HomeMy WebLinkAbout2.01 BOCC Minutes July 1983July, 1983.- Page 66
PROCEEDINGS OF THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS, GARFIELD COUNTY, COLORADO
adamantly opposed to the application. He felt that the ranch was a unique
development and the industrial growth occurring accross the road was not
compatible. Attending the Zemlock public hearing, of which the majority of
the association opposed the periit, Mr. Wright felt that with certain
mitigating circumstances the experihient had failed. He stated that Zemlock
had allowed access to Hwy. 82 off off a jeep road with heavy equipment, had
not applied for the proper permits for the water use, had not applied for
the air quality permit, and had u'Sed the highest point of the site as the
foundation of a stockpile of topso'1. The approval of the Zemlock permit
with conditions led the association to believe that the board had its best
intentions to protect the residents; Overall, the association felt that
the approval of another permit 1 in this area would only compound the
problem. Mr. Wright felt that the majority of the people were opposed to
the permit and urged denial.
Audry VanRaden, of Carbondale, was Sworn in by the Chairman. Ms. VanRaden
did a traffic survey on 103 & 104 Road and spoke with regard to the road
safety. She stated that the additional 60 truck trips per day with the
current traffic will add to the already existing problems on 103 Road. On
July 15, 1983, from 7:00 a.m. to', 5:00 p.m., she made a traffic survey on
the corner of 103 Road and Hwy. 82.;She reported that 166 truck trips with
gravel and asphalt was clocked going up and down 103 Road, 328 cars and
pickups, and 18, farm, horse, & cattle trucks, for a total of 512 vehicles
in a 10 hour period. This totaliaverage 51.2•vehicles per hour. The
gravel and asphalt trucks average 16.6 per hour or 1 truck every 3 1/2
minutes. However, between 7:00 a.m.and 10:00 a.m., 72 trucks traveled 103
Road at an average of one every 2 1142 minutes, along with 92 cars averaging
at one every 2 minutes. Between 3:30 p.m. and 5:00 p.m, there were 20
truck and 70 vehicles. Ms. VanRaden pointed out that the traffic is
heaviest during the hours that ;the school buses are on the road. She
stated that 95% of the trucks were!from private contractors and 5% were
marked Zemlock Gravel. She indicated that in most cases from the time a
truck turned on to 103 Road, got loaded, and back to Hwy. 82, it took 20-25
minutes. Ms. VanRaden indicated that a traffic study was done by the State
Highway Department in 1980 for Hey. 82, which reported that the average
vehicles per day was 5,950. A more',recent State study was made but she
could not get the report in time for the meeting. She urged the
Commissioners to obtain this information. In conclusion, Ms. VanRaden
reported that her vehicle had been 'damaged by rocks of these trucks and was
infomed that the damages would no be covered by insurance because it was
considered road damage. She felt that there would be more traffic in
addition to the concrete and asphalt trucks, such as for water, sand, etc.
Ms. VanRaden urged denial of the pekmit, due to the overwhelming traffic
and safety problems involved and the interest of highway safety to the
whole community.
Upon questioning of Ms. VanRaden, tge applicant indicated that Mid -Valley
Paving will hire private contrac}ors to do the hauling rather than using
their own trucks: She indicated hat Mid -Valley Paving would not use any
more than 30 round trip truck trips per. day..
Joan Acebo, of Carbondale, was sworn in by the Chairman. Being a homeowner
and board member of the Ranch atuthe. Roaring Fork Association, Ms. Acebo
was against the- proposed permit!. She stated that the granting of the
permit would only benefit a small number of the people. The association
would encounter many hardships, incuding 1) Decline in the desirability of
the properties, resulting in a loss of the value, 2) Experience had shown
that the enforcement agencies do not have the personnel to monitor the
impacts, leaving the burden on the residents, and 3) The Ranch at the
Roaring Fork is of a wildlife and recreation quality, which would be
jeopardized. Ms. Acebo indicated that the residents were fighting to
protect the area and quality of life.. She felt that the Zemlock permit was
a mistake, especially since the conditions of approval had not been met.
She referred to Section 5.03.11 ofthe County Zoning Regulations regarding
the denial of a special use and' indicated that the board had this
authority. On page 90 of the County Comprehensive Plan, 6 reasons are
listed for deeming. a proposed land use incompatible with existing land
uses; she indicated that at least 5;of those 6 reasons apply in this case.
Ms. Acebo urged denial.
Davis Farrar, City Manager of Carbondale, was sworn in by the Chairman. He
indicated that the city had received the Mid -Valley Paving request on a
referral from. Garfield County. After a review of the Carbondale Planning
IRuly, 1983 - Page 67
PROCEEDINGS OF THE BOARD OF: COUNTY COMMISSIONERS, GARFIELD COUNTY, COLORADO
Commission, Mr. Farrar presented the following recommendations for denial,
as listed in exhibit "K": 1) The number of accumulative truck trips from
the batch plant site and the Zemlock pit are too high, with regard to
public health safety and welfare, 2) Hauling water offsite from Carbondale
will create an unnecessary negative traffic impact in Carbondale, which
will create additional wear; and damage to the street system of which no
impact mitigation had beeniproposed, 3) Truck traffic on 103 & 104 Roads
will create a dangerous conflict with school bus traffic in the mornings
and evenings, 4) The batch plant and related operations will degrade the
air quality through increased emissions, 5) Generation of noise from the
batch plant accumulated with the existing noise from the Zemlock pit will
negatively affect surrounding rural residential areas, 6) The approval of
the application will add to the existing industrial uses to an area that
was previously established as a rural, agricultural, and residential, 7)
The batch plant will have negative impact on the Carbondale landfill with
the disposal of scraps and waste materials, with no provisions made to deal
with this impact, 8) The approval of the permit will further downgrade the
surrounding area's property values and quality of life, 9) The approval of
the batch plant will establish another industrial special use permit in an
area zoned A/R/RD, a zohe district with uses by right intended for low
intensity and rural densities.
Dale Ellis, of Carbondale,1was sworn in by the Chairman. Mr Ellis
indicated that the tax revenues would be minimal with the corporate
headquarters being located) Within Eagle County.
In response to the questioning of Mr. Ellis, the applicant indicated that
14 employees onsite wouldbe hired with the two batch plants, in addition
to the truck drivers. Theprojected payroll was unknown at that time.
Mr. Ellis continued with his statement. The limit of 30 truck trips per
day will.permit the plant Co operate at 20% of capacity for only 6 months
of the year which translates to only 10% of capacity on an annual. -basis.
If it was possible to operate this plant of this size with an investment of
this amount, then the plants that are operating at 100% of capacity would
generate .enormous profits; and anyone would be making an, errorby not
locating its plant at a location where it could operate at or near full
capacity. Mr..Ellis.questibned what the alternatives would be if the plant
leases money and indicated that 1) increase the .number of daily trips, 2)
walk away and leave an ugly; eyesore on a beautiful piece of property, and
3) continue to operate the plant at a substantial loss over the years.
Because of the above mentioned possibility of corporate losses, he was
concerned that the road ;improvements may never be completed. Mr. Ellis
urged the commissioners that the entire bond for road improvements be
posted upfront, rather than by phases. With regard to the devaluation of
property, Mr. Ellis reported that a house sale was lost last week, at least
until this issue was decided, Mr. Ellis indicatedthat the residents were
the board's constituency and .not the people in Eagle County, he felt that
the board should listen 'to their concerns rather than those in Eagle
County. In conclusion, he: stated, "let the applicant put their plant in
Eagle County."
Louise Noyes, 1262 112 Road, was sworn in by the Chairman. Ms. Noyes was
speaking for herself. Being a valley residentforapproximately 12 years,
Ms. Noyes indicated that 'uietness. was -a very important factor in making a
decision to purchaseher property. Now,the quiet was interrupted by the
Zemlock Gravel Pit. She indicated .that she is opposed to anymore
noncompatible uses being) permited within this rural area. Ms. Noyes
indicated that 30 more truck trips per day will lead to an objectionable
amount ofconjestion onil-103 Road. She reported that she. also had. a
windsheild broken by -the gravel from the trucks. With regard to :the: road
condition, there.is no center line of the road. Ms. Noyes wonders how the
applicant can operate at an; average capacity with such a large investment.
If the permit is approved, she urged the board to add some .specific
conditions regarding the !air quality and the following conditions: 1)
Unannounced onsite inspections of the scrubbers shall take placeonce a
month, 2) Fine will be levied if the scrubber operation is found to be
inadequate, 3) The special; use permit shallbe revoked if the operation
fails to pass. 3 of.these inspections, 4) Costs of the inspections shall be
passed on to the applicant, and. 5) Bonds and -requirements set for the
reclamation plan.
Speaking on behalf of the Garfield County Citizens Association, Louise
July, 1983 - Page 68
PROCEEDINGS OF THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS, GARFIELD COUNTY, COLORADO
Noyes indicated that the association had not taken a formal position
neither for nor against the proposal. The association made the following
comments: 1) Within the Comprehensive Plan there are 6 reasons deeming the
the proposed land use incompatible, l2) The proposed use is not a use by
right in the A/R/RD zoning, nor is it a conditional use, 3) Garfield County
policies have left the County wide open for gravel pits along with asphalt
& concrete batch plants, 4) Some df the operations could be characterized
as refugees from. Pitkin County, ',,which does not welcome this type of
development and Garfield County assumes responsibilities for more than its
share of it, and 5) There are more operations that can be monitored to
ensure that the applicant. has all �:of the necessary permits and that they
meet all of the conditions.
Roy Grice, of Carbondale, was Sworn in by the Chairman. Mr. Grioe
submitted a photograph of the.Zemiiock plant, which was marked as exhibit
"6". He indicated that he is an asthmatic and he moved to the area for the
air quality and the environmental standards and urged the board to deny the
application.
fl
Mike Romanus, of Carbondale, was }sworn in by the Chairman. Mr. Romans
submitted photographs from his fronts yard of 103 Road, which were marked as
exhibits 7-1 through 7-7, and petitions for denial, which were marked as
exhibits 8-1 through 8-3.
Scott Miller, of the State Dept. of }Health, Air Quality Control Division,
was sworn in by the Chairman. Upon questioning by Mr. Romans, Mr. Miller
indicated that he could not even guess at the materials which would be
emitted into the air without knowing the type of machinery proposed. The
applicant indicated that 40 tons! per hour was proposed. Mr. Miller
estimated that 50-200 tons per year 'would be emitted into the air.
Upon the questioning by Mr. Romans!! regarding toxic wastes, Ms. Houben
indicated that the Dept. of Healttiiin Denver reported that the wastes are
not toxic or hazardous. Ms. Soulsbyjindicated that the sludge was actual
dust taken from the.roadbase, which is put into a mill and then mixed with
oil. For clarification, she stated !!that the dust is taken out before being
mixed with the oil and is run through the sludge pond; it is only dust
mixed with water, which is mud. Ngitoxic chemicals are within the sludge.
She indicated that the mud would be 'transferred to the Carbondale landfill,
if that was desirable.
With regard to air quality, Ashley Anderson indicated that generally the
procedure is to receive the special Use permit, get the machinery, and then
apply for the permit from the Alit Quality Control Division of the State
Dept. of Health.
Mr. Miller,Dept. of Health,
of the Irndicated that there was no reason that
the board has to grant the special Oe permit prior to Air Quality Control
permit, but rather a specific designlof equipment must be submitted with a
commitment that a permit can be ;received. If it is rejected, then the
permit must be revised. Mr. Miller stated that Glenwood Springs and
Montrose were two of the cleaner nicer communities on the Western Slope and
to allow a concentration within this valley, up to the air quality
standards, would be a great change in the quality of life the residents are
expecting. He indicated that he didinot have any control over the permit,
but rather the board does. Mr.!lMiller urged the board to delay the
decision so that he may have time tf;analyze the application with regard to
air quality, if this was the concern:
li
Mr. Romanus wanted to know who he SSuld call to get the roads cleaned up.
DI response, Com. Drinkhouse indicated that he could call the County. Mr.
Romanus indicatedthat this was .passing the buck. In conclusion, Mr.
Romanus felt that the County did; not need another plant and could not
understand the logic of the board.
i
In response to questioning of Daie Ellis, the applicant indicated that 5
plants were being considered originally, but 4 were sold. One of the
plants still available for consideration, which was operated by the State.
Since that time, other plants have been sought out. Ms. Soulsby indicated
that Mid -Valley Paving would be veinterested in the Sunmount plant,
which is still permited.within Garfi' ld County. Scott Miller indicated
that the Sunmount plant was approximately 1 year old.
July, 1983 - Page 69
PROCEEDINGS OF THE BOARD OF COUNT. COMMISSIONERS, GARFIELD COUNTY, COLORADO
John Phillips, attorney for the Ranch at the Roaring Fork Homeowners
Association, was previously sworn in at the last public hearing regarding
this application. With regard to 9.03.01 of the County Zoning Regulations,
Mr. Phillips indicated ;that all appropriate letters of approval from
various State and Federal agencies must be obtained prior to the issuance
of the special use permit and not afterwards. He suggested that Asst.
County Attorney Steve Zwick submit a legal opinion letter for the benefit
of the public and the boa'cd for the decision making process. Mr. Phillips
indicated that the applicant's attorney's logical extent of the
applicant's argument concerned the permit process, in that it would hake
more sense to get the special use permit from Garfield County, get the air
quality permit from the State Dept. of Health, and then go out and buy the
plant. With regard to 'Mid -Valley Paving meeting the State and Federal
standards, Mr. Phillips felt that the Planning Staff assumed that the
standards would be met and 'if so the plant could be located anywhere within
the County. He indicated that the real question of the board was where
should the plant go and should it go where it is proposed. In conclusion,
Mr. Phillips commended the applicant for proposing a plant that will meet
all standards, even though[i the type had not yet been determined, but
indicated that this was! not enough information for the board to make a
decision with regard to compatibility with the surrounding residents.
Overall, the proposed plant has impacts that are incompatible with the area
and the board should deny the application or impose strict conditions and
bonds upon the issuance oft any permit.
•
John Stewart, of CarbondalW', was sworn in by the Chairman. in response to
the questioning of Mr. Stewart, the applicant indicated that there would
not be a sludge pond, but 'rather excess material that is washed out by the
scrubbers, a mound of moil. The water will be hauled in approximately once
a month from an available site and stored in a 15-17,000. gallon reserve
tank.
In response to the guestaoning of Mr. Stewart, Mrs. Blue indicated that
Zemlock 'was using a retardant on the road to control the dust. She
indicated that Zemlock waslgetting water from her basin ditch, which she
gave them permission to do so. Mrs. Blue indicated that her water rights
were not changed to industrial from agricultural, because it was assumed as
agricultural. The Chairman indicated that the public hearing was to
discuss the Mid -Valley Paving application and not the Zemlock permit.
Bob Schenck, of Carbondale, was sworn in by the Chairman. Mr. Schenck
indicated that he attended' a public hearing in December of 1981 and
reported that he was not against the Zemlock permit, but rather recommended
several conditions for approval. One condition was that no further permits
for hot mix plants or cehcrete plants shall be issued. On December 16,
1981, Mr. Schenck and his ineighbor,- Clifford Cerise, were called to meet
with the board to discuss the recommendations of Mr. Schenck. He indicated
that it was stated by Mr. Blue and Mr. Zemlock that their was no intention
of putting a hot mix plantor a bulk concrete plant in. Other conditions
were discussed regarding the road and that the gravel trucks be covered.
In the Spring of 1982, when the gravel was starting to be hauled, all that
had been done for road improvements was that an escape ramp on Hwy. 82 was
constructed. Mr. Schenck indicated that from the Spring of 1982, the only
work done on that road wasldone by the County with taxpayers money, when
the work was supposed toibe done by Zemlock. With other examples, Mr.
Schenck felt that the agreement of the original pit had not been lived up
to and that the board should not even consider another permit until 103
Road is at least satisfactory as to the condition of the road presently.
Clayton. Meyring, of Carbondale, was sworn in by the Chairman. Mr. Meyring
read an editorial published in the Valley Journal on July 14, 1983. The
editorial urged denial of the Mid -Valley Paving application and indicated a
dislike of putting industi;ial type facilities within the middle of an
A/R/RD zoned area. Although there are several industrial uses within the
immediate area at that time, but only the Zemlock Gravel Pit was a
permitted use. The othersiwere considered nonconforming preexisting uses.
If another permit was approved for another industrial facility, it would be
a step backwards, and would be making the area fit the use, rather than
making the use fit the ar$a. It would create additional traffic hazards
and would be against tile wishes of the vast majority of the landowners
within the area. In conclusion, the editorial stated that the elected
officials should make a deision according to the majority's desire.
July, 1983 - Page 70
PROCEEDINGS OF. THEBOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS, GARFIELD COUNTY, COLORADO
James Noyes, of Carbondale, was sworn in by the Chairman. Mr. Noyes urged
denial for the reasons given in previous testimony. He indicated that he
can clearly hear the noise of theiZemlock Gravel Pit from his residence,
which is approximately 2 miles awayand 800 feet above the pit. Mr. Noyes
felt that the Zemlock pit was a definite reduction in the quality of life
and the peacefulness of the area; f} also has had a windsheild broken due
to the gravel from the trucks. In conclusion, Mr. Noyes felt that the
proposal was notan appropriate use:for that area.
Michael Kornefel, of Carbondale, ! was sworn in by the Chairman. Mr.
Kornefel indicated that he was probably the closet neighbor of the proposed
plant. He indicated that his wife Was an asthmatic and that they will have
to move if the application is approVd. Mr. Kornefel was also concerned of
the impact of the children who mightihave to breath the pollution over the
long term. Because of the health reasons and other considerations, he
recommended denial.
Mike Romans!questioned the board a$jto the paving of 103 & 104 Road. In
response, Com.Velasquez indicated gnat the Zemlock permit was reviewed and
the County Road Supervisor was satisfied that all of the conditions of the
permit had been complied with as stated on the resolution. The County, as
on any other county road, did the improvements as necessary.
Thomas Connolly, previously sworn in at the last public hearing regarding
this matter, asked the board iftemlock had met the conditions of the
permit by piling the gravel on a!huge hill overlooking the ranch. Mr.
Connolly indicated that the citizensifeel that the Zemlock permit relates
to what they feel is going to happen with the proposed permit and they
don't trust the applicant to live up to the conditions nor the capacity of
the board to enforce the conditions. Mr. Connolly indicated that the
applicants feel that they can sayjanything in the application to get the
special use permit and then they do anything they want. In conclusion, Mr.
Connolly stated that a concrete and/or an asphalt batch plant is
incompatible with the land use of the area.
In response tothe given testimony, Ashly Anderson responded for the
applicant. Mr. Anderson agreed with Mr. Connolly in that sone applicants
put anything in an application toget a permit so that they can do
anything, but this was not true to this application. He welcomed any
enforcement measures to be imposed on Mid -Valley Paving, but assured the
board that 30 round trip truck trips! would be the maximum. Mr. Anderson
indicated that the trucks would nota run during the school bus times. With
regard to the roads, he indicated that the road needs improvement and
Mid -Valley Paving will widen and paVn it and submit a bond to this effect.
With regard to the air pollution, ter. Anderson idicated that Mid -Valley
Paving would like to get the general approval to do the proposal and then
work with the Dept. of Health on an; acceptable plant for the location. In
conclusion, Mr. Anderson -indicated! that there would be benefits to the
connunity, such as, lower pricedion paving the streets. He stated that
Mid -Valley Paving could not buy asphalt at retail from anyone. Although
the reason is unknown, the plants in Silt, Aspen, and Grand Junction would
not sell to them. He stated that the plant would produce 40 tons per hour,
which is a relatively small plant and requested approval of the
application.
Ms. Soulsby indicatedthat if Mid -Valley could buy the asphalt and be
competitive in the market, then an asphalt plant would not be applied for.
Milt Wright, president of the Ranch at the Roaring Fork Association,
indiated that the association had ;.bust purchased $12,000 worth of asphalt
to pave three parking lots and did not buy it from Mid -Valley Paving, Inc.
Ms. Soulsby indicated that Mid -Valley Paving had submitted a bid, which was
$4,000 lower than the accepted bid. plid-Valley Paving was going to get the
asphalt from the same temporary :,plant which was eventually used. She
stated that Mid -Valley Paving's bidiwas refused because of the conflict.
In response to questioning of Joan Acebo, Ms. Soulsby indicated that the
Surmount plant could not be operated] at the existing location, because the
owner wishes to use the area to store equipment only. Mid -Valley Paving
had approached them before and had a verbal agreement to supply the company
with asphalt for the next three years, but it was reneged, that is the
reason for this application. In conclusion, Ms. Soulsby indicated that all
other locations sought were exhausted before attempting this application.
July, 1983 - Page 71
PROCEEDINGS OF THE BOARD of COUNTY COMMISSIONERS, GARFIELD COUNTY, COLORADO
There were no further cements from the board, therefore Commissioner
Velasquez moved that the Public Hearing be closed. Com. Cerise seconded
the motion; carried.
Commissioner Cerise moved that the decision of the Special Use Permit of
Mid -Valley Paving, Inc. to install concrete and asphalt batch plants,
located north of Hwy. 82 off County Roads 103 & 104, be made on July 25,
1983, at 9:00 a.m. Com. Velasquez seconded the motion; carried.
Upon the request of the County Clerk, Commissioner Velasquez moved that the
Chairman be authorized to sign a resolution 483-158) concerned with
payment of claims against Garfield County submitted during the month of
June, 1983, as the first payment. Com. Cerise seconded the motion;
carried.
Upon the request of Mirk:Bean, Senior Planner, Commissioner Cerise moved
that the Chairman be autbgrized to sign an exemption map and resolution
(#83-159) concerned with granting an exemption from the Garfield County
Subdivision Regulations 'for Nark Arnove. Com. Velasquez seconded the
motion; carried.
Upon the request of Mark Bean, Commissioner Cerise moved that the. Chairman
be authorized to sign the following Final Plats for Battlement Mesa, Inc.:
Jack's. Pocket Village Filings #4, 3, 2, 1, Highlands Filing #1, and River
Bluff Filings #4, 6, 8, 9, 3, 2. Com. Velasquez seconded the motion;
carried.
County. Manager Stan Broome presented the calendar events for the coming
week. Mr. Broome indicated that the board will hold its regular meeting on
August 2, 1983, at Carbonate, as part of Garfield County's Centennial
celebration.
After a review of the records, Mr. Broome indicated that the County owes Jo
Terry, the Public Health Nurse, $3126.00 for the differential of salary for
the 1982 period of time spent working at the County Jail. The differential
breakdown is 6.00 for 526Wours, resulting from a base rate of $8.75 and a
jail rate of $18.50. Attorney Rhodes will review the records and give the
board a summary of the nurses work at the County Jail.
Mr. Broome indicated that !,Ray Cogburn, Garfield County Extension Agent, had
requested to hire two 4-HAgents to work at the County Fair. Within the
budget, Mr. Cogburn had:budgeted a salary for a part-time office clerk,
which was not being used; and indicated that this money could be available
to help pay for the 4-H Agents.
With regard to the Cour House Construction, Mr. Broome reported that
change order #3 will total $93,891.00, including the waterline along with
other items. Mr.. Broom anticipated that this would be the final change
order until the remodeling started on the old part of the Court House.
Upon the request of Lep Merkel, Director of Administrative Services,
Commissioner Cerise moved that the Chairman be authorized to sign a
resolution (#83-160) concerned with authorizing the Chairman of the Board
of County Commissioners of Garfield County, Colorado, to sign a lease with
Colorado National Leasing Inc. to purchase the Wang Computer System.. Com.
Velasquez seconded the motion; carried.
Upon the request of Mr. Merkel, the Chairman signed the following Oil Shale
Trust Fund requests for approval:
City of Rifle Collector Streets 557,138.94
City of Rifle. Water & Sewer Improvements 243,021.25
City of Rifle Collector Streets 37,744.95
City of. Rifle Watef!& Sewer Improvements 102,942.87
Rifle City Hall 3,250.00
Silt Low Income Busing 85,000.00
Upon the request of the County Clerk, Commissioner Cerise moved that the
Chairman be authorized toiaign the liquor license renewals for Oasis Creek
Liquors and the Glenwood S$rings Golf Club, both of Glenwood Springs. Com.
Velasquez seconded th motion; carried.
Upon the request County Attorney Earl Rhodes, Comnissiner Cerise moved that