HomeMy WebLinkAbout2.0 Staff ReportRIFLE CREEK RANCH-Subdivisiortetch Plan
Owner:
Surveyor/Engineer:
Location:
Site:
Water:
Sewer:
Roads:
Existing Zoning:
Adjacent Zoning:
Relationship to the comp. plan:
Description of Proposal:
Major Concerns and issues:
•
Kay Robinson -0115 Highway 251, Rifle, CO 816
Solar Country and Associates
Lockwood, Andrews and Newman, Inc.
810 Main Street
Silt, CO 81652
Approximately 2 miles north of the City
of City of Rifle on State Highway 325.
The total property acreage is 47.94 acres.
Part of the site is on a benched east facing
slope and the other part of the site lies
on the east side of Highway 325 on
relatively flat irrigated pasture.
To come from a central water system supplied
from a central well covered by a plan for
augmentation.
Individual septic systems.
The applicant is proposing 50' R.O.W.
roads that average in grade below 8% but
may have a section on the steep portion of
10%.
A/R/RD (Agricultural/Residential/Rural Density.,
North: A/R/RD
South: A/R/RD
East: A/R/RD
West: A/R/RD
The property lies within management District
b-2, an area with moderate enviromental
constraints adjacent to a subdivision
(Rifle Creek Estates) with central water.
The density in Rifle Creek Estates is
1 D.U./2 acres: The proposal has an average
lot size of 2.3 acres. The comp. plan
indicates that new development in District B
should tie into the existing subdivisions
water supply where feasible.
This is a propose' 'or 16 sir:o,n ily
units on 47.94 ages. -4, nnlicant proposes
a central water s./strr and individual septic
systems on each lot. Access would be from
two county spec. roads which access off State
Highway 325.
The project lies within District B which in this
area, would allow the development of 2 acre
lots. Rifle Creek Estates is the existing sub-
division that established District B and has an
average lot size of 2 acres.
CONCERNS: 1) The area along Rifle Creek should
be dedicated for public access as is indicated
in the comp. plan.
2) Some of the lots on the steep slopes may not
have suitable building sites that would allow
the development of standard septic systems.
3) The roads as proposed have 50' right-of-way
and in some areas approach 10% grades. The
county road standard requires 60' ROW with grades
not exceeding 8%.
4) A copy of the approved augmentation plan
should be available at the preliminary plat
stage.
•
5) These comment have been prepared prior to a
site review and are subject to modification after
a review of the site.
6) Lots 1, 2, & 10 have questionable building
sites and possibly should be eliminated.
FINDINGS: This proposal generally fits the provision of
the comp. plan for density and land use criteria.
RECOMMENDATION: The staff recommends approval with the following
conditions:
1) That each lot have at least 1 acre of buildable
area when shown on preliminary plat.
2) That all of the roads in the subdivision
be .c on9tructed to co .# f¢4+ut wCo.'cod.S'tv%o✓
3)Nqia.kt e oppdty.sl•kif`l Neek
be de c e fo pu is c .
4) That the county receive a copy of an
approved augmentation plan at preliminary plat.
me UR$ 2>./Ace.
42v.,x5F)
0,4)o-•-.041 et& Zvt.64523 �. S