The URL can be used to link to this page

Browse Search

Home My WebLink About20000855.tiff EVERITT March 20, 2000 COMPANIES Ms. Julie Chester Weld County Planning 1555 N. 17th Ave. Greeley, CO 80631 VIA FACSIMILE: 970-352-6312 Re: Soaring Eagle Ranch Case#1-537 Dear Ms. Chester: Thank you for sending me the package of information along with your comments about Soaring Eagle Ranch Change of Zone. I have read over your comments and want to bring to your attention some issues: I) It appears that there is a discrepancy between the 420 acres listed as the parcel size, and the actual parcel size. Looking back through our materials, it looks as though we made an error on the Change of Zone Application form and incorrectly listed 420 acres- liowever, the Summary of Land Uses chart on Page 19 of the Development Guide, as well as the Land Uses Table on Page I of 7 of the Plans we submitted, show a Gross Land Area of 382.75 acres. This acreage was calculated based on the Sketch Plan meeting we had with Ben Patton prior to our Change of Zone submittal. He helped us determine how to calculate the acreage as well as how to calculate the amount of open space that is required in a P.U.D. (15%). The 382.75 acres is an accurate representation of the acreage of Soaring Eagle Ranch and the 58.17 acres of open space shown on the plan is .75 acres more than the minimum requirement. I apologize if this incorrect transcription of 420 acres has caused any calculation problems or confusion. 2) The requirement of a Traffic Impact Analysis was waived by both the Colorado Department of Transportation, and the Weld County Department of Public Works. I discussed with the Weld County Traffic Specialist, Diane Houghtaling, the road classifications, lane configurations, right of way widths and other roadway requirements. Based upon our agreed upon design, and the fact that CDOT has agreed to the design of State Highway 257, it was also agreed that a full-fledged Traffic Impact Analysis would not be necessary. This information was included in the Development Guide on Page 7 in the sertion titled "Traffic Impact Analysis". Also, the Change of Zone referral from Public Works, dated January 28, 2000, does not include a requirement for a Traffic Impact Analysis. If further information is necessary to support these designs, we will be happy to supply that upon request from Public Works,prior to submitting for Final Plan. EXHIBIT Corpocalc Offices 3030 South Collect:Avenue•Fort Cullins•Colorado•80525 Mailing Address:no.nos 2125•Fon Collins•Colorado•80522 Telephone:(9701 226-1500•FAX:(970)223-4156-Dcnver Line;(303)623-6018 2000-0855 ?O 'd 99itEE OL6I 'ON XIJA S3IN. .. ww, ,, We ou,c0 NOW 0002-0Z-8WW Page 2 Ms. Julie Chester March 20, 2000 3) You commented that we had not shown the road cross-sections on our plans. Please refer to Page 5 of 7 of our submitted plans. The cross-sections are the majority of the bottom half of the page and include the roadway design standards as required. If these are located in the wrong place in our plans, we can relocate them. Apparently Public Works reviewed these plans because they were not noted as information that they needed in their referral. 4) We have supplied Pam Smith with all the information requested by the Weld County Department of Public'Health and Environment. A copy of this information was also sent to you. Please contact Pam to confirm that we supplied her with this information. 5) On Page 7 of your comments, Item 4-1, you refer to easement agreements between ourselves and the Larimer and Weld Canal from Thompson Lake to State Highway 257. Apparently, this comment comes from the Windsor Planning Department Staff. If you will notice on the Windsor Planning Commission referral, which recommends approval of the Change of Zone,this item was not included in their conditions. As it tuns out, the Windsor Planning Staff had made an error in their map reading and was requesting easements from a lake that does not exist and was not on or adjacent to our property. 6) On Page 9, Item 7-A, signagc adjacent to Weld County Road 13 is required. Our project is 2 miles from Weld County Road 13 and, in fact, does not abut any Weld County roads. Julie, there are other discrepancies and clarifications that need to be addressed at the hearing, but I wanted you to be aware of these as soon as possible. Hopefully, you can inform the Planning Commission Members of these issues at or before the meeting so we do not have to take too much of their time going over these facts. If you want to discuss any of this information further, please feel free to contact me any time at 970-690-7394. Thank you again for getting this package of information to me. See you at the meeting on Tuesday. Sincerely, Stanley . Everitt Executive Vice President SICE:dr P.S. I hope your daughter is feeling better. cc: Monica Daniels-Mika Director of Planning £0 'd 09117£ ?02.6I 'ON Xd.d SHINddWOO LLINEA3 Wd 80:E0 NOW 000?-0?-8VW ® fl March 6, 2000 COMPANIES Ms. Pam Smith Wing Let, Weld County Health Department 'geld Count plan 1555 N. 17t1' Ave. Greeley, CO 80631 ll,10 09 1900 Re: Soaring Eagle Ranch, Case No. Z-537 RE C E IV ED Dear Ms. Smith: G!r We have received your comments regarding our Soaring Eagle Ranch development proposal (Case No. Z-537). As you have expressed, your primary concerns about this development center around the use of individual septic systems on each lot and how some of these systems may be influenced by fluctuating groundwater levels and/or shallow bedrock. We recognize this concern and have taken several steps in our development design to address them. GROUNDWATER MONITORING: On Sheet 7 of 7 of the Preliminary Site, Landscape and Drainage Plan, which was submitted with our application for Change of Zone, there are several details that show what we are proposing to address your concerns. First, the Groundwater Monitoring Data table shows how the water table fluctuates during the seasons. We will have compiled 12 months of data next month which should help us all understand this variable better. We will continue to monitor these test holes throughout this year. One item to note is the periodic "spike" of some of the test holes. In our analysis we have become aware that the test holes were not properly sealed when installed, which allowed surface irrigation water to compromise these holes and influence the reading. A good example of this can be seen on test hole P-4. In early September the Windsor Reservoir was down as the irrigation season was coming to a close, yet our test hole indicated that groundwater was significantly higher than in any other month. Further investigation found that this test hole was in a sugar beet field and the farmer was flood irrigating heavily at the time of the reading. It is our conclusion that this test hole data was influenced by this irrigation and the other areas that show similar variations were similarly influenced by irrigation practices. We have since sealed the test holes and will continue to monitor them. Another related factor that will reduce groundwater fluctuations from irrigation is described in the Development Guide; Component Five: Landscape and Irrigation. The nArm r EXHIBIT ins ( I:r fh ` ddress PO S s 3c 'Aim, ;i leiephap, 3-(;) MY) F _ • 18 Page 2 CQ FT March 6, 2000 Ms. Pam Smith Weld County Health Department Irrigation portion of this Section (Pages 26-28) describes the controlled type and amount of irrigation water that will be applied to the site in an effort to help manage groundwater levels. GRADING PLAN: Another design element of our plan is the grading that will be done, particularly in areas that have higher groundwater. A good example of this can be seen in the area around the intersection of Cullison Ridge Road and Soaring Eagle Circle. The existing grade at this intersection will be filled approximately nine feet along with the adjoining lots. The septic leach field envelopes are placed on the highest part of each lot. Based on the test hole readings of holes #4 and #6, it appears that the groundwater is generally between 4.5 and 6 feet below existing grade. By raising this grade and placing the septic leach fields in the most appropriate position on the lot, concerns about the groundwater should be minimized. The overall Grading Plan for the entire site takes into consideration this kind of design. There may be a few lots that are not able to meet the minimum Weld County requirements, using conventional systems, and these septic systems will require an engineer to design a system that fully complies with County and State regulations. SETBACKS: Reference was made to horizontal setbacks for septic envelopes from surface water on Lot 6, Block 4, and Lots 1 and 2 of Block 5, and that these setbacks may not meet the 200' minimum. According to the measurements from the high water line of Windsor Reservoir to the septic envelopes, these lots exceed this 200' setback requirement. The area on the plan that is along the property line that is shaded is for temporary detention of stormwater and is not a surface water pond. Adjustments to the location of the septic envelopes and/or the detention area can be made if desired. SEPTIC SYSTEMS: In the Development Guide; Component Two; Service Provisions Impacts; Sewage Disposal Provisions section (Pages 8-10) is a discussion of the management provisions and system upgrades that will be required of each septic system installed in Soaring Eagle Ranch. By requiring upgrades to each system that allow for annual monitoring and maintenance, as well as providing the funding necessary to properly manage each system, the concerns generally associated with individual septic systems can be eliminated. The accompanying report from Earth Engineering, Inc., further addresses these issues as well as the concerns you brought up about shallow bedrock. Of the four items of information you requested, this report and the Preliminary Drainage and Grading Plan referred to earlier should satisfy items 1, 2, and 3. The 4th item requested was a discussion of the feasibility of providing community sewage to each lot and/or construct Page 3 March rch CO PM 6, 2000 PT Ms. Pam Smith Weld County Health Department and operate a package treatment plant for sewer treatment. There are two community sewage treatment plants in the region, one in Severance and one in Windsor. The plant in Severance is approximately 3 miles away and the Sewer Master Plan just completed in that community indicates that this property could not practically be served by their plant. Furthermore, Severance has several urban type developments in progress that, taken in total, already exceed the capacity of their plant. The Windsor Sewer Treatment Plant is approximately 6 miles from this property and the Windsor Comprehensive Plan does not indicate that this area will be served by the Windsor treatment facility. Because of these existing conditions, it is not feasible to connect to either community sewer treatment facility. In examining the possibility of constructing and operating a package sewer treatment plant for this neighborhood, several issues were taken into consideration. First, a point of discharge for treated sewage is necessary. The Windsor Reservoir Company and the Larimer-Weld Canal Company do not approve of discharging treated sewer into their facilities, which would leave the option of either piping the treated wastewater 6 miles to the Poudre River or collecting treated wastewater by truck and hauling it to another treatment facility for disposal. Neither of these options is economically feasible. Another issue that was taken into consideration was the higher density that would be needed to afford a treatment plant and how this high density development would conflict with the Comprehensive Plans of both Severance and Windsor. Both communities have expressed support for Soaring Eagle Ranch as an estate lot development because it meets their planning expectations. Placing a higher density development on this property would conflict with the regional planning ideas of the area. In conclusion, it is hoped that this information will help in your evaluation of Soaring Eagle Ranch. As was discussed earlier, we will continue to monitor and refine our data as we proceed through the process, and will adjust our plans if further information indicates that modifications are necessary. If you would like more information or would like to discuss what we have submitted, please let me know. Sincerely, Stanley K. Everitt Executive Vice President SKE:dr cc: Julie Chester Mar 20 00 08: 16a Fred Walker (9701686-2641 p. 1 Fax Coversheet Date: -;-020 —O1,Oc7 Time: q; 3 0 To:aect.c vee " Company O cPary Fax Phone #: 309_(04j ,6: From: rd (✓ife _t_ Subject: Total # of Pages (including cover): Memo: tie t tal °�' a „,,; ;,/ alai _P S, o aze-a-LA. t -Pr c t - tic Cc.24.-ed C"ate If all pages were not received, please call back immediately: EXHIBIT I 3/ Mar 20 00 09: 16a Fred Walker (9701686-2641 p • L 03/16/200e Nh'ln 13063697 W FINANCE GLORIA PAGE 01/01 MARCH 18, 2000 MR FRED WALKER, CHAIRMAN WELD COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION 1555 NORTH 17TH AVENUE GREELEY, CO 80631 DEAR MR WALKER' AS A MEMBER OH THE WINDSOR PLANNING COMMISSION, I AM WRITING TD YOU TODAY, I HAVE RECEIVED A COPY OF THE COMMENTS FROM THE WELD CO DEPT of PLANNING SERVICES REGARDING THE CHANGE OP ZONE APPLICATION FOR SOARING EAGLE RANCH POD (CASE #2-537) . TN THE COMMENTS WRITTEN BY THE PLANNER, JULIE CHESTER, PAGE 4 PARAGRAPH C DISCUSSES THE REFERRALS THAT CAME FROM WINDSOR PLANNING COMMISSION AS WE REVIEWED THIS PROJECT As A SKETCH PLAN AND A CHANGE OF ZONE. I AM VERY DISTURBED Hy THE MISCHARACTERISATION OF WHAT OUR PLANNING CBOTH I SKETCHD PLANE AND CHANGE HOFPZONE, OUR PLANNING N BY THE WELD COUNTY STAFF. ECIDD AND BY PLANNING COMMISSION VOTED WANT MOUSLY TO RECOMMEND APPROVAL OF ROARING EAGLE RANCH IN WELD COUNTY. WE THOUROUGHLY DISCUSSED THE PROJECT AND HOW IT RELATES TO OUR POLICIES AND PARTICULARLY OUR COMPREHRNSIVE PLAN. WE CONSIDERED THIS DEVELOPMENT PRO POSAL TO BE CONO16TENT WITH OUR COMP PLAN AND A HIGH QUALITY AND WELL THOUGHT out DEVELOPMENT. IN FACT, MANY OF THE EXCEPTIONAL LAND PLANNING CONCEPTS CORRIDOR IS AD HELP US REFINE REAUTIFUL ENTRYWAYR POLICIES INTO WINDSOR SURE THE HIGHWAY 257 UNFORTUNATELY. THE COMMENTS MADE BY THE WELD COUNTY PLANNING STAFF DO NOT REFLECT THE POSITION AND INTENT OF THE. WINDSOR PLANNING COMMIS- SION. THEY HAVE USED OBSERVATIONS. OPINIONS AND COMMENTS PROM THE WIND- SOR PLANNING DEPARTMENT TO THE WINDSOR PLANNING COMMISSION AS PART OF OUR REVIEW PROCESS TO DISCREDIT THIS PROJECT. WE WERE FULLY AWARE OF THE ISSUES RAISED BY OUR STAFF AND UNANIMOUSLY DETERMINED THAT THOSE ISSUES DID NOT APPLY. YET, THEY WERE GIVEN AS REASONS To DENY APPROVAL OF THE SOARING EAGLE RANCH. THIS IS DISTURBING BECAUSE IT UNDERMINES THE AUTHORITY OF OUR PLANNING COMMISSION. FREE, I HOPE. YOU WILL BRING THIS MATTER TO THE ATTENTION OF THE OTHER PLANNING COMMISSIONERS BEFORE THEY MAKE ANY DECISIONS ABOUT THE MERITS OF SOARING EAGLE RANCH. 1 WILL AGAIN BRING THE ISSUE OF THE WINDSOR PLANNING STAFF COMMENTS BEING SENT '10 OTHER GOVERNING BODIES AS TOWN OF WINDSOR POSITIONS. I WOULD HOPE THAT YOU WOULD DISCUSS WITH THE WELD COUNTY STAFF THAT COMMENTS FROM OTHER JURISDICTIONS' STAFF MEMBERS ARE NOT NECESSARILY THE POSITIONS INTENDED, As IS EVIDENCED BY THIS TIONS AANDDTSTRIENGTHEN HOPEFULLY IRE RELATIONSHIP WILL SEETWEENELIMINATE THEFUTURE OFI D- WINDSOR AND WELD COUNTY. SINCERELY, GLORIA J KANE, MEMBER WINDSOR PLANNING COMMISSION TOWN OF WINDSOR CC: BOB FRANK. CHAIRMAN WINDSOR PLANNING COMMISSION WINDSOR PLANNING COMMISSION JOE PLUMMER, DIRECTOR OF PLANNING. TOWN OF WINDSOR ROD WENSINO. TOWN ADMINISTRATOR. TOWN OF WINDSOR STAN EVERITT. EVERITT COMPANIES RELD COUNTY PLANNING DEPARTMENT f. °,tktt , ar.Le awL, +AZ. - /1"-64'11Cfr7 s 7 l9 Cr'et/A* Cr'1-4k49 • „. .A, . 1 • I A‘ i • 1 .• ' ... .i , • \,... ,• A,f. . • r ,.... \ , � h � .,ik 00' , i, . . Nr.....=f j 1..il 1 ' ttl . . 01 - N:6 'r`•'r� .k / [. r' I I. .t ,¢' 7 It 1 r ::111::'1'.116:11.::':1•14:: '• l'illi:g. r :(...: �•� 4:"87-11-118::: i •�„�• r t q � ••,::: .� ___....___...._:_____._.:vet raw tHilli :4.' ''' .ill. . .11O')/'ANA, . , . ?". ., "fr\ '15;.:* "1"----b 'I, elP-1.4-r'• 47,1, r- , -1•01...J.:., lit ..$: ofn,,r.,. Ifs .% ori ....... ' . . \ .., ..1. ../....- 14\,.., ' ..." / ',);(„,.. ,‘..: i. .,.• :::'..t 1 4:i...--' ..'_ I• _ _.,.ld :'1,. �r:.: iIf. ts gnu.� Ii.....-111--;-''' ,.� ` "'I� ii I'. -��'r��4r• ' rlj,,r .• ' f/ /_ J .`��'� .►r ��"� r1••,.,.f. i/1�•.r� �J�'•4411.1 "S__44:„. R� '�. nII r - 'L��• .. P I. -,'.. • _ �� ), 211. 1M11 ` - - .mot' ..e!...:;::: •:.1 .~• f'r• I (rY\'+'•',fiy..� -1r - i/- i! - ! t. M • iL = aI+ --��I' .) � �7 1 - -�� r '�CrA!- JP`� • '•t I�. ,•' i� 21, lL`r'k� is7.ca ,6j'i2� j! � 'i,� 1�'�� •� :49::::"---4:-.: : �i. /. P!:✓ A.. _ `�, t r: �w►1:.3:. ?� �� tr �•, iiiii;�� L. �•�pY�. h� — .. .z. ...." f11tL .._�s a �� •?► -✓ '/ _ L ' e 'aci-e.*ea- / • . . +s'4!-tGGGojr � 1 1 ii riattlit•••4 bW a b'S 711055 O ..c. I;) .• Ent1yConceptskec c, (,,, 1 M . , ..,, I EXHIBIT `-\ In tioil 33.0 - #'5 Hello