Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout4.0 CorrespondenceGlenn Hartmann From: Adams, Karlyn [Karlyn.Adams@state.co.us] Sent: Tuesday, April 12, 2011 8:18 AM To: Glenn Hartmann Cc: Martellaro, Alan; Blakeslee, Bill Subject: Old Red Barn ADU Comments Glen, We have completed a preliminary review of the Old Red barn Accessory Dwelling Unit (ADU) Permit Application, however per the March 11, 2011 Memorandum to All County Land Use Planning Directors concerning the State Engineer's Recommendation for Certain Land Use Actions, a physical adequacy review has not been completed. The applicant is requesting approval of an ADU on their property of approximately 37 acres. The applicant proposes to use an existing well, operating under well permit no. 176510, to supply water to the ADU. Permit no. 176510 was issued, pursuant to CRS 37-92-602(3)(b)(II)(A), on March 2, 1994. The uses of the well are limited to fire protection, ordinary household purposes inside three single family dwellings, the irrigation of not more than one acre of home gardens and lawns and the watering of domestic animals. This well permit does not allow for uses at a commercial business. So long as the uses of this well continue to be limited to the uses described on permit no. 176510 and are within the scope of CRS 37-92-602(3)(b)(II)(A), residential uses on a farm or ranch, this office has no objection to this permit application. If water from this well is used in association with a commercial equestrian boarding facility, including animal watering and/or use in dwellings associated with the propagation of a commercial enterprise, this well permit will no longer be sufficient. Thank you for the opportunity to comment on this project. Please contact me at this office if you have any questions. Sincerely, Karlyn Adams Water Resource Engineer Colorado Division of Water Resources 1313 Sherman Street, Suite 818 Denver, CO 80203 (303) 866-3581 office (303)866-3589 fax Please complete our new DWR User Experience Survey on our DWR Homepage to express your opinions of our service. Your complete satisfaction is important to us! 1 April 12, 2011 Jay F. Halliday 5763 County Road 100 Carbondale, CO 81623 Garfield County Building & Planning Glen Hartmann(ghartmann@garfeld-county.com)/Fred Jarmen 108 Eight Street Suite 401 Glenwood Springs, CO 81601 Glen: I am submitting this letter as a follow up to our meeting yesterday regarding the application by the Old Red Barn for an ADU in their agriculture barn/arena. I have many concerns about the operation that is taking place across the street from me and feel that no additional permits should be issued until these concerns are addressed. The quiet enjoyment of my property in this rural setting has certainly been effected by the large scale equestrian operation that is running across the road from my property. I don't understand how permits were issued for what is currently built without public review of what was proposed to be built. What follows is a list of my concerns at this time. 1) The water usage at this operation will have a huge effect on my water table. With more than 7 bathrooms currently in the structure, horse washing and watering facilities and irrigation of future landscaping the added bathrooms of the ADU just add to the burden on the water table. You said you would follow up with the Water Resources Department as to whether the existing well permit allowed the watering of boarded horses. I know that the planting of numerous trees is planned for this property and the irrigation water for this property does not run all summer so I expect water will be corning out of their well to keep these trees alive. 2) The classification of this building seems to change to fit whatever the owners want it to be. The original building and septic permit list it as accessory building to an existing residence as a private arena/barn. As I understand the owners wanted to build without a permit as they were claiming it was an agriculture building. Per the definition of an agriculture structure no human habitation is allowed therefore no ADU should be allowed in the building. 3) Per Garfield County zoning restrictions 3-301 J 1-4 as an accessory building I feel the existing building is not in compliance therefore no additional permits should be issued until these issues are complied with. The existing accessory building does not maintain the agriculture use of the existing property, the traffic operation on Road 100 is effected by the increased usage, the building does affect the natural lighting and visual corridor of the surrounding properties and at times the traffic is affected by the backing up of vehicles at the gate. You have assured me that the county will enforce its zoning codes and that this operation is to be private and not for public use. Currently there is a trailer onsite that is being lived in and I see no enforcement about its usage. I know what is going to take place across the road from me with future camps and horse shows and have no confidence that the county will have the backbone to deal with the lawyers that will allow the owners to do whatever they wish without regard to any of the neighbors or county regulations. If it looks like a pig -if it smells like a pig- it probably is a pig. No more permits should be issued to this operation until public hearings can be held to address all the impacts that this equestrian operation has on Mis -=1 � -1,2 -� I Jay . all}da Resident of Missouri Heig is for 27 years Cc: Glen Hartmann ( ghartmann@garfield-county.com) Fred Jarmen (384-3470/fax) HiII/f/ "I'vY.4111 l‘lr -41 ->‘,41)14Aernc Glenn Hartmann From: Jim Rada Sent: Friday, April 22, 2011 10:25 AM To: Andrea Korber Cc: Glenn Hartmann; Fred Jarman Subject: RE: Letter concerning Old Red Barn rrc ADU application Attachments: CDPHE Primary Drinking Water Regs 2010.pdf Andrea, It was unclear by the application as to whether this facility is used only by the owners of the property or if they allow other people to board horses and/or utilize the facility. The number of stalls in the arena suggested that perhaps dozens of different people could use the facility on a daily basis and therefore have access to the potable water supply. The purpose of my comment to the planning department was not to suggest that there is an issue but to advise them of the potential that this facility's water system could be classified as a public water system depending on how the facility is used and the number of people that have access to the potable water supply on a daily basis throughout the year. From the definitions section of the attached document: (93) Non -community water system means a public water system that is not a community water system. A non -community water system is either a "transient, non- community water system" or a "non -transient, non -community water system." (94) Non -transient, non -community water system means a public water system that is not a community water system and that regularly serves at least 25 of the same persons over six months per year. (95) Non -transient population means the average number of individuals served per day during the year or normal operating period(s), who do not reside at the place served by the water system, but have a regular opportunity to consume water produced by the system. Regular opportunity is defined as four or more hours per day, for four or more days per week, for six months or more per year. (107) Public water system (PWS) means a system for the provision to the public of water for human consumption through pipes or other constructed conveyances, if such system has at least fifteen service connections or regularly serves an average of at least twenty-five individuals daily at least 60 days out of the year. Such term includes: (i) Any collection, treatment, storage, and distribution facilities under control of the operator of such system and used primarily in connection with such system. (ii) Any collection or pretreatment storage facilities not under such control, which are used primarily in connection with such system. Such term does not include any "special irrigation district." A public water system is either a "community water system" or a "non -community water system." (137) Transient, non -community water system means a non -community water system that does not regularly serve at least twenty-five of the same persons over six months per year. (138) Transient population means the average number of individuals served per day during the year or annual operating period(s), who have an opportunity to consume water from the system, but who do not meet the definition of either residents or non- transient customers. If this system is determined to be a public water system, then I would refer you to Mr. Mark Kadnuck at the CDPHE Water Quality Control Division 970-248-7144, for specific information about the construction and operational requirements. Please feel free to contact me if you have additional questions. Jim Rada Environmental Health Manager Garfield County Public Health 195 W. 14th Street Rifle, C 81350 Phone - 970-325-5200 x8113 Fax - 970-825-8304 Cell - 970-319-1579 jradalgarfield-county.com www.garfield-county.com From: Andrea Korber fmailto:andi@landandshelter.coml Sent: Wednesday, April 20, 2011 10:09 AM To: Jim Rada Subject: Letter concerning Old Red Barn Ilc ADU application Jim: The County forwarded us your departmental comments on the ADU application for 5644 County Road 100. We are the owner's representative on that project. T am hoping to translate the comments a bit so we can figure out how the regulations apply to this site. You write that if the facility is serving the equivalent of "25 people of the same or different people for 60 days or more per year" than it will be classified as a "non -community public water system" and falls under the regulatory authority of CDPHE. Couple of follow up questions: 2 1. Could you send me the code section that you are citing? (code section where the 25 people/60 days threshold is found). 2. Could you also send the regulations that apply to a "non -community public water system". 3. Also - We will need to find a method to translate the "25 people of the same or different people for 60 days or more per year". The owner isn't always there. however - someone usually is, sometimes there is help too. How does "25 people/60 days' translate for a facility that typically doesn't house big groups like that? Best, Andi Andrea Korber AIA, LEED AP Land + Shelter, Inc. Architecture Planning Development Nww.landandshelter corn pob 550, Carbondale, CO 81623 t:970.963.0201 f:970.963.0289 cell 970.366.1582 3 Land+Shelter Architecture • Planning • Development Fred Jarman Director of Building and Planning Garfield County 108 8th Street, Suite 401 Glenwood Springs, CO 81601 Missouri Heights Arena / Barn - ADU Application - Neighbor's Letters Parcel: 239119400200 Address: 5644 County Road 100 Carbondale, CO 81623 Dear Fred: April 26, 201 1 This letter addresses letters received from neighbors concerning the ADU application. The concerns are compiled here and addressed point -by -point. We believe that the following responses to each of the concerns expressed by the neighbors will demonstrate that all of the materials reviewed by staff prior to issuance of your director's determination dated April 14, 2011, establish that this application for an ADU is in compliance with all applicable development standards, that there are no further development standards that need to be considered, and that these responses address all issues that might otherwise require a public hearing. A note before the point -by -point below - We would like to take this opportunity to state our regret for the use of the phrase "agricultural barn/arena building" in the narrative description. This phrase is noted in some letters received by the county, and has caused a lot of confusion. The building was reviewed and permitted as an Accessory Use; it was not presented nor was it built as an Agricultural Building; there is no desire on behalf of this application to change the definition of the building to Agricultural, there has never been an effort to define the barn/ arena building as Agricultural; the county staff has never considered the building as anything other than an Accessory Use and has reviewed, permitted, and inspected it as such. There is no intention to side-step the appropriate procedure here, and no intention for the code definition of Agricultural Building to apply to the barn/arena or the ADU. 1. Concern that the barn/arena building is not an Agricultural Building and that there may be some intention to change the definition of the barn/arena and/or to proceed with the ADU without review or permit. a The barn/arena building was presented, permitted, built, and inspected as an Accessory Use. It is not currently considered nor was it ever considered an Agricultural Building by Land + Shelter, PO Box 550, 978 Euclid Ave., 970-963-0201 (p) 970-963-0289 (f) www,landandshelter,com either the county staff or the applicant. If it was, it would not have undergone the rigorous permit and inspection process that occurred. The ADU likewise is not considered Agricultural, and is undergoing appropriate land -use planning, and will undergo appropriate permitting pending land -use approval. 2. Concern that the barn/arena does not comply with the definition of Accessory Use. a The barn/arena was designed, presented and built as an Accessory Use. The county has reviewed and inspected as -built conditions. There have been no changes. The use is intended as a barn/arena accessory to the existing residence. 3. (Related to #2, but slightly different) - Concern that the use of the A4 "assembly" occupancy codification should have required a limited impact review as an equestrian center, not an Accessory Use. a The barn/arena was defined as an Accessory Use to the residence in communication with Garfield County staff and no change has occurred to the plans since that definition. The land use in this case is Accessory. In Missouri Heights, in the R zoning, an owner can build a riding arena as an Accessory Use to the primary residence of a property. The building was properly permitted by applicable code. The 2003 iBC - `International Building Code' This is a non-residential code. In lay terms, it's the commercial code, That does not define the building as a commercial enterprise. The structure, like any non- residential building, is reviewed under the IBC. The IBC requires that every room have an occupancy class associated with it for life safety reasons, so the plan reviewer can assess the egress requirements. The arena is classified as an A4 occupancy, no matter how many people are in the arena - even if there is only 1 or 2 people in the arena at any time. Riding arenas are automatically classified as A4 whether or not the arena is located in a private barn or a public sports facility. A4 calculates a maximum occupancy based on square footage. This maximum occupancy by code does not affect the intended use of the arena. It's the way the code conservatively protects life safety. The occupancy class of the arena likewise does not define the way the planning department views the building's land use. The land use in this case is accessory. In Missouri Heights, in the R zoning, an owner can build a riding arena as an Accessory Use to the primary residence of a property. 4. Concern about the additional square footage associated with the ADU. a. The ADU is proposed to be built underneath the existing roof and within the current slab footprint of the existing barn arena. It will use ASF of existing enclosed space and Wirsf of existing porch space. Plans submitted with the ADU planning application show this detail and locate the proposed ADU within the barn/arena plan. 5. Request that water resources in particular and all other public departments review the application. i. Water resources and all other appropriate referral agencies associated with Garfield County have reviewed the application. No objections are stated. ii. Water resources completed an on-site physical inspection. The property was physically inspected by Brian Romig, water commissioner with the State of Colorado Department of Water Resources. His email of 4/21/2011 is submitted with the responses to all staff comments and staff conditions. He writes that the property is Land + Shelter, PO Box 550, 978 Euclid Ave., 970-963-0201 (p) 970-963-0289 (f) www.Iandandshelter.com fully in compliance with the well permit and that the barn/arena is not operating as a commercial business. iii. Well testing analysis has been completed by Sopris Engineering and submitted to the county with application conditions responses. Well testing analysis supports the adequacy of the well and it's compliance with the existing well permit. iv. Public health cites no problems with the existing barn/arena or the proposed ADU. 6. Concern that the ADU has an unspecified number of employees associated with it i. The ADU is drawn and submitted to the planning department with 2 bedrooms. It will be reviewed as all 2 bedroom residences are reviewed by code, and applicable 2 bedroom occupancy limits will apply to the ADU. 7. Concern that multiple permits have been issued without public hearing. a There has been one permit issued for the barn/arena. The barn/arena was reviewed and properly permitted. No public hearing was required by county land use code. 8. Concern about lighting a. The ADU is not adding any additional lighting to the lighting which is already permitted for the barn/arena (unless the county requests additional lighting in the building permit process), 9. Traffic concerns a. The ADU is intended to be a caretaker's unit. According to traffic engineering and planning standards a residence creates 9 vehicle trips/day (including trips to and from work). In this case, this vehicle trip number will be reduced because the residence is a caretaker unit. The caretaker will work on site. 10.Drainage concerns a Drainage concerns raised over the barn/arena construction period are being addressed in discussion with the affected neighbor and additional work is being completed by the applicant to correct the concerns. The ADU itself has no impact on the drainage. 11. Concern over non -family members using the ADU a. Like any ADU, there is no requirement that it be limited to family members. 12.Concern that irrigation for planned trees will come from the well. a. There is an allowance for up to 1 acre of irrigation from the well, The planned uses are to remain within that well permit limitation. 13,Concern that there is a trailer used as a dwelling on site a The county required that the trailer be removed. The temporary trailer was removed on April 22, 2011. 14. 7 bathrooms noted as inappropriate for an agricultural building. Land + Shelter, PQ Box 550, 978 Euclid Ave., 970-963-0201 (p) 970-963-0289 0) www,landandshelter,com a. The building was not classified as agricultural, and the 7 bathrooms were the exact amount required per the building code; they were not a desire of the owner. 15,Top soil removal caused by barn/arena construction. a Construction requirements for soil and dust control per permit were followed. No issues with the permit compliance for dust control were ever raised by county inspectors. Construction is a temporary impact that must and did abide by Garfield County construction hours and standards. 16.0veruse. Citing the number of horses and the meadow never being the same. a The paddocks submitted and built were also reviewed and built according to code. 17,General visibility of the barn/arena. a A riding arena and barn building is a large structure by nature, Screening from County Road 100 includes a berm that reduces some of the impact on the side where the barn/ arena is closest to the road (although not required). The property sits below a rising slope of County Road 102, and from that vantage, there is little chance to screen the building in an open area visible from above. Thank you for considering this letter. Please submit this letter to the members of Board of Commissioners prior to the meeting on May 2, 201 1 so that they may also review responses to voiced concerns. Kind regards, avin Brooke, Land + Shelter Land + Shelter, PO Box 550, 978 Euclid Ave., 970-963-0201 (p) 970-963-0289 (f) www.landandshelter.com