HomeMy WebLinkAbout4.0 Correspondence & ConditionsSTRONG LUMBER AND SPECIALTY LOG PRODUCTS, INC
P.O. BOX 808 SILT, CO.81652 SAWMILL 7190 HWY 13
To whom this may concern.
Please take a look at the information we are supplying as we feel this is a unique
situation because of all the industrial activity around us.
We have 18 acres west of parachute that we have owned since the 90's. This 18 acres
used to be part of my dads ranch of 480 acres. So thru that time we have seen a lot of
changes. We have seen it go from sheep grazing to an industrial park. As you can see
with the information we are providing. This it not really a special use, but the only
reasonable use.
To the east of us there is an EnCana compressor station. That is far more than light
industrial, as you can see with photos attached. Then to the south of us we have the
Grand Junctions gravel pit, witch will be mined all the way to the south east of EnCana's
compressor station. See photos attached. To the north of us we have the main line of the
Union Pacific Railroad. At this location there are double tracks with trains on the hour
with them passing each other every three hours, see photos attached. Then to the west is
County Rd 300. As you can see by the site plan and photos this is our shortest property
line.
Just to go into a little neighborhood history. Across 6& 24 the county approved
Traveler's Highlands Subdivision which consists of a 190 commercial lots. That is being
built right now. Also, across 6&24 to the north, Garfield County Planning and Zoning
recommended a rezone of 74 acres of A/R/RD to light industrial. In which frac tech
plans to put warehouses on, also storage of gas and oil field supplies. Please refer to
Garfield County Planning and Zoning records to all of what was approved to be put on
that location. This recommendation was just made last month, and is going in front of
Garfield County Commissioners in July. So at the request of what we are proposing this
is little to no impact on the neighborhood. The nearest residence is a .5 miles away, so
there is no effect on them.
As for your first concern we have elected to not put the office space in the building.
As for some of your concerns on 2) 5.03(2) we do have a Garfield County drive way
permit number GRB06-D-120 and it is attached. The paving work is scheduled for 2nd
week of June, 2007 but might have to be put back now. Due to schedule changes we may
encounter a delay, however, we still plan to have it done in the summer of 2007.
As for concerns on 3) 5.03 (3) as you can see by photos we are already screened on
three sides of the property if any screening was to be done it would be on County Rd 300.
As there is limited water on the property so it would have to be fencing, or simple zero
scape in front of the building. The building is colored with earth tone colors so it blends
in with the existing landscape. If the county has any other ideas we will gladly work with
them.
As for 4) 5.03.07 as shown on our site plan there is an engineered detention pond in
place. This was put in with accordance with EnCana because of how they put there
driveway in to the compressor station. As far as impacts to adjacent property's from the
generation of vapor,dust,smoke,noise,glare,or vibration. We are proposing indoor storage
of gas & oil drilling equipment. Therefore, it is contained inside the building. As far as
STRONG LUMBER AND SPECIALTY LOG PRODUCTS, INC
P.O. BOX 808 SILT, CO.81652 SAWMILL 7190 HWY 13
the outside activity, it is semi trucks, passenger cars and light trucks. These vehicles are
licensed and in compliance with state and federal rules. As for the emissions and noise
rules the only other equipment is a forklift; which are plated with SME from Garfield
County Clerk and Recorder. The drive is to be paved off of County Road as permit
suggests, then to be gravel to the building. At the building there will be a concrete apron
for trucks to turn around on. Please refer to the reports done by Wagon Wheel Consulting
on or near our property for wildlife and weed control and management. Since we are
surrounded by industrial uses there is no impact on domestic animals.
As to the traffic this is really very small considering the amount of semis at 10 per
day and light truck or car at 5 per day. When the numbers are ran they barely compute to
actually doing a study. They don't even add up to 1% of the traffic on the four other use
permits or zoning around us. For these numbers please refer to the G.L.G. services report.
As for sufficient distances from abutting our site plan a picture is attached that clearly
shows there will be no impact to adjoining properties. The mitigation measures the
impacts that have been addressed by the County for approving industrial uses on my
property lines.
As for a rehabilitation plan we are proposing a gravel parking lot and a warehouse. This
is real estate investment and property improvement. We have no plans to change any
thing after the fact. If someday things change we will gladly work with the County to put
things back to normal.
Thank you
George strong
GARFIELD COUNTY
Building & Planning Department
Review Agency Form
Date Sent: April 30, 2008
Comments Due: May 23, 2008
Name of application: Simon Casas & Genobeva Lopez -Herons Nest R V Park
Sent to:
Garfield County requests your comment in review of this project. Please notify the
Planning Department in the event you are unable to respond by the deadline. This form
may be used for your response, or you may attach your own additional sheets as
necessary. Written comments may be mailed, e-mailed, or faxed to:
Garfield County Building & Planning
Staffs contact: Craig Richardson
109 8th Street, Suite 301
Glenwood Springs, CO 81601
Fax: 970-384-3470
Phone: 970-945-8212
General Comments: Garfield County Road & Bridge Department has no comments on
this application as it does not have access to or directly impact the County road system.
Name of review agency: Garfield County Road and Bridge Dept
By: Jake B. Mall Date May 5, 2008
Revised 3/30/00
Page 1 of 1
Craig Richardson
From: Rob Ferguson [gvfpdops@sopris.net]
Sent: Monday, May 05, 2008 1:27 PM
To: Craig Richardson
Subject: George Strong Project
Craig — I went out an inspected the water storage tanks at George Strong's property by the Una bridge on 4-30-
08. The install has the FD approval. Thanks let me know if you need anything else.
Rob Ferguson
Deputy Fire Chief - Operations
Grand Valley Fire Protection District
Office: (970) 285-9119
Fax: (970) 285-9748
email: gvfpdops@sopris.net
No virus found in this outgoing message.
Checked by AVG.
Version: 7.5.524 / Virus Database: 269.23.8/1415 - Release Date: 5/5/2008 6:01 AM
5/5/2008
Page 1 of 1
Craig Richardson
From: Jake Mall
Sent: Monday, May 05, 2008 8:34 AM
To: Craig Richardson
Subject: George Strong -Cr. 300
Craig:
All conditions for George Strong's driveway access on Cr. 300 have been met including the stop sign and paved
apron. Let me know if I can do more for you.
Jake B. Mall
Administrative Foreman
Garfield County Road and Bridge Department
970-625-8601 Office
970-618-6194 Cell
5/5/2008
December 12, 2002 Page 1 of 2
Craig Richardson
From: Steve Anthony
Sent: Tuesday, April 22, 2008 10:21 AM
To: Craig Richardson
Subject: Strong SUP Weed Plan
Hi Craig
here is the Weed Plan submitted by George Strong for his SUP of 2007 (not to be confused with his
curretn sketch plan).
The plan is acceptable.
Steve
Steve here is vegetation plan for the una project. Address is 0070 cnty 300. All non graveled areas (bar
ditches, fence lines, detention area) to be sprayed by annually. Salt cedars will be cut down Then spayed
on a yearly basis.
Spray to be used on vegetation will be round up. Unless you have another recommendation.
Spray for the salt cedars to be Garlin 4 or 3 Or pathfinder 2.
Any further input please call me at (970-379-3265).
Thanks
GEORGE STRONG
4/22/2008
Kay EyI
From: Roussin, Daniel[Daniel.Roussin@DOT.STATE.CO.US]
Sent: Sunday, October 14, 2007 3:28 PM
To: Kay EyI
Cc: Fred Jarman; Znamenacek, Zane; Drayton, Devin; Killian, Brian
Subject: RE: Una Development Traffic Study - Cnty Rd 300 Garfield County
Kay - Thank you for the opportunity to review the Una study completed by Kari McDowell, PE, Drexel,
Barrell & Co (DB) dated September 14, 2007. The development does not have direct access to state highway
system. The access is off a county road (Stone Quarry Road, CR300) and they exit onto State Highway 6. The
State Highway Access Code (2 CCR 601-1) states in Section 2.6 (3) if CR 300 intersection at SH 6 increases by
20% then an access permit is required. On this County Road, CDOT doesn't have an access permit.
Therefore, we typically use existing conditions and see if the proposed development increases by 20%. This is
a unique condition, because CDOT has other historical traffic counts done by other developments that when
through the County development process. I have two traffic studies that have historical data on this
intersection. The first was done by Kimley-Horn dated May 27, 2007 for 5C Investment. It showed the
pm peak hour at 108 vehicles for the south approach (CR 300). LSC Transportation Consultants did another
traffic study dated February 1, 2007 for Frac Tech. It showed the pm peak hour at 84 vehicles for the south
approach. The Drexel, Barrell & Co (DB). traffic study dated September 14, 2007 stated pm peak hour of 119
for CR 300.
Page 1 of 2
What is interesting, all three reports measured the intersection within a year. LSC report counted traffic on
September 2006, and DB report counted traffic on August 30, 2007. As you can see traffic has increase by 35
vehicles in the pm peak hour. The Una Development would increase by an additional 15 vehicles in the pm
peak period. Therefore, there would be an increase of 60% in the last year with other development and
proposed developments. Therefore, the County will need to apply for an access permit for CR 300 due to the
20% change at the intersection on SH 6.
The DB report states that a left turn deceleration lane is required and a right turn deceleration lane is required
for this intersection. However, the report didn't take in account the large truck traffic using this CR300. After
the report adjusts the traffic to take account the heavy truck volume, it may also need some acceleration lanes.
This will need to be examined by DB report.
In accordance with the Access Code, Section 2.6(6) states "Vehicular use and operation of local roads where
they connect to (access) a state highway is the responsibility of the appropriate local authority". In this case,
this would be Garfield County. I do understand the County has a tremendous burden on their roadway system;
however, these improvement would provide safety improvements on a 50 mph roadway. This roadway
improvements are needed for safety of the traveling public. The Code does allow the County to fund the
improvements from other primary users of the access or as off-site subdivision developments.
I believe this will take some monumental effort to bring CR300 up to standard of the Access Code. However,
County and development need to take the first steps towards making these safety improvements. If you have
any additional questions, please let me know.
Dan Roussin
Colorado Department of Transportation
Region 3 Permit Unit Manager
222 South 6th, Suite 100
10/15/2007
Page 2 of 2
Grand Junction, Co 81501
970-683-6284
970-683-6290 FAX
From: Kay EyIrmailto:kay@developmentconstructionservices.com]
Sent: Tuesday, October 09, 2007 10:58 AM
To: Roussin, Daniel
Subject: Una Development Traffic Study - Cnty Rd 300 Garfield County
Mr. Roussin,
I was wondering if you have had the opportunity to look over the new traffic study done by Drexel Barrell for the Una
Development property west of Parachute, CO off Garfield County Road 300?
If you have not, do you have any time -line for when you will be able to review it?
If you have reviewed it, does it meet CDOT's requirements and are there any issues that we should be aware of? i.e. Do
we still need to get a letter of permission from Garfield County to apply for a CDOT access permit? any new issues? etc.
Any information you can give us would be greatly appreciated.
Thank you for your time!
Kay EyI
Planner
Kay Eyl
Planner
Development Construction Services
2350 G Road, Suite 240
Grand Junction, CO 81505
970-242-3674
970-245-3674
www.developmentconstructionservices.com
10/15/2007
OCT. 15. 2007 11:13AM LEAVENWORTH & KARP
Form No, OFFICE OF THE STATE ENGINEER
GWS -25 COLORADO DIVISION OF WATER RESOURCES
818 Centennial Bldg., 1313 Sherman St, Denver, Colorado 80203
(303) 886-3581
APPLICANT
NO. 031 P 2
WELL PERMIT NUMBER 66018 - F
DIV, 5 WD 39 DES. BASIN MD
GEORGE P STRONG
C/O ,LEAVENWORTH & KARP PC
GLENWOOD SPRINGS, CO 81602-
(970) 945-2261
CHANOE/EXPANSION OF USE OF AN EXISTING WELL
1095
APPROVED WELL LOCATION
GARFIELD COUNTY
SW 1/4 SW 1/4 Section 27
Township 7 S Range 96 W Sixth P.M,
DIST NCES FR MSE TION LINES
90 Ft. from South Section Line
1100 Ft. from Wast Section Line
UTM COORDINATES (MBters,Zone:13,NAD83),
Eastina: Nnr+hinn.
ISSUANCE OF THIS PERMIT DOES NOT CONFER A WATER RiGHT
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL
1) This well shall be used in such a way as to cause no material injury to existing water rights. The issuance of this permit
does not ensure that no injury will occur to another vested water right or preclude another owner of a vested water right from
seeking relief in a civil court action,
2) The construction of this well shall be in compliance with the Water WeII Construction Rules 2 CCR 402-2, unless approval
of a variance has been granted by the State Board of Examiners of Water Well Construction and Pump Installation
Contractors in accordance with Rule 18.
3) Approved pursuant to CRS 37-90-137(2) for the use of an existing well constructed under Permit No, 201120,
appropriating ground water tributary to the Colorado River, on the condition that the well shall be operated only when the
West Divide Water Conservancy District's substitute water supply plan, approved by the State Engineer, is in effect, and
when a water allotment contract between the well owner and the West Divide Water Conservancy District for the release of
replacement water from Ruedi Reservoir is in effect, or under an approved plan for augmentation. WDWCD contract
#f07032251.(a).
4) The use of ground water from this well is limited to commercial use for an office and a warehouse, including the irrigation
of not more than 15,000 square feet of landscaping.
5) The pumping rate of this well shall not exceed 15 GPM.
6) The average annual amount of ground water to be appropriated shall not exceed 1.0 acre-feet.
7) The issuance of this permit hereby cancels permit no. 201120.
8) A totalizing flow meter must be Installed on this well and maintained In good working order. Permanent records of all
- - -diversions must be maintained by the well owner (recorded at least annually) and submitted to the Division Engineer -upon
request,
9) The owner shall mark the well in a conspicuous place with well permit number(s), name of the aquifer, and court case
number(s) as appropriate. The owner shall take necessary means and precautions to preserve these markings.
10) This well shall be located not more than 200 feet from the location specified on this permit.
11) This well shall be located at least 600 feet from any existing well, completed in the same aquifer, that is not owned by the
applicant. ./940-,/�iJ/
APPROVED
�JL
Receipt No, 3611936
For State Engineer
DATE ISSUED 07-19-2007
By
EXPIRATION DATE
07-1 a.1nna
J