HomeMy WebLinkAbout2.0 DD Staff Report 07.27.2016Directors Determination -Staff Report Exhibits
Accessory Structure (Fence and Wall in excess of 6 ft. in height)
Administrative Review
Exhibit
Number
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
Applicant is DD Investments, LLC
July 27, 2016
(File GAPA-06-16-8469)
Exhibit Description
Public HearinQ Notice Information Form, Dated July 7, 2016
Mail Receipts
Referral Comments from Michael Prehm of Garfield County Road and
Bridge, Dated June 30, 2016
Email from Michael Prehm of Garfield County Road and Bridge, Dated
July 6, 2016
Email from Jeff Nelson of Garfield County Engineering Department,
Dated June 29, 2016
Email from Bill Gavette of the Carbondale and Rural Fire Protection
District, Dave July 9, 2016
Letter from Chris Hale, PE of Mountain Cross Engineering, Dated July
19 ,2016
DD Investments Acc. Structure
GAPA-06-16-8469
July 27, 2016
DP
PROJECT INFORMATION AND STAFF COMMENTS
TYPE OF REVIEW
APPLICANT (OWNER)
LOCATION
LEGAL DESCRIPTION
ACRES
ZONING
I. DESCRIPTION OF THE PROPOSAL
Administrative Review -Land Use
Change Permit for an Accessory
Structure (Fence and Wall in excess of 6
feet in height)
DD Investments, LLC
The property is located approximately 4 .5
miles south of the City of Glenwood
Springs. The address is 43 CR 110,
Glenwood Springs, CO 81601.
Section: 7 Township: 7 Range: 88 A TR
JN LOT 15 SEC 7, Garfield County. The
site is part of a property known by
Assessor's Parcel No. 239307400019.
Approximately 0.522 acres
Commercial Limited
The Applicant is requesting a permit for an Accessory Structure for a fence and wall in
excess of 6 feet in height within the Commercial Limited zone district. The subject
property is approximately 0 .522 acres and has access off County Road 110.
The fence is proposed to be up to 1 O feet high while the replacement retaining wall would
be up to 8 feet high. The purpose for the proposed fence is for security purposes around
a Contractor's Yard on the property, which is a Use-by-Right in the Commercial Limited
zone district. The application has been referred to County Road and Bridge, the Colorado
Department of Transportation , County Designated Engineer, and Carbondale Fire
Protection District for review.
II. DESCRIPTION OF THE SITE
The site is currently developed with a Contractor's Yard and this use is proposed to
continue. The property appears to have positive drainage and is entirely disturbed for the
existing use . Uses within 1500 feet include primarily commercial and industrial uses with
limited agriculture and residential.
2
3
0
,...
i-I
z i
0
(.)
Existing
Retaining Wall
~~
~Ci-----.___,,
'New
Contractor's
Yard
Buildin g
Site Plan
l
Existing
Contractor's
Yard
Bui lding i ...._ ___ _
r I
I
Ill. WAIVER REQUESTS FROM STANDARDS
/i ..
/ ......
. r ·-
G ated Accesses
to CR 110
., L"nW.-v• c •• ,
!~~·· , .. ·-~. -.t·--
-·-....... 4 ...... _ . .,
8 ' Re taining Wall
Replacement
The Applicant has made the following request for a waiver from the Standard related to
the Clear Vision Area described in Section 7·303(1) of the LUDC. This Section provides
the following diagram for gu idance on the Clear Vision Area .
4
Figure 7-303 A: Clear Vision Area Space.
As can be seen in Figure 7-303(A), a clear vision area is required out 20 feet from the
center of the driveway and 20 feet from the public right of way line. The purpose for this
clear vision area is to allow motorists coming out of the driveway to see oncoming
vehicles without entering the roadway.
With this requirement, the Applicant has made the following request for a waiver from
this Standard:
The applicant is requesting that Garfield County allows his driveway gate to
be 20'-0" from the edge of pavement rather than 20'-0" from the property
line as is shown in Figure 7-303 of the Garfield County Land Use and
Development Code. It is our understanding that the purpose of section 7-
303.I (Clear Vision Area) is to allow for a vehicle to gauge traffic before
actually needing to pull out onto the public street. We are proposing an
automatically operated gate which will be set back from the edge of the road
by at least 20'-o': allowing for drivers to drive through the gate and stop
short of the road in order to determine whether or not other cars are
approaching without needing to drive onto the street first.
C. Review Criteria.
A waiver request shall be considered based on the following criteria:
1. The Applicant shows good cause for the requested waiver;
2. The project size, complexity, anticipated impacts, or other factors support
a waiver;
3. The waiver does not compromise a proper and complete review; and
4. The information is not material to describing the proposal or
demonstrating compliance with approval criteria.
5
The applicant responds to the above items as follows:
1) The applicant has looked at multiple alternatives for the design of the
fence and gate. In order to follow the exact wording of Section 7-301.I the
applicant would lose approximately 500 square feet of usable floor area in
the proposed structure. Because the lot is burdened by (2) front yard
setbacks of 25' each, we are asking for our 20' setback from edge of
pavement rather than property line.
2) Because we are dealing with an existing site with an existing building and
(2) existing vehicular entries as well as (2) 25' setbacks that we are
designing around, we feel that the waiver allows us to make the most of an
already constrained site.
3) The applicant has already met with Planning and Building officials from
Garfield County, and presented preliminary plans showing all of the
proposed additions to the site and we feel that we have identified any and
all potential issues that may require any waivers.
4) The information is not material to describing the proposal or
demonstrating compliance with approval criteria.
It is Staff's opinion that achieving a 20' setback from edge of pavement instead of edge
of right of way achieves the intent of the Standard to an equal degree as full compliance.
As a result, Staff recommends acceptance of this waiver request.
IV. AUTHORITY -APPLICABLE REGULATIONS
A. The Land Use Tables contained in Section 3-403 of the Land Use and
Development Code, designates a Building or Structure, Accessory as Permitted with
Standards in Section 7-1201 within the Commercial Limited zone district. These
Standards state that for Fences or Walls in excess of 6 feet in height, an Administrative
Review is required.
B. Section 4-103 of the Land Use and Development Code sets forth the
Administrative Review Procedures by which the current Application is being considered.
C. The Application submittal requests five waivers from submittal requirements .
These waiver requests are from submittal requirements included Access and Roadways,
Water and Wastewater, Traffic Analysis, Development Agreement and Improvements
Agreement, and Grading and Drainage Plan. As this request is limited to a fence and
retaining wall, these Submittal waivers have been accepted as part of the completeness
review.
D. Article 7 of the Land Use and Development Code sets forth Approval standards in
6
Section 1201 (8). These standards are addressed in the Application submittals and in the
Staff Analysis section of the Staff Report.
V. PUBLIC AND REFERRAL COMMENTS
The Applicant has provided documentation that all required notice mailings have been
completed in accordance with the LUDC. No public comments were received as a result
of the public notice. Referral Comments received on the Application are attached as
Exhibits and summarized below:
A . Garfield County Consulting Engineer. Chris Hale, Mountain Cross Engineering
(Exhibit 7): Noted that no comments were generated.
B. Garfield County Road and Bridge (Exhibit 3):
In reviewing the drawing and doing a site visit, a little concern on visibility at
the stop sign at the bottom of County Road 11 O. The new proposed fence
and wall may further impact visibility to the right.
The proposed automated gate will accommodate a single vehicle, it is
important that while opening and closing the gate, vehicles stage off the
edge of the road.
The driveways will need to be brought up to current code. Road & Bridge
will require 2 Driveway permits, one for each access.
A reminder snow removal must not be pushed out onto any County Road.
(Exhibit 4):
Attached is a picture looking to the right as you would be stopped at the
stop sign (bottom of CR 110). The addition of a fence on top of the wall will
not change current condition. The frontage road is also regulated by a stop
sign. With looking closer at this, I do not see that the fence will further
impede sight distance.
C. Carbondale and Rural Fire Protection District (Exhibit 6): Noted that "per Section
506 (Lock Boxes) of the County's Fire Code, the applicant should provide for emergency
access to the facility through the proposed new gates."
D. Garfield County Engineering Department. Jeff Nelson (Exhibit 5): "My comments
would be in the category of making sure the fence is not constructed in the ROW and
line of sites for the transportation corridor are not negatively impacted. The plans for the
fencing would not impact the future plans to reconstruct the entire intersection, as this is
not scheduled to be initiated in the near future."
7
VI. STAFF ANALYSIS
Article 7, Division 12: Accessory Structure.
Accessory Structures including fences, hedges, and walls may be located within any
required yard setback provided the requirements in Table 7-1201 Band Clear Vision Area
standards in section 7-303.1. are met.
Table 7-1201 8: Accessory Structures (Fence, Hedge and Wall) Heights
Maximum Height
lone DtstJ1ct -lironn rd SJClaYa RearY
Agricul t ural Land Withi n R, Rl -P, RL-E, RL-TS and RL-GSt 8 Fe et 1 B Feet1 8 Feeti
R-S, R-U and RM HP 3 Feet 6 Feet 6 Feet
C-l , C-G, I and PL 6 Feet 1 6 Feet1 6 Feet 1
1 Structures propos ing t o ex ceed t he Ma ximum He ight may be erected if r evi ewed and approved t hr ou gh an
Administ rat iv e Rev iew (Section 4-103) w here t he st ru cture:
a. is req ui red to maintain t he agricu lt ural us e or t he ot her existi ng uses on t he prope rty;
b. does no t in any man ner adversely Impact t he operation of any adj acent pu blic right -o f-way or ro ads;
c. does not ad versely im pac t t he natural lighting o r visu al co rr id or of adj acent pro perties; and
d. will not obstruct crit ica l t raffic area s alo nR ro adways.
1. Section 7-1201 (a): Required to maintain the agricultural use or the other existing
uses on the property.
The Applicant has represented the following regarding this Standard:
The current use of the property is not agricultural. The previous use of the
property was a plumbing contractor's headquarters. The proposed use will
be storage of vehicles and equipment for a general contractor I property
management company. Because much of the materials and equipment will
be stored outside, the new fence will be needed to keep all of these
materials secure.
The property is currently in transition between ownership. The previous owner, as noted
used the property for a plumbing contractor's facility while the new use is to be for general
contracting and property management. In relation to the LUDC, both uses are considered
a Contractor's Yard, which is a use-by-right in the Commercial Limited zone district. As a
result , it is Staff's opinion that the proposed increase in fence and retaining wall height
above 6 feet within the required setbacks will be utilized to maintain the existing use on
the property.
2. Section 7-1201(b): Does not in any manner adversely impact the operation of any
adjacent public right-of-way or roads.
The Applicant has represented the following regarding this Standard:
8
The additional height of the fence will not adversely impact the adjacent
public right-of-way or roads as illustrated in the attached renderings. The
proposed 8'-0" to 10'-0" fence steps back at the intersection of County Road
11 O and Highway 82 Frontage Road allowing for increased visibility than a
6'-0" high fence built at the property lines would allow. The proposed
retaining wall is only replacing an existing boulder retaining wall, therefore
will not adversely affect the neighbors.
The application was referred to the County Road and Bridge Department, who noted that
while they have some concern on visibility at the stop sign at the bottom of CR 110, after
further review, Michael Prehm noted (Exhibit 4) that "The addition of a fence on top of the
wall will not change current conditions ... Looking closer at this, I do not see that the fence
will further impede sight distance."
In Exhibit 3, Michael Prehm of Road and Bridge did note that both of the driveways will
need to be brought up to current Code. As a result, Staff recommends a Condition of
Approval that the Applicant obtain a driveway permit for each of the access points prior
to issuance of the Land Use Change Permit.
3. Section 7-1201 (c): Does not adversely impact the natural lighting or visual corridor
of adjacent properties.
The Applicant has represented the following regarding this Standard:
While the additional 2'-0" to 4'-0" height would create a slightly longer
shadow in the winter for the neighbor to the north at 7916 Highway 82, the
proposed building will be 28' high. The height limit for buildings in this zone
district is 40' with a 10' side yard setback; this building will sit 10' from the
property line and cast a shadow longer than the fence would cast
regardless. The retaining wall will not affect any views or natural light for the
neighbors.
While the additional fence will cast longer shadows than the permitted 6 foot fence, it is
Staff's opinion that the impact on neighboring property owners as a result of this shadow
will be negligible. In addition, no comments have been received from adjacent property
owners as a result of the public notice.
4. Section 7-1201(d): Will not obstruct critical traffic areas along roadways.
The Applicant has represented the following regarding this Standard:
The shape of the fence at the southwest corner of the lot allows plenty of visibility
for vehicles. Although a 2'-0" reduction in height would make the fence code-
compliant, it would still not increase the practical visibility at the intersection.
This application was referred to Garfield County Road and Bridge who noted (Exhibit 4)
9
that 'The addition of a fence on top of the wall will not change current conditions ... Looking
closer at this, I do not see that the fence will further impede sight distance." To this end,
it is Staff's opinion that the increase in fence height will not impact critical traffic flows.
In addition, comments were received from the Carbondale and Rural Fire Protection
District which note that the Applicant needs to provide for emergency access to the facility
through the proposed new gates. As a result, Staff recommends a condition of approval
that the Applicant consult with the Fire Protection District regarding emergency access
prior to issuance of the Land Use Change Permit.
5. Section 7-303(1): Clear Vision Area.
See Section II of this report, above, discussing the Clear Vision Area standard . As is noted
in this section, the Applicant has requested a Waiver from this standard for the primary
access point. In this section, it is noted that the proposed Waiver appears to meet the
intent of the Clear Vision Area to the same extent. As a result, it is Staff's opinion that with
acceptance of the Waiver request that the standards from Section 7-303(1) is satisfied .
VII. SUGGESTED FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends a finding that the proposed Accessory Structure is in conformance with
the Comprehensive Plan of 2030 as well as the Land Use and Development Code. Staff,
therefore, recommends approval with conditions of the DD Investments Accessory
Structure application.
Suggested Findings
1. That proper public notice was provided as required for the Administrative Review
Land Use Change Permit.
2. That with the adoption of conditions, the application is in general conformance with
the 2030 Comprehensive Plan, as amended .
3 . That with the adoption of conditions, the application has adequately met the
requirements of the Garfield County Land Use and Development Code of 2013, as
amended.
Suggested Conditions of Approval
Conditions Prior to Issuance of the Land Use Change Permit:
1. The Applicant shall obtain a driveway permit for all access points to the property.
The Applicant shall demonstrate that the Garfield County Road and Bridge
Department has issued a permit for each of the access points prior to issuance of
the Land Use Change Permit.
10
2. The Applicant shall consult with the Carbondale and Rural Fire Protection District
regarding emergency access through the proposed new access gates to the
property. The Applicant shall provide a letter to the Community Development
Department from the Fire Protection District noting the mutually agreed upon
solution to meet the requirements of the Fire Code for emergency access through
the gates prior to issuance of the Land Use Change Permit.
Conditions of Approval:
3. All representation of the Applicant contained in the application shall be considered
conditions of approval unless specifically modified by the Board of County
Commissioners.
4. The property owner shall obtain any necessary Garfield County Building Permits
for the proposed fence and wall.
11
EXHIBIT
I }
Garfield County
PUBLIC HEARING NOTICE INFORMATION
Please check the appropriate boxes below based upon the notice that was conducted for your public
hearing. In addition, please initial on the blank line next to the statements if they accurately reflect the
described action.
~ My application required written/mailed notice to adjacent property owners and mineral
owners •
./ Mailed notice was completed on the 7th day of _J_u_l._y ___ _,,. 2016 •
./ All owners of record within a 200 foot radius of the subject parcel were identified as
shown in the Clerk and Recorder's office at least 15 calendar days prior to sending
notice.
__:L_ All owners of mineral interest in the subject property were identified through records in
the derk and Recorder or Assessor, or through other means [list}-------
• Please attach proof of certified, return receipt requested mailed notice.
D My application required Published notice.
Notice was published on the ___ day of ______ 2016.
• Please attach proof of publication in th~ Rifle Citizen Telegram.
D My application required Posting of Notice.
Notice was posted on the day of _____ -J 2016.
Notice was posted so that at least one sign faced each adjacent road right of way
generally used by the public.
I testify that the above Information is true and accurate.
:Q
J"J
J"J
:Q
lJ CAR'1J Dj?C EF Cff E6f Al
lJ Pos\iti ..Q
:J
..; Certllled Fee
:J Return Receipt Fee :J (Endorsement Required)
:::i
Reslricted Delivery Fee
:J (Endorsement Required)
"-$0.
:Q
lJ
Certified Fee
r-=I
CJ Relum Receipt Fee
CJ (EndD™!ment Required)
g
$0.00
CJ t----~~----1
Restrlcled Delivery Fee
:::I (Endorsement ReqiflJI! ~-------'
:"-
:0
1.J
..; Certified Fee .
$0 .1)1) :::J Retum Receipt Fee
:::J (Endorsement Required)
:::J t---~-ff ~4
Reslrlcted Dellvery Fee
:::J (Endorsement ReqUlred) "'-$0. MJ-------1'
:0
1.J
USE
ru
~
U")
i::O
ru ru • ..D
Cl
,...,
Cl
Cl
Cl
CJ
~
~ ru
,..;
Certified Fee
Return Receipt Fee
(Endorsement Required)
Restric:led Dellvery Fee
(Endorsement Requlr~
t----4;A.,,,..Ai~-V"" .. ,
so .~-----~
Total Postage & Fees
$6 .l::"l---~~~...J
Postage
i-..--_....:.....l~--1
Certified Fee
Cl Retum Recelpl Fee
CJ (Endorsement Required) CJ 1----4l;:J..-l:llH-~
RBStrlcted Delivery Fee
~ (Endorsement Requ ~t1>. H--1-------1
~ Total Postage & ~r. lr+------'
EXHIBIT
EXHIBIT
j 3
Garfield County
Road & Bridge
June 30, 2016
Re: OD Investments LLC-Accessory Structure (Fence and Wall)
David,
In reviewing the drawing and doing a site visit, a little concern on visibility at the stop sign at the bottom
of County Road 110. The new proposed fence and wall may further impact visibility to the right.
The proposed automated gate will accommodate a single vehicle, it is important that while opening and
closing the gate, vehicles stage off the edge of the road.
The driveways will need to be brought up to current code. Road & Bridge will require 2 Driveway
permits, one for each access.
A reminder snow removal must not be pushed out onto any County Road .
Thank for giving us the opportunity to review this application.
Mike Prehm
R&B Foreman
(970) 625-8601 office
(970) 625-8627 Fax
David Pesnichak
From:
Sent:
To:
Cc:
Subject:
Attachments:
Hi David,
Michael Prehm
Wednesday, July 06, 2016 2:42 PM
David Pesnichak
Wyatt Keesbery
RE : DD Investments LLC
CR 110 Stop Sign Looking RightJPG
Attached is a picture looking to the right as you would be stopped at the stop sign (bottom of CR 110). The addition of a
fence on top of the wall will not change current condition. The frontage road is also regulated by a stop sign. With looking
closer at this, I do not see that the fence will further impede sight distance.
We are good with this referral. Let me know if you have any other questions.
Thanks
Mike
From: David Pesnichak
Sent: Wednesday, July 06, 2016 9:49 AM
To: Michael Prehm
Subject: RE: DD Investments LLC
Sounds good. Thanks.
David Pesnichak, AICP
Senior Planner
Garfield County
Community Development Department
108 gth St Suite 401
Glenwood Springs, co 81601
(970) 945-8212
dpesnichak@garfield-county.com
http://www.ga rfield-county .com/ community-development/
From: Michael Prehm
Sent: Wednesday, July 06, 2016 9 :36 AM
To: David Pesnichak <dpesnichak@garfield-county.com>
Cc: David Pesnichak <dpesnichak@garfieid-county.com>
Subject: RE : DO Investments LLC
I
I
July 19, 2016
Mr. David Pesnichak
Garfield County Planning
108 8 111 Street, S11ite 401
Glenwood Springs, CO 81601
EXHIBIT
I 7-
RE: Review of the Accessory Structure for DD Investments, LLC: GAPA-06-16-8469
Dear David:
This office has performed a review of the documents provided for the Accessory Structure for DD
Investments, LLC. The submittal was found to be thorough and well organized . No comments
were generated.
Feel free to call if you have any questions or comments .
. Inc.
826 % Grand Avenue, Glenwood Spri ngs, CO 81601
P : 970.945.5544 F: 970.945.5558 www.mountaincross-eng.com
David Pesnichak
From:
Sent:
To:
Subject:
Dave,
Jeff Nelson
Wednesday, June 29, 2016 11:17 AM
David Pesnichak
RE: DD Investments LLC -Accessory Structures -Referral
·-EXHIBIT
I s
My comments would be in the category of making sure the fence is not constructed in the ROW and line of sites for the
transportation corri dor are not negatively impacted. The plans for the fencing would not impact the future plans to
reconstruct the entire intersection, as this is not scheduled to be initiated in the near future.
Sincerely,
Jeff Nelson
Assistant County Engineer
Garfield County
0375 County Road 352, Rifle, CO
Jnelson@garfield-county.com
970-625-5910 (Phone)
CONFIDENTIALITY STATEMENT: This message and any attachments are confidential and intended solely for the use of the individual
or entity to which it is addressed. The information contained herein may include protected or otherwise privileged information.
Unauthorized review, forwarding, printing, copying, distributing, or other use of such information is strictly prohibited and may be
unlawful. If you have received this message in error, please notify the sender by replying to this message and delete the email
without further disclosure.
From : David Pesnichak
Sent: Wednesday, June 29, 2016 10:37 AM
To: Jeff Nelson <jnelson@garfield-county.com>
Subject: FW: DD Investments LLC -Accessory Structures -Referral
Hi Jeff,
I did not initially include you on the referral list for this project, but I was thinking this morning about the County plans to
redesign the Cattle Creek intersection and thought I should send it along to you in case you want to comment. The
buildings in this application only require a building permit and do not require Land Use review . This application is only
because the proposed fence exceeds the 6 feet allowed in this zone district.
let me know if you have any questions.
Best,
Dave
David Pesnichak, AICP
Senior Planner
1
David Pesnichak
From:
Sent:
To:
Bill Gavette <gavette@carbondalefire.org>
Saturday, July 09, 2016 3:49 PM
David Pesnichak
EXHIBIT
~-
---
Subject DD Investments LLC -Accessory Structure (Fence and Wall), GAPA-06-16-8469
Follow Up Flag:
Flag Status:
David,
Flag for follow up
Flagged
I have reviewed the application for the proposed new fence and wall. The per Section 506 (Key Boxes) of the County's
Fire Code, the applicant should provide for emergency access to the facility through the proposed new gates.
Thanks,
Bill Gavette
Deputy Chief
Carbondale & Rural Fire Protection District
www.carbondalefire .org
970-963-2491
FIRE · £.\IS · RESCUE
1
I
I