Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2.0 Staff ReportBOCC 11/6/89 PROJECT INFORMATION AND STAFF COMMENTS REQUEST: Exemption from Definition of Subdivision APPLICANT: J. R. Hunt LOCATION: A tract of land situated in portions of Sections 10 and 11, T7S, R88W; approximately 3 1/2 miles east of Hwy. 82 off C.R. 113. The site consists of a 118.4 acres. SITE DATA: WATER: Individual wells SEWER: Individual Sewage Disposal System ACCESS: County Road 113 EXISTING ZONING: A/R/RD ADJACENT ZONING: A/R/RD, O/S I. RELATIONSHIP TO THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN The site is located in District F, Severe Environmental Constraints as designated on the Comprehensive Plan Management District's map based on having any of the following constraints: active landslides, debris slide, unstable slope, bedrock, slide, major mudflow, slopes over 25% and 100 year floodplain. II. DESCRIPTION OF THE PROPOSAL A. Site Description: The site is located in a rural portion of the County with the adjacent uses being primarily large lot residential uses. A portion of the site has steep hillsides with pinyon and juniper trees as the predominant vegetation. The majority of the site is creek bottom land with cottonwood, willow and various grasses. Cattle Creek runs through this section. B. Project Description: It is proposed to split the 118.4 acre tract into seven (7) tracts ranging in size from 7.04 acres to 21.29 acres, averaging 16.15 acres each. Access to each lot will be off of County Road 113. Water will be provided by individual wells, with two (2) existing wells and five (5) additional wells proposed through a plan for augmentation. Each lot would have an individual sewage disposal system. History_: The applicant purchased the property in 1965, thus meeting the criteria that the parcel exists prior to January 1973, to qualify for a request for an exemption from the definition of subdivision. III.MAJOR ISSUES AND CONCERNS A. Subdivision Regulations: Section 8:10 of the Garfield County Subdivision Regulations of 1984 states the following: • • The Board of County Commissioners has the discretionary power to exempt a division of land from the definition of subdivision and, thereby, from the procedure in these Regulations, provided the Board determines that such exemption will not impair or defeat the stated purpose of the Subdivision Regulations nor be detrimental to the general public welfare. The Board shall make exemption decisions in accordance with the requirements of these regulations. Following a review of the individual facts of each application, in light of the requirements of these Regulations, the Board may approve, conditionally approve or deny an exemption request. This statement is based on the statutory language contained in C.R.S. 30-28-101(d) that gives the Board the discretionary authority to create rules and regulations to exempt from the definition of subdivision certain subdivisions of land that would technically meet the statutory definition. Both the County's regulations and the State statutes give the Board discretionary authority to determine whether or not a proposed exemption would defeat or impair the purposes of the subdivision regulations. This application meets the technical criteria for making application in that it existed prior to January 1, 1973. This criteria allows a property owner to request a total of four (4) lots. In addition, a property owner may request splits based on public rights-of-way and/or natural features that prevent joint usage of the parcel. This is the basis for lots 1, 2 and 3. (See map, page S ) Lots 1 and 2 are further split by Fisher Creek, a natural feature. The following is a discussion of some of the issues or information of some of the issues or information that would be provided if the full subdivision review process was required of any exemption application: 1. Comments from all of the S.B. 35 review agencies are not required: i.e., B.L.M., Division of Water Resources, S.C.S., State Geologic Survey, utility companies. 2. There is no topographic information required beyond the 40' contours of the U.S.G.S. quadrangle. Full subdivision requires five (5) foot contours for all subdivisions with lots two (2) acres in size or larger. 3. Geology/soils study done by a professional geologic engineer. 4. Statements/information developed by a registered professional engineer regarding drainage, 100 year floodplain, water supply, sewage disposal and road design. B. Staff Comments 1. Road and Bridge has expressed concern about multiple driveways accessing C.R. 113. It was suggested that points of access be shown on any plat and that the access be combined where feasible. It was also suggested that a common access drive be used, where possible. Lots 5 and 6 should have a common driveway access to County Rd. 113. Access to lot 3 should be from the same access point as the Baby Bean subdivision. All driveway accesses should be approved prior to any platting and then placed on the plat at the appropriate location. 2. Topography and soils limit development in many areas within the proposed lots. a) Lot 1 has very steep slopes with erosion and rockfall problems. Any development on this tract would require significant cuts into the hillside and special provisions for rockfall. IV. • b) Lots 2 & 3 both have moderate to steep slopes, with potential building sites that may require engineered foundations due to erosion potential. c) Lots 4, 5, 6 & 7 all have potential floodplain problems, but do have building sites outside of the high water areas. With the exception of lot 4, all building sites should be located between C.R. 113 and Cattle Creek unless it can be demonstrated that a bridge can be constructed to cross Cattle Creek without affecting properties above and below the structure. Lot 4 should be limited to a building site on the south side of Cattle Creek off of County Rd. 112. All of these lots have potential shrink/swell soils. 3. The applicant has proposed to acquire additional water rights through the approval of a water plan for augmentation utilizing Park Ditch and Reservoir Company/Carbondale Land Development Corporation (CLDC) water rights and a Basalt Water Conservancy District Ruedi Water contract. The CLD water will supplement the May through October calls and the Basalt Conservancy District water will protect the rights. for the November through April time period. The augmentation plan anticipates a maximum of 10 horses for the entire development. It also states that lot 1 through 3 may have 1500 sq. ft. of outside irrigation and the remaining lots 3000 sq. ft. The number of horses allowed on lots and outside irrigation limits need to be defined by plat note on any plat. 4. Concerns about wetland habitat degradation were brought to the attention of the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers. The Corps did a site review and requested that the wetland area be delineated on the plat as "Wetland - Regulated by the Corps of Engineers." (See letter page SUGGESTED FINDINGS 1. That proper posting and public notice was provided as required by law for the meeting before the Board of County Commissioners. 2. That the meeting before the Board of County Commissioners was extensive and complete, that all pertinent facts, matters and issues were submitted, and that all interested parties were heard at that meeting. 3. That for the above stated and other reasons, the proposed exemption is in the best interest of the health, safety, morals, convenience, order, prosperity and welfare of the citizens of Garfield County. RECOMMENDATION APPROVAL of lots 2 through 7, with the proposed lot 1 being combined with lot 2 with the following conditions: 1. That the exemption plat required by Section 8:53 include the following plat notes and dgscriptions: ,L -fa.& file_ 74//ith)n e plat;af�e . FUrtherThat lot 4 onl have a driveway = an• e of 3 driveway located on the east property line adjacent to C.R. 11 /06 S �` u�i r/ ljavc- Q -om»i c�fr•� y AL Q 2 , - ]1 That the following plat notes be included: (1) (2) That all property owners are subject to water augmentation plan entered in Case No. , which limits lots irrigation and irrigation. horses each. lots Further, to 1500 sq. ft. of outside to 3,000 sq. ft. of outside that lots may have That engineered foundations and individual disposal systems may be required or necessary lots. --3 — sewage for all (3) No residential/or storage structures shall be built on the south side of Cattle Creek ithout a licensed professional engineer's certification that the road and bridge will withstand poten al floodwater's hydrological effects and not adverse y affectroperty above and below the structure. Ex ept lot 'r which will access off of C.R. 112. 0.7/ i, u� �a- ir* (4) No structure shall be located within 30 ft. measured horizontally from and perpendicular to Cattle Creek or Fisher Creek. (5) No further exemptions from the definition of subdivision shall be allowed on any lot. (6) That the "wetland" area be delineated on the plat with the following note, "Wetland -Regulated by the Corps 8 , of Engineers." 4/gJ)I/tJ 1%I Indy 6-e— That a homeowner's association be established to manage the water augmentation plan. 3. That the Board of County Commissioners shall not sign the exemption plat or resolution of approval until an approved water augmentation plan or other acceptable proof of a legal adequate water supply for each lot is presented to the Planning Department for inclusion in the office file. That a arboh a e - • s rict s . . �� ' .. . _ prc�PPrty can P •,r„+eet.ed. 5. That the applicant submit $1000 in School Impact Fees for the creation of five (5) new lots, prior to signing the exemption plat. 6. That all representations of the applicant, either within the application or stated at the meeting before the Board of County Commissioners, shall be considered conditions of approval. 7 ria 4,sy� me it et- a,"_ Gam._ e4.4.44,4-x, ..e., . A.,,,,,1- 7z17,.f se,-, a- 4-041- JA, --- ,A, nilt-ita4- dru/2-14--) Jit--,,/ .__,4 41,,a, A„,,. 2 - o 0 ii , ‘). dm -i.---74 ct & a,e2- D J ill, d e -; t/iit-ii '4,1,--x-a--- Figure No. 1 Location Map Hunt Subdivision • J 1 r- 7000 Hunt Subdivisjun , • \T • 77 Scale: r ...s 11. •.. • *PI • .."" ' • L. • Pas 4'14 t. • • A, ENARTECH. r. 4 • . REPLY TO ATTENTION OF • • Regulatory Section DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMY SACRAMENTO DISTRICT CORPS OF ENGINEERS 650 CAPITOL MALL SACRAMENTO. CALIFORNIA 95814-4794 1 October 26, 1989 Mr. J.R. Hunt Ranch at Roaring Fork 14913 Colorado State Highway #82 Carbondale, Colorado 81623 Dear Mr. Hunt: I am writing to you concerning a recent inspection of your property on Cattle Creek near the Town of Carbondale, in Garfield County, Colorado. During this inspection, we identified portions of this parcel which are "waters of the United States." These "waters" include Cattle Creek, a narrow band of riparian wetland immediately adjacent to Cattle Creek, and a beaver pond/wetland complex located at the most eastern portion of the parcel. You stated that your plans for the parcel were to subdivide it into smaller 20-30 acre lots for later sale. We indicated that our primary concern involves the potential of a future property owner wanting to drain, fill, cross, or otherwise modify the beaver pond/wetland complex on the easternmost lot. In light of this concern, we recommend that you identify and delineate this wetland area on the plat for this lot and label it as "Wetland - Regulated by the Corps of Engineers." We appreciate your cooperation. Should you have questions, feel free to contact Gary Davis at telephone 243-1199. i' i OCT 301989 �E Gini - LLiy COUNTY Sincerely, Grady L. McNure Chief, Regulatory Unit 4 764 Horizon Drive, Room 211 Grand Junction, Colorado 81506-8719 • BOCC 10/2/89 PROJECT INFORMATION AND STAFF COMMENTS REQUEST: Exemption from Definition of Subdivision APPLICANT: J. R. Hunt LOCATION: A tract of land situated in portions of Sections 10 and 11, T7S, R88W; approximately 3 1/2 miles east of Hwy. 82 off C.R. 113. SITE DATA: The site consists of a 118.4 acres. WATER: Individual wells SEWER: Individual Sewage Disposal System ACCESS: County Road 113 EXISTING ZONING: A/R/RD ADJACENT ZONING: A/R/RD, O/S I. RELATIONSHIP TO THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN The site is located in District F, Severe Environmental Constraints as designated on the Comprehensive Plan Management District's map bases on having any of the following constraints: active landslides, debris slide, unstable slope, bedrock, slide, major mudflow, slopes over 25% and 100 year floodplain. II. DESCRIPTION OF THE PROPOSAL A. Site Description: The site is located in a rural portion of the County with the adjacent uses being primarily large lot residential uses. A portion of the site has steep hillsides with pinyon and juniper trees as the predominant vegetation. The majority of the site is creek bottom land with cottonwood, willow and various grasses. Cattle Creek runs through this section. B. Project Description: It is proposed to split the 118.4 acre tract into seven (7) tracts ranging in size from 7.04 acres to 21.29 acres, averaging 16.15 acres each. Access to each lot will be off of County Road 113. Water will be provided by individual wells, with two (2) existing wells and five (5) additional wells proposed through a plan for augmentation. Each lot would have an individual sewage disposal system. History: The applicant purchased the property in 1965, thus meeting the criteria that the parcel exists prior to January 1, 1973, to qualify for a request for an exemption from the definition of subdivision. III.MAJOR ISSUES AND CONCERNS A. Subdivision Regulations: Section 8:10 of the Garfield County Subdivision Regulations of 1984 states the foli,aing: • • The Board of County Commissioners has the discretionary power to exempt a division of land from the definition of subdivision and, thereby, from the procedure in these Regulations, provided the Board determines that such exemption will not impair or defeat the stated purpose of the Subdivision Regulations nor be detrimental to the general public welfare. The Board shall make exemption decisions in accordance with the requirements of these regulations. Following a review of the individual facts of each application, in light of the requirements of these Regulations, the Board may approve, conditionally approve or deny an exemption request. This statement is based on the statutory language contained in C.R.S. 30-28-101(d) that gives the Board the discretionary authority to create rules and regulations to exempt from the definition of subdivision certain subdivisions of land that would technically meet the statutory definition. Both the County's regulations and the State statutes give the Board discretionary authority to determine whether or not a proposed exemption would defeat or impair the purposes of the subdivision regulations. This application meets the technical criteria for making application in that it existed prior to January 1, 1973. This criteria allows a property owner to request a total of four (4) lots. In addition, a property owner may request splits based on public rights-of-way and/or natural features that prevent joint usage of the parcel. This is the basis for lots 1, 2 and 3. (See map, pages /`� ) Lots 1 and 2 are further split by Fisher Creek, a natural feature. The following is a discussion of some of the issues or information of some of the issues or information that would be provided if the full subdivision review process was required of any exemption application: 1. Comments from all of the S.B. 35 review agencies are not required: i.e., B.L.M., Division of Water Resources, S.C.S., State Geologic Survey, utility companies. 2. There is no topographic information required beyond the 40' contours of the U.S.G.S. quadrangle. Full subdivision requires five (5) foot contours for all subdivisions with lots two (2) acres in size or larger. 3. Geology/soils study done engineer. 4. Statements/information professional engineer floodplain, water supply, B. Staff Comments by a professional geologic developed by a registered regarding drainage, 100 year sewage disposal and road design. 1. Road and Bridge has expressed concern about multiple driveways accessing C.R. 113. It was suggested that points of access be shown on any plat and that the access be combined where feasible. It was also suggested that a common access drive be used, where possible. Lots 5 and 6 should have a common driveway access to County Rd. 113. Access to lot 3 should be from the same access point as the Baby Bean subdivision. All driveway accesses should be approved prior to any platting and then placed on the plat at the appropriate location. 2. Topography and soils limit development in many areas within the proposed lots. a) Lot 1 has very steep slopes with erosion and rockfall problems. Any development on this tract would require significant cuts into the hillside and special provisions for rockfall. b) Lots 2 & 3 both have moderate to steep slopes, with potential building sites that may require engineered foundations due to erosion potential. c) Lots 4, 5, 6 & 7 all have potential floodplain problems, but do have building sites outside of the high water areas. With the exception of lot 4, all building sites should be located between C.R. 113 and Cattle Creek unless it can be demonstrated that a bridge can be constructed to cross Cattle Creek without affecting properties above and below the structure. Lot 4 should be limited to a building site on the south side of Cattle Creek off of County Rd. 112. All of these lots have potential shrink/swell soils. 3. The applicant has proposed to acquire additional water rights through the approval of a water plan for augmentation utilizing Park Ditch and Reservoir Company/Carbondale Land Development Corporation (CLDC) water rights and a Basalt Water Conservancy District Ruedi Water contract. The CLDC water will supplement the May through October calls and the Basalt Conservancy District water will protect the rights for the November through April time period. The augmentation plan anticipates a maximum of 10 horses for the entire development. It also states that lot 1 through 3 may have 1500 sq. ft. of outside irrigation and the remaining lots 3000 sq. ft. The number of horses allowed on lots and outside irrigation limits need to be defined by plat note on any plat. IV. SUGGESTED FINDINGS 1. That proper posting and public notice was provided as required by law for the meeting before the Board of County Commissioners. 2. That the meeting before the Board of County Commissioners was extensive and complete, that all pertinent facts, matters and issues were submitted, and that all interested parties were heard at that meeting. 3. That for the above stated and other reasons, the proposed exemption is in the best interest of the health, safety, morals, convenience, order, prosperity and welfare of the citizens of Garfield County. RECOMMENDATION APPROVAL of lots 2 through 7, with the proposed lot 1 being combined with lot 2 with the following conditions: 1. That the exemption plat required by Section 8:53 include the following plat notes and descriptions: a) That all driveways be designated on the plat, after approval by the Road & Bridge Department. Further that lot 4 only have a driveway off of C.R. 112 and the lot 3 driveway be located on the east property line adjacent to C.R. 113. b) That the following plat notes be included: (1) That all property owners are subject to water augmentation plan entered in Case No. , which limits lots to 1500 sq. ft. of outside irrigation and lots to 3,000 sq. ft. of outside irrigation. Further, that lots may have horses each. (2) That engineered foundations and individual sewage disposal systems may be required or necessary for all lots. 3 (3) • • No residential/or storage structures shall be built on the south side of Cattle Creek without a licensed professional engineer's certification that the road and bridge will withstand potential floodwater's hydrological effects and not adversely affect property above and below the structure. Except lot which will access off of C.R. 112. (4) No structure shall be located within 30 ft. measured horizontally from and perpendicular to Cattle Creek or Fisher Creek. (5) No further exemptions from the definition of subdivision shall be allowed on any lot. 2. That a homeowner's association be established to manage the water augmentation plan and to designate access and maintenance easements for the association to maintain the reservoirs. 3. That the Board of County Commissioners shall not sign the exemption plat or resolution of approval until an approved water augmentation plan or other acceptable proof of a legal adequate water supply for each lot is presented to the Planning Department for inclusion in the office file. 4. That a letter from the Carbondale Fire Protection District be submitted, verifying that the property can be protected. 5. That the applicant submit $1000 in School Impact Fees for the creation of five (5) new lots, prior to signing the exemption plat. 6. That all representations of the applicant, either within the application or stated at the meeting before the Board of County Commissioners, shall be considered conditions of approval. Figure No. Location Map Hunt Subdivision 44.0= 4." 7000 Hunt Subdivision . =_ • Cre- 3) i I 41— Scale: r= �.• 1000 • ENARTECH