Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout20061959 REFERRAL LIST -- Name: Eagle View Farms LLC Case# PF-1090 County Towns &Cities Fire Districts _Attorney _Ault _Ault F-1 z Health Department __Berthoud _Berthoud F-2 $$$ _Extension Office _Brighton Briggsdale F-24 _Emergency Mgt Office - Ed Herring _Dacono _Brighton F-3 z Sheriffs Office z Eaton z Eaton F-4 z Public Works _Erie _Fort Lupton F-5 _Housing Authority _Evans Galeton F-6 _ _Airport Authority _Firestone _Hudson F-7 z Building Inspection _Fort Lupton _Johnstown F-8 z Code Compliance_S.-Ann_N-Beth _Frederick _LaSalle F-9 _Kim Ogle (Landscape Plans) _Garden City _Mountain View F-10 _Lin (Addressing Change of Zone) _Gilcrest _Milliken F-11 _Ambulance Services z Greeley _Nunn F-12 _Grover _Pawnee F-22 State _Hudson _Platteville F-13 Div._ of Water Resources _Johnstown _Platte Valley F-14 _Geological Survey _Keenesburg _Poudre Valley F-15 _Department of Health _Kersey _Raymer F-2 z Department of Transportation _LaSalle _Southeast Weld F-16 _Historical Society _Lochbuie _Union Colony F-20 _Water Conservation Board _Longmont _Wiggins F-18 _Oil&Gas Conservation Commission _Mead _Windsor/Severance F-17 _Milliken Division of Wildlife _New Raymer _South Hwy 66 (Loveland) _Northglenn z North Hwy 66 (Greeley) _Nunn Division of Minerals/Geology _Pierce Commissioner _Platteville _ Soil Conservation Districts _Severance _Big Thompson/ FTC _Thornton _Boulder Valley/Longmont _Windsor Bonanza Creek _Brighton/SE Weld Operating CO Centennial Counties 4900 California Ave _Greeley/West Greeley _Adams Ste. 350,Tower B _Platte Valley _Boulder Bakersfield CA 93309 _West Adams _Broomfield _Little Thompson _Larimer Federal Government Agencies Other _US Army Corps of Engrs z School District RE-2 USDA-APHIS Vet Service _Central Colo. Water Conservancy _Federal Aviation Admin (Structures -zN. Weld county Water Dist over 200 ft or w/in 20000 ft of Pub z Ditch Company, Olgivy Ditch Airport _Art Elmquist(MUD Area) - Info Only _Federal Communications Comm 2006-1959 1 How ' ' ' Cad\ `1S cC"vSLsr ' ° s o� Wl� CILIc coaa b« ( Ncfi cokA( --'C - as I.,owr. 0. Qs C��S ) fs , �; , c�, Ceti �mcti� � �' (A)0-'fir. --- (11',4r----H MEMORANDUM TO: Chris Gathman, Dept. of Planning Services DATE: Sept. 25, 2006 ' FROM: Drew Scheltinga, P. E., Public Works Department k, c I�` �. Eagle �_. ' SUBJECT: PF-1090 Ea le View Farms, LLC 2n° i{�a�4a16 F +isMV U . COLORADO GREELEY OFFirr ' pp SEP 2 7 2006 The Weld County Public Works Department has reviewed the second submit[i&E aV , "`1 t...,..„# application materials. These materials are not dated but were received at the Public Works office on September 15, 2006. Also, I met with Brad Keirnes, at the site of the development on September 20, 2006. Information obtained in that meeting is reflected in the following comments. Comments made during this stage of the review process may not be all-inclusive, as revised materials will have to be submitted and other concerns or issues will arise during further review. The final plat shall not be recorded until all issues in this memorandum have been resolved. Final Plat: Septic envelopes are shown on the recorded change of zone plat and the construction drawings — and are not appropriate on the final plat. The septic envelopes and legend should be removed. "Setbacks for the oil and gas facilities have been shown on Lots 20 and 21 but have not been located or dimensioned. The center of the 150' and 200' radii should be located by dimension on the record plat. —l`he Property Owner's Certificate shown on the final plat is for a recorded exemption and does not contain dedication language for rights-of-way or easements. The Certification of Dedication, Ownership and Maintenance shown in the Appendix of Chapter 24, Subdivisions, of the Weld County Code shall be used for the owner's certification. /The entrance island is called out on the final plat but not shown and dimensioned. ./A Ditch Easement Agreement, dated February 22, 2006, between Ridgeview Farms, LLC and the Ogilvy Irrigating & Land Company has been executed. The east line of the easement is shown on the final plat as a dashed line but not but dimensioned nor is the instrument creating the easement called out. The easement agreement shall be recorded and called out as such on the record plat and dimensioned. S-' There is a proposed Exclusive Pipeline Right-of-way Grant between Ridgeview Farms, LLC, and Duke Energy that is shown in Outlot A. The Grant shall be executed, recorded and called out as such on the final plat. Page 1 of 3 M:\PLANNING-DEVELOPMENT REVIENA3-Final Plat(PF,MF,MJF)\PF-1090 Eagle VievA2nd Final Plat Review 9-25-06.DOC Irrigation Companies: Concerns for erosion and the stability of the Ogilvy Ditch have not been resolved. These issues were discussed in detail at my meeting on September 15, 2006, with Brad Keirnes. Mr. Keirnes said he would address the issue with the Board of Weld County Commissioners at the final plat hearing. Written approval of final construction plans and the final plat from the Ogilvy Ditch must be provided. Construction Plans: Stabilization of the Ogilvy Ditch is not shown in the construction plans or proposed in conjunction with this development. If the Board of Weld County Commissioners accepts a solution that does not include slope stabilization the hazard of an unstable vertical bank adjacent to a residential development still exists. In this case, the east line of the Ogilvy Ditch easement should be fenced. At our meeting On September 15, 2006, Brad Keirnes provided information regarding the ✓existing and proposed perforated underdrain pipes. There are two existing pipes that drain farm ground east of WCR 35 that have been in place for a number of years, one on the north end of the development and one thru the center. On the north end, the proposed 6" perforated underdrain pipe shown on the plans is not intended to control ground water but to replace the existing drain that is not functioning; therefore, it is not owned and should not be maintained by the homeowner's association. The proposed drain should be replaced in an exclusive easement in outlot A and the ownership of the drain shown on the record plat and in the construction plans. Construction details of the underdrain, such as material specifications, depth, trench width, backfill materials, cleanouts, and discharge treatment, must be shown in the plans. The location and ownership of the existing drain that runs through the center of the development shall be shown on the record plat and on the construction plans. If the exact location is not known, an approximate location should be shown and noted as such. The owner of the underdrain system must indicate in writing that the relocation, construction and easements are acceptable. CYNo information has been provided that Duke Energy accepts berming and a trail on their easement. The proposed Exclusive Pipeline Right-of-Way Grant states,"...Grantor agrees not to build ... structures or engineering works on the herein granted right-of-way that will interfere with the normal operation and maintenance of said line." Construction details for the 5' trail shall be shown in the plans. Specifications shall be provided for the proposed Polymer Aggregate Mix. The cost to construct the trail is not shown in the improvements agreement. Page 2 of 3 M:IPLANNING-DEVELOPMENT REVIEWt3Final Rat(PF,MF,MJF)1PF-1090 Eagle Vie\2ntl Final Plat ReNew 9-25-06.DOC Drainage: A revised Final Drainage and Erosion Control Report has been submitted by North Star Design, dated September 12, 2006. Attached is a second review memorandum from Brian Varrella, P. E., of the Weld County Public Works Department, dated September 22, 2006. The items in Mr. Varrella's review shall be addressed. At our meeting On September 15, 2006, Brad Keirnes indicated the original plan was to deliver irrigation water through the swale on the western side of the development. This plan has been changed because of the concern over saturating the soil in close proximity to the Ogilvy Ditch. Mr. Keirnes said the swale is now intended to direct storm water to the detention pond. The original plans showed an 18" culvert taking water from an irrigation check structure into the swale. This culvert is still shown in the plans and only the reference to the irrigation check structure has been removed. If this culvert is not required for storm water conveyance it should be removed from the plans. Attachment: Drainage Review by Brian Varrella, P. E., dated September 22, 2006 PC: PF-1090 Eagle View Farms, LLC Email & Original: Chris Gathman, Dept. of Planning Services PC by Post Owner: Brad Keirnes, Eagle View Farms, LLC Email & PC by Post Applicant: Robb Casseday, Casseday Creative Designs PC by Post Engineer: Patricia Kroetch, P. E., North Star Design Page 3 of 3 M9PLANNING-DEVELOPMENT REVlE 3-Final Plat(PF,MF,MJF)\PF-1090 Eagle Vew2nd Final Plat Review 9-25-06DOC sti,H6 MEMORANDUM TO: Drew Scheltinga, PP..E.,,Public Works Dept. DATE: 22-September-2006 I I I D C FROM: Brian K. Varrella, P.E.,Public Works Dept. COLORADO SUBJECT: PZ-1090 Eagle View Farms PUD(Final Plan) Weld County Public Works Department has reviewed this Final Plan request. Comments made during this phase of the subdivision process may not be all-inclusive, as other concerns or issues may arise during the remaining application process. Drainage Comments ❑ Public Works received a Final Drainage and Erosion Control Report for Eagle View Farms PUD(PZ-1090) on September 15, 2006,herein referred to as the final drainage report. The report was submitted by Patrica Kroetch, P.E. #31306, and Shane Boyle, P.E. #40185,of North Star Design, Inc. The report is dated September 12, 2006 ❑ The Final Drainage and Erosion Control Report shall not be approved by Public Works without a wet-stamp, signature, and date from a registered P.E. licensed to practice in the state of Colorado. This was requested in the Drainage Review Memorandum from Public Works dated June 28,2006,but the latest submittal has not been stamped, signed, or dated by a registered P.E. ❑ The final construction plan documents shall not be approved by Public Works without a wet-stamp, signature, and date from a registered P.E. licensed to practice in the state of Colorado. Unresolved Drainage Items—the following items were identified in the Drainage Review Memorandum dated June 28, 2006, and have not been resolved. Public Works requests the applicant fully resolve these items and re-submit the drainage and erosion control study for a full review. ❑ The applicant must provide for safe conveyance of offsite flows through the proposed development site as described in Weld County Storm Drainage Criteria dated February 2006. o All irrigation ditches shall be assumed to be full at the time of peak stormwater runoff,and will not intercept and divert stormwater runoff. o Stormwater runoff cannot be discharged into the Ogilvy Ditch without written consent from the ditch company. ❑ Revegetation of all disturbed earth shall comply with all standards defined in the Revegetation section of the Weld County Storm Drainage Criteria dated February 2006. New Drainage Items: ci Please address all redlines in the final drainage report and construction plan documents. ❑ The final drainage report must be bound at the time of submittal. Loose-leaf drainage reports will not be accepted by Public Works. ❑ Please remove the"preliminary, not for construction."note from the title block of all construction plan sheets. ❑ The offsite property immediately adjacent to the northeast corner of Eagle View Farms will discharge to the proposed site. The original request from the drainage review memorandum dated June 28,2006 included all offsite areas. The applicant must provide safe conveyance of these flows through their site. Page 1 of 2 ❑ Page 3,paragraph 2 of the final drainage report states "this development is not affecting the outfall or runoff contributing to the outfall, any bank stabilization at this outfall point is to be completed by the ditch company and not the developer. " In the same paragraph,the report notes that the ditch is unstable at the outfall point and there is a potential for erosion during stormwater runoff events. o The development is concentrating flow to the southwest corner of the property and proposing to release stormwater discharge to the Ogilvey Ditch. Remediation for erosion created by the point discharge from the development must be provided by the applicant at this time. o Ogilvey Ditch representatives must approve the quantity and nature of stormwater releases to their ditch in writing. A copy of any written agreements between the Ogilvey Ditch and the applicant must be provided in the final drainage report. See the note from the June 28, 2006 review memorandum reproduced in the previous section of this memorandum. ❑ Please increase the Type-II bedding under all riprap to a thickness of 12 inches. ❑ All culverts were analyzed using UD-Culvert, assuming an inlet condition of groove-end projecting with a Ke value of 0.2. It appears that all proposed pipes will have flared inlets at the upstream and downstream end. Please select a more appropriate inlet condition to reflect the flared end section with a Ke value of 0.4 to 0.5. ❑ The HW/D ratio for culverts at Storm 10, Lot 4, Lot 6, and Lot 11 are too high. All culverts must maintain an HW/D ratio less than or equal to 1.5. ❑ Please provide evidence that the proposed 18" RCP at the entrance to the subdivision will not impair flow in the WCR 35 roadside ditch. Please support the design discharge of 12 cfs with supporting calculations. ❑ Please indicate the property limits of the proposed subdivision on the FEMA FIRM map provided in the final drainage report appendix. ❑ The underdrain on the north edge of the proposed property(near SH 392)is to be "designed by others" according to the utility plans. Please identify who will design this underdrain, when the design will be completed, who will construct the underdrain, and when construction will be completed. The applicant shall address the comments listed above during this Final Plan review process. Comments made during this stage of the review process may not be all-inclusive,as revised materials will have to be submitted and other concerns or issues will arise during farther review. The review process will continue only when all appropriate elements have been submitted. Any issues of concern must be resolved with the Public Works Department prior to recording the Final Plat. Page 2 of 2 __ t_ 4 , MEMORANDUM TO: Chris Gathman, Dept. of Planning Services DATE: June 28, 2696 ' FROM: Drew Scheltinga, P. E., Public Works Department ,K c �r I�`P� 14; " �cc� SUBJECT: PF-1090 Eagle View Farms, LLC (Final Plat) � ( CA. COLORADO (� f g�� Oa ra) CP CPI 01 The Weld County Public Works Department has reviewed the final plat application materia ?•;)*`' Comments made during this stage of the review process may not be all-inclusive, as revise materials will have to be submitted and other concerns or issues will arise during further review. The final plat shall not be recorded until all issues in this memorandum have been resolved. Final Plat: Septic envelopes are shown on the recorded change of zone plat and the construction drawings and are not appropriate on the final plat. The septic envelopes and legend should be removed. The land use designation table and zoning classification table should be removed. With the exception of a very small portion on Lot 11, the sight distance triangles are located in the rights-of-way and do not restrict the use on the lots; therefore, they should be removed from the record plat. In the northeast corner of Lot 1 there is a reference to relocating a gas meter which is a construction note and is not appropriate on the final plat. The note should be removed. Setbacks for the oil and gas facilities shown on Lots 20 and 21 are restrictions on the land and should be shown. The center of the 150' and 200' radii should be located by dimension on the record plat. There is no right-of-way dedication language on the plat. Right-of-way on WCR 35 and must be dedicated to the public and the dedication language placed on the plat. The reference to the City of Greeley referral should be removed. Although Eagle View Farms is intended to be a gated community there is still a need for access for utility providers, service providers and for emergency services. The internal road rights-of- way shall be dedicated to the public and the dedication language placed on the plat. The entrance island and the cul-de-sac landscape islands shall be shown, dimensioned and called out as outlots in order for the homeowners association to have access for maintenance. There is an agreement between the applicant and the New Cache La Poudre Irrigating Company, recorded under reception number 3375676, which establishes a right-of-way in Outlot A and affects the use of the land. The right-of-way shall be shown on the record plat. Page 1 of 4 M:\PLANNING-DEVELOPMENT REVIEWU-Final Plat(PF,MF,MJF)lPF-1090 Eagle View\Final Plat Review 6-28-06.DOC The west line of Eagle View rarms is called out as the East line of the Ogilvy Ditch per Reception No. 3184094. There is a second dashed line called out as Ogilvy Ditch Easement. Clarification is required. If there is to be a dedication of an easement to the Ogilvy Ditch Company there must be specific dedication language on the plat. Approval of construction plans by Weld County and the Ogilvy Ditch Company are likely to require additional easement. There is an exclusive easement to Duke Energy shown in Outlot A. The recording information for that easement shall be indicated. Irrigation Companies: There is a requirement In the Board of County Commissioners zone change resolution, in sections 6 C and D, that, at the time of final plan submission, the applicant submit written evidence that, "ditch activities have adequately been incorporated into the design of the site", by both the Cache La Poudre Irrigation Company and the Ogilvy Ditch Company. Form letters, signed by both ditch companies, have been provided indicating that they have reviewed and approved the Landscape Plan dated May 23, 2006. The New Cache La Poudre Irrigating Company makes their approval subject to the trail being removed from the utility easement. Approving the landscape plan does not adequately address the requirement of the zone change resolution cited above. Of major concern is the Ogilvy Ditch. Head cutting, erosion and slope stability in the ditch are major concerns when residential development is proposed adjacent to the ditch. Although remediation is called for in the Preliminary Geotechnical Engineering Report by Terracon, dated August 24, 2005, nothing is proposed in the construction plans. A new point discharge is proposed from the retention pond that poses a serious erosion potential. Relocation of the existing access road is shown in the construction plans on top of the berm adjacent to the proposed detention and irrigation storage ponds and appears to go outside the Ogilvy Ditch easement, which is not clearly delineated. The new ditch access road is proposed to be shared with Eagle View Farms' trail system. These issues must be acknowledged and the proposed construction approved by the Ogilvy Ditch Company. Written approval of final construction plans and the final plat, from both irrigation companies, must be provided. Construction Plans: The Preliminary Geotechnical Engineering Report by Terracon, dated August 24, 2005, identifies the stability problems in the Ogilvy Ditch (referred to in the report as the Seeley Lake inlet) and the undermining of the concrete structure at the northwest corner of the property. There are recommendations on page 7 of the report which include regarding the slopes, directing surface drainage, construction setbacks, debris removal, and vegetation of slopes, riprap and dewatering systems. None of these recommendations have been included in the construction plans. A final geotechnical report that specifically analyzes the stability of the Ogilvy Ditch slopes addresses erosion and provides specific designs must be provided. The designs in the final geotechnical report must be incorporated in the construction plans. Existing topography for the Ogilvy Ditch is shown south of the property but not adjacent to the development where the information is critical. Topography covering all of the Ogilvy Ditch must be shown on the grading plan. Page 2 of 4 M'.\PLANNING-DEVELOPMENT REVIEW\3Final Flat(PF,MF,MJF)\PF-1090 Eagle ViewlFinal Plat Renew 6-28-06.DOC The report also identifies ground water issues and recommends basement restrictions. Note number 2 on the grading plans is appropriate; however, the lots that are affected by ground water should be identified and the ground water elevation in the report shown on the plans. A proposed 6" perforated underdrain pipe is shown in the utility plans along the north line of lots 1 thru 7 and is shown to daylight into the Ogilvy Ditch. Construction details of the underdrain, such as material specifications, depth, trench width, backfill materials, cleanouts, and discharge treatment, must be shown in the plans. The Ogilvy Ditch Company must accept, in writing, installation of the drain and discharge from the drain into their easement. If this underdrain is intended to mitigate ground water problems and address basement restrictions, a final geotechnical report which provides a detailed analysis and design must be provided. The utility plans show the 20' exclusive easement to Duke Energy as a proposed utility easement. The easement must be correctly called out on all sheets. The grading and landscape plans show extensive berming, landscaping and parts of the 5' trail within the 20' exclusive easement to Duke Energy. This construction can not be allowed in an exclusive easement. Even if Duke Energy would allow the construction, it is only a matter of time when maintenance or replacement of Duke's gas line will occur and the homeowners would loose or be responsible for replacing the landscaping. The 5' trail is shown on all plan sheets but the material the trail will be constructed with is not clear. On sheet 8, the ditch access road relocation calls out concrete but not a thickness. Construction details for the 5' trail are required. The cost to construct the trail is not shown in the improvements agreement. Relocation of the Ogilvy Ditch access road is shown on sheet 4, utility plan and sheet 8, grading plan. As stated above in the final plat review comments, the Ogilvy Ditch easement must be clarified. The easement is very difficult to see on sheets 4 and 8 must be shown clearly delineated. There is a significant portion of the relocated road that appears to be outside the easement and on Outlot A. Additional easement must be shown and dedicated. The Ogilvy Ditch Company must indicate in writing that the relocation and easement is acceptable. The grading plan calls for a berm up to 5' high to be constructed at the edge of the Ogilvy Ditch. The berm creates the retention and irrigation ponds. The berm also has the relocated ditch access road and trail on top. As cited above, the Preliminary Geotechnical Engineering Report points out the ditch banks are unstable. This design issue must also be addressed in a final geotechnical report and designs reflected in the plans. A typical lot grading detail showing how drainage is to be directed away from houses shall be shown. Sheet 11, Street Plan and Profiles shows the entrance and school bus pullout but does not show dimensions. The geometry for this construction must be shown. The taper for the pullout appears to be approximately 1:1 but should be show as 30:1. There is a typical section shown on all the Street Plan and Profile sheets. The typical sections need to be revised to show 3%" of Hot Bituminous Paving Grading SX and 6" of Aggregate Base Course Class 6 called for in the Preliminary Geotechnical Engineering Report. The culverts at driveways shall be revised to show a 15" minimum. The construction estimate provided with the improvements agreement used 3" of HBP. The estimate must be revised. Page 3 of 4 M\PLANNING-DEVELOPMENT REVIEWI3.FInal Rat(PF,MF,MJF)\PF-1090 Eagle View1Final Plat Review 6-28-06.DOC There are to be cuts and fills in the streets of up to 5' and extensive site grading. A note shall be put on the plans as follows, "After street grading has been completed but prior to placing any aggregate base course, a final geotechnical report shall be provided that certifies that the soils exposed by cutting and the soils placed in fills are properly wetted and compacted and that those soils are compatible with the pavement design in the Preliminary Geotechnical Engineering Report by Terracon, dated August 24, 2005." Stop signs and street name signs are required at all intersections and shall be shown on the construction plans. A note shall be placed on the plans "Manufacture and instillation of signs shall meet the Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices." Drainage: A Final Drainage and Erosion Control Report has been submitted by North Star Design, dated May 25, 2006. Attached is a review memorandum from Brian Varrella, P. E., of the Weld County Public Works Department, dated June 29, 2006. A revised drainage report and plans addressing all of Mr. Varrella's comments is required. Improvements Agreements: Improvements agreements for both on-site and of-site have been submitted and are acceptable as to form and the construction estimates appear to be reasonable. Because there will be revisions to the construction plans, a detailed cost review will not be performed until final plans have been approved. The on-site and off-site improvements agreements must be approved by the Board of County Commissioners prior to recording the final plat. Street and Drainage Facilities Maintenance: The Board of County Commissioners zone change resolution section 2.D requires internal roadways of gated communities to be maintained by the Homeowners' Association. The on-site improvements agreement that has been submitted is for private maintenance. In the submitted Declaration of Covenants, Article 2— Definitions, section 2.1.9 "Common Elements", storm drainage improvements are included but not streets. Street maintenance responsibility by the Homeowners' Association shall be included in the Covenants. Attachment: Drainage Review by Brian Varrella, P. E., dated June 29, 2006 PC: PF-1090 Eagle View Farms, LLC Email & Original: Chris Gathman, Dept. of Planning Services PC by Post Owner: Brad Keirnes, Eagle View Farms, LLC PC by Post Applicant: Robb Casseday, Casseday Creative Designs PC by Post Engineer: Patricia Kroetch, P. E., North Star Design Page 4 of 4 M:\PLANNING-DEVELOPMENT REVIEW\3-Final Plat(PF,MF,MJF)\PF-1090 Eagle ViexvFinal Plat Review 6-28-06.DOC MEMORANDUM ' TO: Drew Scheltinga, P.E. Pub c rks Dept. DATE: 28-June-2006 Q FROM: Brian K. Varrell�Pu�s Dept. COLORADO SUBJECT: PZ-1090 Eagle View Farms PUD(Final Plan) Weld County Public Works Department has reviewed this Final Plan request. Comments made during this phase of the subdivision process may not be all-inclusive, as other concerns or issues may arise during the remaining application process. Drainage Comments ❑ Public Works received a Final Drainage and Erosion Control Report for Eagle View Farms PUD (PZ-1090) on June 13, 2006. The report was submitted by Patrica Kroetch, P.E., of North Star Design, Inc., and is dated May 25, 2006 ❑ The Final Drainage and Erosion Control Report must be wet-stamped, signed, and dated by a registered P.E. licensed to practice in the state of Colorado. Final Plan Drainage Items—the following items must be resolved prior to scheduling the Weld County Board of County Commissioners final plat hearing: ❑ Please add the following note to the text of the Final Drainage Report and Final Plat: "Weld County will not be responsible for the maintenance of drainage related areas." ❑ Please address all redline comments in the drainage report and on the construction plan drawing contained therein. ❑ Please address all items included in the drainage review checklist attached to this memorandum. ❑ Proposed development must provide for safe conveyance of offsite flows through the proposed development site as described in Weld County Storm Drainage Criteria dated February 2006. o All irrigation ditches shall be assumed to be full at the time of peak stormwater runoff, and will not intercept and divert stormwater runoff. o Stormwater runoff cannot be discharged into Ogilvy ditch without written consent of the ditch company. o State Highway 392 is likely to be overtopped in a 100-year event. Therefore, SH 392 shall not be considered a diversion feature that intercepts offsite flows from the north. ❑ Please transfer all drainage and erosion control information on Sheet 10 of 15 to Sheets 6-9 of 15. The title for Sheets 6-9 of 15 shall be changed to "Drainage, Erosion Control, and Grading Plan." ❑ A project vicinity map shall be included as a figure in the drainage report,clearly identifying the borders of the proposed development,bounding roads and properties,water features,north arrow, and approximate scale, as per Weld County CODE Sec. 27-9-10(I). ❑ Please include a discussion of the detention pond in the drainage report, and discuss the proposed steady pool. Please include a detention pond outlet structure and emergency overflow details in the construction plan drawings. o Detail must be provided for the outlet structure of the detention pond and how it will discharge to the ditch without eroding the channel. o An outlet structure must be designed to capture the 10-year water quality volume as per Weld County Storm Drainage Criteria. o All CDPHE regulations and State of Colorado water rights regulations must be observed if the detention pond has a steady pool (retention) for non-potable irrigation purposes. Page 1 of 3 . o The emergency overflow spillway shall be located on the drainage plan sheet(s) and included as part of the proposed contours. • The depth of flow out of the spillway shall be 6 inches or less. • A cutoff wall is required to prevent possible breach during the major(100-year) storm event. • The spillway shall have adequate erosion protection on the upstream face, overflow crest, and downstream face to prevent erosion during operation. Please provide engineering calculations in the drainage report index. ❑ Please provide appropriate erosion control at pipe outlets, overflow areas, channel bends, high shear stress channels and swales, or any other areas requiring erosion control. Design calculations must be provided to support the selection of any and all erosion control measures, and must show stable channel conditions prior to the establishment of vegetation. o Please add rock riprap protection at all culvert outlets for the final drainage plans,and include rock size (D50)and apron limits(length, width,and thickness). Please utilize UD&FCD methods, and include all design calculations and/or spreadsheets in the report appendix. o A termination detail is required for rock riprap protection. Please specify geotextile product, or approved other, and support the design choice with engineering calculations in the drainage report appendix. o All proposed erosion control fabric (ECF)must be accompanied by appropriate termination details to prevent uplift by water and mowing operations. Selected ECF measures must be identified by product name and number or approved equal, and shall be fully supported by manufacturer specifications and installation procedures/drawings/details. o Manning's-n values for ECF-lined swales must match manufacturer recommended n-values for depths calculated. Please show hydraulic conditions with and without ECF, and clearly indicate both conditions on sheets included in the appendix. o The top of the ECF must terminate above the 100-year energy grade line (EGL) on all swales where Fr> 0.8. o A standard detail sheet for all temporary and permanent drainage and erosion control features must be provided as part of the construction plan set. This sheet shall be included as part of the drainage report with a stamp, signature and date from a registered P.E. licensed to practice in the State of Colorado. ❑ Please correct inconsistencies between street names in the drainage report text and on the construction plan drawing. ❑ Please include a copy of all summary tables from the construction plan set in the final drainage report. ❑ All culverts must adhere to HDS-5 guidelines published by the FHWA(2005). o All culvert inlets shall include debris racks to prevent clogging due to debris accumulation and to protect the public safety. Debris racks shall be sloped at 3H:IV or flatter per UD&FCD research. o Driveway culverts for all lots must have flared end sections with appropriate riprap protection to protect against probable erosion around the hydraulic jump created at culvert outlets. o Weld County requires a minimum diameter of 15 inches for all culverts. ❑ Streets shall not have ponding in excess of 6 inches in the minor(10-year) storm or 18 inches in the major (100-year) storm. ❑ Revegetation of all disturbed earth shall comply with all standards defined in the Revegetation section of the Weld County Storm Drainage Criteria dated February 2006. Li The following items must be included in the Drainage Plan(s) in the construction plan set. o Please show offsite contours for a minimum of 200 feet outside property limits, and on all offsite areas flowing to the project site on the drainage and erosion control sheet(s). o All easements must be clearly identified and dimensioned. This includes but is not limited to,utility easements, drainage easements, oil and gas easements,County and State right-of-ways, and others. o Please identify existing utilities. o A dedicated drainage easement is required for all areas of 100-year inundation and drainage conveyance features. o Please indicate the 100-year headwater depth(HW 100) on all culverts in plan view. o Please indicate the size, material type, length, invert elevations, and name/number of every pipe in the subdivision. Page2of3 • o Please identify the location, size, type, invert in/out elevations,rim elevations, and name/number of every manhole in the subdivision. A minimum drop of 0.10 feet is required through all manholes. ❑ Please provide Storm Sewer Profile sheets in the construction plan set for all culverts and storm sewers. o Please provide a key map to indicate all profiles on the site relative to the Storm Sewer Utility Plan. o Please identify all existing and proposed utility locations. o Please show the 100-year hydraulic grade line(HGL1oo) for all pipes, and show the energy grade line (EGL100) at a minimum of 6 inches below the final finished elevation of manhole and inlet rim elevations. o Please indicate the size,material type,length,invert elevations, and name/number of every pipe in the subdivision. o Please identify the location, size,type, invert in/out elevations,rim elevations, and name/number of every manhole in the subdivision. A minimum drop of 0.10 feet is required through all manholes. o Please show the existing and proposed ground profiles over all culverts and storm sewers. o Please indicate the type,number,rim elevations, and clogging factors of all inlets. r le applicant sholt**eSSComments listed abiae d this F�naP view o Comment tirliade d , el7Xewewprocess mayi . inclusive,as revised m` a havefo be submitted an '`_er eon.t m s .an rther te�vw The re win continue out when all approp et Y s i coucer olved with the __ , . `les'l p i _' to-__ 37-233L-2'3 Page 3 of 3 WELD COUNTY DRAINAGE REPORT CHECKLIST Name: Eagle View Farms PUD Plan Date: Received June 13,2006 at PW,report dated May 25,2006. _ovation: SW of WCR 35 and SH 392 Rev.Date: June 28,2006 Case#: PF-1090 Rev.By: Brian K.Varrella,P.EC Attention Comment Headings Addressedequately Required comments g Addressed Required The final drainage report is stamped,signed,and dated by a X A wet-stamp must be provided with signature and date. registered P.E.licensed to practice in the State of Colorado All submitted construction plan sheets are stamped,signed,and X No stamp,signature,or dale. dated by a registered P.E.licensed to practice in the State of Colorado Remove"Preliminary"comment in title block I. General Location and Description A. Location 1.Township,Range,Section,'A-Section X 2.Local streets within and adjacent to the development X 3.Major open channels,lakes,streams,irrigation and other water resource facilities within and adjacent to proposed X development 4.Names of surrounding developments including jurisdiction X Please identify neighborhood to the north of SH 392 and the (municipalities) home site to the northeast. B. Description of Property 1.Area in acres X 2.Ground cover X 3.Major open channels and ownership X Please indicate ownership. 4.General project description X 5.Irrigation facilities and ownership information X Please indicate ownership. 6.Groundwater characteristics(where applicable) X II. Drainage Basins and Sub-Basins A. Major Basin Description 1.Reference to Weld County Master Drainage Plan(s)where X applicable 2.Major basin drainage characteristics X 3.Identification of all irrigation facilities within 200 ft of the X property boundary 4. Identification of all FEMA-defined 100-year floodplains and X floodways affecting the property. B. Sub-Basin Description 1.Historic drainage pattems on the subject property and X adjacent properties 2.Off-site drainage flow patterns and impacts on the subject X Offsite flows must be considered as described in the review property memo. III.Drainage Design Criteria Discussion of the optional criteria/deviation from X A. Weld County CODE. B. Development Criteria Reference and Constraints 1.Discussion of previous drainage studies(i.e.project master plans)for the subject property that influence or are influenced by X the proposed drainage design for the site 2.Discussion of site constraints such as slopes,streets, utilities,existing structures,and the proposed development or X site plan impacts on the proposed drainage plan C. Hydrological Criteria 1.Identify design rainfall(source of design storm depth X information,NOAA Atlas,UD&FCD maps,etc.) 2.Identify design storm recurrence intervals X 3.Identify runoff calculation method(s)and any computer X models Weld County Public Works Page 1 of 3 Change of Zone Drainage Report Checklist Form Updated 06-22-2006 • Comment Headings Adequately Attention Comments Addressed Required 4.Identify detention discharge and storage calculation X method(s)and computer models 5.Discussion and justification of other criteria or calculation methods used that are not presented in or referenced by the X Weld County CODE D. Hydraulic Criteria 1.Identify various capacity County References X 2.Identify detention outlet type X Please provide details for detention outlet. 3.Identify check/drop structure criteria used X Please provide details for required rundown or structure into the Ogilvey Ditch. 4.Discussion of other drainage facility design criteria used that X are presented in the Weld County CODE IV. Drainage Facility Design A. General Concept 1.Discussion of concept and typical drainage pattems X 2.Discussion of compliance with off-site runoff considerations X Offsite flows must be managed through site as described in the and constraints review memo. 3.Discussion of the content of all tables,charts,figures,or X drawings presented in the report 4.Discussion of anticipated and proposed drainage patterns X B. Specific Details 1.Discussion of compliance with drainage criteria(street,inlet, X Culverts must be a minimum of 15 inches. and pipe capacities,etc.) 2.Discussion of drainage problems encountered and solutions X at specific design points 3.Discussion of detention storage and outlet design X Please include detention storage and outlet design in report text. 4.Discussion of maintenance access and aspects of the design X Please address maintenance in report text. 5.Provide copies of Draft CDPHE or State Engineer's permit X applications where applicable V. Conclusions A. Compliance with the Weld County CODE I X B. Drainage concept 1.Effectiveness of drainage design to control damage from X storm runoff 2.Influence of proposed development on any applicable Weld X County Master Drainage Plan recommendations 3.Identification of and written approval of affected irrigation company or other property owner(s). Weld County may require that the applicant provide evidence that offsite impacted X jurisdictions have been notified of the proposed drainage plans and potential impacts. VI. References A. Reference all criteria and technical information used X VII.Appendices A. Hydrologic Computations 1.Land use assumptions regarding adjacent properties X 2.Initial and major storm runoff computations at specific design X points 3.Historic and fully developed runoff computations at specific X design points 4.Computer model input and output X B. Hydraulic Computations 1.Culvert sizing X 2.Storm sewer sizing X Please include water surface elevations.Max street depth is 6 3.Street capacity evaluation X in.for the minor(10-yr)and 18 in.for the major(100-yr)storms as per Weld County Stormwater Drainage Criteria dated February 2006. Weld County Public Works Page 2 of 3 Change of Zone Drainage Report Checklist Form Updated 06-22-2006 • Comment Headings Adequately Attention Comments g Addressed Required 4.Storm inlet sizing X 5.Swale sizing X 6.Open channel sizing X 7.Rundown and/or drop structure sizing X Please provide sizing of rundown and/or drop structure. B.Detention pond area/volume capacity and outlet sizing X 9.Changes to Calculation Methods—if applicant/design engineer modifies any portion of UDBFCD spreadsheets used for hydrologic or hydraulic calculations,the applicant/design X engineer shall identify all changes to calculation assumptions or computer programs as to type of change and specific factors that were modified. 10.Computer model input and output X VIII. Final Items Proposed location and sizing of all storm sewers,swales,open A. channels,culverts,cross-pans,and other appurtenances, X including cross-sections of swales and open channels B. Routing and accumulation of flows at various critical points for X the minor storm runoff C Routing and accumulation of flows at various critical points for X the major storm runoff D Detention storage facilities and outlet works,including proposed X Please provide details for outlet structure. 100-year water surface elevations E. Location of all existing and proposed utilities _ X Offsite flows must be managed through site as described in the F. Routing of off-site drainage flows through the development X review memo. Minimum lowest opening elevations of residential and G commercial buildings above the 100-year water surface in X Please indicate 100-yr water surface elevations for pipes, streets,open channels,ditches,swales,or other drainage swales and streets. facilities,as illustrated by the preliminary grading plans H. Proposed on-site private and public utility easements X I. Proposed off-siteprivate andpublic drainage easements X Please clarify easement along Ogilvey ditch boundary. 9 9 Y Elevations of manhole and inlet inverts in relation to projectJ. X datum Please include water surface elevations.Max street depth is 6 K Proposed water surface elevations for street encroachments for X in.for the minor(10-yr)and 18 in.for the major(100-yr)storms the minor and major stone. as per Weld County Stormwater Drainage Criteria dated February 2006. L. Critical hydraulic structure dimensions X Detention outlet and water quality box details missing. M. Orifice plate sizes X _ N. Detention pond volumes X Please include 100-year water surface elevations on plan O. All other critical hydraulic elevations X sheets for pipes,swales and streets. P Operations and Maintenance instructions for the proposed X Please address maintenance. stormwater drainage facilities O. Construction-phase erosion control calculations X Addressed qualitatively only. Attention needed at discharge point to Ogilvey ditch,swale in R. Permanent erosion and sediment control design X sub-basin 7,and outlets of culverts. Weld County Public Works Page 3 of t Change of Zone Drainage Report Checklist Form Updated 06-22-2006 pe, anvast�me°� we\d 0.1GO-c Ey\0 C� CO3 6 7 X00 Memorandum • TO: Chris Gathman, W.C. Planning C DATE: June 30, 2006 FROM: Pam Smith, W.C. Department of Public E9 COLORADO Health and Environment CASE NO.: PF-1090 NAME: Eagle View Farms The Weld County Health Department has reviewed this Final Plan application. The location of primary and secondary septic envelopes on the Final Plan Map are satisfactory in size and location. The plat notes are also acceptable. The covenant language with regard to envelope restrictions is adequate. However, the Department has asked the applicant to elaborate on the meaning of'improvements' in Section 9.3a of the covenants for clarity. The applicant has agreed and will forward changes once they are made. O:\PAM\Planning\Final Plat\pf-1090 Ridgeview Farms.rtf 1 a Ctt DEPARTMENT OF PLANNING SERVICES Weld County Administrative Offices 918 10thWE Street, Greeley, O 80 31 WEBSITE: www.co.weld.co.us Phone (970) 353-6100, Ext. 3546 Fax (970) 304-6498 Co I4209O R 4 Longmont CO 80504 Phone (720) 652-4210 Ext. 8736 COLORADO June 29, 2006 Applicant: Eagle View Farms LLC Case Number PF-1090 Project: A Site Specific Development Plan and Special Review Permit for a PUD Final Plan for 24 residential lots and 9.7 acres of open space. Legal: NE4 of Section 23, T6N, R6, R66W of the 6th P.M., Weld County, Colorado. Location: South of and adjacent to State Highway 392 and west of and adjacent to CR 35. Parcel Number: 0805 23 000017 One previous permit was located for this parcel. Permit#. OGN-042029, Meter skid for Eldridge 2-23 &4-23 OGILVY #1 Tank Battery 1. A building permit application must be completed for each lot and two complete sets of plans including engineered foundation plans bearing the wet stamp of a Colorado registered architect or engineer must be submitted for review. A geotechnical engineering report preformed by a registered State of Colorado engineer shall be required. 2. A plan review must be approved and a permit must be issued prior to the start of construction on any of the planned lots. 3. The new homes shall conform to the requirements of the 2003 International Building Codes, the 2005 National Electrical Code and Chapter 29 of the Weld County Code. Service,Teamwork,Integrity,Quality 4. Setback and offset distances shall be determined by the 2003 International Building Codes and Chapter 23 of the Weld County Code (Offset and setback distances are measured from the farthest projection from the structure). 5. A Flood Hazard Development Plan is required for buildings located within a 100 year flood plane. 6. A letter from the Fire District to ascertain if a permit is required or if there are any special requirements. Please contact me for any further information regarding this project. Sii cerely, ilwat Robert Powell Building Plans Examiner Service,Teamwork, Integrity,Quality 441 (Limit Weld County Referral C. COLORADO June 7, 2006 The Weld County Department of Planning Services has received the following item for review: Applicant Eagle View Farms LLC Case Number PF-1090 Please Reply By July 5, 2006 Planner Chris Gathman Project A Site Specific Development Plan and Special Review Permit for a PUD Final Plan for 24 residential lots and 9.7 acres of open space Legal NE4 of Section 23, T6N, R6, R66W of the 6th P.M., Weld County, Colorado. Location South of and adjacent to State Highway 392 and west of and adjacent to CR 35 Parcel Number 0805 23 000017 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 Utility Board Hearing (if applicable) July 13, 2006 Weld County Board of County Commissioners July 26, 2006 Wehave reviewed the request and find that it does/does not comply with our Comprehensive Plan have reviewed the request and find no conflicts with our interests. ❑ See attached letter. • Comments: tily 1.41 Aift el 0 171# t/7� ��Yi// l' � c�-�� cal pc, /r 717, no• t (/ Signature ( n w d Date /„ • 12�0� Agency C �J Qm is Cam( +Weld County Planning ie. . +918 10 treet,Greeley, CO. 80631 •:•(970)353-6100 ext.3540 •(970)304-6498 fax wer OFFIt.:E OF COMMUNITI DEVELOPMENT Planning Division 1100 10th Street, SA/Opt0oreeley, Colorado 80631 •(970)350-9780 • Fax(970)350-9800 tJ'Pi •www.greeleygov.com GreCieley of RFftF�oFFi papal JUL X RcC 12" July 3, 2006 ElVED Chris Gathman Weld County Planning Department 918 10111 Street Greeley, CO 80631 Subject: PF-1090 PUD Final Plan (Eagle View Farms LLC) Dear Mr. Gathman, Thank you for the opportunity to comment on this PUD Final Plan. The City of Greeley Planning staff has reviewed the application from Eagle View Farms LLC, and recommends against this level of development outside of municipal boundaries due to the cost of extending and serving the various utilities and services necessary for higher densities. This site located within Greeley's Long-Range Expected Growth Area (LREGA)which includes those lands anticipated to accommodate the City of Greeley's urban development over the next 20 years. This type of development makes future City development difficult. If Weld County decides to continue with this development we also wish to forward the following recommendations: 1. ROW dedication along the southern edge of the property line should be included to provide for a Major collector roadway to provide east-west connection. Due to the nature of a gated community the PUD will increase the difficulty of accessing the interior of section 23. With the recent request for a lotline adjustment (AmRE-3868) in the adjacent western property there is an excellent opportunity to plan for future development within the section with appropriate ROW dedications. 2. Show the required setback from all oil/gas related surface equipment. If any questions should arise please feel free to contact me at (970) 350-9824 Sincerely, randon Goss Planning Tec ician r-^ SERVING OUR COMMUNITY • I T ' S A TRADITION • 7k/worn/se/0 preserve and Improve!fie yaa/ify of/le/or ()reeky lArouy//ime4 core-/eous and cos/e/ecli ie service. t Project Review Comments Date: 7/3/2006 Project Name: WCR - Eagleview Farms City of Location: Greeley Reviewed By: Rick Behning Phone: (970) 336-4145 Submittal Date 6/26/2006 Department Eng Development Review City ID# 1148 Submittal #: 1 Plat Page 1 ❑ New Vehicular connectivity for Section 23 should be achieved through the inclusion of Major Collector roadways along the quarter lines of section 23. Inclusion of a East-West connection between WCR 35 and WCR 33 will be critical to allow vehicles an alternative path to the existing WCR 66 and HWY 392, reducing the congestion on these Arterial roads. An East-West connection along the quarter line may already be unlikely due to existing uses, so dedication of 100 feet of ROW to accommodate a connection should be considered along the South boundary of the proposed Eagle View PUD. 50 feet of ROW would be required along this projects boundary with the other 50 feet dedicated by the property to the South. The location of the proposed detention pond and open space provides an ideal opportunity to buffer the road from the proposed homes. As Weld County grows, utilizing foresight and good judgment in acquiring adequate ROW and major roadway alignments will be instrumental in providing adequate public facilities for the increased number of vehicular trips, which will ultimately result in an economic advantage and help attract quality developments due to good traffic planning. Monday,July 03,2006 Page 1 of o-'9-0E; t , :30AM:Eaton School Dist. ;9704545193 = _ JUN 1 5 2006 fgrt TT gel11 In Weld County Referral COLORADO June 7, 2006 The Weld County Department of Planning Services has received the following item for review: Applicant Eagle View Farms LLC Case Number PF-1090 1 Please Reply By July 5, 2006 Planner Chris Gathman Project A Site Specific Development Plan and Special Review Permit for a PUD Final Plan for 24 residential lots and 9.7 acres of open space Legal NE4 of Section 23, T6N, R6, R66W of the 6th P.M., Weld County, Colorado. Location South of and adjacent to State Highway 392 and west of and adjacent to CR 35 Parcel Number 0805 23 000017 _ __T 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 Utility Board Hearing (if applicable) July 13, 2006 Weld County Board of County Commissioners July 26, 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. gs See attached letter. Comments: Signature � _ 4S rtir t $tAntl Nate (1)I(CIoL Agency a4•To") SchkooL 1. t�re..c,-r Rf.-a r.., Weld County Planning Dept. +918 10th Street,Greeley,CO. 80631 4(970)353-6100 ext.3540 4(970)304-6498 fax o-19-o6: 30AM;Ea ton School Dist. ;9704545193 s EATON SCHOOL DISTRICT RE-2 Dr.Randy Miller 200 Park Avenue Superintendent Eaton, Colorado 80615 ^a70)454-3402 d 70)454-5193 Fax June 19, 2006 Chris Gathman Weld County Planning Department 1400 17th Avenue Greeley, CO 80631 RE: Eagle View Farms LLC PUD PF-1090 Chris Gathman: We have reviewed the above applicants request and it appears the applicant's response to accommodate our requests as outlined in previous letters has been met in the final plat drawings (submitted by Torrey Design Studio, LLC for landscape and Intermill Land Surveying) as follows: 1. The cash-in-lieu payment of$1,043 per dwelling lot for a total of$25,032 still needs to be paid by applicant. 2. The 6'x10' bus shelter with a roof that blocks the wind on three sides is acceptable to the District as placed. 3. The District's request for as minimum 15'wide by 80' in length bus turnout in order to pick up and drop off students on WCR 35 appears adequate. Please contact me if you have any questions. Sincerely, Timothy Unrein Assistant Superintendent Business Services Eaton School District RE-2 Enc. Date Paid Amount Check # Received By a County Planning pYY @ld County Referral IDc. Weld GREELEY OFFICE COLORADO JUN 2 6 2006 June 7, 2006 RECEIVED The Weld County Department of Planning Services has received the following item for review: Applicant Eagle View Farms LLC Case Number PF-1090 Please Reply By July 5, 2006 Planner Chris Gathman Project A Site Specific Development Plan and Special Review Permit for a PUD Final Plan for 24 residential lots and 9.7 acres of open space Legal NE4 of Section 23, T6N, R6, R66W of the 6th P.M., Weld County, Colorado. Location South of and adjacent to State Highway 392 and west of and adjacent to CR 35 Parcel Number 0805 23 000017 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 Utility Board Hearing (if applicable) July 13, 2006 Weld County Board of County Commissioners July 26, 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. See attached letter. Comments: up hoc n,et WI dotn'ner r iv' crud •4k, a{-nrLod r u;�vvrbrs Signature Cdr �O Date 4, _21 -04 Agency FF 6' +weld County Planning Dept. ❖918 10th Street, Greeley, CO. 80631 ❖(970)353-6100 ext.3540 ❖(970)304-6498 fax -- EATON FIRE PROTECTION DISTRICT 50 SOUTH MAPLE AVENI IE, EATON COLORADO 80615 970-451-2115 FAX 970-154-2161. FIRE PREVENTION BIJREAII May 26, 2006 Casseday Creative Designs, LLC 55 South Elm Avenue Suite 210 Eaton CO, 80615 RE: Eagle View Farms Robb, and Linda, I have reviewed the information regarding the Eagle View Farms subdivision, and would like to address the following items: • Knox Box location and gate placed into Knox Box in presence of the Eaton Fire Protection District before starting of new home construction. • Upon completion of gate, a final acceptance testing will be completed before construction of new homes can begin. • The fire flow at 1000 gpm at 20 psi will meet the requirements of the Eaton Fire Protection District. After installation of all hydrants the Eaton Fire Protection District, while accompanied by North Weld County Water District, would like to flow the hydrants in order to calculate the exact amount of water available. • It has also come to my attention in reviewing the site plans that the fire hydrants are spaced approximately 700-800 feet apart. In accordance with die adopted 2003 International Fire Code (2003 IFC) residential fire hydrants must be spaced no greater than 600 feet apart, with no structure greater than 300 feet from hydrant. I have attached a copy of the hydrant spacing requirements for your reference. • The bus turnout and cul-de-sac radii specifications meet the requirements of the Eaton Fire Protection District. Thanks you for submitting die information for my review and please feel free to contact me with any questions or concerns. Sincerely, Dan antillanes Eaton Fire Protection District-FPB 0 �e�`� `�"'ad /312 . QeQ RECEIVED Old .- iii rt.���°�F�°`` JUN 14 2006 �p coarrogion niticsoctian c ' 2o1H\-\ >Je CountyReferral d1 s. COLORADO June 7, 2006 The Weld County Department of Planning Services has received the following item for review: Applicant Eagle View Farms LLC Case Number PF-1090 Please Reply By July 5, 2006 Planner Chris Gathman Project A Site Specific Development Plan and Special Review Permit for a PUD Final Plan for 24 residential lots and 9.7 acres of open space Legal NE4 of Section 23, T6N, R6, R66W of the 6th P.M., Weld County, Colorado. Location South of and adjacent to State Highway 392 and west of and adjacent to CR 35 Parcel Number 0805 23 000017 _ ' submitted to you for review and recommendation. Any comments or recommendation you consider releva t would be appreciated. Please reply by the above listed date so that we may give full consideration to yo ion. Any response not received before or on this date may be deemed to be a positive response to the nning Services. If you have any further questions regarding the application, please call the Planner as a request. Please note that new information may be added to applications under review during cess. If you desire to examine or obtain this additional information, please call the Department o 'ces. Weld County Utility Board Hearing (if applicable) July 13, 2006 Weld County Board of County Commissioners July 26, 2006 U 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. ❑ See attached lettteer.J --ROC �\\ pp //�, �II ll � � ids CCo�mments: �rojCCfCLI ROLA v wt4 17 �VU L.If k — 5,(0.!! oe ks) nW 9 CtiK {I ✓ f2 . 1\1 o 8 !red- acres h Signature cru.-4LC.k - l°L- Date Agency (Cjy �/d 0/l7 Ac C_.2 S-D +Weld County Planning Dept. +918 10th Street,Greeley,CO.80631 ❖(970)353-6100 ext.3540 ❖(970)304-6498 fax 13Csset° �1eld fount y Y flrflB ;tie oFfif .Id County Referral C. RE � ° Zoos COLORADO ��/V�o June 7, 2006 The Weld County Department of Planning Services has received the following item for review: Applicant Eagle View Farms LLC Case Number PF-1090 Please Reply By July 5, 2006 Planner Chris Gathman Project A Site Specific Development Plan and Special Review Permit for a PUD Final Plan for 24 residential lots and 9.7 acres of open space Legal NE4 of Section 23, T6N, R6, R66W of the 6th P.M., Weld County, Colorado. Location South of and adjacent to State Highway 392 and west of and adjacent to CR 35 Parcel Number 0805 23 000017 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 Utility Board Hearing (if applicable) July 13, 2006 Weld County Board of County Commissioners July 26, 2006 UWe 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. ❑ See attached letter. Comments: Signature Date h/ .O7 Gb Agency Co Di 15 lc, -- C-1/4 1-) 1i fin( +Weld County Planning Dept. ❖918 10th Street, Greeley,CO. 80631 ❖(970)353-6100 ext.3540 4(970)304-6498 fax Hello