The URL can be used to link to this page

Browse Search

Home My WebLink About20061405.tiff aQyy EXHIBIT D K'A MEMORANDUM TO: Peter Schei, Public Works DATE: February 27, 2006 C FROM: David Bauer, Public Works a COLORADO SUBJECT: Review of Torgerson PUD proposal to detain offsite property drainage Jeff Couch and Mikal Torgerson have requested that the detention pond located on the PF-1066 site (Sec 32, T8N, R66W), be utilized to also detain water from the adjacent undeveloped site (also Sec 32, T8N, R66W) also currently owned by Torgerson. Both sites currently receive additional offsite flows from undeveloped properties located to the west. Public Works drainage staff reviewed the drainage report and drainage portion of the Torgerson PUD construction plans and evaluated the potential capacity of the proposed Torgerson PUD detention pond to handle the additional offsite flows. COMMENTS: The Torgerson PUD 'Final' drainage report by Jeff Couch (P.E. 16584) dated January 9, 2006 was reviewed. The report calculations correctly identify pre- and post-construction 'C' factors for the 77.5 acre Torgerson PUD site. The drainage report provides calculations for proposed sizing of an approximately 20 acre-foot capacity Mention pond to be located in the northwest corner of the Torgerson PUD site. Details of pond outlet structure design were not provided. Per current Weld County Code (24-7-130), the detention pond must be sized to detain the 100-year flows from the developed site and release those flows at a rate equal to the 5-year storm falling on the undeveloped (historical condition) site. Proposed developments receiving undetained and/or detained flows from offsite must provide for safe conveyance of those offsite flows through their site. The Torgerson PUD applicant has requested that the proposed detention pond in the Torgerson PUD site also be approved for detention for the adjacent 81.8 acres (Western tract) for a combined 'service area' of approximately 159 acres. In addition to the offsite 81.8 acre Western tract, stormwater runoff from additional areas to the west and north also currently flow to and through the Torgerson PUD site. 1. For approval of the Torgerson PUD Final Plat and plans, the applicant is requested to provide engineering design calculations and exhibits showing the safe and effective passage of the historic stormwater runoff flows from the additional areas to the west and north must be provided through the Torgerson PUD site. 2. The applicant is requested to provide engineering design calculations and exhibits showing that the proposed 24-inch storm drainage pipe under Torgerson Way is sized sufficient to pass developed onsite flows and any offsite flows draining to that area. 3. For approval of the Torgerson PUD Final Plat and plans, the applicant is requested to provide engineering design calculations and exhibits showing that the detention pond outlet structure is designed and constructed to release at the 5-year historic rate for just the PUD site. The relationship between the proposed outlet structure, pipe inverts and maximum water levels in the Pierce Lateral Ditch shall be provided as a condition of approval of the Torgerson PUD Final Plat and plans. 4. The Torgerson PUD construction plans (Final Plat documents) shall have a note stating that the Torgerson PUD pond outlet structure may be modified to release at the approved combined PUD and 81 acre Western tract rate when that property receives Final Plat approval. The proper re-sizing of the 2006-1405 Torgerson PUD detention pond outlet shall be determined and approved at some future date when the Western tract proposed development plans have been approved. 5. For approval of the Torgerson PUD Final Plat and plans, the applicant is requested to provide engineering design calculations and exhibits showing that the PUD detention pond design includes an emergency overflow spillway designed to pass the 100-year peak flow from all contributing areas. 6. For approval of the Torgerson PUD Final Plat and plans, the applicant is requested to provide engineering design calculations and exhibits showing that the Torgerson PUD drainage system can safely convey the all undetained Western tract 100-year historic flows to the Torgerson PUD detention pond. 7. For approval of the Torgerson PUD Final Plat and plans, the applicant is requested to provide engineering design calculations and exhibits showing that the Torgerson PUD drainage system can safely convey the all other 100-year historic flows to and through the Torgerson PUD site. If those other offsite historic flows flow through the Torgerson PUD detention pond, designs showing the flow paths should be submitted. 8. A signed approval and easement from the Pierce lateral Ditch Company to accept the rates and volumes of developed runoff shall be provided as a condition of approval of the Torgerson PUD Final Plat and plans. 9. All drainage facilities (detention ponds, berms, pipes, and swales) must be in dedicated easements. RECOMMENDATION: The proposed 20 ac-ft detention pond on the Torgerson PUD site appears to be sufficient to handle the combined 100-year flows from the 77.5 acre Torgerson PUD and adjacent 81.8 acre Western tract properties. A separate detention pond is not needed for the Western tract provided that the developed flows from the __Western tract and any other contributing areas are safely conveyed to the PUD pond. The Torgerson PUD iond outlet structure may be modified to release at the approved combined PUD and 81 acre Western tract rate (159 acres total) when Western tract property receives Final Plat approval. Until that time, the Torgerson PUD pond outlet structure should be release at the appropriate 5-year historic rate for the 77.5 acres and pass all offsite flows over the spillway. PC:PF-I066-TorgersonPUD-offsiteDrainageReview Email&Original:Planner:Kim Ogle PC by Post: Applicant:Mikal Torgerson PC by Post: Engineer:Jeff Couch w/TEAM Engineering M\PLANNING-DEVELOPMENT REVIEWI3-Final Plat(PF,MF,MJFpPF-1066-TorgersonpUD-affsiteDrainageReaew.doc a Kit s,'" ,%) Weld County Referral 111kMarch 25, 2006 COLORADO The Weld County Department of Planning Services has received the following item for review: Applicant Mikal Torgerson Case Number PF-1066 Please Reply By April 26, 2006 Planner Kim Ogle Project Final Plat, Torgerson PUD for Nine Lots with E (Estate)Zone Uses along with 28.4 acres of open space. Legal Lot B of RE-2681; Pt of the SE4 of Section 32, TON, R66W of the 6th P.M., Weld County, Colorado. Location North of and adjacent to CR 86; 1/4 mile west of CR 29, Parcel Number 0553 32 000038 The application is submitted to you for review and recommendation. Any comments or recommendation you consider relevant to this request would be appreciated. Please reply by the above listed date so that we may give full consideration to your recommendation. Any response not received before or on this date may be deemed to be a positive response to the Department of Planning Services. If you have any further questions regarding the application, please call the Planner associated with the request. Please note that new information may be added to applications under review during the review process. If you desire to examine or obtain this additional information, please call the Department of Planning Services. Weld County Board of County Commissioners Hearing May 24, 2006 ❑ . have reviewed the request and find that it does/does not comply with our Comprehensive Plan We re have reviewed the request and find no conflicts with our interests. ❑ See attached letter. Comments: 1.1?1, AJ�,-04,)(2 /fl (1(v// 1-C24i?r/l/'j('-� 71/7✓7d / "---/ -74- )17/2_//,j /, i f Pr kc/ Signature (� /7 -(6,.1 Date V-3.(162 Agency /11 2/ /� EXHIBIT 111... +Weld County Planning Dept. +4209 County Road 24.5,Longmont,CO 80504 +(720)652-4210 ext.8730 4 ri.,.... 0 s ce Weld County Referral 111kMarch 25, 2006 COLORADO The Weld County Department of Planning Services has received the following item for review: Applicant Mikal Torgerson Case Number PF-1066 Please Reply By April 26, 2006 Planner Kim Ogle Project Final Plat, Torgerson PUD for Nine Lots with E (Estate)Zone Uses along with 28.4 acres of open space. Legal Lot B of RE-2681; Pt of the SE4 of Section 32, T8N, R66W of the 6th P.M., Weld County, Colorado. Location North of and adjacent to CR 86; 1/4 mile west of CR 29. Parcel Number 0553 32 000038 The application is submitted to you for review and recommendation. Any comments or recommendation you consider relevant to this request would be appreciated. Please reply by the above listed date so that we may give full consideration to your recommendation. Any response not received before or on this date may be deemed to be a positive response to the Department of Planning Services. If you have any further questions regarding the application, please call the Planner associated with the request. Please note that new information may be added to applications under review during the review process. If you desire to examine or obtain this additional Information, please call the Department of Planning Services. Weld County Board of County Commissioners Hearing May 24, 2006 ❑ We have reviewed the request and find that it does/does not comply with our Comprehensive Plan ❑ We have reviewed the request and find no conflicts with our interests. rii See attached letter. Comments: 1 Signature {" )_ 2LU1'\ <�`��i( � Date C' r " _p 7 26 \_3J Agency ikd es./es./ ci \Y:N1 DiCkc CJ C.ws_k_ Cc EXHIBIT (-Weld County Planning Dept. }4209 County Road 24.5,Longmont,CO 80504 4(720)652-4210 ext.8730 }(7. I I ! I Highland Schools Weld Re-9 F�0 Box our+ 4LIIC CC 1 ,'L9J iJ s;(),634 345 Educational ill Excellence Through April 7, 2006 Community Weld County Planning partment Unification SW!Ttl1�lEST BUILDDeING Mikal Torgerson 223 North College Ave APR 1 3 2006 Fort Collins CO 80524 ,EIVE C RE: PF-1066 ® Dear Mr. Torgerson, Weld RE-9 School District with district offices located in Ault Colorado has adopted a methodology to determine an in-lieu a p yment for residential dwelling units sufficient to provide adequate educational opportunities for children who will be living in new residential developments. The school district methodology has been developed in a manner so as to fairly apportion the cost of acquiring school sites made necessary by residential development. The total in-lieu payment per parcel of land separated from the original unit with the intent of future residential development is $759. The plan for the property described in PF-1066 will result in nine residential lots being created;therefore, your total in-lieu payment is $6,831. Payment should be hand delivered to the Weld RE-9 School District Administration Office, 210 West First Street, Ault, or mailed to Weld RE-9 School District, P.O. Box 68, Ault, Colorado 80610. Please include your Recorded Exemption (RE) number for reference. A receipt will be mailed to the party requesting the exemption. Please direct any questions to Dennis Scheer, Superintendent of Schools, 210 West First Street, Ault CO 80610, or by calling(970) 834-1345. Sincerely, bsztAfrA, Dennis M. Scheer, Ed. D Superintendent of Schools Weld RE-9 School District it 9 Weld County Planning Department S0UTN'VST BUILDING APR 1 8 2006 R CE VE w DATE 4/- 1..' '! ti'. 5560 v 0 NO. ORECEIVED FROM i', I`;,JJ !::;. rr / s O 4:0 4-'ao ADDRESS_ o i j • ( , alit.,l tr Q vm� � -� � .. �� /x� DOLLAR5$i�'r- :1 O Q FOR } y..�l I I '� j '�' �; r` .J i (0 3 •- = 4ccaulvr U AMT(IF ` ACCUUNr "I CASH AMT PAID CHECK.r! MHAL ANCE `•�, I MONEY .. '-'1 UUh uNDEII i BY I . ! �'r 1 i,. ` ....r.. / L-•••;, Weld County Referral I Weld .i epartment _. I DING C. APR i 5 2006 COLORADO RECEWED The Weld County Department of Planning Services has received the following item for review: Applicant Mikal Torgerson Case Number PF-1066 Please Reply By April 26, 2006 Planner Kim Ogle Project Final Plat, Torgerson PUD for Nine Lots with E (Estate)Zone Uses along with 28.4 acres of open space. Legal Lot B of RE-2681; Pt of the SE4 of Section 32, T8N, R66W of the 6th P.M., Weld County, Colorado. Location North of and adjacent to CR 86; 1/4 mile west of CR 29. Parcel Number 0553 32 000038 The application is submitted to you for review and recommendation. Any comments or recommendation you consider relevant to this request would be appreciated. Please reply by the above listed date so that we may give full consideration to your recommendation. Any response not received before or on this date may be deemed to be a positive response to the Department of Planning Services. If you have any further questions regarding the application, please call the Planner associated with the request. Please note that new information may be added to applications under review during the review process. If you desire to examine or obtain this additional information, please call the Department of Planning Services. Weld County Board of County Commissioners Hearing May 24, 2006 ❑ We have reviewed the request and find that it does/does not comply with our Comprehensive Plan ❑ We have reviewed the request and find no conflicts with our interests. 1X See attached letter. Comments: Signature .1/4Ne_ — Date l'\"\�-�D Agency \f`j (I GC) EX 5. EXHIBIT ❖Weld County Planning Dept. +4209 County Road 24.5, Longmont,CO 80504 ❖(720)6524210 ext.8730 + 1 Applicant:Mikal Torgerson Planner: Kim Ogle Case: PF-1066 % i l;;1- , _.. in'i454a o k i N� to- f 3A t4 .. .'f 'a ___ mow-e 4i a ' _`Yux": °Y! E'^ ' a y� t i \ i a fir Al } n� t � � --'*,,-.4Y4..." Y�� i �d _ il"Y% R 5 3 rvVP i ( _ . ry 1 y 1 i e '84X2---, �4 •� _ Fg e .F5 S'...t _.., , , t '14. o ly '44k £ E� � v it. i 11wyF wM� „ ' ill, '' rte• t'.- t p &, �r q '< } "+ 1 �"f d ,C 3 6 5,11.;', �C o rvf£ • �r �s, > `�'1h{jj"1. d 7 i ' ,[ gam' ;P i t 'i _ " e ,{t f '". 0.4 0 0.4 0.8 Miles View1 N i \ / Highways Streams Majroads Lakes \f / A/ Locroads Floodplain W rE held boundary Rail T S 3 ' 0) o . e E a) 2 o E n ® E To C 0 @ o e ■ P O Z1- ■ a)a) < ■ 0 = E _ o � CO 43 � a C0- o e & Co o c m c � k $ o 7 ® � a » 2 % � § C E O f_ U I—� >� . u, LL22 0 - @ ■ 2: R 0. co < 7 e 0 co a f .c g a p_ c a t 5 - $ [ k a e2 o c 0 O % a 2II) Ch CD ■ § § ) % A ) % 2 �• co 32 � § � � � O Q / 20) 7 0 C a) co / O \ CO 2 % 2 g� E @ f o « 3o to- k # c � 2 ± C I Tel i5 03q .2.� E / C c co Ui 7 / E ■ o o0 k 2 I' m ■ o o / co o � O - 0 2 ® > g U) - c 2 k 2 1- (13 GS' 2 .o Q .42 ' E E ■ c a. m I / $ -I o o 0 © E u a 2 . 2 © = § 13 Z E co f 0 7 k = Q c q o -0 u) a c g2 � � � ' 30 ,_ g U Q C > a) co - _ rs DEPARTMENT OF PLANNING SERVICES BUILDING INSPECTION I NORTH OFFICE 918 10`h Street GREELEY, COLORADO 80631 C. PHONE (9 0) AX6100, EXT.3540 (970)304-6498 COLORADO SOUTHWEST OFFICE 4209 CR 24.5 LONGMONT CO 80504 PHONE (720)652-4210 ext. 8730 FAX (720)652-4211 April 24, 2006 Mikal Torgerson Final Plat, Torgerson PUD for 9 lots with E (Estate)Zone Uses along with 28.4 acres of open space. PF-1066 1. A separate building permit shall be obtained prior to the construction of any building or structure including any future entry gates. 2. A plan review is required for each building for which a building permit is required. Plans shall include a floor plan. Residential building plans may be required to bear the wet stamp of a Colorado registered architect or engineer. 3. Buildings shall conform to the requirements of the codes adopted by Weld County at the time of permit application. Current adopted codes include the 2003 International Residential Code; 2003 International Building Code; 2003 International Mechanical Code; 2003 International Plumbing Code; 2003 International Fuel Gas Code; 2002 National Electrical Code and Chapter 29 of the Weld County Code. 4. Each residential building will require an engineered foundation based on a site-specific geotechnical report or an open hole inspection performed by a Colorado registered engineer. Engineered foundations shall be designed by a Colorado registered engineer. 5. Fire resistance of walls and openings, construction requirements, maximum building height and allowable areas will be reviewed at the plan review. Setback and offset distances shall be determined by the Zoning Ordinance. 6. Building height shall be measured in accordance with the 2003 International Building Code for the purpose of determining the maximum building size and height for various uses and types of construction and to determine compliance with the Bulk Requirements from Chapter 23 of the Weld County Code. Building height shall be measured in accordance with Chapter 23 of the Weld County Code in order to determine compliance with offset and setback requirements. When measuring buildings to determine offset and setback requirements, buildings are measured to the farthest projection from the building. Property lines shall be clearly identified and all property pins shall be staked prior to the first site inspection. 7. Provide letter of approval from Ault Fire Protection District for each new residential construction. Please contact me for any further information regarding this project. Sin IIryyely, EXHIBIT Rbfger/C/igr 4 Building Official Weld County Planning Department cfl!ITNWVcT BUILDING LIND, LAWRENCE & OTTENHOFF LLP APR 9, 5 2006 ATTORNEYS AT LAW 1011 ELEVENTH AVENUE klu w L' v I ®E® P.O.BOX 326 GREELEY,COLORADO 80632 WEB PAGE:LLOLAW.COM GEORGE H.OTTENHOFF TELEPHONE KENNETH F.LIND (970)353-2323 KIM R.LAWRENCE (970)356-9160 P.ANDREW JONES TELECOPIER RICHARD T.LiPUMA (970)356-1111 KELLY J.CUSTER ken@llolaw.com BRADLEY C.GRASMICK DAVID P.JONES CHRYSTEN S.HINZE ROBERT J.HERRERA KAYLEA M.WHITE April 24, 2006 Weld County Department of Planning Services 4209 County Road 24.5 Longmont, CO 80504 Attention: Kim Ogle .-, Re: Case No. PF-1066 (Torgerson PUD) Dear Mr. Ogle: Our client, the Pierce Lateral Company, has requested that we respond to the referral. The Pierce Lateral Company is a ditch and reservoir company which was incorporated in 1926. The Pierce Lateral Company manages and operates the Pierce Lateral located in Weld County, Colorado which delivers water for purposes of irrigation for the benefit of its numerous shareholders. As you are aware, rural developments are having a significant impact upon operations of ditch and reservoir companies, and this proposed development does have potential significant adverse consequences for the Pierce Lateral Company. Most laterals in Weld County do not have written or deeded easements for their ditches, they exist and have rights by virtue of prescriptive easements. To clarify this issue, we request that the applicant be required to show upon the final plat map the right-of-way and easement for the ditch along with an additional thirty (30) feet on both sides of the ditch extending from the existing banks of the ditch. This easement and right-of-way needs to be delineated for purposes of use, operations and maintenance to avoid boundary issues and conflicts. F:\KFL COUNTY PLANNING LTR wpd EXHIBIT to Weld County Department of Planning Services April 24, 2006 Page 2 Next, no fencing can be permitted on the easement, and any fencing that is constructed along the boundary between the ditch easement and subdivision must be maintained by the developer and should be of non-flammable material as the Pierce Lateral Company does utilize burning to maintain its ditch and property. Further related to the issues of boundaries between the development and ditch easement is the necessity for the requirement that the developer and/or property owners along the easement be responsible for keeping the fence line on their property boundaries free and clear of any weeds, and flammable materials such as wood or other items. It is also necessary that the plat have a notation that there will be no trespassing upon the easement and that there will be no ingress or egress to any lot or parcel that utilizes the ditch easement. Of particular concern is drainage and runoff from the development into the ditch. This raises issues of contamination from chemicals, oil, herbicides, insecticides, and gray water due to septic tanks and leach fields as well as use of these various liquid substances on and around subdivisions. These are all water quality issues. Also of substantial concern is the fact that this development is proposing the use of a detention pond which has totally inadequate flows to control volume and velocity of water that may flow into the Pierce Lateral off of the developed parcels. It is the policy of Pierce Lateral not to accept any waste water or runoff from subdivisions. Even though it is the policy of Pierce Lateral not to accept any wastewater or runoff from subdivisions, Pierce Lateral realizes that there may be some basis to historic discharge upon the same volume and velocity, and this can be accomplished by requiring a 100 year storm design and having a discharge pipe and headgate from the detention pond into the Pierce Lateral which would be locked and totally controlled by the Pierce Lateral Company to manage and control flow of water into the ditch in such a manner that it does not cause problems for the ditch company related to volumes or velocities. It is necessary that the County require the applicant to enter into an agreement with the Pierce Lateral Company covering these issues, especially as to water quality and the detention pond, that all such structures be designed by a registered professional engineer, that the structures be approved by the Pierce Lateral Company, and that the Pierce Lateral Company be reimbursed by the applicant for all of its engineering and legal expenses. In closing, we are also providing to you a copy of land use regulations utilized in Larimer County for rural developments and irrigation companies. We believe that these should be incorporated by Weld County and utilized for all rural subdivisions. F'\KFL\PIERCE\WELD COUNTY PLANNING LTR.wpd Weld County Department of Planning Services April 24, 2006 Page 3 Thank you very much for the opportunity to review this referral, and we would request that you provide to the undersigned any proposed Development Standards or requirements as the same are related to this letter. Very truly yours, LIND, yylgERC LLP Kenn h F. KFUcg Enclosure pc: Pierce Lateral Company F:\KFL\PIERCE\WELD COUNTY PLANNING LTR.wpd STANDARDS FOR ALL tEVLOPMENP 8,8.4 Maximum Sign Size Maximum Sign Height Zoning District (Square Feet) (Feet) K-Residential 3 40 &1 Residential 8 40 &2 Residential 3 40 M-Multiple Family 16 40 M-1 Multiple Family 15 40 A-Accommodation 60 40 'ltlburist 60 _ 40 B-Business 60 40 C-Commercial 90 40 I-Industrial _ 90 40 _ I-1 Industrial 90 40 AI'-Airport 15/90• 40 *In the AP district,uses permitted have a maximum sign size of 15 square feet and uses permitted by special review have a matum sign size of 90 square feet. 8.8- IRRIGATION FACILITIES liminary plat, final rural land plan or site plan must show the top of ditch banks relative to the 8.84. Purpose. limits of the proposed easement; Irrigation is necessary for agricultural opera- B. Written approval of the ditch owner or its lions in the county, Development bas the paten- representatives must be obtained for any pro- • tial of disrupting the delivery of irrigation water. posed modifications of any irrigation facilities, This section of the Cade is intended to Protect including but not limited to realignments,changes irrigation facilities from adverse development im- to configurations (Le. (e.g.], from an earthen to a per, lined ditch, from an open ditch to underground, etc.) or crossings; 8.8,2. Applicability. hex m all applications C. The time schedule for any modifications This section ap plies' for sub- approved under subsection B above or other at- division,conservation development,planned land tivities that may disrupt the flow of water must division,minor land division, special review,ape- be referred to the ditch owner for review and del exception and site plan review. comment The county commissioners will require, by condition of approval, that such modifications 8,8.3. Easements, be made or such activities be conducted when the Easements for existing irrigation facilities, in- disruption of the water flow will be minimized; chiding adequate easements for maintenance ac- D. Ditch easements will extend the length of case, shall be dedicated and shown on all final plats and final site plans approved under this the ditch through the site.The the easement will be the area between minimum width of rode.Applications for development proposals will the ditch be referred to the appropriate ditch companies for banks ks phis the following review and comment.It is the responsibility of the 1. For ditches having an average bottom ditch companies to respond within 21 days from width of less than eight feet, the ease- the date the materials are sent to them. went will be 25 feet measured from the top of the ditch on one side of the ditch; 8.8.4. Review criteria. 2. For ditches hav ing an average bottom A. The following provisions apply to all devel- width of eight feet or more,the easement opment proposals, as listed in subsection 8.8.2 will be 30 feet measured from the top of above, that include irrigation facilities. Any pre- the ditch on both sides of the ditch; Supp.No.4 LUC8:47 8.8.4 LARIMER COUNTY CODE 8. The ditch owner will be entitled to addi- 8.9. SUPPLEMENTARY REGULATIONS tional easement width where the ditch Supplementary regulations are contained in a owner demonstrates; separate volume from the land use code. The a, 'lbrrain or other circumstances(such supplementary regulations listed below are an as tasting maintenance roads on integral part of the land use code and the devel- both sides of a ditch) necessitate a opulent review processes described in the code. wider easement or additional ease- ments to operate, repair and main- 8.9.1. Supplementary engineering regula- taro the ditches; and/or tions. b. An entitlement to a wider easement A. Larimer County Road Manual.Adopted Ro- by law or based on historical use or vember 22, 1999. an agreement between the land owner and the ditch owner. $. Larfiner County Urban Area Street Stan- dards.Adopted December 18, 2000. E. Prior to dedication of any easement or right- C. Lorimer County Stormwater Management of-way for irrigation facilities,the applicant must Manual. Adopted April, 1979 and last amended provide a proper abstract of title or a props' August, 1996. commitment for title insurance in form, amount and insurance company acceptable to the ditch D. Larimer County AcoessPolicy.AdoptedApril owner; 8, 1987. E The applicant is responsible for any and all E. Larimer County Right-of-Way PermitAppli- reasonable costs for engineering, surveying and cation and Construction Guidelines,Adopted Jan- legal services inured on behalf of a.ditch owner nary 19, 1999. as a result of the development proposal.The costa E LaPorte Plan Area Access Control and Road- incurred on behalf of a ditch owner must be paid way-Design.Adopted February 23, 2004- in full before any public hearing is scheduled for the development proposal; 1. Access control and traffic circulation. a. New land divisions and/or site plans G. Unless approved in writing by the county must be designed and constructed to engineer and the ditch owner, irrigation ditches implement the access control and shall not be used to carry surface water flows and traffic circulation plan as shown on stormwater runoff, except to the extent that the the LaPorte Area Plan k'uture fans- ditch received such water prior to the develop- portation Improvements Map. meat.Such water can only be discharged into the ditch in the same volumes, at the same rate of b. Land divisions and/or site plans pet- flow, at the same location or locations and within taming to those properties affected the same time frames as historically occurred, by said access control and traffic Unless the ditch owner agrees otherwise,in writ- circulation plan must be designed iag, the development must be designed and con- such that access from County Road strutted so that the ditch receives such water in 54G or Taft Hill Road takes place this manner free from the addition of any pollut- only in the locations shown on the ant but does not receive additional water; LaPorte Area Plan Future Transpor- tation Improvements Map. The ox- H. When the county commissioners determine act location of the access points along that unreasonable,unnecessary or extraordinary County Road 54G or Taft Hill Road requirements are proposed by a ditch owner, the and the right of-way for said access commissioners may approve only those require- pointy: shall be determined by the meats they deem appropriate to protect the irri- county engineer based upon the ac- gation facilities. case control and traffic circulation 8upp.No,4 LUC8:48 OePeMet* MEMORANA't woos1 ' TO: KimOgle, Dept. of Planning Services DATE: Apr- o Q FROM: Drew Scheltinga, P. E., Public Works Department W� COLORADO SUBJECT: PF-1066 Torgerson PUD (Final Plat) The Weld County Public Works Department has reviewed the final plat application materials. Comments made during this stage of the review process may not be all-inclusive, as revised materials will have to be resubmitted and other concerns or issues may arise during further review. The final plat shall not be recorded until all comments in this memorandum have been addressed. Final Plat: The case number in the title shall be revised to read PF-1066. Landscaping and a subdivision identification sign are intended to be in a median at the entrance to the development. These amenities will be maintained by the homeowners association and -- therefore need to be within an open space tract. An open space for the entrance median shall be shown on the final plat. The location of the Pierce Lateral is of concern. The topography along the ditch on sheet 5 of 9, Overall Utility & Grading Plan is barely readable; however, it shows the crossing under WCR 86 and the ditch to be on the eastern boundary of the PUD, not 40' to the east as the note and dimension on sheet 5 indicate. This inconsistency must be resolved. The eastern boundary of the PUD shall be monument on the site so the centerline location of the Pierce Lateral can be verified. Documentation for the creation and easements for the Pierce Lateral shall be shown on the final plat. If that information is not available, an easement shall be shown, dimensioned and dedicated to the Pierce Lateral on the final plat. The Pierce Lateral shall approve the documentation and adequacy for their easement. Construction Plans: The pedestrian shelter is shown in the right-of-way of Torgerson Way on the landscape plan and sheets 5, 6 and 7 of 9 in the construction plans. In accordance with note 1 B (7 of the Chang of Zone resolution, the pedestrian shelter shall be shown in open space. On sheet 7 of 9 a note shall be added requiring the street identification and stop sign to be manufactured and installed in accordance with the Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices. Page 1 of 3 EXHIBIT M:\PLANNING-DEVELOPMENT REVIEW\3Final Plat(PF,MF,MJF)\PF-1066 Torgerson PUD\Final Plat Review 04-26-06.DOC On sheet 6 of 9, the flow line elevation for the 24" CMP shall be shown. The road ditch will require grading deeper than 2.07', which is shown on the typical street section, in order to install the 24" CMP and meet cover requirements. Road ditch grades and elevations shall be shown on the profile to facilitate installation of the 24" CMP. No erosion control measures or seeding have been indicated for the road ditches, swales or detention pond. Erosion control and seeding shall be shown on sheet 5 of 9 and the following note shall be added: Unlined drainage facilities and all areas disturbed during construction shall be actively revegetated. Seed mixes should be selected to match the conditions where they will be used. Recommended seed mixes may be obtained from the Weld County Public Works Weed Division Supervisor. A construction detail for the proposed 25' pedestrian/equestrian trail is required in section 5 O of the Chang of Zone resolution. That detail shall be added to the plans. Pedestrian/equestrian trails shall not be located in drainage swales or the detention pond. Drainage: A Final Drainage Report& Plan has been submitted by Team Engineering, dated January 9, 2006. Attached is a memorandum from David Bauer, of the Weld County Public Works Department, dated February 27, 2006. A revised drainage report and plans addressing all of Mr. Bauer's comments is required. On-site Improvements Agreement: An executed on-site improvements agreement has been submitted and is acceptable with the following revisions to Exhibit A: Street Base - $25,500 Street Name and Stop Sign - $500 Water transfer—Value of water shares or letter from North Weld County Water District waving surety requirement Engineering and Supervision Costs - $15,000 Total Estimated Cost— Revise Amount Off-site Improvements Agreement: A proposed off-site improvements agreement adequate for submittal to the Board of Weld County Commissioners is required with the final plat application. The application materials do contain a copy of a standard form that was supplied to the applicant but it has not been completed. A completed agreement that addressed the following shall be submitted: • The route to the nearest paved road from the Torgerson PUD is WCR 86 east to WCR 29; then WCR 29 south to SH 14, for a total distance of 2.5 miles. Page 2 of 3 M.\PLANNING-DEVELOPMENT REVIEW\3-Final Plat(PF,MF,MJF)\PF-1066 Torgerson PUD\Final Plat Review 04-26-06.DOG • The cost to stabilize one mile of roadway is $65,000. • The traffic generated from the Torgerson PUD will be 50% of the traffic on WCR 86 and 30% of the traffic on WCR 29. • Road Stabilization adjacent to Torgerson PUD shall be paid 100% by the Developer. • The term of the agreement shall be 10 years • Funds generated by this agreement may be applied toward paving • The cash in escrow when fully funded is $60,120. Public Works requires 3 sets of plans with original signatures and date. Attachment: Memorandum by David Bauer, February 27, 2006 PC: PF-1066 Torgerson PUD Email & Original: Kim Ogle, Dept. of Planning Services PC by Post Applicant: Mikal Torgerson PC by Post Engineer: Jeffrey Couch, P. E., Team Engineering Page 3 of 3 M\PLANNING-DEVELOPMENT REVIEW\3-Final Plat(PF,MF,MJF)\PF-1066 Torgerson PUD\Final Plat Review 04-26-06.DOC STATE OF COLORADO Bilt Owens,Governor 4'OTWO ..-� DEPARTMENT OF NATURAL RESOURCES b 14) DIVISION OF WILDLIFE Weld County Planning Department s 4P4)AN EQUAL OPPORTUNITY EMPLOYER GREELEY OFFICE rot.OF Bruce McCloskey, Director MAY a 4 2006 For Wildlife- 6060 Broadway Denver, Colorado 80216 For People Telephone: (303)297-1192 RECEIVED April 21,2006 Kim Ogle—Planner Mikal Torgerson-Applicant Weld County Planning Department 223 N.College Ave 918 10th Street Ft. Collins,CO 80524 Greeley,CO 80631 RE: Case Number PF-1066 Dear Kim, I received and reviewed the proposal for the PUD sketch plan for nine residential lots (Torgerson PUD). During the review,Troy Florian-District Wildlife Manager,made a site visit to the parcel. In this letter you will find the Division of Wildlife comments concerning the proposal. The Division of Wildlife recommends that: -Construction equipment be cleaned and a weed management plan is used to reduce the spread of weeds. - Any fences built are three or four strand fencing with a bottom strand height of 17 inches and a maximum top strand height of 42 inches,along with installation of double stays between posts. -I rash covenants be used in the development. -Future homeowners are made aware of traditional land uses that may impact them. -Future homeowners are made aware of nuisance wildlife in the area. The site is located north and adjacent to WCR 86 and 1/4 mile west of WCR 29. The field appeared to be an agricultural field irrigated by a Center Pivot Sprinkler system. With new construction taking place and machinery being transported from one site to another, it is important to help prevent the spread of noxious weeds. Noxious weeds reduce property value and wildlife habitat. Care should be taken to avoid spreading and introducing noxious weeds. Equipment should be cleaned periodically to remove weed seeds even if no weeds are recognized. The area should be promptly re-vegetated using native species to prevent erosion and invasions by weeds. It is also recommended that a weed management plan be developed from during construction and for a period of at least 5 years after construction. We are concerned for the safety of the wildlife in the area if fences are erected,as some types of fencing can be dangerous and even fatal to wildlife. Therefore,we recommend that if any fencing is to be used within or around development sites,either during or after the project, it should be the type that would allow the free passage of wildlife. Fencing plans should avoid the use of woven wire type fences that will trap or prevent movement of wildlife. The Division of Wildlife prefers the use of three or four strand fencing with a bottom strand height of 17 inches and a maximum top strand height of 42 inches, along with installation of double stays between posts. The residential development should include covenants that prevent domestic dogs and cats running at large. Domestic dogs and cats roaming the open space on this development and adjacent property would have a definite adverse DEPARTMENT OF NATURAL RESOURCES,Russell George,Executive Director EXHIBIT WILDLIFE COMMISSION,Jeffrey Crawford,Chair•Tom Burke,Vice Chair•Ken Torres, a r �� Mw w nhc Rnharl Rrav•Pink Prick-run•Phikn.lames:•(-lairs rYNnal•Pinharrl Paw•Pnhart Rh - impact on wildlife in the area. CDOW feels strongly that this wildlife corridor encompassing the adjacent upland should be protected from domestic pets of local residents inclined to walk dogs in this natural area. As this area develops, it is important to maintain the legacy of traditional agricultural land uses. Hunting is one such activity that provides recreation an income to landowners and businesses along the 1-25 corridor. Geese,ducks, pheasants and doves are a few of the wildlife species that are hunted in this area. In fact surveys indicate that Weld and Larimer Counties are among the most important in Colorado in the popularity of small game and waterfowl hunting activities. People travel from all over the United States to hunt waterfowl along the 1-25 corridor. Hunting is not only a recreational activity and economic asset,but also an important management tool used by the Colorado Division of Wildlife to manage wildlife populations. Hunting is used as the primary tool to balance wildlife populations with available habitat. With increasing rural development, it is advisable that new residents be informed of traditional land uses, such as hunting,occurring on adjacent land that may impact them. It is recommended that the developer make future homeowners aware of nuisance animals that are found in rural areas. Coyotes,raccoons,skunks, foxes and prairie dogs can all potentially cause problems to landowners. Also, homeowners should be made aware of the potential problems that coyotes and skunks can cause with domestic dogs and cats. The new homeowners should also be made aware that it is their responsibility to prevent and handle any problems that may arise. The Division of Wildlife has brochures available to the homeowners that talk about living with wildlife and will also be happy to give suggestions on how to prevent any potential problems. On behalf of the Division of Wildlife,I would like to thank you for the opportunity to review and comment on this proposal. If you or the applicant have any further questions,please feel free to call Troy Florian at(970)443-1993. Sincerely, y 62C4,r+ C lc,Akse--) Dave Clarkson Area Wildlife Manager Cc:John Bredehoft,Assistant Director—Field Operations DOW Scott Hoover,Regional Wildlife Manager DOW Troy Florian,District Wildlife Manager DOW Mike Sherman,Habitat Biologist DOW file Memorandum TO: Kim Ogle, W.C. Planning 111 g DATE: May 9, 2006 C FROM: Pam Smith, W.C. Department of Public COLORADO Health and Environment CASE NO.: PF-1066 NAME: Mikal Torgerson/Torgerson PUD The Weld County Health Department has reviewed this Final Plat application and offers the following comments: 1. There are primary and secondary septic envelopes on the Landscape Plan but not on the Final Plat. Envelope locations have been recorded on the Change of Zone Plat. 2. The location of the well on Lot 9 (previously though to be Lot 8 by this Department) is also shown on the Landscape Plan but not on the Final Plat. The well location has also been recorded on the Change of Zone Plat. 3. The plat notes are complete and acceptable. 4. The language in the covenants protecting the septic envelopes is acceptable. In fact, the language incorporates measures of a managed septic system, which is above and beyond what was requested. The Department also finds this acceptable as written. O:\PAM\Planning\Final Plat\pf-1066 Torgerson.rtf 'a— 1 EXHIBIT � 13 Hello