HomeMy WebLinkAbout3.0 CorrespondenceEpr-14-99 05:1OP PRINCEEK
44 ark 9e411
'Q+' vre c 4o r
;c:.-1 ck vr5,/
De-ew-- Mr, B e vi
We c:tYe W+'��IXfaW►'yl(
F' 1 v vv1eo d v eq S�
ct g rrlor) 5:;
N�c i V CSr1 Gv1 L xc
(e6\se:.
c er-� /
970 4, 2140
P.01
c Uo,1 I y)/ orc)-xAvol
�
.sior) 4'otri
.
e c-\-- ; n
X1,7)- 1o17)
4 Y1c.VC� (`r0oV)
4-y1 6 (3 v)
1
11 W+r4-1, ye 1-(-171 S ,
c43— s „A?c,
70- 7 f`7/ce2- 141
0,1.0w oto r r c+ ;'� �✓ "� �/
• •
Karla Mobley
1274 County Road 237
Harvey Gap Road
Silt, Colorado 81652
Home Phone 970-876-2060
Email kmobley@oneimage.com
April 14, 1999
Garfield County Commissioners
Glenwood Springs, Colorado
Re: Amended and Corrected Plat Regulation
Peach Valley Orchard Subdivision Amended Final Plats
Gentlemen:
I am requesting that the Garfield County Commissioners review the Amended and
Corrected Plat Regulation Section 6:00 of the Subdivision Regulations of Garfield
County, Colorado (February 19, 1997 as amended).
This regulation was recently used to amend a portion of the Peach Valley Orchard
Subdivision and in the process created confusion among the adjoining landowners of
this property and other interested parties.
By definition (Section 2:20:02) an Amended Final Plat is "a recorded plat amended to
correct minor surveying, drafting errors and other minor changes, if the
amendment does not increase the number of approved lot(sic), represent a major
relocation of a previously platted rad(sic), or creates a new road". There appears to be
a discrepancy between the definition of an Amended Final Plat (Section 2:20:02) and
Section 6:10 wherein the guidelines are established in regards to amendments to a
recorded plat. Is the definition negated by the statement "An amendment may be made
to a recorded plat, if such amendment does not increase the number of subdivision lots
or dwelling units, result in the major relocation of a road or add new roads."?
do not feel the use of the Amended and Corrected Plats - Section 6:00 is appropriate
in regards to the Peach Valley Orchard Subdivision Plat and other properties like it for
the following reasons:
• It is not a minor surveying or drafting error or minor change (Section 2:20:02) when
14 ten acre lots are traded for 14 two to five acre lots even if the number of
subdivision lots or dwelling units is not increased.
• All county road easements within the Peach Valley Orchard Subdivision had been
vacated in 1957 therefore new roads were created.
I have been led to understand by Planning Staff that whether or not it is appropriate to
use this regulation, it is legal and as an adjoining landowner the only public notice I
would have received is the County Commissioner's Meeting Agenda as posted in the
Citizen Telegram or Valley Journal.
RECEIVED APR 1 5 1999
• •
Because there are no guidelines set within this regulation in regards to Public Notice or
notification of adjoining landowners (as are written within other sections of the
subdivision regulations) I was unaware of the action taking place until very late in the
process, I was ignorant of what had taken place in public proceedings and did not
understand what the landowner intended to do with the property.
I am not a proponent of "clustering" and as one of two landowners most affected by the
Peach Valley Orchard Amended Plats I do not feel comfortable with the impacts it will
have on my surroundings. Had I been aware of the proceedings I would have
requested that this subdivision be subjected to a full subdivision review and would
have had some proposals to offer in regards to road placement and visual buffering.
As stated earlier I am requesting that you review the Amended and Corrected Plats
subdivision regulation. Please determine what the definition of an Amended Plat is,
establish guidelines regarding the appropriate use of this regulation and require Public
Notice and notification of adjacent landowners when appropriate.
Thank You,
(cut_.�'
Karla K. Mobley
cc: Garfield County Planning Department