HomeMy WebLinkAbout2.0 BOCC Staff Report 08.04.2003EXHIBITS
Board of County Commissioners _ August 4, 2003
Proof of Certified Mailing Receipts
Proof of Publication
Garfield County ZoningRegulations of 197g, as amended
Garfield County Comprehensive plan of 2000, as amended
Staff Report dated Augu st 4, 2003
Application Materials
Letter from Steve Anthony, Garfield county vegetation Management,date July 22,2003
Exhibit H: Email correspondence with Devin Drayton of the colorado Department ofTransportation
Exhibit I: Excerpt of the state Highway Access code with map
a'uilLt' rt
W )l-wr+rrr( wcn tun haadeeL e-f
O
-
PROJECT INFORMATION AND STAFF COMMENTS
IBOARD:
Special Use Permit for an Accessory
Dwelling Unit ("ADU")
The Applicant requests approval for the
construction of an ADU on Parcel2.
Donald Ziegler
The subject property, Parcel 2, is
located off of Miller Lane (County
Road227), Rifle.
A/R/RD (Agricultural / Residential /
Rural Density)
A/R/RD
Highway 6 &24
8/4t03
TP
TYPE OF REVIEW:
SUMMARY OF REQUEST:
APPLICANT(S):
LOCATION:
EXISTING ZONING:
ADJACENT ZONING:
ACCESS:
I. DESCRIPTION OF THE PROPOSAL:
A' Development Proposal: The Applicant requests approval to construct an appnoximately 920
sq' ft. accessory dwelling unit on the subject property u, i"p."r.nted on the site plan provided with
the application.
As illustrated on the site plan submitted with the application, the Applicant owns what are referred
to as Parcels 1 and 2, and is requesting approval for an Accessory Dwelling Units on each lot. Since
the Applicant is requesting a Special Use Permit on both parcels, each ADU has been reviewed
separately. This memorandum pertains to the issues that surround Parcel 2, thenorth.ern lot.
B. Site and Project Description: The subject property contains approxima tely 4.,67 acres. Theproperty is located approximately 2.5 miles west of the Town of Silt. ihe subject property isimproved with an existing shed and pond. The property is fairly flat, howev"r, ,o.tt of tn" pond theproperty slopes up towards a mesa. No development is proposed or anticipated within this area.
The property is vegetated with oak brush, sagebrush, coitornvoods and various other tree species.
The Applicant has been in the process of improving the quality of the pond on the subject property,
which feeds the pond on Parcel 1. The location of the proposed Accessory Dwelling Unit, as
represented on the site plan, will be screened by existing vlgetation from adiacent parcels.
Ziegler Special (Jse F,ermit - parcel 2
BOCC _ 8/4/03
Page 2
D' zoning; The subject property is zoned A/R/RD (Agricultural / Residential / Rural Density).The zoning adjacent to the subject property is also A/R/RD. The A/R/RD zone district allows for aminimum lot area of 2 acres' Accessory Dwelling units are uses identified as Special Uses in the A/ R/ RD zone district and require a public hearing-process.
E. The subject property is designated on the"Proposed Land use Districts, Study Area2 & -" map initre boifi"ti countj co*prehensive plan
of 2000, as "outlying Residential." outlying Residenjiul i. consistent with tle underlying zoning,which in the case of A / R / RD is a minimum lot area of 2 acres.
The subject property is located within the 2-Mile Sphere of Influence of the Town of'Silt. Thisapplication was not referred to the Town of Silt foicomments. The IGA (IntergovernmentalAgreement between the county and the Town of Silt, which become effective on May 7, 2001, doesnot require "applications for accessory dwelling units, home occupations and any othermodifications use of an existing residential facility" to be referredto the municipality.that is a partto the IGA, which includes the Town of Silt
F' Road/Access: There is an existing gravel driveway off of Miller Lane (County Road 227)that traverses the property to and through Parcel 1 (the property to the south, owned by theApplicant, and the subject of another Special Use Permit request for an Accessory Dvi,elling Unit)and joins with Highway 6 & 24. TheApplicant is proposing to retain the access point off of MillerLane for Parcel 2. Additional discussion regarding u...r, to parcel 2, as well as parcol 1, isprovided under Section III of this memorandum.
G' Applicabillly: Pursuant to Section 9.03 of the zoningResolution, an application for aSpecial Use Permit ('suP") shall be approved or denied by the Board of county cornmissionersafter holding a public hearing thereon in conformance with "ll pr""iri";; ;i;; zoningResolution.
il. REVIEW AGENCY AND OTHER COMMENTS:
The application was referred to the following agencies for comments. comments that were receivedhave been integrated throughout this memorandum where applicable.
1. Rifle Fire Protection District: No comment.2. Colorado Department of Transportation: Exhibit H3. Garfield County Vegetation Management: Exhibit G
III. REVIEW CRITERIA FOR SPECIAL USE PERMIT
Pursuant to Section 5.03.10, uses listed as Special Uses shall be permitted only:
1.
2.
Ziegler Special (Jse permit _ parcel 2
BOCC _ 8/4/03
Page 3
Based on compliance with all requirements listed herein, and;Approval by the county commissioner, which Board may impose additictnal restrictionson-tlte lot area,floor area, coverage, setback and height'oypropor"d uses or reqniredadditional offstreet parking, screiningfences and landscaping, or any other restrictionor provision it deems necessary to protect the health, safei aid welfure of thepopulation and uses of the neighborhood or zone distrir, i, o condition ctf granting thespecial ttse.
Response: Staff sees no reason for the BOCC to require any special restrictions.
SncuoN 5:03
Pursuant to Sectir:n 5.03, special uses shall conform to all requirements listed thereurrder andelsewhere in the zoningResolution, plus the following standards:
1' utilities adequate to provide water and sanitation service based on accepted engineeringstandards and approved by the Board of county Commissioners shall either be in place or shall beconstructed in conjunction with the proposed use.
Response: The Applicant indicated that the domestic water supply to support the tw' primaryresidences, one on the subject parcel and one on Parcel l, and the iwo u...r.o.y dwelling units willbe provided from the water Augmentation Plan submitted ;tffi;;;ru"rr"": A pump house hasbeen constructed on Parcel l, immediately adjacent to Parcel 2, whicl'will adequately supply allproposed residential units, primary and accessory, oD both parcels. --- -"-:
An application for "storage water rights, surface water rights, change of water rights and approval ofplan for augmentation" was submitted to the District coJrt on Decemb er 20,2oo2,a copy isprovided with the application. The Plan for Augmentation has not yet been approved by the courts.The 'Statement of Plan for Augmentation" in the Augmentation plan states tiat ,,the Applicantsseek to adiudicate this augmentation plan to provide i legally viable water ,rppty to sterve thedomestic needsforfour single-family residences, i*igation of up to 2,000 squarefeet of associatedlawn and garden irrigation, and riv)snck watering fir hour head.,,
The Applicant has provided, by means of the Plan for Augmentation request submitte6 to theDistrict court, that there is the possibility of providing adZquate and legal water suppl.y to theproposed Accessory Dwelling unit. It has been the piactice of the cou"nty to grant approval withthe condition that a sigled Plan for Augmentation shall be submitted to the cJunty prior to theissuance of the actual Special use Permit for the ADU. It is Staff opinion that water quality tests ofthe proposed water supply for the Accessory Dwelling unit shall also be provided prior to theissuance of the actual Special Use permit.
__
Ziegler Special (Jse frermit - parcel 2
BOCC _ 8/4/03
page 4
The Applicant indicated that Individual Sewage Disposal System (ISDS) will be installed for theADU' The septic system will need to comply with Garfield county tsos requirements. TheApplicant is in the process of having p.r.oluiio, tests performed in the locations where the ADUwill be placed.
2' Street improvements adequate to accommodate trffic volnme generatecl by the proposed useand to provide safe, convenient access to the use shall eitier be in place or shall be constructed inconjunction with the proposed use.
Response: As noted previously in this memorandum, there is an existing gravel driveway off ofMiller Lane (county Road 227) thattraverses the property to and through parcel 1 (tlhe property tothe south, owned by the Applicant, and the subjeciof unoih.. Special Use permit request for anAccessory Dwelling unit) and joins with Highway 6 8.24. The Applicant is proposing to retain theaccess point off of Miller Lane for parcel2.
According to discussions and emails with Devin Drayton, Region 3 Access Technician for cDoT,the Applicant will be required to submit a Highway e.."r, permit as a result of the construction ofan ADU on Parcel 1, since Highway 6 & 24 within the area of the subject property has a categoryR-A classification (Exhibit H). An.*.."-.p!of the State Highway Access iode utilized by cDorhas been provided in Exhibit I along withthe map provid"a uy cDor indicating what mile markersthe category R-A classification.n.t-pusses. Mr. Drayton indicated that Item 2 under Section 3.gfcategory R-A - Regional Highway] o]the State Highway Access code requires cDrcr to requirethe Applicant to abandon the accesi point onto Highivay 6 *, zqsince reasonable access can beobtained from Miller Lane (county Road 227) thriugh parcel 2 (Exhibit H).
Mr' Drayton noted that the Highway Access Permit submitted for parcel 1 will be reviewed by theAccess committee to determine if the existing access point onto Highway 6 & 24should in fact beabandoned and access for Parcel I should be lhrough Parcel 2 or wheth"ith. access point off ofHighway 6 & 24 should be retained for access to Parcel I only. Mr. Drayton indicate6 that theAccess committee will strongly consider a recommendation from the county with respect to thisaccess point.
During the site visit to the property, aside from some vegetation removal at the intersection of thedriveway and Highw ay 6 & 24 in ord,er to_ improve the si-ght distances, it is stafls opi,ion thataccess from the subject property onto Highw iy 6 & 24 aipearsto be adequate. Acconcing to Mr.Drayton, cDor has not conducted a site visitio the par#s. In additior, ,in". there isi no tuminglane for Miller Lane (county Road 227) off ofHighway 6 & 24,traffic along the high,way wouldneed to stop for any.vehicle turning into either Parcel I or onto Miller Lane. The Appllicant wouldlike to have the ability to retain separate access points for each parcel. The Applicant indicatedwillingness to abandon and revegetate the port_ion of the looped driveway that connects both parcels,in order to retain both access points. The Applicant would prefer not the be required to provide an
Ziegler Special (Jse lrermit - parcel 2
BOCC - 8/4/03
page 5
easement through Parcel 2 for access to Parcel I since there are two existing separate access pointsfor each parcel.
should the Board of county commissioners accept the Applicant's request, it is stalf s opinion thatthe portion of looped driveway that connects both parcets witt need to Le removed prior to theissuance of the actual Special use Permit, since there is no other mechanism to determine if thisportion has been abandoned. By the Resolution of approval, cDor will be notified of the county,saction with respect to access to the subject property.
This application was inadvertently not referred the Garfield county Road and Bridge Departmentfor c-omments regarding access on to county Road 227 forParcel 2. Should the Board allow theApplicant to retain separate access points to the lots, the Applicant will need to obtain an AccessPermit from the I{oad and Bridge Department.
3' Design oJ-the proposed use is organized to minimize impact on andfrom adjarcent uses ofland through installation of screenferri, o, landscape materials on the periphery o/ the lot and bylocation of intensively utilized or"ir, access points, lighting and signs in such a mantler as toprotect established neighborhood character.
Response: The Applicant indicated that the approximate duration of the constructio, of the ADUwlllbe 60 to 90 days. The Applicant noted thai on a given day approximately 3 to 4 r;onstructionvehicles will be on site during normal business hours-only. The Applicant also provicled elevationplans for the proposeq Pu with the application. The abu *itt be a manufactured log home. TheApplicant provided with the application a subsoil study for foundation design prepared by HpGeoTech February 21, 2003.
During the site visit to the subject property, it did not appear that the ADU would be visible fromadjacent properties' There is existing vegetation in thelocation of the proposed ADU which willprovide significant screening. The Applicant indicated that additional i.."r, shrubs anLd landscapingwill be completed within the same period of construction of the ADU. No iandscape plan wassubmitted with the application. standard residential lighting will be utilized.
comments were received from Steve Anthony, Garfield county vegetation Manager (:see ExhibitG). The following are Mr. Anthony's recommendations:
l ' The Applicant shall inventory and map the property for county listed noxious weeds such as
- Russian knapweed, Russian olive andiamariskmay be in the area.2' The Applicant shall provide a Weed Management Plan for the inventoried noxious weeds.The weed Management Plan shall be implimented prior to any further site development.
Ziegler Special Use F'ermit - Parcel 2
BOCC - 8/4/03
Page 6
IV. CRITERIA FOR ACCESSORY DWELLING UNIT (SECTION 5.03.21)
Pursuant to section 5.03.2L of the zoningRegulations, use of a structure as an accessory dwellingunit approved by Special Use shall meet the following standards, as well as all other standardsapplicable to residential use:
1' The minimu-m lot size shall befour (4) acres containing a building site with slopes less than40ok at least two (2) acres in size.
Response: The property contains over 4 acres, however, this is not represented in the informationprovided in the application. According to the Garfield County Assessors records, the subjectproperty contains approximately 4.67 acres. The existing and proposed improvements avoid slopesin excess of40Yo.
2' The gross/loor areafor residential use occupancy shall not exceed 1500 sq.ft.
Response: The ADU will be approximately 920 sq. ft. in size, which does not exceed themaximum floor area allowed.
3' Approvalfrom the subdivision homeowners association and/or allowed by co.venant ifapplicable.
Response: The property is not located within a subdivision. No covenants are applicable to thisproperty.
4' Proof of a legally adequate source of waterfor an additional dwelling unit.
Response: Discussion regarding the proposed water supply has been addressed previously in thismemorandum.
5' Compliance with the County individual sewage disposal system regulations or proof of alegal ability to connect to an approved central r"*og" tre)mentfocility.
Response: Discussion regarding the proposed water supply has been addressed previously in thismemorandum.
only leasetbold interests in the dweiling units are ailowed.
Response: The Applicant will comply with this requirement. The ADU will not have a separateownership interest.
Ziegler Special (Jse Permit - parcel 2
BOCC _ 8/4/03
Page 7
7' That all construction complies with the appropriate County building code requirements.
Response: The Applicant asserted that the ADU will be built to UBC (Uniform Building Code)standards.
V. STAFF }-INDINGS:
1' That proper posting and public notice was provided as required for the meeting beforethe Board of County Commissioners.
2' That the meeting before the Board of County Commissioners was extensive andcomplete, 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 Special Use perrnit has beendetermined to be [not] in the best interest of theiealth, safeiy, morals, corrvenience,
order, prosperity and welfare of the citizens of Garfield couriy.
4' That the application has [not] met the requirements of Special Use (Sections 5:03 and9:03) in the Garfierd county zoningResolution of r97g.
5' That the applicant has [not] met the requirements of an Accessory Dwelling Unit(Section 5.03.21) in the Garfield county zoningResolution of 197g.
VI. RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends that the Board APPRO^VE the Ziegler Special Use permit for an AccessoryDwelling Unit on Parcel2, subject to the following.onaition*
1' All representations of the applicant, either within the application or stated at the hearingbefore the Board of County Commissioners, shall be considered conditions of approv6l.
2' Access to the subject property shall be by means of Miller Lance (County Road 227) only.
3' Prior to the issuance of the actual Special Use Permit, the Applicant shall:
a. Provide a signed Plan for Augmentation by the District court.b' Provide a water quality test for the water supply to the Accessory Dwelling; Unit.c. Provide a signed Highway Access permit from the colorado Department JfTransportation indicating that the access to Parcel 1 will be by means of Highwa y 6 &24 only and not through parcel2.
d' Should the Colorado Department of Transportation allow access to parcel I by means of
Ziegler Special (Jse p,ermit - parcel 2
BOCC _ 8/4/03
Page 8
Highway 6 & 24, the portion of the existing driveway that adjoins the sutrject property
(Parcel 2) to the parcel to parcel 1 shall be removed and revegetated.
e' The Applicant shall inventory and map the property for County listed nox.ious weeds
such as Russian knapweed, Russian olive and tamarisk. The Applicant stLall provide a
weed management plan for the inventoried noxious weeds. The Weed Msnagement plan
shall be ongoing and shall be implemented prior to the construction of the,Accessory
Dwelling Units. The Weed Management Plan shall be reviewed and approved by the
Garfield County Weed Management Director.f' The Applicant shall obtain an Access Permit from the Garfield County Road and Bridge
Department for access onto Miller Lane (county Road 227).
4.
5.
Only leasehold in the ADU shall be allowed. The unit may not be sc,ld separately.
The use of cistern as a source of domestic water shall not be a permitted.
To:
From:
Re:
Date:
MEMORA.NDTIM
Tamara Pregl
Steve Anthony
Comments on the Zeigler Special Use permit
July 22,2003
Thanks for the opportunity to comment on this Special Use permit. My comments are as follows:
1. Noxious Weeds
A' Inventory and mapping-It is suggested that the applicant inventory and map the properryfor County listed noxious weeds as Russian knaiweed, Russian olive, and tamarisk may
be in the area.
B' Weed Management-The applicant shall provide a weed management plan for the
inventoried noxious weeds. It is recommended that the weeJ managiment plan be
implemented prior to any further site development.
Tamara
From:
Sent:
To:
Subject:
Drayton, Devi n [Devi n. Drayton@DOT.STATE. CO. US]
Wednesday, July 16, 2003 4:46 PM
Tamara Pregl
RE: Comments on the Ziegler Development
HiTamara,
I spoke with Don about the intent of building his cabins, he said that his intent would be to provide a place for
visitors to stay when he had company. I told him I would check with the access committee.
Our committee suggested that Dan apply for a highway access permit and we will look more closely at the
details and determine if the Hwy 6 access should be closed or not. We feel that the cabins could [ose a threat
to full{ime use and thus cause an increase in traffic. I emailed Dan a Hwy access application.
Devin
-----Original Message-----
From : Tama ra Preg I [mailto :tpregl@garfield-cou nty.com]' Sent: Wednesday, July 16, 2003 4:25 pM
To: Drayton, Devin
Subject: RE: Comments on the Ziegler Development
Devin,
Thanks for the email. However, I thought that you would need to close off access to the Hwy with the
additional dwelling units? Did your conversation with Mr. Ziegler change your decision?
Tamara
----Orig inal Message-----
From : Drayton, Devin Imailto : Devi n. Drayton@ DOT.STATE.CO.US]
Sent: Wednesday, July 16, 2003 3:55 pM
To: Tamara Pregl
Subject: Comments on the Ziegler Development
The Department of Transportation will require a Hvvy access permit for the builcling of cabins on
the Ziegler property.
Devin Drayton
Region 3 Access Technician
Phone (970) 248-7230
Devi n. Drayton @dot.state.co. us
71r6t2003
tr
3.8 CATEGORY R-A - Regional Highway
Functional Characteristics and Category Assignment Criteria
(1) This category is appropriate for use on highways that have the capacity for medium to high speedsand relatively medium to high traffic volumes over medium and long distances in an efficient and safe
manner. They provide for interregional, intra-regional, and intercity iravel needs. Direct access serviceto abutting land is subordinate to providing service to through trafiic movements. This category isnormally assigned to National Highway System routes, significant regional routes in rural aieai, and
other routes of regional or state significance
Access Granting Criteria lncluding Category Related Access Location, Operation and Design Criteria
(2) When application is made, one access shall be granted per parcel of land if reasonable access
cannot be obtained from the local street or road system. Reasonable local access will be determined inconsultation with the appropriate local authority. A determination of reasonable access from a local
street or road should include consideration of the local street or road function, purpose, capacity, opera-tionaland safety conditions and opportunities to improve the local street or road. Direct access to thehighway should not be denied if the alternative local access would create a significant operational orsafety problem at the alternative location and the direct access to the state highway would not be asignificant problem to the highway.
(3) (a) The standard for the spacing of all intersecting public ways and other accesses that will be fullmovement, or are or may become signalized, is one-half mile intervals, and basbd upon section lines
where feasible. Exceptions to this one-half mile standard shall not be permitted unless the proposal
documents that there are no other reasonable alternatives to achieve a one-half mile interval, ihere is adocumented necessity for the intersection at the proposed location, and a signal study acceptable tothe Department is cornpleted in accordance with section 2.3(5).
(b) Where it is not feasible to meet one-half mile spacing and where signal progression analysisindicates.good progression (35 percent efficiency or better), oido". not degrlde tn" "*i.ting signaiprogression, a full movement may be allowed. Spacing to nearby intersecti6ns shall be suff'riieni toaccommodate the 20th year left turn vehicle storage queue for both turning movements. The accesslocation must also meet other Code access spacing, design and need reqiuirements. lf 20h yearprojections for the access indicate that the access volumes would be less than 75 percent of thoserequired for M.U.T.C.D. traffic signal volume warrants, or if there are less than two nearby (within onemile either direction) accesses that are or could be signalized, the intersection location does not needto be on one-half mile spacing, nor does it need to meet progression analysis criteria.
(c) Where topography or other existing conditions make one-half mile intervals inappropriate ornot feasible, location of the access shall be determined with consideration given to topography,
established property ownerships, unique physical limitations and or unavoidable or pre-existing
historical land use patterns and physical design constraints with every attempt to achieve a sp-acing ofone-half mile. The final location should serve as many properties and interests as possible to reducethe need for additional direct access to the state highway.'ln selecting locations foi fult movement
intersections, preference shall be given to public wiys that meet or miy be reasonably expected to
meet signal warrants in the foreseeable future.
State Highway Access Code, August 31, 1g9g
Page 37 of 62
o
(4) lf a restrictive median exists, left turns at unsignalized intersections should be restricted, unless
the restriction of these movementswould cause a safetyoroperations problem, orcause an out-of-
direction movement of greater than one mile. lf a traversable median exists, left turns will be permitted
unless an operational or safety problem is identified.
Auxiliary Lane Requirements
(5) Auxiliary turn lanes shall be installed according to the criteria below.(a) A left turn deceleration lane with taper and storage length is required for any access with a
projected peak hour left ingress turning volume greater than 10 vph. The taper length will be included
within the required deceleration length.
(b) A right turn deceleration lane and taper length is required for any access with a projected
peak hour right ingress turning volume greater than 25 vph. The taper length will be included within the
required deceleration length.(c) A right turn acceleration lane and taper length is required for any access with a projected
peak hour rightturning volume greaterthan 50 vph when the posted speed on the highway isgreater
than 40 rnph. The taper length vrill be included within the required acceleration length. A right turn
acceleration lane may also be required at a signalized intersection if a free-right turn is needed to
maintain an appropriate level of service in the intersection.(d) Right turn deceleration and acceleration lanes are generally not required on roadways with
three or more travel lanes in the direction of the right turn exCept as provided in subsection 3.5.(e) A left turn acceleration lane may be required if it would be a benefit to the safety and
operation of the roadway or as determinei by subsection 3.5. A left turn acceleration tane is generally
not required where; the posted speed is less than 45 mph, or the intersection is signalized, oitne
acceleration lane would interfere with the left turn ingress movements to any otheiaccess.
(6) No additional access rights shall accrue upon the splitting or dividing of existing parcels of land or
contiguous parcels under or previously under the same ownership or controlling interest. All access to
newly created properties shall be provided internally from any existing access Jr a new access
determined by Code design standards or by permit application and consistent with this subsection.
(7) When an existing access meets the warrants for a traffic signal as defined in the M.U.T.C.D., and
the location does not meet the requirements of subsection 3.8(3), the access shall be reconstructed to
eliminate or reduce the traffic movements that cause the traffic signal warrant to be met, and the
access brought into conformance with appropriate design criteria. A raised median may be required.
closure may be required if alternative reasonabre access is available.
(gl With the exception of frontage roads, any new rural highway location or newly designated state
highway shall be considered no less than an access category R-A highway untilthe Commission has
specifically assigned an access category.
(9) Where frontage and service roads are present, unless othenrvise specifically categorized, a
category R-A shall be assumed for all at-grade rural roadway sections within Department right-of-way
between frontage and service roads and the main roadway.
State Highway Access Code, August 31 , 1998
Page 38 of 62
ommen
Tamara Pregl
From:
Sent:
To:
Subject:
Wednesday, July 16, 2003 3:55 PM
Tamara Pregl
Comments on the Ziegler Development
The Department of Transportation will require a Hvvy access permit for the building of cabins on the Ziegler
property.
Devin Drayton
Region 3 Access Technician
Phone (970) 248-7230
Devin. Drayton@dot.state.co. us
age 1 of3
711612003
SILT MESA RD
i
ii
i
11*\a:6D rnn?A'ls *fitnqtt '66
cnf*yor1 R- fl
II
@t