HomeMy WebLinkAbout2.0 PC Staff Report 11.14.1984PROJECT INFORMATION
REQUEST:
APPLICANT:
LOCATION:
SITE DATA:
WATER:
SEWER:
EXISTING ZONING:
ADJACENT ZONING:
I.RELATIONSHIP TO THE COMPREHENSIVE
PC LL/L4/84
AND STAFF COMMENTS
Special Use Permit for a resort.
Don Marsnal.L
A parcel of land located in
poitions of the SE L/4 Section 7
and SE L/4 SE L/4 Section L2, T5S,
R9OW, more practically described as
a parcel located 3 miles north of
New Castle off of CountY Road 24L'
A 2.0 acre Parcel to be utrllzed as
a recreation resort.
Indrvidual well
Indivrdual sewers
A/R/RD
A/R/RD
PLAN
t'tew Castle Urban Area of Influence.
II.DESCRIPTION OF THE PROPOSAL:
A. Site Descriptlon: The parcel is in the East EIK Creet< drainage
with East EIk Creek traversing the h,estern boundary of the
property. The property is welt vegetated with Iarge cottonwood
and willow trees along the creek wit,h an oPen meadow to tne east
of the creek. The terrain is varied with the majority of the
property sltting on a small bench above the creek witn a steep
embankment going uP to tne road.
B^ proiect Description: It ts proposed to place one lodge (owners
residencffiGG6Tns, two Laaitional cabins or dining f acirrty
on a 2.0 acre parcel of land. Each Of the cabins woulo oe one
bedroom caoins as would the todge. Four of the cabrns and lodge
would be on tne east side of the creeK, I"rth the dlni'ng facility
or two additional cabrns on the west side of the creek'
The nouse, cabins and clrning facrlrty would oe served oy a weII
approved in an augumentation plan (No.82CW52). The house, Cabins
and dining facilily would be served Dy indrvidual sewage disposal
systems. The drning facilrty coulct seat up to 30 people, based
on the augrnentation PIan -
History- Tne two (2) acre
ResoTution No . 84-206, in
(8) acre Parcel created at
parcel was created bY exemption bY
Septemoer of 1984. 'I'here was an eignt
the same time.
-4 -
IIT.IVIAJOR ISSUES AND CONCERNS
The proposal meets the general parameters set forth in the zoningResolution.
Agency Comments:l' The Tovrn of New Castle Planning Commission recommended theapprication be denied for the fol10wing reasons:a. The additional traffrc load on the East Etk creekRd. (C.R. 24'L).
A.A resort is a special use permit in the A/R/RD zoneThe tollowlng is the deflnrtion of a resort:
Resort: Dude ranch or guest ranch; hunting or fishing camp,cross-country or trail skiing looge (any of whrch stratt ,rolexceed twelve (L2) dwelring units or toity-eignt (4g) oeds orvisitor capacity), land usio tor the purpose of recreation, whichprovides lodging, recreatronal activil,iei, dining facirities,commissary and other needs operated on tne site ior guests ormembers.
o.
I.
Possible porrution of the Neb, castle water system bythe proposed indrvrduar sehrage orsposar systems and Eheproposed horse shed.
The proposed densrcy is too high.That a commercial development of tnis sort isincompatibte wrtn tne suirounding agrrcultural area.(see letter, page Z5 )
Staff Comments:
A11 of the proposedside of the creer.side is too small tosystem.
cabins should be locateo on the eastThe portion of the parcel on the hrestaccommodate two cabins and a septic
The county Environmentar Health officer has reviewed theproposed resort- (see memor page26-27) Basically, themaximum number of units wourd- b; m-ree cabins ano Lne rodge(ownerrs resrdence) on the 2.0 acre parcel. Thrs assumesthat the cabins have limited pJ-umbinir Do garbage disposal,dishwasner, washing machine, hot tub or ottrer n6avy waterusage fixture.
The proposed cabins are to be located near the creek, within30 feet of the hrgn water mark. whrle thrs meets the baslcrequirements of the Zoning Resolution regarding setbacks, itdoes not guarantee that trre units wilr oe rocated outsrde ofthe East E-r"k 100 year froodprain. presently, the countydoes not have froodplain rniormatron avarrable for thrsarea- Prior to tne issuance of any special use permits, the100 year frood erevation shou].d oe-esiaorrsheo by aregistered professronar engineer an<i the proposed new unitslocated accordingly.
The apprrcation reviewed Dy the Town of New castle proposedr-l- cottages on the slte. ineir concerns related to traf f ic
_impacts and potential ground water poirution weie-jr"tif red.rf the resort is rimited to three caoins and a rooge, theseconcerns should be mitigated.
.a-
5- East Elk Creek ls an access polnt to the Frat ropswilderness and recreation area. Addit.ionalry, theparcer to the north nas the camp Christian facirities.
IV. SUGGESTED FINDINGSffiingwiththePIanningCommissionwasextensiveand
complete, that all pertinent facts, matters and issues weresubmitted and that alt interested partres $rere heard at themeeting.
2. That the proposed special use conforms to section 5.03 of theGarfield County Zoning Resolution concerning the approval ordisapproval of a petition for a special use.
3. That the proposed land usepermitted land uses in allof approval are met.
will be compatrole wrth exlstrng anddirections provided certain conditions
4. That for the above stated and other reasons, the proposed SpecialUse permit is in tne best lnterest of the health, saiety, morals,convenience, order, prosperity ano welfare of the citizLns ofGarfield County.
V. RECOMIIENDATION
APPROVAL of a resort with an owners residence and three cabinsprovrded the foilowing conditions are met:
l. That prior to the issuance of the special use permit, theapplicant nave a regtst,ered prof essional engineer estab.Lrsh ther00 year floodplain elevation for rhe propeity. Further, thatthe cabins will be locateo at least one foot above the lO0 yearflood elevation and that a copy of the report and maps besubmitted to tne Department of Deveropmeni.
2. That tne three cabins have limited plumbing facilities. No cabrnwill have a garDage disposal, dish$rasher, wasning machine, nottub or other heavy water usage fixture or device. . . .i
f . That all sEructures oe located on tne east stoe of East, ElK, ,!,i ) , jg cregk
sr .'!' -t;l'.'/)t ' "4, 7Aa/. -/t{..' .i,".,''.;',t'4y,'/
--.t,1,..;1 :. ,t.ta..,:..,,"i"ji,t,'r;/4,'"'1...
h- o-, y'.- /.4t:,/i/ 4?'1.'(-,.r,, /).r,r,, /rtr,{t,-.,6 * ., (" _l,^.)r_..Uttal4g1sr76 _ ie*s--Zgy& ,!,,...,. r. .-',r'- i1.aaltat. Zo ,- ?a qu te * rk
&a.*,te gniA -t$oe)/).y' aloz./aa/ /aorlf ,p?**/2
-r.S ,N///ao) nko aP/taa/idt .
,6//17 /o 4z n,zz//g sailqLl b
d-/r-.*/ ,6 //- / I
o
ifi
l.:.)
',
a
These are the concernsthey w111 be consld.ered.
SF/mat
cc: Garf 1e1d Count.y
-o
October 1!, 198dl.
I,1r. Mark L. Bean
Senior Planner
Department of Development
109 Bth Street, Surti 306Glenwood Sprlngs, CoIo. 81601
Dear Mark!
rn regard to the Don Marsharl speciar- I-rse permit apprication fora resort you recentLy submitted to the wew castre planningcommlssion for revlew, it is the recommend.ation of the plannlngcommlssion to deny the permlt. The Tom Board accepted. therecorunendation and moved that the application be aentea.
The conslderatlon for denlar was that the East Erk Greek Roadcould not accomodate the additlonar traffic. There wasconslderabre concern over the septic system rocations and theeffect lt would have on the New Castle ,ut""-"rppfy. Also thelocatlon of the horse sheds "orta al5o be d.etrllnentar to thequallty of water. Th_e d.enslty of the pr.n *""-too hlgh for thearea of property envolved-. Another co-nstaerairon *"" that slncethls wourd be a commerclal deveropment, it would be unacceptabreln the agrlcultural area that is now there.
of the Town of New Castle and I,m su.redurlng your review of thls project.
TOWN OF NEW CASTLE
BOX 166
NEW CASTLE. COLORAOO 8t647
TELEPHONE: 984.23t t
Commlssloners
Sincerely,
Stan Fultright, TownP. O. Box 165
New Castle, Colorado g1d+Z
m
a
GARFIELD COUNTY
DEPARTMENT OF DEVELOPMENT
PLANNING / ENVTRONMENTAL HEALTH / BUtLDtNG: 945.82t 2
I{EMORANDUM
T0: Mark Bean, Senior planner
FBOtvl: Ed Feld, Ervironrnental Health Officer 4
DAIE: October 3I, t9B4
RE: Don llarshaIl Reguest
rn regard to ttre above refererrced, prease consider thecorcerning the intent of tfre respective iegulations as ttreyindividual sehrage disposal systems and ttre luoric healtlr.
folloring
relate to
-section 5.04.03 of the Garfierd county zoning Resorutionrequires a minimun of two acres for an r.s.D.s and a privatewell or one acre witfr a central water sutrp1y.
-section 3.2r of ttre Garfierd @unty rndividual sewage Disposalsystems Regulation reguires a Erblic hearing conduciea by ffieBoard of Healttr for a density of npre Uran iwo dr^relling unitsper acre.
Presently, !'lr. MarshaU desires to place his honre and tfrree other cabinson the east side of Fast ELk Creek which divides the two acre parcel. loewest side of the parcer is proposed to acconmodate tr,'D additionaL cabinsor possibly a restaurant for tfre guest ranch patrons. Fbr hrastebraterpurposes, I consider the proposed "cabins'r dwelling units as nrcdernPl,ming f ixtures (i.e. toilets, sinks, tubs, garbage disposals,dishwashers, washing mrchines) are pranned in each unit -for possibleyear-round use- From a wastewater disposal standpolnt, the six iwellingunits or "cabins" proposed on tlris tuo acre parlel are eggivalent to sixtwo bedroom single famlly drcellings.
without arguing one regulation against the ottrer, prease consider ttreintent ls to prevent ttre pioriferation of nseptic systems', in agiven area and the sr:bsegurent incieased potential roi crd;d--or surfrcewater contamination.
rhe county has always exercised extra precaution in regard to areas whereprblic water supply 'rintakes" are located in relation to upstream ,,septicsysten" installations. Srch is tfie case in tfiis area as- ttre lown of !,Ietu,Castlers public water supply I'i.ntake'r is located dor,rnstream of tlreproposed guest ranch.
"14:,it
ii
' 1it
lit
!i'
#ji.r'ill
,s
'.(iFir'ji4::
,71:, .
.*: .
.f,.
.:+
+rt:.
: il)'
'.1v.'
'*,
.l
.fi
GARFI ELO COUNTY COURTHOUSE I09 8TH STREET. SUITE 306 GLENWOOD SPRINGS. COLORADO 8I 60I
.>,/ -- z-a
Mr. tlarshall understards this situation and has been very cooperatrve inlocating the leach field for his house well in excess of tire reguired
miniuum fifty feet from a stream or water course.
I urderstand Mr. t{arshall's desire to have a full convenience guest ranchbut the fact, remains tlre wastewater flor.r can be considered eguivalent to asuMivislonts flow rates rather tlran the "traditional" seasonal guest
rarrch with limited fixtures. (i.e. Bridges or @lter Iake Gues! Ranches).
For this reason, I vrould advise the Planning Division and Conmisslon toconcentrate their attention, in general, to ttre increasing densitiesbordering East ELk Creek and, in this particular case, l,lr. Marshallrsproposal.
I would recorrnend the cabins be limited in nuurber to ttre eguivalent
wastewater flow frorn two, three bedroom horres provided water is supptiedfrom an approved central source. prease refer to the folrorringcalculations:
O(re 6-Bedroom House
3 Bdrms x 2 people@rm x 75 gpd,/personx 1.5 max. daily flor^r factor . 675 gpdrzhonre x
2 homes=Ir350 GpD
Ilxury Resort with Full Pltnrbing
125 GPD/person x 3.5 people/cabin x I.5 max.daily flo^r factors 656.25 6>DlCaoinarra_IE9.
Bedfoom house wiffr full plr-urrring TreEEf@rson (I.5 maximum daily floh,
frctor)=450 GPD + 556.25=1105.25 6pD.
Resort h,ith Limited plurbilg
506 PD/Person x 3.5 people/cabin x 1.5 mar<.daily flow factor = 262.5 GPD/Unit x 3 Cabins=
787.5 GPD and two bedroom house wim ffi-
pluuroing (2 people trnr bedroom x 75 GpD/person x I.5
max. daily flow factor)= 450 GpD + 787.5 = L237.5 GpD.:
Should these reconnrendations be incorporated into a conditional approvalfor a Special Use permit for !rr. Irlarshall's guest ranch then I believe we
have kept with tne intent of tne regulations by reducing wastewater flowsto a reasonable and acceptable level.
*IiUIE:
Limited Ph:rlring - No garbage distrnsa.L, dishwasher, $rashlng machine,hot tub or otier heaqf rrater usage fixture or device.
- 27-
/./
NEW CASTLE QUAD
COLORADO-GARFIE
7.5 MINUTE SERIES (ToI
COLORADO
NATURAL RESOURCES
I 430 000 FEET 284
281R9tw 32'30'R eo w
--lF--+
I
I
d
\\,\\
,l
rl,
\k
//
F/tl;-ae
'sa99,(G
,2;.\
, -:l
\.-[\-ll
'.1
\i
t\
}rr\t\li
u{"o-),
))/VI
Y,
\\t\\
' \\r
------
l -"\_
aS
-.o{o -i{q#N-----1-\ \
ttP*==J=.
I