Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout3.0 Resolution 80-153TATE OF COLORADO County of Garfield Ata regular • meeting of the Board of County Commissioners for G4£iel%County, Colorado, held at the Court House in Glenwood Springs on Monday the isday of July A. D. 19 80 , there were present: R i.d a r..d...G.,....0 011 u , Commissioner Chairman Flaven Cerise , Commissioner Larry Velasquez , Commissioner Arthur A. Abplanalp, Jr. , County Attorney Nancy Sprick Page, Deputy , Clerk of the Board when the following proceedings, among others were had and done, to -wit: RESOLUTION NO. 8o-153 RESOLUTION CONCERNED WITH THE DENIAL OF SUBDIVISION EXEMPTION REQUEST BY BRUCE KISTLER III, SCOTT WRITER, AND EMILIE KISTLER. WHEREAS, the Board of County Commissioners of Garfield County has received an application from Bruce Kistler III, an application from Scott Writer, and an application from Emilie Kistler, for subdivision exemptions relating to tracts of land in SE/4NW/4 of Section 23, Township 7 South, Range 88 West of the Sixth Principal Meridian; and WHEREAS, the Board of County Commissioners has carefully considered the said applications together with the recommendation of the Garfield County Planning Di- rector, and has further viewed the site of the proposed exemption and has considered the cirsumstances surrounding the said subdivision exemption request and the subject property; and WHEREAS, the Board of County Commissioners has made the following determina- tions of fact: 1. That the public highway most nearly serving the subject property, Garfield County Road 112, is incapable of safely carrying additional traffic which would be generated by the granting of the requested subdivision exemptions; 2. That Roaring Fork School District RE -1 has indicated its unwillingness to serve the proposed tracts, or the access points from the tracts to Garfield County Road 112, with public school bus service, and that in the absence of such service the creation of additional tracts in the area poses a threat to the public safety and health of both children inhabiting the proposed divided sites and the safety of other travelers on the subject roadways; 3. That the pressure on the County Road 112 in its present condition generated by additional building sites which would pose a threat to the safety of travelers on said County Road 112 may not, within County funding constraints, be alleviated in a manner which would lessen the aforementioned hazard and permit the said roadway to bear the additional traffic generated by divisions such as that presently before the Board; 4. The applicants, individually and jointly, have effectively attempted the subdivision of the subject property through joint and repeated applications for sub- division exemptions from this Board of County Commissioners, which requests threaten -to create a subdivision of the subject property with neither public services or safeguards whose provision is the purpose of the Garfield County Subdivision Regu- lations and Colorado law relating to zoning and subdivision control; 5. That the method of disposition adopted by the applicants in this and pre- vious „subdivision exemptions has been adopted for the purposes of evading the Garfield County Subdivision Regulations and Colorado law relating to subdivision process, due to the fact that the proposed divisions are the part of a larger development plan; 6. That one of the grounds for the proposed division is the increase valua- tion of the subject property by approximately five times, which increase in valuation this Board has determined to be irrelevant to the question of subdivision of land, in that the increased valuation should have reasonably been foreseen by the present owners of the property when purchased and converted from agricultural use; 7. That the argument of the applicants that the division of land would create additional tax revenues for the County is without basis, due to the increased pres- sures which would be created for public service as a result of additional population inhabiting the area were the subdivision exemption request approved, which population would demand additional public services in excess of the tax revenues generated by the additional properties; 8. That the applicants' argument that they are entitled to the most intensive use permitted by the zoning resolution is without foundation due to the fact that this Board is required to examine any proposed division of land against the require- ments established by statutes relating to the subdivision of land and the Garfield County Subdivision Regulations; 9. That the proposed division of land falls within the purposes of the Garfield County Subdivision Regulat:ionsand the statutes of the State of Colorado relating to the subdivision of land within this State; 10. That the proposed division of the subject property, because of steep topo- graphy and potential natural hazards, features, and conditions associated with the subject property, makes the division likely to be harmful to the health, safety, and welfare of the future residents of the proposed divided lands; 11. That the growth pattern characterized by the proposed division of land is of such form and physical shape that governmental inefficiencies and unnecessary public costs and financial burdens will inevitably result from the natural require- ment that the County provide extensions of public services and public support faci- lities to the divided land„ which services and facilities extensions cannot be accom- plished in a planned, ordered, or effective manner; E! 12. That the subject lands are not suitable for subdivision under criteria established by the Garfield County Subdivision Regulations for each and all of the following reasons: a) That the proposed division of land will not be adequately served by existing streets and roads and presents significant problems related to the intensive use of land and the provision of utilities and services; b) That the proposed division of land is part of an existing and potential larger land development project. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Board of County Commissioners of the County of Garfield,•State of Colorado: That the request for exemption from the Garfield County Subdivision Regulations and the subdivision laws of the State of Colorado by Bruce Kistler III, Scott Writer, and Emilie Kistler be and hereby are denied. AZ^r ST : duty 'erk 6f the Boar BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS GARFIELD COUNTY, COLORADO Upon motion duly made and seconded the foregoing Resolution was adopted by the following vote: Richard C. Jolley Aye ' _�_ �._.._.laven Cerise Aye r. tarry Velasquez Aye Commissioners STATE OF COLORADO Its County of Garfield I, , County ,Clerk and ex -officio Clerk of the Board of County Commissioners in and for the County and State aforesaid do hereby certify that the annexed and foregoing Order is truly copied from the Records of the Proceedings of the Board of County Commissioned for said Garfield County, now in my office. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and affixed the seal of said County, at Glenwood Springs, this day of , A. D. 19 County Clerk and ex -officio Clerk of the Board of County Commissioners.