Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2.0 PC Staff Report 09.11.1991• • PC 9/11/91 PROJECT INFORMATION AND STAFF COMMENTS REQUEST: Eastbank Commercial Center Preliminary Plan OWNER: Wayne Rudd and John Stanford LOCATION: A parcel of land located in Government Lots 9 and 18, Section 1, T7S, R89W of the 6th P.M.; located off C.R. 154 just west of the intersection with Highway 82 opposite the CMC turnoff. SITE DATA: The site consists of 3.9 acres. WATER: Individual well. SEWER: Individual Sewage Disposal System. ACCESS: Existing and proposed driveway. EXISTING AND ADJACENT ZONING: C/L (Commercial Limited). I. RELATIONSHIP TO THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN The subject property is located in District D - Rural Areas with Moderate Environmental Constraints as designated on the Garfield County Comprehensive Plan Management Districts Map. II. DESCRIPTION OF THE PROPOSAL A. Site Description: The subject property consists of an excavated and graded building site located west of and below the Highway 82 and C.R. 154 intersection. The site is currently developed with two (2) buildings separated by a vacant building pad. The remainder of the property is occupied by landscaping, driveways and parking areas. B. Project Description: The applicants are proposing to split the subject property into three (3) lots of 1.06, 1.1 and 1.7 acres in sizes (see enclosed text and plat). C. Background: In 1990, the applicants obtained a Special Use Permit to allow for the construction of two (2) buildings intended for storage. The first building was constructed last year at the north end of the subject property and operated as "File Finders", an office records storage facility. The second "storage" building has not been constructed to date. A second generic commercial lease building was constructed at the south end of the property in early 1991. This building is currently leased to service commercial and contracting business. • • • In May, staff became aware that the applicants had split the subject property into three (3) separate parcels in violation of the Subdivision Regulations. In response to staff's concerns, the applicants have filed a sketch plan application towards the goal of legally subdividing the property. In July, the applicants submitted a sketch plan application to the Planning Commission. Concerns included the shared wastewater system and its conflict with zoning, adequacy of water and the adequacy of access. The preliminary plan is substantially the same as the sketch plan. III. REVIEW AGENCY COMMENTS A. Colorado Division of Water Resources: Existing well is appropriately permitted for proposed uses. (see letter on page `3 ). B. Colorado Department of Health: Concerned about the potential for contamination of I.S.D.S. from various commercial uses. Concerned about potential for groundwater contamination. C. Colorado Division of Wildlife- No wildlife concerns. D. Colorado Geological Survey: No major geologic hazards exist on the subject property (see letter on page 9 ). IV. MAJOR ISSUES AND CONCERNS A. Water: There is currently a permitted well on the property. According to the D.W.R. letter, the permit can accommodate up to three separate buildings compliant with the proposed lot configuration. No well sharing or maintenance agreements have been proposed. Blanket utility easements have been proposed to include water lines. B. Wastewater: The applicants are proposing to service the three (3) lots from an existing I.S.D.S. located on lots 1 and 2. This arrangement presents concerns to staff. The concept of a shared wastewater system is discouraged. The potential for conflicts with differing ownership interests is great. In addition, Section 5.04.03 of the Zoning Resolution requires a minimum of two (2) acres for parcels with I. S. D.S. and individual wells. Parcels of 1 to 2 acres are allowed if domestic water is provided from an approved central source. An individual well is not considered an approved central source unless designated by Colorado Department of Health. One form of relief' from this regulation is to pursue a Variance. C. Roads: There are currently two (2) access points proposed to the subdivision. One driveway, permitted by County Road and Bridge, accesses directly onto C.R. 154. The northern driveway accesses the County road via an adjacent private access easement. This is not a dedicated easement or County approved driveway. Obtaining an easement and driveway permit should be required as a prerequisite to Final Plat approval. No specific standards have been specified for interior roads. The proposed roadway would need to be designed in accordance with recently adopted road standards. The design capacity will be based on a vehicle per day count using I.T.E. Trip Generation standards. D. Utilities: Gas, telephone and electric utilities are currently available to the property line. • • E. Drainage: There is currently a stormwater retention basin on the site. According to the drainage report, additional retention capacity will be required. An engineered design and improvement plans will be required prior to the approval of a final plat. F. Fire Protection: No specific fire protection improvements are being proposed. The Carbondale Rural Fire District has not commented on the subdivision proposal. They have consulted with the Building Department on the design for both of the existing buildings. G. Zoning: Because of the lack of a central water system and the parcel size of less than two (2) acres, the subdivision proposal conflicts with the Zoning Resolution. Options include obtaining a Variance or a designation of the water system as a "community system" by the Colorado Department of Health. V. SUGGESTED FINDINGS A. That proper publication, public notice and posting were provided as required by law for the hearing before the Planning Commission; and B. That the hearing 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 hearing; C. That the proposed subdivision of land is in general compliance with the recommendations set forth in the Comprehensive Plan for the unincorporated area of the County; D. That the proposed subdivision of land conforms to the Garfield County Zoning Resolution; and E. That all data, surveys, analyses, studies, plans and designs as are required by the State of Colorado and Garfield County have been submitted and, in addition, have been found to meet all requirements of the Garfield County Subdivision Regulations. VI. RECOMMENDATION Due to the conflict with the Zoning Resolution, staff cannot recommend approval of this request. However, if the Planning Commission is inclined to recommend approval then staff recommends that approval be subject to the following conditions: 1. All representations of the applicant, either within the application or stated at the public hearing before the Planning Commission shall be considered conditions of approval unless otherwise stated by the Planning Commission. 2. The applicant shall resolve the conflict between lot size and wastewater disposal method by obtaining a Variance or a designation as a community water system by C.D. of H. prior to the approval of a Final Plat. 3. The applicant shall establish a Property owner's association. The property owner's association shall be incorporated in accordance with Colorado Revised Statutes. The property owner's association shall be responsible for ownership and maintenance of all common facilities to include, but not limited to; water, sewer, utility drainage and road facilities. Protective covenants shall be prepared and reviewed prior to the approval of the Final Plat. • • 4. The applicants shall prepare and submit a subdivision improvements agreement, addressing all on and off-site improvements, prior to the approval of a Final Plat. 5. The applicants shall submit improvements plans for all road, drainage and utility improvements prior to the approval of a Final Plat. 6. All utilities shall be placed underground. 7. The applicants shall revegetate and/or landscape all disturbed areas of the property where said activity is not precluded by other encumbrances. 8. The applicant shall submit plans and specifications for additional stormwater retention facilities as required by the drainage report. 9. All required permits from the Road and Bridge Department shall be obtained prior to the approval of the Final Plat. 10. All roadways shall be designed and constructed in conformance with design standards set forth in the County Subdivision Regulations and in place at the time of submittal of the Final Plat. 11. The protective covenants shall address the prohibition of introducing contaminants into the wastewater system. This shall also be included as a plat note. 12. The following plat notes shall be included on the Final Plat: a) Facilities common to each lot include water, sewer drainage and utility improvements. Use and maintenance are regulated by restrictive covenants. b) A blanket utility easement encumbers the entire subdivision. c) Contaminants may not be introduced into the wastewater system. 01. REQUEST: PC 9/11/91 PROJECT INFORMATION AND STAFF COMMENTS A text amendment to Section 6: Floodplain Regulations of the Garfield County Zoning Resolution. APPLICANT': Board of County Commissioners. I. PROJECT DESCRIPTION 1. Proposed Text Amendment: delete: Section 6.09.02 (1) (D) Flood Fringe/Flood Prone Areas (1) Prohibited Uses and Activities (D) The placement of any manufactured homes. add: Section 6.09.02 (3) (H) Flood Fringe/Flood Prone Areas (3) (H) Performance Standards Require that all manufactured homes to be placed within Zone A on a community's FHBM or FIRM shall be installed using methods and practices which minimize flood damage. For the purposes of this requirement, manufactured homes must be elevated and anchored to resist flotation, collapse, or lateral movement. Methods of anchoring may include, but are not limited to, use of over -the -top or frame ties to grand anchors. This requirement is in addition to applicable State and local anchoring requirements for resisting wind forces. A manufactured home should be elevated above the base level and anchored to the elevated foundation. 2. Background: In May 1989, the Board of County Commissioners made various amendments to Section 6: Floodplain Regulations. The primary purpose for these amendments was to modify our regulations to conform with Federally mandated changes. Included in these changes was the elimination of the term "mobile home," which was replaced by an expanded definition of"manufactured housing." Previous regulations prohibited mobile homes. At that time, the Board decided to continue the prohibition on "manufactured housing," apparently in an effort to discourage their use and any proliferation of single wide mobile homes. In August, the Board of County Commissioners were presented with an application for a Floodplain Special Use Permit to allow the placement of a manufactured home in the floodfringe area along the Roaring Fork River near Carbondale. After considerable discussion with staff' and the applicant, the Board agreed to consider an amendment which would allow the placement of manufactured homes in the floodfringe. b alb • • II. MAJOR ISSUES AND CONCERNS 1. The proposed amendment would only allow the placement of a manufactured home where allowed in the underlying zoning. It would require all units to be in compliance with Section 5.03.01(2) (see enclosed on page 1 1 ), which specifies minimum design standards for manufactured housing in the Zoning context. This section does not specify which building code standard, either HUD or UBC, must be utilized provided the design standards can be met. A separate operative definition of "manufactured home" applies exclusively in Section 6: Floodplain Regulations. By virtue of this definition, only homes built to UBC standards may be placed in floodfringe areas under current regulations. By allowing manufactured homes in the floodfringe areas, any conflict between zone district regulations and floodplain regulations should be reduced. 2. There is no public health and safety reason to preclude the placement of certain types of manufactured homes in the floodfringe. Existing and proposed performance standards would require engineered foundations, floodproofmg, anchoring and elevation requirements. These are similar to requirements which are applicable to site -built homes. 3. The proposed changes do not allow the placement ofmanufactured homes in the floodway, only in the floodfringe. The floodway is defined as the channel of a stream and those portions of the floodplain that must be kept free of encroachments in order that floodwaters be carried without a substantial increase in flood heights. The proposed changes would not affect replacement rights for non -conforming manufactured homes in the floodfringe or floodway. 4. The proposed amendments do not appear to conflict with any state or federal regulations. The proposed amendments are gleamed from guidelines distributed by the state to municipalities and counties. A copy of the proposed amendments have been sent to state and federal regulatory agencies. Numerous other counties allow manufactured homes in floodplains. 5. The proposed amendments appear to create a more equitable situation by allowing all types of manufactured housing to be located in floodfringe areas where permitted in the underlying zoning. III. SUGGESTED FINDIN 7S 1. That the application for the proposed zoning resolution text amendment has met the requirements of Section 10.01 through 10.04.01 of the Garfield County Zoning Resolution of 1978, as amended; 2. That the public hearing before the Board of County Commissioners was complete and that all persons has an opportunity to speak; 3. That the proposed zoning text amendment is in response to a need to clarify existing resolution language; and 4. That for the above stated and other reasons, the proposed zoning resolution text amendment is in the best interest of the health, safety, morals, convenience, order, prosperity and welfare of the citizens of Garfield County. • • IV. RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends that the Planning Commission endorse the proposed amendments and recommend Approval to the Board of County Commissioners. 1 ROY ROMER Governor ti OFFICE OF THE STATE ENGINEER DIVISION OF WATER RESOURCES 1313 Sherman Street -Room 818 Denver, Colorado 80203 (303) 866-3581 FAX [303] 866=3589 July 10, 1991 Mr. Andrew McGregor Garfield County Regulatory Office and Personnel 109 8th Street, Suite 303 Glenwood Springs, CO 81601 RE: Eastbank Commercial Center NE 1/4, SE 1/4, Section 1, T7S, R89W, 6TII PM Division 5, District 38 Dear Andrew, II JERIS A. DANIELSON State Engineer D ,Irg,7..?.157,TP,1 JUL 18 1991 1 GARFIELU uuu[NTY We have reviewed the above referenced proposal for comments on a sketch plan submittal for the commercial center. Currently there are two existing buildings and one proposed building. The proposed water supply for the three buildings is an existing well, Permit Number 37778-F. This well is permitted for fire protection, commercial purposes and irrigation of not more than 0.08 acres (3,200 square feet) of lawns. If the applicant proposes these uses of the well for the complex, we can recommend approval of this plan. Should you have further questions regarding this submittal, please contact this office. JTS(f)/clf:eastbank cc: Orlyn Bell, Division 5 Engineer Joe Bergquist, Water Commissioner, District 38 Bruce DeBrine • S 41. Sincerely, J aprn Vn (yldy T. Sappington Water Resource Engineer ROY R. ROMER GOVERNOR G ►: 310*b. 440) COLORADO GEOLOGICAL SURVEY DEPARTMENT OF NATURAL RESOURCES 715 STATE CENTENNIAL BUILDING.- 1313 SHERMAN STREET DENVER, COLORADO 80203 PHONE (303) 866-2611 August 22, 1991 GA -92-0001 Andrew McGregor Garfield County Planning Department 109 8th Street, Suite 303 Glenwood Springs, CO 81601 RE: Eastbank Commercial Center Dear Sir: AUG 27 1991 tar.)�ri� LL) LouNTY JOHN W. ROLD DIRECTOR We have reviewed the preliminary plan, drainage report and geologic investigation for this subdivision. Minor geologic conditions affecting the site include: swelling soils, slope stability, flooding, and the potential for radon gas. Site geology consists of thin alluvial fans overlying a thicker gravel terrace. The gravel sequence is of an undetermined depth, but should be thick and compacted enough for commercial building structures. Site specific soils testing for foundations should include swelling soils tests if any clayey material is discovered. Slope stability problems on site are minimal. Off site there is a moderate rockfall hazard in the red cliffs across Hwy 82 north of the site. The highway and railroad should intercept any rock features that project toward this site. South and west of the site, shallow bluffs over the Roaring Fork River should have setback determinations for buildings. Erosion from the slope to the river does not endanger this site as it is too far away. Flood drainage from both the Roaring Fork River and the red cliffs area seem to be covered in the Drainage Study by Tim Beck. The moderate slope onsite should help drainage toward the river. Flood information from the Roaring Fork River may be obtained from the Colorado Water Conservation Board. No radiation survey was conducted for this site. We recommend testing for radon for all proposed structures. Radon -reduction building techniques should be implemented if any radon accumulation is observed. GEOLOGY STORY OF THE PAST... KEY TO THE FUTURE Garfield County Planning Department August 22, 1991 Page 2 If the recommendations outlined above and those of the consultant geologist are followed, then we have no objection to the approval of this subdivision. Sincerely, Christopher J. Carroll Engineering Geologist -10- '1G Section 5.03.01 (2) shall be amended to read as follows: (2) Manufactured dome as the Principal Use of the Lot-:: A manufactured home shall be allowed as the principal use of a lot as a use by right, provided that each of the following conditions is satisfied: A. The manufactured home is at least twenty four (24) feet in width and thirty six (36) feet in length; B. The manufactured home is installed on a permanent concrete or masonry footer approved by the Building Official; C. The manufactured home shall be skirted with materials of the same appearance and color as the siding and be permanently affixed to the building, if the foundation is not completely enclosed. The Building Official may require tie -downs in locations subject to high winds; D. The manufactured home has a brick, wood, or cosmetically equivalent exterior and have a pitched roof with no metal materials not pre -painted with a non -reflective color and permanently affixed to the metal by a manufacturer. MOTE: Manufactured Home, subject to the above standards, was added as a use by right in the A/R/RD, A/I, and R/L gentle slopes and valley floor, zone district:' Please contact the Garfield County Planning Department for further information. (945-0212 or 625-5571)