Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2.0 Staff Report Director's DeterminationFile No. FPAA-8178 Director's Determination GH PROJECT INFORMATION AND STAFF COMMENTS TYPE OF REVIEW APPLTCANT (OWNER) ARCHITECT/RE PRESENTATIVE LEGAL DESCRIPTION PRACTICAL DESCRIPTION LOT SIZE ZONING Amended Plat Parcel 1, Stowe Subdivision Exemption Bethel Party Rentals, !nc. Bruce Bafih, Red House Architecture Parcel 1, Stowe Amended Exemption Plat, recorded at Reception No.402248 The property is located approximately 5 miles south of Glenwood Springs off of County Road 154. The propefiy is located at 5447 County Road 154, Glenwood Springs and is known by Assessor's Parcel No. 2395-01 4-00-1 1 3. 2.2 acres Commercial Limited (CL) I. DESCRIPTION OF PROPOSAL. REQUEST The Applicant is requesting an amendment to the Amended Stowe Exemption Plat to remove a parking easement from the Plat. The parking easement is located only on the Applicant's property, Parcel 1 . Removal of the easement will allow additional development and construction on that portion of the !ot. The modification to the plat will allow the construction of an additional building and installation of an onsite waste water system on Parcel 1. The Application represents that there is no written documentation as to the intended use or benefitted pafties of the easement nor any conveyance or dedication of the easement. The property is zoned CL and all new construction will be required to complywith allzoning standards and provisions including setbacks, building heights, floor area ratios, maximum lot coverage and setbacks between wells and septic systems. No changes to the plat are proposed other than the removal of the parking easement. No new lots will be created and no changes to access or existing easements are proposed. lnfrastructure improvements are being addressed as paft of the building permit review process. !!. AUTHORITY - APPLICABLE REGULATIONS The Amended Final Plat Application is being processed in accordance with Section 5-305, Amended Final Plat and 4-103, Administrative Review of the Land Use and Development Code, as amended. Public notice is required in accordance with Sections 4-103 and 4-101 and the Applicant has provided documentation that all required public notice has been completed. The County Attorney and Planning Manager have reviewed the notice and County Staff has taken the extra step to contact the address of record for the owner of Parcel 2 (HLazy F Mini Storage LLC) in the Subdivision Exemption and confirmed receipt of the notice. ilt.STAFF ANALYSIS 1. The Application was referred to the County Road and Bridge Department and the County Surveyors Office (see comments attached). The Road and Bridge Depaftment response indicated no comment. The County Surueyor indicated that he had no comments or corrections prior to approval for survey content and form. 2. Comments from an adjacent property owner John Stowe have been received and are attached. The letter indicates that he does not have an issue with the vacation of the Parking Easement so long as an existing access easement serving his property and crossing the Applicant's property "remains intact and usable". 3. No other public comments have been received regarding the application, however, verbal comments were provided from a neighboring propefty owner expressing concerns regarding potential fence encroachments along their property line. 4. Parcel2 within the Stowe Exemption is owned by H Lazy F Mini Storage LLC and is improved with a series of mini storage warehouses, access driveways and circulation. The mini storage operation is a fenced and secured facility and appears to be located entirely on Parcel 2. 5. The Applicant has provided a letter from its Attorney (see attached) outlining his research undeftaken on the parking easement and supporting the Applicant's position for removal of the easement. The letter addresses review of title commitments, past County approvals, contacts with past owners of the property, review of past surveys, and a discussion of Colorado case law associated with easements. The letter indicates that "The easement lacks adequate dedication language, and the easement is now over 30 years old with no actual use". 6. Consultation with the Assistant County Attorney regarding the easement has resulted in the direction that the removal of the easement is permissible through the amended plat process subject to the following considerations: . Public notice of the proposed removal of the easement has been provided to the neighboring property owner of Parcel 2.o No evidence of conveyance of the easement to any party was indicated on the origina! plat.. No evidence of conveyance of the easement to any party has been identified in the public record. 2 No description of the intended purpose of the easement has been found either on the plat or in the public record. Previous county approvals for the subdivision exemption do not include any conditions of approval or requirements for the creation of the parking easement. The parking easement is not necessary to meet off-street parking requirements for either Parcel 1 or Parcel 2. 7. The draft amended plat and all plat certificates shall be subject to final review and approval by the County Attorney's Office and the County Surveyor. Any required changes or edits shal! be made to the plat prior to submittal to the County for execution. 8. An updated title commitment should be provided by the Applicant for review by the County Attorney's Office. All easements and encumbrances in the title work should be included on the amended plat. The plat shall be updated to clarify the numerous references to apparent easements with recorded documents or a definition in the notes of "apparent easements" for further explanation. The apparent access seruing the out-parcel at the northwest corner of the site, owned by John Stowe needs to be addressed based on the updated title work. lf no recorded easement exists for Mr. Stowe's access, the plat notes should verify its existence and history. L No nonconforming conditions are anticipated to result from the plat amendment subject to compliance with recommended conditions of approval. As pafi of future building permit activities, the Applicant should maintain and repair as necessary the existing chain link fence along the westerly property line to ensure that it does not encroach onto the adjoining propefiy. 10. Plat Note #9 on the draft plat provides an explanation as to the purpose of the plat amendment and needs to be included on the final versions of the plat for recording. An additional plat note is needed referencing past plat notes as may be included on the current Amended Stowe Exemption Plat recorded at Reception # 402248. IV. SUGGESTED FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATION Staff supports a finding that the Amended Final Plat Application for Parcel 1 , Amended Plat of the Stowe Subdivision Exemption meets the requirements and standards of the Garfield County Land Use and Development Code as amended and is recommended for Administrative Approval by the Director of the Community Development Depaftment subject to the following conditions of approval. 1. That all representations of the Applicant contained in the Application submittals shall be conditions of approval unless specifically amended or modified by the conditions contained herein. 2. The amended plat shall be subject to final review and approva! by the County Attorney's Office and the County Surveyor. All requirements from the County Surveyor shall be met prior to submittal of the plat for final execution. All plat certificates and signature blocks, plat notes, and easements shall be subject to approval by the County Attorney's Office.3. The Plat shall include the existing note #9 regarding the purpose of the amended plat and shall include plat notes clarifying the references to apparent easements and incorporating plat notes from past approvals (i.e. the current Amended Stowe Exemption Plat). The Ianguage for said plat notes shall be subject to final review and approval by the County Attorney's Office and shall be consistent with the following: . All plat notes and easement provisions contained on the Amended Stowe Exemption Plat recorded at Reception # 402248 shall remain in effect.. References to apparent easements are noted where no reception numbers or recorded documents were found in the records of the Garfield County Clerk and Recorder related to said apparent easements. 4. An updated title commitment shall be provided by the Applicant for review by the County Attorney's Office. Any additional easements or encumbrances verified by review of said title work shall be included on the amended plat. The Surveyor's notes on the plat shall be updated such that the Surveyor shall validate that all easements are shown on the plat. 5. The access for the Stowe propefty located at the northwest corner of the site shall be shown on the plat or the Applicant and their surueyor shall affirm that no such easement exists based on the updated title commitment. lf no easement exists the Applicant shall edit the current note on Parcel 1 to read "No change to existing access conditions including existing driveways serving adjacent properties". 6. As part of future building permit activities, the Applicant shallmaintain and repairas necessary the existing chain link fence along the westerly propefiy line to ensure that it does not encroach onto the adjoining property. EXCERPT FROM DRAFT AMENDED PLAT ilffit il tti h'*,ufu | h,hl['i1,fi il ri*l Is.4 h E::!EL ugii E!tdl -r r F,:fr; € i'l Irl x!ii\,r,\.. \* *#1ffirtuffiffi|#lr it .l- - ,--_-4 GLENWOOD SPRINGS OFI'ICE The Denver Center 420 Seventh Street, Suito 100 Glenwood Springs, Colorado 81601 Telephone (97 0) 9 47 - 1936 Facsimile (97 0) 9 47 - 1931 GARFIELD &HECHT, PC. ATTORNEYS AT LAW Since 1975 www.garfieldhecht.com January 28,20t5 David D. Smith dsmith@ qarfieldhecht. com Glenn Hartmann Garfield County Community Development 108 8th Street Suite 401 Glenwood Springs- CO 81601 Re: Bethel Party Rentals land useapplioation fbr 5447 CR 154 (the "Subject Property") Glenn: At your request, this correspondence traces the investigation conducted into the parking easement ("Easement") located on the Subject Property. The information below is provided to give context for the applicant's assertion that the Easement was not adequately described and dedicated and therefore should not encumber the Subject Property in such a way that the land use application should be denied or conditioned. This letter does not constitute a formal legal opinion by the undersigned or by Garfield & Hecht, P.C, The Stowe Subdivision Exemption was approved by the County in 1983 pursuant to Resolution S3-327. The original resolution did not reference any parking easement. The approval was amended by Resolution 83-358 to add a legal description of the Easernent, but it does not Contain any additional description of the pulpose of the easement beyond the word "parking;'nor does it contain any irrformation about the beneficiary of the Eaiement. The Stowe Subdivision Fxemption plat was then recorded December L2,1983 as reception number 348082. Again it contains a legal description and visual depiction of the Easement, but the plat does not have a dedication certificate, offers no further explanation of the purpose of the easement, nor who is permitted to use it. Finally, an Amended Stowe Exemption Plat was recorded in 1989 as reception number 402248,but no additional information was provided about the Easement. ' Review of the County's land use case file from the 1983 approval did not reveal any additional infonrration concerning the scope of the Easement or the intended beneficiary : : l' . .' bontract on tt i Subject Property. The commitment did not show any additional documents that would shed light on the Easement. There was no evidence of additional deeds or other legal instruments conveying the Easement to a 3'd party. Aspen .lAror, . Basalt . Glenwood Springs . Rifle @Pri'tedoo'ecvclcdpaper GARFIELD &HECHT, PC. Hartman January 28,20L5 Page 2 of 2 The applicant also spoke to the seller of the Subject Property, Walt Stowe, about the nature of the Easement. The seller was not able to provide any additional context for the dedication, nor any evidence of historic use ofthe Easement. Finally, the applicant also had a survey performed on the Subject Property prior to purchase. The survey noted the parking easement, but again did not find any evidence of formal dedication. See note 9 ofthe survey affached. In Colorado an express easement is valid if the parties, location, dimensions and scope, are clearly described. These requirements are to be set forth in the document that created the Easement. See Lazy Dog Ranch v. Telluray Ranch Corp. 965 P.zd 1229 (Colo. 1998). In the event that one of these requirements cannot be readily discemed, then one may look to the use (historic or otherwise) of the easement. Express easements may be dedicated by plat, deed, or separate written agreement, but the instrument must be clear concerning the dedication. Here the problem is that the document creating the Easement (namely the Stowe Exemption Plat, ai Amended) does not have any dedication language indicating the intended beneficiary of the Easement. Nor is the scope of the Easement clear beyond the simple demarcation that it is for "parking." The Resolutions of approval do not help. Looking to the use of the Easement is also 9f no hglp since the Easement area has not been used by anyone except the owner of the Subject Property. The Easement lacks adequate dedication language, and the basement is'now over 30 yearJ old with no actual use. After your review, please do not contact me with any questions. 1188159 @ Printed on recycled paper Glenn Hartmann From: Sent: To: Subject: Glenn, MichaelPrehm Thursday, March 12,2015 2:19 PM Glenn Hartmann Stowe Exemption Admended Plat File # FPAA-8178 In reviewing the proposal, Road & Bridge has no concerns with this. Thanks for giving me the oppoftunity to review. Mike Prehm Garfield County Road & Bridge Foreman / Glenwood District (970) 94s-L223 Office (970) 94s-1318 Fax. (970) 618-7109 Cell To: From: Subject: Date: Gurlield Coanty SURVEYOR scoTT ArBNE& P.L.S Samuel Phelps - SurvCo, Inc. Scott Aibner - Garfield County Surveyor Plat Review - Second Amended Final Plat of Parcel I Stowe Subdivision Exemption as Amended 03131/20t5 Sam, Upon review of the Second Amended Final Plat of Parcel 1, Stowe Subdivision Exemption as Amended Plat, I have no comments or corrections to be made prior to approval for survey content and form. Once all final comments from Community Development have been completed, the Mylar may be prepared for recording. The Mylar shall be delivered to the Community Development office with all private party signatures no later than Monday the week prior to the next commissioner meeting day in order to make that meeting. Sincerely, Scott Aibner Garfield County Surveyor cc Glen Hartmann - Community Development Department 109 8 th Street ,Suite 1008 , Glenwood Springs, C081601 , (970)945-1377 . Fax: (970)384-3460 , e-mail:saibner@garfield-countycom John Stowe PO Box276 Glenwood Springs, CO 81602 March 23,2075 Garfield County Community Development Department 108 8th Street Glenwood Springs, CO 81601 Dear Sirs, I am in receipt of a Public Notice filed by Martin Herrera, Bethel Party Rentals, lnc. That public notice is requesting the vacation of a "parking permit" associated with the Stowe Exemption Plat. The Stowe Exemption Plat was established in the late 1970's or early 1980's for the express intention of breaking a parcel of property currently in the northwest corner of the property noted on the vicinity map as 5447 County Road 154. With that "Special Use Permit" designation, the property at5447 County Road 154 was left with two acres +/- and had designated on it a "parking easement" as well as an access easement for the "Special Use Permit" parcel. That access easement allows access to my parcel containing .23 acres +l- bV crossing from the current entry point of 5447 County Road 154 directly to the front lot line of my parcel. The "Parking Easement" was designated as such when the property at5447 CR 154 was originally split from another two acre parcel which currently contains the RW Mini Storage Buildings in the late 70's or early 80's. I do not have an issue with the vacation of the Parking Easement in the southwest corner of 5447 CR 154 as long as my access easement from the northeast corner of 5447 CR 154 to the front of my property at the northwest corner of 5447 CR 154 remains intact and usable. Thank you for your attention to this matter. Sincerely, John W Stowe