Recommended Motion: - Microsoft



March 27, 2018Nina Ruiz, PM/Planner IIEl Paso County Planning and Community Development Department2880 International Circle, Ste. 110Colorado Springs, CO 80910 AUTOTEXTLIST Subject: Flying Horse North Filing #1, Review 1Dear Ms. Ruiz:This letter responds to your letter of February 8, 2018 regarding the subject project. Responses to the comments in your letter are shown in RED below under the original comment.EL PASO COUNTY PLANNING AND COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENTCurrent Planning General 1. Prior to recording we will need the recording fee, tax valorem showing a zero balance, and title dated within 30 days. Additional documents to be recorded must also be submitted, such as the SIA. The Mylar will need to be signed by all parties other than El Paso County and have the PPRBD stamp placed on it. All recording fees are to be paid prior to recording. Noted.2. Any items that are uploaded will override the previous versions and replace them. Noted.3. All engineering documents must be approved by the County Engineer prior to the item being scheduled for hearing. Noted.4. Additional redlines and comments will be submitted upon completion of the PCD engineer. Noted.5. A Jurisdictional Dam exists within the preliminary plan area. The approval has not been supplied as part of your submittal. A copy of the State approval must be submitted prior to the associated engineering documents being approved. Noted.6. The final plat(s) must be approved and recorded prior to construction of any structure. Noted.7. The detention pond maintenance agreement must be recorded and referenced on the final plat(s). 8. Prior to scheduling the item for hearing, all engineering documents must be signed by the County Engineer. Noted.9. The HOA documents must be recorded prior to the final plat(s) and referenced on the face of the plat. Noted.10. Redlines and additional comments will be submitted upon completion of the PCD Engineering division. Noted.Application 1. The acreage under the description is incorrect. Acreage has been changed.Mineral Certification 1. The mineral certification has not been notarized. Please have the form notarized. A notarized certification has been submitted noting that the hearing date has not been established. Soils and Geology 1. Many proposed lots contain identified hazards. These hazards should be shown as no build, or a note added that includes a mitigation technique. The hazard lines and the notes requested by the County in the review comments have all been added to the plat.Traffic 1. The CDOT access permit was for 40 lots, phase 1 will exceed this allowance. A new access permit through CDOT with associated improvements will be required. If this permit should be submitted to PCD prior to recording the final plat. PCD has no mechanism to limit building permits issued to 40 if the final plat has been approved and recorded. If construction of 40 lots is desired by the applicant an alternative would be to submit the 1st final plat with 40 lots and then other final plats following would require the CDOT access permit as a submittal item. Should you choose this avenue contact Nina. Phase 1 was tied to the number of occupied homes (40) permitted before Highway 83 improvements are required by CDOT. The 40 lots for which building permits may be issued are being shown on the Filing 1 Plat. Any occupancy over 40 lots or the addition of the Golf Course triggers Highway 83 improvements.Signage 1. The proposed sign plan does not match the recorded PUD. The PUD specifically states the signage will be as indicated on the PUD. Either the PUD or the sign plan will need to be amended to be consistent. The PUD Plan will be amended once CDOT approves the engineering plans for Hwy 83 thereby clarifying the sign location. 2. The County Engineer will submit comment regarding the signage proposed within the ROW. If the signage is to remain within the ROW a license agreement will be required. Noted. Fire Protection Report 1. The report did not include response times. Please add all information required in 6.3.3.B.1 of the Land Development Code. Fire response times from each fire department have been uploaded.Landscaping 1. Easements must be provided for the landscaping that is to be provided on parcels not included within this final plat. Noted. Easements will be provided with the sign permit applications for signs that are not located within plat boundaries. Comment 2:Attachment: Comment_SF181_3.docSee County Attorney Comments but use this template for signatures. Noted. Comment 3:Three waivers are being requested: 300 year water supply for the golf course, using leased water, and trees along Stagecoach, Black Forest, and Hodgen. The BoCC will approve/deny these requests at a public hearing. Should the water requests be denied, the application would be denied or the item continued due to there being no way of making a finding of sufficiency for water quality, quantity, and dependability. Noted. Comment 4:Potential wetlands and ponds were identified in the Natural Features Report, similar finding and potential hazards were identified in the soils and geology report. The final plat does not reflect that these hazards exist or provide notes to require mitigation measures. The hazard lines and the notes requested by the County in the review comments have all been added to the plat. Potential wetlands and existing ponds were ment 5:Traffic 1. The CDOT access permit was for 40 lots, phase 1 will exceed this allowance. A new access permit through CDOT with associated improvements will be required. If this permit should be submitted to PCD prior to recording the final plat. PCD has no mechanism to limit building permits issued to 40 if the final plat has been approved and recorded. If construction of 40 lots is desired by the applicant an alternative would be to submit the 1st final plat with 40 lots and then other final plats following would require the CDOT access permit as a submittal item. Should you choose this avenue contact Nina. 40 lots have been identified on the Plat for which building permits may be granted. Prior to issuance of a building permit for the 41st lot, a new CDOT permit for access to Highway 83 will be required insuring that improvements to the Stagecoach/Highway 83 intersection will be made. Comment 6:Signage 1. The proposed sign plan does not match the recorded PUD. The PUD specifically states the signage will be as indicated on the PUD. Either the PUD or the sign plan will need to be amended to be consistent. An amended PUD Sign Plan will be provided for administrative review once the sign package has been approved. 2. The County Engineer will submit comment regarding the signage proposed within the ROW. If the signage is to remain within the ROW a license agreement will be required. Noted. Fire Protection Report 1. The report did not include response times. Please add all information required in 6.3.3.B.1 of the Land Development Code. Fire response times have been ment 7:Landscaping 1. Easements must be provided for the landscaping that is to be provided on parcels not included within this final plat. Noted. Easements will be provided with the sign permit applications. See uploaded attachments in EDARP. Noted.Engineering Department Comment 1:Submit the following documents: - O&M Manual for the permanent BMP facilities - SDI Worksheet for each of the permanent detention ponds - EPC MS4 Post Construction Form These documents are now submitted. -Geotech report for the analysis/recommendation regarding the foundation/embankment for all permanent detention facilities per DCM 11.3.3. (Can be a supplementary document instead of updating the 2016 Geotech report that was submitted). A supplemental geotech. report for ponds will be submitted. The following documents will be required prior to or at preconstruction: - A copy of the non-jurisdictional dam application form submitted to the state. These documents are now provided. 2:Attachment: Comment_SF181_2.pdfEngineering review 1 redline comments to the following documents will be uploaded by the project manager: - Plat - Traffic Study - Construction Plans - SWMP (attached is the checklist) - Drainage Report - Grading and Erosion Control Plan - FAE: update accordingly based on the comments on the other documents. - Signage Plan - Reservoir Design Report Due to the amount and complexity of review 1 comments, new comments may be generated with the resubmittal. Noted.ELPASO COUNTY PARKS DEPARTMENT The Planning Division of the Community Services Department has reviewed the Flying Horse North Phase I Final Plat, and has the following comments of behalf of El Paso County Parks. This application will be presented to the Park Advisory Board February 14, 2018.The Flying Horse North Phase I Final Plat proposes 80 single-family residential lots on 532.3 acres, with a minimum lot size of 2.5 acres, and includes 15.7 acres of private open space, and a 207.5- acre 18-hole golf course. The property is located immediately north of Black Forest Regional Park, bounded by State Highway 83 on the west, Black Forest Road on the east, and Hodgen Road to the north. This project area is within the Black Forest Preservation Plan area.The El Paso County Parks Master Plan shows an alignment of the Fox Run Regional Trail running through the project area. This Primary Regional Trail links several regional trails and connects the adjacent Black Forest Regional Park to Fox Run Regional Park. The Flying Horse North Preliminary Plan shows a 25-foot wide County Trail easement running along the southern boundary, continuing north through an open space park, where the trail is then planned to connect to Hodgen Road through two other subdivisions currently in the County development review process – Sundance Ranch and Providence Point Estates.The Park Advisory Board endorsed the Flying Horse North PUD Development Plan in May 2016 and the Preliminary Plan in January 2018, the latter of which with the following recommendation:“Recommend to the Planning Commission and Board of County Commissioners that approval of the Flying Horse North Preliminary Plan include the following conditions: (1) designate and provide to El Paso County a 25-foot wide public regional trail easement along the southern property line and through the open space park that allows for public access, as well as construction and maintenance by El Paso County of the Fox Run Primary Regional Trail, and the easement be dedicated to the County via forthcoming final plat(s); and (2) fees in lieu of land dedication for regional park purposes in the amount of $121,690 will be required at time of the recording of the forthcoming final plat(s).” Noted. Phase I Final Plat does not include the tracts that contain the proposed Fox Run Primary Regional Trail corridor, and as is shown in the Flying Horse North Preliminary Plan, these tracts will be included in later phases of the overall project. El Paso County Parks staff supports the regional trail as shown on the Preliminary Plan, and recommends the applicant provide a 25-foot wide public regional trail easement to be dedicated to the County via forthcoming final plats for public access and the construction and maintenance of the primary regional trail.Recommended Motion:“Recommend to the Planning Commission and Board of County Commissioners that approval of the Flying Horse North Phase I Final Plat include the following conditions: (1) designate and provide to El Paso County a 25-foot wide public regional trail easement along the southern property line and through the open space park that allows for public access, as well as construction and maintenance by El Paso County of the Fox Run Primary Regional Trail, and the easement be shown on and dedicated to the County via forthcoming final plat(s); and (2) require fees in lieu of land dedication for regional park purposes in the amount of $34,400.” Noted.ELPASO COUNTY ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES The Environmental Division has no further comment. Noted.ELPASO COUNTY CONSERVATION DISTRICT Comment; Pond outlets appear to be sufficient. If vegetation in the stream channels downstream of the outlets is not sufficient to prevent gully erosion, might consider drop structures in a series to stabilize Noted.ELPASO COUNTY HEALTH DEPARTMENT Please accept the following comments from El Paso County Public Health regarding the project referenced above:The proposed 80 lot (2.5 acre+ minimum lot size) rural residential development will be provided water from individual private wells. Wastewater treatment service is proposed to be by onsite wastewater treatment systems (OWTS). Noted.A finding for sufficiency in terms of water quality cannot be made at this time. Table 1 of the Curt Wells 24Nov2017 Water Quality Report lacked several water quality constituents, including all Volatile Organic Chemical (VOC’s) contaminants, and several Synthetic Organic, Inorganic, and Secondary Maximum Contaminant contaminants. A copy of the required samples required to be taken for approval is available at the Planning and Community Development Department or El Paso County Public Health. Water testing is underway. Results will be provided shortly.The 20Nov2017, Entech Engineering Soil, Geology, Geologic Hazard, and Wastewater Study Report, and The Entech Engineering Soil, Geology, Geologic Hazard, and Wastewater Study Report was reviewed to determine the feasibility of using wastewater treatment through onsite wastewater treatment systems (OWTS). The referenced report supports the use of onsite wastewater treatment systems for this proposed development project. Review of the 4 existing (2016) soil percolation tests and the 11 soil profile test pit excavations all indicated that the majority of, if not all, OWTS’s will be require a Colorado Professional Engineer design due to poor soil conditions. It is recommended that this information is discussed at future formal and informal public meetings. In any case, all onsite wastewater treatment systems must comply with Chapter 8 of the El Paso County Board of Health Regulations. Each individual lot requires soil profile test pit excavations in the proposed soil treatment areas as part of the permitting process by El Paso County Public Health. Planning the location of the house footprint, well location, and primary and secondary soil treatment area locations on each lot is critical. Dry gulches, ponds, and rolling terrain are variables to watch during lot development. Noted. The OWTS for the Clubhouse and any golf course related out-building with wastewater requirements must also be designed by a Colorado Registered Professional Engineer. Noted.Water Quality detention ponds must be maintained to eliminate stagnant water in an effort to minimize the risk of West Nile Virus from potential mosquito breeding areas. Noted.Radon resistant construction building techniques/practices are encouraged to be used in this area. The EPA has determined that Colorado, and the specifically the El Paso County area, have potentially higher radon levels than other areas of the country. Noted.Earthmoving activity in excess of one acre, but less than twenty-five acres, will require a Construction Activity Permit from El Public Health. Go to activity-application for more information, and links to the Colorado Department of Public Health and Environment for earthmoving activity greater than 25 acres. Noted. Grading permit has been issued for this subdivision.El Paso County Public Health encourages planned walk-ability of residential communities. Please consider appropriate connections to commercial areas through the use of sidewalks, and bike trails. Walk- ability features help in the effort to reduce obesity and associated heart diseases. Noted.Mike McCarthy, R.E.H.S.El Paso County Public Health Environmental Health Division 719.575.8602mikemccarthy@ 31Jan2018ELPASO COUNTY ATTORNEY’S OFFICE Comment 1:Attachment: Comment_SF181_1.pdfOne change to SIA RevisedComment 2:Your drainage report indicates the HOA will maintain the drainage facilities. Please use the Developer/HOA template for the Detention Basin Maintenance Agreement and resubmit. RevisedCOLORADO STATE FOREST SERVICE The Colorado State Forest Service recommends that all forested acres be mitigated to reduce the risk of wildfire and that defensible space be created for each dwelling using the standards in “Protecting Your Home From Wildfire: Creating Wildfire-Defensible Zones“ FIRE 2012-1 located on the Colorado State Forest Service website. addition, I recommend that all wildfire mitigation be completed before or during dwelling construction. Noted.Please feel free to contact me if I can be of any further assistance.Respectfully,Larry LongLarry Long C.F.District Forester – Woodland Park719/687-2921larry.long@colostate.eduCOLORADO DIVISION OF WATER RESOURCES See uploaded attachments in EDARP911 AUTHORITY –ELPASO/TELLER COUNTY Stagecoach Road – There are three sections of the proposed Stagecoach Road that do not logically continue. The change in direction at the two roundabouts indicated below would dictate a change in road name. In addition, the eastern end of Stagecoach would be considered a logical continuation of Terra Ridge Circle due to its position directly across Black Forest Road.Stagecoach / Shortwall Stagecoach / Milam Agreement has been reached on the naming on Stagecoach Road from Hwy 83 to the 2nd roundabout. East of the 2nd roundabout the street will be named Old Stagecoach Road. Milam Road has been removed.Husted Court – Not Acceptable – Existing road name replaced with Billings Court.Milam Road – Not Acceptable – Existing road name replaced with Shortwall Drive.Laredo Drive – Not Acceptable – Existing road name replaced with Allen Ranch Road.Sunnyside Court – Not Acceptable – Existing road name replaced with Whorton Court.Tarryall Court - Not Acceptable – Existing road name replaced with Weir Mill Court.-Talbert Court – Acceptable Shortwall Drive – Acceptable – Due to continuity, suffix should be “Court, Place, Way, Terrace, Lane, Loop, Trail, or Path” Shortwall Drive replaces Milam Road.Longwall Court – Acceptable – Due to continuity, suffix should be “Street or Drive” Suffix changed to “Drive”.Gold Run Court – Acceptable Quartz Creek Drive – Acceptable Coffer Court – Acceptable – Due to continuity, suffix should be “Street or Drive” Suffix changed to “Street”.Coalmount Court – Acceptable – Due to continuity, suffix should be “Street or Drive” Suffix changed to “Drive”.Strongboy Drive – Acceptable – Due to continuity, suffix should be “Court, Place, Way, Terrace, Lane, Loop, Trail, or Path” Suffix changed to “Place”.Holmes Road – Acceptable – Logical ContinuationAbundance Court – AcceptableMedota Court – AcceptableRubble Drive - AcceptablePistol Court - AcceptableBounty Drive - AcceptableHangman Road – AcceptableHardesty Court - AcceptableMOUNTAIN VIEW ELECTRIC ASSOCIATION INC This area is within MVEA certificated service area. MVEA will serve this area according to our extension policy. Connection requirements may include provisions for necessary line extensions and or other system improvements, and payment of all fees under MVEA line extension policy. Information concerning these requirements can be obtained by contacting the Engineering Department of MVEA. Noted.MVEA recognizes the utility easements of ten (10) foot front, side and rear lot lines. MVEA does request all tracts, landscaping, drainage and open spaces, to be listed to include utilities. As construction moves forward additional easements may be required once a review of civil drawings with grading and erosion plan is provided to MVEA. Noted.MVEA has existing facilities near these parcels. If there is any removal or relocation of facilities it will be at the expense of the applicant and a review of easements will be required in order to serve. Noted. Mountain View will require that the owner or developer of this project coordinate with it and the El Paso County concerning the location of any roads or other public improvements that it constructs, including any offsite modifications to existing roads or other public improvements, in order that arrangements can be made, in advance of entering into any construction contracts affecting such facilities, to complete any necessary relocation of Mountain View facilities prior to construction of said improvements, all in accordance with Colorado law and Mountain View's published policies and Bylaws. Mountain View will not proceed to relocate any facilities until after such coordination is complete and Mountain View has been paid those relocation costs that are properly owned it under its published policies and Bylaws and Colorado law.If additional information is required, please contact our office at (719) 495-2283. Noted.Sincerely,Cathy Hansen-LeeEngineering Administrative AssistantPIKES PEAK REGIONAL BUILDING DEPARTMENT 1. Unacceptable street names are on the final documents. Please see comments from Justin Annan from El Paso/Teller County 9-11 Authority. 2. Please provide a large scale copy of the entire development (not just filing 1) on 1 sheet of paper for addressing purposes. 3. Standard final plat comments: ENUMERATIONS/FLOODPLAIN WILL REVIEW THE MYLAR PRIOR TO PLAT FOR ADDRESS PLACEMENT, ROAD NAMING, TITLE BLOCK, & FLOODPLAIN STATEMENT. $10.00 PER LOT & TRACT FEE WILL BE DUE AT THE TIME OF THE REVIEW OF THE MYLAR. IF AN ADDRESS IN NOT NEEDED ON A TRACT THEN NO FEE APPLIES. CHECK SHOULD BE MADE OUT TO PIKES PEAK REGIONAL BUILDING DEPARTMENT. PAID DIRECTLY TO ENUMERATIONS DEPARTMENT. A COPY OF THE FINAL RECORDED PLAT IS REQUIRED PRIOR TO PLAN SUBMITTAL FOR RESIDENTAL. A COPY OF THE FINAL RECORDED PLAT IS REQUIRED PRIOR TO APPROVAL IN ENUMERATIONS DEPARTMENT ON ANY COMMERICAL PLANS SUBMITTAL. Noted.NORTHERN EPC COALITION OF COMMUNITY ORGANIZATIONS, INC (NEPCO)NEPCO is providing the collective input from its membership that includes 8,000 homeowners, 41 HOAs and 18,000 registered voters within and around Monument. The purpose of NEPCO, a volunteer coalition of Homeowner Associations in northern El Paso County, is to promote a community environment in which a high quality of life can be sustained for constituent associations, their members and families in northern El Paso County. We collectively address growth and land use issues with El Paso County Planners and the Town of Monument, as well as addressing HOA issues of common interest among the members. NEPCO achieves this by taking necessary steps to protect the property rights of the members, encouraging the beautification and planned development and maintenance of northern El Paso County.General Concerns/Questions related to the Flying Horse North Flying Horse North Final Plat, Filing 1:The Neighborhood Meeting Summary just pushes a meeting with the local community to a date after 1 Jan 18.?NEPCO recommends that the plat is NOT approved until such neighborhood meeting occurs and the Planning Commission sees the results.On page 11 of the Letter of Intent, paragraph 4, Policy 9.4 the Developer states “Land in Flying Horse North is within two school districts. SD#38 and SD#20.”Have there been discussion concerning student populations relative to the proposed phasing of this development? There is general and serious concern about adequate water resources in any development proposed in the western U.S. On page 12 of the Letter of Intent there is a statement about needing a waiver to the El Paso County 300-year water supply requirement. If it is a requirement there should be no waivers, if it is not going to be supported as a “requirement,” take it off the books.The letter from the Colorado Division of Water Resources states that “Since insufficient information was provided, we cannot comment on the potential for injury to decreed water rights or the adequacy of the proposed water supply under the provisions of Section 30-28-136(1)(h)(I), C.R.S.” The information they are referring to is a misstatement on the number of lots and confusion as to which water decree(s) applies to which portion of the development.Additional concerns are raised due to comment on page 12 of the Letter of Intent that states the lease for the water for the golf course only runs through the year 2048, approximately 28 years after the first blade of grass is sprouting on the course. After that time the water (problem) will belong to the HOA. On page 2 of the PLAT, the Developer has indicated the route of an extension of the El Paso County Multi-Use Trail system as passing through Tract D and G. Will there be any parking spaces allocated on Stagecoach Road to Tract D or on Milam Road to Tract G? The Traffic Impact Analysis states on page 2 in the paragraph labeled “Access” that access would also be provided via an extension of Holmes Road into the site.Who will pay for the extension? Traffic Impact Analysis, Table 3 Recommended Improvements…Filing 1 and Page 6LSC’s analysis has determined that the intersection of SH83 and Stagecoach Road will require northbound right-turn deceleration lane with this first phase.CDOT has determined that a southbound left-turn acceleration lane would be required on Highway 83 at Stagecoach Road, again with the first phase.Further, page 6 states that a northbound right-turn acceleration lane is not currently required “However the applicant may choose to construct this lane along with other auxiliary lanes required in Filing 1.” Oncoming traffic will be traveling at least 55 mph as they approach vehicles leaving the development and proceeding north, beginning their travel at approximately 5 mph for a closure rate of 50 mph. With approximately 1/3 of the 1,376 vehicles leaving Flying Horse North turning north that equals about 454 potential rear end collisions a day.NEPCO believes that CDOT and El Paso County should compel the Developer to construct this acceleration lane commensurate with Filing 1. It would be prudent to complete all roadway changes simultaneously to limit traffic interference and get drivers accustomed to the reconfigured road rather than incrementally make changes that drivers may miss. Will the Developer be required to adhere to the schedule listing on Page 6 of the Traffic Impact Analysis and will they be responsible for funding these additional lanes? On page 5 of the Traffic Impact Analysis report in the paragraph titled TRIP GENERATION, the report states “At buildout the Flying Horse North at Shamrock Ranch site could be expected to generate about 1,405 new vehicle-trips (the previous version of the Traffic Study stated “3,337 new vehicle-trips”) on the average weekday.What event reduced the total expected traffic by 42% “at buildout”? Again page 5, the proposed development is for 80 dwelling units (762 trips) plus an 18-hole golf course (total trips of 1,405 while Table 2, Trip Generation Estimate for Flying Horse North, analyzes the development for 77 dwelling units and golf course generating (1,376 trips).? Both were authored on the same day. Table 2 of the Traffic Impact Analysis states that there will be 282 dwelling units (DU) at buildout. The Letter of Intent states there will be 283 DU at buildout. The filing with the Division of Water Resources states 283 DU and they require the developer to “clarify the number of lots to be created,”. It seems like a simple math question…which is correct?On the Construction Drawings, page 2, bottom middle, there is an annotation of “Sanctuary Rim Drive.” That road is in Sanctuary Pointe, a few miles to the NW. Is the profile depicting Stagecoach Road or is it for Sanctuary Rim Drive?NEPCO Recommendations:The Developer has informed NEPCO that the entire development, including residential lighting, will be Dark Sky compliant. We believe this is the first major development in El Paso County to achieve this goal and they should be commended for their effort and community spirit. Noted. NEPCO has a significant concern about water usage in the County. Golf courses have been generally unsuccessful in the northern El Paso County due to extended winter weather. We believe that the Developer should consider the use of grey water for the golf course if possible although it is highly unlikely to be a significant contributor since it appears that each home will have its own septic system. Gray water system is not practical. Golf course water will be drawn from the Arapahoe and is a part of the augmentation plan. General Comment related to traffic on SH83 at Stagecoach Road: The Stagecoach Road intersection with SH83 will exacerbate the coming severe problem with SH83. SH 83?needs to be upgraded to a four-lane road from Northgate Road all the way to Highway 105 and will also need to be realigned at various places.?Since SH83 is a four-lane road almost to Old North Gate Road now and Highway 105 is planned to become a four-lane from I-25 to SH 83 in the next few years, it would follow that the section of SH 83 between those two points should also be a four-lane road. Any developer improvements to this intersection should incorporate planning for the eventual four-lane improvement to SH 83.Usage of SH 83 is going to reach higher levels of traffic ahead of all forecasts by state and county forecasts and unfortunately, improvements seem to be made once the problem is on top of us and people suffer through years of unwelcome delay.?El Paso County is projected to reach 1 million residents within the next 10 years and SH83 represents one of only two routes between Denver and Colorado Springs.?With construction on tap for I-25 beginning later this year, the traffic counts on SH 83 will rise rapidly.? NEPCO requests that our organization be informed of subsequent actions related to this development and be a participant in the review and coordination process.Thomas M. VierzbaLarry OliverVice President, NEPCOPresident, NEPCOChairman, NEPCO Land Use & Transportation Committee COLORADO GEOLOGIACL SURVEY Colorado Geological Survey has reviewed the Preliminary Plan and Final Plat for Phase One for the Flying Horse North Planned Unit Development (PUD). We previously reviewed the rezoning request for this property in our letter dated May 12, 2016. Our previous review comments remain valid and should be considered a part of this review letter. CGS has no objection to approval of the Preliminary Plan and Final Plat for Phase One as proposed. We would like to review the site specific investigations and geotechnical recommendations for planned structures at future stages of the project. Noted.Thank you for the opportunity to review and comment on this project. If you have questions or need additional review, please call at (303) 384-2643, or e-mail jlovekin@mines.edu.Sincerely, Jonathan R. Lovekin, P.G. Senior Engineering GeologistSummary of Neighborhood Meeting February 12, 2018. Comments raised at the neighborhood meeting:Request to remove Holmes Road connection. Several concerns/suggestions were expressed regarding Holmes Road:-Extend Holmes but to make it emergency only with a gate. The Flying Horse North connection to Holmes Road will not be made until a future phase after internal traffic patterns are established. -Concerns regarding signage on Holmes The signage request is a County issue.-Concerns regarding the construction traffic on Holmes and using another access point instead. Contractors have been requested to use the Highway 83/Stagecoach Road access for all trucks. Request to eliminate access to Hodgen and to Black Forest Road with the exception of one access. By dispersing rather than concentrating traffic, new traffic signals on adjacent roads can be avoided or minimized. The access points were evaluated during the PUD review and deemed to be consistent with County access criteria. Request to connect to Milan Road. Applicant has provided for the extension of Milam Road on property under its control. The end of pavement is ? mile south of Flying Horse North. The platted location of dedicated ROW, and the topography within Flying Horse North do not allow for a connection.Water concerns were expressed. Documents addressing water are a part of this application. Approval will be tied to the required findings of quantity, quality, and dependability.A concern was expressed that the phasing that was presented with the PUD Development Plan has not been followed. The Phasing Plan presented with the PUD Development Plan had several components. The principle components of the phasing plan are the sequencing of early phases relative to public improvements required to service each phase. Public improvements are tied to specific phases, i.e., degree of development. Phase 1 was tied to the number of occupied homes (40) permitted before Highway 83 improvements are required by CDOT. The 40 lots for which building permits may be issued are being shown on the Filing 1 Plat. Any occupancy over 40 lots or the addition of the Golf Course triggers Highway 83 improvements. Although the Golf Course is under construction, it will not be open for play until June of 2019 when Highway 83 improvements will be in place. Highway 83 improvements are under design and construction will be started once plans are approved by CDOT. The Phasing Plan contains a note stating that sequencing may be adjusted based on market conditions. Adjustments will be made throughout the project. Impacts are related to occupied homes. There will be a lag time between the approval of Plats, the subsequent sale of lots, and the construction of homes. Applicant has uploaded response documents to the County EDARP site. Please contact our office if you need further information. Sincerely, 067310John Maynard ................
................

In order to avoid copyright disputes, this page is only a partial summary.

Google Online Preview   Download