HomeMy WebLinkAbout2.0 Staff Report PC 10.12.16October 12, 2016 Planning Commission Exhibits
Peterson -CR 121 ROW Vacation
. ,;~'1J1l?iJ; :'exhibit• 11 'r '··:
; .... .: ':I< •.•. :·.·;;;:< > : {J· ( i •: .. V;}?i }'iffil: ;
<.Letter. ;:',,f'.w>
(At62:~ :
A Garfield County Unified Land Use Resolution of 2008, as amended
B Garfield County Comprehensive Plan of 2000, as amended
c Application
D Staff Report
E Staff Presentation
F Email dated September 28, 2016 from Dave Erickson, Aspen Valley Land Trust
G Email dated September 29, 2016 from Mike Prehm, Road & Bridge
H Letter dated October 3, 2016 from Colorado Parks and Wildlife
I Letter dated October 4, 2016 with Sue Rogers/Crystal River Ranch Co signature
J ~ J:h..""t"(;(~ \ ?.?'-.r~ <J Jetv\t l: {-U hi f ~ IA.J7',./ ·~ ~I -{ ~c;., -
K I I I •
L
M
N
0
p
Q
R
s
~t--.1u<::D-rD '' (or l l ~
\h.~f'-.1 lO\l~l\o
TYPE OF REVIEW
APPLICANT
REPRESENTATIVE .
LOCATION
EXHIBIT
D
PROJECT INFORMATION
Planning Commission
October 12, 2016
RVAC-07-16-8475 -KE
Vacation of a portion of County Road -CR 121, Coulter Creek
James and Hensley Peterson; Coulter Creek Valley Ranch, LLLP
Tim Malloy-TG Molloy Consulting, LLC
Eastern Garfield County, north of CR 113 CR 100 intersection
I. PROPOSAL AND LOCATION
The Applicants are requesting that two sections of right-of-way for CR 121, Coulter Creek, be vacated as
that right-of-way terminates within the subject sites. The Applicant states that vacation of the road right-
of-way would not impair any access as the two segments to be vacated do not provide access to
subsequent properties or to public lands.
CR 121 ROW to
Figure 1 -Vicinity Map
The right-of-way straddles two privately owned parcels including a 78-acre parcel owned James and
Hensley Peterson (Peterson property) and a 1,271-acre parcel owned by Coulter Creek Valley Ranch, LLLP
(CCVR property). The right-of-way extends 900 feet into the CCVR site where it terminates. This area is
known as the Ralston Right-of-Way
llPage
The 2013 Land Use and Development Code, as
amended (LUDC) contains regulations for the
vacation of a County Road based upon
provisions in §42-2-301 C.R.S. which require
Planning Commission recommendation to the
Board of County Commissioners on the
vacation of the road, as well as a companion
Location and Extent review to determine
general conformity with the Comprehensive
Plan.
11. HISTORY
This property was subject to a prior request
for a Road Vacation, on the 78-acre Peterson
property. Resolution 2010-39, see Exhibit 14
in the application, vacated a portion of the
right-of-way which was replaced by a new
segment along the existing road surface
(called connector ROW in the application).
This request was solely to move right-of-way
that existed proximate to the Peterson's
home as shown in Figure 2.
At that time the Applicants were not
contemplating vacating the entirety of the
right-of-way on their properties however due
Existing ROW to
be vacated
Planning Commission
October 12, 2016
RVAC-07-16-8475 -KE
''1'
' '
Figure 2 -2010 ROW Vacation/Replacement
to estate planning and family issues the Applicant is now seeking the vacation of the dead-end right-of-
way from the two properties.
Ill. REFFERAL AGENCY COMMENTS
Submittal documentation was forwarded to the following agencies and response was received as noted
below.
Road & Bridge. Exhibit H: Road & Bridge indicated that they maintain CR 121 to the turn-around area as
shown on Exhibit 8 of the application, and that the vacation of the right-of-way would not alter or affect
any services provided by Road & Bridge. Private easements exist to serve properties to the north, however
they are not show in relation to this request. If the proposed vacations do not interfere with the private
easements then Road & Bridge has no issues with the request.
Aspen Valley Land Trust (AVLT), Exhibit G: Dave Erickson, Stewardship Director, responded that they had
provided a letter to the Applicant regarding this request. That letter, dated June 7, 2016, states that AVLT
21Page
J i • j
l
f,',
. 1"·
Planning Commission
October 12, 2016
RVAC-07-16-8475 -KE
holds a conservation easement on the property and that the easement does not appear to be adversely
impacted by the proposal.
Colorado Parks and Wildlife, Exhibit H: CPW has no issues with the request.
The following agencies were requested to comment, however no response was received.
County Manager Carbondale and Rural Fire Protection District
US Forest Service Sheriff
BLM Assistant County Engineer
Consolidated Reservoir
Book Cliff, Mount Sopris and South Side Soil Conservation District
IV. APPLICABLE REGULATIONS
A. Overview.
1. Applications to vacate a County road or public right-of-way shall be reviewed and
a recommendation made by the Planning Commission, and decided by the BOCC.
2. The provisions of C.R.S. § 43-2-301, shall control all vacation proceedings
considering a petition to vacate or abandon the entire width of any County road
or public right-of-way. The provisions in this Code are in addition to all other
requirements of State law.
B. Review Process.
Applications to vacate a County road or public right-of-way shall be processed according to Table
4-102, Common Review Procedures and Required Notice, with the following modifications:
1. Pre-application Conference. The Director may waive the pre-application
conference.
2. Review by Referral Agency. Staff shall request that referral agencies address the
following:
a. Whether the property is or is likely to be necessary or desirable for any
public purpose within the reasonably foreseeable future;
b. Any term, condition, reservation, or dedication of any easement or
interest in the property necessary or desirable for public purposes and
permitted by law; and
c. Any other comment relevant to the County road or public right-of-way.
3. Planning Commission Review and Recommendation. The Planning Commission
shall review all applications or petitions to vacate a County road or public right-
of-way pursuant to the provisions of C.R.S. § 30-28-llO{l)(d).
a. The Planning Commission shall conduct its review of the petition or
application to vacate a County road or public right-of-way at a Public
Hearing without required notification other than inclusion in a posted
agenda.
31Page
Planning Commission
October 12, 2016
RVAC-07-16-8475 -KE
b. The date established for initial review by the Planning Commission shall
be considered the date of submission pursuant to C.R.S. § 30-28-110.
c. The Planning Commission may continue consideration of the application
until the next regularly-scheduled Planning Commission meeting. Under
all circumstances, it shall conclude its review and render its decision and
recommendation to the BOCC within 60 calendar days of submission.
d. The decision of the Planning Commission shall be considered a
recommendation, not a final action on the request.
4. BOCC Review and Notice. The BOCC shall conduct its review pursuant to the
provisions of C.R.S. § 43-2-301, et seq., and the requirements of this Code. The
BOCC review and decision shall be considered a legislative act.
a. Hearing Notification. Action of the BOCC shall be pursuant to a Public
Hearing. Mailed and published notice shall be provided according to
section 4-101.E.
b. Published Notice. Published notice shall include a statement that a
resolution to vacate the subject County road or public road right-of-way
will be presented at the hearing.
c. Hearing Information. During the Public Hearing before the BOCC, the
Applicant shall provide a form of resolution vacating the subject County
road or public right-of-way that is prepared by the Applicant and
reviewed and approved by the County Attorney's Office prior to the BOCC
hearing.
5. BOCC Decision. The BOCC may approve, approve with conditions, or deny the
application pursuant to section 4-101.G., or take any of the following actions:
a. Continue the Hearing. The BOCC may continue the Public Hearing as it
deems necessary to receive all information the BOCC deems relevant.
Any continuation must be to a date certain with a decision to approve or
deny the resolution vacating the County road or public right-of-way
occurring within 90 calendar days of the initiation of the Public Hearing.
b. Modified Resolution. The BOCC may elect to approve a resolution
vacating a County road or public right-of-way in a form modified or
altered from that presented. In that event, the BOCC shall specifically
direct staff to make alterations to the resolution by a motion specifying
those alterations. Such motion shall also include a continuance to allow
staff to revise the resolution and present it in final form as part of the
continued Public Hearing.
c. Final Action. No final action on a petition or application to vacate a
County road or public right-of-way shall occur until a resolution has been
considered at a Public Hearing, signed by the chair of the BOCC, pursuant
to motion, and recorded with the Garfield County Clerk and Recorder.
d. Vested rights. No rights shall vest in the vacated right-of-way until final
action of the BOCC has occurred, including recording of the vacation
resolution under C.R.S. § 43-2-301, et seq.
6. Subsequent Action. Subsequent to recording a resolution vacating a County road
or public right-of-way, the Road and Bridge Supervisor shall delete the roadway
41Page
Planning Commission
October 12, 2016
RVAC-07-16-8475 -KE
or portion of roadway from all County road maps submitted to the State of
Colorado and all reports submitted to the State claiming the road or right-of-way
as a County road.
C. Review Criteria.
A petition or request to vacate a County road or public right-of-way may be approved so long as
it meets the following criteria. However, meeting these criteria does not preclude the BOCC's
denial of a petition or application for any other reason.
1. The subject County road or public right-of-way does not provide any access to
public lands (for the purpose of this subsection, public land shall mean any
property owned by the Federal government or the State of Colorado).
Staff Comment: CR 121 does not provide access to public land.
2. The subject County road or public right-of-way does not abut or connect to any
property, including any easement owned by the Federal government, State of
Colorado, municipality, County, or special district, where such property or
easement constitutes a public park, recreational area, or trail.
Staff Comment: The right-of-way that is requested to be vacated does not abut
or connect to any property other than the subject site.
3. The subject County road or public road right-of-way is not currently used nor will
it be used in the future for any County road or public right-of-way purpose unless
the BOCC makes a specific finding that a satisfactory alternative route for the
existing or future County road or public right of way purpose is available or will
be provided.
Figure 3 -End of CR 121 Improvements and Maintenance
Staff Comment: County Road 121
improvements and maintenance physically
terminates at the Peterson property where
the dirt road surface splits, as shown in
Figure 3, left. One direction in the split leads
to the Peterson residence driveway (to the
right) and the other direction CR 121 ROW
that leads to the Connector ROW, based
upon the 2010 road vacation. The CR 121
ROW and Connector ROW then traverses to
the east while the ranch road continues to
the north to provide access to properties
including Consolidated Reservoir, Nieslanik,
and Crystal River Ranch properties.
SIP age
V. STAFF ANALYSIS
Planning Commission
October 12, 2016
RVAC-07-16-8475 -KE
The application includes letters from Century Link, Holy Cross Energy and the Carbondale and Rural Fire
Protection District that the proposed ROW vacation will not impair their ability to provide services.
Road & Bridge does not appear to have an issue with the vacation of that portion of CR 121 past the
proposed turn-around area, as shown in the photo below.
It appears that the Applicant has met the burden of demonstrating that the proposed vacation of CR 121
meets the 2013 Land Use and Development Code, as amended and therefore Staff recommends that the
Planning Commission recommend that the Board of County Commissioners approve the request.
VI. RECOMMENDED FINDINGS
1. That proper public notice was provided as required for the hearing before the Planning Commission.
2. That the hearing before the Planning Commission was extensive and complete, that all pertinent facts,
matters and issues were submitted or could be submitted and that all interested parties were heard
at that meeting.
3. That for the above stated and other reasons the request to vacate portions of County Road 121 is in
the best interest of the health, safety, convenience, order, prosperity and welfare of the citizens of
GIP age
Garfield County.
Planning Commission
October 12, 2016
RVAC-07-16-8475 -KE
4. That the application is generally consistent with the Garfield County Comprehensive Plan 2030, as
amended.
5. That the application has adequately demonstrated that the road vacation is compliant with the
regulations required by the Garfield County 2013 Land Use and Development Code, as amended.
VII. PLANNING COMMISSION DELIBERATION AND DECISION
The Planning Commission has several options with regard to this request:
1. Recommend approval of the request;
2. Recommend approval of the request with conditions;
3. Continue the meeting to request additional information;
4. Recommend denial of the request.
71Page
Kath A. Eastle
From:
Sent:
To:
Subject:
Attachments:
Hi Kathy,
Dave Erickson <dave@avlt.org>
Wednesday, September 28, 2016 4:31 PM
Kathy A. Eastley
RE: Referral for Review of CR 121 Road Vacation
Peterson_60'_ROW _ Vacation_Letter _AVL T.PDF
EXHIBIT
I F
. .! ,,;,'· .·:!'·-. ·:~:~:~i.~~· ~~L}~?:J~~~t ~ ·
Sorry to be getting back to you late on this. I was just leaving for vacation when you emailed me and it slipped through
the cracks when I returned I
Anyways, I've attached the letter we sent to the Peterson's for this application to vacate a portion of the CR 121 ROW. In
these instances, where we've already submitted a letter that is attached to the application, do we still need to submit a
letter to the county? Or does the letter we submitted with application suffice?
Let me know and I can address a letter to the county if needed.
All the best,
Dave Erickson
Stewardship Director
ASPEN VALLEY LAND TRUST
320 Main Street, Suite 204
Carbondale, CO 81623
970.963.8440
AVLT.org
• Saving the best ... to last
Board of Directors
Jim Cardamone
President
Dave Bellack
Vice-President
Gary Knaus
Secretary
Dan Brumbaugh
Treasurer
Jeanne Doremus
Bill Kane
Amy Daley Krick
Fred Lodge
Matt Sturgeon
Staff
Suzanne Stephens
Executive Director
Melissa Sumera
Operations Director
Dave Erickson
Stewardshi~ Director
Erin Quinn
Conservation Director
Valery Kelly
Development Director
June 7, 2016
James Peterson
1654 County Road 121
Carbondale, CO 81623
Saving the best ... to last
RE: Abandonment of 60' Connection R.O.W.
Dear Mr. Peterson,
. .
The Aspen Valley Land Trust (AVLT) has received your request regarding the
abandonment of a Garfield County R.O.W. across the northem portion of your property
(78 acres) that is und.er conservation easement (CE) with AVLT (CE Recorded on
12/27/2007 at Reception# 740028 and Amended on 6/9/2010 at Reception# 787037).
The location of this R.0.W. is depicted on the attached exhibit and labeled "-60'
Connection ROW".
AVLT is not opposed to this request as no adverse impact to the property under CE is
ar.itlcipated by this action.
Should you or Garfield County have any additional questions regarding this matter, do
not hesitate to ~ontact me. '
Thank you,
jMJ~
Dave Erickson
Stewardship Director
970.963.8440
dav~@avlt.org
Aspen Valley Land Trust, 320 Main Street, Suite 204, Carbondale, CO 81623 tel:970/963.8440 fax:970/963.8441 email: avlt@avlt.org www.avlt.org
IJll lri1. f M1l'l~l't'I~ llfl~i11~ llr.,..,~lfri'lW~ I~ .~1 ~ 1111 I
Reception#: 787037
06/09/2010 09:38:24 AM Jean Alberico
5 of 6 Rec Fee:$36.00 Doc Fee:0.00 GARFIELD COUNTY CO
EXIDBITF
Survey of Relocated County Road 121 ROW, Connection ROW, and vacated Ralston ROW , / I/
Centerline of one-lo,,_ uminpnwed rood sho"" on S.rvco Inc. slJIVtly • / • • • • • ; • / • • • • • •
dofrd Not/tl/77/>er 29, 20IH extending northtlf'ly from Loelt«I Gate No. 1 This / //
road provid# access through various reconled .asem11nts and/or ............. • / • //. • •
prt1$cripfiWI rights to kinds owM<I by Coutt.r Cl'Hk Vofk!y Ranch Ul..P, ""{ /.
Jim ond Sharon l'Hslanik.Ul..P. Consolidot«I Hes.rvoir. Inc. I • "( • •
for rtlJlttrVOir moinftJnonc. and Crystal RI_. Ranch Co. U.P. /. ((·
1 • \ \ •
. f t\ \.
'· . . \ .
SWNE ·
·[ \\\
60' CONNECTION ROW \ \ \ ·
• Point of b~inning of tho cent~-line of 60" R-0-W
to be gront11d to Corfield County os parl of th11 vocolion
• of o portion of the rood on th11 Peter. 78 ocr11 parcel os
described In the 1904 Rolston R-0-W (f, d to Garfield County
This t:t1nter-lin11 is described in o rood'" surw:y doted
• 27 Novttmb11r. 2004 by Samuel Phelps. rfield County Surw:yor.
Conservation Easement Boundary
Surveyed northerly proptUty. fin; oi
Peterson 78 acre parcel.
\··.
.
. \ . . . \ \
.....
• . '\\ \Q...._RkstON °cABIN •
..~\\ .....
-'flf:RSON RANCH . ./':: . _.. . . . . . ,r-__
,// ...
/ / POINT OF' 6CCINNIN(l . / y . I.AT J9'29"29.Jll105"
/ /
LONG. 107"01"52.48025"
/,' N-16080:12.61 C-25.J9657.11 . / )' . . ·~:1'k~COOROW41E3
Conservation Easement
NWSE
'\ Conservation Easement Boundary
EXHIBIT
I G-
Garfield County
Road & Bridge
September 29, 2016
RE: County Road 121 Road Vacation
Kathy,
Garfield County Road & Bridge currently maintains County Road 121 to the turn-around as
indicated on map in Exhibit 8. This vacation of Right of way would not alter or affect any
services we provided.
In the referral it mentions private easements to access property to the North but did not show
them in relation to this request. If the Ralston and the Connector Right of Way vacations does
not interfere with the private easements, Road & Bridge would be ok with this proposal.
Thank you for giving us the opportunity to review.
Mike Prehm
Garfield County R&B
Foreman
(970) 625-8601 Office
(970) 625-8627
EXHIBIT
COLORADO
Parks and Wildlife
Department of Natural Resources
Glenwood Springs Area Office
0088 Wildlife Way
Glenwood Springs, CO 81601
October 3, 2016
Kathy Eastley
Senior Planner /
Garfield County Community Development
108 8th Street
Glenwood Springs, CO 81601
RE: RVAC-07-16-8475 and LAEA-07-16-8474 County Road 121 Road Vacation
Dear Kathy,
Colorado Parks and Wildlife (CPW) has reviewed the application for the proposed road
vacation and location and extent. Based on the proposed action, CPW staff believes
·that the effects on local wildlife and wildlife habitat should be neglfgfble.
Colorado Parks and Wfldlffe appreciates the opportunity to submit comments for this
project. If there are any questions or needs for additional information don't hesitate
to contact District Wildlife Manager, Matt Yamashita at (970) 947-2931 or Land Use
Specialist, Taylor Elm at (970) 947-2971.
Sincerely,
Cc.
'
ill, Area Wildlife Manager
Matt Yamashita, District Wildlife Manager
Taylor Elm, land Use Specialist
File
Bob D. Broscheid, Director, Colorado Parks and Wildlife • Parlls and Wildlife Commissim: Robert w. Bray, Chair
C~ C<Htillan, Vite Chair• Jeanne Home, Secretaiy • John Howard, Jr. •Bill Kane• Date Plzel •James Prl~I • Jallll!'S Vigil
Dean Wingfield • Mlche4te Zimmerman • Alex Zipp
H
I
EXHIBIT
October 4. 2016
Sue Rodaers
Crystal River Ranch Co, llP
555 17th Street, SUite 2400
D~nver, CO 80202
Re: Proposed vacation of unused ROW on Peferson/CCVR Property
DeorSue:
x-
As our long-time neighbor ond friend. we wonted to let you know that we ore in the
process of applying to Garfield County for the vocation of unused right-of-way on our
property in the Coulter Creek Volley (see attached Exhibit 7 from our application). As you
. can see from the attached mop, the proposed right-of-way vacation will not affect
access to your property. Since the right-of-way being vacated is not within 200 feet of
your property, the Garfield Land Use Code does not require that we notify you regarding
the proposed vacation. However, as a courtesy to you and out of appreciation for our
long history of cooperation, we wanted to inform you of our pending application.
Ovr appffcation for right-of-way vacation approvals will be reviewed by the Garfield
County Planning and Zoning Commission on October 12th and the Board of County
Commissioners during the following months. If you have any concerns or would like
to have more information about our proposed right-of-way vacation, please feel free to
contact us. Sue, we would appreciate you expressing your support for our application by
signing in the space provided below and returning a copy of this lefter to Hensley and
me at PO Box 1714, Aspen, CO 81612.
We send oyr thanks and best regards.
o( 'f(-Ulhllt}-
es and Hensley Peterson
Jo Garfield Counfv Board of Countv Commissioners: We support the right-of-way
vacation action proposed by James and Hensley Peterson and Coulter Creek Valey
Ranch. LUP.
/fJ.//~ ///J Doti I