Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2.0 Staff ReportPlanning Commission, May 13, 2015 Exhibits — GCCI Zone Change Exhibit Letter (A to Z) Exhibit A Public Hearing Notice Affidavit, with attachments B Garfield County 2013 Land Use and Development Code, as amended C Garfield County Comprehensive Plan 2030, as amended D Application E Staff Report F Presentation G Letter dated April 2, 2015 from Balcomb & Green on behalf of the RFWSD II Letter dated April 3, 2015 from Andrew McGregor, City of Glenwood Springs I Letter dated April 3, 2015 from Stacy Bernot and Gavin Brook, Town of Carbondale J Letter dated April 10, 2015 from Dan Blankenship, Roaring Fork Transportation Authority (RFTA) K Email dated April 13, 2015 from Dan Roussin, CDOT L Letter dated April 21, 2015 from Steve Anthony, Vegetation Management M Letter dated April 20, 2015 from Rick Lofaro, Roaring Fork Conservancy N 0 P Q R S T U Planning Commission May 13, 2015 GCCI, LLC — ZDAA8210 PROJECT INF l R TICK, AN STAFF COMMENTS TYPE OF REVIEW APPLICANT (OWNER) REPRESENTATIVE Zone District Amendment Garfield County Commercial Investment, LLC Mike Cerbo, Galloway & Company, Inc.; Caitlin Quander and Wayne Forman, Brownstein Hyatt Farber Schrek LOCATION West side of SH 82 north of Cattle Creek Road (CR 113) between the Rio Grande Trail and SH 82 43.25 -acres Residential Suburban Commercial General ACRES EXISTING ZONING PROPOSED ZONING COMPREHENSIVE PLAN Residential High Density, Unincorporated Community, Water and Sewer District, Rural Employment Center Garfield County Commercial Investments, LLC (GCCI), a subsidiary of Carbondale Investments, LLC (CI) requests a zone change on a 43.25 -acre parcel on the west side of SH 82 between CR 113 and CR 114. The Official Zone District Map of Garfield County designates the parcel as Residential Suburban and the Applicant seeks to rezone the site to Commercial General (CG). Figure 1- Location Map History This 43.25 -acre parcel has been the subject of numerous land use actions when it was part of larger property known as Sanders Ranch PUD/Bair Chase and the Cattle Creek Colorado development proposals. The subject site is adjacent to the River Edge PUD, but not included in the zoning or entitlements associated with that PUD development. The Rio Grande Trail physically separates the two projects. The Board of County Commissioners rezoned that portion of the Sanders Ranch PUD that was outside of the conservation easement areas to Residential Suburban in 2008, Resolution No. 2008-112. Planning Commission May 13, 2015 GCCI, LLC — ZDAA8210 Currently the 43.25 -acre site could develop the Suburban dimensions, uses, and density which would permit a maximum of 94 residential Tots based upon the minimum lot size required in the Suburban zone (20,000 square feet). Those lots could cover (rooftops and pavement/impervious surface) 21.6 - acres of the site with a maximum of 941,985 square feet of floor area within the 25 foot height restriction (two stories). Zone District Dimensions If rezoned to CG the permitted dimensions would allow up to 251 lots (minimum lot size 7,500 square feet) to be used for commercial or residential use. If commercial uses were proposed on the overall site impervious cover maximum (rooftops and pavement) would be 36.8 -acres of the site with a maximum of 941,985 square feet of floor area within the 40 foot height restriction (four stories). Appendix A includes photographs of the subject property and existing uses within the defined unincorporated community area. Appendix B contains photographs of various large scale commercial developments including the Meadows and Willits Town Center. The photos may be used as a comparison regarding acreage and potential square footage on the subject site. The complete Use Table — Table 3-403 of the LUDC, is included as Appendix C of this report. Uses Permitted in Suburban (but not in CG) Agriculture Building or Structure Necessary to Agricultural Operations Forestry Riding Stable Manufactured Home Park Group Home Facilities Injection Well, Piped/Injection Well, Small/Injection Well, Large Uses Permitted in both Suburban and CG Products, Processing, Storage Distribution and Sale at Point of Production Single Family Dwelling Home Office/Business Foster Home 2IP g. Residential Suburban (existing) Commercial General (proposed) Minimum Lot Size 20,000 square feet 7,500 square feet Maximum Lot coverage 50% Commercial 85% Non-commercial 75% Maximum Floor Area 50% 50% Maximum Building Height 25 Feet 40 Feet If rezoned to CG the permitted dimensions would allow up to 251 lots (minimum lot size 7,500 square feet) to be used for commercial or residential use. If commercial uses were proposed on the overall site impervious cover maximum (rooftops and pavement) would be 36.8 -acres of the site with a maximum of 941,985 square feet of floor area within the 40 foot height restriction (four stories). Appendix A includes photographs of the subject property and existing uses within the defined unincorporated community area. Appendix B contains photographs of various large scale commercial developments including the Meadows and Willits Town Center. The photos may be used as a comparison regarding acreage and potential square footage on the subject site. The complete Use Table — Table 3-403 of the LUDC, is included as Appendix C of this report. Uses Permitted in Suburban (but not in CG) Agriculture Building or Structure Necessary to Agricultural Operations Forestry Riding Stable Manufactured Home Park Group Home Facilities Injection Well, Piped/Injection Well, Small/Injection Well, Large Uses Permitted in both Suburban and CG Products, Processing, Storage Distribution and Sale at Point of Production Single Family Dwelling Home Office/Business Foster Home 2IP g. Planning Commission May 13, 2015 GCCI, LLC — ZDAA8210 Small Employee Housing Facility Family Child Care Home Park Ultra -Light Aircraft Operation Trail, Trailhead, Road O&G Drilling and Production Remote Fracking Facility Utility Distribution Lines Neighborhood Substation Utility Distribution Facility Accessory Building or Structure Fence, hedge, wall Uses Permitted in CG (but not in Suburban) Community Meeting Facility Library Professional Office Nursery/Greenhouse Retail — General Retail — Equipment, Machinery, Lumber Yards Retail — Vehicle and Equipment Sales Theater - Indoor Recreation — Indoor Eating or Drinking Establishment Cabinet Making, Wood & Metal Working, Machining, Welding General Service Establishment Laundromat Vehicle Repair, Body/Paint or Upholstery Shop Lodging Facilities Adjacent uses include: North: Commercial (vacant restaurant, Fyrwald Parcel) South: Conservation Easement and Residential. East: Service commercial and Institutional uses on the east side of SH 82 including the Road & Bridge Facility. West: Vacant — Vacant Residential (River Edge PUD). Adjacent zoning includes Rural, Planned Unit Development, CL and CG, as shown on the map, right. Storage/Mini-Storage Storage — Cold Storage Plants Recycling Collection Center Solar Energy System, Small EM( Springs PU6 Figure 2 Zone District Map dural Planning Commission May 13, 2015 GCCI, LLC — ZDAA8210 Referral Comments were received from the following agencies: Colorado Department of Transportation, Exhibit K — Dan Roussin responded to the referral that CDOT had no comment on the rezoning of the property but that the new uses will require a new access permit in the future. Roaring Fork Water and Sanitation District, Exhibit G — Scott Grosscup of Balcomb & Green, P.C. responded on behalf of the Roaring Fork Water and Sanitation District (RFWSD) and its engineers that the GCCI property is located within the RFWSD service area boundary; however the property has not yet been included within the District. A Pre -Inclusion Agreement with Carbondale Investments, LLC (CI), owners of the properties to the west of the site, has been recorded which sets the terms and conditions of inclusion of the properties (including GCCI) within the boundaries of the district whereupon RFWSD would agree to provide water and sanitary sewer service to the properties. Terms of the Agreement include paying for and constructing certain infrastructure necessary to provide service to the properties. This includes the following improvements which would be the responsibility of CI or GCCI, whichever developed first: 1. Extension of water lines from RFWSD existing infrastructure and/or construction of a surface water treatment plant; 2. Developing infrastructure necessary to provide sanitary sewer service; 3. Expansion of the RFWSD sewer treatment plant; Specific development of the GCCI property was not contemplated at the time of the agreement and instead 375 EQRs were dedicated for potential development based upon the exiting Suburban zoning. Further, comments note that commercial and residential uses have differing impacts on infrastructure necessary to serve the property. Commercial development fire flow requirements exceed those for residential uses and larger storage tanks may be necessary to meet these requirements. RFWSD is unable at this time to determine if the infrastructure contemplated by the Pre -Inclusion Agreement would be sufficient to meet future development on the re -zoned property. Other Comments include: • The type of commercial development can impact wastewater treatment operations. • Permitting, design, construction and acquisition of the property necessary to construct required facilities can take several years. • Off-site infrastructure required for service to the property will impact the CR 113, Cattle Creek Road intersection with SH 82. Coordination must occur between GCCI, CI, RFWSD and the County on timing of improvements to coincide with intersection improvements. Planning Commission May 13, 2015 GCCI, LLC — ZDAA8210 Carbondale Fire District — No response received. Town of Carbondale, Exhibit I — On behalf of the Town of Carbondale Board of Trustees and Planning and Zoning Commission Stacey Bernot, Mayor and Gavin Brook, Chairman of the Planning and Zoning Commission, responded to the referral with concerns related to the vagueness of the application and the fact that details are not provided regarding the intended commercial use of the property. The Town commented on the maximum allowances that would be permitted by the CG zone district and questions the proposal's compliance with the County's adopted Comprehensive Plan and rezoning criteria. Carbondale is extremely concerned with potential loss of sales tax revenue if proposed commercial uses at this site would compete with commercial uses in the incorporated area, particularly since the sales tax rate would be significantly less in unincorporated Garfield County. The town cites specifically a Comprehensive Plan policy that states that "...the county will discourage commercial development in the unincorporated areas that would significantly reduce sales tax revenues in incorporated municipalities." The Town requests that the County Commissioners deny the rezoning for the above reasons. City of Glenwood Springs, Exhibit H — The City cites concerns with the proposal satisfying the rezoning criteria in the county regulations: 1. Logical and orderly development pattern — An inventory of commercial uses currently exists in this corridor of SH 82, some of which is vacant. The City questions the neglected condition of the property and states that it is not good land use practice to create large tracts of commercially zoned property when an inventory currently exists as this may pull existing commercial uses from neighboring cities and towns resulting in a loss of sales tax revenues to the incorporated communities. 2. The area has changed and it is in the public interest to encourage a new use or density — The City states that circumstances have not changed as this and adjoining property have previously obtained entitlements over the last 15 to 20 years, yet no development has occurred. The neighborhood and unincorporated community do not support the demand based upon vacant commercial properties in the area. 3. Rezoning addresses a demonstrated community need — The City responded that the Applicant has not adequately addressed the community need for this magnitude of commercial rezoning; no statistical evidence supports this request. The proposal does not comply with the County's adopted Comprehensive Plan as the project is intended to "...benefit the county as a whole." and that sales tax leakage will have a negative effect on surrounding communities. 4. General conformity with the Comprehensive Plan — The City believes that the application is inconsistent with the future land uses designation as this neighborhood cannot support the additional square footage permissible by the zone district. The demand for new commercial development in the Planning Commission May 13, 2015 GCCI, LLC — ZDAA8210 Roaring Fork Valley is doubtful; instead this development would draw existing businesses out of incorporated cities and towns. The City requests that the application be denied. Roaring Fork Conservancy, Exhibit M — Rick Lofaro, Executive Director, commented that the Roaring Fork Conservancy (RFC) administers the Cattle Creek Conservation Easement as well as the adjacent Heron Point Conservation Easement. RFC has concerns regarding potential effects of commercial development on the nearby conservation easements. RFC is currently working on a study of water quality in Cattle Creek and the increase in impermeable surfaces can increase runoff and erosion which leads to concerns about potential pollutants reaching the waterways. Other potential impacts include increased light pollution and traffic as they may impact the easements. Vie etation Management, Exhibit L — Steve Anthony noted that the subject parcel has one of the largest Scotch thistle infestations in the County and the plant is prevalent throughout the site. The 2013 Land Use and Development Code, as amended (LUDC) contains regulations regarding rezoning of property within the County in Section 4-113 C., Review Criteria An application for rezoning shall demonstrate with substantial evidence that an error exists in the Official Zone District Map, or meet the following criteria: 1. The proposed rezoning would result in a logical and orderly development pattern and would not constitute spot zoning; 2. The area to which the proposed rezoning would apply has changed or is changing to such a degree that it is in the public interest to encourage a new use or density in the area; 3. The proposed rezoning addresses a demonstrated community need with respect to facilities, services, or housing; and 4. The proposed rezoning is in general conformance with the Comprehensive Plan and in compliance with any applicable intergovernmental agreement. A. General - A rezoning request, if approved, would allow the site any by -right use permitted within the CG zone, as well as the maximum dimensional allowances of the zone district. If the rezoning is approved there would be no further review of the development by the County Planning Department, other than application for building permits. 61 Planning Commission May 13, 2015 GCCI, LLC — ZDAA8210 Site planning or a determination of potential uses on the site, has not been discussed as it is not a requirement of a request to rezone to a standard County zone district (this would be required if the Applicant was requesting a PUD or a Land Use Change Permit). The CG zone offers a wide variety of uses, some of which the Comprehensive Plan may support at this location, however many other uses by -right are not within the scope of the unincorporated community designation. Those CG uses by -right not supported by the Comprehensive Plan, include any uses that would be termed regional (the Roaring Fork Valley) or light industrial in nature, as the intent of the unincorporated community is not to draw outside populations, as quoted from the Comprehensive Plan - "Self- contained subdivisions that contain town and neighborhood centers primarily to serve their own populations. Their infrastructure and certain governmental functions are provided by one or more special districts." In this case that residential community consists of the River Edge PUD, the residences on Coryell Road, and both the H Lazy F and Mountain Meadows Mobile Home Parks. Regional retail, such as big -box stores, offices, and many other CG allowed uses would not be in general conformity with the Comprehensive Plan designation at this location. The County does not have the ability to limit, or conditionally approve specific by -right uses within the CG zone. Size and Scope of Project — Once the site is zoned as CG there are no use or dimensional restrictions nor requirements - other than those permitted within the CG zoning regulations. The result could be a development approaching the size and scope of Glenwood Meadows or a development that is more than twice the size of Willits Town Center. Staff provides photographs of existing commercial developments in Appendix B of this report. Commercial square footage and acreage of these existing facilities is provided in the charts below to aid in understanding visualizing the scale of the commercial uses at these existing developments. Visualizing the potential scale of development at the subject site is critical in determining the appropriateness of the requested zone district. The Applicant has not provided details of what may be developed at the site, however this information is not applicable to the current review as, once rezoned, the site is only required to comply with the use and dimensional standards contained in the LUDC. Since no details of the site were provided staff conducted a comparison of some existing commercial sites to be used as reference for size and scale of potential new development. City of Glenwood Springs Square Feet Acreage City Market 47,337 4.19 Wal-Mart 116,815 5.77 Rite Aid 26,412 2.1 Source: City of Glenwood Springs 71P a g Planning Commission May 13, 2015 GCCI, LLC — ZDAA8210 In reviewing the Meadows project in Glenwood Springs it appears that a significant portion of that development (from Petco and Wells Fargo on the east end, to Chili's on the north, to the west end at Lowe's, Target and Sports Authority on the south) is on approximately the same land area as is proposed for the rezoning. Commercial square footage and parcel size at the Meadows is provided below: The Meadows Square Footage Acreage Lowes 128,230 12.417 Target 124,900 10.613 Vitamin Cottage 10,000 1.485 Pier 1/BB&B/Petco 81,416 8.401 Market Street 40,515 4.853 Chili's 6,312 .96 Wells Fargo 5,000 .563 Subtotal 396,373 40.821 acres Source: City of Glenwood Springs Note: Staff has only included that development that `fits' within the approximate size site as the parcel for rezoning Willits Town Center Located within the Town of Basalt, this mixed use development includes allowance for a maximum of 500,000 square feet of commercial space on approximately 15 acres. The commercial development currently consists of Whole Foods, a medical clinic, medical offices, and misc. retail including restaurants, clothing stores, kitchen store and hair salons. A hotel is currently under construction. Constructed commercial space is about 150,000 square feet, approximately 1/3 of which is currently vacant. Tree Farm — Ace Lane Garfield County recently received information related to a development application in Eagle County which is proposed to be located on the opposite side of SH 82 from Willits Town Center. The Tree Farm development is proposing 400 dwelling units and 135,000 square feet of commercial space. It is important to note that both the Meadows and Willits Town Center had gone through a PUD process that allowed the municipalities to determine the appropriateness of the scale, elevations, and uses on the site. That process also resulted in open space, housing and other public amenities - including the Glenwood Springs Community Center. No amenities are associated with this rezoning application, nor can they be required through this rezoning process. If the County would like to retain the ability to determine the appropriate uses and scale of development on this parcel then the request to rezone the site to CG should be denied. Planning Commission May 13, 2015 GCCI, LLC — ZDAA8210 B. Review Criteria — Section 4-113 C. 1. The proposed rezoning would result in a logical and orderly development pattern and would not constitute spot zoning. Comment: The Applicant has not adequately demonstrated that the proposed rezoning would result in a logical and orderly development pattern. A logical and orderly development pattern is a coherent, consistent and ordered pattern of development. The existing commercial zoning and uses that currently exist between CR 114 (Spring Valley Road) and CR 113 (Cattle Creek) contain a variety of uses ranging from contractor's offices, CNG sales, lumber yard, restaurants, gas station, the Habitat Restore, and limited retail uses. The Rural Employment Center asterisk identifies 'small areas adjacent to major roadways that allow light industrial, manufacturing, equipment storage and incidental retail sales.' This asterisk is located at the intersection of Cattle Creek and SH 82 in response to the existing uses and staff does not believe this is intended to represent a preference for application of this designation along the surrounding SH 82 corridor. Continuation of this wide variety of uses on the subject site could occur with the proposed CG zoning and would not result in a logical or orderly development pattern in the area. The existence of adjacent commercial zoning is one factor the Applicant has utilized in determining the appropriateness of additional commercial uses in the area, but the continuation of commercial uses is determined by more than just the existence of adjacent commercial zoning. The proposed rezoning would not constitute spot zoning as adjacent Figure 3 Zoning Map parcels are currently zoned commercial. Spot zoning is defined as applying zoning to a specific parcel or parcels of land that exist within a larger zoned area. The parcels immediately north of the subject site are zoned Commercial General — the former location of the Sopris restaurant, and the Fyrwald Exemption which contains four (4) commercially zoned lots - two of which are vacant and one which is the site of the Habitat Restore. See map, right — orange is CG zoning and brown is CL. 2. The area to which the proposed rezoning would apply has changed or is changing to such a degree that it is in the public interest to encourage a new use or density in the area. Comment: The area has not undergone significant change since the subject site was rezoned from Sanders Ranch PUD to Residential Suburban in 2008. That rezoning occurred at the request of the Board of County Commissioners due to a prior proposal on the site failing to commence development. The Applicant has not demonstrated that a new use or density in the area is in the public interest as no analysis or data has been provided regarding the need for additional commercial activities, nor did the Applicant provide any information related to public benefit of this Planning Commission May 13, 2015 GCCI, LLC — ZDAA8210 development proposal. As an example other large scale retail and/or mixed use developments, such as the Meadows in Glenwood Springs or Willits Town Center in Basalt, provided some public benefit in the form of cohesive design standards, affordable housing, trails and other public amenities. The rezoning and future development of this site does not discuss or require the provision of any of these amenities. There has been no evidence provided that it is in the public interest to encourage commercial use on this property. 3. The proposed rezoning addresses a demonstrated community need with respect to facilities, service, or housing. Comment: The Applicant has not provided analysis or data related to community need for the proposed commercial use. This documentation would typically come in the form of a market analysis or needs assessment which would analyze the existing commercial inventory in a region to determine if there were gaps in services or commercial activities that one would assume to be available to serve a population. A windshield survey of existing commercial facilities in the Roaring Fork Valley has shown that there are empty storefronts and for rent/sale signs in Glenwood Springs, Town of Carbondale, Town of Basalt and in unincorporated Garfield County. There has been no demonstration of community need related to the proposed uses on the site. 4. The proposed rezoning is in general conformance with the Comprehensive Plan and in compliance with any applicable intergovernmental agreement. Comment: Several referral agencies have commented that the proposal does not generally conform to the Comprehensive Plan, and planning staff agrees with these agencies for the following reasons (Please see Appendix A for photographs of the subject property and the Unincorporated Community area): A. Future Land Use Map 1) Residential High — The existing underlying designation of the subject site is defined as a density of residential uses from 3 dwelling units per acre to 1 dwelling unit per less than 2 acres. This range of density is to be specifically determined by the Planning Commission and will be based upon a "degree of public benefit", considering factors such as the amount of affordable housing, parks/trails and open space, energy conservation, fiscal impacts on the County, preservation of views, providing for schools and other public needs, etc. Compatible zoning for this designation includes Residential Suburban, Residential Urban, Residential Mobile Home Park and PUD. The request to rezone the site for commercial uses is not consistent with this designation. 101 s Planning Commission May 13, 2015 GCCI, LLC — ZDAA8210 s MI 2) Rural Employment Center (REC) — The applicability of this designation to the subject site is questioned by staff as it appears to have been located in response to the existing light industrial uses that occur today at the SH 82 intersection with Cattle Creek Road. Compatible zoning for the REC includes both the CG and CL zone districts. The REC designation is described as "Small areas adjacent to major roadways that allow light industrial, manufacturing, equipment storage, and incidental retail sales. This designation also includes residential uses for employees of the business on the property, such as live/work housing." The request to rezone the subject site to CG would allow the uses described, however it would not be located on a 'small area' but on a 43.25 -acre site and would allow more than "incidental" sales. 3) Unincorporated Community — This land use designation is described as "Self-contained subdivisions that contain town and neighborhood centers primarily to serve their own populations. Their infrastructure and certain governmental functions are provided by one or more special districts." Compatible zoning includes Residential Urban, Commercial Limited, Commercial General and Planned Unit Development. The Plan Glossary defines Unincorporated Community as "Generally, a small town that has not been incorporated. They typically contain a mix of retail, office and residential uses. The commercial uses are intended to serve their own populations and immediately surrounding residences. Service and infrastructure are provided by a combination of county (e.g. sheriff) and special districts (fire, water/sewer, school, etc.)." The area included in this designation straddles SH 82 commencing north of Spring Valley Road (CR 114) continuing south on both sides of the highway to Cattle Creek. Uses and Planning Commission May 13, 2015 GCCI, LLC — ZDAA8210 properties Included in this area include Nelson's Auto, Thunder River Market, Habitat Restore area, Coryell Road, H Lazy F Mobile Home Park, the Sopris restaurant site, the subject site, River Edge PUD, Road & Bridge facility, Ferguson Supply, Lumber Yard, Dodson Engineering, Roto -Rooter, Mind Springs Health and Mountain Meadows Mobile Home Park. The Comprehensive Plan supports commercial services to support their own population. The variety of commercial uses permitted by -right in the CG zone appears to exceed the intent of commercial uses for this designated area. Certainly some of the uses permitted within the CG zone would be in general conformance with this designation; however the broad uses permitted within the zoning category exceed the recommended land uses for the Unincorporated Community designation. Neither the size nor scope of the proposed rezoning appears to be in conformance with this future land use designation. 4) Water and Sewer Service Area — An area where central water and sanitation services are available through a special district(s). The subject site is part of an executed Pre - inclusion Agreement with RFWSD. 5) Area of Influence (3 Miles) — This is defined as areas that are located within three miles of an incorporated jurisdiction. Garfield County has intergovernmental agreements with incorporated areas whereby the County seeks review and comment from the jurisdiction regarding potential impacts from a development proposal. Both the Town of Carbondale and the City of Glenwood Springs recommend that the County deny the request to rezone this property to Commercial General. 6) General - Five major themes are included in Chapter 2, Future Land Use of the 2030 Comprehensive Plan. Two of these themes are applicable to the review and determination of general conformity of the proposed CG zoning with the Comprehensive Plan. The applicable themes include Growth in Unincorporated Communities and Growth in Designated Centers. Growth in Unincorporated Communities — Guidelines are provided for new or expanded unincorporated communities: i. The development is not located within the UGA of existing municipalities; Staff Comment: This development is not located within the UGA of any municipality, but the site is located within the Area of Influence for the City of Glenwood Springs and is located just outside of the Area of Influence for the Town of Carbondale. ii. The development is served with urban services by a special district; 12IP�,;. Planning Commission May 13, 2015 GCCI, LLC — ZDAA8210 Staff Comment: The subject site is located within the REC/Cattle Creek Metropolitan District(s) and within the service area boundary of the Roaring Fork Water and Sanitation District. iii. A contract for police from county sheriff is established; Staff Comment: No information has provided regarding this contract. iv. Connecting county roads are upgraded at developer's expense; Staff Comment: The sole access to the site will be from SH 82. v. Fiscal costs to the public will be considered in the review of new unincorporated communities; Staff Comment: No information has been provided regarding fiscal costs to the public that may result from the proposed rezoning of the site to Commercial General. This would include potential fiscal costs to the public in regard to sales tax revenues. vi. Any internal commercial is primarily for the convenience of area residents (minimize competition with existing communities); Staff Comment: The wide variety of uses that are permitted by -right in the CG zone exceed the 'convenience' uses to serve area residents. CG uses include offices, general retail, retail — vehicle and equipment sales, retail — lumber yards, eating and drinking establishments, and other uses that may be regional in nature. Some of the CG uses may be appropriate on a case-by-case basis with county review; however, in general, the CG uses appear much broader than anticipated in this guideline. vii. Transit opportunities are provided; Staff Comment: RFTA provides transit along the SH 82 corridor; however the nearest bus stop is located at the intersection of SH 82 and Spring Valley Road (CR 114), approximately 2,300 feet north of the northern property line of the GCCI parcel. No information has been provided regarding discussions with RFTA to secure a bus stop at this site. viii. Recreation and other public amenities are provided; Staff Report: No information was included regarding the provision of recreation or other public amenities at this site. The Rio Grande Trail exists on the western boundary of the subject site. 13 I !=• a�. " Planning Commission May 13, 2015 GCCI, LLC — ZDAA8210 ix. School sites may be required (these locations preferred over schools in rural areas). Staff Comment: A school site is not appropriate for consideration in the zone change application. Growth in Designated Centers — The Rural Employment Center designation does not appear to be applicable to this site as it is located at the SH 82 / Cattle Creek Road intersection. B. Plan Elements — Economics, Employment and Tourism — This section discusses commercial uses and Locating commercial uses at this site that generate sales tax revenue could negatively impact near -by communities including the Town of Carbondale, the City of Glenwood Springs and the Town of Basalt. As is common in the State of Colorado these incorporated areas generate a majority of their revenues from sales tax. The County budget is primarily supported by property tax and severance tax, with the addition of a 1% sales tax to the county on sales generated by retail and commercial uses — regardless of whether the use is located in unincorporated county or within an incorporated community. This is a critical point as the County receives revenues from sales generated in both unincorporated and in incorporated areas The draw of commercial activities to this site could cause sales tax revenues to decline in the incorporated areas in a concept known as "sales tax leakage". This concept relates to the sales tax revenues that leave a particular community when new commercial uses are constructed in near -by incorporated or unincorporated communities (this may be a "new" commercial use or it may be the relocation of an existing commercial use). This leakage may be greatest when the commercial activities decline in an incorporated area due to new commercial developments in unincorporated areas — this may occur because sales tax rates are lower in unincorporated county (3.9%) versus for the Town of Carbondale (8.4%) and the City of Glenwood Springs (8.6%). The charts below provide sales tax rates and 2015 sales tax revenues. SALES TAX RATES Unincorporated City of Glenwood Springs* Town of Carbondale** State Tax 2.9% 2.9% 2.9% Garfield County 1.0 % 1.0 % 1.0 Incorporated Community 3.7% 3.5% Other (transportation, etc) 1.0% 1.0% TOTAL 3.9% 8.6% 8.4% * City of Glenwood Springs has an additional 2.5% Accommodation Tax on lodging and the Meadows has a 1.5% Public Improvement Fee (PIF) ** Town of Carbondale has an additional 2% tax on lodging The fiscal impact of locating potentially large-scale urban commercial uses in an unincorporated area is that the required public services, particularly public safety, would be the responsibility of the County. The application materials did not demonstrate that the potential sales tax 14 Planning Commission May 13, 2015 GCCI, LLC — ZDAA8210 generated by the uses would pay for the additional services that the county would be required to provide to the site. Any shortfall in the cost/revenue equation for new service (e.g. sheriff) would be borne by the County taxpayers. SALES TAX GENERATED 2014 % of Sales Tax 2015 Jan - April % of Sales Tax Revenue Revenue City of Glenwood Springs $3,994,899.81 46.70% $1,262,574.17 47.67% Town of Carbondale $ 850,249.97 9.94% $ 254,478.38 9.61% Unincorporated County $ 865,340.06 10.12% $ 356,609.28 13.47% Source: Garfield County Sales Tax Reports VII. STAFF RECOMMENDATION AND SUGGESTED FINDINGS Due to the concerns itemized above regarding general conformance with the Comprehensive Plan and compliance with the review criteria, Staff recommends that the Planning Commission recommend denial of the application to rezone the GCCI property from Residential Suburban to Commercial General, with the following findings: 1. That proper public notice was provided as required for the hearing before the Planning Commission. 2. That the hearing before the Planning Commission was extensive and complete, that all pertinent facts, matters and issues were submitted or could be submitted and that all interested parties were heard at that meeting. 3. That for the above stated and other reasons the request to rezone the property is not in the best interest of the health, safety, convenience, order, prosperity and welfare of the citizens of Garfield County. 4. That the application has not met the requirements of the Garfield County 2013 Land Use and Development Code, as amended. 5. That the application is not in general conformance with Garfield County Comprehensive Plan 2030. PLANNING COMMISSION ELIBERATION & RECOMMENDATION The Planning Commission has several options regarding a recommendation on this application: 1. Approve the request; 2. Continue the request in order to seek additional information from the applicant; 3. Deny the request. 151;,, Planning Commission May 13, 2015 GCCI, LLC — ZDAA8210 The last option of denying the request could be supported by proposed findings that the rezoning to Commercial General is inappropriate due to: 1. The proposal is not in general conformance with the Comprehensive Plan, specifically the potential competition of the proposed site with existing municipal commercial facilities and the FLUM. 2. The lack of demonstrated community need; 3. The area has not changed to the degree that it is in the public interest to encourage this new use and density; 4. The proposed CG zoning would not result in an orderly development pattern. 16 1 , APPENDIX A - UNINCORPORATED COMMUNITY PHOTOS 11Page APPENDIX A - UNINCORPORATED COMMUNITY PHOTOS 21 Page APPENDIX A — UNINCORPORATED COMMUNITY PHOTOS can Intersection of SH 82 / CR 114 pt _ � f > 4 Thunder River Market 31Pa,c APPENDIX A — UNINCORPORATED COMMUNITY PHOTOS Roto Rooter Pro -Build Lumber Road & Bridge 41 Page APPENDIX A — UNINCORPORATED COMMUNITY PHOTOS Habitat Restore Fyrwald Parcel APPENDIX B — COMMERCIAL DEVELOPMENT PHOTOS The Meadows — City of Glenwood Springs The Meadows — outlined area approximately 40.8 -acres and 396,000 square feet of commercial space Lowe's 128.230 Square Feet on 12.417 acres 1 APPENDIX B — COMMERCIAL DEVELOPMENT PHOTOS Target 124,900 Square Feet on 10.613 -aces Pier 1/BBBB/Petco 81.416 Square Feet on 8.401 -acres P a g Walmart 116,815 Square Feet on 5.77 -acres APPENDIX B - COMMERCIAL DEVELOPMENT PHOTOS Market Street 40.515 Square Feet on 4.853 -acres City of Glenwood Springs 31Page APPENDIX B — COMMERCIAL DEVELOPMENT PHOTOS Town of Carbondale 4IPage APPENDIX B — COMMERCIAL DEVELOPMENT PHOTOS Willits — Town of Basalt Willits i1ASAI r. (Ol ORArxl Willits commercial area is approximately 15 acres with 150,000 square feet existing. The site is approved for a maximum of 500,000 square feet of commercial space. 51 Page APPENDIX B - COMMERCIAL DEVELOPMENT PHOTOS APPENDIX B - COMMERCIAL DEVELOPMENT PHOTOS 7I F APPENDIX C 3-403. USE TABLE. GARFIELD COUNTY LAND USE AND DEVELOPMENT CODE � � � � }a } ° }a \; >. « 1 P EXEMPT EXEMPT EXEMPT EXEMPT k r. 7-602 7-603 o NI.} 7-604 . \\ .« . \\ N R a a a a s 2_1-J a\«a « a a a o_ < o_ a a a . « Cl_ a a s a a -J -I a ; a « 0- • • • • • • • • • • • • • \ \ • • • • -I Q 2 2 < « < \ _1 < -I a 2 _I _J _J r < -J < -I a _I -I -1 \CI_ « -J < Reidt .1 a \: a « -1 < a \~a « « « Cl. a s a 2 a« \a « -I< a a« a a 2 2-J 2 a«\\a < -I« a Agriculture Building or Structure Necessary to Agricultural Operations, Accessory Forestry Off -Site At Point of Production Animal Sanctuary Animal Processing Feedlot, Commercial E 2 c ƒ Kennel, Large Riding Stable Veterinary Clinic d� ». »< \2 Dwelling, Single -Unit (per legal lot) Dwelling, 2 -Unit Dwelling, Multi -Unit Dwelling Unit, Accessory Cabin General Products Processing, Storage, Distribution, and Sale _) \J ,1) ƒ ct E 7 \\ I Household Living GARFIELD COUNTY LAND USE AND DEVELOPMENT CODE Table 3-403: Use Table /P/ By Right /A/ Administrative Review /L/ Limited Impact Review /M/ Major Impact Review 1.1 Exempt from County Review and Standards Residential inresidentt l Resource Land Unless exempted, all _.. _ .Districts :Distric Zone Districts . uses must comply with Use Category Use TypeA,.... Article 7 Standards R RS - RM PL RL RL including Use -Specific ' HP P GSStandards. 7-702 7-704 in o r- r; 7-706 r` o r` r. - -a 7-804 7-804 a. -J Q a -I Q Q Q a -I Q a t a a L L a a a- a 0- a a a a -.1 Q a _1 a s a a • • • • • • • • • • • • • Family Child Care Home PPP PPP • • • Corrections Facility IMIMIMI IMI M I M( • Iducational Facility L LL L A A A • (Emergency Shelter LLL L L L L • Home Office/Business PPP PPPP Foster Home PPP PPPP Group Home Facilities LLL LP Employee Housing Facility, Major MMMMMMM Employee Housing Facility, Minor A' Al A' A' Al Al Al Employee Housing Facility, Small PPP PPP P Community Meeting Facility A AA A PP A Place of Worship A A A A A A A Public Gathering A A A a a Q a a L- .Q -0 Museum A A A A A A A Adult Day Care A A A A A A A Child Care Center A A A A A A A Q a a a a Q a a a a Q a a 0 Tai E N U -‘- ca o_ Office Group Living Temporary E co Q >. U m LL 0 Day Care Parks and Open Space Community Service Facility 1 Review and decision of an application is completed administratively, but is subject to the process set forth in section 4-107 N GARFIELD COUNTY LAND USE AND DEVELOPMENT CODE k. RS Z V) p =(i) W �y oc=Na= RS 3 a 0 . a tia w a-0 w Q- E C • 'O E Oc6 •coN . y c0 U (I) _ 'O d y n O ca y O 0 C N co E 7) lij 7-802 O CO ti 7-803 7-803 7-802 r 0 Q) A N 0 Q) A 7-903 Table 3-403: Use Table Administrative Review /L/ Limited Impact Review /M/ Major Impact R•eview 1.1 Exempt from Coun Residential nresident 1 Resource Land `� _ - Zone Districts cts. Use Type R RS RU PL RL RL RL RL P E TS GS Q Q a J a 5 5 Q a J Q n. a a Q a Q a a Q a Q Q Q a J a 5 5 Q 0. J Q • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • N • < Q L L Q Q Q Q L L a. a L L L L 5 Q a Q a Q a Q a 5 n. 5 Q a Q a Q a Q a 2 a Q J Q Q J a J J 5 Q a <0_<Q_<0_0_ Q 5 Q Q o. J J 2 J a - < 5 Q < Q 2 Q Q a 5 5 5 L L a < 5 Q QI Q 5 Q Q a 5 5 5 a Q 5 Q Q Q 5 Q Q J a 5 5 5 5 J a J J Q J a Q Fire Station Hospital J Public Building Access Route Aircraft Landing Strip Aircraft, Ultralight Operation Airport o a = _ 0- o rii - = Mass Transit Facility Park and Ride Facility Trail, Trailhead, Road Broadcasting Studio Professional Office Professional Office, Temporary 1) Y m 'Convenience Store 'Nursery/Greenhouse 'Optional Premises Cultivation Operation Retail, General Q CC ns m vc N a = C 0 o o T I Office Retail/Wholesale 2 Refer to the Federal Government for the laws and policies in regards to cultivation operations for Medical Marijuana. N M GARFIELD COUNTY LAND USE AND DEVELOPMENT CODE o c-o>. cp coaNu) Ec12 maD co X +• �., c N 3 N a fn N E U -p a) N ` 3 7-904 r 7-905 7-1001 Table 3-403: Use Table /P/By Right /A/Administrative Review /L/ Limited Impact Review /M/Major Impact Review 1.1 Exempt from Coun Residential Nonresidential Resource Land Use Category Use Type RL RRL RL R RS RU HP CL CG I PL P EL TS GS Retail, Equipment, Machinery, Lumber P P P • P P P P Yards Retail, Vehicle and Equipment Sales M P P P • Bulk Sales of LPG and CNG LLLLL L Q —I J 2 Q 2 Q J J 2 J J 2 —J J J 2 Q J Q J • • • • J J • • • • • • • • • J • • Golf Course/Driving Range A A A A A Theater, Indoor P P A Recreation and Motor Sports Center M M M M Entertainment Recreation, Indoor LMMMP P A Recreation, Outdoor LMMMMML Shooting Gallery/Range LMMMMML Crematorium M L L L Eating or Drinking Establishment LLLLPPP General Service Establishment L P P P Services Laundromat ALL LPPP Laundry or Dry -Cleaning Plant L L L Mortuary M L L L Car Wash M A A A Vehicles and Parking Lot or Parking Garage L LL L AA A Equipment Repair, Body /Paint, or Upholstery Shop A P P P Visitor Campground/ RV Park M M M L Accommodation Lodging Facilities L L L L P P L Extraction Compressor/Pipeline Pump Station (Not L L L Subject to Article 9) N C7 GARFIELD COUNTY LAND USE AND DEVELOPMENT CODE Table 3-403: Use Table Administrative Review /L/ Limited Impact Review /M/ Major Impact Review 1.1 Exempt from County Review and Standards Residential Nonresidential Resource Land Unless exempted, all Districts. strict.' Zone Districts. uses must comply with Use Type .�,uzx.. Article 7 Standards g RS ' RU RM 111111 PL RLOle RL includingUse-Specific HP P GS; Standards. 7-1001, 7-1002 7-1001, 7-1003 Il EXEMPT T 0 T T 0 T T 0 T EXEMPT T 0 T T 0 T 7-1001 7-1001 7-1001 T 0 0 T T 0 0 T 7-1007 7-1001 T 0 T 7-1001 a J J d d d n. a Q J Q Q Q Q M a J J J O. o. L L L L d Q. CL d Q Q J Q Q d Q.Q. O Q Q J O. J J 0. a d d a Q J Q Q Q Q J a J J J • J J • • • • • • • • • • • • • • Cabinet Making, Wood and Metal A L P P P • working, Glazing, Machining, Welding Equipment, Small Appliances L I I I L I L I A I, •_ Compressor, Booster A A A A A A A Extraction, Gravel M M Extraction, Mining and Other M I L Hydraulic Fracturing, Remote Surface p p p pp p p Facility Injection Well, Piped P A P Injection Well, Small A A P Injection Well, Large L L Oil and Gas Drilling and Production PPP P PPP Contractor's Yard, Small A P P P Contractor's Yard, Large M P P P Material Handling L L L Processing L L L L Processing, Accessory (Batch Plant) L L L L Processing, Temporary A A A A Vehicles, Machinery, and Heavy M M Equipment Vehicle Safety Area A Assembly of Structures L L A Q a L, CC Cr) CO U d a v (/) Fabrication GARFIELD COUNTY LAND USE AND DEVELOPMENT CODE Table 3-403: Use Table Administrative Review /L/ Limited Impact Review /M/ Major Impact Review 1.1 Exempt from County Review and Standards Residential Nonresidential Resource Land Unless exempted, all � �t7 a.fis �rac S Zoite Districts uses must comply with Use Type Article 7 Standards R RS RU RM II PL RL Ei RL including Use -Specific HP P GS Standards. 00 0 0 0 0 0 0 7-1001, 7-1004 7-1001 7-1001, 7-1005 7-1001, 7-1006 7-1001 0 T Q J J 2 J J 2 2 J 2 2 J < J d J Cr J L L J J n. J Q J J d J < J J J J E E J < J d J • a 0 a J 0 0) 2 0 cn Storage, Mini L P P P • Storage, Cold Storage Plants P P P • Storage, Hazardous Materials M M M M • Warehouse and Distribution Center M L L L • Mineral Waste Disposal Areas L L • Recycling Collection Center L P P P • Recycling Processing Facility M M M L • Salvage Yard M M L • Sewage Treatment Facility L L L L L L L • Solid Waste Disposal Site and Facility M M • Solid Waste Transfer Facility M L L L • Water Impoundment L L • Electric Power Generation Facility, Small L L A A P • Electric Power Generation Facility, Large L L Lines, Distribution P PP PPPP • 'Lines, Transmission ILILILILFLILILIL se Categor -o C co E o > LL 0 03 0) GARFIELD COUNTY LAND USE AND DEVELOPMENT CODE WIRMIEDIORITTarlIr U Ti.a co 0) d c X E o• V CO a) (o n 0 0 N 3N (I)a) • E - a • Nt 3 Q 3 •- *-i uisi an 0) J (/) 1 110 0 T T T T1111 J CC CL J d 0 T A 0 T eaail aooMUM El a- cIF a- 11111 II a- a- 11 ao;amo�o 01101130000111113 J U CC = CC N CE se Categor 0 CL a a a a a Solar Energy System, Accessory a CL a 0 0 131:1 OM 131:1 Solar Energy System, Small Solar Energy System, Large a a CL 0 a a 0 00 00 00 111111 O8 00 Telecommunication Facility a 0 a 0 a a a a 0 N T a a 0 T r. a a 0 Water Reservoir Water Tank or Treatment Facility Wind Energy System, Commer Wind Energy System, Small a 0 a CL 0 a 0 0 U U Building or Structur a a 0 0- 0_ a a Fence, Hedge or Wall rx 0 0 0 0 o -c oQ a) 03 C O 0 U U O 0 C 0 0 9 O _ 00 Q0 0 O 0 U = N U a 0 • E E O b�0 O 0 N L 0 d E O 0 i ✓ O C O 0 O n(I) B 0 O • co LL C 0 O • co U u O U_ •E • E 3 Eo • U 5 N cr 0) N cv) GARFIELD COUNTY LAND USE AND DEVELOPMENT CODE EXHIBIT Garfield County PUBLIC HEARING NOTICE INFORMATION Please check the appropriate boxes below based upon the notice that was conducted for your public hearing. In addition, please initial on the blank line next to the statements if they accurately reflect the described action. My application required written/mailed notice to adjacent property owners and mineral owners. Mailed notice was completed on the $ day of Apr: \ , 2015. r% All owners of record within a 200 foot radius of the subject parcel were identified as shown in the Clerk and Recorder's office at least 15 calendar days prior to sending notice. All owners of mineral interest in the subject property were identified through records in the Clerk and Recorder or Assessor, or through other means [list] ■ Please attach proof of certified, return receipt requested mailed notice. My application required Published notice. Notice was published on the day of Af l , 2015. Please attach proof of publication in the Rifle Citizen Telegram. My ap lication required Posting of Notice. Notice was posted on the 6 day of r1 e1=1t- , 2015. Notice was posted so that at least one sign faced each adjacent road right of way generally used by the public. I testify that the above information is true and accurate. Name: A'1C- P -L S . Of_43 Signature: -."14:a Date: 11/0/I5" Ad Name: 11062742A Customer: Galloway Your account number is: 2582448 PROOF OF PUBLICATION THE RIFLE CITIZEN TELEGRAM STATE OF COLORADO, COUNTY OF GARFIELD I, Michael Bennett, do solemnly swear that I am Publisher of The Rhe Citizen Telegram, that the same weekly newspaper printed, in whole or in part and published in the County of Garfield, State of Colorado, and has a general circulation therein; that said newspaper has been published continuously and uninterruptedly in said County of Garfield for a period of more than fifty-two consecutive weeks next prior to the first publication of the annexed legal notice or advertisement; that said newspaper has been admitted to the United States mails as a periodical under the provisions of the Act of March 3, 1879, or any amendments thereof, and that said newspaper is a weekly newspaper duly qualified for publishing legal notices and advertisements within the meaning of the laws of the State of Colorado. That the annexed legal notice or advertisement was published in the regular and entire issue of every number of said weekly newspaper for the period of 1 consecutive insertions; and that the first publication of said notice was in the issue of said newspaper dated 4/2/2015 and that the last publication of said notice was dated 4/2/2015 the issue of said newspaper. In witness whereof, 1 have here unto y hand this 04/03/2015. Michael Bennett, Publisher Publisher Subscribed and sworn to before me, a notary public in and for the County of Garfield, State of Colorado this 04/03/2015. My Commission Expires 11!0112015 Pamela J. Schultz, Notary Public My Commission expires: November 1, 2015 PUBLIC NOTICE TAKE NOTICE that Garfield County Commercial Investments, LLC has applied to the Planning Commission, Garfield County, State of Colorado, to request a Rezoning: Map Amendment of the Gar- field County 2013 Land Use and Development Code, as amended, in connection with the follow- ing described property situated in the County of Garfield, State of Colorado; to -wit: Legal Description A tract of land situated in the southeasterly quarter of Section 1, Township 7 South, Range 89 West, and in Section 7, Township 7 South, Range 88 West of the Sixth Principal Meridian, County of Garfield, State of Colorado, being more particularly described as follows: Beginning at a point on the westerly right of way line of Colorado State Highway 82, whence a 2 1/2" Brass Cap, found in place, and correctly marked as the southeast corner of said Section 7, bears S. 63°31'48" E. a distance of 2312.55 feet; thence, along the westerly right of way line of Colorado State Highway 82 N. 06°01'00' W. a distance of 1467.90 feet; thence, N. 08°53'00° W. a distance of 200.30 feet; N. 00°18'30" W. a distance of 201.00 feet N. 06°01'00" W. a distance of 700.90 feet N. 08°52'00" W. a distance of 313.00 feet thence, 346.52 along the arc of a curve to the left having a radius of 1820.00 feet, a central angle of 10°54'32" and subtending a chord bearing of N. 15°58'00" W. a distance of 346.00 feet; thence, N. 11°08'00" W. a distance of 97.90 feet; thence, 250.29 along the arc of a curve to the left, having a radius of 1840.00 feet, a central angle of 7°47'38° and subtending a chord bearing of N. 28°19'00" W. a distance of 250.10 feet; thence, N. 35°14'00" W. a distance of 122.52 feet; thence, N. 89°17'09" W. a distance of 7.98 feet to a point on the easterly line of a parcel of land de- scribed in Reception No. 575283; thence along said easterly line S. 35°22'19" E. a distance of 1.46 feet to the southeasterly corner of said parcel; thence along the southerly line of said parcel, N. 89°17'09" W. a distance of 224.24 feet to the southwesterly comer of said parcel; thence, N. 00°00'00" W. a distance of 0.68 feet; thence, N. 89°30'08" N. a distance of 0.71 feet; thence, N. 00°20'09" E. a distance of 0.49 feet to the southeasterly corner of a parcel of land de- scribed in Reception No. 603760; thence along the southerly line of said parcel the following three courses: 1 N. 89°44'57" W. a distance of 0.99 feet; 2 N. 30°31'43" W. a distance of 65.06 feet; 3 N. 86°4711" W. a distance of 65.63 feet to the southwesterly corner of said parcel; thence, N. 86°47'11" W. a distance of 52.73 feet; thence, N. 89°36'12" W. a distance of 292.61 feet; thence, N. 89°43'30" W. a distance of 100.90 feet to a point on the easterly right of way line of the Roaring Fork Transit Authority Transportation Cor- ridor Easement; thence, along said easterly right of way line S. 19°38'52" E. a distance of 3829.47 feet; thence, 79.82 along the arc of a curve to the right having a radius of 2915.00 feet, a central angle of 1°34'08° and subtending a chord bearing of S. 18°51"48" E. a distance of 79.82 feet; thence, departing said easterly right of way line N. 89°59'59" E. a distance of 73.94 feet to a point of the westerly right of way line of Colorado State Highway 82, also being the point of beginning. County of Garfield, State of Colorado Practical Description The parcel is located on the west side of State Highway 82 and the east side of the Rio Grande Trail, between CR 113 (Cattle Creek Road) and two parcels that are adjacent to the northern prop- erty line. The two parcels bordering the north prop- erty line are located at 7215 Highway 82, which was home to the now defunct Sopris Restaurant and Dos Hermanos, and the existing commercial center and land associated with 7025 Highway 82, Glenwood Springs, CO 81601. Request Description Rezone a 43.25 -acre prop- erty from Residential Suburban to Commercial General All persons affected by the proposed Zone District Amendment are invited to appear and state their views, endorsements or objections. If you cannot appear personally at such meeting, then you are urged to state your views by letter, as the Planning Commission will give consideration to the com- ments of surrounding property owners and others affected in deciding whether to grant or deny the request for the land use request. This application may be reviewed at the office of the Planning De- partment located at 108 8th Street, Suite 401, Gar- field County Administration Building, Glenwood Springs, Colorado, between the hours of 8:30 a.m. and 5:00 p.m., Monday through Friday. A public hearing on the application has been scheduled for Wednesday May 13, 2015 at 6:30 p.m. in the County Commissioners Chambers, Garfield County Plaza Building, Suite 100, 108 8th Street, Glenwood Springs, Colorado. Planning Department Garfield County Published in the Citizen Telegram April 2, 2015. (11062742) 7011 1150 0000 1171 9997 CI r-1 m D rR D Lfl t -q rR rR D Fot Off ititorrootion Oar webSiteld,' Postage Certified Fee Return Receipt Fee (Endorsement Required) Restricted Delivery Fee (Endorsement Required) Total P^-•"^-• F^^^ $ ..us° Postmarkk HertW !NC Sent Tc street, K & L LLC or P01108 CROWN MOUNTAIN DRIVE City, St BASALT CO 81621 U.S. Postal Servic FOY 416,04 Intoritiatioin visifour webalte www.uipe:caiiiiII rt" A Postage Certified Fee Retum Receipt Fee (Endorsement Required) Restricted Delivery Fee (Endorsement Required) $ s ) th :76 Set JSWLAW REI LLC ar 7094 HWY 82 cit) CARBONDALE CO 81623 Oh_ U.S. Postal Servic CERTIFIED MAILTM El (Domesik Man °air NO Psdrance Coijerage Pmvided) -,10,estmark • • Hero • '1,40.1e intottnatioinit*Atkivebtaeit AA, Postage Certified Fee Return Receipt Fee (Endorsement Required) Restricted Delivery Fee (Endorsement Required) Total F Sent To 3 •-.) tis Postmark Here ?'‘ MANSFIELD, LINDA L & MICHAEL L or POI P 0 BOX 2508 citY GLENWOOD SPRINGS CO 81602 .... 4c(o, D EDr tr rR D CI D 7011 1150 a - D D D ru rrR- 7011 1150 0000 1150 0000 1172 0023 r9 rR D r- :1,12()stalServicer. FIECE.IPT (DoMestic Mali Only; No insurance Coverage Provided) . For dellYerY Information visit our website at www.usps.comt. S E Postage Certified Fee Retum Receipt Fee (Endorsement Required) Restricted Delivery Fee (Endorsement Required) $ qg 76 q s) ant To s„„4, B P INVESTMENTS, LLC 855 ROSE LANE City, Sta CARBONDALE CO 81623 Postmark Here C,-; • f ifT,V U.S. Postal ServiceTM CERTIFIED MALTM RECEIPT (PoinapPc Mall Only;Alo Insurance Coverage Provided) -Wogs: tteaverY kaoralaalOn it OtleWebolte'lt WwwAllIPLOorile ;, Postage Certified Fee Retum Receipt Fee (Endorsement Required) Restricted Delivery Fee (Endorsement Required) Total 0^^•^^^ "--- fri • ; Sent 1-‘ GLENWOOD REAL ESTATE -Stm'if, INVESTMENT, LLC or PO City, PO BOX 2607 GRAND JUNCTION CO 81502 P5 Fo 'Ppstmark Here • rOct ens U.S. Postal $ervIteTM CERTIFIED MAILTM RECEIPT (DOnte,stic Mail Only; No Insurance Coverage Provided) For delivery information visit our website at w‘mtrsps.coraw • r tr. C Postage Certified Fee Retum Receipt Fee (Endorsement Required) Restricted Delivery Fee (Endorsement Required) Total Pecten & Feta $ q 3 36 (2. 76 ,t -LIS Postmark Herq. , 2tst Sont -§ria M&M ENTERPRISES, LLC orPO 133 MARAND RD Oty, GLENWOOD SPRINGS CO 81601-9325 FtS Fq ructiorws 7011 1150 0000 1172 0160 7011 1150 0000 1171 9812 U.S. Postai ServiceTM CERTIFIED MAILTM RECEIPT (Domestic Mail Only; No Insurance Coverage Provided) For delivery iritormationvisit our website at www.usps.cams. Postage Certified Fee Return Receipt Fee (Endorsement Required) Restricted Delivery Fee (Endorsement Required) Total Postap= A c�Ar Sent To 3UREAU OF LAND MANAGEMENT, $ .t0 '3-56 t Ostmark / Here Street, Apl. MC/ 0 COLORADO RIVER VALLEY FIELD or tosoxtvo3FFICE City, State, Zit 2.300 RIVER FRONTAGE ROAD S. Postal Ser rlc CERTIFIED MAImv, CEIPT (Domestic Mail Only; No insurance Coverage Provided) For delivery information visit our web e at www.uspscom/t, Postage Certified Fee Return Receipt Fee (Endorsement Required) Restricted Delivery Fee (Endorsement Required) Total Postane A FA.A $ 5,'56 co Postmark ite sentro PERKINS, MELVIN L & PHYLLIS M `-6rr–s—OC 448 COUNTY ROAD 110 or PO I City, St, GLENWOOD SPRINGS CO 81601-9604 untions` U . Postal Service." RTIFIED (l' omestic *all Only; Nd;lnsuranceiCoverage Provided) Far `delivery,)nfprrmation visit ou **site at-wwwusps.caiti Postage Certified Fee Retum Receipt Fee (Endorsement Required) Restricted Delivery Fee (Endorsement Required) Total Pesten. R Sent To GREMEL HOLDINGS, LLC or PO Bo PO BOX 557 City, Stan EMERY UT 84522 PS Fdrl» Postmark Hero rUCtl(tj1$;`"'. 1-1 a D m Ea rr r3 N r1 D D D D D u -t r-1 r3 r-1 rR O For delivery t fir rmatiort visit our website at'wiew.usps come" Postage Certified Fee Return Receipt Fee (Endorsement Required) Restricted Delivery Fee (Endorsement Required) Tot $ 1.36 ./o USE Sent Strsf CARBONDALE INVESTMENTS, LLC ort C PO BOX 17330 City LITTLE ROCK AR 72222 PostmarRv r Here% r t- . t litiOralatIOnmj 0J 'fir sit t.www.uspsmorov.. Postage Certified Fee Return Receipt Fee (Endorsement Required) Restricted Delivery Fee (Endorsement Required) Total Pry eon. R F. Sent "e ree. or Pc 200 DEER RUN TRAIL Crty` RIFLE CO 81650 3 36 ,2.76 Q / `1 g PERAU, RONALD G Prnark Hero U.S Postal ServceTM 'CERTIFIED MAILTM RECEIPT (Domestic Mail Only; No Insurance Coverage Provided) FOrkVatiVerY,Mt! ioboe ai;www u#PAcol Postage Certified Fee Return Receipt Fee (Endorsement Required) Restricted Delivery Fee (Endorsement Required) Total * cede $ Sent To PAYNE, JOHANNA S & WAYNE S 3 `t"reet;i PO BOX 8198 orf'OD city, sty ASPEN CO 81612-8198 pp For, Postmark Here a- 1-3 N 1-3 r9 CI D U) ✓ i r-3 ✓ 3 rR N rR r- rR r-1 D D D D D Lfl r-3 rR rR r-9 r- r- rR N 1-1 D D D D D ES) r3 1-9 1-3 D r-3 r- R4.31raSe :4:E)' "16 toonles 0 nsy.honce coAola , r ge 12rovirted For delivery Information visit our website at vuvrw.usps.cornD F Jj =41.0 *7 Postage Certified Fee Retum Receipt Fee (Endorsement Required) Restricted Delivery Fee (Endorsement Required) Total ° Sent ,(18 33) .".76 d te: REINKE, HENRY S Street, or PO 1400 SHELDON DRIVE cftY's ELGIN IL 60120 Postmark Here kEtdeill(009dfOnift000 Alt rilit144140-4W#410 Postage Certified Fee Return Receipt Fee (Endorsement Required) Restricted Delivery Fee (Endorsement Required) Total pe.t.". Ft:kg:4a Sent To c6 .43 Postmark H "l• 4ic CHOICE VENTURES, LLC Street, ,d OrPOB 8626 COUNTY ROAD 301 cux st' PARACHUTE CO 81635 tion CRTIEbMAUj (Domestic Mail Only, No Insurance Coverage Provided) For deliveni information visit our website at vnavv.usps.cornt rh Postage Certified Fee Return Receipt Fee (Endorsement Required) Restricted Delivery Fee (Endorsement Required) Total Postaae & Fees t(N Sent To ------ RE DEVELOPMENT CORP Btreet, orPO 21 COUNTY ROAD 216 c'tY'sk GLENWOOD SPRINGS CO 81601 D. Pbtmark Her,e , D c0 0 N 1-3 r-1 D D D D D r3 rR 1-1 rR D N Postal Service,. CERTIFIED MAIL,. RECEIPT (Domestic malt On4f; No insurance Coverage Provided) For delivery Information visit our website at www.usps.como F n %.0 Postage Certified Fee Retum Receipt Fee (Endorsement Required) Restricted Delivery Fee (Endorsement Required) Total ° c --- Sent To Street, , or PO City, Sti $ ,13t) 7D ct 0 Here JANCO REAL ESTATE HOLDINGS LLC 7800 HIGHWAY 82 STE 209 GLENWOOD SPRINGS CO 81601 Jos. `i For. deliVerY informs n vinft ouk Webitife atwww,usps.nomo " Postage Certified Fee Return Receipt Fee (Endorsement Required) Restricted Delivery Fee (Endorsement Required) Total a C.... Sent 7t $ i(tg 8-a) <, 'VS< MSLHS PROPERTIES LLC tree(, or PO46095 HIGHWAY 6 & 24 cliJ's GLENWOOD SPRINGS CO 81601 ps Fo Postmark Here rutions U.S. Postal ServiceTM CERTIFIED MAILTM RECEIPT (Domestic. Mail Only; No Insurance Coverage Provided) For delivery information visit our website at www.usps.corriD , 0 r. ti 0e r ,ort t•":.) Postage Certified Fee Retum Receipt Fee (Endorsement Required) Restricted Delivery Fee (Endorsement Required) Total $ 9, 76 6.a Postmark,k- Here Senn.° ROARING FORK TRANSPORTATION "gfrAUTHORITY or PO Bc City, Stai 530 E MAIN STREET ASPEN CO 81611 cams U.S. Postal ServiceTM CERTIFIED MALTM RECEIPT (Domestic Mad Only; No insurance Coverage Provided) 7011 1150 0000 1171 9973 it Ln rrErrR rR rR D D D Lfl rR rR N Ln m rr r-9 1•'- rR D D D D D r.rr r-1 D Nr -q r-1 oSt) SerVIcerm T R lEt). M ILTm 13E EIP IF A C T (Domestic Mail Only; No Insurance Coverage Provided) For delivery information visit our website at www.usps.comv 1 Postage Certified Fee Return Receipt Fee (Endorsement Required) Restricted Delivery Fee (Endorsement Required) Total F Sent To Ntreet or POE 31825 HIGHWAY 6 c'Y'sf‘ SILT CO 81652 $ 5-'36 1).76 Poteiterrr HERRING FAMILY PARTNERSHIP, LLLP For delivery Information visit our website at www.usps.conk, Postage Certified Fee Return Receipt Fee (Endorsement Required) Restricted Delivery Fee (Endorsement Required) Total P PH Poititemr:rk Sent To STEELE, WE & V M FAMILY LLLP treet, I or P013 po BOX 1507 c14'sta GLENWOOD SPRINGS CO 81602-1507 -sserrrs1r- see, rewlertrtleteStypillAggiegirkenni,,z,„ ab:er (Domestic Mail Only. No Inst'iratice Coverage, Provide For delivery information visit our website at www uSps Goitre '1) Postage Certified Fee Retum Receipt Fee (Endorsement Required) Restricted Delivery Fee (Endorsement Required) Total 4 , Postrik Flare Sent r() BARNETT-FYRWALD HOLDINGS, INC., streetiC/0 ROBIN FERGUSON or PO 13c 6„y 2222 COTTONDALE LN STE 200 LITTLE ROCK AR 72202-2017 errM woe - D LI) ENr rg rq D D D D D Ln D Nri rq rR N rR r-1 D D D IJ-) rl rl 1-9 1-1 D N ru II" or delivery tnformation visit our website at www.usps.corn,) Postage Certified Fee Retum Receipt Fee (Endorsement Required) Restricted Delivery Fee (Endorsement Required) Total P000rre F..t $ 1q4 3 30 ce% Sent To ASPEN EQUITY GROUP LLC gtreet. At or PO So. PO BOX 1439 citY•s' CARBONDALE CO 81623 F',Fr.aren (40 P Here t one U.S.Postal ServiceTM CERTIFIED MAILTM RECEIPT (Domestic Mail Only; No Insurance Coverage Provided) For delivery Information visit our website at vivivrtosPs•ooros Postage Certified Fee Retum Receipt Fee (Endorsement Required) Restricted Delivery Fee (Endorsement Required) Total Pr ' Sent To ,9Th Here ? RUDD LIMITED LIABILITY COMPANY Street irp orPosc 132 PARK AVE c'Y'stat BASALT CO 81621 Miens U.S. Postal ServiceTM CERTIFIED MAILTM RECEIPT (Domestic Mail Only; No Insurance Coverage Provided) For delivery information visit our website at www.usps.cam., fid Postage Certified Fee Return Receipt Fee (Endorsement Required) Restricted Delivery Fee (Endorsement Required) USE 3')O -76 (L) • : ',.1,,tsss.ssams,0,,',01.0.Szs.000,00S,SSISVS430170WS ' REYNOLDS, WILLIAM W & SHEPHERD, -gt JOAN E or -6 1375 WALNUT STREET #10 BOULDER CO 80302 W.604,0Al2Milez,0 T.illf0 ark r - ere ra O ru fti r -i r4 O O O rR r-1 ra r1 0 N U.S. Postal Service,. CERTIFIED MAILTM RECEIPT (Domestic Mail Only; No insurance Coverage Provided) For delivery information visitour website at www,usps.Gome Postage Certified Fee Return Receipt Fee (Endorsement Required) Restricted Delivery Fee (Endorsement Required) Total r---'--- " Sent Tt $ 3' a 9-76 H LAZY F, LLC Street, or Poi PO BOX 185 cty S' CARBONDALE CO 81623 PS For U.S Postal Servicer TIFI D A� ostmark r.. p t )elbierOnfOrthstiet visit put Pte! Postage Certified Fee Return Receipt Fee (Endorsement Required) Restricted Delivery Fee (Endorsement Required) T -...f n........... n C..nn 3 :6 a•76 6 s WAECHTLER, DONALD G & BONNIE F 7916 HIGHWAY 82 LENWOOD SPRINGS CO 81601-9307 Qjmark Hare instructiona U.S. Postal ServicM CERTIFIED MAIL. EC IPT (DomesticMali Only; No InSurance Coverage Provided)•`. For delivery information visit our website atwww,usp> coti a `( Postage Certified Fee Return Receipt Fee (Endorsement Required) Restricted Delivery Fee (Endorsement Required) Total Postage & Foos Sent $ 3,a) ,O' 7cD Li ( Postmarji . ; Here ' VAN RAND PARK ASSOCIATION, Scree or PC C/0 DAVE DODSON c`t. t PO BOX 248 GLENWOOD SPRINGS CO 81602-0248 113 11J N r1 rR D 0 0 r9 ri rl a cJ r - 0000 1172 0177 1150 0000 1172 0474 U.S. Postal ServiceTM CERTIFIED MAIL,,, RECEIPT (Domestic Mall Only; No Insurance Coverage Provided) For delivery Information visit ou website at www.usps.com4-, Postage Certified Fee Return Receipt Fee (Endorsement Required) Restricted Delivery Fee (Endorsement Required) Total Postage & Fees 2.76 r Postr{tr Sent Stree RUDD LIMITED LIABILITY COMPANY or PC 132 PARK AVE Crty, BASALT CO 81621 U S `Postal ServiceTM CERTIFIEDiMAILTM RECEIPT (Domestic Mali Oniy; No insurance Coverage Provided) For. delivery information visit our website at www.usps:com& USE Postage Certified Fee Return Receipt Fee (Endorsement Required) Restricted Delivery Fee (Endorsement Required) Total p^®*a^^ 2-7a s Sent 1 -s`irest REINARZ, BERNADETTE F TRUST °rPo 1110 COUNTY ROAD 110 Crry, yGLENW00D SPRINGS CO 81601 Peatmark Here UwS Postai Servicer. 'CERTIFIED MAILTM RECEIPT (Domestic Il Only; PO Insurance CoverageProvided) For delivery information visit our website at www.usps.corna Postage Certified Fee Return Receipt Fee (Endorsement Required) Restricted DeliveryFee (Endorsement Required) i? a 6 Tolsl,('£'rt'C"i3 5 eo- Sent? sweet, HOWE, JOHN J & HEATHER D or PO 552 COUNTY ROAD 110 City, s PS Fo GLENWOOD SPRINGS CO 81601 i61%rk Here ruction.' =.• r-1 D ru I-9 D D D Lfl F-1 r-1 rR D r - U.S. Postal Service,. CERTIFIED MAIL., RECEIPT (Domestic Mail Only; No insurance Coverage Provided) For delivery irdormation visit our website at www.usps.com, AL USE Postage Certified Fee Ratum Receipt Fee (Endorsement Required) Restricted Delivery Foe (Endorsement Required) Total ° 76 —gel -T7--6- VAN RAND PARK ASSOCIATION,G — C/O DAVE DOBSON Street, A orPO& PO BOX 248 citxSta' GLENWOOD SPRINGS CO 81602-0248 ,qt.104' co 0 ru r-9 rR 1150 0000 r -R D U.S. Postai Service, CERTIFIED MAILM RECEIPT (Domestic Mad Only; No Insurance Coverage Provided) For delivery Information visit our website at www.usps.com, OFF Postage Certified Feo Return Recolpt Fee (Cridersement Requ(red) Restricted Delivery Fee (Endorsement Required) Total "-"--- Sarrt BAYMAR HOTELS & PROPERTIES INC asrtZ 1111 KANE CONCORSE #211 cay: BAY HARBOR ISLANDS FL 33154 ,14 • etma,k 'A Here trUeb'OnS B&G Via Internet BALCOMB & GREEN, Pc A FULL SERVICE LAW FIRM SINCE 1953 April 2, 2015 Ms. Kathy Eastley, Senior Planner Garfield County Community Development 108 8th Street, Suite 401 Glenwood Springs, CO 810601 keastley@garfield-county.com RE: GCCI Rezone — File Number ZDAA8210 Dear Kathy: EXHIBIT Scott Grosscup Direct Dial (970) 928-3468 Receptionist (970) 945-6546 sgrosscup@balcombgreen.com On behalf of the Roaring Fork Water & Sanitation District ("RFWSD"), thank you for providing us with a copy of the Land Use Change Permit Application submitted by Garfield County Commercial Investments, LLC ("GCCI") to rezone a 43 acre parcel of land from Residential -Suburban to Commercial General. This letter incorporates the comments from the District and its engineers at SGM, Inc. The GCCI property lies within the RFWSD's service area boundary. However, the property has not yet been included within the RFWSD. The RFWSD, GCCI and Carbondale Investments, LLC ("CI", which owns the adjacent parcels to the south and known as the River Edge Colorado PUD) entered into a Pre -Inclusion Agreement, recorded at reception number 825458, setting forth terms and conditions whereby the GCCI property and CI property would be included within the boundaries of the RFWSD and the RFWSD would agree to provide water and sanitary sewer service to these properties (the "Agreement"). Under the terms of the Agreement CI and/or GCCI agreed to pay for and construct certain infrastructure necessary to provide water and sanitary sewer service to the respective properties. These included the extension of water lines from the RFWSD's existing infrastructure and/or the construction of a surface water treatment plant as well as developing Mailing Address: P.O. Drawer 790 Glenwood Springs, CO 81602 www.balcombgreen.com Glenwood Springs Office: 818 Colorado Avenue Glenwood Springs, CO (970) 945-6546 Aspen Office: 0133 Prospector Road, Ste. 4102E Aspen, CO 81611 (970) 920-5467 B&G BALCOMB & GREEN,pc A FULL SERVICE LAW FIRM SINCE 1953 Ms. Kathy Eastley Re: File No. ZDAA8210 April 2, 2015 Page 2 of 2 the infrastructure necessary to provide sanitary sewer services to the properties and expansion of the RFWSD's sewer treatment plant. These responsibilities applied to either CI or GCCI depending upon which property developed first. The Agreement did not contemplate a specific development on the GCCI property. Instead, it contemplated potential development of up to 375 EQRs as defined in the RFWSD's Rules and Regulations. That number was based on the development potential of the property under its present zoning classification of Residential Suburban. Residential and commercial developments can have different impacts on the infrastructure necessary to serve the property. For example, the amount of water necessary to satisfy fire flow requirements for a commercial development can exceed that of a residential development. Commercial development could require construction of larger storage tanks necessary to meet fire flow requirements. Without any information about the size or type of commercial activity that could occur on the re -zoned GCCI property, we are unable at this time to determine whether the infrastructure contemplated by the Agreement would be sufficient to meet future development on the re -zoned property. Additionally, the type of commercial development can impact wastewater treatment operations. While the Agreement does recognize that CI and GCCI would be responsible for the costs of design and construction of a wastewater treatment plant necessary to serve the respective developments, the design requirements for a commercial development could alter how the plant is designed and constructed. The permitting, design, construction and acquisition of property necessary to construct the facilities described in the Agreement can take several years. Thus, the development of the GI property after re -zoning could be delayed depending upon the timing to build the necessary infrastructure to connect that property to the RFWSD. The applicant will need to work with the RFWSD to develop a schedule for building the infrastructure for the District to provide water and sanitary sewer to the GCCI property. Additionally, the offsite infrastructure required for CI and GCCI will impact the Cattle Creek Intersection design that Garfield County is currently planning and designing. Further, we understand that CI is proposing a new Highway 82 interchange for access into the CI property. The proposed commercial zoning of the GCCI parcel and the new highway interchange could impact both the size and location of the infrastructure required to be installed at the Cattle Creek Intersection, including the location and size of the underground sleeves that Garfield County would install. Without knowing the specific fire flow requirements for the GCCI parcel, the RFWSD is not able to ensure that the sizing of the lines through this intersection is correct. These issues should be coordinated between GCCI, CI, Garfield County B&G BALCOMB & GREEN, PC A FULL SERVICE LAW FIRM SINCE 1953 Ms. Kathy Eastley Re: File No. ZDAA8210 April 2, 2015 Page 3 of 2 and the RFWSD to ensure the proper infrastructure is installed at the Cattle Creek Intersection. At this time we are not aware of the schedule for the intersection improvements. Thank you for the opportunity to provide comments on the Land Use Change Application. Please let us know if we can be of any further assistance. Very truly yours, BALCOMB & GREEN, P.C. By: cc: Louis Meyer, P.E. Scott Grosscup EXHIBIT /—tuinL April 3, 2015 TO: Kathy Eastley, Senior Planner, Garfield County Community Development FROM: Andrew McGregor, Community Development Director, City of Glenwood Springs RE: Referral Comments — ZDAA8210 — GCCI Rezone Please accept our comments into the record in reference to the above -noted application. The City of Glenwood Springs staff has substantial concerns about the proposed rezoning as requested. The rezoning is a speculative act based not on a specific development but rather a build it and they will come approach. Furthermore, the rezoning action would be the public's only opportunity to comment as the vast majority of uses allowed in the CG zone district are by - right uses. Any site specific development application would proceed directly to a building permit process. It is noteworthy that lot coverage and FAR maximums in the CG zone district would allow an extraordinarily large amount of commercial square footage to be constructed. Under the FAR alone, almost a million square feet of retail could be constructed on a parcel of this acreage. Obviously other needs like parking, landscaping, drainage, etc. may reduce this number, the prospective square footage of buildings in this requested 45 acre rezoning are enormous. The Garfield County Land Use Resolution stipulates that in order to rezone a property it must be demonstrated that a property was rezoned erroneously or that the four criteria discussed below be satisfied. I. The proposed rezoning would result in a logical and orderly development pattern and would not constitute spot zoning. The CMC/Cattle Creek area along Highway 82 already has substantial amounts of commercially zoned land. Some of that acreage is vacant and is owned by the applicant. The neglected condition of that property are indicative of a lack of community responsibility and stewardship. It is not good land use practice to create large of tracts of commercially zoned properties when an inventory already exists unless the agenda is to pull pre-existing commercial uses from the neighboring cities of City of Glenwood Springs Page 1 of 1 101 West 8'" Street, Glenwood Springs Colorado 81601 PH: 970-384-6411 FX: 970-945-8582 Glenwood Springs and Carbondale or attract competing large format retail which will pirate retail dollars from the cities to these exurban greenfields where development costs are lower and infrastructure is limited. A logical development pattern places this magnitude development within an incorporated community. 2. The area to which the proposed zoning would apply has changed or is changing to such a degree that it is in the public interest to encourage a new use or density in the area. Circumstances have in fact not changed appreciably in this locale. This property and the adjoining parcel to the east have been a part of a series of failed commercial and residential PUDs for the last 15 to 20 years. Regardless of the entitlements on these properties, no development has occurred. Now the public is being asked to extend 45 acres of commercial zoning. Not only does the neighborhood or "unincorporated community" not support this demand, as there is plenty of vacant commercially zoned property in both the immediate area and in the neighboring cities. While we acknowledge that there has been slow growth in recent years in nearby subdivisions such as Elk Springs, Iron Bridge and Aspen Glen, these new units have not suddenly created the demand for many thousands of square feet of new commercial or retail square footage. 3. The proposed rezoning addresses a demonstrated community need with respect to facilities, services and housing. The GCCI application does not adequately address a "demonstrated community need" for this magnitude of commercial rezoning. They supply no statistical evidence supporting this request. Within the Garfield County Comprehensive Plan's definition, it states that an unincorporated community is intended to be "self-contained subdivisions that contain town or neighborhood centers primarily to serve their own populations." The applicant even goes so far as to state in the application narrative that "development of the subject property will benefit the County as a whole." The application further states that "The proposed commercial and office uses will serve the immediate residents of the local unincorporated community, as well as surrounding communities..." Sales tax leakage is already an issue for cities and towns. Adding large acreage of commercial land in this location will have a negative effect on surrounding communities by pirating existing and future development from these communities. On page 50 of the Comprehensive Plan, Policy #2 states that "The County will discourage commercial development in the unincorporated areas that would significantly reduce sales tax revenues in incorporated municipalities. Perhaps the applicant should be requesting an amendment to the Comprehensive Plan in advance of a rezoning application of this magnitude as the scale of this request clearly doesn't comply with the current "Unincorporated Communities" designation that exists today in the Comprehensive Plan. 4. The proposed rezoning is in general conformance with the Comprehensive Plan and in compliance with any intergovernmental agreement. This rezoning application is clearly inconsistent with the current future land use designation which is intended to have commercial zoning only to "serve their own populations". This neighborhood center can not support an additional million square feet of commercial development. Furthermore, it is doubtful if the entire Roaring Fork Valley has demand for that quantity of new commercial. Instead, it would draw exiting business(s) out of the incorporated cities and towns in the valley. In summary, the application does not demonstration compliance with the adopted Comprehensive Plan nor does it demonstrate that circumstances have changed to the extent necessary to warrant such a large speculative rezoning. The City's Community Development Department staff recommends that the application be denied. April 3, 2015 TOWN OF CARBONDALE 511 COLORADO AVENUE CARBONDALE, CO 81623 Garfield County Planning and Zoning Commissioners Garfield County Board of Commissioners 108 8th Street, Suite 401 Glenwood Springs, CO 81601 Re: Garfield County Referral — Garfield County Commercial Investments, LLC - Rezoning Dear Commissioners: Thank you for referring the Garfield County Commercial Investments, LLC rezoning application to the Town of Carbondale for the Town's review and comments. The application is to rezone the Garfield County Commercial Investments, LLC property (GCCI) which is a 43.25 acre property from Residential Suburban to Commercial General (CG). The Planning Commission discussed this item at its March 26, 2015 meeting. The Board of Trustees discussed the application at its March 31, 2015 meeting. This letter is intended to convey our comments. According to the Garfield County pre -application conference summary, the area with the CGGI property has several designations on the County's Comprehensive Plan Land Use Map: 1. Residential High Density 2. Unincorporated Community 3. There is an asterisk for Rural Employment center that appears to be located around the SH 82 — Cattle Creek area 4. A Water and Sewer Service Area The application does not indicate what type and size of development is planned for the property. The applicant's letter states that the uses allowed in the CG zone district will fill the need for commercial uses that focus on serving the population of the unincorporated community, such as restaurants, convenience stores, recreation centers and general retail. The letter is vague and does not outline the intended use of the property. Phone: (970) 963-2733 Fax: (970) 963-9140 The GCCI, Inc. property is 43.25 acres. The General Retail Use is a permitted use with no site plan review process and a generous lot coverage allowance at 85%. This could result in a significant amount of commercial square footage with very little oversight and input from surrounding communities. Rural Employment Centers are defined as small areas adjacent to major roadways that allow light industrial, manufacturing, equipment storage and incidental retail sales. The size of the GCCI parcel would allow much more square footage than what appears to be envisioned in a Rural Employment Center as defined in the Garfield County Comprehensive Plan. Unincorporated Communities in the Garfield County Comprehensive Plan are intended to be "self-contained subdivisions that contain town and neighborhood centers primarily to serve their own populations." A Targe retail store or stores would go beyond serving the existing and potential residential units surrounding the GCCI property. Finally, the Town questions whether the rezoning criteria in the Garfield County Land Use Code could be met with the proposal. Large commercial square footage would not result in a logical and orderly development pattern; the Cattle Creek area has not changed to such a degree that it serves the public interest to rezone the property. The proposal has not demonstrated a community need. In fact, the resulting development could compete with existing municipalities. Finally, the rezoning does not appear to be in compliance with the Garfield County Comprehensive Plan as it does not meet the definition of Unincorporated Community and Rural Employment Center. Garfield County has a 1% sales tax rate. Incorporated areas have an additional percentage on top of that. In the case of Carbondale, the Town has a 3.5% sales tax rate and 1% RFTA sales tax rate. Commercial uses competing with existing and future commercial uses in Carbondale could result in the loss of sales tax and services to the community and RFTA. One of the policies in the Garfield County Comprehensive Plan is that "the county will discourage commercial development in the unincorporated areas that would significantly reduce sales tax revenues in incorporated municipalities." The potential retail development which could be constructed as a result of this rezoning would conflict with this adopted policy. With the lack of detail in the application, it is difficult to determine how the GCCI property could be built out. However, for comparison's sake, Glenwood Meadows in Glenwood Springs is approximately 40 acres. It appears that 405,000 sq. ft. of gross leasable square footage is allowed on the property. Glenwood Meadows is intended to function as a regional shopping center. The GCCI property is approximately 43 acres. Assuming that the building floor area will be 30% of the lot area, the potential square footage could be around 550,000 sq. ft. This estimate is conservative since this is based on a single story building and the allowed height in the CG zone district is 40 ft. in height. We question whether there is a community need for this type and scale of commercial property in this area. Phone: (970) 963-2733 Fax: (970) 963-9140 The Garfield County Comprehensive Plan includes a policy that "Garfield County will encourage the development of a diversified industrial base recognizing physical location -to -market capabilities of the community, and the social and environmental impacts of industrial uses." If the property is to be rezoned, some type of light industrial zone district may be more appropriate to serve to meet the community needs in the valley. Garfield County has expended a significant amount of time and resources in developing and adopting the County's Comprehensive Plan and Land Use Code. The Town asks that the County Commissioners abide by the standards and guidelines included in those documents. The Town respectfully requests that the County Commissioners deny the rezoning. Thank you for the opportunity to submit comments. Sincerely, cSt“,46'-1*- Stacey Patch Bernot Gavin Brooke Mayor Chairperson Board of Trustees Planning and Zoning Commission Phone: (970) 963-2733 Fax: (970) 963-9140 Roaring Fork Transportation Authority April 10, 2015 Tamra Allen, Planning Manager Community Development Department Garfield County 108 8th Street, Suite 401 Glenwood Springs, CO 81601 EXHIBIT 1 Id RE: Garfield County Commercial Investments, LLC , Request for Zone District Amendment (Residential -Suburban to Commercial -General) Dear Ms. Allen: Thank you for soliciting RFTA's comments on the proposed Request for a Zone District Amendment on the 43.250 -acre Tax Parcel Number 2393-072-031. Without knowing the mix of commercial development that might be proposed by the developer on this site in the future, RFTA cannot offer any specific comments about the potential impacts that such development might have on RFTA transit services or the Rio Grande railroad corridor. In general, large-scale commercial developments that are created outside of Urban Growth Boundaries can pose challenges for the public sector. These challenges can take the form of increased demand and costs for a variety of public services, which are not always offset by the tax revenue created by the commercial activities. In addition, large scale commercial developments can potentially create undesirable traffic impacts, especially in highway corridors that are already congested. If the County subsequently approves a large-scale commercial development on this site, RFTA foresees that demand for its regional transit services could increase because of people wanting to access the businesses for employment and shopping purposes. However, because the development would not be located within one of RFTA's member jurisdictions, there would not be any sales tax revenue generated for RFTA to help offset any increased demand. In addition, the development might have the potential to siphon off sales tax revenue from RFTA member jurisdictions; further reducing resources RFTA relies upon to maintain and increase its transit services. When considering this request for a Zone District Amendment, RFTA is hopeful that Garfield County will carefully evaluate the extent to which a significant increase in commercial activity at this location might exacerbate existing transportation challenges in the Highway 82 corridor and adversely impact the economies of nearby municipalities. Thanks again for soliciting RFTA's comments on this Request for Zone District Amendment submitted by Garfield County commercial Investments, LLC. If you have questions, please let me know. Sincerely, Cwv. Dan Blankenship Chief Executive Officer 2 Roaring Fork Tronsportolion Authority 71 200' to 100' ROW switch at parcel line Approximate Proposed New Access GCCILLC 43 ACRES Rio Grande Railroad Corridor Right -of -Way 200' to 100' wide Rio Grande Trail Centerline Garfield County Parcels Created y: Jason White, RFTA Assistant Planner Source: Pbtic and Garfield County GIS data Date: 4/15-._ 75 0.15 4' From: Roussin - CDOT, Daniel To: Kathy A. Eastlev Subject: Re: Garfield County Commercial Investments Rezoning Date: Monday, April 13, 2015 12:47:22 PM EXHIBIT 1 Kathy - Thank you for the opportunity to review the rezoning of 43 acres. I have no comment on the rezoning of the property. However, the new uses will require a new access permit in the future. If you have any questions, please let me know. thanks Dan Roussin Permit Unit Manager Traffic and Safety P 970.683.6284 ( F 970.683.6290 222 South 6th Street, Room 100, Grand Junction, CO 81501 daniet.roussin@state.co.us 1 www.coloradodot.info 1 www.cotrip.org On Fri, Apr 10, 2015 at 3:51 PM, Kathy A. Eastley <keastley(agarfield-county.com> wrote: Good afternoon Dan, Can we expect any formal comments from CDOT on the request to rezone the 43 acre property adjacent to River Edge on SH 82? We'd like to make sure that CDOT weighs on any impacts related to the potential traffic that would be generated by this commercial rezoning. Thanks and have a good weekend. Kathy Eastley, AICP Senior Planner Garfield County Community Development 108 8th Street, #401 Glenwood Springs, CO 81601 April 21, 2015 EXHIBIT 1 Garfield County Kathy Eastley Garfield County Community Development Department Vegetation Management RE: Garfield County Commercial Investments LLC Rezone of Parcel A Dear Kathy, Thank you for the opportunity to comment on the rezone application. This parcel lies between the Rio Grande Trail and Colorado State Highway 82. The Garfield County and State listed noxious weed, Scotch thistle is prevalent throughout the site. One of the largest Scotch thistle infestations in the county is located on the site about 200 feet east of the bikepath and is at least a % acre in size. I have concerns that if left untreated this infestation will spread up and down both the bikepath and Highway 82. I am in the process of initiating contact with the property owner; however it may be helpful if the Planning Commission would consider requesting the property owner to treat the noxious weeds on site during the rezoning application. Sincerely, Steve Anthony Garfield County Vegetation Manager 0375 County Road 352, Bldg 2060 Rifle, CO 81650 Phone: 970-945-1377 x 4305 Fax: 970-625-5939 ROARING FOR CONSERVANCY 11, rt<Pn,c<1 f BOARD OF DIRECTORS Diane Schweuer President Rick Neilev 17(1' President Jennifer Sauer Sec're:arr• 'fed Borchelt Stephen rllspernian Jim Light Rick Lolaro Executive Director Don Schuster Larry Ya' Valerie Ale\ander Yaw l'at McMahon PROGRAM STAFF Rick Lotaro Executive Director Sheryl Sabandal Development Associate Christina Medved Ethical/on Director Chad Rudow 11 iuer Oualitr ('oordittator Heather Lcwin 11 iner•.x{ted .action Director Sarah Woods Director of J'hiluntltropr Ms. Kathy Eastley, Staff Planner Garfield County Building and Planning Department 108 8v' Street, Suite 401 Glenwood Springs, CO 81601 keastley a,garfield-county.com RE: File Number ZDAA8210, GCCI Rezone Dear Ms. Eastley, 11 EXHIBIT • April 20, 2015 Please accept these comments on the proposed re -zoning of a 43.25 acre property located on the west side of Highway 82 between CMC Road and Cattle Creek Road. This parcel, owned by Garfield County Commercial Investments (GCCI), is associated with the 53 -acre Cattle Creek Conservation Easement held by Roaring Fork Conservancy (RFC). Given the lack of specifics and planning accompanying this request, RFC cannot support a change of zoning at this time. The Cattle Creek Conservation Easement and adjacent Heron Point Conservation Easement, acquired in 1998 and 1999 respectively, preserve valuable riparian habitat at the confluence of Cattle Creek and the Roaring Fork River. Riparian habitat (vegetation along river and stream banks), is among Colorado's most important plant communities for wildlife and healthy waterways, but comprises less than l% of the entire land area of the state. Essential riparian habitat, a thriving great blue heron nesting colony, crucial elk winter range, and high water quality are among the many conservation values RFC is obligated to protect, preserve, and enhance in perpetuity within the conservation easement. RFC has not been privy to GCCI development plans and has concerns with the potential effects of commercial development on the nearby Conservation Easements as well as the Roaring Fork River and Cattle Creek. RFC is currently engaged in a comprehensive scientific study of Cattle Creek with the goal of improving water quality in the creek. The increase in impermeable surfaces associated with commercial development and parking lots can increase runoff and erosion, raising concerns about potential pollutants reaching the waterways. The impacts of possible increased light pollution and traffic associated with commercial development are of particular concern because the Cattle Creek and Heron Point Conservation Easements are home to a wide variety of wildlife, notably a great blue heron nesting colony. Light Pollution can inadvertently interfere with the circadian rhythm and migration patterns of P.O. Box 3349 Basalt, Colorado 81621 970.927.1290 I www.roaringfork.org wildlife, including birds, potentially interrupting their growth and reproductive cycles) i In addition, lighting and traffic increases have been shown to negatively affect great blue heron colonies potentially leading to site abandonment.2 Without knowing more detail of the proposed development and mitigation for concerns such as light pollution, runoff and traffic, RFC cannot currently support a zoning change. Please contact me with any questions. Thank you for your consideration. erely, Rick Lofaro Executive Director 1 http://sierraclubmass.org/wp/?incsub wiki=dark-skies-outdoor-lighting z http://www.pugetsoundnearshore.org/technical papers/herons.pdf