The URL can be used to link to this page

Browse Search

Home My WebLink About20171139.tiffLittle Thompson Water District PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT (PUD) CHANGE OF ZONE APPLICATION FOR PLANNING DEPARTMENT USE DATE RECEIVED: RECEIPT # /AMOUNT # Is APPLICATION RECEIVED BY CASE # ASSIGNED: PLANNER ASSIGNED: Parcel Number 1061 _ 19 0 _ 00 039 & 1061-19-4-00-081 (12 digit number - found on Tax I.D. information, obtainable at the Weld County Assessor's Office, or www.co,weld.co.us) (Include all lots being included in the application area. If additional space is required, attach an additional sheet.) Legal Description South half , Section 19, Township 4 North, Range 68 West Property Address (If Applicable) 572 County Road 42.5 Existing Zone District: A Proposed Zone District: PUD Total Acreage: Average Lot Size: 6.59 Minimum Lot Size: 5.26 Proposed Subdivision Name: Spanish Fox Estates Proposed Area (Acres) Open Space: 58.02 in Tract A, 8.90 acres landscape setback for common open space Are you applying for Conceptual or Specific Guide? Conceptual ✓ Specific FEE OWNER(S) OF THE PROPERTY (If additional space is required, attach an additional sheet.) Name: Lawrence and Jacquelyn Bebo Work Phone # 970-532-3706 Home Phone # Address: P.O. Box W Email Address l @lmenterprisesinc.com City/State/Zip Code Berthoud, CO 80513 APPLICANT OR AUTHORIZED AGENT (See Below: Authorization must accompany applications signed by Authorized Agent) Name: Kent Bruxvoort - KBC Engineers Work Phone # 970-219-2832 Home Phone # Address: 5014 Rose Court City/State/Zip Code Fort Collins, CO 80528 UTILITIES: Water: Sewer: m ivi ua se tic Gas: ce ner Electric: ou re a e Phone: Centui Link DISTRICTS: School: Thom son R2 Fire: Berthoud Fire Post: Berthoud CO 80513 I (We) hereby depose and state under penalties of perjury that all statements, proposals, and/or plans submitted with or contained within the application are true and correct to the best of my (our)knowledge. Signatures of all fee owners of property must sign this application. If an Authorized Agent signs, a letter of authorization from all fee owners must be included with the application. If a corporation is the fee owner, notarized evidence must be i ncluded indicating the signatory has the legal authority to sign for the corporation. I (we), the undersigned, hereby request hearings before the Weld Cou' y Plant) } g Co �•' for the aove'dion and the Board of County Commissioners concerning the proposed Change of Zone f.; • riaed .nincorporated area of Weld County, Colorado: leltirlfr Email Address 125.0 Proposed #ILots 9 thorized Agent Date Signature: Owner or Authorized Agent Date '7- DEPARTMENT OF PLANNING SERVICES 1555 N 17th AVE GREELEY, CO 80631 PHONE: (970) 353-6100, Ext. 3540 FAX: (970) 304-6498 AUTHORIZATION FORM Kent Bruxvoort represent Larry and Jacquelyn Bebo for the property (Agent/Applicant) locatedat 572 Weld County Road 42.5 (Owner) LEGAL DESCRIPTION: SEC 19 TWN 4N RNG 68W SUBDIVISION NAME: Spanish Fox Estates LOT BLK I can be contacted at the following Home Work 970-219-2832 Email: kbruxvoort@telesto-inc.corn The property owner can be contacted at the following Home Work 970-566-1349 Email: mbebo@Imenterprisesinc.com Correspondence emailed to: (Check one) DATE March 17, 2017 OWNER'S SIGNATURE XI Agent/Applicant E Property Owner Imaging - View Transaction Page 1 of I L&M Enterprises, the. �.�). tf3l3R W izi-thoucl, CO n11513 ((970) 522-3%6 HUE 61ITi' b.U'V p.r,tuil c':) a_!,1] c,amd,u 2421 r.taw gNIH2f937 t,N r"1' luTG SEVENTEEN ' AOOSAN S FIVE HUNDRED THIRTY Pay WELD COUNTY TErASUM P-. G. _ B0[.-46. GREELE' CO 80632-P458 .L7r,aelset 3U3�. A 11 a I Venda? N,o. Chock No, 120042 04 11.113 -la 42 chock Pale EIGHT DOLL lzS AND 40 CEN S.•*}r,►a� $1/,5V:3,48 -042D1AVP •:.O7UD4??G -430%0_ T 004 T 052 L&M Enterprises, Inc. Berthoud, CO 80513 O , t 'r 0 &PR g5 2036 va¢a,Y gtaId,Cnssr:ty 'Q`FPyouzex 4 429ao43.75 m V T m 4 mm.60 m ITND CEWN LDI CZT§RYDATE- SURER REFERENCE R43490'36 R43493.)6 R4349406 R4349506 R4676086 R4678486 R6778266 R7781999 T4698586 04/13/16 04/13/16 04/13/16 04/13/16 04/13/16 04/13/16 04/13/16 04/13/16 04/13/16 TOTAL 120042 Check Date: 4 / 13 / Check No.: UscOUNT NE+Moq4 GROS 779.16 371.88 1,441.82 1,138.02 10,104.30 1,205.96 396.44 14.48 2,086.42 17,538.48 .00 .00 .00 .00 .00 .00 .00 .00 ,00 779.16 371.88 1,441.82 1,138.02 10,104.30' 1,205.96 396.44' 14.48 2,086.42 .00 17,538.48 'ORi.'4 MA}:-253LE MOD NATIONAL DOCUMENT SOLUTIONS 800-325-3120 T224275 Spanish Fox Estates Development Guide Page 1 of 7 Spanish Fox Estates Change of Zone Development Guide Introduction The following Development Guide narrative addresses the requirements of Article VI of Chapter 27 of the Weld County Code. Spanish Fox Estates is a proposed 9 -lot rural estate subdivision, with eight residential lots to be added to an existing lot. Lot sizes will range from 5.3 to 8.6 acres, with a remainder parcel, Tract A, totaling 58.0 acres, which will remain in agricultural use. The project is located cast of the Town of Berthoud, one-half mile south of Highway 56, and immediately to the west of County Road 3. Access to the proposed P.U.D. subdivision will be from County Road 3. Component One - Environmental Impacts 1. Noise and vibration The application proposes a 9 -lot residential subdivision in keeping with the agricultural and rural residential character of the surrounding area. The existing home would be located on one of the proposed lots; eight residential lots would be added. Lot areas would range from about 5.3 to 8.6 acres. Noise levels will be consistent with ordinary residential uses, including outdoor lawn mowing, and similar uses. Lot size will allow ample distance for local noise levels to diminish at the lot lines. 2. Smoke, dust and odor Levels of smoke, dust and odor will be consistent with ordinary residential uses, including typical activities such as outdoor cooking and landscape maintenance. Lot size will allow ample distance for dust or odors generated to diminish at the lot lines. 3. Heat, light and glare The application proposes 9 large residential lots. Lighting will be at a residential level, with primarily indoor lighting, and outdoor lighting provided for safety and navigation as approved by subdivision covenants. 4. Visual/aesthetie impacts The design of the homes and any outbuildings allowable in the Estate Zoning uses will be covenant - controlled and consistent with the scope of surrounding land uses and rural estate residences. Proposed lots are large and will largely maintain view corridors to the west and south. 5. Electrical interference Installed electrical services will be at the residential scale. No modification to electrical distribution infrastructure will be required with the proposed P.U.D. Spanish Fox Estates Development Guide Page 2 of 7 6. Water pollution Residential lots will be few and large, and changes to total impervious area within the developed portion of the property will be minimal. Existing drainage patterns promote non - erosive sheet flow and post -development conditions are proposed to maintain these historic runoff patterns. Home sites will be located on the upland, flatter portions of the property, maintaining existing vegetated conditions along the steeper slopes that transition to the river plain. Existing vegetation will act as a grass buffer to limit erosion potential; the length of this natural grass buffer will be approximately 600 feet or longer. Thus, pollution to the Little Thompson River associated with erosion will be limited. 7. Wastewater disposal Sewage disposal will be provided by individual septic disposal systems, designed on a lot by lot basis at the building permit stage. Site geotechnical investigations completed by Soilogic, Inc. indicate that "the site soils would be expected to exhibit percolation rates supporting conventional septic system construction. Mounded systems could be considered in areas of shallow bedrock," where encountered. 8. Wetland removal No wetlands exist in the portion of the site proposed for lot development. All lots are proposed to be located north and outside the plain of the Little Thompson River, on the upland portions of the property. 9. Erosion and sedimentation Residential lots will be few and large, and changes to total impervious area within the developed portion of the property will be minimal. Existing drainage patterns promote non - erosive sheet flow and post -development conditions are proposed to maintain these historic runoff patterns. Stormwater drainage under developed conditions will be allowed to follow historic sheet flow conditions. Concentrated flow conditions will be avoided in site development planning to continue to limit erosion potential. 10. Excavating, filling and grading Excavation activities will be consistent with road improvements, utility installation, and construction of individual residences. 11. Drilling, ditching and dredging Drilling and ditching, consistent with installation of utilities and construction of foundations for individual residential uses, will be temporary during the construction process. Spanish Fox Estates Development Guide Page 3 of 7 12. Air pollution The application proposes 9 large residential lots. Air pollution will be minimal and limited to typical air pollution generated at a residential level, including automobile and lawn maintenance equipment usage. 13. Solid waste Individual home owners will provide acceptable household waste containers and containers for recycling qualified materials for temporary storage of household solid waste, as accepted by local sanitation services companies. It is expected that a single trash hauler will be selected to minimize trips and road impacts associated with solid waste haulage, and to limit the number of days that trash containers would be visible at the local street. 14. Wildlife removal Spanish Fox Estates is currently agricultural land, adjacent to a river bottom. The Little Thompson River provides a wildlife corridor that will not be impacted by the proposed residential lots. No removal of wildlife individuals during construction of utilities, road improvements and individual residences is anticipated. 15. Natural vegetation removal Removal of vegetation will be limited to that area to be disturbed/improved for house and yard footprint, and for road and driveway access. 16. Radiation/radioactive material No radiation or radioactive material will be introduced through the development of the proposed P.U.D. beyond that typically produced by household uses. 17. Drinking water source Potable water will be provided by the Little Thompson Water District. A commitment to serve letter prepared by LTWD dated May 31, 2016 is provided with the Change of Zone submittal materials. 18. Traffic impacts Traffic and roadway impacts are addressed in the traffic narrative prepared by Gene Coppola and included with this Change of Zone submittal. The narrative concluded, "No auxiliary lane improvements will be warranted by the (Spanish Fox Estates) development. This was determined by comparing site traffic at the access to CR 3 and the County's numerical turn lane warrants. Turn lanes will not be needed with this development since site traffic will not impede through traffic and the number of peak hour turning vehicles will be below ... County triggers for higher speed roadways. In summary, the (Development) is not cxpcctcd to adversely impact the area street system. It is considered viable from a traffic engineering perspective." Spanish Fox Estates Development Guide Page 4 of 7 Component Two - Service Provision Impacts 1. Schools The proposed 9 -lot Spanish Fox Estates residential subdivision will be located in Thompson School District RE -2J, which did not comment on the Sketch Plan submittal. The number of potential students to the district is limited by the small number of additional lots (8) proposed. 2. Law enforcement Spanish Fox Estates will be served by the Weld County Sheriffs Department, which did not comment on the Sketch Plan submittal. 3. Fire protection Spanish Fox Estates will be located in the Berthoud Fire Protection District, which did not comment on the Sketch Plan submittal. The number of homes added to the district (8) by the proposed P.U.D. is a relatively small number. 4. Ambulance Emergency services to Spanish Fox Estates will be provided by the Berthoud Fire Protection District, which did not comment on the Sketch Plan submittal. The number of homes added to the district (8) by the proposed P.U.D. is a relatively small number. 5. Transportation Traffic and roadway impacts are addressed in the traffic narrative prepared by Gene Coppola and included with this Change of Zone submittal. The narrative concluded, "In summary, the (Development) is not expected to adversely impact the arca street system. It is considered viable from a traffic engineering perspective." 6. Traffic impact analysis A traffic narrative was prepared by Gene Coppola for the Sketch Plan submittal and is included with this Change of Zone submittal. 7. Storm drainage Stormwater drainage will be allowed to follow historic drainage patterns to the adjacent Little Thompson River. Sheet flow, as currently exists, will be encouraged so that soil erosion potential is minimized. No detention is proposed for the subdivision. Lot sizes are large and overall increases in the percentage of impervious area will be less than 10 percent. Any increase in post -development runoff thus is expected to be minimal. Additionally the timing of peak runoff from the subdivision would not typically align with the timing of flood peaks in the Little Thompson River; storm durations producing peak flows in the subdivision drainage would be entirely different from that of the Little Thompson River drainage. Spanish Fox Estates Development Guide Page 5 of 7 8. Utility provisions Stormwater drainage will be allowed to follow historic drainage patterns to the adjacent Little Thompson River. Sheet flow, as currently exists, will be encouraged to limit erosion potential. No detention is proposed for the subdivision. Lot sizes arc large and overall increases in the percentage of impervious arca will be relatively small. Any increase in post -development runoff thus is expected to be minimal. Additionally the timing of peak runoff from the subdivision would not typically align with the timing of flood peaks in the Little Thompson River; storm durations producing peak flows in the subdivision drainage would be entirely different from that of the Little Thompson River drainage. 9. Water provisions Water will be provided by the Little Thompson Water District. LTWD provided a commitment to serve letter, dated May 31, 2016, attached with the Change of Zone submittal materials. 10. Sewage disposal provisions Sewage disposal will be provided by individual septic disposal systems, designed on a lot by lot basis at the building permit stage. 11. Structural road improvements plan Traffic and roadway impacts are addressed in the traffic narrative prepared by Gene Coppola and included with this Change of Zone submittal. The narrative concluded, "No auxiliary lane improvements will be warranted by the (Spanish Fox Estates) development. This was determined by comparing site traffic at the access to CR 3 and the County's numerical turn lane warrants. Turn lanes will not be needed with this development since site traffic will not impede through traffic and the number of peak hour turning vehicles will be below ... County triggers for higher speed roadways. In summary, the (Development) is not expected to adversely impact the area street system. It is considered viable from a traffic engineering perspective." Thus, no adjacent roadway improvements to County Road 3 will be required with the proposed P.U.D. Component Three - Landscaping Elements 1. Landscape plan Individual lots will be landscaped by the homeowner. Existing landscaping within the right-of-way and along County Road 3 will remain with completion of the subdivision, and where located within right-of-way will be maintained by common association. A landscape plan will be prepared as part of the final plan. 2. Buffering and screening The proposed P.U.D. project will include only low intensity uses, and large percentages of undeveloped spaces. Buffering or screening of uses is not required. Spanish Fox Estates Development Guide Page 6 of 7 3. Maintenance schedule Existing landscaping within the right-of-way and along County Road 3 will remain after completion of the subdivision, and where located within right-of-way will be maintained by common association on a schedule appropriate for the time of year and the extent of maintenance required for grass and trees. 4. On -site improvements agreement An agreement for managing and maintaining common landscaping will be provided with the final plan. 5. Adequate water Evidence of adequate water to sustain the landscaping will be provided with the final plan. Component Four - Site Design 1. Unique features The Change of Zone application proposes a subdivision into nine large residential lots, in keeping with the agricultural and rural residential character of the surrounding area. The existing home would be located on one of the proposed lots; tight residential lots would be added. Lot areas would range from about 5.3 to 8.6 acres. The layout of the eight new lots was selected to take advantage of unique features of the site. A 58 -acre agricultural tract (Tract A) will remain after the subdivision, providing view corridors to the west, separation from uses near County Road 1, and maintaining agricultural uses immediately adjacent to the proposed lots. Lots were chosen so that home sites could be placed on the flatter portions of the property, north of the 5 to 10 percent slopes that fall toward the Little Thompson River flows at the southern margin of the property. All lots arc located north of the Rockwell Ditch so that there will be no conflict with ditch access or maintenance, and the ditch will be located entirely inside Tract A. All lots arc located outside of the Little Thompson River floodplain, as shown on the Change of Zonc Plat. 2. PUD rezoning consistency Spanish Fox Estates, as designed with 9 large residential lots and a 58 -acre open tract, will be consistent with the surrounding agricultural land uses and the natural resources provided by the Little Thompson River corridor. Lots were sized and located to respect these objectives. 3. Allowed uses Eight single family residential units are proposed in addition to the existing home. Outbuildings will be allowed consistent with the rural residential character of the subdivision, to be defined per the covenants, consistent with uses allowed in the Estate Zoning District. 4. Use compatibility The proposed single family, large -lot residences proposed with the P.U.D. are compatible with existing agricultural and estate development that surrounds the property. The shooting range (Berthoud Gun Club) is a trap range to the west of the property, and the Town of Berthoud Spanish Fox Estates Development Guide Page 7 of 7 wastewater treatment facility is located to the southwest. Both are uses that are within the margin of compatibility with the proposed large -lot residences. However, separation from these two facilities is provided by placing the eight new lots as far to the east as possible. Tract A is a 58 -acre tract that provides a buffering distance from these uses. The Berthoud Gun Club is located approximately one- half milt from the nearest proposed lot. 5. Hazards or overlay zones All of the proposed residential lots will be located outside the Little Thompson River floodplain. The property is not in a geologic hazard zone or airport overlay district. Component Five - Common Open Space Usage The project is considered urban scale due to its proximity to the Town of Berthoud, and will provide a fifteen percent allocation of the total land area of the nine lots as a landscape setback. Lot sizes arc large (5.3 to 8.6 acres), allowing for ample open space on each lot. Additionally, the 58 -acre open space to the west, Tract A, allows for views westward and a sense of openness in the subdivision area. The landscape setback, proposed as 70' from the interior road rights -of -way, will emphasize existing view corridors already enhanced by landscaping planted by the land owner. The landscape setback will total approximately 9.4 acres, or 16 percent of the 59.35 acres comprised by the 9 residential lots. Component Six - Signage Signage for the proposed P.U.D. will be installed at the entry to the subdivision from County Road 3. Signage will be in accordance with the sign regulations of Chapter 23, Article IV, Division 2. Proposed Signage plans will be submitted with the Final Plan. Component Seven - RUA Impact Spanish Fox Estates is not located within any of the three current Regional Urbanization Areas (RDAs), which include the 1-25 RUA, the Southeast Weld RUA, and the Dry Creek RUA. Component Eight - Intergovernmental Agreements No impact upon Intergovernmental Agreements or other formal or informal understandings between Weld County and the Town of Berthoud is anticipated. In review of the Sketch Plan submittal, the Town indicated that they could see no conflicts in the proposed P.U.D. subdivision. Weld County Public Works Dept. 1111 H Street P.O. Box 758 Greeley, CO 80632 Phone: (970)304-6496 Fax: (970)304-6497 Applicant Name Lawrence and Jacquelyn Bebo Company Address P.O. Box W City Berthoud State CO zip 80513 Business Phone Fax E-mail larry@lmenterprisesinc.com 970-532-3706 Parcel Location & Sketch The access is on WCR 3 Nearest Intersection: WCR 3 &WCR R 44 Distance from Intersection 1/2 mile to south Parcel Number 106119000039 & 106119400081 Section/Township/Range S 1/2 Sec 19 T4N, R68W Is there an existing access to the property? IVES NO Number of Existing Accesses 1 Road Surface Type & Construction Information Asphalt X Gravel Treated Other Culvert Size & Type NA Materials used to construct Access Asphalt overlay Construction Start Date 4/2017 Finish Date Proposed Use ❑ Temporary (Tracking Pad Required)/ $75 o Small Commercial or Oil & Gas/$75 ci Field (Agriculture Only)/Exempt 512017 ACCESS PERMIT APPLICATION FORM Property Owner (If different than Applicant) Name Address City State Zip Phone Fax E-mail A = Existing Access t N ri 3 3 A= Proposed Access WCR 44 - H 56 WCR 42 o Single Residential/$75 o Industrial/$150 o Large Commercial/$150 XSubdivision/$150 Is this access associated with a Planning Process? n No a USR o RE XPUD o Other Required Attached Documents - Traffic Control Plan -Certificate of Insurance - Access Pictures (From the Left, Right, & into the access) By accepting this permit, the undersigned Applicant, under penalty of perjury, verifies that they have received all pages of the permit application; they have read and understand all of the permit requirements and provisions set forth on all pages; that they have the authority to sign for a d bind t Applicant is bo • bnd a regarding faci itie; c Applicant, if the Applicant is a corporation orother entity; and that by virtue of their signature the es to comply with all said permit requirements and provisions, all Weld County ordinances, and state laws ion. Si natur-%'►Date June 10, 2016 g Printed Name Lawrence Bebo Approval or ' enial will be issued in minimum of 5 days. Approved by Revised Date 6/2 /10 SPANISH FOX ESTATES, EXISTING ACCESS PHOTOGRAPHS Photograph 1 — From Property Access, Looking North Along County Road 3 Photograph 2 - From Property Access, Looking South Along County Road 3 Photograph 3 - Looking West Across County Road 3 Toward the Property Access F il;4 -9Pa :AW a C. ye :m L }VJ r7 . a. - .. • l~r b ir y_ - LbE`iir' r 3- ., �-f� i c� r _..1' R y'9r dr- tVPO' -this u — �t i •It-! ,.K. ._ r - • . - - _ . } •� 1r.F n t ,,,yin ....'; r _. �.w?r . W we • R. L _ - - �.+ a �. - i- 17 4 Iced Y 1 l ` _ - _ T _ 1 ' , _,a _ 'A ' :-:F a i 60 R.O. , 2 16' Buffer Shoulder Varies 2' 24' 21 1 2' Travel Lane * HMA 12' Travel Lane a ABC (Class 5) * LIMA * ABC (Class 6) 16' Shoulder Buffer �_,��' • H , .. Compacted Subgrade TYPICAL CROSS SECTION Turn Lanes as Required by Public Works** Seer CROSS SECTION NOTES: 1. BUILD TO DIMENSIONS SHOWN 2. CONSTRUCT 2" OVERLAY OVER EXISTING 15' DRIVE, BUILD EDGES WITH 6" SUBGRADE AND 4" ASPHALT, PER CONSTRUCTION DRAWINGS 3. BUILD WITH NO CROWN, CROSS SLOPE FROM NORTH TO SOUTH AT 2% 4. BUILD WITHOUT ROADSIDE SWALES, PROMOTE INFILTRATION AND SHEET FLOW NOT TO SCALE Length of Aux. Lanes Will Vary According to Posted/Design Speed Requirements Computer File Information Notes: It 3. 4. 5* * The allowable class and thicknes of Ilot Mix Asphalt (HMA) and Aggregate Base Course (ABC) shall be determined by the guidelines described in the Pavement Design Chapter. The foresinpes and backsl«pes shall be no steeper than 3:1 with a preference of d:1 a 6:1.. All sideslopes shall be seeded and mulched. Additional ROW may be required by Public Works to meet site specific requirements. Signing and striping per approved plan. Creation Date: 02/Icii0 loi iaJs; K1"l Last Madi ftcado © bate: 01/04112 le ails: 1(1 FAIL' Path; T:'tPBSO dntinTrropcsale.Weldt< Ekewints file Nacre; M lintrilaii.011. Vet XM Ste: N.T.S. llits English WELD COUNTY PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT Ole 1111 [{ St-cot/Post Office Boa 758 Greeley, Colon* S06:t2475S Hone: (970) 30i-64% Fax: (410) 304- 4' Revisal: Revised; RURAL LOCAL .g1et: Weld County Uciailcr: K. iiinnenkamp FIGURE NO. WELD COUNTY ENGINEERING & CONSTRUCTION CRITERIA Page 110 Tel: 303-792-2450 P.O. Box 630027 EUGENE G. COPPOLA P.E., PTOE Fax: 303-792-5990 Littleton, CO 80163-0027 September 26, 2014 Kent Bruxvoort KBC Engineers 1209 N. Cleveland Ave. Loveland, CO 80537 RE: Traffic Narrative for Estates at Coyote Run Weld County, CO Kent: As requested, I have prepared a traffic narrative for the Estates at Coyote Run. The site is located on the west side of CR 3 about one-half mile south of SH 56. Specific traffic items are identified and discussed in the following sections of this letter. PROJECT OVERVIEW The Estates of Coyote Run (Coyote Run) will be comprised of the existing single family home plus eight additional homes at build out. All residences will use the existing site access to CR 3. This access is located about one-half mile south of SH 56 along the west side of the road. It is paved and extends west from CR 3 through the 125 acre Coyote Run site. EXISTING CONDITIONS Coyote Run will use CR 3 for access. This two lane roadway extends south from SH 56 and continues to the south of the site. There is no posted speed limit on CR 3. CR 3 is paved from SH 56 to the south but turns into a gravel roadway some 700 - 800 feet south of the site access. Based on recent (September 2014) County traffic counts, about 175 vehicles per day use CR 3 in this area. SITE TRAFFIC Site traffic was calculated using the Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE) publication "Trip Generation, Ninth Edition". Based on the ITE trip generation rates for single family homes, Coyote Run will generate the following site trips: # Homes Daily Trips 9.521 D.U. AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour Rate In Out Rate In Out Build Out 9 86 0.75 2 5 1.0 6 3 Existing 1 10 0.75 1 1 1.0 1 1 New Trips 76 1 4 5 2 As indicated, Coyote Run will add 5 morning peak hour trips, 7 afternoon peak hour trips, and 76 daily trips to the area street system. Most, if not all, of these vehicles are expected to travel north on CR 3 to SH 56. Site traffic will use the existing access to CR 3 and will be composed of passenger cars and pickups. Peak hour site traffic at the CR 3 access is shown below. CO N Aj Access 5/3-94 Nominal/Nominal-4 LEGEND: AM/PM Peak Hour PEAK HOUR SITE TRAFFIC Sight distance was measured at the existing access. It was determined that the available sight distance is 1,000+ feet to the north and about 550 feet to the south. These sight distances are acceptable for the 55 MPH defacto speed limit on CR 3. IMPROVEMENTS No auxiliary lane improvements will be warranted by the Coyote Run development. This was determined by comparing site traffic at the access to CR 3 and the County's numerical turn lane warrants. Turn lanes will not be needed with this development since site traffic will not impede through traffic and the number of peak hour turning vehicles will be below the following County triggers for higher speed roadways: 10 vph during peak hour turning left into the facility -left deceleration lane 25 vph during peak hour turning right into the facility -right deceleration lane 50 vph during peak hour turning right out of the facility -right acceleration lane In summary, the Estates of Coyote Run is not expected to adversely impact the area street system. It is considered viable from a traffic engineering perspective. I trust this traffic narrative will meet your current needs. Please give me a call if you have any questions or need further assistance. Sincerely, f Eugene G. Coppola, P.E., PTOE SO v LOGIC September 8, 2014 KBC Engineers 1269 North Cleveland Avenue Loveland, Colorado 80537 Attn: Mr. Kent Bruxvoort, P.E. Re: Geology Report Estates at Coyote Run Weld County, Colorado Soilogic Project # 14-1181 Mr. Bruxvoort: Soilogic, Inc. (Soilogic) personnel have completed the geologic evaluation you requested for the above referenced project. Our evaluation was completed through review of mapped and published information concerning site soil and groundwater conditions. A list of the references reviewed is included with this report. The subject property includes a total of approximately 125 acres located in Section 19, Township 4 North, Range 68 West of the 6th Principal Meridian in Weld County, Colorado. The property is located south of Colorado State Highway 56 and west of County Road 3 in Weld County, Colorado. The site is relatively flat in the area of proposed development with site grades estimated to be less than 2%. Steeper grades are identified sloping downward to the south toward and adjacent to the Rockwell Ditch and Little Thompson River on the order of approximately 8 percent. The included soil type delineation diagram outlines those soil groupings identified at the site by Weld County Soil Conservation Service (SCS) maps. SCS descriptions of those soil types are included with this report. In general, the near surface soils at this site consist of low to moderately plastic silty/sandy clay and silty/clayey sands from the Aquolls, Aquepts, Colby, Otero, Paoli, Tassel and Weld series. The mapped soils consist of Eolian Deposits from the Holocene and Pleistocene geologic period. Mapped information indicates the property located immediately adjacent to the Little Thompson River is flood prone and would be expected to have groundwater at depths ranging from 5 to 10 feet. The area proposed for development is not located in an area identified as flood prone and would be expected to have groundwater at depths ranging from approximately 10 to 20 below ground surface. The site is located in area identified as a potential source of gravel and crushed rock. At this time, we do not expect the gravel deposits would be economically recoverable due to the thickness of low quality sandy clay and clayey sand overburden soils. Soilogic, Inc. 3050 67th Avenue, Suite 200 • Greeley, CO 80634 • (970) 535-6144 P.O. Box 1121 • Hayden, CO 81639 • (970) 276-2087 Geology Report Estates at Coyote Run (Approximate 125 -Acre Parcel) Weld County, Colorado Soilogic # 14-1181 2 According to geologic maps of the area, the site overburden soils are underlain by the Upper Unit of the Pierre Shale bedrock formation consisting of shale, claystone and sandstone from the upper cretaceous period. According to SCS data, the depth to bedrock would be expected to be greater than 5 feet across a majority of the site. Shallower bedrock depths on the order of 20 to 40 inches would be expected in the area of Tassel series soils. Based on our review of the site as outlined above, we expect the near surface soils could be used for support of lightly loaded residential structures. Deep foundation systems could be employed if expansive bedrock is encountered near surface. In addition, the site soils would be expected to exhibit percolation rates supporting conventional septic system construction. Mounded systems could be considered in areas of shallow bedrock. Site specific percolation testing would be required to better evaluate the percolation rate of near surface soils and depth to bedrock and groundwater in septic absorption field areas. During our review of available site data, we did not identify other potential geologic hazards as outlined in H.B. 1041. We appreciate the opportunity to be of service to you on this project. If we can be of further service to you in any way or if you have any questions concerning the enclosed information, please do not hesitate to contact us. Very Truly Yours, Soilogic, Inc. Wolf von Ca owitz, P.E. Principal Engineer Geology Report Estates at Coyote Run (Approximate 125 -Acre Parcel) Weld County, Colorado Soilogic # 14-1181 3 REFERENCES 1. Colton R.B. and Harold R. Fitch, 1974, Map Showing Potential Sources of Gravel and Crushed -Rock Aggregate, in the Boulder -Fort Collins -Greeley Area, Front Range Urban Corridor, Colorado: U.S. Geological Survey Miscellaneous Investigation Series Map I -855-D. 2. Colton R.B., 1978, Geologic Map of the Boulder -Fort Collins -Greeley Area, Colorado: U.S. Geological Survey Miscellaneous Investigation Series Map I -955-G. 3. Hershey L.A. and Schneider, Jr. P.A., 1972, Geologic Map of the Lower Cache La Poudre River Basin, North-Central Colorado: U.S. Geological Survey Miscellaneous Investigation Series Map I-687. 4. Hillier D. and Schneider, Jr. P.A., 1979, Depth to the Water Table in the Boulder -Fort Collins -Greeley Area, Front Range Urban Corridor, Colorado: U.S. Geological Survey Miscellaneous Investigation Series Map I -855-I. 5. United States Department of Agriculture Soil Conservation Service and Forest Service in Cooperation with Colorado Agricultural Experiment Station, 1980, Soil Survey of Weld County Area, Colorado, Maps 239-812/3. 6. Schneider, Jr. P. A., 1983 Shallow Groundwater in the Boulder -Fort Collins -Greeley Area, Front Range Urban Corridor, Colorado 1975-77: U.S. Geological Survey Water Resources Investigations Report 83-4058. 7. Soil Survey Staff, Natural Resources Conservation Service, United States Department of Agriculture. Web Soil Survey. Available online at http://websoilsurvey.nrcs.usda.gov/ accessed (September 8, 2014). ‘_kbc Kent Bruxvoort Consulting Engineers October 7, 2016 Chris Gathman Weld County Department of Planning Services 1555 N. 17th Avenue Greeley, CO 80631 RE: PUD Change of Zone Plat Spanish Fox Estates Dear Chris: Please find attached the Change of Zone Plat for the above -referenced project. The property is owned by Lawrence and Jacquelyn Bcbo and includes parcel #s 106119000039 and 106119400081. To answer your questions sent by email dated June 20, 2016: 1. The revised Change of Zone Plat was based upon a Property Information Binder prepared by Land Title Guarantee Company, effective date July 12, 2016 (see General Notes #1 on both pages 1 and 2). 2. Requested zoning is listed on the revised Change of Zone Plat on pages 1 and 2, top center. 3. No variances or waivers from the Estate and Agricultural Zone District requirements will be requested, other than the size of Tract A being less than 80 acres. 4. Bob Choate and I have been in contact by email regarding Little Thompson Water District's requirement for provision of acceptable water shares. My client and LTWD have discussed his shares of Handy Ditch, and both are satisfied. Bob's email of September 29, 2016 indicated this was sufficient for him. 5. I would like to defer the question regarding Lot A being a buildable lot for a residence until the hearing, if possible. I don't want this issue to be a deal -breaker, but if the County staff and Commissioners are amenable, I bet my client would also be amenable. 6. I believe access to Lot A will be via Lot 4, since both would have the same ownership. If needed, we could dedicate an access easement on the final plat from Prairie Wolf Court north between Lots 1 and 7, and along the north property line over the utility casement. This would serve to provide access to Lot A plus utility access to LTWD. If you have any questions, please do not hesitate to contact me. Best regards, KBC Engineers 10/444e&v- Kent Bruxvoort, P.E. KBC Engineers • 5014 Rose Court, Fort Collins, CO 80528 • cell: 970.219.2832 Chris Gathman From: Sent: To: Subject: Attachments: Hi Chris, Kent <kentbruxvoort@msn.com> Tuesday, November 08, 2016 10:50 AM Chris Gathman Re: Attached Image 20161007_Submittal Letter.pdf; Bebo-Change of Zone 7-27-2016.pdf 1) The October letter and PUD plat are attached. 2) The intent for the 58 acre parcel is that it be an ag parcel under private ownership, NOT a common open space 3) I'm assuming your 3rd item is a question rather a statement (i.e., you want to clarify whether the 70' setback would be ...). The intent is for the 70 -foot landscape setback to be maintained by the individual lot owners for the benefit of all but under the control of each lot owner, rather than through the HOA. Ample open space will be provided in this development, for view corridors, separation of homes, landscaping, and for each lot owner to tailor their own recreation space to their own preferences, but without the expense of creating and maintaining a common open space for just 9 lots. It's our opinion that high density is required to generate the revenue and the need for common open space. When density is low, the need for open space is met through the size of each lot and through each owner's ability to create the open space they determine for themselves they need. I know that my client will ask me, so I'll ask you: when might we anticipate the hearing? The client just asked me about the check listed in your receipt. I'm assuming that it now will be deposited by the County and will clear the client's bank shortly?? Cheers, -Kent From: Chris Gathman <cgathman@co.weld.co.us> Sent: Monday, November 7, 2016 12:13 PM To: Kent Subject: FW: Attached Image Dear Kent, I was out part of last week for training. I am setting up the change of zone application for Bebo. I have attached the receipt. I had a couple of items before this goes out for referrals. I need to make sure that I describe the PUD accurately in the notice: 1) Can you please resend the cover letter and PUD plat that you sent in October? — I was trying to locate it in my records and I am not finding it (unfortunately our system keeps e -mails for only a limited time — a real pain). 1 2) Per the application submitted in June— it lists the 58 acre parcel as open space —Common Open Space is owned and maintained by the HOA. However, we have had subsequent correspondence about this parcel — is the intent to make this parcel an Ag parcel that is under private ownership or common open space? 3) I want to clarify that the 70 -foot landscape setback will be maintained and owned by the individual lot owners vs. the HOA. Per the code —Common Open Space: Common open space is defined as any usable parcel of land or water unimproved and set aside, dedicated, designated or reserved for public or private use or for the use and enjoyment of owners or occupants of land adjoining or neighboring such area. Common open space includes landscape areas that are not occupied by buildings or uses such as storage or service areas, private courtyards, parking lots and islands. In all PUD districts, except for those containing residential uses, common open space may include landscape setbacks adjacent to roadways, where the setbacks are not utilized as parking or storage areas. The amount and type of common open space provided in a PUD Zone District shall be proportional to the intensity of the zone districts called for in the PUD or uses specified in the application, unless specifically delineated in Chapter 26. Common open space shall be designed to be useful to the occupants and/or residents of the PUD Zone District for recreational and scenic purposes. Common open space in the PUD Zone District shall be owned and maintained in perpetuity by an organization established specifically for such ownership and maintenance purposes. If the open space is not owned and maintained/accessible to the HOA— then it is not considered Common Open Space. We have had this come up before. The applicant can ask for a waiver from the 15% open space requirement. It will be up to the Board of County Commissioners (at the change of zone hearing) as to whether or not to grant a waiver from this requirement. Once I get the map and questionnaire and clarification on the open space — I will set up the case. Regards, Chris Gathman Planner III Weld County Department of Planning Services 1555 N. 17th Avenue tel: 970-400-3537 fax: 970-400-4098 Confidentiality Notice: This electronic transmission and any attached documents or other writings are intended only for the person or entity to which it is addressed and may contain information that is privileged, confidential or otherwise protected from disclosure. If you have received this communication in error, please immediately notify sender by return e-mail and destroy the communication. Any disclosure, copying, distribution or the taking of any action concerning the contents of this communication or any attachments by anyone other than the named recipient is strictly prohibited. From: Chris Gathman [mailto:cgathman@co.weld.co.us] Sent: Monday, November 07, 2016 11:46 AM 2 To: Chris Gathman <cgathman@co.weld.co.us> Subject: Attached Image 3 Chris Gathman From: Sent: To: Subject: Hi Chris, Kent <kentbruxvoort@msn.com> Tuesday, November 01, 2016 7:59 AM Chris Gathman Re: Completeness Review Comments for Bebo PUD change of zone application Good observations, all. Right now the client is overseas, and I know he is anxious to see the hearing scheduled. It has never been a priority to have a buildable lot at Outlot A. We've always focused solely on the 9 lots (existing + 8 new). He wants to avoid the potential complications of drainage requirements and 15% common open space designation. Let's stay with the project as currently envisioned, without a plan for Outlot A to be buildable. Best regards, -Kent From: Chris Gathman <cgathman@co.weld.co.us> Sent: Monday, October 31, 2016 3:59 PM To: Kent Cc: Hayley Balzano Subject: RE: Completeness Review Comments for Bebo PUD change of zone application Kent, There are some potential drainage requirements involved. Also, at a minimum, the internal road would have to be paved and 15% common open space is required because it would be considered urban scale — more than 10 lots. It probably wouldn't hurt to meet or have a conference call about it. However, Hayley is out this week for training. So next week is the earliest we could discuss. Regards, Chris From: Kent [mailto:kentbruxvoort@msn.com] Sent: Monday, October 31, 2016 3:22 PM To: Chris Gathman <cgathman@co.weld.co.us> Subject: Re: Completeness Review Comments for Bebo PUD change of zone application Hi Chris, The Bebors are thinking about which way they prefer to go. Will it matter to the County process? Is it just a clarifying question, or if Outlot A is buildable, will that make the project more difficult to support/approve? 1 ‘_kbc Kent Bruxvoort Consulting Engineers October 7, 2016 Chris Gathman Weld County Department of Planning Services 1555 N. 17th Avenue Greeley, CO 80631 RE: PUD Change of Zone Plat Spanish Fox Estates Dear Chris: Please find attached the Change of Zone Plat for the above -referenced project. The property is owned by Lawrence and Jacquelyn Bcbo and includes parcel #s 106119000039 and 106119400081. To answer your questions sent by email dated June 20, 2016: 1. The revised Change of Zone Plat was based upon a Property Information Binder prepared by Land Title Guarantee Company, effective date July 12, 2016 (see General Notes #1 on both pages 1 and 2). 2. Requested zoning is listed on the revised Change of Zone Plat on pages 1 and 2, top center. 3. No variances or waivers from the Estate and Agricultural Zone District requirements will be requested, other than the size of Tract A being less than 80 acres. 4. Bob Choate and I have been in contact by email regarding Little Thompson Water District's requirement for provision of acceptable water shares. My client and LTWD have discussed his shares of Handy Ditch, and both are satisfied. Bob's email of September 29, 2016 indicated this was sufficient for him. 5. I would like to defer the question regarding Lot A being a buildable lot for a residence until the hearing, if possible. I don't want this issue to be a deal -breaker, but if the County staff and Commissioners are amenable, I bet my client would also be amenable. 6. I believe access to Lot A will be via Lot 4, since both would have the same ownership. If needed, we could dedicate an access easement on the final plat from Prairie Wolf Court north between Lots 1 and 7, and along the north property line over the utility casement. This would serve to provide access to Lot A plus utility access to LTWD. If you have any questions, please do not hesitate to contact me. Best regards, KBC Engineers 10/444e&v- Kent Bruxvoort, P.E. KBC Engineers • 5014 Rose Court, Fort Collins, CO 80528 • cell: 970.219.2832 Chris Gathman From: Sent: To: Subject: Hi Chris, Kent <kentbruxvoort@msn.com> Tuesday, November 01, 2016 7:59 AM Chris Gathman Re: Completeness Review Comments for Bebo PUD change of zone application Good observations, all. Right now the client is overseas, and I know he is anxious to see the hearing scheduled. It has never been a priority to have a buildable lot at Outlot A. We've always focused solely on the 9 lots (existing + 8 new). He wants to avoid the potential complications of drainage requirements and 15% common open space designation. Let's stay with the project as currently envisioned, without a plan for Outlot A to be buildable. Best regards, -Kent From: Chris Gathman <cgathman@co.weld.co.us> Sent: Monday, October 31, 2016 3:59 PM To: Kent Cc: Hayley Balzano Subject: RE: Completeness Review Comments for Bebo PUD change of zone application Kent, There are some potential drainage requirements involved. Also, at a minimum, the internal road would have to be paved and 15% common open space is required because it would be considered urban scale — more than 10 lots. It probably wouldn't hurt to meet or have a conference call about it. However, Hayley is out this week for training. So next week is the earliest we could discuss. Regards, Chris From: Kent [mailto:kentbruxvoort@msn.com] Sent: Monday, October 31, 2016 3:22 PM To: Chris Gathman <cgathman@co.weld.co.us> Subject: Re: Completeness Review Comments for Bebo PUD change of zone application Hi Chris, The Bebors are thinking about which way they prefer to go. Will it matter to the County process? Is it just a clarifying question, or if Outlot A is buildable, will that make the project more difficult to support/approve? 1 Chris Gathman From: Sent: To: Subject: Attachments: Hi Chris, Kent <kentbruxvoort@msn.com> Tuesday, November 08, 2016 10:50 AM Chris Gathman Re: Attached Image 20161007_Submittal Letter.pdf; Bebo-Change of Zone 7-27-2016.pdf 1) The October letter and PUD plat are attached. 2) The intent for the 58 acre parcel is that it be an ag parcel under private ownership, NOT a common open space 3) I'm assuming your 3rd item is a question rather a statement (i.e., you want to clarify whether the 70' setback would be ...). The intent is for the 70 -foot landscape setback to be maintained by the individual lot owners for the benefit of all but under the control of each lot owner, rather than through the HOA. Ample open space will be provided in this development, for view corridors, separation of homes, landscaping, and for each lot owner to tailor their own recreation space to their own preferences, but without the expense of creating and maintaining a common open space for just 9 lots. It's our opinion that high density is required to generate the revenue and the need for common open space. When density is low, the need for open space is met through the size of each lot and through each owner's ability to create the open space they determine for themselves they need. I know that my client will ask me, so I'll ask you: when might we anticipate the hearing? The client just asked me about the check listed in your receipt. I'm assuming that it now will be deposited by the County and will clear the client's bank shortly?? Cheers, -Kent From: Chris Gathman <cgathman@co.weld.co.us> Sent: Monday, November 7, 2016 12:13 PM To: Kent Subject: FW: Attached Image Dear Kent, I was out part of last week for training. I am setting up the change of zone application for Bebo. I have attached the receipt. I had a couple of items before this goes out for referrals. I need to make sure that I describe the PUD accurately in the notice: 1) Can you please resend the cover letter and PUD plat that you sent in October? — I was trying to locate it in my records and I am not finding it (unfortunately our system keeps e -mails for only a limited time — a real pain). 1 2) Per the application submitted in June— it lists the 58 acre parcel as open space —Common Open Space is owned and maintained by the HOA. However, we have had subsequent correspondence about this parcel — is the intent to make this parcel an Ag parcel that is under private ownership or common open space? 3) I want to clarify that the 70 -foot landscape setback will be maintained and owned by the individual lot owners vs. the HOA. Per the code —Common Open Space: Common open space is defined as any usable parcel of land or water unimproved and set aside, dedicated, designated or reserved for public or private use or for the use and enjoyment of owners or occupants of land adjoining or neighboring such area. Common open space includes landscape areas that are not occupied by buildings or uses such as storage or service areas, private courtyards, parking lots and islands. In all PUD districts, except for those containing residential uses, common open space may include landscape setbacks adjacent to roadways, where the setbacks are not utilized as parking or storage areas. The amount and type of common open space provided in a PUD Zone District shall be proportional to the intensity of the zone districts called for in the PUD or uses specified in the application, unless specifically delineated in Chapter 26. Common open space shall be designed to be useful to the occupants and/or residents of the PUD Zone District for recreational and scenic purposes. Common open space in the PUD Zone District shall be owned and maintained in perpetuity by an organization established specifically for such ownership and maintenance purposes. If the open space is not owned and maintained/accessible to the HOA— then it is not considered Common Open Space. We have had this come up before. The applicant can ask for a waiver from the 15% open space requirement. It will be up to the Board of County Commissioners (at the change of zone hearing) as to whether or not to grant a waiver from this requirement. Once I get the map and questionnaire and clarification on the open space — I will set up the case. Regards, Chris Gathman Planner III Weld County Department of Planning Services 1555 N. 17th Avenue tel: 970-400-3537 fax: 970-400-4098 Confidentiality Notice: This electronic transmission and any attached documents or other writings are intended only for the person or entity to which it is addressed and may contain information that is privileged, confidential or otherwise protected from disclosure. If you have received this communication in error, please immediately notify sender by return e-mail and destroy the communication. Any disclosure, copying, distribution or the taking of any action concerning the contents of this communication or any attachments by anyone other than the named recipient is strictly prohibited. From: Chris Gathman [mailto:cgathman@co.weld.co.us] Sent: Monday, November 07, 2016 11:46 AM 2 To: Chris Gathman <cgathman@co.weld.co.us> Subject: Attached Image 3 kbc Kent Bruxvoort Consulting Engineers June 10, 2016 Chris Gathman Weld County Department of Planning Services 1555 N. 17th Avenue Greeley, CO 80631 RE: Change of Zone Application, Summary of Concerns Spanish Fox Estates Dear Chris: The following presents the applicant's response to concerns raised during the Sketch Plan application for Spanish Fox Estates, a proposed 9 -lot PUD subdivision off County Road 3, about one-half mile south of Highway 56. Affected parcels arc #s 106119000039 and 106119400081. I've attached the County's comment letter from the Sketch Plan submittal, and inserted in bold font our responses to those comments, where appropriate. The Department of Planning Services' staff and various referral agencies have reviewed your Sketch Plan application. Comments made during the Sketch Plan phase of the Planned Unit Development and agency referral responses may not be all inclusive, as other concerns or issues may arise during the remaining application processes. Response: So noted. Copies of the following referral agency comments are enclosed with this letter: Weld County Department of Planning Services -Engineer, referral dated 12/9/2014 Weld County Department of Public Health and Environment, referral dated 12/3/2014 Weld County Zoning Compliance, referral dated 11/12/2014 Weld County Department of Planning Services Floodplain, referral dated 11/12/2014 Colorado Geological Survey, referral dated 12/9/2014 Colorado Division of Water Resources, referral dated 12/1/2014 Town of Berthoud, referral dated 11/25/20134 Little Thompson Water District, referral dated 11/13/2014 Rockwell Ditch, referral dated 121912014 West Greeley Soil Conservation District, referral received 12/13/2013 The following referral agencies did not provide a response: Weld County Sheriff's Office Colorado Parks and Wildlife Town of Johnstown Town of Mead Berthoud Fire Protection District Larimer County School District RE -2J 50145 Rose Court, Fort Collins, CO 80528 • kentbruxvoort@msn.com • cell: 970.219.2832 OVERVIEW AND DISCUSSION The site under review is zoned Agricultural and is located West of and Adjacent to County Road 3 and L25 Mile North of County Road 40. The Planned Unit Development Sketch Plan proposes an urban scale development on 125 acres, with nine (9) residential lots with Estate Zoned uses, and one (1) agricultural lot. Lots sizes will range from 5.29 acres to 7.12 acres in size. The site borders the Little Thompson river to the south and a portion of the property is located in the Little Thompson river floodplain. An existing outdoor shooting range facility (approved under Use by Special Review Permit USR-1569) located to the west of the site. The Planned Unit Development is considered urban scale in that it is located immediately adjacent to the town limits of Berthoud. Section 27-2-190 of the Weld County Code defines Urban Scale development as developments exceeding nine (9) lots and/or located in close proximity to existing PUDs, subdivisions, municipal boundaries or urban growth corridors and boundaries. All urban scale developments shall pave the internal road systems of the development. The agricultural lot will be 62 acres in size. The Planned Unit Development would be served by Public Water (Little Thompson Water District) and by Individual Sewage Disposal Systems. No landscaping is proposed. The application indicates that the internal road will be paved. Response: Please note that with the submitted plat, the agricultural lot is 58.02 acres in size. Section 27-6-80.B.7 states: "All urban scale development PUDs containing a residential element shall provide for a fifteen -percent common open space allocation, unless otherwise stated in Chapter 26 of this Code." Section 27-2-60 states "Common open space is defined as any usable parcel of land or water unimproved and set aside, dedicated, designated or reserved for public or private use or for the use and enjoyment of owners or occupants of land adjoining or neighboring such area. Common open space includes landscape areas that are not occupied by buildings or uses such as storage or service areas, private courtyards, parking lots and islands. In all PUD districts, except for those containing residential uses, common open space may include landscape setbacks adjacent to roadways, where the setbacks are not utilized as parking or storage areas. The amount and type of common open space provided in a PUD Zone District shall be proportional to the intensity of the zone districts called for in the PUD or uses specified in the application, unless specifically delineated in Chapter 26. Common open space shall be designed to be useful to the occupants and/or residents of the PUD Zone District for recreational and scenic purposes. Common open space in the PUD Zone District shall be owned and maintained in perpetuity by an organization established specifically for such ownership and maintenance purposes. The A (Agricultural) lot is not considered common open space in that it will be privately owned and maintained and will not be accessible to the other lot owners in the PUD. Common Open Space will be required per the Weld County Code. Response: The cumulative area of the proposed 9 lots is 59.35 acres +/-; fifteen percent of this total is 8.90 acres. With the Change of Zone plat, the applicant proposes approximately 9.4 acres of landscape setback. A 70 -foot landscape setback will be identified on the PUD plat along the subdivision roads. This 70 -foot landscape setback will 5014 Rose Court, Fort Collins, CO 80528 • kentbruxvoort@msn.com • cell: 970.219.2832 provide for a scenic corridor to complement the existing landscaping the property owners have already established. Unless otherwise requested, lots 1-9 would be bound to adhere to the Estate zone district requirements, including number of animal units and building height etcetera and the agricultural lot would be required to adhere to the A (Agricultural) Zone District requirements. Easements shall follow rear and side lot lines whenever practical and shall have a minimum total width of twenty (20) feet apportioned equally on abutting properties and, where front line easements are required a minimum of fifteen (15) shall be allocated as a utility easement. Response: The applicant has taken note of the Estate zone district requirements. Easements as listed above have been established on the Change of Zone plat. LAND USE REF ERRAL COMMENTS: The Department of Planning Services' staff and referral agencies have reviewed your application for a sketch plan on the above described parcel. Planning staff comments are based upon consistency with the Weld County Code, Chapters 19, 22, 23, 24, 27 and any adopted intergovernmental agreements, or master plans of affected municipalities. The Weld County Environmental Health Department, in their referral dated December 3, 2014 indicated that the applicant has not demonstrated compliance with Chapter 27 of the Weld County Code in regards to water service. Response: A commitment to serve letter from Little Thompson Water District has been submitted with the Change of Zone application. The Colorado Division of Water Resources stated in their referral dated December 1, 2014 that the existing well (Permit No. 288016) must be included in an augmentation plan or must be plugged and abandoned. Response: The applicant does not agree that the Colorado Division of Water Resources (DWR) is interpreting state statute correctly. DWR has taken the position in its letter that although the existing well is located on a parcel that will be greater than 35 acres in size (58 acres), the fact that the land is being subdivided, as defined by Section 30-28-101(10)(b), C.R.S., all of the parcels are part of the subdivision, including the 58 -acre parcel. DWR then concludes that "the existing exempt well must be included in an augmentation plan, or must be plugged and abandoned." However, there is a logical fallacy in their two statements. In its essence, the DWR's position is that a well on a parcel that is part of a subdivision must be augmented or plugged. However, C.R.S. Section 37-92-602(3)(b), under which the well permit no. 288016 was issued, provides in two separate locations an allowance for permitted wells in a subdivision. A permitted well on a parcel in excess of 35 acres is in fact allowed in subdivisions by the plain reading of the statute language. The first instance where the statute allows permitted wells in subdivision is in Section 37- 92-602(3)(b)(II)(A), which states, "... will be the only well on a tract of land of thirty-five 5014 Rose Court, Fort Collins, CO 80528 • kentbruxvoort@msn.com • cell: 970.219.2832 acres or more or will be the only well on a cluster development lot..." Here, the statute clearly allows a permitted well on a lot in a subdivision (a cluster lot subdivision). The second instance is in Section C.R.S. Section 37-92-602(3)(b)(III), which states, "if the application is for a well, as defined in subparagraph (II) of this paragraph (b), which will be located in a subdivision, as defined in C.R.S. Section 30-28-101(10), C.R.S..." Again, the statute clearly allows a permitted well in a subdivision. Prior to proceeding to the next process, written evidence of water agreements will be required. Appropriate documentation shall be provided which indicates not only that taps are available, but provide assurances that these connections will be made. The style of assurance may take several forms, however pre -purchase of taps, line extension agreements, tap service agreements, or another form of "participation agreement" will be acceptable. The agreements shall be approved by the Weld County Attorney's Office prior to submitting the Change of Zone application. Response: A commitment to serve letter from Little Thompson Water District (LTWD), dated May 31, 2016, has been submitted with the Change of Zone application. The Weld County Environmental Health Department, in their referral dated December 3, 2014 indicated that the applicant has demonstrated compliance with Chapter 24 of the Weld County Code in regards to Individual Sewage Disposal Systems requirements. Each lot will require an individual septic permit and percolation tests in accordance with Section 30 of the Weld County On -site Wastewater Treatment Systems Regulations. No septic systems shall be installed in the floodway. Response: The comments above regarding individual septic permits are noted. Not all of the environmental impacts as outlined in Chapter 27 of the Weld County Code were addressed. This shall be addressed in the Change of Zone application. Response: A Narrative regarding Development Guide components, including environmental impacts, is included with the Change of Zone application. The applicant shall include with the Change of Zone application a copy of a surface use agreement with the property's mineral owners stipulating that the oil and gas activities have adequately been incorporated into the design of the site, or show evidence that an adequate attempt has been made to mitigate their concerns. Response: The property owner is also the property's mineral owner. Per the Public Works referral dated December 9, 2014, internal roadway details (cross section, ROW, etc.) and an access permit from the Public Works Department will be required to be submitted with the change of zone application. An Access Permit is required. For new accesses and/or change of use of an existing access, the fee and photos are required (Access permit instructions and application can be found at http:.. vww.co.weld.co.us'DepartnicntsiPubIicWorL .PcrinitsiApplications.htm1.) Chapter 6, Sections 6.3, 6.4 and 6.5 of the Weld County Engineering and Construction Criteria, offer access design guidance. This document can be found at: 5014 Rose Court, Fort Collins, CO 80528 • kentbruxvoort@msn.com • cell: 970.219.2832 http://www.co.weld.co.ussDepa rtments/1) u I ic Works/Enui neer i nua ndRiu-htotWa v/LnginceringC r iteria a lid Policics.html) Existing access points with change of use or new access points may or may not be granted. Questions pertaining to access permits or access design shall be directed to the Public Works Department. Stop signs and street name signs will be required at all intersections. Roadside drainage shall be contained within the right-of-way. The applicants will be required to maintain historic drainage flows and run-off amounts on the property. Response: An access permit is included with the Change of Zone application. A roadway cross section applicable for the subdivision is attached with the Change of Zone application. We have noted the comments above regarding, access, stop signs, and street name signs. A drainage report is included with the Change of Zone application. The drainage report provides a discussion of how the proposed subdivision will be developed to maintain historic drainage flows and runoff amounts on the property. No stormwater detention shall be required for rural residential developments of nine (9) lots or fewer, where the average lot size is equal to or greater than three (3) acres per lot and: 1) downstream roadway criteria are not exceeded (6 -inches water depth on road for the 10 -year storm); and 2) the total post -development imperviousness for the rural residential development does not exceed ten percent (10%), assuming that all internal roads and driveways are paved (or eventually will be paved). Response: Nine lots are proposed, each of which is greater than 3 acres per lot, and the total post -development imperviousness for the development is estimated at approximately 5.8%. Thus, no stormwater detention is proposed. Per the Weld County Certified Floodplain Manager (Diana Aungst), in the referral dated November 12, 2014: The southern portion of the proposed PUD is in the Little Thompson River floodplain. The applicant shall submit a Floodplain Development Permit (FHDP) for all development activities located within the special flood hazard area. The FEMA definition of development is any man-made change to improved or unimproved real estate, including by not limited to buildings or other structures, mining, dredging, filling, grading, paving, excavation, drilling operations, or storage of equipment and materials. For the Change of Zone and Final Plan Plats: Show the floodplain and floodway (if applicable) boundaries on the map. Label the floodplain boundaries with the FEMA Flood Zone and FEMA Map Panel Number or appropriate study. Response: No portion of the proposed development will be located within the Little Thompson River floodplain. The floodplain is shown on the Change of Zone plat. The applicant shall meet with the School District RE -2J prior to submitting the Change of Zone application to discuss the requirements for a bus drop pull off/pick up location and any other requirements/concerns. Parking or stopping of the bus on the County Roads will not be allowed. The applicant shall also meet with the appropriate postal district prior to submitting the Change of Zone application to determine if a common mailbox area (Kiosk) will be required. If required, the mail box area must be shown and dimensioned on the Change of Zone plat. Evidence of approval for the mail box siting shall be included in the Change of Zone application. The school bus shelter, mail box kiosk, and pond shall be located on an outlot and shall be maintained by the Homeowners Association (HOA). 5014 Rose Court, Fort Collins, CO 80528 • kentbruxvoort@msn.com • cell: 970.219.2832 Response: The applicant's engineer reached out by phone and in person to the school district and the post office. Neither responded to attempts to meet to discuss school bus shelter and mail box kiosk. The applicant is proposing a 10' access easement on the property adjacent to County Road 3, to be used to create a wider shoulder for both bus and mail carrier pullout. The wider shoulder will be designed on the Construction Drawings to be prepared with the Final Plan. Eighteen (18) land use referrals were sent, to agencies who may be impacted by this proposed development, eleven agencies responded, some with specific concerns, seven agencies did not return a response. PRIOR TO PROCEEDING TO THE CHANGE OF ZONE: The applicant shall contact all referral agencies (including the referral agencies referred to in the previous section) and provide written documentation indicating that their concerns have been addressed to the satisfaction of each referral agency. Response: Ten of the referral agencies provided a written response to the Sketch Plan submittal, as listed above. Where a comment was provided we have addressed the comment with the Change of Zone submittal, as detailed in each response below. • Weld County Department of Planning Services — Engineer: No issues were raised that cannot be addressed at either the Change of Zone application or with the Final Plan. An access permit is included with the Change of Zone application. A roadway cross section applicable for the subdivision is attached with the Change of Zone application. We have noted the comments above regarding, access, stop signs, and street name signs. A drainage report is included with the Change of Zone application. The drainage report provides a discussion of how the proposed subdivision will be developed to maintain historic drainage flows and runoff amounts on the property. • Weld County Department of Public Health and Environment: Comments provided regarding individual septic permits are noted. No issues were raised that cannot be addressed at the time of building permit. • Weld County Zoning Compliance: No conflicts were noted. • Weld County Department of Planning Services — Floodplain: Comments provided regarding the floodplain are addressed on the Change of Zone plat. • Colorado Geological Survey: No objections were raised. Comments provided regarding lot -specific concerns will each be addressed at building permit. • Colorado Division of Water Resources: As noted above, the applicant believes that the DWR has misinterpreted the statute it quotes. The statute allowing the permitting of well no. 288016 explicitly allows wells in subdivisions. The conditions 5014 Rose Court, Fort Collins, CO 80528 • kentbruxvoort@msn.com • cell: 970.219.2832 that allowed the well to be initially permitted will not be changed by the proposed P.U.D. and the well should remain as permitted. • Town of Berthoud: No conflicts were noted. • Little Thompson Water District: A water service commitment letter has been provided by LTWD, dated May 31, 2016, and is provided with the Change of Zone submittal materials. • Rockwell Ditch Company: A statement from David K. Schaal dated May 12, 2016 has been provided with the Change of Zone submittal materials. The project will address the three concerns of the Rockwell Ditch Company as follows: 1) increases over historic runoff will be less than 10 percent during the 100 -year storm event; 2) the development will remain entirely outside the ditch right-of-way and no infringement upon that right-of-way will occur; and 3) operation and maintenance of the ditch will not be impaired in any way by the proposed P.U.D. subdivision. • West Greeley Soil Conservation District: Comments provided regarding individual septic permits are noted. SUMMARY: After reviewing the Planned Unit Development Sketch Plan proposal, it is the opinion of the Department of Planning Services that the proposed PUD is predominately supported (with the exception of the Common Open Space requirement) by the Weld County Code. The applicant shall clarify in the change of zone application if they propose to waiver from any of the E (Estate) Zone District uses and requirements for the nine (9) residential lots and also if they propose to waiver from any of the A (Agricultural) Zone District uses and requirements. Additionally the applicant shall address the Common Open Space requirement or request a waiver from this code requirement. The applicant should be aware and consider that there are a number of uses/activities allowed in the A (Agricultural) Zone District that have the potential to impact the adjacent residential lots (through odors, dust...). The applicant should also be aware and address any potential impacts from adjacent land uses (specifically the shooting range) in the Change of Zone application. The proposed development is located in close proximity to the municipal boundaries of the Town of Berthoud and existing subdivisions and is consistent with an urban scale development. Should you choose to proceed with the Planned Unit Development application process, the next step is to address the concerns of the referral agencies. When the concerns are addressed and the water agreement has been approved by the Weld County Attorney's Office, a PUD Change of Zone application may be submitted, unless it has been determined that substantial changes from the submitted Sketch Plan would warrant the need to submit a new Sketch Plan application. Subsequent submittals associated with this proposed PUD must address all issues discussed above, as well as the questions and concerns of the following referral agencies. Further, where stipulated, written evidence of approval by the referral agency is required prior to submitting the Change of Zone application. Please review the enclosed materials and then call to 5014 Rose Court, Fort Collins, CO 80528 • kentbruxvoort@msn.com • cell: 970.219.2832 schedule and appointment so that I may reserve a sufficient amount of time with you. The purpose of the meeting will be to familiarize you with the PUD Subdivision application procedure and discuss any problems or concerns identified in the referrals associated with this letter. No additional information is required at this time. Please note, staff comments made during the Sketch Plan phase of the PUD application procedure and agency referral responses may not be all inclusive as other concerns or issues may arise during the remaining application process." If you have any questions, please do not hesitate to contact me. Best regards, KBC Engineers Kent Bruxvoort, P.E. 5014 Rose Court, Fort Collins, CO 80528 • kentbruxvoort@msn.com • cell: 970.219.2832 Hello