Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2.02 Impact AnalysisIMPACT ANALYSIS Below are the evaluation criteria outlined in Section 4-203 G (Impact Analysis). We will address each criterion on a point by point basis. Where they do not apply, we will indicate with “NA” 1. Adjacent land use. Existing use of adjacent property/neighboring properties within 1500-foot radius. Response: The subject property is part of the Wooden Deer Subdivision which had a Preliminary plan approved in 1992. There are 22 single-family lots in the subdivision, and residential construction began in the mid-1990s. The subdivision is approximately 50% built out. Lot 2 is located at the north end of the subdivision at the highest point in elevation of the subdivision on Wooden Deer Road. The immediately adjacent properties are all single-family residential with the exception of land immediately to the West. That land to the West is owned by the Ryobi foundation and it is irrigated/agricultural land. Please note that the irrigated land is adjacent to County Road 103 and this is topographically separated from the subject lot. There are 2 other agricultural properties that lie within 1500-feet of the subject – though these are separated from the subject property by other single-family lots and are also separated topographically from the subject. To the northeast is the Crystal Springs Ranch LLC. Southeast of the subject property is the Dee Blue ranch – and this portion of the Blue property has a conservation easement in place. No impact is foreseen to these agricultural properties because of the topographical separation as well as the fact that other single- family properties lie between the subject and the Agricultural properties. 2. Site Features. A description a site features such as streams, areas subject to flooding, lakes, topography, vegetation cover etc. Response: The site is located generally at the northern boundary of the Wooden Deer subdivision and is located at the end of Wooden Deer Drive. The lot is relatively flat near the road and in the area of the proposed construction. Steep slopes exist to the West and South. Towards the east, the topography slopes gently towards the east. Vegetation is Piñon and sagebrush and related grasses. 3. Soil Characteristics: Response: We are not in possession of the Soils or Geotech Report that was submitted with the original subdivision application. We assume that findings by the County were satisfactory at 22 lots were approved for the subdivision. We have submitted the soils report that was originally done for Lot 2. 4. Geology and Hazard. a description of the geologic characteristics of the area including any potential natural or man-made hazards, and the determination of what effects such factors would have on the proposed use of land. Response: As this application is for simple ADU on a single-family lot presently undergoing construction, we are asking for a submittal waiver. 5. Groundwater and Aquifer Recharge Areas. Evaluation of the relationship of the subject parcel to floodplains, the nature of soils and subsoil’s and their ability to adequately support waste disposal, the slope of land, effect of sewage affluence, etc. Response: There should be no adverse impact to groundwater or aquifer recharge areas. The subject property is not located near any identified floodplain areas. A soils investigation was prepared by HP Geotech in 2001 and has been resubmitted as part of this application. Please note that the soils study was done for purposes of suitability of construction, foundation design etc. An On-site Wastewater Treatment System (OWTS) application was submitted in June 2017 for purposes of providing wastewater service to the subject property for single-family residence and the ADU. That application was submitted by All Service Septic, with an engineering review by Richard Petz, PE. That report is being resubmitted as part of this application. 6. Environmental Impacts. Determination of the existing environmental conditions of the parcel to be developed and the effect of development on those conditions, including: a. Determination of the long-term and short-term effect on flora and fauna; Response: Any long-term or short-term effects to flora should be minimal. Vegetation for a suitable building site has been cleared but clearing is minimal and related to vehicular access, clearing of site for actual construction and for protective space. Other parts the site will not be cleared. Effect on fauna should be minimal. b. Determination of the effect on designated environmental resources, including critical wildlife habitat; Response: Impacts from the ADU and a development on Lot 2 should be relatively minimal. A High Wildfire Designation appears to be the only critical development issue related to the lot. There may be some affects Mule Deer habitat, but even the should be minimal as the subdivision started build out in the mid-1990s that no significant changes in the surrounding area have occurred since that time. c. Impacts on wildlife and domestic animals through creation of hazardous attractions, alteration of existing native vegetation, blockade of migration routes, use patterns, or other disruptions; and Response: No significant impact foreseen. Alteration of existing vegetation is minimal – both for the subject property and the subdivision as a whole and in keeping with alterations that a been seen in other portions of Garfield County. No attractive or hazardous nuisances are being created. As with the creation of other single-family subdivisions typical of the Rural Zone District, some impact to deer migration may have occurred at a low level, but this is an impact from the subdivision and other surrounding subdivision and not created by this lot or proposed land-use change by itself. No new lots are being created and the ADU is part of the proposed single-family residence which is already received the building permit. d. Evaluation of any potential radiation hazard that may have been identified by the state or County Health Departments. Response: To our knowledge, no known radiation hazards were identified during the original subdivision approval process. 7. Nuisance. Impact to adjacent land from generation of vapor, dust, smoke, noise, glare or vibration, or other emanations. Response: No projected impacts related to, vapor, dust, smoke, noise etc. Subject property will have an ultimate land use of the single-family residence and an ADU which is compatible with the adjacent properties in the subdivision and in the surrounding area. No commercial or industrial activities are allowed or foreseen. 8. Hours of Operation. NA.