The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About3.0 BOCC Staff Report 12.14.1992• • BOCC 12/14/92 PROJECT INFORMATION & STAFF COMMENTS REQUEST: Amendment of the River Ridge PUD plan and zone district APPLICANT: Walter A. Stowe LOCATION: A parcel of land located in portions of Sections 35 and 36, T6S, R89W; more practically described as a parcel of land located approximately three (3) miles south of Glenwood Springs off of County Road 109. SITE DATA: WATER: An 8.003 acre parcel A central water system supplied by a well on site SEWER: Individual Sewage Disposal System ACCESS: County Road 109 ZONING North: A/R/RD South: A/R/RD West: A/R/RD & R/L/SD East: A/R/RD & R/L/SD I. RELATIONSHIP TO TI -IE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN The property is within a District B Subdivisions/Rural Serviceable Areas, with a lc classification noting central water and sewer service availability, but having severe environmental constraints. For the record, there is no central sewer presently available to lots in the Westbank area. Subdivision areas are defined by the Comprehensive Plan as areas "Best able to absorb growth". II. DESCRIPTION OF THE PROPOSAL A. Site Description: The River Ridge P.U.D. is a flat linear piece of property that sits on a terrace above the Roaring Fork river, with very little vegetation. There are two duplexes, a single family dwelling and a mobile home presently on the site. The Westbank subdivision is adjacent to the property (See map page 1 1 B. Project Description: The applicant proposes to modify the previously approved River Ridge P.U.D. from a 48 unit townh se development to an eight (8) lot single family development (See pages 203 ). The lots would be served by a central water system which has a well on site as the source of water. Each lot would have an individual sewage disposal system. Access from County Road 109 is proposed to be a 40' wide access easement through each lot with a 100 ft. diameter cul-de-sac at the end. HISTORY In 1979, by Resolution No.79-74, Don Ice received approval for a 50 unit P.U.D. Subsequently, by Resolution No. 82-10, the final plot for the River Ridge PUD (formerly Hillview P.U.D.) was approved for 48 units. As a part of the approval process, a central sewage disposal system was to be developed to serve the River Ridge P.U.D. and the Weslbank Filing 4 P.U.D.. No system was ever developed and as a result, the River Ridge P.U.D., as originally platted, was given a number of extensions of approval to complete the subdivision improvements originally proposed. III. MAJOR ISSUES AND CONCERNS A. Zoning: This application is being made as a modification to the original P. U.D. based on Section 4.12.03 of the Zoning Resolution which states the following: 4.12.03 All those provisions of the Plan authorized to be enforced by the County may be modified, removed or released by the County, subject to the following: (1) No modification, removal or release of the provisions of the Plan by the County shall affect the rights of the residents, occupants and owners of the PUD to maintain and enforce those provisions at law or in equity; and (2) No substantial modifications, removal or release of the provisions of the Plan by the County shall be permitted except upon a finding by the County, following a public hearing called and held in accordance with the provisions of Section 24-67-104, C.R.S., that the modification, removal or release is consistent with the efficient development and preservation of the entire PUD, does not affect in a substantially adverse manner either the enjoyment of land abutting upon or across a street from the PUD, or the public interest, and is not granted solely to confer a special benefit upon any person. There is only one owner of the property who is making the application. The present occupants are renters within the duplex units and the applicant's family. The applicant is processing as a rezoning and as such will be following the public hearing and notice requirements for a zone district text amendment. The proposed rezoning is a reduction in density to a lot size more consistent with the lots in the Westbank subdivision and should not affect in an adverse manner the enjoyment of land by property landowners abutting the property or across the road. B. Subdivision: The proposed modification will require the vacation of the present 2 River Ridge P.U.D. Final Plat, filed on February 25, 1982. It will require following the Subdivision Regulations to file a final plat. C. P.U.D Zone Districts: The applicant proposed to create a Residential/Distr'ct/Single Family with 40,000 sq. ft. minimum lot size (See enclosed page O' ). It is proposed to maintain the existing duplexes in place, but subject to future demolition. There is no time identified for demolition, which should be prior to conveyance of any interests in lots 2, 3 or 4. The same issue applies to the mobile home on the common lot line between lots 3 and 4. The PUD zone district text should reflect these changes. D. County Road 109: When Garfield County rebuilt the Hardwick bridge, additional right-of-way was acquired from the applicant's property. The legal description of the property conveys was incorrect. E. Access Easement: The proposed 40 ft. access easement is consistent with the recently adopted road width standards contained in the Subdivision Regulations. Because it is intended to be included in each lot as a part of the lot area calculation, there is a need to redefine the setbacks, since this is not a street. The reason for the easement to be included in the lot area calculation is related to the one (1) acre minimum lot size in the Zoning Resolution for a lot with central water and an ISDS. Changing the language of the front yard setback to recognize the easement lines as the point of measurement for the setback. IV. SUGGESTED FINDINGS 1. That the application for PUD modification meets the requirements of Section 4.12.03 of the Garfield County Zoning Resolutions. 2. That the PUD modification is in general conformity with the Comprehensive Plan. 3. That the meeting before the Planning Commission was complete and all interested persons were given the opportunity to speak. 4. That for the above stated and other reasons, the proposed PUD modification is in the best interests of the health, safety, morals, order, convenience and prosperity of the citizens of Garfield County. V. RECOMMENDATION The Planning Commission recommended APPROVAL of the proposed PUD Plan and zone district amendment, subject to the following conditions: 1. That all representations made verbally or in writing shall be considered conditions of approval unless stated otherwise by the Board. 2. That the applicant shall not claim any veste right to the PUD zoning unless subdivision approval of the Preliminary Pla given within one (1) year from the date of approval of the PUD modification, per Section 4.09.01 of the Garfield County Zoning Resolution. 3 3. The PUD Zone District Text be modified to read: Uses, by right - Two-family dwellings and mobile home existing as of the date of the PUD, provided that prior to conveyance of lots 2, 3 or 4 to another party, such uses shall be removed or demolished. Uses. Special - Studio for the conduct of arts and crafts. Minimum Setback: (1) Front yard - 25 feet from the front property line or access easement line. 4. At the time of subdivision, an Engineer shall identify areas suitable for the location of ISDS on each lot d in an area near the a s asement.or 664/10-147)266664/10-147)2a. 4^.t/ s- mid /sy.r} 6hces014- /a�sac.,4 i sys� 6z.- 12, 5. That the previously approved Final Plat for the River Ridge PUD bvacated. 4vat le,„ �m 7`a y"/10- / f1/0 j 7)i - ats�i�� el' �p J6il Q *�� et/ fit 7ZI lo /ovt a/ 7rOV r, 1sadill/Slerl . 411..41 ?OG( • V 1 • 0 • i 1 IP 0.1 21 1 .I 1. z it I su �rw 1v[i� I i t i I _. n, Z 1 Y F . ! I 2 �.l J C 4r-- - '''i pro- sArai •wa' ' 1 1 • NR 1 4 r Jt Ter �1 'r1 s 1 '1 is-xMsi-sx . izii-Titie