Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2.0 PC Staff Report 09.08.1993• • PC 9/8/93 PROJECT INFORMATION AND STAFF COMMENTS REQUEST: Larsh Subdivision Preliminary Plan APPLICANT: Ed Larsh LOCATION: A parcel of land located in a portion of Sections 19 and 20, T.7S. R88W; more practically described as a tract of land located between State Highway 82 and The Roaring Fork River, between Glenwood Springs and Carbondale. SITE DATA: 14.726 acres. WATER: Wells SEWER: I.S.D.S. system. ACCESS: Access easement from SH 82 EXISTING ZONING: A/R/RD ADJACENT ZONING. A/R/RD & Aspen Glen PUD I. RELATIONSHIP TO THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN The subject property is located in District C - Rural Areas Minor Environmental Constraints, District D - Rural Areas Moderate Environmental Constraints, and District F - River/Floodplain Severe Environmental Constraints as shown on the Garfield County Comprehensive Plan Management Districts Map. H. DESCRIPTION OF THE PROPOSAL A. Site Descri tp ion: The property is bound on the southwest by the Roaring Fork River and on the northeast by the Rio Grande Railroad and State Highway 82. To the northwest is an agricultural property owned by Mr. Richard Burry, and the proposed Aspen Glen development is located directly across the Roaring Fork. Access to the site is provided via an access easement through the Burry property and across the railroad. A vicinity map is included in the applicant's submittals, which are included in the Planning Commission packet. 13 • • The property gently slopes to the Roaring Fork River at approximately 12 percent grade, and the slope decreases to approximately 4 percent as the property approaches the river. Vegetation includes native grasses in the historic pasture areas, with Cottonwoods along the banks of the river. The regulated floodplain is contained within the bank system, and does not appear to impact any potential building sites within the subdivision. The only structure on the property is Mr. Larsh's residence, a caboose, and a detached garage/studio. B. Mr. Larsh is proposing to split the 14.726 parcel into four (4) parcels of 6.4, 2.6, 2.6 and 2.9 acres in size. Mr. Larsh intends on retaining the 6.4 acre parcel with the existing structures. All of the lots would utilize the existing easement through Mr. Burry's property. The existing driveway will be improved to County Road standards. Domestic water will be provided by individual wells augmented by Basalt Water Conservancy contracts. Copies of the contracts were submitted at Sketch Plan. Shares in the Glenwood Ditch will be transferred to each lot on a proportional share basis. Mr. Larsh's well has historically produced dependable water. Sewage disposal will be handled by ISDS. The predominate soils on the site include the Mussel type, which only has moderate restrictions for ISDS systems. Two percolation tests have been performed on the property, and the Geotechnical Study (within the application) indicate that ISDS are feasible on the site. III. REVIEW AGENCY COMMENTS Division of Wildlife- DOW has noted methods of protecting the riparian habitat adjacent to the site, and suggested tigin to protect the Bald Eagle site south of the Larsh property (see letter page • ). The closest building site to the eagle nest adjacent to Aspen Glen is in excess of 1000 feet. In addition, the nest is not visible due to terrain and vegetation. The Division of Wildlife is requesting that no construction be allowed from February 15 to May 1st if eagles are present, and that no public or private fishing be allowed except for float - through traffic from January 1 through May 15. Staff has always supported DOW efforts to protect the eagle nest during the Aspen Glen hearings, however, it does not appear that the construction limitations on the Larsh property is warranted due to distance and topography from the nest. The maintenance preservation of the cottonwoods, in addition to the setback restrictions recommended by DOW have been met by the applicant. Garfield County has historically limited dogs in development located in winter range or critical habitat for elk and deer. The Larsh property is not located within these designations. In staff's opinion, dog restrictions are not necessary in this case. Colorado State Forest Service- The Forest Service has not responded in writing to the proposal, but verbally approved the project due to lack of wildfire danger in the area. No other agencies have commented on the project to date, although staff referred the project on August 11, 1993. Additional agency comments are expected prior to the Board of County Commissioner hearing scheduled for October 4, 1993. ig • • IV. STAFF COMMENTS A. ComprehensiyePlan Compliance: During the Sketch Plan review process, staff and the Planning Commission agreed that the project was in general compliance with the Garfield County Comprehensive Plan, 1984. Staff suggests that the retainment of open space adjacent to the Roaring Fork River, as well as the identification of non -buildable areas, brings the project further in compliance with the Comprehensive Plan. B. Soils/Topography: As was the case at the adjacent Aspen Glen site, the property includes sinkholes that have formed in the alluvial fans in the field area of the southwest part of the property. No residential structures are proposed in sinkhole areas. The Preliminary Plan includes "unbuildable area" designations, consistent with the geotechnical report included in the application,. C. Roads/Access: As noted earlier, all lots access off of an existing easement through the Burry property. Plans submitted with the application confirm that the road design is consistent with County standards. Staff still has significant concerns regarding the ability of Mr. Larsh to utilize the Burry easement for the additional parcels. The easement recorded with the County (Book 497 Page 220) describes an 18 foot easement for utility and access purposes. In order to meet Subdivision Road Standards, a 40 foot ROW would be required. Staff has contacted the applicant regarding this issue. The applicant intends on resolving the easement with Mr. Burry, probably by recording a revised easement agreement, prior to the Board hearing. The crossing of the railroad is in the from of a deeded crossing without any use limitations. D. Fire Protection: The subject property is within the Glenwood Springs Rural Fire Protection District. The fire district has not commented on the proposal. E. Lot Design • Significant changes in lot design have occurred in response to comments from the Planning Commission during Sketch Plan review and the findings of the geotechnical report. Specific changes include the following: • Areas considered unbuildable have been identified and graphically depicted on the plat; • An open space easement, confined to portions of the lot to be retained by Mr. Larsh, has been identified on the plat. Staff suggests that very specific language be included at the time of final plat regarding the accessibility of the easement to future owners within the subdivision. • The original proposal was designed around all lots having river frontage. The only drawback to this design configuration is that the lots were quite narrow, approximately 100 to 130 feet wide in the area most likely to include building sites (i.e. next to the river). This also reduced the horizonal separation between future structures within the subdivision. In staff's opinion, the revised design is superior than the sketch plan configuration. • • V. STAFF RECOMMENDATION Staff is recommending approval of the project, subject to the following conditions: 1. That all representations of the applicant, either within the application or stated at the public hearings before the Planning Commission and the Board of County Commissioners shall be considered conditions of approval, unless stated otherwise by the Planning Commission and the Board of County Commissioners. n s ll be incorporated in accordance with C Colorado Revised Statute requirements. 3. The applicant shall prepare and submit a Subdivision Improvements Agreement addressing all on-site improvements, prior to the submittal of a final plat. 4. The applicants shall submit improvement plans for all roads, utilities, fire protection, improvements, signage and drainage structures prior to the submittal of the final plat. 5. That all proposed utilities shall be placed underground. 6. That the applicant shall demonstrate that procedures are established for the maintenance of all roadways, including snow removal, through tea-► C T7 ee �a;on.�eG" U J7S��. 8. That the applicant shall pay $200 per lot in School Impact Fees prior to the approval of the Final Plat. 9. That the following plat notes shall be included on the Final Plat: a. All residential structures shall be constructed consistent with the recommendations of The Preliminary Geotechnical Study prepared by Hepworth - Pawlak Geotechnical, Inc. (July 2„ 1993). 10. Prior to the approval of the Final Plat, the Applicant shall submit approved well permits, consistent with the Basalt Water Conservancy Contracts providing for a legal water supply for the Larsh Subdivision. The Basalt Water Conservancy District Water Allotment Contract and the water rights associated with the wells, together with well permits, shall be transferred by the developer to a homeowner's association which shall have the power and the duty to enforce compliance by lot owners with the terms and conditions of the augmentation plan. Appropriate Protective Covenants shall further require compliance with the terms and conditions of the augmentation plan. 11. That the applicants shall pre are and submit protective covenants, articles of incorporation and other '�tocCuments including by-laws will be submitted for review by the County Attorney prior to the approval of the Final Plat. 12. That the plat and covenants will provide that there will be no resubdivision of 1 1. • • the lots. 13. That all roadways shall be constructed in accordance with the design standards in effect at the time of submittal of the Final Plat. 14. The Final Plat shall include the same unbuildable designations as shown on the Preliminary Plan, in conformance with the recommendations of the geotechnical report. This requirement shall be incorporated into the restrictive covenants. 15. That adequate easements for wells, waterlines and other attendant facilities shall provide on the Final Plat. 16. Prior to the Preliminary Plan hearing before the Board of County Commissioners, the applicant shall submit to County legal staff evidence that the applicant has legal right to use the easement through the Burry's property for all lots created by the subdivision. /P70 1 a-G,e/a. a 724 1 `7 r\STATE OF COLORADO 1� ( ' Roy Romer, Governor •••• ry DEPARTMENT .OF NATURAL RESOURCES DIVISION OF WILDLIFE AN EQUAL OPPORTUNITY EMPLOYER Perry D. Olson, Director 6060 Broadway Denver, Colorado 80216 Telephone: (303) 297.1192 3-30-93 Garfield County Planning 109 8th St., Suite 303 Glenwood Springs, CO 81601 Dear Dave: iLI �� L,7.] Jam. 1- 1 � !BAR 3 11993 111[0,00" •v..,.... r .. REFER TO 3 OF N For Wildlife— For People On 3-29-93 I inspected the Larsh Subdivision proposal. The property does not lie within any winter range designations for deer and elk but does lie adjacent to critical winter range and winter range across Highway 82 to the northeast and across the Roaring Fork River to the southwest. Wintering mule deer and elk will occasionally utilize the property as is evidenced by their droppings. The property contains valuable cottonwood riparian zone. along the Roaring Fork River and lies north of a bald eagle nest site. These cottonwoods along the lower portion of the property are valuable wildlife habitat to a variety of species but are also very important as a screen between homesite development and the eagle nest and adjacent feeding and roost sites. It is important that this zone of cottonwoods be protected The following will help minimize impacts to wildlife. Most of these recommendations emphasize measures which will minimize impacts to the bald eagles. 1. Maintain and preserve the cottonwood riparian zone (i.e.- no removal of cottonwoods, no livestock or horse grazing within this zone) 2. Homesites be constructed on the upper 1/2 of the lots with, a 100 yard setback from the river bank and cottonwoods. This' would also keep homes away from what appears to be some active sinkhole activity in the lower portions of the lot. 3. Limit dogs to 1 dog/home with dogs kenneled or chained. Kennel be constructed before C.O. is issued. 4. No construction activity from Feb. 15 - May 1 if eagles are present. This is less restrictive than Aspen/Glen due to this subdivision's distance and elevation from the eagle nest. 5. No public or private fishing on the Roaring Fork River, except float through traffic only, from Jan. 1 - May 15. Once eagles abandon or leave the area for the year fishing may continue. DEPARTMENT OF NATURAL RESOURCES, Kenneth Salazar, Executive Director WILDLIFE COMMISSION, William R. Hegberg, Member • Eldon W. Cooper, Member • Felix Chavez, Member • Rebecca L. Frank, Memb( Louis F. Swift, Secretary • George VanDenBerg, Chairman • Arnold Salazar, Member • Thomas M. Eve, Vice Chairman In addition, if homeowners have livestock or horses, winter feeding will attract deer and elk causing game damage problems. In addition, it may also draw more animals across Highway 82 and increase animal/car collisions. To minimize this we recommend that homeowners be required to fence their stackyards with 8' game proof fencing. We can provide fence specifications upon request. Thank you for the opportunity to comment. If you have any questions, please feel free to give me a call. Since Kevin Wright District Wil•rife Manager Carbondale • • GARFIELD COUNTY BUILDING AND PLANNING MEMORANDUM TO: Garfield County Pla ning Commission FROM: Dave Michaelso 12r - DATE: September 3, 199 RE: WESTBANK RANCH FILING #4 PUD PRELIMINARY PLAN On August 16, 1993, the Board of County Commissioners tabled the rezoning decision on Westbank Filing until September 7, 1993. Staff has not prepared a Preliminary Plan Staff Report due to no final decision by the Board on the PUD zoning. If the Board approves the PUD zoning, Staff will present a Staff Report at the September 8, 1993 Planning Commission hearing. Staff has attached a copy of the Board report for the re -zoning for the Commission reference. Note that several conditions are proposed that are directly related to the Preliminary Plan submittal. Conditions #2(building envelopes), #5(zone district revisions), #7(wildfire) and #8 (flashflood hazard) all address building envelope issues. On September 2nd, the applicant submitted a revised Preliminary Plan that included building envelopes, a re -alignment of the entrance road, revised open space designation, and have eliminated the duplexes from the Zone District Text. Staff will provide the Conuuission with revised maps at the September 8, 1993 hearing, assuming the Board approves the re -zoning. In addition, the Colorado Department of I lealth has submitted comments on the project, and Dwain Watson's letter is attached. If you have any questions, feel free to give me a call. 109 8TH STREET, SUITE 303 • 945-8212/625-5571/285-7972 • GLENWOOD SPRINGS, COLORADO 81601