HomeMy WebLinkAbout3.0 BOCC Staff Report 05.21.1984€rlbty' D
PROJECT INFORMATION
Bocc 5/21/84
AND STAFF COI'4MENTS
REQUES!:
APPLICANT:
LOCATION:
SITE DATA:
WATER:
SEWER:
ACCESS:
ZONI NG:
ADJACENT ZONING:
Special Use Permit for
communication towers and a
broadcasting studio.
Rifle Broadcasting ConPanY
A parcel located in Sections 27,
34, T5S, R92Wr dPProxirnatelY f our(4) miles south of Silt on CountY
Rd. 331.
The request is to allow the
I. RELATIONSHIP TO THE COMPREHENSIVB PLAN
The proposecl special use is located in Distr ict C, Rural Areas,/t'tinor
Environrnental Constraints. The following are some relevant plan
objectives and policies:
A. V[hile major nature preserves or general open space is adequately
provided by avaj lab1e feder:al and slate forest and park lands in
the County, open space along the highly visual and scenic road
cor r i dor s iteeds to be pr eser ved . ( pg . 14 )
B. EncouraEe non-agricultural development in agricultural areas to
locate on non-productive farmland. (pE.1B, {}6)
C. Visual Quality: Any development in Districts CrDrE or F in an
area whieh is determinerl to have a high degree of visual quality
after site specific investigation shal1 receive special
consideration to ensure the minimum impact on these qualities.
Special design and siting of development in such areas should be
usecl to ensure compatibiliLy with visual quality (p9.74)
II. DESCRIPTION OF THE PROPOSAL
placement of five (5)
towers an..l a radio
studio.
Existing well
Existing septic
Via County Rd. 331
A/R/RD
A/R/RD in all directions
communication
br oadcasting
open valley
es carpments
The land iswith rural
Efle oescrlption: The parcel is located
FIoor with very Iittle large vegetation.
within 1/4 to I/2 nil.e to the north andgenerally open agricultural grazing and
homesites intermixed.
in a fairly
There are
nor thwest .crop land
A.
-/-
B. Profect Descr i-ption: Ttre proposal would allow f or the placement
of five (5) 351 foot high, ccminunicaLion towers, a 1000 sguare
foot transmitter building and an additional 1000 sguare foot
building for a radio broadcasting studio. The radio station will
be a 50KW AM stereo station, with an average of four employees onsite at an-/ one time. The tovrers will be located in an area 890feet wide by 2450 feet long, or approximately 50 acres. Waterwill be provided by an existing well and sewer i:y an exisLingseptic system.
III.MAJOR ISSUES AND CCNCERNS
Zoning: communication towers and broadcasting studios are aspecial use in the A/R/RD zone djstrict. To approve a special
Use permit, the following requirements must be met:
1. Utiljties aCequate to provide water anJ sanitation servicel:ased on accepted engineering standards and approved by theEnvironmental Health Officer shall eitirer be in place or sha11 beconstructed in conjunction with the proposed usei
A.
2. Street improvementsgenerated by the proposedaccess to the use shallconstructed in conjunction
adequate to accommod;rte traffic volumeuse and to provide safe, convenienteitirer be in place or sha1l bewith the proposed usei
3. Design of the proposeil use is crganizeC to minimize impact onand from adjacent uses of land through installation of screenf ences or J.andscape mater ials on the per ipnery of the lot ancl bylocation of intensively utilized areas, access points, lightipgand signs in such a manner as to protect establisheri neigSborloodcharacter;
4. Broadcasting studios and communication towers must beapproverl by the Federal Cornmunication Coinmission and Fe<ieralAviation Administration.
The applicants
manrler :
have addressed those requirements in the following
1. Water and sewer are both presently available on the 1ot as aresult of the previous landowner drilling a well and ir:sta11ing aseptic system for a residence.
2. The broadcasting studio would average four employeesr butcould range from one to five employees. rt is stated, b! theapplicant, that traffic generated by this many peopre should notbe significantly greater than some of the resirlences in the area.
3. The application notes that the broadcasting stu<lio andtransmitter bui lding will be simirar in appearance to thesurrounding homes. The transmitter tovrers will be very visibleto the neighbors to the south and tr) ttre immeiliate areasllrrounding the site. Generally, the towers will not be veryvisible froin the Colorado River va11ey floor rlue to t5e visualscreening provided by weible and Dry Ho11ow peaks and thedistance from the va11ey.
4. Rifle Broadcasting has obtained the requirecj constructionpermit f rom the F.C.C. and a ndeterinination of no hazard to airnavigationn from the F.A.A. The actual operating license is noti ssued until the equipment has been const-ructe*l ano tested.
B.Rev i ew_Ag en cy_CoEme4ls :
Letters of objection from adjacent and area residents have been
received. The primary concerns are related to the visual impact
on the area, ancl the depreciation of land values of a
residentiat/agricultural area. Generally, the people in the area
feel that the towers could be located in a more remote area that
would not impact existiirg and f uture resident"ial development.
( See letter s , Pages/-t:3l_)
Staff Comments:
1. The visual impact of the proposed communications towers was
an issue at the time that the A/R,/no zone district text was
amendecl. At that timer dn opponent to the amendment stated that
strol:e lights would be placed on the towers, wirich is not the
situation. Three of the towers will have red 620 watt beacon
lights or1 the top and two 69 watt obstruction lights at lower
levels. Additionally, these three structures will be painted
alternately red ancl white. According to the applicants, it is
possible to shielcl the top beacon 1ig[t from ground view by
ptacing a plate pelow t[e l ight making it visible to air
traffii. The towers will be made of ln tubular rods, in an 18"
triangular patt€rrrr making tirem difficult to see from tnore than a
mile away, according to tire application. The towers will sit in
a va11ey, with the bases of the towers ueing set at approxintate
elevations of 5720 feet to 5820 feet. This would result in the
top beacons being at approximately 6071 feet to 6l7L feet itr
elevation. The rnost significant visual impact will be to the
surroun,Jing arear pdfticularly those persoils in the same va11ey
or south of the valley. The impacts to the Colorado River Valley
floor ancl Silt Mesa areas should be mirtimal during the day, with
the lights visible during the nighttirne.
Z. Concerns about the transinitters interf ering irith radio,
telephone and television reception liave been expressed, along
with the possibility of the radio signal being transmitted
through certain metallic objects within the area. In talking to
a number of electrical engineers, the opinions were somewhat
varied as to the intensity of the effects, but generally agreed
upon the following as possible effects:
a. It is possible that the radio signal could be picked up on
telephone lines in the area, but this Can be corrected.
b. Two way signals, suc| as paging devices, could have
interference, but again this can be corrected.
c. One engineer stated that it was possible for certain
appliances to pick up and transmit the radio signal.
engineers conceded that it was possible, but highly
Shoulcl it happen, it is possible to correct the effect.
d. Some older radios may not be able to pick up any other
thalt Rifle i3roaclcasting's signal. It can ire corrected
radio being replaced by a new mode1.
e. An improperly installeci transmitter call, in certain
circumstances, arc certain levels of RF energy to certain objects
within a I00 to 200 foot radius. This could occur on a high
1eve1 broaclcasting frequency transmitter. Rifle Broadcasting is
a low 1evel broadcasting frequency.
The other
unl ikely.
In talking to an FCC
regulations will require
problems within a one volt
of the proposed site.
signalby the
engineer, he stated that Federal
the radio station to correct anY
area, or approximately one mile radius
- 3'
IV. SUGGESTED E'INDINGS
1. That the meeting before the Board of county commissioners was
extensive anci coinplet., that all pertinetrt facts' matters and
issues- lrere submitteci and Lhat all interested parties vrere heard
at the meeting;
2. That the special use application meets the requirements set
forth in Section 5.03 of the Garfield Couilty Zoning Resolution of
1978r os amended;
3. That the proposed land use will not be generally compatible
with the existiirg and permiLte<l land uses in all directions.
4. That for the above stated and other reasons, the proposed
special use is not in the best interest of the health, safety,
morals, convenience, order r prosper ity and welfare of the
citizens of Garfield CountY.
V. RECOT,IT4ENDATION
The Planning Commission feels that the visual impact of the
proposed towers is not compatible with the surrounding area and
tor that reason recommended denial of the aptr)lication.
*4 -
l,
CO 81652
I984
t,r-' ,l .
'r. .,
i:""*{i 'l-*' i i'1";-
RECEI\Itr[r
ilAY 15 1984
GARFIIJLTI
GOUNTY COi\lMiSSiOi{[RS
i9B4 ,:i ii,Hl
ruffnEn
P.O.
SiIt,
Box 374
May I,
Garfield CountY Commissioners
P.O. Box 640
Glenwood SPrings, CO 81602
RE: Rifle Broadcasting ComPanY
Special Use Permit
Gentlemen:
I wistr to go on record as being opposed t: lill:^t::"::?:t*::inXli lt'il "Z"nIi^;; : - -
1" . " 1
i"aoi'.i!;-.: L. i, "?:i:1". :"r : :
t:.::: "'
;;=;;;:";i;";-"t"* mainry from trre visuat impact to the area.
-..r.l ..^ +!r6 rri err:1 imrraCtilil.":i;;: :ffi i ll"'o" 1"" il"i'i " "il i ", :lli "?- :il: ^:: :: "
t., :fni;:, r rom
If,: ;:fi':;";i'i;-,;i;; ;;;; 4 miles rrom the towers' vet thev
- ^..^1^ mi naEng l(.)wll \.rJ- ef ru wrrrvr' - --'- - ----Lhave totatly ie""i"a the visual impact.:" !"Tt:-:Y:l :=-T:1"i;l;r';:;';ir;;";;; ii;; '"Ji" towlr site and havins a much
- i.^ !L^ c.i'l+ 5162 Plaase;i;;:'-;;';;;; varue than.homes :? :n:-:i-t:^":?:.:,,?::"?:i';'Ji3"Ii.;il;;";;..-*.p showins my home and the view rine rrom mv
Ev,h/t/ F
home to the tower site'
AIso I have included a verticle profile similar to the appli-
cant,s, however, starting from *y ho*e. Looking at this it is
very obvious ttrat we wiff ne able to see at least the upper 25O
to 3oo feet of all five towers. In the staff comments they refer
to the towers being one inch tubular rod in IB inch triangular
p"tI"r", -mafing-ih;*-difficult to see for more than a mile away'
rf that is in iact true, than why is it the appricant was so
concerned about the visual impaci to the- Toy" tf-:i:: and the
screening from ttre Town of siit and the highway corridor; the
fact being that the towers are visible under most lighting
conditioni from more than a mile away'
Duringdaylighthourswithproperlightingcondition-s'thenew
channel 3 T.V. tower is visirrE from as fir away as EI Jebel' I
viewed a similar one inch diameter tubular frame tower' recently
instarred on castle peak, north of Eagre. viewing it from 6-L/2
miles away, during the dayiight hours, tt" 80 foot taII tower is
very visible from town. rt.-applicant was certainly justified in
being concerned about the view-impact to the colorado River
valley and the Town of silt. Howlver I feel they should have
arso addressed the visuar impact from the sirt Mesa area and
homes suctr as the Martin;onls home in Mineota Ridge Estates'
homes that pay a very large tax to Garfield county, that have a
very high "==L"=*"nt and are going to be visually impacted by the
installation of these towers'
L
Thank you,
d-*r/P rrymrl,
Xenneth R. Mattingley
,&4t5t/ 6
May 6, 1984
Kenneth R. Mattingley
RRl Box 2C
Strasburg, Colorado 8O136
County Plannersl
fn regards to the publi-c hearing on May !, 1984, held in
Glenwood sprlngs, colorado before the county planning Board to
hear a proposal of the Rifl-e Broadcasting company placing ) towers
in the Dry Hallow area east of County Road JJl.
r appose that project because of the effect it would have
on the area for people wanting to li-ve there. J own Chipperfi-eld
Estates just south of the proposed site. rt is extremery hard
to market land with the economy the way it is and f feel that
this project would further complicate any chances of ever selling
rural lots in the area.
I also remember in the fal1 of 1981 , when I first began
chipperfield Estates with 12 lots and a road system in the sub-
dlvision, r spent the better part of a day walking the land with
a Holy cross engineer trying to place the power pores in low
lying areas ac we would not obstruct the vlews of the surrounding
homes. This was not a requirement but strongly encouraged. The
subject was mentioned in the Sketch plan I'{eeting and discussed
briefry then. T feel that FrvE towers Jlo feet high would be; an
extreme exagerati_on.
3
.t-
, '.1 :i
o nl-/
-/r/rr
Er6ilr/ //G-")-q**€4G4^-Uil".,
vQor / @Z*l,tg7b;*%v,64 stzat
eza<2"*,^ 6r,,'V"--'* g/a'-")t-/ - .*xal " ,4,, a/a, .rb /
b 6A..-2.
A H*, 4 Kzr%d azz-<t
,/* Zze*x G-<-rbrrz,*2. d
44e.r'Zj, -..UZ<l , ,4n<- -zt-<-e
"a/*.- Aa. -,2?a--?1 , C*z4{a&r
Z.r*;q *; h Z-e,za- -tur6/c< u-q c4.-lu ,-&te ft-
s/-Z*()r** -; H*
TaZL /"a.o,,1
%. 4.42-" ,*" Ae44-aaL
"1
OarrJ ,,AU---t -Z^*;-A A'",-/ d-Ar;X
LM-t ;t tatra.)**t- J//z.z{
T l/, JU/-frt";,
A ; a/zz.-n-ar Are
/L /nz) /ZaZtnt -AHrzi, -4
4zL rya/-;42 -ilr- Q,Q. c'-
C^/u-Z aZ H,L-?-, ?-rfrza err -
ldrr..)
74fr.-// %-**, Z/; -4r*
rfu**?-uu 'b fuo<-,tt
d^4u,aL<{
-
-7v
tI-
S', ,1. g 'l
l4t1a,-lc 'h ru,^-
/1 .r',n.'//c>t,{.taQ LL,vr*-/-T
ZcrYt B L"e
6,&*,-at,( 5n, rc
ffcr'* //la. 73ro,-
Drrr*', t4,,r &,,U.^^ou-.,.-
f r6o /Ey4t6rt -f
,-"..L cO au-l "( /./C" /, lic c u\ ...tt ccv,l ,"o ,(-<^
J
of p +1.* /! / k o^l ; ! Srt:/,-L ,in,,,.*7 filpo>t "r,*
fu.ft L{ , /2..r,*"((e?r-,n.r &"Va*^7.
' [bq ,'L.t(itcwt o-.rt- &--t tr.,:o4ionrs,
l. fk p.Lapo>*,e ^l(--c *t),-r*-,* tttr,,,-(,L -k
ltui"n^L".( ,t ult*y t 't- tl- I-';L.LL ga,' it ,<rr.i/r^*4 ;4
iL,Li/'-. I ; o*"{t t(o^ h ck }-t. oo.,. iL ( clu\-
C0rr*-7" lz /r0, .-" / *^ fL- u) u<-'r( r*- 4 n L , ho--u<*.
5.-t-+- L,^*,*- {L- /l* ,rufu ,LLr-.{,t/ '7/*
/1/L(L4.1. ..11a, (-,)^- 4 < .D Cr-,-rl^ e .L; L( ti-t4- 2--*7rr^.L, L.fa-x
/^ f/.- L,tt-,,a l. lA Sr^-iL T/" ,,1*,, fuLy'-u*..- ruttu.(cL ,{*-r!^L./ q h 'dn t"^-,r/.-- c,t
1u ho-u,o- d.-, &- LLr t{yt,- cc-t -/" 4{ ,cc,rlt- h+a 7
Ca)or^Lrd
&4^- Mor,l lJ*-* t-/ , iril)' ,
e. l/oi,,* U*(-^tn ; t k d-,ra ct-- L.ut ^4a( c{,L,p .
{krou- glt-tut-n d-.tt aLuu*0.-, (tt-,t--, )-c-d 4^ 4- a"^ of L-r-
C.ff ue r,^7rl .{,,."- ,Lruaolr-/rA ta t^< f t:,,v:cn^,-t-/ , ,
l-l; p.+cdcr*.C ,cc.-(.'o a*of;; 7r6,'Lr( h.tzt/(t /ut-s.,
lr.r,,,'*- t ',-t -^,LI-( Lcpc--{-i.J-L
3 Tk i;iu<!..-d *f{fu,- t,;tut& t ' '
33t M. A^ rAdi.rc, (1t7,r.r..(. ,:-r'7# "y/rrf
l?rt (fU 0/.Ll-**,.- h'uq ) ,n -L.,{t,( ce o ), ,J-c.r",-t- ,tooJ< .
fL, Liou-(t( l,&-rl-, hu p+, urr.oy &1/--, 4-&,*.- rLc-c-ce
(tu\^,!'tw'. ,
( '- ll' --*vv -- 7 :r*" - -\
t/ *l /n :-.t/. fL. le rT 0 LLit^-(-,- ,r'a LL pr*-1 i-,r^ "( -./\ .t'*^&
u"dr'- f/-:-
d-4 , ct*cyt t-*- "-U--u^-"J / 7L **;- ? (J.nr,(,'*** hour--, , ft^
I I .'t , , ,,y' ,.,t
I k, fa'ao.( L2 h^d4 'i"or-
[),'tuiu-y' "'* ,'
^5^ l l"*, u hte\T' cL (c-4t16f,'Aq '** 4 ad; ,(''^ * )'
tk 44t-,t'Lo'(,vtu.:7 P,tor-,-t lz., . 6r" .1 */-[L.t' /r/,
tLr,^^ ^-t-1* ct -lui ir' /rrrn-- i fl,* ut^ *-- ru-"-l i
b/t'r*ai*1 &rt*c{ ,ua"t.!o /r"r.-. d.,t-r-. u* i ,,t-era-(7 ,r)
f;u*Liay'a:or*-, /i".V.,-r*
Vea'r 33/ rz'A
5\z(,Cc"
[ /a s'z-
o
Wer,ryzo
?, r/f/
L,rfu* tfurLr-' a4L Rl .'r?'er// .
4l;r"- \Za- \Z*z//vla 0/Lo(A7/<-
&lilt/ t
/* il.*M -t JrH-^- cb,€.i*)t/" &;r,,rr*-a
/\%zd,44/ A*.L 4ft4/cz4b"r/4t(fu -.<-o aM.
>444 bLA Jlc .t+tzzL 4rqtat/ a",.( /n a,g-L"irt $.
J<//D 7.U A""/- /12fu-ltzzz'frbo Z u7Lafu) *fu. 4aA,--J<//D T.{U F7r( /1n/ar-,ttzq'AboA, UZ-"fu>rue 4rze,L
tgurw hA- a-,-/. VUz, C/z/z--/ r'z- kz-*
bo/aza /na z4-z- nU", a"J 'o-z*tzt<- /4r.2-Z/rrz4>)
\ZrL '4;a a,,z,att--.-,.& /k ila k*Zv /-.2-,rl*lU, n-e-z<-nh- l/X-.,Z ,'b /r*Z/ U, ,Zr=/* a^/
'Ur* ,t ;7,1 b' o co6- /JbrZ" , /-*t<) C/4- -r/rr4 .Apt-*rX
Ur; /kzL ,aqd 7. -r,al h,oL 0*hz4Yz*rr*ar*,,*l?, 1ry 1-%-a.x- o4./zzzz dz/l// L atLa
t*@ry @
{ u*24
ha,rsru,
On=,rry
-fr 0hzlzf,i6zfr.fah..uH-
fu/.1A
oNo.356. GENERAL AffIDAvIT.-B;ord publishng co., 182t1-46 stout stret, Denver, colo6do -?-?8
GEI\ERAL AFFIDAVIT €XlI
--lfr,raPfrat**- personalryappearedberoremethis t{qfi lq,8+
t0r*
4*a
who beingfirstduly sworn according to law, $enopes and says: That f *.4 *u 'rri/n
,1{*,bLr" r^ Wa a*ua-1il"*; t"dhi .W;utl*'*;JL
'frPn
C*n-#hrd ,./,:lLA'fl"*0,', d^erilorplvttpil!*t-AW,#"P4fu+o&'fr
Subscribed and sworn to before me this
My commission expires
, A,D. 19
ll
I.:
GD
of
County of
@ li*rt(tz hfr: ?tfu,y,fur
STATE
).'
t&.
e41
Garfield County Departmentof Developuent -2-May 9, 1984
The application shows no reason why the facility must belocated in the Dry Ho11ow creek valley. rt is our view that such a facilitycan be placed in a substantially more remote location without anyinconvenience to RBC. There is no technical reason to have the towers l0catednear the studios.
within close ,.1:!,Il";:l::; ;i"""::,1::.,:i:r::::i;ri;::"::";n:"':;:u",,""application' rt has been impossible for us io outain detailed technicalinformation on this subject in time for this iesponse. However, we haveconsulted I{illiam watlington, an engineer with KGMJ in Eagle. Mr. llatlingtonindicates that he is experienced wiln so1000 watt, directional, AM radiostations sinilar-to that proposed here. Accordin! to ur. wrtii.rgton, a 50r000watt' directional facility th.or" off a signal from 250,000 to 50or00o wattsin the direction in which the signar i" p.i"t"a. Because of the power of thesignal, nearry any uetal coil wilhin cro"e-p.r"iriay will act as both areceiver and speaker for the signal. Mr. llatlington cites an example at KXELin waterloo, rowa where the raaio broadcast could be heard over fence wirewithin a quarter of a mile of a 501000 watt transmitter. He cites otherinstances of picking-up such signals in toasters and as con6tant backgroundmusic on the telephone within a mile and a half of such a facility.Admittedly, the statements on the subject made here do not constitute atechnical indictment of the facility, but.,eitt.r does the application provideany technical assurance in its defense.
we therefore urge that the Planning and Zoning corrmissionrecommend that the county commissioners deny the application on the basis thatit is inconopatible with the established character of the neighborhood in whichit is proposed to be constructedl that there is no substantial neea to placethe facility in Dry Hollow creek valley and thar the effects of rhe facilityupon the health and safety of the o"..by residents has not been sufficientlydealt with in the app1i""tior,. Further, \{e urge that RBC consider locatingtheir facility in a more remote part of the coJnty.
Sincerety yours,
flrL-Jr^hl,Lrt.
Mr. and Mrs. Bob Voit
[J,l- Pvt-v*- 3, A 7h
k *r-L o'4 bA W: b.*llf,, M
'5 tttux;-
6 t- @ tr- 33t'*s*uwb
fr/-.* no, &mT*--t%,tp-e- f-'- ,'3 ; /ry *&*r""-
T;ffivHdl)"u ulr*f Jo/*J- t*
^ -tr*lfrlw
g/,6,/ n
l
o
lll u7 .t {, i? rY eklbt/ /U
[triry""].g
a a
Apr:il 1984
Gu.rfield Uounty
i'larnning und Zoning Conmlssionii014 t3}*ke
,i
I
Gleriwood Springs, Colo
Slrs:
81601
Hecently we ]earnecl thr,;t 6i. radiottre liilt &rea. Our inltia.L reactto "thfttrs gre&t, me.yoe I can geta bit of thought, sofle rriri(1ing andthe stntj.on is Dein j ilr,oIor,ed .l.orthe liome lt,e recently i:irohased rtr:cl
One of the ma.in r(.rrdtrrons for rJuylrli.; r,hthe oeurutir'ul vierv in r:]1 ciirections.
;551 foot commu.nicati.on towers rrill benorth of us, in the mi,ld.Ie nf one of
The fact that the towersColorado River va11cy nor
me&n anythinl; to us. i,,V€r
srlen or not 0e seen fromwhut r,ie *',ill Ue forced tr:
siation wes being proposeril for
i,ln.-o ro ngerl f ror" " the t I s nlc ert
&" job there.'" Th.en, afterl:ese$rch r{e founrL out t,hatfl percel of lun{ ver}r near
n,o,,v live in.
is particulrr home was
l,ioloi ,;*e lea::n thet flveput , cl ilect Iy to theour mcsrt scenic si4hts.
lvill not 00 very vislble from t;hefrorn the $11t lr{esa area doesnrtpel?sonslI),r coul,.l care less rvhat cen$iLt [4esa; what vre cfire about ls100k at fr,,::m our front Foreh.
'I{rry has tiie int'orr,"r*.,tlon aoout t}rn propclse,l stetlon beena-lrnost non-existant to tire surrounl-ting len:lowners? 'J/e questlonItifre rroaclcastln6; companyrs motives. rs the intelrfereneefrom the stt.tion ;oiu,g to be such that it intorferes rvittr otherraOio rrnd. r'V r.cc{:-lt)pt ion? lfhu t sort of lmpect, is tl:e statir:ngoing to have on the re-saie vah:,t c:f th; surrnundini5 landand homes? The incroasec activity on the now existlng road,wnich even now is rrg1ly,,Il, arlerluate, by heevy const::uctionerlulpmen! *qy be tire straw that i:rr;akes the camerf s be.ck.Take si tt$unrley dlive'f on tj"re road anrl you ri/ill see,,,vhst f mean.
IIIe are not trgainst pro8re$s nor Hre lve i,galnst the srtation an<llue elr nnow tire silt sire6 ne**d.s jobs, buf, surely a betterlocati-on can be found for the statlon.
.:iqcerely;-.., / 4Ldo--l VJ-,t ac /a-r.l c--./4'z
Thb irAy l)r'octoi Fanily
4408 Co. Rd. 531Silt, Colo 816be
,r,-Lr
€(A)/t/ P
&hr4r/ s
Garfield County C'itizens' Association
P.0. Box 604
Glenwood Springs, Colorado 81602
21 May, 1984
Board of County Conrnissioners
Garfi e'ld County
P.0. Box 640
Glenwood Springs, Colorado 81602
Dear Commissioners Velasquez, Cerise, and Drinkhouse:
The Garfield County Citizens' Association, a County-wide group concerned
with good planning, rec-onrnends denial of Rifle Broadcasting Company's applica-
tion ior a Speciai Use Permit allowing the siting of five 357'radio towers in
the Dry Hollow Creek area, for the following reasons:
1. This request is contrary to the County Comprehensive Plan,
2. The potential negative economic impacts of this project
will not be offset by its possible positive impacts,
3. There are other lands available within this County that
are not zoned A/R/RD, and
4. The ppproval of this development will make it difficult for
the surrounding land to remain A/R/RD.
Each of these points will be outlined below.
1. Countv Comprehensive Plan
We completely agree with the Planning and Zoning Conrnission's unanimous
recommendation foi denial of this Special Use Perm'it. A drive through this
area shows that it is in the purest sense A/R/RD. The area is used for agri-
cultural pursuits and rural density home sites exclusively. There are no
commerciai developments in the area. The comprehensive plan makes a number of
points which are directly applicable to this situation:
A. "While maior nature preserves or general open space is
adequately providedby, available federal and state forest
and park lands in the County, open space along the highly -:visuil and scenic road corridori needs to be preserved." (p. 14)
Road 331 through Dry Hollow Creek is a hjghly visual and scenic cor-
rfdor. It is ihe only road that actually exits the County to the
South (it becomes County Road 342) between Colorado State Highway 82
and the Town of Parachute. It provides a scenic access to the towns
of Collbran and Paonia, to Vega Reservoir and to the Grand Mesa Na-
tional Forest, for sportsmen and travelers alike.
B. "Encourage non-agricultural development in agricultural areas
to locate on non-productive farm land." (p. 18, #6)
The placenent of these five towers on the proposed site will effective'ly
remove it from agricultural production. Its primary use will be for
commercial enter[rise rather than continuing agricultural practices.
Garfield County Citiz#' Assocjation, page 2 -
,,vISUAL QUALITY: Any development proposed within Districts
C, D, E, or F in an area which is determined to have a high
aegree of visual qua'lity after site specific investigation
sfrilt recejve qpecial consideration to ensure the minimum
impact on these qualities. Special design and siting of
development in such areas should be used to ensure compati-
bility'with the visual quality." (p. 74)
As Bruce 0liphant stated before the Planning Commission, there
are one-hundred parcels of land within a two-mile radjus of the
proposed tower site. Surrounding these.-parcels are impressive
vistus such as the Mamm l4ountains, the Mann Creek Drainage'!!9
Colorado River Valley, the Grand Hogback, the Flat Tops and-Elk
Creek Area, the Divide Creek Drainage' and Dry Hollow itself.
Each parcei has a vjew of one or moie of these sights and.rCISt have
several. We do not believe that five 357' towers and their accom-
pinying n.tro.k of 90 guy wires which spread nearly one--half mile
icross"the valley f'looi and consume nearly 50 acrers of land are-ompatible with this area, or for that matter any other A/R/RD area'
The following are drawn from Part 3 of the Comprehensive Plan:
Performance Standards :
I . Compati bi f i tY: General
B. Performance Standards (P. 90)
4. Any proposed land use may be deemed incompatible for
the fol lowi ng reasons:
a) Adversely affectjng the desirability of the immediate
neighborhood or the entire community.
b) tmpiiring the stability or value of existing adiacent
of I i fe of exi sti ng
adjacent land uses or
properties.
c) Adversely affecting the quality
adiacent residents.f) Altering the basic character of
the enti re commun'i tY.
We believe that all of these irssues are intertwined' If given a
choice few people, if anyone, would choose to be put in a position
of having tb live with, iook at, or even pass by th9:9 towers on
i Ouily 5asis. That being the case, these towers will have a
direcf negative impact on the desirability of the surrounding
area as wel I as on i ts property val ues. Al so, fi ve 357' structures
that are essentially conrnercial in nature do alter the basic char-
acter of the-irr.ounding properties. 0bviousiy the quality of
life is altered--people don't tolerate the additional cost of
rr.il living to find a little peace and serenity in steel towers
and flashing beacons.
V. Compatibility: Building Height (p.92)
B. Performance Standards
3. No proposed sturcture, of any height, shall create a
negative impact on exis!in9 adiacent structures or
properties which potent'ial1y lowers the value of the
adjacent land.
I
There are other lands available within the county that are not A/R/RD.All one has to do is look at a map to find innumerable areas far more remoteand much more suited for this kind of develop*nt. Had Rifle Broadcast
99*pSwnotapplied to the FCC for a uroaoiail.ii."n." with silt designated asits "Town of License" prior to locating urd-i".r.rng a suitable site for thetowers, they would have had many more iocations available to them.
4. Zoni ng Integri ty
The approval of this deve)opment will make it difficult for surroundinglands to remain A/R/RD. As the surrounding owne.s find it diffucult to selltheir-property as.A/R/RD they wi1'l apply f6r reion;ng or speciui ,.. permitsto allow similar.development in order'to maintain th6ir priipJ"iv values.Proper pl anni ng i s .the_ County's best defense i n preventi irg lrri s- ki nd ofspotty and costly deve'lopment.
Garfield County Citizens, Associatr'on, page 4
3. Appropriate Si ti ng
Si ncerely,
The Comprehensive Plan is very clear in its position on this project. Itcannot support it. The County cannot afford the costs associated wit[ spot.-development. There are other more appropriate iites aviifuufe-*itnin GarfjeldCounty for structures of this size ahi tvpe, and location of five radio towersin the.proposed area would substantially btring. the natuie of the surroundingcommunity. Garfield County Citizens' Aisocialion thereforu u.g"r the Board ofcounty commissioners to deny Rifle Broadcast company,r uppiririion for aSpecial Use Permit.
Thank you.
?'*rn t /'- -
George S. Henry
Garfield County Citizens' Association
o
?'^.V c,n *^^n nn*r,
ZWa G_VL,,"
Y*".*"7_fiugr, e
D aa-, _.(r; , ,fr- /*t"..o h _b?r-,_*-&_^ %-.{** *_,-4*'l ,*- -/r**, {r/,. 4f/**/ :" fy yl_l ,, *ruU+W S.l*"":h Co.'* *uz./ yl, /* .,t,q&< {r-un.r.J;W% #"lh- &a.ta*,
Lff ," ;,frY*: tr %,i:yi::ffitrM!'u/:trffil.7,"***;:;3*il .;!h-
Wlt""L*fr*rtr*- A *avL* nyc.*l
0.*rd/r4 cr^-[.
--)
['(a.*u', V*7/&e.