The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About2.0 PC Staff Report 09.08.2004pitit ft,/ �',� �a✓t� rte vvl d 4. /2 PC 09/08/04 FJ PROJECT INFORMATION AND STAFF COMMENTS REQUEST APPLICANT REPRESENTATIVE LOCATION ZONING Amend the text of the Blue Creek Ranch Planned Unit Development (PUD) Blue Creek Land Holdings, LLC Balcomb & Green, PC, Lawrence R. Green 3220 County Road 100 (Catherine Store Rd) PUD I. BACKGROUND The Board of County Commissioners approved the Blue Creek Ranch PUD and Preliminary Plan on August 5th, 2002 which is memorialized in Resolution 2002-82 (the Resolution). The Board subsequently approved the Final Plat on February 18`h, 2003. The Board approved the PUD as a site specific development plan which was proposed and intended to include a total of 48 single-family residential lots. Lot 1 was designed to include the existing original ranch house as well as an existing accessory dwelling unit (ADU). Due to a scrivener's error, the Resolution refers to 49 residential lots rather than 48 residential lots as well as neglected to specifically include a reference to the ADU on lot 1 which was contemplated throughout the review process as an existing unit which would continue to exist as a lawful use on Lot 1. Additionally, confusion has recently arisen regarding the intent of the term "barn" which was approved as a use -by -right in the private common open space district within the PUD. The Applicant intended the barn to mean "storage barn" for the benefit of individual lot owners in the PUD where owners in the subdivision would be able to store personal belongings in the barns as a private amenity provided by the Homeowners Association (HOA). Because this specific intent was never discussed during the review process, Staff maintained a more agricultural understanding of the term "barn." As a result of that understanding, building permits had been submitted by the Applicant for one of the proposed barns which, by design, resembled a traditional "barn" design on the exterior while the interior was designed as "storage" units which was contrary to Staffs understanding. II. REQUEST The Applicant requests the Board approve a request to amend Resolution 2002-82 to 1) correct a scrivener's error effectively changing 49 residential lots to 48 residential lots while including the existence of the ADU on Lot 1 and 2) to clarify the definition and intent of "barn" as it is contemplated as a use -by -right in the private common open space zone district within the PUD. 1 • • III. STAFF COMMENTS Section 4.12.03 of the Garfield County Zoning Resolution identifies the criteria the Board of County Commissioners shall use to determine if a modification to a PUD is warranted (pursuant to CRS 24-67- 106(3)(a — c)). Specifically, it states, all those provisions of the Plan authorized to be enforced by the County may be modified, removed or released by the County, subject to the following (these criteria are listed below in bold italics). (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 Section 24-67-104. C.R.S., that the modification, removal or release is consistent with the efficient development and preservation of the entire PUD [and the modification] 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. (3) If time-share or fractional ownership units or other similar interest in property are proposed after PUD zoning is granted by the Board of County Commissioners, an application for such designation shall contain unanimous approval of all owners of real property within the PUD. Staff Response Staff finds the request to correct the scrivener's error is warranted simply on the basis that it was an oversight in preparing the Resolution. Clearly, the number of single-family lots proposed, discussed, and approved was 48 rather than 49 and the ADU on Lot 1 was also contemplated throughout the approval process and inadvertently left out of the Resolution. The clarification of the term "barn" to mean "storage barn" to contain storage units for the specific benefit of lot owners within the subdivision is consistent with the primary residential nature of the development as well as the general intent of the PUD as a shared amenity. Staff agrees that cluster design incorporated into Blue Creek Ranch contemplates smaller lots while preserving larger tracts of open space. A separate storage barn for the benefit of the lot owners affords additional storage space without compromising the intent of the small lot concept. The PUD does not include any time-share or fractional ownership units. Staff finds the proposal is consistent with the efficient development and preservation of the entire PUD [and the modification] 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. IV. STAFF RECOMMENDATION & SUGGESTED FINDINGS TO THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS Staff recommends the Planning Commission recommend the Board of County Commissioners approve the request to 1) correct a scrivener's error to Resolution 2002-82 and 2) amend the text of the Blue 2 • • Creek Ranch PUD to clarify the intent of "barn" in the private open space to mean "storage barn" finding that: 1. That the meeting before the County Planning Commission was extensive and complete, that all pertinent facts, matters and issues were submitted and that all interested parties were heard; 2. The PUD text is consistent with the efficient development and preservation of the entire PUD [and the modification] affects 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; 3. That the proposed PUD Amendment has been determined to be in the best interest of the health, safety, morals, convenience, order, prosperity and welfare of the citizens of Garfield County; and 4. That the application has met the requirements of the Garfield County Zoning Resolution of 1978, as amended. 3 • • GARFIELD COUNTY Building & Planning Department 108 8th Street, Suite 201 Glenwood Springs, Colorado 81601 Telephone: 970.945.8212 Facsimile: 970.384.3470 www.garfield-county.com Text Amendment to Zone District / Zoning Resolution GENERAL INFORMATION (To be completed by the applicant.) ➢ Name of Applicant (Property Owner): Blue Creek Land Holdings, LLC ➢ Address: 3220 County Road 100 Telephone: (970) 704-9006 ➢ City: Carbondale State: Colorado Zip Code: 81623 FAX: (970) 704-9006 ➢ Name of Representative, if any (Planner, Attorney, etc): Lawrence R. Green, Balcomb & Green, P.C. ➢ Address: P.O. Drawer 790 / 818 Colorado Avenue Telephone: (970) 945-6546 ➢ City: Glenwood Springs State: CO Zip Code: 81602 FAX: (970) 945-9769 ➢ Specific Section of County Zoning Resolution of 1978 or PUD to be amended: 1. The underlined portions of Garfield County Resolution No. 2002-82 dated September 12, 2002. The language to be interlineated is reflected at Paragraphs (1) and (2) of Attachment A. 2. Modify Paragraph 20 of Resolution No. 2002-82 to clarify that "Barn" as a use by right in the Private Open Space Zone District includes up to four (4) storage barns for the storage of private personal property to be owned as Common Elements by the Homeowners Association, as well as traditional agricultural barns. ➢ Purpose for the proposed text amendment: 1. Is reflected at Paragraph (3) of Attachment A. 2. Is reflected at Paragraph (2) of Attachment B. STAFF USE ONLY ➢ Doc. No.: Date Submitted: TC Date: ➢ Planner: Hearing Date: