HomeMy WebLinkAbout2.0 BOCC Staff Report 02.26.1996• •
BOCC 2/21/96
PROJECT INFORMATION AND STAFF COMMENTS
REQUEST: An exemption from the definition of
subdivision.
APPLICANT: Thomas Odgers, Samuel Potter
LOCATION:
A tract of land located in a portions of
Section 11, T6S, R94W and Section 6, T7S
R94W of the 6th PM; located
approximately one (1) mile southeast of the
Rulison I-70 exit..
SITE DATA: 204 acres
WATER: Springs
SEWER: ISDS
ACCESS: County Road 309
EXISTING/ADJACENT ZONING: A/R/RD
RELATIONSHIP TO THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN
The site is located in District B- Subdivisions/Rural Serviceable Areas 1/2 to 1 mile
radius, Minor Environmental Constraints, as designated on the Garfield County
Comprehensive Plan Management Districts' Map. The subdivision noted in the
Comprehensive Plan is the Rulison Industrial Park, which was a subdivision that
received sketch plan approval in the middle 70's, that was never submitted for any
further review and is a nonexistent development.
II_ I)I;,SCR1l'"I'ION O1 THE PROPOSAL
A.
Site Description: The site is Located south of the Rulison I-70 exit, in an area of
rural residential use, mixed in with an agricultural area. There is an existing
residence on the property. A vicinity map is shown on page' S . The
property slopes from the south to the north with slopes ranging from around
6% to over 25% in the southern most portions of the site.
B. Project Description: The applicant is proposing split the 204 acre parcel into
four (4) parcels of approximately 4.70, 5.00, 5.15 and 189.15 acres in size. A site
plan submitted with the application is enclosed. (see y505: Pflf )
• •
III_ MAJOR ISSUES AND CONCERNS
A.
Subdivision Regulations, Section 8.52 of the Garfield County Subdivision
Regulations state that "No more than a total of four (4) lots, parcels, interests
or dwelling units will be created from any parcel, as that parcel was described in
the records of the Garfield County clerk and Recorder's Office on January 1,
1973, and is not a part of a recorded subdivision; however, any parcel to be
divided by exemption that is split by a public right-of-way (State or Federal
highway, County road or railroad) or natural feature, preventing joint use of the
proposed tracts, and the division occurs along the public right-of-way ornatural
feature, such parcels thereby created may, in the discretion of the Board, not be
considered to have been created by exemption with regard to the four (4) lot,
parcel, interest or dwelling unit limitation otherwise applicable;
Documentation submitted with the application shows that the tract in question
was recorded in the records of the Clerk and Recorders Office in June, 1963, in
Book 351, Page 29. Based on the existence of the tract prior to January 1, 1973,
the applicants qualify to make the requested exemption.
B. Zoning. All of the exemption parcels are consistent with the required two (2)
acres minimum lot size for the A/R/RD zone district.
C. Legal Access Access is provided by CR 309, but there are no approved
driveways to the property. Driveways should be approved by the Road and
Bridge Department prior to the approval of a plat.
D. Water and Sewer. The applicant is proposing to use an existing domestic wells
for the source of water to the existing house and springs for the new lots. Copies
of the application for change of water rights was included in the application for
the exemption. It is noted that the applicants could obtain contracts from the
West Divide to obtain exempt well permits, but none were included in the
application. (See applications pgs. !,O No information has been submitted
to demonstrate the quantity and quality of the water from the existing well or the
proposed springs. The Board has required applicants to meet the following
criteria for demonstrating the quality, quantity and dependability of a shared
well/water system:
1) A well be drilled and a 4 hour pump test shall be performed;
2) The applicant supply, to the Planning Department, the well completion
report demonstrating the depth of the well, the characteristics of the
aquifer and the static water level;
3) The results of the 4 hour pump test indicating the pumping rate in gallons
per minute and information showing drawdown and recharge shall be
submitted to the Planning Department;
4) A written opinion of the person conducting the well test that this well
would be adequate to supply water to the number of proposed lots and
be submitted to the Planning Department;
5) An assumption of an average ofno less than 3.5 people per dwelling unit,
using 100 gallons of water per person, per day;
6) If the well is to be shared, the provision for individual water storage
tanks ofno less than 1000 gallons for each proposed lot (required at time
of building permit application);
• •
7) A discussion of the mechanical components of the shared well system to
include the pump, water supply line, storage tank and other components
(for shared well systems);
8) A legal, well sharing agreement which discusses all easements and costs
associated with the operation and maintenance of the system and who
will be responsible for paying these costs and how assessments will be
made (for shared well systems);
9) The water quality be tested by an approved testing laboratory and meet
State guidelines concerning bacteria and nitrates.
Enclosed is a letter from Sherry Caloia, representing Ova Gibbs who is
submitting a Statement of Opposition to the proposed application for Change
in Use by the applicants for the same water. (See letter pgs. Until this
water case is resolved, there is no proof of a legal water source, thus the Board
cannot make a finding that there is a legal source of water, in addition to the
previously noted questions regarding the physical supply.
Sewer is proposed to be individual sewage disposal systems (ISDS)for each of
the new lots. The soils information included in the application, notes that the
use of ISDS for sewage disposal has severe constraints due to slow percolation
rates. Any approval should include a plat note stating that engineered ISDS is
required for each lot
E. Fi re Protection. The applicant has had the Grand Valley Fire Protection District
review the application and the Assistant Fire Chief has stated that the parcels in
question are within the District. The District has requested that all structures be
separated from native trees by a distance of four times the height of the
surrounding native trees or 100 feet. This should be a plat note.. (See letter pg.
3,)
F. Easements. Any required easements (drainage, access, utilities, etc..) will be
required to be shown with legal descriptions on the exemption plat.
G. School Impact Fees School impact fees of $200.00 for each new lot created will
need to be paid prior to the signing of an exemption plat..
H. Neighbors Comments Enclosed are letters from neighbors of the proposed
exemptions. They have expressed a number of concerns about the use of ISDS
due to soil constraints and concerns about their water supplies being depleted_
due to drawdown from the proposed water supplies. (See letter pgs3•4
_)
IV_ SLIGGFSTED FINDINGS
1. That proper posting and public notice was provided as required for the meeting
before the Board of County Commissioners.
2. That the meeting before the Board of County Commissioners was extensive and
complete, that all pertinent facts, matters and issues were submitted and that all
interested parties were heard at that meeting.
3. That for the above stated and other reasons, the proposed exemption is not in
the best interest of the health, safety, morals, convenience, order, prosperity and
welfare of the citizens of Garfield County.
• •
V REC C)MMENDATION
Staff cannot recommend approval of the proposed splits, given the lack of certainty
regarding the legality of the source of water and the questions being raised by the
neighbors regarding the physical supply to the proposed parcels and the impact to their
wells due to draw down. Before the Board should consider any kind of approval,
additional documentation needs to be submitted regarding the water supplies and the
potential for contamination from ISDS from the proposed lots.