Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutWATERFIELD PUD, FIRST FILING - FINAL - 7-95C - LEGAL DOCS - PRIVATE ENTITIES (3)Mr. Michael Ludwig July 14, 1997 Page 2 5. As you are aware, as development continues to occur along this and other major irrigation ditches, buyers of subdivided lots often build their residences relatively close to the ditch, only to find that ditch seepage problems in the spring and summer impact their properties. This is something which the County should try to avoid in this and other similar subdivisions. We would suggest that basements may not be appropriate for Lots 1-13 and perhaps also not appropriate for the lots south of Garganey Drive. 6. It should be made clear to the developer, the owner and any buyers that no dumping of any materials into the ditch is permitted and that the ditch, ditch bank and adjacent ditch maintenance road belong to the ditch company and may not be used by any owners in the subdivision. 7. Our client is also concerned that the plat maps do not reflect the existence of the Barker's No. 10 head gate, the weir which extends into the subject property and the open ditch which crosses the property. Since neither the weir nor the open No. 10 ditch are shown on the plat map, it is important for our client to be informed as to the intentions of the developer. There have been no discussions to date between the developer and our client, the Larimer and Weld Irrigation Company, concerning any plans on the part of the developer. The head gate and weir shall remain as they are currently located. Any changes to the ditch would be subject to the approval of the ditch company as well as any downstream water users. The integrity of the ditch system and the water rights of the parties concerned must be protected. 8. It is also important for the developer to understand that the No. 10 ditch rights for the subject property are for agricultural purposes only and cannot be transferred off the property. When said water rights are no longer used on the property for agricultural purposes, such water rights revert back to the Larimer and Weld Irrigation Company. 9. The Board of Directors for the Larimer and Weld Irrigation Company would be willing to meet with the developer and its representatives, as well as any representatives from the City of Fort Collins to discuss this matter further. Thank you for your attention to these concerns. Should you have any further questions, please feel free to contact me. Yours very truly, SOMMERMEYERWICK & CAMPBELL, LLC J. RJP:mt cc: VF Ripley Associates, Inc. Country Club Farms Land, LLC Larimer and Weld Irrigation Company r. JUL 14 REC'D SOMMERMEYER WICK & CAMPBELL, LLC ATTORNEYS AT LAW LAMES D. BRAMER' KENT N. CAMPBELL KATHRYN S. LONOWSKI ROBERT I. PENNY* KIMBERLY B. SCHUTT BLAIR J. TRAUTWEIN* TROY A. UKASICK• ROBIN L. WICK MAYO SOMMERMEYER* OF COUNSEL 'ALSO ADannrn IN v ORGNO Mr. Michael Ludwig City Planner City of Fort Collins 281 N. College Ave. Fort Collins, CO 80522 H3 CLOCK TOWER SQUARE Branch Offices 323 SOUTH COLLEGE AVENUE P.O. BOX 2166 2312 CAREY AVENUE FORT COLLINS, COLORADO 80522 CHEYENNE, WYOMING 82001 (970) 482-4011 (307) 632-0323 FAX (970) 482.8929 1295 MAIN STREET THE SHOPS AT WESTWOOD BUILDING ONE SUITE 3 WINDSOR, COLORADO 90550 (970) 686.6W5 July 14, 1997 Re: Waterfield PUD No. 7-95C Dear Mr. Ludwig: HAND -DELIVERED As you are aware, this firm represents Larimer and Weld Irrigation Company which owns and operates the Larimer and Weld Canal, aka the Eaton Ditch. We have reviewed the subdivision plat for Waterfield P.U.D. and have the following comments for staff consideration and response on behalf of our client. 1. The subdivision plat should reflect that the ditch company maintains a 25 foot right-of-way and easement from the top of the ditch bank out. No development should occur in this area. 2. The developers and, homeowners will not be allowed to place any fences or gates across the ditch company right-of-way, nor will there be any allowed use of the ditch company maintenance road. 3. The developer and the property owners should be made aware of the normal seepage below the ditch, and staff should require that this matter be investigated and that the developer be responsible for any necessary engineering or construction steps to deal with any seepage for the protection of future lot owners. 4. The plat should also reflect that the lot owners have no right of access to or use of the irrigation ditch. We would ask require the developer to construct an 8 foot. wooden fence along their property lines to prohibit children from getting into the ditch and to discourage lot owners from using the ditch for dumping grass clippings and other debris.