HomeMy WebLinkAbout27. PC Staff Report 11.28.2012Exhibits — Major Impact Review — Nathan and Becky Schaeffer, MIPA 7214
PC Public Hearing (11/28/2012)
Exhibit
Letter
(A to Z)
Exhibit
A
Proof of Publication, Posting, and Mailings
B
Garfield County Unified Land Use Resolution of 2008, as amended
C
Garfield County Comprehensive Plan of 2030
D
Application
E
Staff Memorandum
F
Staff Powerpoint
G
Emails from Melody Massih, dated September 27 and 28, 2012
H
Email from Garfield County Road and Bridge, dated September 6, 2012
Letter from Garfield County Vegetation Manager, dated September 11, 2012
J
Letter from Mountain Cross Engineering, dated September 10, 2012
K
Email from Colorado Department of Transportation, dated August 23, 2012
L
Email from Colorado Parks and Wildlife, dated September 10, 2012
M
Email from the Town of Parachute, dated August 23, 2012
N
Emails from Grand Valley Fire Protection District, dated August 22, 2012 and
September 18, 2012
p
Letter with attachments from Olszewski, Massih & Maurer, P.C. dated October 12,
2012
P
Email from Mountain Cross Engineering, dated October 15, 2012
Q
Letter from Garfield County Vegetation Manager, dated October 16, 2012
R
Letter from Olszewski, Massih & Maurer, P.C. dated November 14, 2012
S
Geology and Geologic Hazard Evaluation Letter from CTL Thompson, dated
November 8, 2012
T
Spill Prevention Control and Countermeasure Pian from HCSI, dated November 5,
2012
U
Revised Traffic Analysis Report from High Country Engineering, dated November
14, 2012
V
Revised Site Plan, revision date: November 16, 2012
W
Revised Erosion and Sedimentation Pian, revision date: November 16, 2012
X
Revised Reclamation Pian, revision date: November 16, 2012
Y
Emails from Mountain Cross Engineering, dated November 16, 2012.
7-
L.2.4-1-6,-- .6a1,1,/ w/ M e t a J,A,, .i'.0 . d 4,1_74.. Li. 1\.i 1) . .; 71 ze' (2_,
j
1
r ,
Lk.J. O t t r.cU.0 WN 4 c.k.,
={7:17411.7:-.
p, : - R' kr '
e");Ito -;j I ft fi>i
C1nN�t2.� V
C- `('t- i
,f{
(
jzJ \ (\ I- ue tr-s 4-f-,/\
'NYU 0/1d ei O t..1.1., V AAA
Planning Commission
11/28/12
Continued from 10/24/12 and 11/14/12
MOL
PROJECT INFORMATION AND STAFF COMMENTS
REQUEST Major Impact Review — Contractor's Yard
PROPERTY OWNER Nathan and Becky Schaeffer
REPRESENTATIVE Melody Massih, Olszewski, Massih & Maurer, P.0
LOCATION 2456 County Road 301 (CR 301)
ACCESS County Road 301
ZONING Rural
I. GENERAL PROJECT DESCRIPTION
Nathan and Becky Schaeffer (Applicant) seek approval of a Major Impact Review Permit for a
Contractor's Yard on their property located at 2456 CR 301. The subject property is 37.7 acres
in size of which five acres will be used for the proposed land use. The Applicant presently owns
a company (BNS Services) that supplies equipment to the oil and gas industry in the area. BNS
Services is located in Traveler's Highlands but wishes to build a shop and store equipment and
materials for the company on the subject site. Presently, there are two non -office employees
who report directly to the job site and will visit the proposed Contractor's Yard to pick up and
drop off equipment and materials.
The subject site will consist of a 50'
x 100' shop and two graveled
storage areas. The shop will
contain a sink and toilet. No office
is proposed in the shop at this time.
Water will be provided by an
existing commercial well (Permit
No. 287650) and a proposed
Individual Septic Disposal System
(ISDS) will serve the wastewater
on-site. The shop and storage yard
are also to provide locations to
conduct repairs on equipment and
vehicles.
Access to the parcel is from CR
301 by an existing gravel road
which bisects the five acre subject
site. On either side of this road are
the storage areas. A portion of the
storage area west of the access
road already exists and is to be
expanded to the north. The east storage yard also exists and was recently installed without a
County grading permit. The Site Plan in the application depicts the shop to be situated at the
south end of the east storage area and this storage area to be set back a distance of 35 feet
from the Helwitt and Milburn Ditch, a water body. However, a site visit on October 11, 2012 by
County staff revealed this setback to be 10 feet or less for this water body. The application also
states that the site will store approximately four pieces of Targe equipment such as a trackhoe,
skidsteer, backhoe, etc. The staff's site visit also found the parcel to contain an assortment of
machinery, tanks, a trailer, generators, Targe equipment, and materials in both existing storage
areas. The subject site is presently being used as a "Storage Yard" which has not been
reviewed or approved by the County.
On August 13, 2012 County staff met with the Applicant's representatives to discuss the
application. At this meeting County staff identified the existing ditch on-site as a water body and
indicated that all applicable sections of the Unified Land Use Resolution of 2008, as amended
(ULUR) concerning water bodies would need to be addressed (i.e., Section 7-203, Section 7-
207, etc.) by the Applicant. The County also discussed Section 7-104 Sufficient Legal and
Physical Source of Water and Section 7-106 Adequate Central Water Distribution and
Wastewater System and reviewed what information is required as per the ULUR. The request
of submitting drainage calculations/report with the building permit was also discussed. The
County's consulting engineer indicated that drainage calculations couldn't be delayed and
needed to determine if the application complied with the ULUR. Waivers for Sections 4-502
(D)(12) Resource Areas and 4-502 (E)(8)(b) was also reviewed. Information was provided by
the County regarding record searches conducted by the Colorado Historical Society and that a
request for a waiver may not be necessary for this section of the land use code. After further
review of Section 7-104, the Applicant's representative requests a waiver of Section 7-104
(B)(2)(a) to reduce the 24 hour pump test to 4 hours (Exhibit G). The justification for this waiver
is that this requirement is excessive and costly for a five acre project that will house a storage
building with no employees working on-site.
Many of the Sections of the ULUR discussed above with the Applicant weren't addressed or
sufficiently addressed leading to a recommendation of "denial" in the October 24, 2012 Staff
Report. In order to provide County staff with information to address the deficiencies in their
application, two continuances were requested at the October 24th and November 14th Planning
Commission public hearings. The Applicant provided staff with this material on November 14,
and 16th 2012 (Exhibits R, S, T, U, V, W, and X). This staff report summarizes all the material
provided to date.
II. LOCATION AND SITE DESCRIPTION
This property is located off of CR 301, east of the Town of
Parachute. The subject parcel is bowled shaped with the
terrain sloping downward into the site from the east and
south. These slopes transition into an open area that drains
to the northwest. The Helwitt and Milburn Ditch bisects the
property in a south to north direction and skirt the slope along
the eastern portion of the property. This ditch transports
water from Battlement Creek to irrigate properties to the north
of the subject parcel. The south and east portions of the site
are covered in a juniper tree canopy with the remaining
portion of the property vegetated mainly in grasses,
sagebrush, and rabbitbrush. Along portions of the ditch,
more water loving tree species can be found.
2
III. ZONING AND ADJACENT USES
The subject property is zoned Rural and the adjacent parcels are zoned Planned Unit
Development (PUD) and Rural (kitty corner). The land uses of the surrounding properties
consist of undeveloped ground with the exception of some oil and gas development situated to
the north of the subject property.
IV. REFFERAL AGENCY COMMENTS
Staff referred the application to the following State agencies, applicable town and fire district, and
County Departments for their review and comment Comments received are noted below and
incorporated within the appropriate section of this memorandum. Comment letters are attached
and labeled as noted.
Garfield County Road and Bridge (Exhibit H)
Garfield County Vegetation Manager (Exhibits I and Q)
County Consulting Engineer, Mountain Cross Engineering (Exhibits J, P. and Y)
Colorado Department of Transportation (Exhibit K)
Colorado Parks and Wildlife (Exhibit L)
Town of Parachute (Exhibit M)
Grand Valley Fire Protection District (Exhibit N)
V. REVIEW STANDARDS & STAFF COMMENTS
Major Impact Review for a Contractor's Yard is required to adequately address topics in the
listed submittal requirements of Section 4-501 (F) Major Impact Review which includes. Land
Suitability Analysis (Section 4-502(D)), Impact Analysis (Section 4-502(E)), Erosion and
Sediment Control (Section 4-502 (C) (4)), the General Development Standards found in Article
VII of the Garfield County Unified Land Use Resolution of 2008 (ULUR). Pursuant to Divisions
1-3 of Article VII all applications for land use change shall conform to the listed standards.
Divisions 1-3 discuss General Approval Standards, Resource Protection, and Site Planning and
Development. The Applicant has addressed all of the requirements of the ULUR that apply to
this Major Impact Review and Section 7-810, Additional Standards Applicable to Industrial Use.
The following provides a review of specific standards that are of interest when considering the
impacts caused by a Contractor's Yard followed by a staff comment:
Section 4-502 (D) Land Suitability Analysis The Land Suitability Analysis shall include the
following information, unless specifically waived by the Director.
1. Public Access to Site. Show historic public access to or through the site.
Staff Comment: Public access will be from CR 301.
2. Access to adjoining Roadways. Identify access to adjoining roads and site distance
and intersection constraints.
Staff Comment: There is an existing gravel road from CR 301 to the subject site The
Applicant indicates that there are no sight distance or intersection constraints.
3
3. Easements. Show all easements defining, limiting or allowing use types and access.
Staff Comment: The Improvement Topographic Survey plan shows two 30 foot wide
overhead electric easements on the north portion of the subject property. No "Will Serve"
letter from the electric company was provided in the application. Staff recommends as a
condition of approval that this letter be provided prior to the issuance of a Land Use Change
Permit.
4. Topography and Slope. Topography and slope determination.
Staff Comment: The Improvement and Topographic Survey shows the subject property to
slope from the southeast to the northwest at a 10-12% slope with steeper slopes to the east
and adjacent to the ditch on the property. The revised Site Plan (Exhibit V) shows the
proposed equipment storage areas and access road at a 10% grade. The shop area is
proposed at a 2% grade and south of the shop at 5:1 slope. From a site visit conducted by
County staff it didn't appear that the storage areas or the road were as steep as 10%.
Exhibit 0 also indicates that the proposed Contractor's Yard is to be at a 2 to 3% grade.
5. Natural Features. Significant natural features on-site and off-site.
Staff Comment: The property maintains a tree canopy and an open area consisting of
grasses and shrubs. The ditch that bisects the property supports riparian plant species.
Battlement Creek lies approximately % mile to the east of the parcel.
6. Drainage Features. Existing drainages and impoundments, natural and manmade.
Staff Comment: The memorandum dated October 11, 2012 from the Applicant's engineer
indicates the ditch transports water for two months during the irrigation season and is dry
the reminder of the year (Exhibit 0).
7. Water. Historic irrigation, tailwater issues, water demands, adequate water supply
plan pursuant to Section 7-104.
Staff Comment: The property is served by an existing commercial water well (Well Permit
No. 287650). The well is limited to drinking and sanitary facilities as described in CRS 37-
92-602(1)(c) for a commercial business. Water from this well shall not be used for lawn or
landscape irrigation or any other purpose outside the business building structure (shop).
Since there are no employees working on-site, the County supports the Applicant in
demonstrating adequate, reliable, physical, long term, and legal water supply with another
land use change application.
In a letter from Olszewski, Massih & Maurer, P.C. dated October 12, 2012 (Exhibit 0) states
that the six pine trees will be installed north of the subject site and areas to be reclaimed will
be irrigated by a water tank on the property. This water will need to be hauled to the site
since the commercial well specifies its' water can't be use for irrigating the landscape. The
Applicant also proposes to use this water to irrigate reclaimed disturbed areas and suppress
dust during construction. This water tank is shown on the revised Site Plan (Exhibit V).
The Applicant requests to modify Section 7-104 (B)(2)(a) by reducing the 24 hour pump test
performed on the well to be used on-site to a 4 hour pump test. The Applicant's justification
for this modification is that this standard is excessive and expensive. The present ULUR
only requires a 4 hour pump test to establish sufficient quantity.
8. Floodplain. Flood plain and flood fringe delineations.
Staff Comment: The application states the property is not within a floodplain or flood fringe
which is supported by the Garfield County's ArcGIS mapping.
4
9. Soils. Soils determination, percolation constraints, as applicable.
Staff Comment: The Site Plan identifies the property contains two soils types: Lidefonso
Stony Loam, 6 to 25 percent slope; and, Potts-Lidefonso Complex, 12 to 25 percent slopes.
Both soils are deep and well drained with a moderate permeability and erosion hazard. The
soil is defined as being in hydrologic group "B". The letter from CTL Thompson dated
November 8, 2012, further states that the soils on-site are non -expansive and not known to
be collapse prone (Exhibit S).
The Applicant's engineer anticipates these soils will perform adequately for the future ISDS
(Exhibit 0). The Applicant wishes to address the implementation of an ISDS with the shop's
building permit. If the Applicant wishes to have employees on-site, a land use change
application will need to be submitted and reviewed by the County.
10. Hazards. Geologic hazards on-site, and adjacent to site.
Staff Comment: Under Tab 12 of the original submittal indicates that there are no geologic
hazards within the property or adjacent to the parcel but no documentation was provided to
substantiate this claim.
The Applicant has since provided a letter from CTL Thompson dated November 8, 2012
stating that no geologic hazards preclude development within the subject parcel (Exhibit S).
The County's ArcGIS shows the property as having a low fire hazard.
11. Natural Habitat. Existing flora and fauna habitat, wetlands, migration routes.
Staff Comment: The subject property contains predominantly grass, sagebrush, and
rabbitbrush in the open areas and a juniper tree canopy on the eastern and south portions of
the parcel. Riparian tree species can also be found along the existing ditch that bisects the
property.
Under Tab 13 of the application the Applicant's engineer states that the subject site contains
native grasses and shrubs. The existing west storage area is void of vegetation and is
covered in gravel. The proposed expansion to the north of this area is covered in grasses,
sagebrush, and rabbitbrush. The east storage area has been disturbed and vegetation
removed by recent grading activities. A juniper tree canopy can be found along the east.
south, and western edges of the subject site.
A letter from Olszewski, Massih & Maurer dated July 19, 2012 states that no wetlands are
present on-site.
Narrative under Tab 13 also indicates that the subject site is range for elk, mule deer, and
bear, data which was obtained from the Garfield County Habitat Profile (maps). These
maps are from the Colorado Parks and Wildlife and used as a general guide for determining
where species may exist in Garfield County. Colorado Department Natural Resource
mapping is provided under Tab 21 in the application and illustrates that no elk and mule
deer migration routes are located on the property. Again, this mapping is used as a general
guide. Colorado Parks and Wildlife reviewed the application and in an email (Exhibit L)
state that they don't anticipate any significant impacts to wildlife in the area.
12. Resource Areas. Protected or Registered Archaeological, cultural, paleontological
and historic resource areas.
Staff Comment: The Colorado Historical Society conducted a research of the Colorado
Inventory of Cultural Resources (OAHP) which showed no sites and two surveys in the
5
designated area (SE SW of Section 9, T7S, R95W), see Tab 22 of the application. The
Applicant's representative had further discussions with OAHP who indicated that no known
prehistoric, archaeological or cultural sites are located on the property.
Section 4-502 (E) Impact Analysis The Impact Analysis shall provide a description of the
impacts that the proposed land use change may cause, based upon the standards that the
proposed use must satisfy. The Impact Analysis shall include a complete description of how the
Applicant will ensure that impacts will be mitigated and standards will be satisfied. The following
information shall be included in the Impact Analysis.
1. Adjacent Property. An address list of real property adjacent to the subject property,
and the mailing address for each of the property owners.
Staff Comment: The Applicant provided an address list for property owners within 200 feet
of the parcel for public notice.
2. Adjacent Land Use. Existing use of adjacent property and neighboring properties
within 1500' radius.
Staff Comment: The site is located in an area containing an oil and gas facility, rural
residential and undeveloped land.
The application states that there are other Contractor's Yards in the area but no specific
locations were given. Research conducted by County staff found two contractor yards in the
Morrisania Ranch Subdivision and one at 0998 County Road 309. These Contractor's
Yards are approximately one mile away from the subject property.
3. Site Features. A description of site features such as streams, areas subject to
flooding, lakes, high ground water areas, topography, vegetative cover, climatology,
and other features that may aid in the evaluation of the proposed development.
Staff Comment: This is addressed in I. General Project Description.
4. Soil Characteristics. A description of soil characteristics of the site which have a
significant influence on the proposed use of the land.
Staff Comment: This is addressed under Section 4-502 (D)(9).
5. Geology and Hazard. A description of the geologic characteristics of the area
including any potential natural or man-made hazards, and a determination of what
effect such factors would have on the proposed use of the land.
Staff Comment: The letter from CTL Thompson dated November 8, 2012 states that the site
soils are non -expansive and not collapse -prone. No Quaternary faults are mapped within 30
miles of the site and liquefaction potential is nil for the site soils. The letter also indicated
that a site visit found no evidence of unstable slopes, debris flow, and natural -occurring
radioactive materials. This letter concludes that there are no geologic hazards on this parcel
that will preclude development (Exhibit S).
6. Effect on Existing Water Supply and Adequacy of Supply. Evaluation of the effect of
the proposed land use on the capacity of the source of water supply to meet existing
and future domestic and agricultural requirements and meeting the adequate water
supply requirements of Section 7-104.
Staff Comment: This is addressed under Section 4-502 (D)(7).
7. Effect on Groundwater and Aquifer Recharge Areas. Evaluation of the relationship of
the subject parcel to floodplains, the nature of soils and subsoils and their ability to
6
adequately support waste disposal, the slope of the land, the effect of sewage
effluents, and the pollution of surface runoff, stream flow and groundwater.
Staff Comment: See 4-502 (D)(9) regarding an ISDS on the property.
The revised Erosion and Sedimentation Plan (Exhibit W) indicates that there will be .93
acres of disturbance with this proposed land use and .43 acres will be reclaimed. The areas
to be reclaimed include a 35 foot wide strip of the east storage area along the Helwitt and
Milburn Ditch and slopes adjacent to the proposed shop.
8. Environmental Effects. Determination of the existing environmental conditions on the
parcel to be developed and the effects of development on those conditions,
including:
Determination of the long term and short term effect on flora and fauna.
Staff Comment: This is addressed under Section 4-502 (D)(11).
a.
b. Determination of the effect on significant archaeological, cultural, paleontological,
historic resources.
Staff Comment: This is addressed under Section 4-502 (D)(12).
c. Determination of the effect on designated environmental resources, including
critical wildlife habitat.
(1) Impacts on wildlife and domestic animals through creation of hazardous
attractions, alteration of existing native vegetation, blockade of migration
routes, use patterns or other disruptions.
Staff Comment: There is no livestock on-site and as per the revised Site Plan
(Exhibit V), the property is fenced. The existing fence viewed on a site visit by
County staff will not impede wildlife movement. No wildlife migration routes exist
on the subject property.
d. Evaluation of any potential radiation hazard that may have been identified by the
State or County Health Departments.
Staff Comment: The letter from CTL Thompson, dated November 8, 2012 indicates that
there are no naturally -occurring radiation hazards on-site (Exhibit S).
e. Spill Prevention Control and Counter Measures plan, if applicable.
Staff Comment: The original application didn't address this section of the ULUR.
However, Applicant has since provided a letter from HCSI dated November 5, 2012
addressing Spill Prevention Control and Counter Measures Plan (SPCC). This letter
states that federal regulations require a SPCC for facilities that store 1,320 gallons or
more of petroleum products (Exhibit T). The land use proposed will store 100 gallons of
diesel on-site. The location for fuel storage and secondary containment is located west
of the proposed shop and shown on the revised Erosion Control Ran (Exhibit W). Also,
any oil generated from oil changes will be stored in metal drums or other suitable
containers within adequately sized secondary containment. Exhibit T also includes a
Spill Prevention and Mitigation Plan that addresses on-site storage, secondary
containment, and spill mitigation for the site.
9. Traffic. Assessment of traffic impacts based upon a traffic study prepared in
compliance with Section 4-502(J).
Staff Comment: The Contractor's Yard has access off of CR 301. Road and Bridge
Department indicates that a driveway permit needs to be obtained for the existing access
and improvements done on the entrance to the access road in order to meet Road and
7
Bridge standards (Exhibit H). The Applicant is willing to make these improvements which
could be implemented in 2013.
Tab 11 of the original application contains a traffic study prepared by High Country
Engineering, Inc. dated April 11, 2012. The County's consulting engineer indicates that "The
traffic report uses traffic counts from 2002 as the background traffic (Exhibit J). No factor
was applied to the 2002 counts to estimate growth over the last 10 years. Also, this traffic
report does not evaluate the overall performance of the adjacent roadway. The traffic report
needs to evaluate the current condition and also evaluate how the anticipated traffic will
impact the performance." The revised Traffic Analysis Report prepared by High Country
Engineering (Exhibit U) was submitted and reviewed by the County's consulting engineer
who found it to sufficiently address all his concerns (Exhibit Y).
10. Nuisance. Impacts on adjacent land from generation of vapor, dust, smoke, noise,
glare or vibration, or other emanations.
Staff Comment: The Applicant anticipates that there won't be any long term or lasting
additional nuisances in the form of vapor, dust, smoke, noise, glare of vibration of other
emanations will be generated with the change of land use.
11. Reclamation Plan. A reclamation plan consistent with the standards in Section 7-212
(B).
Staff Comment: The Reclamation Plan provided in the original application didn't sufficiently
address Section 7-212 since it didn't describe or show what areas are to be reclaimed or
quantify the surface area around the site that is to be revegetated (Exhibit P). The Applicant
has provided a revised Reclamation Plan (Exhibit X) which adequately addresses this
Section of the ULUR.
Section 7-100 GENERAL APPROVAL STANDARDS FOR LAND USE CHANGE PERMITS
1. Section 7-101 Compliance with Zone District Use Restrictions
Staff Comment: The Applicant's property is in the Rural Zoning District and a Contractor's
Yard is considered a permitted land use subject to Major Impact Review.
In the original application all development standards were met with the exception of the
height of the proposed building. In Exhibit R, the height of the shop is indicated as 30 feet,
satisfying this Section of the ULUR.
2. Section 7-102 Compliance with Comprehensive Plan and Intergovernmental
Agreements
Staff Comment: The property is located in Medium High Residential (2 to <6 AC/DU) of the
Garfield County Comprehensive Plan of 2030. This application is generally in conformance
with the comprehensive plan however, it does not reflect the specific land use designation
as provided in the Future Land Use Map.
There are no known Intergovernmental Agreements that affect this parcel.
3. Section 7-103 Compatibility
Staff Comment: Presently, the majority of the land surrounding the site is undeveloped and
the property's existing topography and vegetation will screen most of the proposed shop and
storage areas. The views of the development will be visible from a portion CR 301 The
proposed trees may assist in blocking and/or softening this view from the road.
8
4. Section 7-104 Sufficient Legal and Physical Source of Water
Staff Comment: This is addressed under Section 4-502 (D)(7).
5. Section 7-105 Adequate Water Supply
Staff Comment: This is addressed under Section 4-502 (D)(7).
6. Section 7-106 Adequate Water Distribution and Wastewater Systems
Staff Comment: No wastewater system will be installed at this time. No employees will be
allowed to work on-site until an ISDS and potable water system are installed. Staff
recommends that this be made a condition of approval.
7. Section 7-107 Adequate Public Utilities
Staff Comment: The Applicant proposes to extend overhead electric power from an existing
line along CR 301. No "Will Serve" letter was provided in the application stating that this
provider will serve the property. Staff suggests as a condition of approval, the Applicant
provide the County with a "Will Serve" letter prior to the issuance of Land Use Change
Permit.
8. Section 7-108 Access and Roadways
Staff Comment: This is addressed under Section 4-502 (E)(9).
9. Section 7-109 No Significant Risk from Natural Hazards
Staff Comment: This is addressed under Section 4-502 (D)(10).
Section 7-200 GENERAL RESOURCE PROTECTION STANDARDS FOR LAND USE
CHANGE PERMITS
1. Section 7-201 Protection of Agricultural Lands
Staff Comment: The Garfield County GIS does not identify the subject property as important
farmland.
2. Section 7-202 Protection of Wildlife Habitat Areas
Staff Comment: Removal of noxious weeds is addressed under this section of the ULUR.
The County Vegetation Manager requests that a weed inventory and map be developed for
diffused knapweed which is known to be in the area (Exhibit I). If this knap weed is found
on-site then the Applicant will need to submit a Weed Management Plan that addresses the
treatment of this weed Staff recommends that this be made a condition of approval.
As per Exhibit Q, the County Vegetation Manager wishes the Applicant to clarify the quantity
of surface area to be disturbed by the berm around the site. The revised plans (Exhibits V,
W, and X) no longer show this berm therefore staff will not require the Applicant to address
this request of the Vegetation Manager.
3. Section 7-203 Protection of Wetlands and Waterbodies
Staff Comment: The application states that the subject site isn't within a wetland. Wetlands
weren't evident within the subject site during a site visit by County staff.
The revised plans (Exhibits V, W, and X) show the existing east storage area setback 35
foot setback from the Helwitt and Milburn Ditch which is considered a water body.
9
Section 7-204 Protection of Water Quality from Pollutants
Staff Comment: In a letter from Olszewski, Massih & Maurer dated October 12, 2012
(Exhibit 0) states that BNS Services will store a maximum of 100 gallons of diesel fuel in a
tank on-site and no oil or other fluid storage is anticipated. This tank is shown on the
revised Site Plan (Exhibit V) and is 100' from the existing water body on-site. A Spill
Prevention Control and Countermeasures Plan is also provided in Exhibit T
Exhibit 0 also indicates BNS Services may do routine maintenance of its vehicles involving
the changing of oils and other fluids. These waste products will either be disposed of in an
oil burner or hauled off-site.
4. Section 7-205 Erosion and Sedimentation
Staff Comment: The County's consulting engineer indicates that the revised Erosion and
Sedimentation Control Plan (Exhibit W) provided satisfies this Section of the ULUR.
5. Section 7-206 Drainage & Section 7-207 Stormwater Run -Off
Staff Comment: Under Tab 19 the application discusses how the subject site will drain and
is illustrated on the revised Erosion and Sedimentation Control Plan (Exhibit W). Positive
drainage is proposed for the site through the installation of swales and sheet drainage. As
per Exhibit W, there is now no new development within 100 feet of a water body and the
proposed land use has less than 10,000 square feet of imperious surface therefore this
Section of the ULUR is not applicable.
6. Section 7-208 Air Quality
Staff Comment: This land use is not anticipated to reduce the air quality below the
acceptable levels of the Colorado Department of Public Health and Environment. Dust
mitigation measures such as watering during construction will be implemented to minimize
impacts to adjacent properties.
7. Section 7-209 Areas Subject to Wildfire Hazards
Staff Comment: Staff Comment: This is addressed under Section 4-502 (D)(10).
8. Section 7-210 Areas Subject to Natural Hazards and Geologic Hazards
Staff Comment: This is addressed under Section 4-502 (D)(10).
9. Section 7-211 Areas with Archeological, Paleontological or Historical Importance
Staff Comment: This is addressed under Section 4-502 (D)(12).
10. Section 7-212 Reclamation
Staff Comment: This is addressed under Section 4-502 (E)(11).
Section 7-300 SITE PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS
1. Section 7-301 Compatible Design
Staff Comment: The majority of the views of the proposed shop and storage areas will be
screened by the existing vegetation. The Contractor's Yard will be visible from a portion of
CR 301 but the Applicant proposes to plant trees to block these views.
2. Section 7-302 Building Design
Staff Comment: Not applicable.
10
3. Section 7-303 Design and Scale of Development
Staff Comment: The amount of site disturbance appears minimal.
4. Section 7-304 Off -Street Parking and Loading Standards
Staff Comment: Not applicable.
5. Section 7-305 Landscape and Lighting Standards
Staff Comment: Landscaping is addressed under Section 4-502 (D)(11). The Applicant
doesn't anticipate installing outdoor lighting but if lighting is provided it will adhere to the
County's lighting standards.
6. Section 7-306 Snow Storage Standards
Staff Comment: Snow storage is provided north and adjacent to the proposed west storage
area.
7. Section 7-307 Roadway Standards
Staff Comment: This application uses existing roads.
8. Section 7-308 Trail and Walkway Standards
Staff Comment: Not applicable.
9. Section 7-309 Utility Standards
Staff Comment: Not applicable.
Section 7-810 Additional Standards Applicable to Industrial Use
A. Enclosed Building. All fabrication, service and repair operations shall be conducted
within an enclosed building or obscured by a fence, natural topography or
landscaping.
Staff Comment: The repair of equipment may occur on-site either within the proposed shop
or outside this building by employees. Repairs conducted outside shall be obscured by the
existing and proposed vegetation on-site.
B. Loading and Unloading. All operations involving loading and unloading of vehicles
shall be conducted on private property and shall not be conducted on a public right-
of-way.
Staff Comment: This requirement shall be met.
C. Outdoor Storage Facilities. All outdoor storage facilities for fuel, raw materials and
products shall be screened by natural topography or enclosed by a fence or wall
adequate to conceal such facilities from adjacent property.
1. All outside storage abutting or facing a lot in a residential or commercial zone
shall be screened by natural topography or enclosed by a site -obscuring fence
to obstruct the storage area from view. The fence shall be of material and
design that will not detract from adjacent residences.
Staff Comment: Screening equipment and materials on-site will not be a problem
due to the existing vegetation and topography and proposed vegetation.
D. Industrial Waste. All industrial wastes shall be disposed of in a manner consistent
with statutes and requirements of CDPHE.
Staff Comment: This is addressed under Section 7-204.
11
E. Sound. The volume of sound generated shall comply with the standards set forth in
the Colorado Revised Statutes.
Staff Comment: The activities associated with this application are not expected to exceed
County or State noise standards.
F. Ground Vibration. Every use shall be operated so that the ground vibration inherently
and recurrently generated is not perceptible without instruments at any point of any
boundary line of the property.
Staff Comment: Ground vibration beyond the site boundary is not anticipated.
G. Interference, Nuisance or Hazard. Every use shall be so operated that it does not emit
heat, glare, radiation or fumes which substantially interfere with the existing use of
adjoining property or which constitutes a public nuisance or hazard. Flaring of
gases, aircraft warning signal and reflective painting of storage tanks, or other legal
requirements for safety or air pollution control measures shall be exempted from this
provision.
Staff Comment: The activities associated with this application will not emit heat, glare,
radiation or fumes which would substantially interfere with existing uses or adjacent property
owners.
VI. RECOMMENDED FINDINGS
1. That the proper public notice was provided as required for the hearing before the
Planning Commission
2. That the hearing before the Planning Commission was extensive and complete, that all
pertinent facts, matters and issues were submitted or could be submitted and that all
interested parties were heard at those meetings.
3. That for the above stated and other reasons the proposed Land Use Change Permit for
a Contractor's Yard is in the best interest of the health, safety, convenience, order,
prosperity, and welfare of the citizens of Garfield County.
4. That with the adoption of conditions, the application is in general conformance with the
2030 Comprehensive Plan.
That with the adoption of conditions, the application has adequately met the
requirements of the Garfield County Unified Land Use Resolution of 2008, as the same
had been amended at the time the application was deemed by the Building and Planning
Department to be technically complete.
6. The requested modification of reducing the minimum 24 hour pump test performed on a
water well to 4 hours is in conformance with the purpose of Section 7-104 (B)(2)(a).
VII. STAFF RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends the Planning Commission approve the Contractor's Yard with the
following conditions:
1. That all representations made by the Applicant in the application, and at the public
hearing before the Planning Commission, shall be conditions of approval, unless
specifically altered by the Board of County Commissioners.
12
2. The operation of the facility shall be done in accordance with all applicable Federal,
State, and local regulations governing the operation of this type of facility.
3. Site operations shall not emit heat, glare, radiation, dust or fumes which substantially
interfere with the existing use of adjoining property or which constitutes a public
nuisance or hazard.
4. Volume and sound generated shall comply with the standards set forth in the Colorado
Revised State Statute 25-12-103.
5. Storage of flammable material shall be conducted so as to meet all applicable Federal,
State, and local regulations and utilize the practices identified in the Spill Prevention
and Countermeasure Plan.
6. Prior to the issuance of a Land Use Change Permit, the Applicant shall submit the
following information to the Building and Planning Department for review.
a. A map identifying the locations of diffused knapweed on the subject property and a
Weed Management Plan developed by a qualified professional. If no diffused
weed is found on-site then a letter from a qualified professional stating that this
weed is not present shall be submitted.
b. A "Can and Will Serve" letter from Holy Cross Energy to supply electricity to the
site.
7. Prior to the issuance of a Land Use Change Permit, the Applicant shall:
a. Reclaim the 35 foot wide area west and adjacent to the Helwitt and Milburn Ditch
and once completed, schedule a site visit with County staff to verify that this
reclamation has occurred.
b. Obtain a Driveway Permit from the County Road and Bridge Department.
c. Upgrade the entrance to the property to comply with Garfield County driveway
standards by:
• Re -grading the driveway to remove the hump adjacent to the existing apron;
• Installing a new asphalt or concrete apron (v -pan highly recommended) to
match the width of the existing corrugated metal pipe and a minimum 10 feet in
length;
• Installing 3/" thick layer of compacted road base the width of the driveway and
a minimum of 20 feet back from the driveway's apron; and,
• Installing an apron so that no surface water or run-off from the site or driveway
flows onto County Road 301.
8. Since the Applicant has not demonstrated adequate legal and physical water and
wastewater service to support the this use as presently proposed, no employees,
other than the property owner/Applicant shall work at the Contractor's Yard;
however, pickup and delivery of materials to and from the site are permitted. In the
future, if the owner/Applicant wishes to expand the use to include employees on-site,
an amendment to the Land Use Change Permit application shall be required to be
13
submitted to the County for review and approval. This revised application shall
address the provision of adequate legal and physical water service as well as an
appropriate method of wastewater disposal (ISDS).
9. To assist in the protection of the water quality of the Helwitt and Milburn Ditch, the
Applicant shall use the eastern storage yard for "dry" storage only.
10. All lighting associated with the property shall be directed inward and downward
towards the interior of the property.
VIII. RECOMMENDED MOTION
I move to approve a Land Use Change Permit through the Major Impact Review for a
Contractor's Yard on five acres, on property owned by Nathan and Becky Schaeffer with the
Staff recommended findings and conditions.
14
Edward B. Olszewski
Melody U. Massih
Amanda N. Maurer
OLSZEWSKI, MASSIH & MAURER, P.C.
ATTORNEYS AT LAW
P.O. Box 916
214— 8"' STREET, Suim 210
GLENWUoo SPRINGS, CO 81602
TELEPHONE: E: 970.928.9100
FACSIMILE: 970.928.9600
Novcmbcr 2, 2012
Molly Orkild-Larson, Senior Planner
Garfield County Building and Planning Department
108 8th Street, Suite 401
Glenwood Springs, CO 81601
VIA E-MAIL ONI.Y TO: morkild-1arson(a)garfield-county.conl
Website:
www.omni c.rnn
RE: Major Impact Review for Nathan and Becky Schaeffer, RNS Services, tit:
Contractor's Yard- Staff Report Submission Materials
Dear Molly:
This correspondence comes to request a continuance of the meeting before the Planning &
Zoning Commission scheduled for November 14, 2012. As we have discussed, the Applicants are
working to address the issues raised in the staff report and need additional time to satisfy the
requirements outlined in the staff report(s). We are currently obtaining additional professional or
engineering reports to address and satisfy concerns articulated by Garfield County staff, and request a
continuance from November 14, 2012 to the November 28, 2012 Planning & Zoning Commission
meeting to give additional time for the submission of these reports and allow county staff the time
necessary to review the additional reports and materials in advance of the meeting.
As discussed, we will not be attending the November 14, 2012 meeting, but will plan to
attend the continued meeting date on November 28. Please let me know if you would like me to
attend the November 14, 2012 meeting in person for purposes of obtaining this continuance.
Thank you for your time and consideration. Please contact nye with any questions or
concerns.
Very truly yours,
OLSZEW K1, M,;;.SIH & MAURE • , P.C.
By:
MDM:mkd
cc: Nate and Becky Schaeffer
xly 1 Massih