Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2.0 Director's DecisionSeptember 14, 2009 BUILDING & PLANNING DEPARTMENT Eric McCafferty Compass Mountain Land Use, LLC P. O. Box 86 Glenwood Springs, CO 81602 RE: Determination of Non Substantial Modification for the request to amend the Strong Preliminary Plan Dear Eric, This office is in receipt of the application requesting an amendment of the recent approval given by the Board of County Commissioners (the Board) for the Strong Preliminary Plan as memorialized in Resolution 2009-09. Staff understands the purpose of the request to amend the Preliminary Plan is to eliminate condition no. 11 in Resolution 2009-09 which presently requires Mr. Strong obtain a State Highway Access Permit for traffic trips generated by his development as they impact the intersection of State Highway 6 & 24 and County Road 300. As you recall, the Board recently held a discussion on July 28, 2009 where they voted (motions attached as Exhibit A) to "take the lead" in examining the intersection of State Highway 6 & 24 and County Road 300 and will ultimately determine what financial contributions certain land owners (including Mr. Strong) / projects will contribute to improve that intersection. Staff understands the Board's decision to "take the lead" to mean the County will serve as the lead agency to obtain the permit and thereby relieve Mr. Strong of condition no. 11 in Resolution 2009-09. Therefore, based on the specific direction by the Board on July 28, 2009 and Section 5- 304 of the Unified Land Use Resolution of 2008, as amended, this office has determined that the requested change is not considered to be a substantial modification. As such, this office has approved the amended Preliminary Plan request. As also required by the Unified Land Use Resolution of 2008, I am sending this letter to the Board of County Commissioners so that they have notice of this action. As required by Section 5-304 of the Unified Land Use Resolution of 2008, as amended, this office has sent notice of this decision to the affected property owners as well as the Board of County Commissioners who have 14 days (from the date of this letter) to 108 Eighth Street, Suite 401 • Glenwood Springs, CO 81601 (970) 945-8212 • (970) 285-7972 • Fax: (970) 384-3470 request a call-up for review by the Board. Therefore, this administrative decision cannot become effective until after September 28th, 2009. Do not hesitate to contact this office should you have any additional questions. Very truly yours, ✓/ Fred A. Jarman, AIi'P Director, Building and Planning Department 970.945.8212 fredj annan(a,garfield-county.com cc Board of County Commissioners County Attorney's Office File EXHIBIT Motion — Intersections Commissioner Samson —There are three things: 1) I do not think everyone is going to be happy with me. 2) I think we need to go forward with this County Road 300. If we have principal player that are willing to be at the table and it seems like we do, I don't have a problem with the County stepping up and saying bringing everyone together and let's get that done. So I think we need to take care of that today and let those guys go forward with that. Commissioner Houpt — What do you have in mind with our participation in that financially? And, I'm assuming that will come back to this Board once — how are we first going to identify all of the partners? Commissioner Samson — Well, I think they have already been identified. Commissioner Houpt — Well, if we have identified the oil and gas companies as well. Chairman Martin — And the pipeline. Commissioner Samson — You've got the pipeline, the railroad companies, two gravel pits, the RTZ, Grand Junction Pipe, Strong, EnCana with their compressor stations but my understanding Chairman Martin — And we have the north side over here too. Commissioner Samson — But, my understanding, everybody that is a principal player is willing to come to the table and get this intersection done. That's what I've heard from three or four people here today, correct. Commissioner Houpt — Is that true? Audience — Yeah, yeah, yeah. Commissioner Houpt — All of those parties. Audience — Everybody has been saying that ... Commissioner Houpt — That was not my question. My question was whether you individually were ready — My question was whether we actually talked to all of the partners. Commissioner Samson — My understanding from these individuals is that they have those people lined up ready to go — correct. Audience — All we need to do is meet before you guys. Chairman Martin — And, Mr. Green has also had a meeting I think Marvin, the engineer, Fred you might have been there as well, and they identified the different partners — that is how it came forward to this point if you are talking about CR 300. Commissioner Samson — I am talking about 300. So, I think we need to go forward. I am ready to meet with those people — I am ready for the County to take the lead, let's get those people in the same room and hammer it out. Now, you are asking about a financial commitment, yes, I think the County is going to have put some financial commitment there. How much, I think that is what we are going to do when we hammer it out. Commissioner Houpt — I think this is something that this Commission needs to decide as a Commission though. Commissioner Samson — They are going to be before us. Does that require a motion? Deb Quinn — All I want to do is point out this Board in his Land Use capacity after public hearings has designated two applicants, RTZ and Strong to obtain the access permit from CDOT. That was through a public hearing process. Commissioner Samson — That is never changed. Tim Thulson — That is not correct, because it is only if the County decides not to take the lead. Deb — Oh yes, yours is different. George Strong — I do not believe my subdivision has been signed. Commissioner Houpt — You are still tied to that. Chairman Martin — Unless we have a change in that request. Deb — RTZ is a little different, I apologize to Tim for forgetting that piece, but I do not think it's inconsistent with those existing those land use resolutions for you to tell all these people who have represented today that they are willing to come forward with some money and to talk to us about how much they need from us. That is what I hear you saying, let's talk to them about that and have some staff get together and figure out where we are with it all and bring it to the Board. I do not think that is inconsistent with the outstanding land use approvals. Commissioner Samson — You don't think it's okay is what you are saying. Commissioner Houpt — But would it be inconsistent if the County became the lead on obtaining the access code. Deb — Getting the permit from CDOT. Yes, that would be — we can deal with that later. Chairman Martin — You have to revisit the final resolution on George in order to be able to do that but that has to be a request. Commissioner Houpt — I am sure that you guys can get that access code and if we are partners we — Commissioner Samson — That is one of the big things we will be talking about when we all come together. So, can you help me with a motion so that it is legal. Deb - I think what you are talking is what you said before is all right. Commissioner Samson — I would move that the County take the lead, that doesn't mean that we will be necessarily getting the access code but the County will take the lead in getting the principal players/parties together for the building of an intersection at County Road 300 and State Highway 6 & 24. Along with that we will make a commitment financially — I'm not going to say how much, I'm just going to say we will make a financial commitment to be part of that intersection being built. Deb — On the financial piece, it is always subject to budget appropriations. You cannot make a financial commitment without that process. Chairman Martin — It has something to do with the Constitutional Amendment — Tabor Issue I guess. Deb — Correct. Commissioner Houpt — So, if I agree to this. Commissioner Samson — Yes. Commissioner Houpt — Okay I will second your motion. In favor: Samson — aye Houpt — aye Martin — aye Commissioner Houpt — And I will make a motion that we accept staff s recommendation to have staff put an RFP out to hire someone to work with them on identifying and prioritizing intersections in this County and coming back to us with the costs, the study of these intersections and a proposed policy to change what we have in place with our Code currently for intersections that involve state highways. Commissioner Samson — Does that basically fill the bill as far you've heard that — are you okay with that. Chairman Martin — Sure, you are going to go ahead and do a scope of services for intersection evaluation and then you are also asking for a change in the Land Use Zone Text to allow the new policy in place instead of what we have on the books. Deb — I heard it all as one for an RFP to address those issues. Chairman Martin — It should be two motions, one is an RFP to allow to go out for the scope of services so we can prioritize the intersections and safety factors and at that point we can go from there. Then if there is a change in reference to that, there should be a third motion and that is to go ahead and make the appropriate land zone text changes to amend that universe. Commissioner Houpt — Well, I will split the motion but I want the work to come back together. So my first one will be for the RFP. Commissioner Samson — Second. In favor: Houpt — aye Samson — aye Martin - aye Commissioner Houpt — And my next motion will be that along with the study that will come forward from staff and the contractor we hire that a proposed policy for our Code to replace the policies that are in place that deal with intersections along state highways will be brought to us. Commissioner Samson — Second. In favor: Houpt — aye Samson — aye Martin - aye