HomeMy WebLinkAbout2.0 Staff Report PC 07.11.07Exhibits for Public
E:rhibitLsttcr
(Ato Z,
Exhibit
A Mail Receipts
B Proof of Fublication
C Garfield County ZofugResolution of 1978, as amended
D Garfield County Subdivision Regulations of 1984, as amended
E Garfield County Comprehensive Plan of 2000
F Stafflteport
G Application for heliminary Plan
H Memo from Garfield County Road and Bridee Departm€nt, dated lvlay 30-, 2007
I l-s[tgr Carbondale Fire Protection Dis;trict, dated Julv 3'",2007
PC 0711112007 cR
TCI Lane Ranch
Comprehensive Plan Amendment
Sketch Plan APPlication
APPLICANT / OWNER
REPRESENTIATIVE
LOCATION
SITE DATA
Extsnruc zotttttc
ApJACENT ZOlllNG
STAFF RECOMMENDATION
TCI Lane Ranch, LLC
Jon Fredricks, Louis Wilsher
Noble Design Studio
South of the Town of Carbondale, CO
State Highway 82
100.52 acres
Agricultural / Residential / Rural Density
Agricultural / Residential / Rural Density, PUD,
Comprehensive Plan Amendment - Approval
Sketch Plan Application - Recommendations
PC 0711112007 cR
I REQUEST
The Applicant is seeking approvalfrom the Planning Commission for land use approvals
to develop a property into a residential development. The property is located on Highway
82 south of the Town of Carbondale, CO. The subject property is approximately 100.52
acres. The submitted Sketch Plan proposes 80 lots to include single family, multi-family
(Duplex) and Nursery/Residentia! uses.
Currently, the subject property is situated in Study Area 1 of the Garfield County
Comprehensive Plan of 2000 and is identified as Residential Low Density (10+ acres per
dwelling unit). The Applicant is requesting that the Planning Commission the Proposed
Land Use Map in the Comprehensive Plan changing the property's designation to
Residential High Density (<2 acres per dwelling unit).
r AMENDEMENT TO THE GARFTELp COUNTY COMPREHENSIYE PLAN OF 2000
Current Desionation - Residential Low Density (10+ acres per dwelling unit)
Requested Desionation - Residential High Density (<2 acres per dwelling unit)
III REFERRALS
Town of Carbondale: No Comments
Carbondale Fire Protection District: Exhibit
Garfield County Road and Bridge: Exhibit
RELATIONSHIP TO THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN
The ultimate goa! of the Applicant is to submit a PUD for approval. As identified in the
Gartield County Zoning Resolution of 1978, as amended a PUD must generally conform
to the Comprehensive Plan. The proposed Sketch Plan demonstrates general conformity
with most of the applicable policies identified in the Comprehensive PIan.
Protecting Visual Corridors - The proposed design includes preseruation of
cultural resources and open space protecting the identified visual corridor of
Highway 82. Ranching activities will be continued adjacent to Highway 82.
Creative Cluster Type Design - The development as represented clusters
residential development preserving opens space and riparian vegetation.
Affordable Housing - The Applicant has proposed to provide sixteen (16) deed
restricted atfordable housing units integrated throughout the development. (The
Applicant is only required to provide nine (9) deed restricted units).
Open Space - The plan includes multiple open space areas through out the
development. (61%)
o Public Transportation - The proposed development is located near a RAFTA
park and ride facility.
Public Park for River Access - Preserued open space located adjacent to the
Roaring Fork River will be open to the public. Limited public parking will be
provided.
Bike and Pedestrian Trail - The Applicant is collaborating with the Roaring Fork
Conseruancy to potentially establish a conservation easement connecting existing
trail systems.
PC 0711112007 CR
The proposed development is responsive to the Gartield County Maps that delineate
potential hazard areas or constraints on the property. No slope hazards are identified on
the subject property. The subject property is not adjacent to a Gounty Road. ldentified
constraints include septic constraints (high water table), 100 year-floodplain and sensitive
riparian areas along the Roaring Fork River. Mitigation for the identified constraints is
identified in the application:
Septic Constraints
lndividual sewage disposal systems will not be utilized within the proposed development.
The Applicant has proposed two (2) possibilities to mitigate the identified septic
constraints.o Construction of a private community wastewater treatment system;
. Connecting to the Mid Valley Metro District;
Floodplain
Residential development will not encroach the identified 1OO-year floodplain. lf approved
by an Administrative Floodplain permit limited development including nature trail and a
pedestrian br.idge over the Roaring Fork will occur within the flood fringe. No
development will occur within the floodway. The Applicant is requesting that the
Floodplain Constraint be amended from "Majo/'to "Mino/'.
The Comprehensive Plan Proposed Land Use Designation Map identifies the subject
property as Low Density residential. The App![cant's request proposes to amend the map
for the subject property to High Density Residentia!. TCI Lane Ranch will have a density
ol 1.2 acres per dwelling unit. Surrounding developments have similar density.
o Blue Creek PUD - 1.6 acres per dwelling unit. Aspen Equestrian Estates - 1.2 acres per dwelling unit
M
M
Minor
Minor
/ Can be mit
/ Can be mi
Compatible w/ other
Subdivisions
Can be accommodated
3 miles from Carbondale
and 2 miles El Jebel / Near
Commercial Uses
(Gartied County Comprehensive Plan of 2000)
Catherine Store
PC 0711112007 cR
The Comprehensive Plan states that floodplain and septic constraints are to be evaluated
at plan review. Should the Planning Commission approve the requested Comprehensive
Plan amendment, all future development will be required to demonstrate the ability to
appropriately mitigate the identified constraints at the time of project review.
Section lV, Table 30 contains a methodology matrix demonstrating how densities were
assigned in Study Area l. The matrix analyzes the carrying capacity of a property in
term-s of 1) environmental constraints (steep slopes, challenging soils, etc.) and 2)
development constraints (roads adequate to handle traffic and water and sewer
availability, etc.). Designations within the Comprehensive Plan were completed by an
overall analysis and did not result from individua! property analysis. Mitigation of the
identified constraints was not contemplated in the exercise. The Applicant suggests that
the constraints can be mitigated. Blue Creek Ranch located adjacent to the subject
property is identified in Proposed Land Use Map as High Density Residential.
Statf finds that subject property can conform to the methodology used to determine land
use designations within Study Area 1. Although currently designated Low Density, the
subject property is consistent with the methodology used by Garfield County to determine
land use designations.
V SKETCH PLAN
fne npplicant has chosen to develop the property utilizing a cluster design. The proposa!
includes five neighborhoods or nodes and one Nursery Commercial lot each separated by
preserued open space. Zoning will be addressed within the Planned Unit Development
stage.
Domestic & lrriqation Water
The exact source of water has not yet been determined. The subject property currently
has four existing wells on-site. lf the Applicant has legal right to an adequate amount of
water, a central water system may be utilized to serue the proposed development, ln a
letter Lee E. Leavenworth, Representative for Mid Valley Metropolitan District, date
February 14th,2OO7 it is stated that the District has the capacity to provide water and
sewer treatment for ninety (90) dwelling units subject to conditions (Exhibit F, Application
Binder). The Applicant should review the following requirements found in $4:91 of the
Subdivision regulations regarding water supply plans:
Section 4:91 of the Subdivision Regulations requires that a water supply plan, at
the same scale as the Preliminary Plan, shallprovide the following information in
graphic and/or written form:
A. tn alt instances, evidence that a water suppty, sufficient in terms of quality,
quanty and dependability, shall be available to ensure an adequate supply of
water for the proposed subdivision. Such evidence may include, but shall not be
limited to:
PC 0711112007 cR
l. Evidence of ownership or right of acquisition or sue of existing and proposed
water rights;
2. Historic use and estimated yield of claimed water rights;
3. Amenability of existing right to change in use;
r b the4. Evidence that pubtic or private water owners can and willsupply watet
proposed subdivision, including the amount of water available for use within the'subdivision
by such providers, the feasibility of ertending seruice to the area, proof
of the tegal dependability of the proposed water supply and the representation that
alt neceisary water rights have been obtained or will be obtained or adiudicated,
prior to submission of the final plat; and
5. Evidence concerning the potabitity of the proposed water supply for the
subdivision.
B. tf a central suppty and distribution system is to be provided, a general
description of the system, as designed by a Colorado registered engineer. ln
addition:
1. Nature of the legat enttg which will own and operate the water system; and
2. Proposed method of financing the water system.
C. tf connection is to be made to an existing water system, a letter from an
authorized representative of said system staging tnit the proposed development
witt be serued, and evidence from either the Colorado State Engineer's Office or
Water Court, Water Division No. 5, that the existing water system presently
possesses adequate legal water supply to serue the proposed development;
D. tf individualwater systems shatt be provided by lot owners, a repoft indicating
the avaitability of ample potabte ground water at reasonable depths throughout the
subdivisiol dtnd the expected quatity and long-term yield of such wells, with the
written report by a registered professional engineer licensed by the State of
Colorado, qualified to pertorm such work; and
E. lf appticable, a Ptan of Augmentation and a plan for subdivision water supplies,
as required by law, with the supporting engineering work signed by a Colorado
registered engineer, shatt be submitted by the applicant, even if the applicant is not
the actual supplier of water.
Section 9:51 requires an adequate potable and irrigation water supply shall be
avaitabte to att tots within a subdivision, taking into consideration peak demands to
seruice total development population, irrigation uses, and adequate fire protection
requirements in accordance with recognized and customary engineering
standards
-5-
PC 0711112007 CR
9:52 lndividualwells may be used as the water supply, provided the applicant has
submitted the required documentation to the appropriate water court, and the
Colorado Division of Water Resources will approve well drilling permits for all lots
within the development.
9:53 Central water systems shall be designed by an engineer quatified to design
water systems and be a registered professional engineer licensed by the State of
Colorado. Centralwater and treatment and storage facilities shall be approved by
the Colorado Depaftment of Health. All lines in a centralwater system should be
looped, with no dead ends included in the system. Where dead ends are proposed
for cul-de-sacs, there will either be a fire hydrant or blow-off valve at the end of the
line.
9:54 Water supply stems, on-lot or otherwise located in a floodplain, shall be
designed to minimize or eliminate infiltration and avoid impairment during or
subsequent to flooding.
9:55 Allwater mains shall be a minimum diameter of four inches (4"), provided
storage facilities adequate for fire protection are available.
Waste Disposal
As stated earlier in this memorandum the property is subject to identified septic
constraints. The Applicant has proposed two methods for wastewater disposal.
Wastewater will managed by Mid Valley Metropolitan District;
The Applicant will construct a centralized on-site treatment facility;
Road / Access
The design proposes three access points. The primary access to residential development
will be from Old Highway 82 (82), west of the existing entrance. A second access point is
proposed from 82 providing access to the planned nursery lot. A third possible access
point may be provided internally connecting Blue Creek Ranch and the proposed
subdivision. This access is proposed to be gated and utilized during emergencies. This
access point will be addressed at Preliminary Plan. The Applicant will be responsible for
any improvements deemed necessary to accommodate the proposed development. A
Colorado Department of Transportation Access Permit may be required.
An internal road system will be constructed by the Applicant. The designs shall comply
with the standards identified in $9:00 (Design and lmprovement Standards) unless
approved by the Board of County Commissioners as part of a separate application.
1)
2)
PC 0711112007 cR
Fire Protection Plan
At the time of Preliminary Plan the Applicant shall provide a fire protection plan that
addresses the fire protection standards in $9:70 of the Subdivision Regulations.
9:71 Subdivision fire protection plans shall be reviewed by the appropriate fire
protection district to ensure that all lots have primary and secondary access points
to escape fire entrapment.
9:72 Where a centralwater system has fire hydrants, allfire hydrants shall meet
the specifications for the appropriate fire protection agency, particularly with regard
to thread size on the fire hydrants.
9:73 Where there is no central water system available, a central located fire
protection storage tank shall be designed to meet the fire protection needs of the
subdivision and be approved by the appropriate fire district.
9:74 Water used for fire protection purposes does not have to be potable water
and may be from a source separate from the domestic supply.
ADT. !90
S*rfl ijr ry Ar:,ress B*si0fi St*ndl rd Applis s
PC 0711112007 CR
Drainaqe / Floodplain lssues
The southern poftion of the subject property is located within an identified 1O0-year
floodplain. The Applicant has not proposed any residential construction within the
floodplain. All requirements identified below must be met at the time of Preliminary Plan.
4:80 ST JPPLEMENTAL TNFORMATTON: DRATNAGE PLAN
A drainage plan, at the same scale as the Preliminary Plan and prepared by an engineer
registered in the Sfafe of Colorado, shall depict the following information in graphic and/or
written form:
A. Existing water courses and takes;
B. Limits of tributary areas, where practical;
C. Computations of expected tributary flows; and
D. Design of drainage facilities to prevent storm waters in excess of historic run-off from
entering, damaging or being carried by existing drainage facilrties, and to prevent major
damage or flooding of residences in a one hundred (100) year storm, showing:
1. Area subject to inundation; and
2. Location and size of propo,sed culvefts, bridges, ditches and channels.
9:41 Drainage easements, channels, culverts and required bridges shall be designed by
an engineer registered in the State of Colorado.
9:42 Alt drainage facitities shatt be designed based on a twenty-five (25) year frequency
storm.
9:43 Where new developments create run-off in excess of historic site levels, the use of
detention ditches and ponds may be required to retain up to a one hundred (100) year
storm.
9:44 Att culverts shatt be designed such that the exposed ends are protected by
encasement in concrete or extended a minimum of three feet (3') beyond the driving
surtace on each side. Culverts, drainage pipes and bridges shall be designed and
constructed in accordance with AASHO recommendations for an H-20 live load.
Wildlife
No information was provided regarding this issue. The Applicant shall be required to
address $4:70 at Preliminary Plan.
$4:70(D) Wildlife - Description of wildtife habitation, including big game ranges based on
the mapping practices of the Colorado Division of Wildlife.
-8-
PC 0711112007 cR
Veqetation
The Applicant will be required to provide a vegetation management plan at the time of
Preliminary Plan. The vegetation management plan shall address the following:
Vegetation lnventory
Weed management
Topsoil disturbance
(g4:70 (C) Vegetation - Map and description of plant associations following practices
of the Soil Conseruation Seruice and including a description of adapted materials and
the location of major tree masses.)
Recommended Plat Notes/Covenants
The County requires the Applicant that the following plat notes be included on the final
plat and in Declaration of Covenants:
"Colorado is a "Right-to-Farm" State pursuant to C.R.S. 35-3-101, et seq.
Landowners, residents and visitors must be prepared to accept the activities,
sights, sounds and smells of Garfield County's agricultural operations as a normal
and necessary aspect of living in a County with a strong rura! character and a
healthy ranching sector. All must be prepared to encounter noises, odor, lights,
mud, dust, smoke chemicals, machinery on public roads, Iivestock on public roads,
storage and disposal of manure, and the application by spraying or otherwise of
chemicalfeftilizers, soil amendments, herbicides, and pesticides, any one or more
of which may naturally occur as a part of a legal and non-negligent agricultural
operations."
"No open hearth solid-fuelfireplaces will be allowed anywhere within the
subdivision. One (1) new solid-fuel burning stove as defied by C.R.S. 25-7-401, el.
sew., and the regulations promulgated thereunder, will be allowed in any dwelling
unit. All dwelling units will be allowed an unrestricted number of natural gas
buming stoves and appliances."
"All owners of land, whether ranch or residence, have obligations under State law
and County regulations with regard to the maintenance of fences and irrigation
ditches, controlling weeds, keeping livestock and pets under control, using property
in accordance with zoning, and other aspects of using and maintaining property.
Residents and landowners are encouraged to learn about these rights and
responsibilities and act as good neighbors and citizens of the County. A good
introductory source for such information is "A Guide to Rural Living & Small Scale
Agriculture" put out by the Colorado State University Extension Office in Garfield
County."
1.
2.
3.
-9-
PC 0711112007 CR
4. "All exterior lighting will be the minimum amount necessary and all exterior lighting
will be directed inward and downward towards the interior of the subdivision,
except that provisions may be made to allow for safety lighting that goes beyond
the property boundaries."
5. "One (1) dog will be allowed for each residential unit and the dog shall be required
to be confined within the owner's property boundaries."
SKETCH PLAN COMMENTS AND PRELIMINARY PLAN REVIEW
The Sketch Plan comments shall be valid for a period not to exceed one (1) year from
the date of the Planning Contmission review. lf a Preliminary Plan for the proposed
subdivision in not presented to the Garfield County Planning Commission by that date,
the Applicant wil! have to resubmit the proposed Sketch Plan.
VII SUGESTED FINDING
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
and that all interested parties were heard at that meeting;
3.) The Application is in conformance with Garfield County Zoning Resolution of
1978, as amended and Comprehensive Plan of 2000;
4.) That for the above stated and other reason, the proposed Zone District
Amendment is in the best interest of the health, safety and welfare of the citizens
of Garfield County;
YIII STAFF RECOMMENDATTON
Statf recommends the Planning Commission approve the proposed amendment to
the Gadield Gounty Comprehensive Plan of 2000 changing the designation of the
subfect property on the Proposed Land Use Districts, Study Area I Map from Low
Density Residentialto High Density Residential. As stated in this memorandum the
proposed density can be accommodated through mitigation.
- 10-
GARFIELD COT]NTY
Building & Planning Department
ReviewAgency Fomn
Date Sent May 30,2007
Comments Duo: June 2512007
Name of application: TCI Lane Ranch
Sent to:
Garfield County requests your comme,nt in review of this project. Please noti$ the
Planning Deparhrent in the event you are unable to respond by the deadline. This form
may be used for yourresponse, oryou may attach your own additional sheets as
necessary. Written comments may be maild, e-maile4 or faned to:
Garfield Couuf Building & Planning
Staff contact: Craig Richardson
109 8e Street, Suite 301
Glenwood Springs, CO 81601
Fa:r:970-3W3470
Phone: 970-945-8212
General Comments: Qaffield County Road & Bridge Deoarfinent has no comments or-r
this applioatio,n as the enfiance to the proposed p{oject is onto a CDOT confio4qd access
and does not have any direct effect on our, Countv r-oad svstem.
Name of review agency: Garfield County Road.Bnd Bridge,Dept
By: Jake B. M+ll ,, , , Date Jr&Cl--2@Z
ReYised 3/30/00
FIRE. EMS. RESCUE
Iuly 3,2007
Craig Richardson
Garfield County Building & Planning
108 8th Steet, Suite 201
Glenwood Springs, CO 81601
RE: TCI Lene Ranch, Skctch Plen
Dear Craig:
I have reviewed the sketch plan application for the proposed TCI Lane Ranch Subdivision. The
application was reviewd for compliance with the Intemational Fire Code (IFC) 2003 edition"
adopted by the County. I would offer the following comments.
Acccsr
The proposed access tbnoughout the zuMivision generally appears to be adequate for emergency
apparatus.
lYeter Suoolios for Fine Protection
No specific water system has been proposed. Waier supplies for fire protection shall be in
. accordance with IFC Appendix B. Locarion and spacing of fire hydrants shall be in accordance
with IFC Appendix C.
Imnact Fecs#
The development is subject to development impact fees adopted by the District. The developet
will be required to enter into an agieernent with the District for the payment of development
impact fees. Execution of the agrcement and palment of the fees are due prior to the recording
of the final plat. Fees are based upon the impact fees adopted by the District at the time the
agreement is executed. The current fee for residential development is $437.00 per uoit.
Please contact me if you have any questions or if I can be of any assistance.
Sincerely,
Bill Gavette
Depu8 Chief
Carbondah & Rural Fire Prctectlon District
300 Meadowood Drive o Carbondale, CO 81623 o970-963-249lFax 97G'963-0569
HTluiL editor
Garfield Planning and Zoning Board
July 11,2007
I want to thank you for the opportunity to speak this evening.
I too believe that the TCI Lane PUD application has many merits and is far above many
of those that come before the board. But if it is to rise to the level of Superior and match
Blue Creek Ranch two major changes have to occur. The density needs to be reduced to
1.6 to match Blue Creek Ranch and the nursery needs to be eliminated.
These changes would make the two Subdivisions entirely compatib,)e.
I also think the 3 storage barns at Blue Creek Ranch are an inty{egral amenity which they would
have room for if the nursery were eliminated.
I ask you folks,"Why set the bar lower when you did such a fine job with Blue Creek Ranch?"
I also ask you, "Why set neighbor against neighbor with too great a density and the inclusion
of a commercial operation that is disruptive to all?
Please don't lower your standards but maintain them and where possible seek improvement.
Let's not go backwards in Garfield County.
Respectfully yours,
Paul Andersen
301 Ponderosa Pass
Carbondale, Colorado
Page 1 of 1
RECEIVED
JUL I 3 2007
s,fffi,lFlP",ff^liil
,, ]ol
I i ;l'r"
http ://mailc enter. comcast. net/wm/too lbar/notheme. htrnl 7/1212007
Garfield Planning Staff
Garfield County Commissioners
July 10,2007
Regarding TCI Lane's PUD application for a combination
residential development and nursery. As a homeowner in the
contiguous Blue Creek Ranch Subdivision I and my fellow
neighbors have no objection to the Residential part of the plan.
But we do object to the inclusion of a nursery operation
particularly since it is shoved right up against our homes.
Nursery's are noisy and dirty and generate an incredible
amount of truck and vehicle traffic. This is a real threat to our
quality of life in Blue Creek Ranch.
Let them build the houses but eliminate the nursery. Besides
the service road used by the nursery is not designed to
accommodate a commercial operation. This is particularly
true since it is a bicycle and pedestrian corridor.
Respectfully yours, i
Paul Andersen
301 Ponderosa Pass
Blue Creek Ranch
Carbondale, CO 86623
970-963-2282
\
(fl e^ouhe [' v-t '
Rgcf,rn/trtr}
JUL I 1 2r,O7
ffi*mn;G**i*J