HomeMy WebLinkAbout2.0 Staff ReportPROJECT NAME:
OWNER/APPLICANT:
SI]RVEYOR:
LOCATION:
PROJECT INFORMATION AND STAFF COMMENTS
J-Mar Estates Subdivision
Sketch Plan
Gary Sheveland
Tim Callahan
Located approximately I mile
of Silt on County Road 346
Request for 12 single family
of 3.5 acres t
southwest
lot s-SJIE-DATA:
WATER:Individual wells
Individual septi-c systems
A/R/RD
North: A/I
South: A/n/nnEast: A/n/noWest: A/R/RD
SEI,IIAGE:
EXISTING ZONING:
ADJACENT ZONING:
I. RELATIONSHIP TO THE COI\IPREHENSIVE PLAN:
The proposal i-s within Distri-ct B, subdivision/rural servicable areas , Lz to L
mi-le radius, minor environmental constraints. District B density may be the
same as the existing subdivision, but should not exceed three (3) units peracre. Developments withi-n District B shal1 connect to an exi-sting cenLralwater system or construct its own central water system. The proposed densityis consj-stent with the Plan, but the individual we1ls proposed. are not consistentwith Plan language for technlcal services.
II. DESCRIPTION OF PROPOSAL:
A. Site Descri-ption: Steeper slopes of roughly 20% grade on the southern
boundary represent a smal1 portion of the project. The gentle sloping agricul-tural lands is the predominant rphysical feature.
B. Project Description: This request for 12 single family lots of 3.5 acres l,is less dense than prevj-ous Sketch Plan proposals of 18 single family lots of2 acres t. the appiicant r s previous submittals were denied due to inconsistencywith Plan language. Earlier proposals were denser wlth a central water system
and individual septic systems. This proposal substitutes indivi-dual wells forthe central water system. Previous denials were also based on the poor accessto the development due to the conditi-on of the Silt Bridge.
III. MAJOR CONCERNS AND ISSUES:
A. Comprehenslve Plan: The denials of previous Sketch Plan were due toi-nconsistencies with the Comprehensi-ve Plan density and access standards. Thepresent proposal i-s consistent with policy language related to density. TheSilt Bridge is nearing completion, which will resolve the access i-ssue. As aresult of eliminating the central water system and proposing individual wells,the development is now inconsistent with District B techni-cal services policy.
The policy requires development to hook i-nto the existing subdivision or developa new central water system.
B. Review Agency Cornments:
f) Town of Silt: In a letter (see page B &',9) dated February 17, the Townof Silt made the following recsmmendations:
a) uater mains be extended to both intersections of Giomi Lane and
CounLy Road 346, with fire hydrant loeations at Preliminary Plan.
b) Sanitary sewer lj-nes extended to County Road 346 if still proposed.
c) Giomi Lane built to tor,rrr standards.
Page 3
d) Clusterj-ng of housing, to preserve agricultural area.
e) High water table should be looked at closely.
f) Until the Roger Dickson (Valley Farms) properti-es are developed,
other development is considered premature.
2) County Road Supervi-sor:
a) The structural design of the road should be determined by a pavement
thickness design prepared by a licensed professional engineer exper-
ienced in geotechnical soils analysis.
b) A11 culverts for roads and driveways should be sized, and those sizes
noted in any drai-nage study. Additionally, the culverts shal-l be
designed such that the ends will not be crushed as a result of
direct pressure.
c) The roads will be a hard surface of material a-proved by the Road
Supervisor.
d) The enEire length of Giomi Lane will be hard surfaced.
3) County Environmental Health: Percolatlon rates have been good and bad in
this area. Due to the inconsistent percolation rates in the atea, a
minj-mum of three, B foot profile holes should be completed in different
areas of the subdivision. These will establish the depth of the water
table and bedrock. If ET waste\,r'ater systems are required, additional
water will be required
4) Staff comments:
a) The proposed individual wells are not consistent with the Comprehensive
Plan language for rechnical services, which would require a central
water system. Staff would like the Planning Commission to look
closely at the issue of whether or not a central water system is
needed and appropriate for a 12 Lot subdivi-sion.
b) Ihe submi-ttal does not show evidence of adequate r^/ater rights, which
should be provided as a part of the Prelininary Plan subnittal.
IV. FINDINGS:
A. The sketch plan conforms to Section 4.01, sketch plan requlrements of the
Garfield County Subdivision Regulations;
B. The sketch plan conforms to the requirements of the zone district in which
the development is located;
C. That the sketch plan is in generaL conformance with the Comprehensive PIan.
V. RECO}4MENDATION:
On l,iarch 9, 1983, the Planning Commission recommended approval to the Board of County
Commissioners of the J-Ilar Estates Subdivision Sketch Plan with the followi-ng conditions:
A. That the applicant agree to hook-up to the Town of Siltrs water and sewer systems
when they are available.
B. The structural design of Giomi Lane shall be determined by a pavement thickness
design prepared by a licensed professional engi-neer experienced in geotechnical
soils analysis.
C. A11 culverts for roads and driveways shall be sized, with the sizes noted on
the preliminary plan drainage study.
D. A11 culverts shall be designed such that the ends will not be crushed as a
result of direct pressure.
E. Giomo Lane will have a hard surface its entire length, with materials approved
by the County Road Supervisor.
page 4
t
TOWNof SIL|
P.O. Box 174
Garfield County
Department of Development
Attention Terry Bowman
2014 Blake
Glenwood Springs, C0 81601
Subject: J-MAR ESTATES/SKETCH PLAN
Dear Temy,
Silt, Colorado 81652
February 17, 1983
iir.I1[ "r1rr
303 876-23 53
-.tt-!fafar--lf,.*\
irf
FEB18H8s #
ffiirrri.*l u{}L Hs-ni'&idgfi
The fo1lowing are comments that should be addressed as to this proposal's
impact on Silt:
Water - Water main extended to County Road 346 at both entrances to the
subdivision for possible future hook-up to the Town's water
system. At that time the we]'l could be abandoned and capped.I'd like to request that in later design stages, should the
Sketch Plan be approved, that the fire hydrant p'lacement be
reviewed by the Silt Fire Marshal.
Sanitary Sewer- If a sanitary sewer main is still be'ing proposed for
Giomi Lane, then again this shou'ld be extended to County Road
346 for possib'le future hook-up to the Town's Sanitary Sewer
system.
Streets - Giomi Lane should be constructed to minimum Town of Silt
standards for residential streets: 1) 28' of asphalt paving,
2) 6" base and 2" of surface. Because of the rural nature of
the subdivision, sidewalks and/or curb and gutter mjght be
given possible variance consideration. Yet keep'ing in mind
that curb and gutters general'ly assure extended longevity of
the paved surface by prohibiting undermining at the surface
edges due to the runoff plus it lends edge support.
Additionally it's apparent that not to far down the line
Country Road 346 will require necessary road 'improvements andI feel this topic shou'ld be addressed so that the County can
get a handle on it.
Land Use - The J-MAR ESTATES property lies near the Growth Area B-7
ofournew1yadoptedComprehensjveP]anwhichffis:" Character of th'is area (B-7) shou'ld be rural , open space.
Housing development should be clustered so as to preserve
agricultural area. New development adioininq existing sub-
divisions shoulO Oe
areW
page 2
Subject: J-MAR ESTATES/SKETCH PLAN
High Water Table - In Dan Kersts' letter dated February 7, 1983 to the
Board of County Conrmissioners it's statedo"It is our belief that
the only geo'logical characteristic which adversely affects this
project is a relatively high water table". This condition should
mandate considerable attention due to septic tanks and leach
fields being proposed.
In sunrnaryit is generally felt that until the vast property holdings of
Roger "Dick" Dickson (Valley Farms) south of the river are initially devel-
oped,proposals to the south, east and west are premature. Town services
which wi]l have to be built south of the Colorado River include,at a min-
imum, new water and sewer facilities. Mr. Dickson has had P.U.D. plans for
his Valley Farms property for sometime but until he starts construction it
wouldn't be feasible nor economical for the Town of Silt to provide services.
One only has to look at other areawide mistakes to make a sound planning
judgement: South Rifle, Battlement Mesa and West Glenwood.
Thank you again for the opportunity to respond.
Sincerely,
Mike l.Iikoff
Pl anner
HOLY CROSS JLE,CTRIC ASSuCIATION, INC.
3799 HIGHWAY 82
P. O, DRAWER 250
GLENWOOD SPRINGS, COLORADO 8T602
June 30, I9B3
Mr. Ivlark L. BeanGarfield County planning
20L4 Blake Avenue
Glenwood Springs,
RE: Jay-llar Estates
Dear Mark:
We have provided lr{r. Gary R. Sheveland easements that would berequired to provide primlry voltage service to his subdivisionand a cost estimate for installation of those primary facilities.
To date we have received no correspondence fromindicating that he has added those easements orprovisions for the installation of the power.
S incerely ,
HOLY CROSS ELECTRIC ASSOCIATION,INC.
.r. fflJJ .',
,-:s
tri*" iiilr"-51d,iffi
Mr. Sheveland
that he is making
AREA CODE
303
94s-5491
Department
Colorado 81601
,/i''i,Jitzd k'e-t'?
Winston Chaffin,Staking Engineer
WC: vp
{*,lf.,?n:r'i-iJ-::,. :: ! :
i*'r'! ;. " 'td!'f;':l;"'I ii.:
Jfii Jur"
L.} L
PROJECT NAME:
OWNER:
PLANNER:
MORTGAGEE:
ENGINEER:
LOCATION:
SITE DATA:
WATER:
SEWER:
PROPOSED ROADS:
EXISTING ZONING:
PROPOSED ZONING:
PROJECT ]NFORMATION AND COMI'IENTS
J-Mar Estates Subdivision/Sketch Plan
Gary Sheveland
Tim Callahan
Fred Giomi
Edward Giomi
Ihomas Giomi, Jr.
None
Located approxi-mately 1
on County Road 346.
3/4 miles southwest of Silt
Request for 18 two acre single farnily lots on 44.5 acres
Central well to pump to central storage tank proposed
Proposal for individual septic systems on each lot
to county standards andChip and seal roads to be built
dedicated to Lhe county.
A/R/RD
Same
Norrh: R/n/no
Sourh: a/n/noEast: A/R/RD
WeSt: A/R/RD
ADJACENT ZONING:
RELATIONSHIP TO THE COMPREHENSIVE PI,AN:
The project falls within manaElement district 2b, an area adjacent to an existing sub-
division with central water and minor environmental constraints. The existing
subdi-vision is llineota Ridge Estates with an average lot size of 14 acres. This is
also an area with surrounding agricultural uses. The proposed is for 2 acre lots
which is not consistant with the district B policy for compatible lot sizes. The
application does not utilize density transfer on the PUD concept to provide buffer
zones between the residential and agricultural uses.
DESCRIPTION OF PROPOSAL:
SITE DESCRIPTION: The property is gently sloping terrain which drains generally to Lhe
north. The site is bordered on the south by steep erraln. There is an existing 6 lot
exemption that lies to the north east and i-s contiguous to the parcel . trrlest and north
of the property is agricultural land. Di-rectly east of the project is lvlineota Ridge
Estates with an average lot size of 14.23 acres.
PROJECT DESCRIPTION: This is a request for 18 single family lots. The 1ot size is
2* acres. Each lot will be accessed by internal streets and will be served by a central
,"ter system and individual septics. The proposal also includes a 4.5 acre site to be
used as a park to serve the subdivision.
MAJOR CONCERNS A}trD ISSUES:
A) Comprehensive Plan: The comprehensive plan indicates that areas surrounding Mlneota
Ridge Estates should use density transfer or the PUD concept to buffer adjoining
agricultural uses and increase compatibility. Access to the property is across the
Silt Bridge whic.h, in the staff opinion is not adequate access. The coinprehensJ-ve plan
indicates that all developments should have adequate access.
B) Zoning: The exl-sti-ng zor.ir.g allows for a minimum of 2 acre lots. The comprehensive
plan indicates that this area should have a 1ot size less than or equal to that of the
prgject from whlch districL B has been estabtished. In this case, the district has been
established on lvllneota Ridge Estates with a minimum 1ot size of 14 acres. 5 acre
lots may be an appropriate lot size for this subdivision as a transitional lot size from
the larger L4 acre lots to the rural lot sizes established for districts C, D, E, and F.
c)Reviewing Agency Comments :
1) The Town of Silt has commented
2) Paul Limbach is opposed to the
3) W.E. Limbach i-s opposed to rhe
in opposition to thls project (See letter)
project (See letter)
project (See letter)
FINDINGS
This proposal has come before the Planning Commission before on trdo occasions and has
been recommended for denial twice; onee when Gary Sheveland applied and once when
Tim Callahan applied. This proposal is up for reconslderation by the Planning Commission
because it was recommended for denial previously and the applicant, in his absence,
was not able to respond. This project is not in general compliance with the provisions
of the comprehensive plan because it does not use density transfer or the PUD concept
to buffer adjoinlng agricultural uses. The lot sizes are not compatible with the
established character os the area. The access across the Silt Bridge is not adequate
until a new bridge is built. The application is essentially the same as the one that
came before the Planning Cormnission under Gary Sheveland and was recommended for denial.
RECOMMENDATION:
Recommendation for denial because the proposal does not meet the basic reconrnendations
of the comprehensive p1an. The applicant should use denslty transfer by PUD to cluster
the uniEs and provide an open space buffer between adjoining agricultural uses.
The lots within the subdivision should be an average of 5 acres as a gross density
to be conpatible with the provl-sions of the comprehensive plan. The Silt Bridge must
be replaced before there is adequate access to the area.
|'}"O. Bax 174 Silt, Crtloruilo I I652 30-t 876-2353
MEM0RANDUM T0: Garfield County Pianninq Conrnission
and Planning Staff
SUBJECT: J-Mar Estates / sketch plan
FROM: Mike Wikoff, Silt Town Planner
The 18 unjt subdivjsion, if approved" would have a definite lmpact
on the Town of S'ilt. It's geographic location being approximately 1%
miles southwest of Town, presents many concerns for the Town of Silt.
These concerns include the following:1. Town's Comprehensive Plan is in draft stage2. Impact upon the Town,should residents petition for annexation
3. The Town's abi'lity to provide police and fire protection
4. Approval of "spot zoning" may establish a precendent which could
create other difficulties in the future in this Town's attempt to
foster orderly growth.
If approved street, water and sewer must be approved to City Standards.
After reviewing the Sketch Plan we'have raised questions
as follows:1. A need for erosion and drainage plan?. Impact on traffic3. Is there a Cul-de-Sac or tltru street4. What are lots A,B,C,D,E5. How do roads f it adiacent propert'ies
6. No turnaround for fire vehicles
7 . A need for 1 or 2 more fi re hydrants8. Road 346 should be brought up to City Standards in front
9. We don't know that the 60 foot interior road right-of-way
and concerns
of subdivisionwill be
adequate
10. F,ire. Marshal should be made cognizant of the proposal for his input
Further, I'd like to add that there are large parcels or tracts of
land adjacent to and within the Town of Silt which could better facilitate
this type of development.
TOWNofslIl"
J-MAR Estates
Town of Silt's Concerns
Dear TerrY:
The questjon has arisen as to thc tirn.ing o{ this propg:a]'- I! is generally agreed
,il6n'6y-iom oiiiiiari that the submittit for sketch Plan Review mav be some two-
three months pr.*itur*. iirt's lomJ..h.nrive Plan is due for completion around June'
This coupled with'ir1e-ne* silt b;iJbr-iirorr the colorado River not forecast for
.onitiuilion until late fall illustiates th'is opinion.
In]ieuoftheabove,shouldthePlanningCorrrm.issionersmakeamotionforcontinuance
of this project, we isk that we ue mai.-iognizant of all submittals for review corments'
Our concerns being,
-Lot-size; aruilabi'lity to physical!v-and-economically design
the effluent dit.turg.-io il'ai should propbrty ow"ners of J-MAR subdivision petition
for annexation in the future it;;r'u..ubi.ii.ated with the last amount of efforts;
to design the *.t., tank plu..rn.ni"anJ *at.i distribution lines so again that future
hook-ups will be feasibly accomoJit.a; ina fastly we'1e i.nterested in the proposed
iiiiit:5i-*uy anj roia*iv"widths and 'irnpact on Countv Road 346'
I wi'll not be in attendance the evening of the 12th of Apli1 as I have zoning
'items on the Town Boards' Agenda
please distribute this letter to the Planning conmissioners and express my apologies
for a late resPonse.
SincerelY subm'itted,
Town of Silt
+$ff,
ETEOTEISEBTNO & SUBITETIISS CC. .
.1 i,m Raqsd:r1e
fo Rox 361
l\r:rrlcler, C0 q0306
.lim,
Enc I osed is the prooosed s):e tclt p1 -r n
c;.n see we propose eiohteen two- icre
$\rstem and individuar 1 septic svstems
Il,,rni lton (Centennial Enc,ineerinq) on
revisir)ns to this plan to f aci lit:rte
T 'l ook forward to meetincr You on.lpril il , -rt l:00 p.m. and vtill
confirnr this the afternoon pr ior to thj s i rte.
:f you have .-rny (ruestions ,:e(,-rrdinct this .sul:Civision plc:se feel
free to caII me.
5 i ncerell',
,,1.)a
'l'i m Cal l."rlrrn
P r esi iclent
i0
'1"'Crl c l. ed
c:c/ Crrl,
I).arris
5 ir eve 1a nrl
irarr;rr
ol' ,l*" lr litrhr<iivision. .\s ','ouI.ot's witlr ;r centrtl wrtc:'
. ,.rr meetinq with Iiuss\i;rrch 3l to discuss possible
frrture i1nnexation t-o Silt.
Eoxl
QO8
,1ob "lc)" -. ,'t:
tq
:"rs$.}-
.[)n.f.^-
t^- p,lU,**P-
L^r%,
&uifi).
f,AE E. EIMHTACH
\6876 COUNTY 80AD 3-t,;' .\Eu[. GqLct gr6sa
\
d,/-
Ao
a/
,J_"
tl,r, xlt orriry,",1,
4 4-' .ctt(4lPt t
'.ft2 ratv,
'W;,f*,, A1, tt,CI |
T' ',,ru/t 'ltf, rH, lr;r2,
;,;;tffi***'f W *ry:;
,ro*rwful'ery,ry -.,77*'"l-w*'
,Jllrrrlfrw d,\e"ylL{L19' iy>q'u\L&{tx
&ttbvlzv
/' l, ,, .1 ,;, -.f,o'e*t-,ffi ffi r*, **, d't't
"''w{*
Q't'i/u t' " fu'fu!ff;'Y,w*
flt fr rru,W--Zil s?.,fftu',,Yi-+otq''tou"6 aoifr"ii'- z(tt'
caNrra,*w W u.u//., fu&,./-r^!"'y'a"rw'w(bu y w'
l"r*W.' , .v
l\e'X"iw"l'ao/r/
&,.+, :
pruler,u{a*r&aV zou4/
, G,u*t- "*e{ zJkt
'
/YL*vvL/'</' -'*.vwL*"ttu7 ,np- *ll* h- a4tLL'lru:
^Y"/vr1'<''L'Y'/rttaut',t' 4 'tt,t, :: , {,tu+,*!L,.hrff/-w,Yryf
T^-;i*y;-Y,35,tffi'ffi*ffwtr" ,f',t":::"'lo'u/ r rt'Ku{'/w t')
,
lww #t* nra,t?/ p u*#ff-W,y,# .'r,'T {* *ffi ffr,;f #*
ffi ffiili,;?*f;*ffi;
" tfr*v r'oo /' \W Y,ffi;T&'
Wy *r,: ffi
, fff *-:;:;*m,ff*;, *fr -, o 4*ff*,t
/. ltnA ) aA///I/ tt^dL) w; . r .7
7** ,,1 rfiz i'tlilh(i/' i, mL4t,t,t , a-liX'a-ew;!'ffffi',::;lmffi;.W"rffiryffi
1 r llt*uclu /782,
,J I'utatr fatofu.
I 'wu M"elL' tf S t t-'l {lcorttt
r4