HomeMy WebLinkAbout2.0 Staff Report & AttachmentsPROJECT INFORMATION AND STAFF COMMENTS
FDPA-7974
GH
Administrative Review for a Flood Plain
Development Permit
Lawrence & Lisa Singer
Sopris Engineering
Paul Rutledge & Yancy Nichol
Lot2 Ries Subdivision Exemption
2621 County Road 100, Carbondale, CO
81623 (Parcel No. 2391 -31 3-00-026).
3 acres
Rural
TYPE OF REVIEW
APPLTCANT (OWNER)
REPRESENTATIVE
LOCATION
ACRES
ZONING
I. DESCRIPTION OF THE PROPOSAL
The Applicant is requesting approval for construction of an accessory garage/RV storage
building and a replacement onsite wastewater treatment system (OWTS) within the 100
year flood plain adjacent to the Roaring Fork River. The proposal also includes changes
to utility services, a driveway expansion, relocation of an irrigation ditch/pipeline and
grading associated with the above uses. Placement of some fill material will be required
for construction of the proposed elements including the driveway and OWTS. The
proposed structure is to be elevated with the lowest floor one foot above the base flood
elevation (BFE). The OWTS will be an engineered mound system with the soiltreatment
area (STA) mounded to be 4 feet above native grade. Water tight tanks and engineering
for high ground water are proposed as part of the OWTS design.
The Application represents that no areas of wetlands have been identified on the
developed portion of the site and that no hydrologic condition has been identified that
required determination or permitting by the Army Corp of Engineers. No development
within the floodway is proposed.
AUTHORITY
A. The Land Use and Development Code Section 3-301 contains regulations and
standards specific to development within a 100 year flood plain. Section 4-109 contains
provisions related to the review process (Administrative) and the review criteria for
development within a 100 year flood plain and the Flood Plain Permitting requirements.
1
a
B. Section 4-203(0) contains a description of the requirements associated with a
Floodplain Analysis. Table 4-2Ol contains submittal requirements for Development in a
100 Year Flood Plain.
C. The Application is also subject to compliance with all building code requirements,
zoning provisions (setbacks, building height), drainage and stream setback provisions
contained in Article 7 of the Land Use and Development Code.
III. STAFF ANALYSIS - REFERRAL COMMENTS
1. Referral Comments received from various agencies and are attached and
summarized as follows:
Resource Engineering - Consulting Engineers forthe County: Provided comments
noting general concurrence with the Application responses to the Code requirements
with the following topics/exceptions noted:
. Need for final elevation certificate after construction.. Supporting documentation needed on statement regarding Army Corp Permitting.
o Electric transformer needs to be elevated to above the 100 year flood elevation.o Post construction drainage needs to be analyzed with the impacts of the OWTS
berm considered including maintaining historic drainage patterns.
Army Corp of Engineers: Noted that there is not enough information provided in the
submittals to make a determination regarding permitting requirements. The comments
clarify that "lf there will not be any wetland or stream impacts a permit will not be
required by this office."
c.Garfield County Road and Bridge: lndicated that the existing driveway needs to be
, brought up to Road and Bridge standards and a driveway access permit should be
required to process the proposed changes. Verbalcomments clarified that no specific
deficiencies have been noted but that the access permit process would allow for more
detailed review and requirements for improvements as conditions of the permit. The
potential for an upgraded culvert and/or a paved apron were noted in the follow-up
verbal comments.
Garfield County Environmental Health Manager: Provided comments noting thatthe
septic system (OWTS) is designed to avoid contamination in the event of a flood and
expressed caution related to storage of agricultural materials and/or oil and paints
within the garage building. Subsequent comments requested the requirement that the
Applicant comply with the recommendations of All Service Septic the designer of the
system.
2. The Applicant has provided evidence of proper mailing of public notice for the
Director's Decision date in compliance with the Land Use and Development Code
provisions. No public comments on the request have been received.
b
d
Site Plan Excerpt &
Flood Plain Designations
3. The Comprehensive Plan addresses flood plain issues with key sections noted
below:
Section 8 Natural Resources Goal #2: Preserve natural drainage patterns so the
cumulative impact of public and private land use activities will not cause storm drainage
and floodwater patterns to exceed the capacity of natural or constructed drainage ways, or
to subject other areas to an increased potential for damage due to flooding, erosion or
sedimentation or result in pollution to streams, rivers or other natural bodies of water.
Section 8 Natural Resources Policies #2: Gafüdd Count will encourage the protection of
watersheds, flood plains, and riparian areas.
4. The Applicant has provided detailed analysis of the flood plain, applicable county
regulations, and required mitigation/flood proofing including the elevation requirements for
the proposed structure. Engineering information for both the structure's foundation and for
the OWTS design have been provided and reflect design considerations appropriate to
mitigate the location within the 100 year flood plain.
5. Proposals for relocation of the electric utility line will need to receive final approvals
from Holy Cross Electric.
6. lrrigation ditch relocations will require authorization or approval from the appropriate
irrigation ditch company or owners.
7. The existing primary residence on the property is located within the designated
building envelope from the Ries Subdivision Exemption approvals and is outside the 100
year flood plain. A non-conforming cabin is located between the home and the Roaring
Fork River. The original subdivision exemption files indicate that both structures were in
place prior to the subdivision approvals in 1988. No modifications to the cabin are
proposed. lt is currently served by the existing ISDS that will be replaced by the new
OWTS.
8. Plat notes on the Exemption Plat indicate that structures outside of the building
envelope will require flood plain development permits. The current proposed garage RV
storage structure is located outside of the envelope and within the 100 year flood plain. In
accordance with the plat note the current flood plain development permit application has
been filed.
9. The Applicant needs to maintain compliance with Section 7-203 Protection of
Waterbodies including but not limited to Section 7-203(C) which does not allow removal of
existing native vegetation within the 35 foot setback.
Section 4-109 (G) Review Criteria
10. The following comments address the review criteria contained in Section 4-109 (C)
Staff responses are shown in bold.
1. The danger to life and property due to flooding or erosion damage;
The Application represents that ample areas to carry the floodwaters will
be maintained and the level site will minimize erosion potential.
2. The susceptibility of the proposed facility and its contents to flood
damage and the effect of such damage on the individual owner;
Elevation of the proposed structure and OWTS will mitigate potential flood
impacts. Flood proofing utility installations are also proposed.
3. The dangerthat materials may be swept onto other lands to the injury
of others;
Gontents of the proposed structure will be enclosed within the building.
Other improvements are largely below grade utility installations.
4. The compatibility of the proposed use with existing and anticipated
development;
The proposed uses are consistent with residential uses on adjoining lots.
5. The safety of access to the property in times of flood for ordinary and
emergency vehicles;
Access to the lot will not change significantly and should be improved by
the placement of a modest amount of fill to expand and improve the
driveway.
6. Ihe cosfs of providing governmentalseryrces during and after flood
conditions, including maintenance and repair of sfreefs and bridges,
and public utilities and facilities such as sewer; gas, electrical, and
water sysfems;
Proposed improvements should reduce potential of flood impacts to trigger
governmental services during and after flooding based on utility and
access improvements.
7. The expected heights, velocity, duration, rate of rise, and sediment
transport of the flood waters and the effects of wave action, if
applicable, expected at the site;
The technical evaluations prepared by the Applicant's Engineer represent
an anticipated zero rise in flood Ievels and velocities based on the
Applicant's proposal.
8. The necessity to the facility of a waterfront location, where applicable;
The Applicant's proposal does not include waterfront improvements and
will maintain compliance with river setback requirements.
9. The availability of alternative locations, not subject to flooding or
erosion damage, for the proposed use; and
The Applicant's proposal utilizes areas of the site farthest from the river
and in areas with the Ieast potential for impacts to flood plain and river.
The relationship of the proposed use to the Comprehensive Plan for
that area.
10
The Applicant's proposal is in general conformance with the
Comprehensive PIan Goals and Policies calling for the protection of
floodplains and maintaining capacities of drainage ways.
11. A summary of Article 7 Standards and related issues is provided below:
7-101: Compliance with Zoning Regulations will be required.
7-102: The request is in general conformance with the Comprehensive Plan
7-103: The uses are generally consistent with adjoining residential uses.
7-104: No change to existing water services are proposed.
7-105: An engineered replacement OWTS is proposed to upgrade the existing system.
7-106: Utility upgrade for electric service is proposed and will be flood protected.
7-107: Minor upgrades to the existing private driveway are proposed and may be required
based on the requirement for a new access permit.
7 -108: The Application addresses the natural hazard of a location within the 1 00 yr. Flood
Plain.
7-109: No changes relative to fire protection have been noted other than benefits of minor
improvements to access and elevation of portions of the driveway.
7-201: No Agricultural Lands issues or impacts have been noted
7-202: Compliance with river setback provisions will minimize wildlife impacts
7-203: Compliance with Protection of Waterbodies provisions will be required.
7-204: The Application addresses general drainage issues. Additional drainage conditions
of approval are being recommended. The proposal has minimal areas of disturbance.
7-205: The Application reflects significant upgrades to the OWTS to protect environmental
quality.
7-206 No impacts associated with Wildfire Hazards as anticipated.
7-207 No hazardous conditions associated with this section have been noted
7-208: The Application addresses re-vegetation of disturbed areas in particularthe mound
OWTS installation and berm.
7-301: The proposed use is generally consistent with adjoining residential uses.
7-302: Adequate off-street parking exists for the current residence. The proposed
structure will create additional enclosed parking options.
7-303: The lot has existing landscaping with re-vegetation of disturbed areas proposed.
7-304,7-305. and 7-306: No Lighting, Snow Storage, or Trail issues were noted as part of
the Flood Plain Permit review.
IV. SUGGESTED FINDINGS
The following suggested findings support an approval of the requested Flood Plain
Development Permit
1. That proper public notice was provided as required for the Director's Decision
2. Consideration of the Application was extensive and complete, that all pertinent facts,
matters and issues were submitted and that all interested parties were given the
opportunity to provide input prior to the Director's Decision.
3. That for the above stated and other reasons the proposed Singer Flood Plain
Development Permit is in the best interest of the health, safety, convenience, order,
prosperity and welfare of the citizens of Garfield County.
4. That with the adoption of conditions, the application is in general conformance with
the 2030 Comprehensive Plan, as amended.
5. That with the adoptions of conditions the application has adequately met the
requirements of the Garfield County Land Use and Development Code, as amended.
IV. RECOMMENDATION
Planning Staff supports a Director Decision approving the Singer Application for a Flood
Plain Development Permit based on a the above suggested findings and subject to the
following conditions:
1. That all representations contained in the Application submittals and in the
suppfemental submittals from Lawrence and Lisa Singer dated July 9, 2014, Sopris
Engineering dated July 16, 2014, and All Service Septic dated July 14, 2014, shall be
considered conditions of approval unless specifically modified by the Director's Decision.
Said representations include but are not limited to technical flood plain evaluations,
minimum elevations for the proposed structure, engineered details for the foundation and
OWTS.
2. That the Applicant shall comply with the recommendations of the County's
consulting Engineer, Resource Engineering contained in their referral letterdated 81812014.
Compliance shall include:
a. Prior to construction or grading on the site the Applicant shall provide a more
detailed analysis of compliance with Army Corp of Engineers requirements in regard
to wetlands and confirming compliance with any applicable permitting requirements.
b. A post construction elevation certificate shall be provided to the County confirming
compliance with the elevation requirements for the proposed structure, a minimum
of one foot above the base flood elevation.
c. The elevation of the Holy Cross Transformer pad shall be a minimum of one foot
above the 100 year flood elevation.
d. Prior to construction or grading of the site the Applicant shall provide an additional
clarification of the post construction drainage on the site confirming that flows will
not be restricted by the proposed improvements and that drainage onto the west
neighboring property shallfollow historic patterns and not create increased impacts.
3. That the Applicant shall comply with the representations contained in the All Septic
Services summary of the OWTS dated 7114114 including but not limited to compliancewith
the sections on Flood Plain Considerations, Re-Vegetation Requirements, and the
recommendations contained in the section on Operation lnformation and Maintenance
including pumping recommendations and maintaining appropriate service contracts.
4. Re-vegetation shall utilize seed or plant types approved by the County Vegetation
Manager and adequate to protect the berms from erosion. The Applicant shall comply with
the County weed control regulations including noxious weed management on the site.
5. All new construction on the site shall be subject to obtaining appropriate building
permits, OWTS Permits, and grading permits. Compliance with zoning requirements
including building height shall be demonstrated at the time of building permit application.
An engineered foundation shall be required forthe proposed garage RV Storage structure
and the OWTS shall be an engineered system.
6. Electric utility line relocation shall be subject to final approvals by Holy Cross Energy
and shall be flood proofed to avoid any impacts from flood waters.
7. Prior to construction or grading on the site the Applicant shall obtain an updated
driveway access permit for the site from the Garfield County Road and Bridge Department.
The Applicant shall comply with any conditions of approval and/or required improvements
associated with the permit.
8. That the Applicant shall comply with Section 7-203 Protection of Waterbodies
including but not limited to Section 7-203(C) which does not allow removal of existing
native vegetation within the 35 foot setback.
Location of Proposed Structure
and Driveway Upgrades
View of OWTS Location
River Frontage and lrrigation Splitter Box
Area of Ditch Relocation & River Setback
!!¡¡¡RESOUFICEIIIIITTIITE N G IN E E FI IN G IN C
Glenn Hartmann, Senior Planner
G arfield County Com m un ity Develo pment Department
108 8t' Street, Suite 401
Glenwood Springs CO 81601
August 8,2014
RE: Floodplain Development Permit Application Review, FDPA-7974,
Lawrence and Lisa Singer
Dear Glenn:
At the request of Garfield County (GARCO), Resource Engineering, lnc. (RESOURCE)
reviewed Floodplain Development Perm it Application FDP A-7 97 4 subm itted by Lawrence
and Lisa Singer. The application is for proposed additional development within the
Roaring Fork River Floodplain on Lot 2, Ries Exemption, also known as 2621 County
Road 100, Carbondale. The proposed improvements include an RV Bârn/Greenhouse
structure, expansion of the driveway and parking area, a new OWTS with mounded
leachfield, landscaping/grading around the new structure, relocation of a ditch pipeline,
removal of overhead electric and construction of a pad mounted transformer with
underground electric lines. RESOURCE reviewed the submittal package including a
report titled "Revised Application for a Development Permit for Construction Activities
Proposed Within the Flood Fringe Associated with Accessory lmprovements on Lot 2, Ries
Exemption Being within the 100 year Flood Plain - Flood Fringe" prepared by Sopris
Engineering, LLC dated July 15, 2014. RESOURCE's review comments are presented
below,
GENERAL BACKGROUND
The proposed project is located along the Roaring Fork River off County Road 100 west
of the Catherine Store Bridge. This reach of the river has been analyzed in detail for the
delineation of the regulatory flood boundary and floodway. The effective maps for the
project are tlie FEMA Flood lnsurance Rate Map Panel 080205 18808 and the FEMA
Flood Boundary and Floodway Map Panel 080205-18808, both dated January 3, 1986.
Since the Floodway has been delineated by FEMA, fill and encroachment activities that
meet GARCO criteria can be approved in the flood fringe area.
REVIEW AND ANALYSIS
RESOURCE reviewed the application for compliance with the applicable requirements in
the 2013 GARCO Land Use and DevelopmentCode (amended July 21,2014). These
include Section 3-301 Floodplain Overlay Regulations, Section 4-109 Development in the
100 year Floodplain, and the general submittal requirement in Section 4-201 through 4-
203. RESOURCE generally concurs with the responses to each applicable section of the
code provided in the Sopris Engineering report and such responses meet the code
requirements, except as noted below.
Consulting Engineens and Hydnologists
Glenn Hartmann, Senior Planner
Page2
August 8,2014
A new elevation certificate of the as-built lowest finished floor elevation of the RV
Barn/Greenhouse will be required after construction of the foundation and should be
submitted prior to final approval otthe structure by the building official.
There was no supporting documentation regarding wetlands on the property and the need
for Section 404 permitting from the USACE. Approval of the Floodplain Development
permit does not confirm that 404 permitting is not required for the project.
The elevation of the transformer pad should also be above the 100 year base flood
elevation. The elevation should be coordinated with Holy Cross Energy.
The post construction drainage plan for the site should be analyzed and the general plan
outlined as guide for final design. Thís includes looking at whether the new berm blocks
off site flows and ensuring drainage onto the west neighboring property follows historic
patterns.
Although outside the scope of GARCO review, the Applicants are advised that alteration
and relocation of an irrigation ditch owned by others requires consent of the other owners.
Please call if you have any questions or need additional information.
Sincerely,
RESOURCE ENGINEERING, ING.
MichaelJ , P.E.
Water Resources Engineer
MJE/mmm
885-83.0
::::iFIESC]UFICE
r¡.TTENEfNÉEñINô INı
Glenn Hartmann
Sent:
bject:
To
Su
From:Green, Nathan J SPK [Nathan.J.Green@usace.army.mil]
Monday, July 21,2014 2:47 PM
Glenn Hartmann
FDPA-7974 Singer Flood Plain Permit (UNCLASSIFIED)
Classification : UNCLASSIFIED
Caveats: NONE
HeIIo Glenn,
I have neviewed.the above-nefenenced county permit. There is not enough infonmation for me
to make a determination as to whether on not this project will nequine a Depantment of the
Army 4Ø4 permit. A permit is requined if a project wiLl nesult in the placement of dredged
on fill matenial within waters of the United States or wetlands. If the pnoject will impact
streams on wetlands, as defined by the Corps of Engineers 1987 wetland deiináation manuair'
and appropriate regional supplement; a penmit will likely be required. If,thene will not be
any wetland on stneam impacts, a permit will not be nequired by this office. Please feel
fnee to contact me with any othen questions
Sincenely t
Nathan Gneen
Regulatony Pnoject Manager
Regulatony Division, Sacramento DistnÍct U.S. Anmy Corps of Engineens
4ØØ Rood Avenue, Room 224
Gnand'Junction, Colonado 8L5øt-2563
O: (97ø) 243-tL99 x t2
F: (97ø) 24L-23s8
Let us know how we're doing.Take oun short customer sunvey at:
odFTKCVS hocuc-
rCz
dTI^JVEV dNc-
s8Yhz ML
w59OnH
Our websÍte address has changed: httpz / /cp.mcalee,conld/k-
Kn6hSqdEInvdTSVZOXVKVleZOTbzA0S3qtXFKnTgIfCOXIIc L E ETd79J d 5BAOs FK9 LK609foPl54ØkhSbI LfgbSGT2pnB
5dmVEVTsGTDRSOl
I1íT
fNd4ØKvmGLEw2N
Classification : UNCLASSIFIED
Caveats: NONE
1
Glenn Hartmann
From:
Sent:
lo:
Cc:
Subject:
MichaelPrehm
Tuesday, July 29, 2014 4:43 PM
Glenn Hartmann
Rayjean Kramer
Singer Flood Plain Permit (2621 CR 100)
Glenn,
After reviewing the referral, the driveway will need to be brought up to current Road & Bridge standards. A driveway
permit applications are on the County website or can be e-mailed. Any questions please contact me.
Thanks
Mike Prehm
Garfield County Road & Bridge
Forema n/Glenwood District
(970) 945-1223 Office
(970) 94s-1318 Fax.
(970) 618-7109 Cell
1
Glenn Hartmann
From:
Sent:
To:
Subject:
HiGlenn,
I have reviewed the land use application for the Singer Flood Plain Permit and have several comments/questions:- I didn't notice a site plan included in the application. Without having reviewed these types of land use changes
before l'm not sure if that was required or not, but I would tike to see exactly where all of the proposed facilities
are going to be located. lt also would be nice to see a proximity map. Perhaps ljust missed it on the CD?- The septic system appears to be designed appropriately to avoid contamination in the event of a flood, I don't
have anything to add there.
While I noticed that there are no planned hazardous mater¡als to be stored on site, the applicant should be
careful in their storage of agricultural materials such as pesticides and fertilizers in the building/garage facility.
Fluids associated with the garage portion, such as used oil or paint, should also be properly stored and disposed
of.
I also would like to be part of a site visit to view the proposed OWTS upgrade if possible. Thank you
ll/lotgaa lll00
Environrnental Health Specialist lll
Garfield County Public Health
195 W. 14th Streêt
Rifle, CO 81650
Phone: (970) 665-6383
,
Email: mhill@earfield-countv.com
www.garfield-couniv.com/environmenta l-hea lth
Morgan Hill
Friday, August 08,20141:50 PM
Glenn Hartmann
Sínger Floodplain Permit
1
Glenn Hartmann
From:
Sent:
To:
Subject:
Morgan Hill
Tuesday, August 12,2014 9:46 AM
Glenn Hartmann
RE: Send data from MFP07309788 08/08/201415:49
Hi Glenn,
I think the comments fnom my pnevious email ane still accurate aften neading thnough thisletter. To my knowledge of septic systems, it seems this one has been propèrly deiigned to
account fon floodwaters. Public Health does ask that the applicant adhere to all the
necommendations outlined by AlI Service Septic to pnomote pnoper functioning of the 0hlTS andsoil tneatment anea.
Thank you,
Mongan
-- ---Oniginal Message-- ---
From: Glenn Hantmann
Sent: Fniday, August ø8, 2øt4 4:24 pM
To: Morgan HilI
Subject: FhJ: Send data from MFPø73ø9798 øg/øg/2Øt4 L5:49
HÍ Mongan: Attached is supplemental infonmation h,e neceived on the septÍc system design.did neceive youn email comments and they ane veny helpful. If you have additional commentsgetting them to me on Tuesday will work fine. Thanks again fon youn neview and input.
Glenn.
Glenn Hantmann
Community Development Depantment
-----Oniginal Message---- -
Fnom: toshiba@sanfield-countv.com Imailto:toshíbatôearfÍe1d-countv.com]Sent: Fniday, August ø8, 2øL4 3:5ø pM
To: Glenn Hantmann
Subject: Send data fnom MFPø73ø9788 øB/øg/2ØL4 LS:49
Scanned from MFPØ73ø9788
Date:ø8/ø8/2øL4 t5:49
Pages: L2
Resol utio n : 2ØØx2ØØ DPT
I
1