Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2.0 BOCC Staff Report 05.29.1984• • BOCC 5/29/84 PROJECT INFORMATION AND STAFF COMMENTS REQUEST: Senate Bill 35 Exemption OWNERS: Don Marshall/Phyllis Chowdry LOCATION: A parcel located in portions of the SE 1/4 Section 7 and the SE 1/4 SE 1/4 Section 12, T5S, R90W, more practically described as a parcel located 3 miles north of New Castle off of County Road 241. SITE DATA: A 45.3 acre parcel to be split into 3 parcels of 35.3, 8 and 2 acres each. WATER: Individual wells SEWER: Individual sewers EXISTING ZONING: A/R/RD ADJACENT ZONING: A/R/RD I. RELATIONSHIP TO THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN The parcel is within District A, New Castle Urban Area of Influence. In general, there should be no significant impacts to the New Castle area. II. DESCRIPTION OF THE PROPOSAL A. Site Description: The parcel is in the East Elk Creek drainage with East Elk Creek traversing the eastern portion of the property. The property is well vegetated with large cottonwood and willow trees along the creek and open meadows adjacent to these areas. The terrain is varied with the property sitting on a small bench above the creek. B. Project Description: The proposal is to split a 45.3 acre parcel in three (3) lots of 35.3 acres, 8.0 acres and 2.0 acres each. Technically, the 45.3 acre parcel is deeded to the applicants separately. Mr. Marshall owns 10.0 acres, which will be split into the 8.0 acre and 2.0 acre parcel. Ms. Chowdry owns the 35.3 acre parcel that will be created which already has a house on the property. The 8 acre and 2 acre parcel will be served by a well approved in augmentation plan No. 82CW52. Tne 35.3 acre parcel will be served by an existing well. History: Orginally, Chester Barry owned 70.0 acres, from which 10 acres were conveyed to a neighbor for agricultural purposes without any County approval. This should have been done as a lot line adjustment, but it was deeded separately with no restrictions on the use in the deed. Subsequently, Mr. Barry received approval for an S.B. 35 exemption to create a 24.7 acre parcel in Resolution No. 79-83. This left the 35.3 acre parcel and 10.0 acre parcels that were deeded separately but never subject to any review and approval by the County Commissioners. Mr. Marshall purchased the 10.0 acre parcel in 1981. He applied for an S.B. 35 exemption in 1983. As a result of reviewing the application, it was determined that the 10 acre parcel was not legally created and the 35.3 acre parcel owned by Ms. Chowdry was technically not a legal parcel either. As a result, the application is being made jointly to clarify previous errors and to review Mr. Marshall's request. • • III.MAJOR ISSUES AND CONCERNS A. The well, proposed to serve the 8 acre and 2 acre parcel, was approved in Water Court, Case No. 82CW52. The well can serve one single family dwelling, 10 residential cabins, a 30 seat restaurant and irrigate 0.17 acres of lawn and gardens. Mr. Marshall would like to create a small resort eventually. Since these parcels could only be used for residential purposes without a Special Use permit, the Division of Water Resources was asked if any well permit could be approved without modifying the Water Court decision. Their answer was affirmative. (See letter pages ) It will also be necessary to create a water line access easement and easement around the well that is legally described. B. Due to the relatively close proximity of the parcels to the creek, the soils reports indicate that there may be some problems with shrink -swell soils conditions. As a result, it may be necessary to have the foundations designed by a registered professional engineer. It should also be noted that the Zoning Regulations do not permit the placement of any structures within 30 feet of a live stream. C. It may also be necessary for any individual sewage disposal systems to be designed by a registered professional engineer due to the possible slow percolation rates and possible higher water table. At a minimum, any individual sewage disposal system will have to be at least 50 feet from the creek according to the County Environmental Health Officer. D. Access to the proposed 8 acre parcel will be across the proposed 2 acre parcel. An access easement is proposed along the south boundary of the 2 acre parcel. This access will be subject to approval by the County Road and Bridge Supervisor. A County Road Access permit should be obtained prior to final approval by the Board of County Commissioners. IV. FINDINGS 1. That the application meets the requirements of Resolution No. 80-65; and 2. That all lots created will meet the minimum lot size requirements of the Garfield County Zoning Resolution of 1978, as amended; and 3. That for the above stated and other reasons, the proposed exemption from the definition of subdivision is in the best interest of the health, safety, morals, convenience, order, prosperity and welfare of the citizens of Garfield County. V. RECOMMENDATION APPROVAL, subject to the following conditions: 1. That an exemption plat be created for the 8 acre and 2 acre parcels that has the following additional information: a. A legally described water line and well easement. b. A legally described access easement. c. A plat note stating that foundations and individual sewage disposal systems may have to be designed by a registered professional engineer. 2. That prior to the Chairman signing the exemption plat, an approved County Road Access permit be submitted to the Department of Development. 3. That no further exemptions be allowed on any parcels, unless it can be shown that any new parcels created are separated by a public right-of-way or natural feature that prevents joint usage of the parcels and they meet all other existing requirements of the County. 4. That all conditions of approval be fT Th¢ u Gl 4.5 met within 120 days.