Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2.0 BOCC Staff Report 10.14.1996• • BOCC 10/14/96 PROJECT INFORMATION AND STAFF COMMENTS REQUEST: An exemption from the definition of subdivison. APPLICANT: Cary Weldon LOCATION: A tract of land located in Section 25, T7S, R95W of the 6th P.M.; approximately five (5) miles southeast of Battlement Mesa along County Road 338. SITE DATA: 40 Acres WATER: Shared well SEWER: Individual sewage disposal system (ISDS) ACCESS: Direct access from County Road 338 EXISTING ZONING: A/R/RD ADJACENT ZONING: North: O/S South, East, West: A/R/RD I. RELATIONSHIP TO THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN The subject tract is located in District E - Rural Areas/Severe-Moderate Environmental Constraints, as designated by the Garfield County Comprehensive Plan's Management District Map (1981; 1984). II. DESCRIPTION OF THE PROPOSAL A. Site Description: This 40 acre tract is located five (5) miles southeast of Battlement Mesa, near the terminus of County Road 338, in a remote portion of Garfield County, at an approximate elevation of 8000 feet. The tract slopes generally from east to west, toward Battlement Creek, at an average slope of 24%. Vegetation consists of aspen, pine and deciduous shrubs and there is an existing, single -wide mobile home located on the eastern side of CR 338. See vicinity map, page 7 B. Adjacent Land Uses: The primary land use in the area of this proposal is agricultural, with secondary, recreational land uses. There are a few single family dwellings in the vicinity. Proposal: The applicant proposes to divide, by exemption, the 40 acre tract into two (2) parcels of approximately 14.33 and 25.69 acres each, with the County Road forming the common demarcation line between the proposed parcels. The larger tract would contain the existing dwelling and the other improvements and staff contemplates the smaller parcel would be developed as a single family homesite. See sketch map, page c III. MAJOR ISSUES AND CONCERNS A. Subdivision Regulations: Section 8:52 (A) of the Garfield County Subdivision Regulations states 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), preventing joint use of the proposed tracts, and the division occurs along the public right-of-way, such parcels thereby created may, in the discretion of the Board, not he considered to have been created by exemption with regard to the four (t) lot, parcel, interest or dwelling unit limitation otherwise applicable:" The applicant obtained title to the tract in 1976 and it would appear that the subject, 40 acre tract was originally part of a larger tract. See deeds, pages 9 -72- . Therefore, the applicant is seeking an exemption based on the county road right-of- way creating an impediment to joint use of the tract. In August, 1993, the applicant granted a 60 foot wide access easement to the Forest Service, whit appears to allow unlimited public access. See narrative and easement, pages ) 3 - /� . Given the remote location of the tract, the joint use argument may be dubious as daily road traffic would be minimal. If the Board determines that the County Road is a sufficient impediment to joint use, then this request would comply with Section 8:52 (A) of the Subdivision Regulations. B. Zoning: The tract is located within the A/R/RD zone district and both proposed lots are in excess of the two (2.0) acre minimum lot size requirement. Staff has calculated average slope of the tract to be approximately 24%, with some steeper slopes located on the tract. It does appear that there is sufficient developable area on both proposed parcels to meet the requirements of Section 5.04.02 (2) of the Zoning Resolution. C. Water Supply: The applicant is proposing to share an existing spring among the two (2) proposed parcels. An application for a variance to allow an unconventional well has been made to the Division of Water Resources, which requests permitting as an • • exempt, domestic well, allowing a legal water supply for up to three (3) single family residences. See narrative and application, pages /1- 2.0 . No spring flow information has been submitted attesting to the physical amount of water that actually emanates from the spring; therefore, it is difficult to determine the adequacy of the water supply for the proposed uses. At this time, the Division of Water Resources has not issued a well permit, so a legal water supply has not been demonstrated. Furthermore, the deed on page /0 reserves to the grantor "the Austral Spring and all water rights adjudicated thereto ..." If the Austral Spring is the subject of the well permit application, this provision casts further doubt on the legality of using this spring for the intended uses. Staff has attempted to clarify the status of the Austral Spring; however, no conclusive information has been discovered. For these reasons, staff suggests this petition be continued to allow the applicant sufficient time to address these concerns. D. Soils/Sewer: The proposed method of waste water treatment is the use of individual sewage disposal systems (ISDS). According to the Soil Conservation Service, soils on-site fall within two classifications, the Bucklon-Inchau loam and the Cochetopa loam. When used for building site development, both soils are considered to have severe constraints due to depth to bedrock and slope and when used for placement of ISD systems, both soils are considered to have severe constraints due to slow percolation and slope. Staff recommends a plat note to address these limitations. E. Access: Both proposed lots would be accessed from CR 338 (Battlement Creek Road) and both lots would have adequate frontage along the road. Staffs chief concern regarding access is with the road itself, essentially, that the area is very remote and any additional development in the general area will further impact the provision of services and infrastructure. F. Fire Protection: The Grand Valley Fire Protection District has given its approval of the petition for exemption and requests that before building occurs on the property, the fire department be contacted to review the plans and to assist in planning for fire protection, road design and water sources. See letter, page 2 i . Staff suggests these provisions be made conditions of approval and further recommends the inclusion of the standard plat note addressing wildfire mitigation. G. Easements: All required easements for access, utilities, water supply, etc.,will be required to be shown on an exemption plat. H. School Impact Fees: The applicant will be required to pay the $200 school impact fee for the creation of the exemption parcel. Potential Road Impact Fees: Upon adoption of a road impact fee, the lot created by this exemption will be subject to paying that fee; paid at time of building permit application, paid by the building permit applicant. This provision shall be included as a plat note. 3 J. Unnatural Hazards: The subject tract is the location of an experiment designed to liberate oil from the shale that contained it, known as the "Rulison Blast Site." A nuclear charge of unknown strength was detonated, at considerable depth, with the hypothesis being the heat of the nuclear reaction would vaporize the hydrocarbons, freeing them from the shale, which would later condense in recoverable deposits. Apparently, the experiment failed; however, it is likely that for many years there may be a hazard associated with the radiation that was released. For this reason, staff strongly suggests that the proposed water supply be tested for alpha and beta radiation, with an opinion given that this water would be safe for human consumption. The Department of Energy has groundwater monitoring wells in the area; however, staff does not know the nature of these wells, nor the information they may provide. IV. SUGGESTED FINDINGS 1. That proper posting and public notice was provided as required for the meeting before the Board of County Commissioners. 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 in the best interest of the health, safety, morals, convenience, order, prosperity and welfare of the citizens of Garfield County. V. RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends this petition be continued to allow the applicant time to demonstrate an adequate legal, physical and safe water supply. If the Board determines all concerns have been addressed and finds that County Road 338 creates an impediment to joint use of the tract, then staff recommends APPROVAL of the application, pursuant to the following conditions: 1. That all representations of the applicant, either within the application or stated at the meeting before the Board of County Commissioners, shall be considered conditions of approval. 2. A Final Exemption Plat shall be submitted, indicating the legal description of the property, dimension and area of the proposed lots, access to a public right-of-way, and any proposed easements for setbacks, drainage, irrigation, access or utilities. 3 That the applicant shall have 120 days to present a plat to the Commissioners for signature, from the date of approval of the exemption. The Board may grant extensions of up to one (1) year from the original date of approval. 4. That the applicant shall submit $200.00 in School Impact Fees, for the creation of the exemption parcel, prior to authorization of an exemption plat. 5. That the following plat notes be included: "The minimum defensible space distance shall be 30 feet on level terrain, plus appropriate modification to recognize the increased rate of fire spread at sloped sites. The methodology described in "Determining Safety Zone Dimensions, Wildfire Safety Guidelines for Rural Homeowners," (Colorado State Forest Service) shall be used to determine defensible space requirements for the required defensible space within building envelopes in areas exceeding five (5) percent grade." "Upon adoption of road impact fees by the Board of County Commissioners, the lots created by this exemption shall be subject to paying the fees, paid at time of building permit application, paid by the building permit applicant." "Soil conditions on the site may require engineered septic systems and building foundations. Site specific percolation tests at the time of building permit submittal shall determine specific ISDS needs on the site." "The individual lot owners shall be responsible for the control of noxious weeds." "' %NE `pe, mom,', r» i Grp owrf F a 1,tNPg-- "1 d Lb -r 4►-) S•t.�c-v ra c�7 0� NC -r- is / -- , t p alai eit 7. That the recording fees for the exempt t and all associated docurris be paid to the County Clerk and Recorder prior to the signing of an Exemption Plat by the Board of County Commissioners and a copy of the receipt be provided to the Planning Department. That the exemption plat submittal include a copy of a computer disk of the plat data, formatted for use on the County Assessor's CAD system. That all proposed lots shall comply with the Garfield County Zoning Resolution of 1978, as amended and any building shall comply with the 1994 Uniform Building Code, as adopted. 10. The applicant shall consult with Road and Bridge and receive any required driveway permits, prior to final approval. 11. The applicant shall adhere to all provisions of the letter submitted by the Grand Valley Fire Protection District, dated August 21, 1996. 12. That the following provisions be included in the protective covenants governing the exemption parcels: One (1) dog will be allowed for each residential unit within an exemption and the dog shall be required to be confined within the owner's property boundaries, with 5 • • enforcement provisions allowing for the removal of a dog from the area as a final remedy in worst cases. No open hearth solid -fuel fireplaces will be allowed anywhere within an exemption. One (1) new solid -fuel burning stove as defined by C.R.S. 25-7-401, et. seq., and the regulations promulgated thereunder, will be allowed in any dwelling unit. All dwelling units will be allowed an unrestricted number of natural gas burning stoves and appliances. All exterior lighting shall be the minimum amount necessary and that all exterior lighting be directed inward, towards the interior of the subdivision, except that provisions may be made to allow for safety lighting that goes beyond the property boundaries. pwo ifT 0141'Y