HomeMy WebLinkAbout2.0 BOCC Staff Report 07.07.1994Exp �1�
• Ems{.$ P!p
E x C S–T P9 Ifo -T
BOCC 7/7/94
PROJECT INFORMATION AND STAFF COMMENTS
REQUEST: Special Use Permit for a Communication
Tower in the A/R/RD Zone District
APPLICANT: Joan Savage (MCECommunications) —
LOCATION: A tract of land in a portion of Section 8, pro
T7S, R94W of the 6th P.M., generally
located approximately 2.5 miles southeast
of Rulison, 1/4 mile east of County Road i
301.
71.SITE DATA: Leased area - 1000 square feet
K
WATER/SEWER: N.A.
ACCESS: Private easement from County Road CR 301
EXISTING ZONING: A/R/RD
ADJACENT ZONING: A/R/RD
I. RELATIONSHIP TO THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN
The subject property is located in District C - Moderate Environmental Constraints as
designated on the Comprehensive Plan Management Districts map.
II. DESCRIPTION OF THE PROPOSAL
A. Site Description: The subject property is located approximately 2.5 miles
southeast of the Rulison, in an area known as Hunter Mesa (see location map
on page ' 7 - ). The property slopes from the south to the north, and is in
native vegetation. The site is described as natural grasslands.
B. Development Proposal: The applicants are requesting a Special Use Permit to
establish a cellular telecommunications facility within a leased portion of the
subject parcel. The applicant's cover letter and lease agreement is attached on
pages /04410
The facility will consist of a 25' x 25' fenced area containing an 8' x 12' x 12'
prefabricated skid -mounted metal building and a 50' metal tower with a 20'
antenna array. Electrical power and phone lines will brought to the side
underground from existing lines.
Access will be by existing private driveway from County Road 301. The
applicant expects approximately 10 trips by light truck during a 2 to 3 day
installation period. Thereafter, the site will be visited less than once a month, by
utility vehicles.
III. MAJOR ISSUES AND CONCERNS
A. Proposed Use: A Communication Facility is defined as "A noninhabitable structure
over twenty-five (25) feet in height, built for the purposed of transmitting or receiving
electrical impulses and approved by the Federal Communication Commission and
Federal Aviation Administration, as appropriate" due to the relative distance from
operating airports, no FAA approval or regulations are applicable to the application.
The facility clearly is consistent with this definition.
B. Zoning: The property is currently zoned A/R/RD. A communication tower is
considered a Special Use within the A/R/RD Zone District.
C. Consistency with the General Plan: Compatibility with the Garfield County
Comprehensive Plan is based on four sections addressing "Environment," "Community
Services," "Natural Environment" and "Compatibility".
Policy #1 (Environment), which discourages development in areas with slopes
in excess of 25%, is satisfied in that the elevation change in the upslope direction
on the leased site is five (5) feet in 60 feet (approximately 8 percent).
Regarding "Community Services', the proposal will not place additional burden
on community services and conversely may, be facilitating communication,
enhance emergency services.
In reference to performance standards addressing "Natural Environment" staff
is suggesting through conditions that the applicant address stabilization and
revegetation in accordance with12.
Due to the isolated location and the prominent vegetation on the site, and
proposed conditions of approval, the SUP should not create compatibility
problems.
D. Standards of Review: The Board of County Commissioners may deny any
request for a Special Use permit based on the lack of separation in terms of
distance from similar uses on the same or other lots, the impact on traffic volume
and safety or in utilities or any impact of the special uses which it deems
injurious to the established character of the neighbor hood or zone district in
which such special use is proposed to be located.
Adjacent Property Owners: Carl Bernklau has voiced concerns regarding the
impact to existing TV, Satellite dish and telephone reception (see Mr. Bemklau's
October 30, 1994 letter on page "/S• ).
IV. SUGGESTED FINDINGS
1. That all applicable regulations regarding a Zone District Amendment have been
complied with including, but not limited to, Section 10.00 of the Garfield County
zoning resolution of 1978, as amended.
• •
2. That the public hearing before the Board of County Commissioners was
extensive and complete, that all pertinent facts, matters and issues were
submitted and that all interested parties were heard at that meeting.
3. That the proposed Special Use permit is in general compliance with surrounding
land uses and zoning in Garfield County.
4. That for the above stated and other reasons, the proposed Special Use permit is
in the best interest of the health, safety, morals, order, convenience and welfare
of the citizens of Garfield County.
V. RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends APPROVAL based on the following conditions:
1. All representations of the applicant, either contained within the application or
stated at a hearing, shall be considered conditions of approval.
2. All new cut slopes or grading shall be revegetated with certified weed -free seed.
3. No external lighting shall be allowed.
4. USFS Wildfire Protection Guidelines will be followed in the construction of all
structures.
LI"r V D Fore. Pvguc.
All adjacent property owners shall be provided a contact number and name for
MCECommunications. In the event of a complaint regarding television,
satellite, radio, or telephone reception, MCEshall be responsible to responding
to the complaint within 24 hours. I -Sao 14%.)
ankr2-
Elizi14, 4y c«0t7- —4 t(6t^1
Dr.1..1,4ry . -T0 .X04,4
-t��vE/�e�
-
3