Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout01 Cover LetterI Brownstein Hyatt I Farber Schreck January 30, 2015 Tamra Allen, Planning Manager Garfield County Planning Commission 108 8th Street, Suite 401 Glenwood Springs, CO 81601 Carolynne C. White Attorney at Law 303.223.1197 tel 303.223.0997 fax cwhite@bhfs.com RE: Application for Amendment to the River Edge Colorado Preliminary Plan and River Edge Colorado Planned Unit Development Plan Dear Ms. Allen: In December 2011, the Garfield County Board of County Commissioners ("Board") issued Resolution 2011- 84, approving the River Edge Colorado Preliminary Plan ("Preliminary Plan") and River Edge Colorado Planned Unit Development Plan ("PUD Plan"). The Preliminary Plan and PUD Plan authorized the development of 366 home sites of varying types and sizes, including 55 affordable homes, in a walkable clustered -form of residential development, passive and recreational open space, and a neighborhood center (the "Project"). The Project sits on a 160 -acre undeveloped site within the Roaring Fork Valley in Garfield County, Colorado, approximately four miles south of Glenwood Springs, in the vicinity of Cattle Creek Road. It is located within the Residential High Density designation on the Future Land Use Map of the Garfield County Comprehensive Plan 2030, and is owned by Carbondale Investments, LLC ("Carbondale Investments"). The Project adjoins the Roaring Fork River and a 54 -acre conservation easement to the west and the Rio Grande pedestrian and bike trail and State Highway 82 to the east. Garfield County Commercial Investments, LLC ("GCCI"), an affiliate of Carbondale Investments, owns the 70 -acre undeveloped site directly to the north and east of the Project. The majority of the GCCI property is zoned for residential single-family use. The portion of it that comprised the former Sopris Restaurant is zoned commercial general. GCCI is concurrently submitting an application to rezone approximately 43.25 acres of its property to commercial general use. The enclosed application is for a Substantial Modification to the approved Preliminary Plan and PUD Plan ("Amendment"). Carbondale Investments requests a recommendation of approval of the Amendment from Garfield County staff and the Garfield County Planning Commission, and approval of the Amendment from the Board. Carolynne White, Esq., of Brownstein Hyatt Farber Schreck, LLP, is the appointed representative for Carbondale Investments for the purposes of this Amendment. The County has stipulated that the Garfield County Unified Land Use Resolution in effect at the time of the approval of the Preliminary Plan and PUD Plan applies to review of this Amendment. Therefore, references to specific code sections, requirements, and standards below all refer to the Garfield County Unified Land Use Resolution of 2008, updated December 28, 2010 ("ULUR"). Carbondale Investments's contact information is as follows: Carbondale Investments, LLC 410 Seventeenth Street, Suite 2200 Denver, CO 80202-4432 main 303.223.1100 bhfs.com Brownstein Hyatt Farber Schreck, LLP Tamra Allen, Planning Manager January 30, 2015 Page 2 Attn: Ted Skokos 5121 Park Lane Dallas, Texas 75220 with copy to: Brownstein Hyatt Farber Schreck, LLP Attn: Carolynne White, Esq. 410 Seventeenth Street, Suite 2200 Denver, Colorado 80203 Phone 303-223-1197 Email: cwhite@bhfs.com The purpose of this letter is to update the Justification Report, dated January 18, 2011 (the "Report"), that was filed with the original application seeking approval of the Preliminary Plan and PUD Plan and which is incorporated herein by reference. The analyses detailed in the Report detailing how the Project complies with the ULUR and Comprehensive Plan applies to this Amendment, with certain exceptions as described below. This letter also serves as a request that the County formally absolve the Memorandum of Understanding Regarding the Intersection of State Highway 82 at the Junction of County Road 110 and County Road 113 entered into with Carbondale Investments, dated October 1, 2013 (the "MOU"), pursuant to which Carbondale Investments is required to reimburse the County for the design and construction costs of the East Side Improvements (as defined in the MOU). The East Side Improvements will no longer be constructed; however, the County incurred some costs associated with their design. On September 26, 2014, Carbondale Investments fulfilled its obligations to reimburse the County by delivering a check in the amount of $68,038.55 to the County. Therefore, Carbondale Investments requests that the County absolve the MOU by executing the attached Certificate of Completion. Finally, the changes proposed in this Amendment require updates to the Service Plan in effect for the Cattle Creek Metropolitan District ("District"), which serves the subject property. The District will submit an application to amend the Service Plan and an application to create a new district, the combined effect of which will result in one district serving the subject property and the other serving the commercial GCCI property. This will allow each district to tailor the services it provides, infrastructure it constructs, and the method by which it finances such services and infrastructure to the residential and commercial uses on each property without unnecessarily imposing inappropriate requirements and burdens on the other property. I. Amendment Summary Carbondale Investments requests an amendment to the Preliminary Plan and PUD Plan to accommodate the relocation of the access to and from State Highway 82. The new access point will move north from River Edge Drive to a new roadway known as Terrace Parkway and will provide access to both the Project and the GCCI property through a single access road. The creation of Terrace Parkway results in a new layout of the Project's intersection with State Highway 82 and a modification of the Project's internal streets. The Amendment largely maintains overall density, with a slight reduction from 366 residential units to 362. The Amendment also: creates a new Rio Grande Trail crossing and related improvements for Terrace Parkway; eliminates the River Edge Drive Right -of -Way extension to State Highways 82 and related plat adjustments; creates new trail connections and/or crossings of State Highway 82 at the old access location; relocates the secondary emergency vehicle access onto State Highway 82 to run through adjoining properties to the north of the Project to connect to County Road 167; reorganizes the Subdivision 013738\0001\11610902.1 Tamra Allen, Planning Manager January 30, 2015 Page 3 Filings as reflected on the Preliminary Subdivision Plan; and revises the PUD Phasing Plan to shift earlier phases of development to the vicinity of the new access point. The Amendment is otherwise largely consistent with the current approved Preliminary Plan and PUD Plan. Overall open space will increase by 0.1 acres (to 40.60 acres), total common area will remain at 16.89 acres, and total parks will increase by 0.26 acres (to 17.34 acres). The Amendment maintains the same affordable housing ratios as previously approved and the majority of affordable housing units will now be developed in the first five Subdivision Filings, with Subdivision Filing 1A now including 28 of the 55 units. II. The Proposed Amendment Meets the ULUR's Criteria for Approval of an Amendment to a Subdivision Preliminary Plan The Director has determined that the Amendment requests a Substantial Modification to the approved Preliminary Plan. Therefore, the Amendment "shall be considered a new application for preliminary plan review." ULUR § 5-304(A)(5)(b). As such, the Amendment must meet the standards in Article VII of the ULUR. ULUR §§ 5-303(A)(5)(a) and (A)(7)(a). The Board has already determined that the Preliminary Plan "meet[s] the requirements, approval criteria, and standards set forth in the ULUR" and is in "general conformance with the Garfield County Comprehensive Plan 2030," "subject to compliance with the conditions of approval set forth in [Resolution 2011-84] and except where waivers have been granted." Resolution 2011-84, §§ 1(3) and 1(6). The Amendment does not substantially alter the basic characteristics of the Preliminary Plan except to adjust the location of access to State Highway 82. Therefore, as demonstrated in the supporting studies and plans included in this application, the Amendment likewise satisfies the standards in Article VII of the ULUR and conforms with the Comprehensive Plan. The original Preliminary Plan requested "(1) relief from certain standards set forth in Article VII in the manner contemplated by the ULUR; and (2) modifications from certain standards set forth in Article VII necessary to construct the Project." Report, p. 24. As stated in Section I(4)-(7) of Resolution 2011-84, the Board approved such requests or approved them with conditions. The Amendment assumes all such relief will continue. III. The Proposed Amendment Meets the ULUR's Criteria for Approval of an Amendment to a Planned Unit Development Plan Amendments to approved PUD plans shall be processed as a Rezoning as set forth in § 4-201 of the ULUR. ULUR § 6-201(F). However, upon the determination of the Director that an amendment constitutes a Substantial Modification to an approved PUD plan, such amendment "shall be considered a new application." ULUR § 6-201(F)(2)(b). New PUD applications must "conform to the County's Comprehensive Plan and applicable intergovernmental agreements" and satisfy the standards in § 6-202. ULUR §§ 6- 101(B) and 6-202. Like with the Preliminary Plan, the Board has already determined that the PUD Plan "meet[s] the requirements, approval criteria, and standards set forth in the ULUR" and is in "general conformance with the Garfield County Comprehensive Plan 2030," "subject to compliance with the conditions of approval set forth in [Resolution 2011-84] and except where waivers have been granted." Resolution 2011-84. Density in the Amendment falls well within the residential density range contemplated by the Comprehensive Plan for the Residential High designation. The Project will continue to offer affordable housing, a diverse mix of housing types at a range of prices, a significant area devoted to parks, trails, and 013738\0001\11610902.1 Tamra Allen, Planning Manager January 30, 2015 Page 4 open space for Project residents, and preservation of the County's rural character and views. See Comprehensive Plan at pages 23 & 27. Indeed, the Amendment retains the basic characteristics of the approved PUD Plan, with the exception of the relocation of access to the Project. Therefore, the Amendment satisfies the requirements for approval in § 6-202, including the rezoning criteria in § 4-201(B), in the same ways and for the same reasons as the PUD Plan (as detailed in the Report), with the following modifications necessary to reflect the relocation of the access point for the Project: A. ULUR § 4-201(B)(3): Demonstrated Community Need. The proposed rezoning addresses a demonstrated community need with respect to facilities, services or housing. The Report states that Carbondale Investments will install a traffic signal at the intersection of CR 113 and SH 82. Because the Amendment relocates access to the north at the new Terrace Parkway, a T - intersection and traffic signal (when warranted) will now be installed there, where it will provide the benefits contemplated by the Report. See, Report, p. 7. The old access location will also have a T -intersection and traffic signal (when warranted), mirroring the new access. The new design reflects an overall improvement to the operations and safety for the traveling public on SH82 with the consolidation of four existing accesses into one new access. The new access location also provides a better location and safer crossing of the RFTA corridor. The Amendment maintains nearly the same maximum density, with a slight reduction from 366 to 362 residential units. Therefore, the Amendment also continues to fulfill a community need by providing a diverse mix of housing types, including a significant amount of affordable housing. Report, p. 6. Further, as summarized above, the Project experiences a slight increase in open space and total park acreage, which will be available to residents in the Project regardless of housing type. Therefore, as described in more detail in the Report, the Amendment satisfies the standards for approval in § 4-201(6)(3). B. ULUR § 6-202(D): Street Circulation System. The PUD shall provide an adequate internal street circulation system designed for the type of traffic generated, safety, separation from living areas, convenience and access. Private internal streets may be permitted, provided that access for police and fire protection is maintained. Bicycle traffic shall be provided for when the site is used for residential purposes. The Amendment provides adequate internal street circulation, access for police and fire protection, and for bicycle traffic, as detailed in the Report and the supporting materials in this application. Report, pp. 13-14. The Amendment still has two emergency -only accesses, as requested by the Carbondale and Rural Fire Protection District; one remains in the location provided for in the PUD Plan on the south end of the Property and the other has been relocated to connect to the local street system to the north of the Property. These accesses are designed in compliance with RFTA's emergency vehicle access ("EVA") standards and will be gated and posted to prevent unauthorized users from accessing the EVAs. The only other change in the Amendment is that the relocated access does not have a roundabout like the old access location. The roundabout was not required by the ULUR, and the new design continues to accommodate capacity exceeding 20,000 vehicle trips per day in satisfaction of the ULUR's requirements. Therefore, the Amendment satisfies the standards for approval in § 6-202(D). 013738\0001\11610902.1 Tamra Allen, Planning Manager January 30, 2015 Page 5 IV. Conclusion As evidenced by this letter and the voluminous materials attached hereto, the Amendment meets or exceeds all of the criteria for approval set forth in the ULUR. Accordingly, Carbondale Investments respectfully requests that County staff, the County Planning Commission, and the Board approve the Amendment. If you have any questions or require additional information, please do not hesitate to contact me at the number above. Sincerely, Carolynne C. White Enclosures: Justification Report, dated January 18, 2011 013738\0001\11610902.4 013738\0001\11610902.1