED WELL LOCATION GARFIELD COUNTY NE 1/4 NE 1/4 Section 23 Township 7 S Range 88 W Sixth P.M. DISTANCES FROM SECTION LINES 409 Ft from North Section Line 930 Ft. from East Section Line UTM COORDINATES (Meters Zone:13,NAD83( Easting: Northing: ISSUANCE OF THIS PERMIT DOES NOT CONFER A WATER RIGHT CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL 1) This well shall be used M such a way as to cause no material injury to existing water rights. The issuance of this permr, does not ensure Mat no injury will occur to another vested water right or preclude another owner of a vested water 951 11040 seeking relief in a civil court action. 2) Construction details for this exiang well have not been provided to this office: therefore, it is not known it the construction of this well is in compliance with the Water Well Construction Rules, 2 CCR 402-2 The issuance of this permit does not relieve the well owner of responsibility e liability in the everil contamination 01 15 groundwater source results from the construction or use of this well, nor does the State Engineer assume any responsibility or fiability should contamination Occur 3) This well is rec)rded and permit approved in acccrdance with CRS 37-92.602(5) for historical use as indicated herein and described in CRS 37-92-602(1)(0), being a well producing 13.33 GPM and used for ordinary household purposes inside one (1) single family dwelling, fire protectioi, the watering of domestic animals and poultry, and the irrigation of not more than one (1) acre of home gardens and (awns. 4) Approved as a well on a tract of land of 4 19 acres described as that portion of 04 55 1)401 the NE 1/4, Sec. 23, Twp, 7 South, Rag 88 West, 6th P M., Garfield County, more particularly descriued on the attached exhibit A. Further identified as 0955 County Road 112, Carbondale, CO 81623, 5) Approved for an amended (clarified) legal desuiption. the installation of a pump in, and the of use (verification of histonc use) an existing well, constructed on June 30. 1966, to a depth of 157 feet, without a valid p0451 014 later recorded fur use under permit no. 104391 (canceled), Issuance of this permit hereby cancels permit no. 104391. 6) The date of first beneficial use, as claimed by the applicant, is June 30, 1966 NOTE:This well was decreed as Marquis Well no. 1 in Division 5 Water Court case no. 79CW0078. This well was decreed for 0.029 OS (1333 gallons per m(nute) The total depth 0185 well 5 decreed as 157 leet, At the 44(0 01 the every of this decree with the court on October 14, 1979, the welt owner was: Austin Margus: 4500 Grape Syet, Denver. CO. NOTE: Parcel identification Number (PIN): 23-2393-231-00,279 NOTE. Assessor Tax Schedule Number. R111625 (totaling 50.7 acres) APPROVED DMW State E. i Receipt No. 95032789 DATE ISSUED 08-20-2009 EXPIRATION DATE Page - 1 Marquis Subdivision Preliminary Plan Supplemental Submittal Wastewater. Lot lA is served by an existing septic system that was approved and permitted by Garfield County. No change is proposed to this facility. Adjacent Ownership. The adjacent ownership information submitted with the application extended 250 feet from the boundary of the 50.7 acre parcel. This boundary includes the proposed new 5.0 acre parcel. The County regulations require identification of property owners within 200 feet of the subject property. The only change in the list of property from the original to the owners within 200 feet of the 50.7 acre parcel is the elimination of the Nan Kelly, 1022 County Rd. 112, Carbondale, CO 81623 - Parcel Number 239324200339. Mineral Ownership. The minerals on the property are owned by the surface property owner who is also the applicant. Stewart title, the company that completed the property title confirmed that the surface owner also owns the minerals in the following memo that was e-mailed to Western Slope Consulting, LLC on December 22, 2009. Davis, this email is regarding the property described in Stewart Title File No. 20070355-C3. The Schedule B2 Exceptions do not disclose any documents that would have severed the minerals from the surface estate. Please let me know if you need anything further. Thanks, Melanie Lang Title Officer Stewart Title (970) 766-0233 direct (970) 926-0235 fax 97 Main Street, Suite W-201 Edwards, CO 81632 mlang@stewart.com Subdivision Improvements Agreement. No public improvements are associated with the Marquis Subdivision. Privately owned improvements will consist of a gravel driveway consistent with the design submitted in the preliminary plan, improvements required by the Garfield County Road Bridge Department at the intersection of County Rd. 112 and the driveway, revegetation-weed control measures and minor drainage management consistent with the engineered drawings. The applicant anticipates completing these improvements prior to recordation of the Final Plat. Therefore, a subdivision improvements agreement and associated surety will not be required. In the event that Garfield County regulations and/or approvals require submission of a subdivision improvements agreement, the applicant anticipates submitting a subdivision improvements agreement in association with the Final Plat. The details of any such document will comply with all County requirements and will be negotiated with the County Attorney in conjunction with the Final Plat process. Homeowners Association & Covenants. No homeowners association or covenants are proposed for the Marquis Subdivision. The reference to a homeowners association and covenants in the ISDS Management Plan is an error. Long-term management of the ISDS system and maintenance of that obligation is proposed to be accomplished with a plat note or another mechanism acceptable to Garfield County that obligates the property owner to long- term maintenance and operation of the ISDS system. Page - 2 Marquis Subdivision Preliminary Plan Supplemental Submittal Recorded Statement of Authority. The application includes signed and notarized consent documents from all of the partners in the Ce- MarSam Co. LLLP authorizing Samuel A. Marquis Jr. to handle the affairs and represent all interests associated with the Marquis subdivision preliminary plan and final plat applications. The applicant is not clear about a requirement in the Garfield County Land -Use Regulations for a "recorded statement of Authority". The applicant will be seeking additional clarification and discussions with the Garfield County planning staff about this requirement and will submit additional materials as required by the Unified Land -Use Resolution (ULUR) of 2008. Attachments. Items 12, 13 and 14 of Schedule B of the Stewart Title Commitment. The following attachments were obtained from the Garfield County Clerk and Recorder's Office to satisfy the request for items 12, 13 and 14 of Schedule B of the title commitment. Page - 3 Marquis Subdivision Preliminary Plan Supplemental Submittal ATTACHMENTS TI w x , f iR3Z ati c fie7; C.o4nt;', t:alcresdu £fir ar, ex:4pt -" L ," and "suudisiide ? land wi=.fd} us m trc c, rd *he Sui ni3. olatado, « nt d .' xruar-: 2, 1979, Sec c<.'vi kion of a> 32.0 acre tract des cr:he t i esti described 'i' )acument iso. 31 ad w s £fico of the Cie rk and Recorder o= c>urti.eld t7, t torr into 3 tracts of approxitaately 5.0, 5.0, -9 74 9cres c, ore or less, whichproposed r.ded is _t c,,1 1y described as follows: ct of land situated in the NEltNEk of Sac .t South', Range 88 West of the 6tn Pricipal c16 Counry, Colorado, .,o being more par- es a point on the %orti'ori. 10dcrr brass capfound in place and properly arker-c,r tlt rr a r lea= Goroer of said Section 23 nears S 89`24'00 f: 711..44 fe t; thence South 202.99 feet to rte centerline of a cutch: Lh�.c ta1oug said ditch centerline an .he fnliawing courses: :S°30'34" W 87.37 feet: thence N 51'59'52" W 111.58 feet: tt;"crr'_ 66°06'57"1,1 31.13 feet; :hence S 85'18`55" W 31.96 feet; , nee S 45°12'27" W 109.29 : et: thence S 2J)'00'00" id 93.66 fort' t tl orae'. leavinn said ditch centerline on tt er's::r;o hearing South for 222.00 thence West 272.32-3 _ t, rto a pc't on the Westerly teundary dine of the: '.4., c .'.�:: Sect'. . thence N 01-°50'21" E 548.36 feet alonp the Uen to y .,i7J. of the S;v*;P ,-. s said Section 23 to t'ac .,..rthwe t .,_ .. !;^?'. of said Section 23: thnca c r v:)rt tccri!! 'C c> xndara line of Tract B: A t.rr;ct. of 1::: Township 7 South, 2aance Garfield County, i':rl or dc, Westerly right-of-way particularly d Beginning at:. Section 23, with No. 112 whence 9: ctsa the Northeast feet; ti cecc aloc3 No. 132 co the ..... S 25°0';' 30" t: leaving the 'Weo7.. Marquis Subdivision Preliminary Plan Supplemental Submittal ough tia procee iS, the Petitioner has demonstrated to the ounty Commissioners of Garfield County,Colored able Probability of locating domestic water on each of sax is adequate ingress and egress to said tracts, that the loca tanks will be permitted by the Colorado Department of Health;; ted division 'is not part of an existing or larger development 4. *-thin the general purposes and intent of the subdivision reg' he state of Colorado and the County of Garfield, and should, therif' exempted from the definition of the terms "subdivision" and 'ubdiv & set forth in ..-_-S. 1973, 5' '` _ 1; (al— amended; NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the divisi.an'of the above cribed tracts "A" and "B", from the above described 32.0 acre tract is eby exempted from such definitions and said tract may be divided into tracts and "B", all as is more fully described above, and said divided tract may conveyed in the form of such smaller tracts without further compliance with" aforesaid subdivision statutes and regulations; provided, however, that_this emption is granted en the condition and with the express understanding and eement of the Petitioner that no further exemptions be allowed on said is "A" and "3", and that a copy of the instrument or instruments of conveyanc shall be filed with this Resolution. ATTEST; Deputy Clerk. of. the Board of County Commissioners CarfieloCounty, Colorado R1 C,_ aT�F C. T�., _,yay Larry, Vela <Iu'='a Flavor: ; Cerise Page - 5 9 isi:'iw yr COCNTY COMMISSIONERS OF GARFIELD COUNTY, COLORADO By: Chairman Marquis Subdivision Preliminary Plan Supplemental Submittal C.C-J 1Vld IN3141511POV ANVON110E1 3 O Marquis Subdivision Preliminary Plan Supplemental Submittal Recorded at . M. >CT 01 VW Reception No. ` " `tea ALAOORF, RECORDER GARE1ELD COUNTY, COLORADO DECLARATION OF PROTECTIVE COVENANTS AND RESTRICTIONS FOP THE MARQUIS,/WALLBA *: ..�N ARY ADJUSTMENT PLAT 122 r 2711 THIS DECLARATION is made on the date hereinafter set forth by Austin Marquis (hereinafter referred to as the "Declarant"); W I T N E S S E T H: WHEREAS, the Declarant situate in the County of is the owner of all real property Garfield and State of Colorado described as the Marquis/Wal (hereinafter referred to as appears upon the Plat thereof 1987, as Reception No. 38322` R:ec o:ew ;>f Garfield Cour:`=. , lbank Boundary Adjustment Plat the "Development") as the same recorded for record on June 29, fn the C`. f ice of the Clerk and WHEREAS, the Declarant, being desirous of protecting pro- perty and protecting the health, convenience, and welfare of the owners of the lots in the Development, does hereby publish and declare that the following terms, covenants, uses, conditions, restrictions, limitations, and obligations shall be deemed to run with the land located within the Development and shall be a burden upon and a benefit to any person or persons acquiring or owning any interest in the Development and the real property owned by such persons, their grantees, successors, heirs, devisees, personal representatives, and assigns. __O DEFINITIONS. As used fn these Protective Covenants, �F i ng words and £ ren - ?' L have the following meanings: 1.1 "ACC" shall mean the Architectural_ Control Committee for the Development. 1.2 "Lot" shall mean any lot, tract, or parcel of land in the Development. 1.3 "Owner" shall mean the owner of a lot created within the Development and shall also mean the owner of water rights designated for use within the Development. 1.4 "Development" shall mean the Marquis/W ilbank Boundary Adjustment Plat, as r..es .ribed above. 1.5 "Unit" shall mean a residential dwelling unit. 2.0 PLAN FOR AUGMENTATION. The use of water on each lot shall comply with and be subject to the terms and conditions of the Plan for Augmentation decreed in Case No. S7CW100 ih the Water Court in and for water Division No. 5, as the some may be amended and as recorded in the Office of the Clerk a04 001904sr of Garfield County in Book — at rage , Recepl1O11 01114 Page - 7 Marquis Subdivision Preliminary Plan Supplemental Submittal BC'K 7 2 Fl1E273 The Decree entered in said case is incorporated herein re nce and shall be binding upon the owners. All owners shall resochle to maintain contracts with the Basalt Water 'Con:-iervancy in tuil force and effect; to drill wells and complete well drilling reports, pump reports, statements of beneficial use, and other matters necessary to maintain well permits in good standing; and to apply to make absolute or to maintain reasonable diligence on the water rights owned by them. All sewage systems shall be of non -evaporative type approved by all appropriate health officials. 3.0 ENFORCEMENT OF PROTECTIVE COVENANTS. Any owner shall have the right to enforce all covenants herein imposed by a pro- ceeling at law or in equity. Failure by any owner to enforce any covenant or restriction herein contained shall in no event .ieened a waiver of the r? vht to enforce these covenants or. ._-ereafter. 4.0 RESIDENTIAL PURPOSE. All lots shall be used only for residential purposes, provided that one barn, garage, or othei outbuilding may be constructed in addition to a residence on any lot, and provided further that no land within the Development shall be occupied or used for any commercial or business pur- pose. No barn or accessory structure may exceed fifteen percent (15%) of the total square footage of the principal structure, as measured from the outside of foundation walls, unless approved by the ACC. The barns and accessory structures shall be so designed as to blend with and complement the general architec- t ra scheme oz the principal structure. All barns anu a; ess ry structures shall be located entirely within the envelope, for the payti.cula4. lot, if applicable. No ispiay, stock in trade, o outside storage equipment, signs, or other external advertising shall be permitted. 5.0 STRUCTURES AND LANDSCAPING IN THE DEVELOPMENT. 5.1 Building Envelope. All structures in the Development shall be designed to blend into and complement the natural surroundings. All structures shall be sited on each lot by the owner and approved by the ACC. Unless varied by the provisions of Paragraph 13.7, infra, no structure on Lots 2, 5, or 6 shall be constructed out- side the building envelopes for such lots as shown on Exhibit "A" attached hereto and incorporated herein by this reference. :in.; a _ _ruct:Ire, the ACC shall approve its location as near to the spot selected by the owner as shall not impede or restrict the view plane of other owners and otherwise meet the criteria set forth in Paragraph 13.4, infra. 5.2 Minimum SizejHeight. The minimum size of each single - T roily structure shall be not Less than 1000 square feet of habitat floor area, exclusive of open porches, garages, or carports, as measured from the extstnei —2— Page - 8 Marquis Subdivision Preliminary Plan Supplemental Submittal nne274 foundation we] ls . No structure shall be permitted on any lot or tract which exceeds twenty-four ( 24) feet in heicht measure,',.! -e ave, -e natural finished grade Lire immed i at TJning the foundatior- to the average roof height, unless exempted by the ACC upon review of plans based on the criteria set forth in Paragraph 13.4, infra. 5.3 Restrict ions on Antennae. No electronic antennae or device of any type, other than an antennae for receiving normal television signals, shall be erected, constructed, or placed or permitted to remain on any lot. A television antenna may be attached to a struc- ture ; provided, however, the antenna's location shall De restricted to the rear of the structure or to the rear of the ridge 1 i ne, gable, or centerline of the pr dwe id de n from c; igh t No tele vi s ion or iaC shall be peridltted unless approved by the ACC, which may condition any approval upon appropri ..ce screening. 5.4 New Construction. No structure shall be erected by means of other than new construction, it being the pur- pose of this covenant to insure that old buildings will not be moved from previous locations and placed upon a lot. Exteriors of all structures shall be constructed of either stone or lumber, or a combination thereof. The use of cinderblock shall not be allowed unless it is faced with another material herein approved. Landscaping shall blend with natural vegetation. No tree shall he rer:-r- wr ithout approval of the ACC, unless 4:ne ree or trees are dead, dying ,or diseased. All areas cut, filled, or disturbed by any construction or other activity shall be fully restored and revege t a ted . 6.0 UTILITY LINES AND EASEMENTS. No new gas lines, powe' lines, telephone lines, or television cables shall be permitted on Lots 2, 5, or 6 unless said lines are buried underground or overhead and out of sight of other lot owners' building site views from their primary source to the structure and at the owner's expense. Easements for installation and maintenance of 1 ties are reserved as shown on the Plat and no permanent structure shall be erected on any of said easements and no er al encrc-achments may t -h K e pla.-e over such easements. Nei trier the Declarant or ar utility company or gove rrueental entity using the easements shall b" liable for any damages done by any of them or their assigns, agents, or employees to the shrubbery. trees, flowers, or improvements of the owner located on the land covered by said easements. 7.0 LIMITATION ON CERTAIN STRUCTUREO. No structure shell be placed on any lot which is or ever has been or could be fade the subject of a specific ownership tax as now clef ined t Title -3- Page - 9 Marquis Subdivision Preliminary Plan Supplemental Submittal 13-e /22 Fe11215 42 cf tne Colorado Revised Statutes, nor shall structures constructed in the manner fashion of mobile houses be allowed. it is the inent these covenants to prohibit the use of mobile houses as residences within the Development. No structure of a temporary character, trailer, basement, tent, or shack of any description shall be used on any lot except on a temporary basis, not exceeding six months, by the construction company constructing a structure on a lot or tract. 8.0 FENCES. Architectural screen fences, limited to six (6) feet above ground level and constructed of natural wood, are allowed provided they are attached to the primary building. Open post and rail fences, limitee to four (4) feet above ground lovel and constructed of unfinished natural wood poles, are allowed provided they are located so as to not unduly disrupt 7atral trush an tree veqe-nor n -;se soil erosion and are apprT)ved Dy the ACC. 9.0 LIVESTOCK. No horses, cows, pigs, chickens, poultry, rabbits, or other livestock shall be raised, grown, bred, main- tained, or cared for upon any lot other than as hereinafter pro- vided; provided, however, that nothing herein contained shall prevent any owner of any lot from maintaining, keeping, and caring for domestic, household pets not for commercial purposes. Said lots must be maintained in a clean and odor -free condition. Dogs must be kept on owner's property and maintained so as ant to disturb wildlife. o.n VEHICLES. Vehicles which are unlicensed shall not be or maintained on the freses for a period in excess of fifteef, (15) days follewin tne expiration oi. such license, except such vehicle may be stored in a garage or otherwise screened from view from all other lots within the Developniant and from all commonly used roadways within the Development. Recreation vehicles, such as camping vans or trailers, boats, snowmobiles, and other off-road devices shall be parked or stored out of sight. Motorcycles shall not be operated in the Development, except that they may be utilized for transportation in and out of the Development. No off-road vehicles, including snowmobiles, shall be operated in the Development. 11.0 STORAGE OF MATERIALS. Premises must be kept neat and de (i Except for paseei„, ;.nicee and pickups, no motor vehi:.les, construction equipment, or heavy equipment may be stored for more than twenty-four (24) hours. •;.2 All trash containers and storage tanks must be enclosed in a structure or opaque fence. 11.3 Except for firewood, no lumber, metals, scrap, or building material may be stored except during construction. -4- Page- 10 Marquis Subdivision Preliminary Plan Supplemental Submittal 722 PitiaM LLSCHARGi'. OF FlREARMS. There shall be no discharge of arm pon ,,,xceot for sel..-defense or :t • pc ;:,pe, rt.y 13.•, AR,:flITF,C-RAC CONTROL COMMITTEE (ACC). Sa:omital of Plans. No improvements of any kind, 1Aling but not limited to dwellings, drives, ,4araes, tennis courts, swimming pools, fences, barns, arvt Dutbuildings may be constructed or altered on any larvls within the Development unless three (3) complete n)f architectural plans and specifications for such odstr,stion are submitted to the ACC prior to the . ommennement of such work. Required drawings shall nclude: a site plan depicting structuras, yards, fences, utli.es,.s,te drainage, and land- all.:Lans and elevations of the strct:re(s); and a description of the exterioz mat_erials to he used. The ACC will notify all adjacent landowners nf the time and place of their review of the All decisions of the ACC shall be in wrIting. One set of such plans and specifications !-m)in on file and become a permanent record of r,▪ ne ;CC. In the event the WC fails to take any action w itnn thirty (30) days after complete architectural :-Ians and specifications for such work have been sub- -dtted to it, then all of such pians and specifications na]l be deemed to be approved. of ACC. Ths ACC snail exercise its best d,4ment to set- . all improvements, construction, Iterations on the land within the Onvelopment con - Ln and harmonize with the natural surroundings and wit't the existing structures as to external design, materials, color, setting, height, topography, grade, arv7.! finished ground elevation. Architectural Plans. Plans and specifications sub- mitted under Paragraph 13.1 hereof shall show the natre, Kind, shape, height, materials, floor plans, 1-),;ation, exterior color scheme, alterations, grading, and all other matters necessary for the ACC to properly 2nnsider and make a determination thereon. The ACC sha: ,lisapprove any architectural plans submitted to L wtdh are not :::•Icient for its to exercise the judgment required of it by these covenants. s.4 Architectural Standards. The ACC review and decisions shall be based upon the standards set forth in these covenants. In particular, it is the goal of the*, covenants that all unite blend in with the natural surroundings and be hidden from view to the ext*St practical. By becoming an owner, the owner atareeit thSt he and all occupants of the lot shall be bound by the requirements of these covenants. Page - 11 Marquis Subdivision Preliminary Plan Supplemental Submittal 7,2r2 r4(277 13_5 ConstructionSchedic. At any time that plans and specifications, gra.i.r. L)lans, and location have been approved, then :,:.:tractic.,-1 c.f. the same shall be carried. out forthwith and completion effected within twelve (12) months from the date construction is com- menced7 provided, however, that the cime limit on completion of construction may be extended by the ACC if unusual circumstances or delay beyond the control of the owner occur. Failure to complete constitutes revo- cation of approval and such structure shall be removed within forty-five (45) days of demand at the owner's expense. 13.6 Tine of Construction. Clean up of the site must be complete by tjme of occupancy. Landscaping and repair of site construction ars must be complted within one year from --- nhe issuance of the Certificate of Occupancy. 13.7 Variance. The ACC may orent a reasonable variance or adjustment of these cocditions and restrictions, including modifications to a building envelope,in order to overcome practical difficulties and prevent unnecessary hardships arising by reason of the applica- tio.i of restrictions contained herein. Such variances or adjustment shall be granted only in case the granting thereof shall not be materially detrimental air injurious to other property or improvements of the neighborhood and shall not defeat the general intent of these restrictions, 13.8 No Liability of ACC. The ACC shall not be liable in damages to any person or association submitting any architectural plans for approval or to any owner by reason of any action, failure to act, approval, disapproval, or failure to approve or disapprove with regard to such architectural plans. Any owner sub- mitting or causing to be submitted any plans and speci- fications to the ACC agrees and covenants that he will not bring an action or suit tri recover damages against the ACC collectively, its members individually, or its advisors or agents. 13.9 Right of Inspection The ACC an(' its duly -appointed agents or emplcy anter upon any property at any reasonable time or times for inspection of any structure. 13.10 ACC Members. The initial members of the ACC shall be: Lincoln Wallbank Austin marquis The ACC may be expanded by appointment by a majority of the then -constituted ACC. -6- Page - 12 Marquis Subdivision Preliminary Plan Supplemental Submittal 5"-e 122 1W2.718 J3 '.Reolaeement of ACC A majority of the ACC may designate a rece:esetative to act for it. Should a member resign or become unable to act, the, other mem- bers shall appoint a successor. Subsequent to the sale of all lots and tracts, one or more members may be replaced by written designation recorded in the Garfield County Clerk and Recorder's office showing approval by a majority of the owners. 14.0 SIGNS. No signs of any kind shall be displayed to the public view, except one sign of not more than five (5) square feet advertising the property for sale or rent, or signs used by a Ocilcler to advertise the property during the construction and s;Iriefi pu;iod, 15.3 HAZARDOUS ACTi5. Nc acT.iivities shall be con- ducted on any lot and no improvements constructed on any lot which are or might be unsafe or hazardous to any person or pro- perty. Without limiting the generality of the foregoing, no open fire shall be lighted or permitted on any lot excepting in a contained barbecue unit while attended and in use for cooking purposes or within a safe and well designed interior fireplace. 16.0 NOANNOYINGLIGHTS,SOUNDS,NRMOTORS. No light shall be emitted from any lot which is unreasonably bright or causes unreasonable glare. No sound shall be emitted from any lot which is unreasonably loud or annoying. No odor shall be emii from anylot which is noxious or offensive to others. 7.0 DRIVWAY CONS.4RuL. Ail driveways shall be constructed so as to meet minimum Garfield County specifications and all cut slopes for driveways shall not exceed one to one and one-half slopes and all areas disturbed shall be revegetated in conformance with the revegetation plan submitted by the deve- loper and approved by the County. 18.0 COVENANTSR0NWITH THE LAND. These covenants are to run with the land and shall be binding upon all parties and all persons claiming under them. 19.0 AM4NDMENT. Subject to compliance with the applicable sections of the Garfield County Land Use Code and so long as they are consistent with prin-r Carfield County land use appro- vals for this Development, tne Protective Covenants may be amended by an instrument signed by not less than seventy-five percent (75%) of the owners of the lots in the Development. Such amendments shall become effective upon the recordation thereof in Garfield County, Colorado. 20.0 SEVERABILITY. The invalidation of any one of these covenants by judgment or court order shall not affect any of the other provisions which shall remain in full rorce :And effect. Page - 13 Marquis Subdivision Preliminary Plan Supplemental Submittal Drat ti 8 day STATE OF COLORADO ) SS County of Garfield USTIN MARQUIS he foregoing instrument was acknowledged before r this „"e9._ day of 5/;4,o4r,e- , 1987, by AUSTIN MARQUIS . WITNESS my hand and official seal. My Commission expires: 6eT. 06,,* Page - 14 lictary Public .1 0 • -.4.07.: , 1111 Err! iyanoirommiii m, II 111 Reception#: 781381 02/01/2010 11:48:56 AM Jean Alberico 1 of 1 Rec Fee:$6.00 Doc Fee:0.00 GARFIELD COUNTY CO STATEMENT OF AUTHORITY Pursuant to C.R.S. §38-30-172, the undersigned hereby executes this Statement of Authority on behalf of Ce—Mar—Sam Co, LLLP a, Limited Liability Limited Partnership an entity other than an individual, capable of holding title to real property (the "Entity"), and states as follows: The name of the Entity is Ce—Mar—Sam Co, LLLP a Colorado Limited Partnership (state type of entity and state, country, or other governmental authority under whose laws such entity is formed) The mailing address for the Entity is 567 Fairfield Lane, Louisville, CO 80027 The name or position of the person authorized to execute instruments conveying, encumbering, or other affecting title to real property on behalf of the Entity is: Samuel Austin Marquis Jr. The limitations upon the authority of the person named above or holding the position described above to bind the Entity are as follows: All authority and actions associated with processing a subdivision Preliminary Plan and Final Plat with Garfield County, CO. (if no limitations, insert "None") Other matters concerning the manner in which the Entity deals with any interest in real property are: (if no other matters, leave this section blank) jh EXECUTED this I day of January• Signature: Name (typed or printed): Title (if any): STATE OF r ss. COUNTY OF ! J 2010 7\44 G 71-(e3/7- (.• C3 -ii-, The foregoin instrument wa acknowledged before me this I i day of -0—,nom-I• by '1C -S CSc, �;r'��'i;; , on behalf of Cf_.—f� t� r' L L L N , a Li r -k..8 L. +,-d 13,-4 f- r s n;p Witness my hand and official seal. My commission expires: j .( t,1 31 /� f D [SEAL] Notary Public DPW 116 02/07/02 SCOTT SANCHO Notary Public State of Connecticut Myi Commission Expires Jul 31, 2010 1111 tiir� N iN4l°iMl� lt ImirgiliFiliiglOitki 1111 Reception#: 781382 02/01/2010 11:48:56 RM Jean Alberico 1 of 1 Rec Fee:$6.00 Doc Fee:0.00 GARFIELD COUNTY CO STATEMENT OF AUTHORITY Pursuant to C.R.S. §38-30-172, the undersigned hereby executes this Statement of Authority on behalf of Ce -Mar -Sam Co, LLLP a, Limited Liability Limited Partnership an entity other than an individual, capable of holding title to real property (the "Entity"), and states as follows: The name of the Entity is Ce -Mar -Sam Co, LLLP a Colorado Limited Partnership (state type of entity and state, country, or other governmental authority under whose laws such entity is formed) The mailing address for the Entity is 567 Fairfield Lane, Louisville, CO 80027 The name or position of the person authorized to execute instruments conveying, encumbering, or other affecting title to real property on behalf of the Entity is: Samuel Austin Marquis Jr. The limitations upon the authority of the person named above or holding the position described above to bind the Entity are as follows: All authority and actions associated with processing a subdivision Preliminary Plan and Final Plat with Garfield County, CO. (if no limitations, insert "None") Other matters conceming the manner in which the Entity deals with any interest in real property are: (if no other matters, leave this section blank) EXECUTED this G day of January , 2010 Signature: c— Name (typed or printed): �=,c--crlc:y t.a Title (if any): t�� �- �= °�'� �- r' N- STATE OFSVLI, K D d1 ) ` ss. COUNTY OF ) C� The forego}} ,,ng instrument was acknowledged before me this � day of , Gio11,F.()_. r t by 1..t l (Gt, li\i' 6.- ( Li c. , on behalf of �L-- U a(- iA- 0,111P, ,a Iyr~,ktle_ck 11(A.h; Iltz.1 1iNit k» Pc-r+,tied. ,` p Witness my hand and official seal. My commission expires: (C ko( t (7 t3 oowntunini , •• 6). ?L-")( ;W�o [SEAI �1' •.•.O �'�., Notary Public ct ,c)j '� puB�‘L ,�� •• a .,,�1r......... 14 pS�,`���. DPW 116 02/07/02