Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2.0 PC Staff Report 06.11.1986REQUEST: PC 6/11/86 PROJECT INFORMATION AND STAFF COMMENTS Canyon Creek Estates PUD Plan amendment and Zone District text amendment OWNERS: Lazier -Sills Partnership ENGINEER: LOCATION: SITE DATA: Mountain Engineering and Land Surveying The property is located in portions of Section 25 & 26, T5S, R90W of the 6th P.M., more practically described as a tract of land north of Highway 6 & 24 and immediately east of the I-70 Canyon Creek exit. The request is to split a 74.577 acre parcel into 69 single family lots. WATER: Existing community distribution system supplied by a well. SEWER: Privately owned central sewage disposal system. EXISTING ZONING: PUD ADJACENT ZONING: North: O/S South: R/L/UD West: A/R/RD East: O/S, R/L/UD I. RELATIONSHIP TO THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN The site lies within Districts C & D of the Comprehensive Plan. The PUD plan and zone districts have been found to be in general compliance with the Comprehensive Plan of May of 1981. The proposed amendments to the PUD Plan and zone district text are in general compliance with the Garfield County Comprehensive Plan of 1984. II. DESCRIPTION OF THE PROPOSAL A. Site Description: The site is on a small mesa above Canyon Creek that has primarily pinon and juniper vegetation. B. Project Description: It is proposed to amend the original PUD plan and zone district text to allow for 69 single family detached dwellings on lots ranging in size from 0.25 acres to 8.027 acres. An approved water and sewage system is in place consistent with previous approvals. Access will be from State Highway 6 & 24 onto a private road. III.MAJOR ISSUES AND CONCERNS A. Zoning: Section 10 of the County Zoning Resolution allows for the amendment of a PUD Plan and zone district text. Any modifications of the Plan or text must meet these criteria contained in Section 4.12.03: (1) No modification, removal, or release of the provisions of the Plan by the County shall affect the rights of the residents, occupants and owners of the PUD to maintain and enforce those provisions at law or in equity; and • • (2) No substantial modifications, removal, or release of the provisions of the Plan by the County shall be permitted except upon a finding by the County, following a public hearing called and held in accordance with the provisions of C.R.S. 1973, 24-67-104, that the modification, removal or release is consistent with the efficient development and preservation of the entire PUD, does not affect in a substantially adverse manner either the enjoyment of land abutting upon or across a street from the PUD, or the public interest, and is not granted solely to confer a special benefit upon any person. There are no residents, occupants or owners of the property other than the applicants. The proposed modifications do not change the impacts on adjoining property or across the street since there is no increase in density or general concept. This will be explained further on in these comments. B. Staff Comments: 1. The original PUD approval and the water augmentation plan were for 69 dwelling units. The amendments proposed are primarily to eliminate the multi -family and duplex units from the development. There will only be two zone districts, a Single Family Residential Zone District and Common Open Space Zone District. (See pages, 1,*,5'' One suggested change is to change the Conditional Uses to Uses by Right, subject to standards contained in Section C. Eliminate "studio for arts and crafts" given that it would be a "home occupation". Then add to Section C the following language: Home Occupation Standards A. No home occupation shall be permitted that: 1. Changes the outside appearance of the dwelling or is visible from the street; 2. Creates a hazard to person or property, results in electrical interference, or becomes a nuisance; 3. Results in the outside storage or display of anything. B. The following are prohibited as home occupations: 1. Dancing studios; 2. Repair shops; 3. Restaurants; 4. Stables or kennels; 5. Automobile repair or paint shops. Another suggestion would be to modify the side yard setback requirements in the Single Family Residential Zone given the potential for some fairly narrow pie -shaped lots. The following language may be appropriate: side yard: 7.5 feet 2. The PUD plan shows 17 blocks, ranging in size from 1.113 acres to 8.027 acres. Each block has an assigned number of lots that can be created by further redivision of a final plat. Section 7.20 of the County Subdivision Regulations allows for the redivision of a final plat into smaller lots if the intent to do so is indicated on the plat and the Board feels it is appropriate based on a Preliminary Plan approval. The applicants will submit an amended Final Plat with a plat note indicating the intent to redivide the blocks further based on their previous Preliminary Plan approval. • • A condition of approval of the PUD plan and zone district text amendment should be included to clarify this intent. The following language is suggested: That all blocks may be divided further in accordance with Section 7.20 of the Garfield County Subdivision Regulations of 1984 and the densities approved on the Canyon Creek PUD Plan map. 3. The applicant's engineer has stated that any future redivision of the blocks will not increase the surface drainage flows of the area. This would be a possible issue during redivision, if it had not been answered now. IV. FINDINGS 1. That the meeting before the Planning Commission was extensive and complete, that all pertinent facts, matters and issues were submitted, and that all interested parties were heard at the meeting; 2. That the PUD Plan and Zone District text amendments are consistent with the efficient development and preservation of the entire PUD, does not affect, in a substantially adverse manner, either the enjoyment of the land abutting upon or across a street from the PUD, or the public interest, and is not granted solely to confer a special benefit upon any person; 3. That the proposed zoning is in general compliance with the recommendations set forth in the Comprehensive Plan for the unincorporated area of the County; provided certain conditions are met in any subsequent land use permit applications; 4. That the requested Planned Unit Development Plan and Zone District text amendments are in general compliance with all requirements of the applicable Garfield County Zoning Resolution and, further, that the requested Planned Unit Development Modification is suitable and appropriate for the subject property, given the location, condition and circumstances of the property, and it is generally compatible with existing land uses in the surrounding nearby area; 5. That for the above -stated and other reasons, the proposed Planned Unit Development Zone District Text Modification Text amendments are in the best interest of the health, safety, morals, convenience, order, prosperity and welfare of the citizens of Garfield County. V. RECOMMENDATION APPROVAL, with the following conditions of approval: 1. That the PUD Zone District text be modified as noted in staff comment #1. 2. That all blocks may be redivided further in accordance with Section 7.20 of the Garfield County Subdivision Regulations of 1984 and the densities approved on the Canyon Creek PUD Plan Map.