Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout3.0 BOCC Staff Report 02.22.1994• BOCC 2/22/94 PROJECT INFORMATION AND STAFF COMMENTS REQUEST: Subdivision Exemption 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. RELATIONSIIIJ 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. II. DESCRIELLOADEIIIEPROPOSAL A. Site Description: 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 attached on page . A sketch plan of the exemption will be presented at the hearing. 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 will not impact any future B. B. • 1 dwelling units within the exemption. The only structures on the property is Mr. Larsh's residence, a red caboose, and a detached garage/studio. Background: In August of 1992, the Board of County Commissioners conditionally approved an Exemption for Mr. Larsh identical to the current request. Following conditional approval of the exemption, Mr. Larsh decided to pursue a full subdivision to create four (4) lots on the property, pending resolution of access issues with Mr. Burry (Preliminary Plan approved by Resolution 93-090). Due to difficulties regarding the access easement, Mr. Larsh now requests that the prior exemption be granted by the Board. Since 120 days has passed since the original exemption approval, and no extensions have been approved by the Board, the current application is required to go back to a public meeting. Request: Mr. Larsh is proposing to split the 14.726 parcel into two (2) parcels of approximately 6.4 and 8 acres in size. Mr. Larsh intends on retaining the 6.4 acre parcel with the existing structures. Both lots would utilize the existing easement through Mr. Burry's property. No specific road improvements are required under the Garfield County exemption regulations. III. MAJOR ISSUES AND CONCERNS 1. Section 8:10 (Applicability -Exemptions) states that the Board has discretionary authority to except a division of land from the definition of subdivision. Following a review of the facts of each application, the Board may approve conditionally or deny an exemption request. The Board may not grant an exemption unless the applicant can demonstrate compliance with zoning, legal access, adequate water and sewer, state environmental health standards, necessary road and drainage improvements, fire protection, adequate easements and school impact fees. 2. Exemption Criteria. Section 8:10, states that the Board may approve a total of four (4) lots parcels, interests or dwelling units, as that parcel was described in the records of the Garfield County Clerk and Recorder's office on January 1, 1973. The proposed 15 acre tract was the result of two previous subdivision exemption actions. In 1977, Ray Baldwin received approval to split a 20 acre tract from a 150 acre tract owned by Richard Burry by Resolution No. 77-36. Subsequently, Mr. Baldwin split the 20 acre tract into two (2) parcels of 14.86 acres and 5.14 acres. As a result, only one more parcel may be created by the exemption process. This does not preclude further subdivision via the full subdivision review process mandated by C.R.S. 30-28-133 and the County Subdivision Regulations. 3. Water and Sewer. The applicant has entered into an agreement with the Basalt Water Conservancy District for augmentation water for additional wells. A copy of the final contract was submitted with the sketch plan for the full subdivision. Staff expects that these contracts will be modified to reflect the reduction in density. Copies of the revised contract should be submitted prior to signing of an exemption plat. Sewage disposal will be handled by ISDS. The predominate soils on the site include the Mussel type, which has moderate restrictions for ISDS. Two (2) as • • percolation tests were performed on the site, and the Geotechnical Report prepared during the prior Preliminary Plan indicated that ISDS is feasible on the site. 4. Natural Hazards. The site is encumbered by areas of evaporite, similar to the Aspen Glen site. During the Preliminary Plan process, "unbuildable" areas were identified by a geotechnical engineer. Staff suggests that these areas be shown on the final exemption plat. 4. Wildlife Impacts. At Preliminary Plan for the proposed subdivision, the applicant agreed to retain the existing cottonwoods along the Roaring Fork River in respect to eagles in the area, in addition to setback restrictions. Since the applicant did not oppose these restrictions, staff suggests that these restrictions become a condition of approval of the exemption. IV. SUGGESTED FINDINGS 1. The proposal is in general compliance with the Garfield County Comprehensive Plan and the Garfield County Zoning Regulations. 2. The proposed land use would be consistent and compatible with the existing surrounding land uses. 3. The proposal is in best interest of the health, safety, morals, convenience, order, prosperity and welfare of the citizens of Garfield County. V. RECOMMENDATION APPROVAL, but of only one (1) additional lot, subject to the following conditions: 1. All representations of the applicant shall be considered conditions of approval unless otherwise stated by the applicant. 2. The applicant shall have 120 days to complete the required conditions of approval. Extensions of 120 days may be granted by the Board for a period of up to one (1) year. 3. The applicant shall submit $200 in School Impact Fees, prior to the signing of an exemption plat. 4. A final exemption plat will be submitted, indicating the legal description of the property, dimension and area of all proposed lots or separate interests to be created, access to a public right-of-way, and any proposed easements for drainage, irrigation, access and utilities. .45 4000 5. The following plat notes shall appear on the finalVxemption Plat: All residential structures shall be constructed consistent with the recommendations of The Preliminary Geotechnical Study prepared by Hepworth - Pawlak Geotechnical, Inc. (July 2„ 1993). 6. The final exemption plat shall include the same unbuildable designations as contained in the recommendations of the geotechnical report. This requirement shall be incorporated into the restrictive covenants. �•ir/�r 1 5* cu O O (0 0 r+