Press Alt + R to read the document text or Alt + P to download or print.
This document contains no pages.
HomeMy WebLinkAboutR00-085 Blue Ridge PUD varianceCommi e -g oner movecr- adoption
of the followQng Resolution:
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
COUNTY OF EAGLE, STATE OF COLORADO
RESOLUTION NO. 2000 -
APPROVAL OF A PETITION TO GRANT A VARIA1
FROM THE IMPROVEMENTS STANDARD!
ESTABLISHED IN SECTION 4 -620 AND SECTI
OF THE EAGLE COUNTY LAND USE REGULA
FOR THE BLUE RIDGE PUD
File Number VIS -0007
E I E I
IOkRGI.E COUNTY ATTORNEY
WHEREAS, Kevin & Tammy Tucker, (hereinafter "Applicant "),
submitted to the Eagle County Department of Community Development
a petition for variances from the requirements of Section 4 -620
and Section 4 -630 of the Eagle County Land Use Regulations for
the Blue Ridge PUD; and
WHEREAS, the specific variances are shown on the attached
Exhibits "A ", "B ",and "C"; and
WHEREAS, the Board of County Commissioners ( "the Board "),
conducted a public hearing on May 22, 2000 to consider the
Applicant's petition; and
WHEREAS, the Board, has considered all the evidence, exhib-
its and arguments presented at and prior to the hearings.
WHEREFORE, based on the evidence presented, the Board finds
that the Applicant's petition meets the intent of Section 5 -260.G
which governs the granting of a variance permit from - the Improve -
ments Standards of the LUR, and also finds the following:
1) The applicant has filed a petition for a Variance Permit
from the Improvement Standards in conformance with the require-
ments of Section 5 -260.G of the LUR.
2) The petition has been properly advertised and is ready
for consideration by the Board of County Commissioners.
3) The design proposed by the petitioner will provide a Toad
and trail design that is equally'durable and equally safe to the -
standards but would be considerably less expensive, use less
land, and blend in better with the environment and land - form.
4) The applicant has demonstrated hardship to the developer
and the public if there is strict adherence to the road and trail
standards for the Blue Ridge PUD.
1
1
732822
06/23/2000 03:40P 370
Sara
Fisher
1 of 8
R 0.00 D 0.00 N 0.00
Eagle
CO
4 . 5 ) The har °a
"hips demonstrated include, but are not limited
to, loss of a grove of mature cottonwood trees that screen the
project from Highway 82, the applicant's ownership of a limited
easement for access, and the excessive cost of building a trail
to county standards, when the project contains an extensive
trails system.
5) Hardships to the applicant of not granting the variances
exceed any currently perceived adverse impacts on the health,
safety, and welfare of persons affected, or adverse impacts to
the affected lands.
NOW, THEREFORE be it resolved by the Board of County Commis-
sioners of the County of Eagle, State of Colorado:
THAT, on balance, the benefits to the developer of granting
the variance outweigh the adverse impacts to people and lands
affected by granting the variance.
THAT, The Board hereby approves the Applicant's petition for
a Variance Permit from the requirements of Section 4 -620 and
Section 4 -630 of the LUR, as shown on the attached Exhibits "A ",
"B ",and "C ", for the Blue Ridge PUD.
THAT, the Board of County Commissioners directs the Depart-
ment of Community Development to provide a copy of this Resolu-
tion to the Applicant.
THAT, the Board hereby finds, determines and declares that
this Resolution is necessary for the health, safety and welfare
of the citizens of Eagle County.
MOVED, READ AND ADOPTED by the Board of County Commissioners
of the Count of Eagle, St a of Colorado, at its regular meeting
held the day of 2000.
COUNTY OF EAGLE, STATE OF
COLORADO, by and Through Its
ATTEST: BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
By: y .
ara J. Fidher µ- Tom C. Stone hairman
Clerk to the Board of D "All
County Commissioners
Michael L. Ga17agh 7
Commissioner
n /)
Johnnette Phillips, CoOlmissioner
2
G C"
Commissioner seconded adoption of
the foregoing resolution. The eoll having been called, the vote
was as follows:
Commissioner, Tom C. Stone _ Ct
Commissioner, Michael L. Gallagher
Commissioner, Johnnette Phillips
This Resolution passed by C - 3 - 0 vote of the Board of
County Commissioners of the County of Eagle, State of Colorado.
3
l
ISOM & ASSOCIATES
Architecture Land Planning Project Management
March 2 [ 2000 7]
John Vengrin MAR 2 4 Z000
Eagle County Engineering Department
xt
P.O. Box 179
Eagle, CO. 81631 ENGINCEERING
Re: Blue Ridge PUD (Blue Ridge Lane)
Dear John,
i I
� f
Please review the attached "Land Use Application Form" which details our formal request for a
variance from Eagle County Site Improvement Standards. This request for a variance is
necessary to provide essential infrastructure for the Blue Ridge Project without compromising
the character and natural amenities of the site.
A variance is requested from the following Eagle County Roadway Standards;
(a) Section 4 -620J, Table 4- 620.J, Lane Width, Suburban Residential Collector.
We request a 12' lane instead of 15'.
"It should be noted that the Board of County Commissioners approved a road
pavement width of 12' lanes with shoulders - this request for a variance is in
keeping with that original approval."
(b) This variance is requested for Blue Ridge Lane, Station 6+00 to Station
I9 +09 +13.05 within the Blue Ridge Lane right - of - way.
(c) The hafdship associated with this variance pertains to the protection of existing
cottonwood trees which are an integral component of the community character.
(d) This design will provide equal or better performance from the established
standard as Blue Ridge Lane will not experience decreased services levels for
automobile traffic, and the PUD proposal calls for a path & trail
system which will provide improved service for alternative modes of
transportation
2 (a) Section 4 -620J, Table 4- 620.J, Bike Lanes, Suburban Residential Collector. We
request that Blue Ridge Lane be exempted from the County Improvement
Standard for providing a detached 4' bike lane
(b) This variance is requested for Blue Ridge lane, Station 6 +00 to Station
Exhibit A
C
19 +09 +13.05 within the Blue Ridge Lane right -of -way.
(c) The hardship associated with building the attached 4' bike lane stems from the
interest in preserving the existing cottonwood grove that would have to be
eliminated to conform with County Standards.
(d) The proposed PUD design incorporates path and trail system,
which may offer an improved, safer corridor for alternative modes of
transportation by providing a bypass away from auto traffic, and the proposed
sidewalk will connect with the public trail system of El Jebel.
3. (a) Section 4- 620.1, Table 4- 620.J, Paths, Suburban Residential Collector. We
request that the 6' sidewalk be allowed to be attached with the curb & gutter.
(b) This variance is requested for Blue Ridge Lane, Station 6 +00 to Station
19+09+13.05 within the Blue Ridge Lane right -of -way.
(c) The hardship associated with detaching the sidewalk stems from the interest in
preserving the existing cottonwood grove that would have to be eliminated to
conform with County Standards.
(d) The attached 6' sidewalk will provide equal service to the public and the Blue
Ridge PUD provides for alternative bypasses as well.
These are the variances we are requesting for Blue Ridge Lane, as identified by an independent,
certified engineers. In regard to Staffs request for a variance for the internal private driveways
from County Roadway standards, we do not believe this is appropriate. The project is a PUD
with Homeowner maintained private drives accessing their parking spaces much the same as all
multi - family projects in Arrowhead, Singletree, Beaver Creek, Homestead and other projects.
None of these internal private drives conform to any County standards. Blue Ridge should not be
the exception.
If you have any questions, please call.
Sincerely,
CO-7 0
Campbell Mayer
Planner
cc Glen Ault
Kevin & Tammy Tucker
Walt Sasser
9906Vmgrm01 15110
Exhibit A
C ._
Vf S - ow 7 April 21, 2000
Steve Isom
Isom and Associates
P.O. Box 9
Eagle, CO 81631
RE: Blue Ridge P.U.D.
SE Job No. 98079.01
APR 2 4 2000
ENGINEERING
Dear Steve:
As agreed upon in the staff meeting on April 18, 2000 the site roads ( Cedar Ridge Drive and Cedar Hill Court)
need to be classified per the Land Use Code and any standard that can't be met require a variance.
Based upon the proposed use of Blue Ridge P.U.D. as now being a. Multiple- Family Project we have classified the
private on site roads, Cedar Ridge Drive and Cedar Hill Court as a Suburban Residential Road with a terrain
classification of rolling hills with an average day trip less than 750. Base upon the Eagle County Land Use
Regulations 9 aspects of these roads do not meet the required standards. A variance will have to be obtained for the
following items or the road will need to be modified.
1. Roads to be private roads with a 40' ingress egress easement. We.request a variance from the required
50' Right -of -way per table 4-620 -J since the roads are private. The 40' easement is adequate to
maintain the proposed road.
2. The required lane width per table 4 -620 -1 is 10'0 ". The proposed is 10'6 ". We request a variance on
lane width. The increased width will make it easier for emergency vehicles to access the site and the
parking spaces to function.
3. The required curb and gutter type to be mountable curb per table 4 -620 -J the proposed curb is a barrier
type curb, barrier type curb has better drainage and flow characteristics than mountable curb and better
suits multi - family use since the driveway locations are already designated. We request a variance on
curb types.
4. The required widening of the inside lane on curves is, yes, Case III -B, per table 4- 620 -1, and there is no
widening curves proposed. We request a variance on widening of curves since the proposed road is 1
foot wider than required. The Project is a pedestrian orientated neighborhood and widening at the
curves only invite speeding by cars. The widening is not required for emergency vehicles.
5. Minimum vertical curve K Valve for a sag curve per table 4 -620 -J is 20. There are two sag curve valves
less than 20 at the entrances of Blue Ridge Drive at STA PVI 1 +54, the K Valve is 13.76 and STA. PVI
17 +30.60 the K Valve is 12.61. Since both of those vertical curves are near the entrances, cars will be
maneuvering less than 25 MPH at the intersections and it is not a safety issue. We request a variance for
vertical curve K Valve.
6_ Minimum centerline radius per table 4 -620 -J is 100', the proposed minimum centerline radius is 50'_
Since the terrain of the site requires tighter radius' to traverse from the lower part to the upper part of the
project. We request variance for centerline radius.
Exhibit B
5Q2 (Mai Stre Suit A3 • C arbondale, CO 81623 - ;910) 704031 1 - Fax (970) 7040313
Steve Isom
SE Job No. 98079.01
April 21, 2000
Page 2
7. Minimum tangent separation per table 4 -620 -1 is 85'. We propose the minimum tangent length to be
25'. This length of tangent better serves multi- family use and does not reduce vehicular safety issues_
We request a variance for minimum tangent separations.
8. Per table 4 -620 -1 no on street parking is to be allowed. We request a variance for on street parking.
9. The intersection radius per table 4 -620 -1 is a 20' radii. We propose a 15' intersection radii variance
We have verified that fire truck access is acceptable to the Fire Chief.
Review of the plans show extensive paths within the Project There are 2 aspects of the proposed path that do not
meet Eagle County Land Use Standards. A variance will have to be obtained for the following items or the path will
need to be modified.
1. A 10' wide trail is required per section 4- 630 -A -1. There is a proposed 6' wide trail. We request a
variance to minimize the disturbed areas to construct the trail system that is proposed.
2. An asphalt surface is required per section 4- 630 -A -2. The proposed surface is aggregate base course to
minimize the use of an oil base surface such as asphalt in an vegetated open space situation. We
request a variance for the surface of the trail_
In review of the remainder of the Project it is our opinion that all other county standards are met. Give us a call if
you have any questions or need any additional information.
Sincerely,
SOPRIS ENGINEERING, LLC
Yancy Nichol, P.E.
Project Engineer
Exhibit B
f t ^9 C " , C)
V - 000 -7 April 21, 2000
Steve Isom
Isom and Associates
P.O. Box 9
Eagle, CO 81631
RE: Blue Ridge P.U.D.
SE Job No. 98079.01
Dear Steve:
This letter has been written as requested to update the existing variance request for Blue Ridge Lane.
Per Eagle County Staff meeting on April 18, 2000, the County Engineer requested the offsite portion of Blue Ridge
Lane, from E1 Jebel Road to Station 9+15 be part of that variance. There are aspects of this portion of the road that
does not meet the Eagle County Land Use Regulations. A variance will have to be obtained for the following items
or the road will need to be modified.
I. The required Right -of -way width per table 4-620 -J is 60', existing Right -of -way is 50'.
2. The proposed lane widths are I I' in width with 3' shoulders. The standard is IS' wide lanes
With 2' barrier curb and gutter.
3. The minimum proposed centerline radius is 110', the standard is 200' per table 4- 620 -J. The existing
Right -of -way will not allow < 200' radius. The Right -of -way was defined by the neighboring property
owners to avoid existing site restraints.
4. Proposed intersection radius with El Jebel Road is 25', the standard per table 4 -620 -J is 30'. We request
a variance to better fit within the Right-of-way which reduces the amount of fill on the neighboring
parcels.
5. There is no proposed path or sidewalk at this time do to the agreement of the existing Right-of-way ,
detached sidewalks or extensive paths are required per table 4- 620 -J.
6. There is no attached bike lane proposed. Per table 4 -620 -J an attached bike path is required. The
proposed road is not centered in the proposed Right -of -way because of existing site restraints. The bike
path will not fit within the Right-of-way-
Give us a call if you have any questions or need any additional information.
Sincerely,, y �y
SOPRIS ENG[NEERIN, LLC
YaKEy ichol,`P:E. .
Mnci _
a
IL -T 2 4 2000
ENGINEERING
Exhibit C
502 Main S treet` Suite A3 • Carbondale, CO 81 623
(970)
704 -0311
Fax (970) 70 0313
.6moRIQ
FURIMCCRI P.
0 1
I n
_.