PC members present: Emily, Rachel, Bob, Gerrish, Kevin, Bryon and Josie.
313/191 Small Area Plan
The PC members engaged in a detailed discussion on a variety of issues regarding the SAP, including: in general, what the County Council wanted in the draft SAP; possibly changing the northern boundary of the planning area to exclude the airport; the concept of a vision document vs a more detailed LUC zoning type document; possibly using the existing zones in the area (Resort Special, Highway Commercial) as a starting place for the SAP, with several PC members suggesting that Resort Special, with a few changes to reflect current community priorities, could be a good starting point for the SAP; strip developments and dense development were generally thought to not be consistent with the area.
Jaylyn stated that her take away from the County Council/PC workshop (7-21-20) was that the Council wanted to prioritize preservation of the natural, undeveloped beauty of the area and that the SAP should similarly prioritize protecting the viewshed, and scenic character of the area since it’s the gateway to our community.
There was general agreement that to be consistent with the current Land Use Code, a short vision statement is needed for whatever zone(s) are ultimately included in the draft SAP, and if using existing zones such as Resort Special, the existing vision statements for those zones will need to be modified/updated.
Mila reported that the County has received 178 response to the survey so far, but she hasn’t had a chance to review them yet. Based on the PC members’ discussion she said that by next PC meeting the staff will: draft a vision statement, compile survey results/comments received, draft a list of possible zone uses and would appreciate input from PC members via google doc. Staff will also research viewshed/scenic resource protection language from other cities/counties and provide examples. She also noted the need to reach agreement on removing the airport from SAP map, as suggested by Grand County Council.
Hideawy Estates Subdivision – 1640 Murphy Lane
This is a four (4) lot subdivision for a 3.18 acre lot on Murphy Lane; the lot is currently zoned large lot residential, with allowed density of 2/acre (half acre lots). The applicant’s request is within allowable density. The applicant has worked with the floodplain administrator and road supervisor to ensure that appropriate drainage easements have been dedicated from Murphy Lane to Pack Creek. Applicant has also worked with the neighbor to dedicate an existing access as an easement for the neighboring property.
This property was historically prohibited from subdivision due to its proximity to Pack Creek’s floodplain. However, FEMA has released finer-grained flood maps since the original subdivision prohibition that show buildable area out of any flood zones. The applicant has marked the flood zone on the plat, and designated appropriate buildable areas, so there is no need for the subdivision prohibition with current information.
PC voted to approve the Preliminary Plat for Hideaway Estates Subdivision, 1640 Murphy Lane, parcel number 02-0017-0048: 7-0.
Public comments and citizens to be heard. Discussion as to whether public comments should be taken at 4 PM and 5 PM, to allow a citizens a time-specific for commenting, OR allow comments during a discussion of a particular issue. General agreement that it’s convenient for residents to know they have a standing opportunity to comment at 4 PM and 5 PM, but Chair should use judgement and allow citizens to comment during a discussion. NOTE: This discussion was for public comments NOT related to a public hearing issue, as citizens have a right to comment during a public hearing.
Excluding airport from 313/191 Small Area Plan. Kevin noted that due to limited time to complete the 313/191 SAP, and due to the airport being different than the rest of the 313/191 planning area (various developments might be appropriate at the airport, but not for the general 313/191 area), it makes sense to exclude the airport from the 313/191 SAP by drawing the planning area’s northern boundary on the south side of the airport. It also seems reasonable to have a separate planning process for the area from the airport to I-70 in the near future.
Scheduling next workshop with Grand County Council on 313/191 Small Area Plan. Mila noted that the public comments on the SAP would continue to be accepted through the first part of August. To stay on schedule for completion of the SAP by end of the year, PC and staff should aim to have draft SAP ready to present at the GCC’s Sept. 1 meeting. Thus, we should try to schedule a joint workshop at the GCC’s Aug. 18 meeting or at least before the Sept. 1 GCC meeting.
Grand County Council Update
- there have been 38 Covid19 cases in Grand County, 5 currently active
- GCC approved formation of a committee to research possible solar farm at the airport
- GCC appointed Josie Kovash to the PC to fill vacancy with term ending 12-31-20
- Two events for Fall 2020 have been cancelled by their sponsors: Rally on the Rocks and Outerbike
- A new NPS Superintendent has been named for Arches, Canyonlands, Hovenweep and Natural Bridges
- Will research websites for more detailed info regarding GC Covid19 testing results, positivity rates, etc. for Grand County