HomeMy WebLinkAbout2.0 BOCC Staff Report 04.05.2004o
Exhibits Naugle lTeter Public Hearing held on 4/5/04
a
b lr,t"/-D 'Jfh : 6o,*5 P/''
{ . ol,;,**'
{ (lrcJ./l-ld ,
" Ul;1 i v'll1 t
t,l' llt..v '
t FpA f.r) . i
b*/ f,* 0ll
yA^ &,,
h) ,l
A Mail Receipts
B Proof of Publication
C Garfield County Zoning Regulations
D Garfield County Comprehensive plan of 2000
E Application
F Staff Memorandum
G Referral comments from Road and Bri dge oepurtm"nt dat"d zlz6/ol
H lqOT Comments to Garfield County from3l30lO4IReferral comments from vegetation Managemeniffi
J fn;
K Lrlh, 1,*., (. "r ^t V J
dil| f*'l +/-,1 ,/ 7
u
I 'H','atr
REOUEST
PROPERTY OWNER
APPLICANT
LOCATION
SITE DATA
ACCESS
WATER
SEWER
EXISTING ZONING
SUROUNDING ZONING
occ 04t0s104
FJ
Industrial Support Facilities which would include
Warehouse / Staging Facilities
Harry & Rhonda Naugle (sellers)
Doug & Beverly Teter (prospective purchasers)
16605 State Highway 6, just west of the Interstate -
70 Interchange at Rulison, Colorado.
Approximately 35 acres
County Road 323
Well
Porta Potties / ISDS
RL - Resource Lands (Gentle Slopes / Lower Valley
Floor)
Open Space, RL
PROJECT INFORMATION AND STAFF COMMENTS
View of property looking west towards Parachute. l-70 borders the property to the south that follows the power line
on the left side of the photo.
I.D ON
The Applicant requests the Board gr"rt
" sp*ial use Permit in order to locate their compan y (Doug
f::;":^:;':,:::I',':,f::'::i',"::.li:il _,i * ;,0*t propertv which orrers rorow-upmaintenance support to the natural gas drilring operations'il";;"ffi;i#'#:lr#';;,:fl?ril:county.Thisrequest,fallsundertheSpecia1Us#ermitr.@whichwould
include Warehouse / Staeins Facilitils.
More specifically, the company provides support service to gas and oil companies during drillingfollowed by on-going mainierance at the driti sites. The company does the completion work on wellsafter they have been drilled including setting dehydratorr, r"p#,"^,;;J,-";r, as they are needed.In addition, the company does all of-the corl"ction *;;( digs out and lays pipe for flow-lines andsales lines followed by backfill and final grading of the location. when ttris is aone, the well is readyto produce' Lastly, the company provides on-gJing .uini"rur.e, repair, and service to the wells asneeded' Presently, the company operates on a24-hour I 7 daya week basis for Encana oil and Gasand Monday thru Friday for caipine Natural Gas. Both companies are located south ofRifle and silt.co' The current operation employs between and 15 and 17 employees, *r,o *1illu". ilj'd;;ivehicles to the yard, pick up theiidesignated equipment, complete their daily assignment, and retumto yards at end of shift.
In providing service, the company uses the folowing trucks in their operation:
a) Six (6) bbl bobtail watsr/vactrucks which are used for transporting and transferring wastewater' water is hauled from site to site or to a designated disposal pIt. wut., or waste waterwill never be stored at the yard.b) Two (2) tandem-axet gravel trucks, two (2) winch trucks, two (2) backhoes, and two 2)trenchers, one (1) trencher, and four (a) traiiers to ."*i"" the oil and gas companies.c) Five (l) one-ton roustabout trucks .qripp"J *i,t 1""r, and supplies.
The proposed site plan includes the following proposed structural improvements:
a) A 60' x 80'.single-story shop building (4,800 sq. ft.) on the site which will be used to storetools, supplies, *gJo store equip*"rit io'b"..pui."a;b) Parking areas.for all.of the .o.puny trucks and employee vehicles;c) Two sets of pipe racks;
d) One dumpster; and
e) An area for fuel tanks.
when the shop building is completed and the yard is graded and leveled, the Applicant intends toconstruct dirt berms and leave the natural sagebrush uiundr"oping. The Applicant intends to planttrees and shrubs once the well is complet-ed thereby providing limited irrigation water. [TheApplicant is presently und.er contract to purchase trre sulject property from the property owners. As acondition of the contract, the Applicant will not purchas. irirr"y are unable to obtain a SUp for theirbusiness.l
H
2
II. SITE DESCRIPTION
The 35-acre property is located just north and adjacent to I-70 just west of the Rulison exit. Access isprovided by the frontage road on the north side of t-zo which dead-ends into a driveway / gate for theNaugle Property which is adjacent to the subject p.op"ny, Note however, the subject property islandlocked but is provided un .ur"rn"nt across the neighboring (Naugle) property to the eastproviding access to r-70 and cR 323. Practically, this frontage road turns into county Road 323(Rulison Road) after it passes under the interstat. .rapr.t the frontage road on the south side of theinterstate.
Physically' the property is relatively flat with some gentle I - S%slopes in a southerly directionacross the site' The property is coveied.mostly uy rug""C*sh and dry grusre"*irt, u".y sparse pinionvegetation' There is a significant drainage tourse"that cuts throug-h the property in a southerlydirection eventually going unde r l-Tothroigh u tu.g. ,q,r* concrete culvert. It appears to be in placeto handle storm water across the property *hi.h "ulnt uily flows into the cotoraoo River. (Staffwillprovide color slide of the property ut tfrl hearing.) '--J
III.REFERRALS
Staff referred the application out to the following review agencies and or county Departments:
a. City of Rifle: No comments received.b. Town of parachute: No comments received.c. Grand valley Fire protection District: No comments received.d' Garfield county
-Road
& Bridge Department: No issues with the proposal. (Exhibit H)e. Garfield County Vegetation Mr.rug"_"nt: (See Exhibit G)f' colorado Department of Transportation: Applicant will need an access permit. (Exhibit I)
IV. COMPREHENSIVE PLAN
The property lies within Study Area 3 and is designated on the proposed land use map as outlyingResidential' The Applicants piopor. a use that is industrial in nature which conflicts with thepresentdesignation' consider the foilowing Goals, objectives, aro poticies that apply to the proposal:
a. Goals
IilTi;l,ii ;|ii\ii,Xf;i:;X'nd industriat devetopmentatthewestern and interchangeparts of
Garfield countlt will encourage the development of a diversified industrial base for the countywhich recognizes the humai resources' notural resources, and physical location-to-marketcapabilities of the community, and which further rerognirx and addresses the social andenvironmentul impacts of industrial uses.
Regarding the goals aboye, the property is located at the I-70 interchange for Rulison in the westempart of Garfield county' Locating inaustriat developmentinihis location is consistent with the plan.The proposed use is a support business j: lh" "il id;;loration industry which is a significantcomponent in the county's economy which is centerfd i, tf,. ,um. area ofthe county as the proposed
H
use. This proposed use would serve to. further diversi$z this sector of the economy and is located inthe area where the services are needed.
b. Objectives
4'2 To ensure that commercial and tldy{riul developments are compatible with adjacent landuses and mitigate impacts identified during the pian review process.
The property (35-acre tract) is located in a very rural and primarily undeveloped area of the countythat has mainly been used for ranching surrounded by l-lo tinterchange,"i#;j]i;ffiil'jii
steep slopes on public land to the north and west. Therl is one single-family residence (Naugle) and asmall commercial I generar feed store adjacent to the property.
4'3 Encourage the location of industrial development in areas where visual, noise, air qualiry, andinfrastructure impacts are reduced.
The use, if unscreened, will be visually d_etrimental to the present character ofthe surrounding naturalenvironment specifically as seen from I-70. The Plan identifies the property as lying within thevisual corridor which is based on significant view-sheds or naturalfeinries, iistancefrom a majortravel corridor, and topographic conditions .that define sight clistancefrom a major roadway.In thisway (and as recognized by the Plan by placing lanl use.7ar. on visual corridors), I-70 serves as alinear qatewalr to the.rest of the county because it determines the irnpression from what traveler seesfrom the road' This impression also assumes the rest of the county is treated in the same mannerregarding appropriate land use or associated mitigation of land uses. unmitigated or inappropriateland use only detracts from the natural assets / resources of the county. The Applicant proposes touse berms, trees, and landscaping but does not indicate where they will be planted / constructed andto what specifications. Therefore, this proposal in not consistent w,ith this objective of the plan.
4'6 Ensure the typl, size, and scope of industrial and commercial development are consistentwiththe long-term land use objectives of the county.
The Plan's proposed land use map shoes this property as outlying Residential rather than LightIndustrial which would be a more appropriate designation. However, the underlying zoning ofResource Lands does contemplate the proposed use in the district in this location. As a result, theBoard may approve this use with certain mitigation measures in place that are regulated rather thanunregulated outright uses. one of the goals in the plan is to locate the proposed use near or atinterchanges in the western part of the county. Based on this, it appears, with proper mitigation, theuse could be consistent with the plan.
4'7 Ensure that zoning regulation addressing commercial and industrial uses reJlects thechanging land use patterns and demograf,hics of the county and encourage the furtherdiversffication of the Countlt,s economy.
As mentioned above, one of the goals regarding industrial development is to ,.encourage thedevelopment of a diversified indusirial basJ." rrrJ p.op".ty is located at the I-70 interchange for
Rulison in the western part of Garfield County. Locating industnial development in this location is
consistent with the Plan. The proposed use is a support business to the oil / gas exploration industry
which is a significant component in the County'r i"onorny which is centered in the same area of thecounty as the proposed use. This proposed use would serve to f'urther diversi$z this sector of theeconomy and is located in the area where the services are needed. The standardsin the zoning code
are intended to provide regulatory guidance to ensure proper mitig,ation is in place or to show this useis inappropriate. This is discussed in subsequent sections of this,r.-o.
c. Policies
4'3 Landscaping and screening will be required to address specffic visual impacts of industrial
and commercial developme nt.
4'4 The proiect review process will inctude the identffication and mitigation of transportation
impacts related to commercial and industrial deielopment
The Applicant mentioned planting trees and shrubs and constructing dirt berms as part of landscaping/ screening for the use; however, no specific plan was submitted that shows where trees / shrubs willbe planted, how high and where the berms will be located. The use, if unscreened, will be visually
detrimental to the present character of the surrounding natural environment specifically as seen fromI-70. The Plan identifies the property as lying within the Visual Corridor which is based onsignificant view-sheds or naturalfeatures, clistancefrom a major travel corriclor, and topographicconditions that define sight distance from a major roaclway. Br:cause no plan was specifically
identified by the Applicant, this proposal is inconsistent with this policy in the plan. Transportation
impacts are discussed in subsequent portions of this memo.
V. REVIEW STANDARDS
Special Uses are subject to the standards in Section 5.03 of the ZoningResolution. In addition,the proposed use, due to its industrial nature, shall also be requireJto address the industrialperformance standards in 5.03.07 and 5.03.098 of the ZorungResolution. These review standards
are presented below followed by a response by Staff.
A. Section 5.03 Review Standards
1) Utilities adequate to provide water and sanitation servic,e based on accepted ensineerinsstandards a!! Loytiyed by the.Board of Couity co**,ittiiii,:tiiiii;;;;";'L";';;;hr'"or shall be conitiucted ii conjunctioiwith th'e propoi,;A;;;;
Staff Finding
Regarding water, the Applicant obtained an exempt domestic well permi t (#zs4l54) which
may provide water for fire protection, ordinary household tr,u.por., inside not more than 3single-family dwellings, the watering ofpoultry, domestic animals and livestock on a farm or
ranch and the irrigation of not more than I acre of home gardens and lawns. At present, nowell has been drilled; however, if the proposal is approved, the Applicant commiti to drilling
the well to provide domestic water to the operation which wo,uld presumably include waterin!
of irrigation.
Staff discussed this permit and the proposed hear,y industrial nature of the proposal with theDivision of water Resources who indicated that the exempt domestic well permit cannotlegitimately be used for the proposed use and that the Applicant would either need to obtain an"exempt commercial" well permit that would cover sanitary and drinkinguses associated withthe operation or obtain a West Divide contract to augmenl. additional outdoor uses such asirrigation and washing of trucks, etc. As a result, the Applicant's have not demonstrated they
have adequate legal access to water.
Regarding wastewater, the Applicant proposes to provide pofta-potties to handle wastewater at
the property and proposes to install a septic system QSDS) at some point in the future. This isunacceptable for the following reasons: 1) the well permit requires that return flow from theuse of the well must be through an individual waste water disposal system (ISDS) of the non-evaporative type where the water is returned to the same stream system in which the well islocated (as indicated by the Division of Water Resources) ; and 2)the use of porta-potties aregenerally only permitted as a very temporary method olwarste iisposal andnot adequate tohandle long-term waster water generation. The proposed operations are significant and of along-term nature that require the installation of an rsps.
2) street iy|r:r:y:r!t ade.q,uate to accommodate traffic vorume generuted by theproposed, use and to provide safe, convenie-nt _access tti"the use shalieitnei ii iibtaiior shall be construcied in coffiiuion wtih tn'i propiriiii;;-
Staff Finding
The Applicant indicates the proposed operation will generate traffic / trips in the following
manner:
,;\ ' 1' Daily.Trips: Trips include (15- 17) employees that w.ill drive to the property in the'r morning to pick up their work vehicle and depart for the:work sites then returning at the
end of the day or end of their shift to pick uptheir personal vehicles.
2' Weekl)' Trips: Trips include a weekly diesel fuel deliverry to fill the proposed fuel tankson the property used to fuel work trucks on the proper[y. Other traffic would be fromoccasional UpS / FEDX deliveries to the property.
Proposed Internal Road: The Applicant proposes to install a road (road base & gravel) along
an existing 3O-foot easement that is legally described on the "Naugle Boundary Survey,, thaltraverses the southeastem property line of Naugle Exemption paicel. The easement beginsfrom the end of the CDOT frontage "spur" that dead-ends into the property at the end of CR323 and then travels approximately 600 linear feet to the prop,erty line oltn. subject property.
The Applicant proposes to continue that improved road foiapproximatel y 720 feet into thesubject property along the southern property line the turning northward about 225 feetinto the
area of operations. This proposed road will cross an existing ,10-ft wide power line easement
and an existing 40-foot gas line easement for an g,, diameter gas line.
Main Access to Property: Access to and from the property is from the frontage road on thenorth side of I-70 which dead-ends into a driveway / gate forr the Naugle property which is
adjacent to the subject property. Note however, the subject property is landlocked but is
provided an easement across the neighboring (Naugle) property to ihe iast providing access to
I-70 and CR 323. Practically, this frontage road turns into County Road 3)3 (Rulison Road)
after it passes under the interstate and past the frontage road on the south side of the interstate.
As a matter ofjurisdiction, CR 323 actually ceases to be a county road as it intersects with the
CDOT frontage road on the south side of I-70. The remainder of the roadway as it crosses
under I-70 and dead-ends into the Naugle property is part of the CDOT frontagl road system.
Therefore, trips from the property do not access directly onto a county road; they either
directly access ease or west bound I-70 (from the interchange ramps) or enter the county road
system as CR 323 begins heading south into Rulison.
Staff referred the application to the County Road & Bridge Department who indicated the
proposal will not have any effect on county roads. The application was also referred to CDOT
who provided comments requiring the applicant to obtain a state highway access permit.
3) ?:f!qn,9{!he plotole!. u1e is organized to minimize impact on ondfrom adjacent usesoJ tqn! through installation of sgre-enfqyces or landscafoe materialion the ieriphent of,!:^lgt rld by location of intensively ytillzed-aye-as,-access points, lightinghnd sigis i;,such o munner as to protect established neighborhood cliaracter;"
Staff Finding
There is no "established neighborhood character" as the surroundin g area is very rural in
nature (vacant sagebrush land); however, the neighboring Naugle exemption properly is zoned
Commercial Limited and contains a small feed and general store as un ugr;.u1-tural support
store which was rezoned in 1999. The property is quite isolated from any residential use and isphysically located on a flat vacant plateau between the I-70 corridor and a significant hillside
to the north. The property is bound on the west by BLM land which is similar in physical
nature as the subject property. The site plan covers a very small portion of the 35 acre tract.
However, the operation will be highly visible from the I-70 corridor.
The Applicant did not provide any proposed method of screening from I-70 and / or other
adjacent properties as specifically shown on the site plan. They only indicate that when the
shop building is completed and the yard is graded and leveled, they pian to construct berms of
dirt and use the natural forage (existing sage brush) as landscaping. Additionally, they intend
to plant trees and shrubs when the well has been drilled so that there will be water to irrigate
the plantings.
Regarding lighting, the Applicant proposes to install minimal lighting for security purposes.
Should the Board approve the request; Staff recommends that alGxterior lighting shall be the
minimum amount necessary and all exterior lighting will be directed inward anJ downward,
towards the interior of the subdivision, except that provisions may be made to allow for safety
lighting that goes beyond the property boundaries. The Applicanihas not proposed the use of
signage on the property. Regarding signage, the Applicani shall be requiiedio adhere to the
county's sign code.
Industrialoperations,includingextraction,processing,fabrication,@,
Ti1:Iul waste disposal, stgragq, sanitary landfill, ,utiug" yard, accesr r*Grli-o utility lines,shall be permitted, provided:
1) Te applicant for a permit for industrial operations shall prepare and submit to tltePlanning Director ten (10) copies of an impict ,,toi.iinnt on,the proposed use describingits location' scope' design aid coistruction trtrraiti, including an explanotion of itsoperational charo.cteristics. One (1) c-opy gf,the impait statement shall befited with thecountlt Commissioners by the Planniig D"irector.'ii', t^poct stuteieil'shall addressthe following:
o) Existing lawful use of water through depletion or pollution of surfoce run-ffi streomJlow or ground waterl
Staff Finding
Regarding wastewater, the Applicant proposes to provide porta-potties to handlewastewater at the property and proposes to install a septic system (ISDS) at some point inthe future' This is unacceptable forthe following."uro.rr, l) the well permit requires thatreturn flow from the use of the well must be through an individual waste water disposalsystem (ISDS) of the non-evaporative type where the water is retumed to the same streamsystem in which the well is located; and 2) the use of porta-potties are generally onlypermitted as a very temporary method of waste disposal. The proposed iperations aresignificant and of a long-term nature that require the installation of an ISDS. Should theBoard approve the request; Staff recommends an ISDS be required in order to obtain apermit.
b) rmpacts on adiacent landfrom the generation of vapor, dust, smoke, noise, glare orvibrution, or other emanitions;
Staff Finding
The Applicant states that there will be a minimum impact on adjacent land due togeneration vapor, dust, smoke, noise, glare or vibration generated dom the starting oftrucks and equipment. As a matter of practice, the road should be surfaced and the lotshould be graveled with a dust free maintenance program.
c) Impacts on witdtife and domestic animals through the creation of hazardousattractions, alteration of existing native vegetation, b'tockade oyiijrrtii" routes, usepatterns or other disruptions;
Staff Finding
The Applicant states that there will be no impact on wildlife and domestic animals as aresult on the proposed operation which is proposed to occur on a relatively small portion ofthe property' No supporting data was submitted to the county to justify this response. Staffreviewed the property as it relates to the Wildlife Resource Information System (WRIS)developed by the Division of wildlife which maps wildlife in Garfield county. It appearsthere is Elk overall Range, Mule Deer Winter Range, and Mule Deer overall Range on the
-
entire property and mule Deer Winter Concentration Area and Mule Deer Severe winterRange partially on the property.
d) Affirmatively show the impacts oftruck and automobite traffic to andfrom such usesand their impacts to areai in thi County;
Staff Finding
As mentioned above, the Applicant states the operation generates daily trips that include(15- l7) employees that will drive to the prop..ty in thJ morning to pickup their workvehicle and depart for the work sites then retuming at the end of the day or end oftheir shiftto p-ick up their personal vehicles. other weekly trips include a weekly diesel fuel deliveryto fill the proposed fuel tanks on the property used to fuel work trucks on the property.Other traffic would be from occasional UPS / FEDX deliveries to the property.
Also as mentioned above, the main access to and from the property is on CDOT frontage;therefore, trips from the property do not access directly onto a county road; they eitherdirectly access ease or west bound I-70 (from the interchange ramps) or enter the countyroad system as CR 323 begins heading south into Rulison.
While the Applicant described the types of trucks and the typical traffic trips generatedfrom the property, there was no discussion provided related to the impacts from these trips.Staffrefened the application to the county Road & Bridge Department who indicated theproposal will not have any effect on county roads. However, the trucks used in thecompany's business may or may not need to be regulated for overweight permits. Theapplication was also referred to CDoT who provid"J.o--.rts requiring the applicant toobtain a state highway access permit.
e) Thut sufficient distances shall separate such usefrom abuttingproperry which mightotherwise be damaged by operations of the prof,or"i use(s);
Staff Finding
The Applicant states this property is rural agricultural land abutting more of the same onwhich there are no other structures. All surrounding land is vacant and covered with naturalforage' Staff agrees that the area is rural agricultu;l/ranch land, however, there is a smallsingle-story commercial store on the neighboring property to the east and a small coralbuilding on the property directly to the north. stari mas ihut th"r" is sufficient distancebetween these structures and the proposed site on the subject property which would containthe proposed shop, fuel tanks, pipe iacks etc.
fl Mitigation meas::re! lroposedfor (t^olt\elgrggoing impacts identified andfor thestandards identified in sectioi 5.8.0d of tiis R"esolition
Staff Finding
The Applicant does not propose any mitigation for impacts generated from the proposedoperations.
9
2) Permits ygl be grantedfor those uses with provisions that provide adequate mitigationfor the following:
A planfor site rehabilitation must be approved by the County Commissioners before
a permitfor conditional or special usi will be iisued;
Tlte -county commissionlls mu! require security bnyorc a permit for special orconditional use is iss-1te(, if required. The applicoit tt lottyrrnish eviience'of a bankcommitment_of credit, bond, certified check-or other seciri4, deemed acceitatble bythe County Commissioners in thi amount calculated by the-County Comiissioners
to secure the execution of the site rehabilitation plan ii workmanlike manner and inaccordance with the specffications and cons*uciion schedule established or approved
by the-CoynQt Commissioners. Such commitments, bonds or check shall bi'fayubleto and held by the County Commissioners;c) Impac-ts set forth. in -the impact statement and compliance with the standardscontained in Section 5.03.08 of this Resolution
Staff Finding
The Applicant provided no site rehabilitation plan to the county. The Applicant intends to
clear existing sage brush vegetation from the u."u u, well as level the site for the proposed
activities which mainly include large truck storage and the building site for thl 60, g0,
shop. Staff referred the proposal to the County Vegetation management Director whoprovided the following comments:
A' Inventory and mapping-The Applicant shall map and inventory the property for
County listed noxious weeds.
B' Weed Management-The Applicant shall provide a weed management plan for the
inventoried noxious weeds.
C' The Applicant has stated in response to Item 5 of your January 14,2}O4letter, that
they will provide landscaping. This is just a suggestion on my part; the County may
want the applicant to provide a more detailed landscaping planthat would name the
species to be planted and the location of the trees.
All industrial operations in the County shall comply with applicable County, State, and Federalregulations regulating water, air and noise pollution and slall not be conducted in a mannerconstituting a public nuisance orhazard. operations shall be conducted in such a manner as tominimize heat, dust, smoke, vibration, glare and odor and all other undesirable environmental
effects beyond the boundaries of the property in which such uses are located, in accord with thefollowing standards:
1) (olyme of sound generated shall comply with the standards set forth in the ColoradoRevised statutes at the time any new application is made.
Staff Finding
The Applicant states there will be only a minimum impact from the volume of sound generatedfrom the operations on the property. The Applicant dld not provide any supporting analysisindicating what "minimum impact" meant or how it was determined. As the goard is a*are, the
a)
b)
l0
county uses the Colorado Revised Statutes (CRS 25-12-10l) for determining noise impacts.
The Statute states "Sound levels of noise radiatingfrom a property line at a distance o7 )S Teetor more therefrom in excess qf the dB(A\ establishedfor thefollowing time periods and zones
shall constitute (premafacia) evidence that such noise is a pubtic nuironrr.- " The table below
shows the zones and dB(A) acceptable for each zone and particular time.
Zone TamtoTpnr TltmtoTam
Residential 55 dB(A)50 dB(A)
Commercial 60 dB(A)55 dB(A)
Light Industrial 6s dB(A)70 dB(A)
Industrial 80 dB(A)7s dB(A)
As the Board is also aware, the statute is somewhat ambiguous in the following two ways: l)
whether the noise impact should be evaluated from the sender (emittei) or receiver
(neighboring use), and2) weather the "zones" refer to the zoningclassification of a particular
piece of property or the actual predominant use thereon. The only certain element in this statute
is the fact that we know where to measure the noise levels (ZS feet from the property line ofthe
emitter). Based on past practice, Staff finds that noise impacts should be miasured as they
relate to the receiver properties (the neighbors), and 2) the"zone" classifications offered by thl
statute (in the table above) refer to the actual use on the property rather than the underlying
Garfield County zone district designations.
Since the standard requires that the "volume of sound generated shall compllz with the
standards set forth in the Colorado Revised Statutes ut th" ti*" uny re* applicaiion is *ad".
Because the applicant did not provide any information as to th" uot,r-*filila generated, this
standard is not met.
2) Vibration generated: every use shall be so operated that the ground vibration inherentlyand re-curuently generated is not pe,rceptibie, without instriments, at any point of aiyboundary line of the propergt on which the use is located;
Staff Finding
The Applicant states that vibrations produced on the property will have a minimum impact. No
trucks were leaving or entering the site during the site visit so no vibration could be tested.
Staff believes that the vibration would not be detected at the property boundaries of a truck
entering, parking, or leaving the property. Staff finds this standard is met.
3) Ery1ssi9n1 of s\o\e and particulate matterl every use shall be operated so os to complywith all Federal, State and County air quality liws, regulationi and standards;
Staff Finding
The Applicant states that there will be only minimum emissions produced on the property as a
result of the operations. It appears the only emissions generated would come from the exhaust
(diesel fumes) of the trucks as they waffn up (idle), leave, or enter the property. Once properly
parked and engines tumed off the emissions would also cease. However, piactically, trucks
such as these generally take a while to warm up prior to leaving site. ThLy will pioduce a
1l
noxious odor from diesel exhaust as they warrn up on the site. In aclclition, Staff is unclear if allthe trucks that are there leave at the saml time oni4onday moming which would exacerbate theissue to have trucks all warming up at the same time prior to departure.
As the standard requires, every use shall be operated to comply with county, state, and federallaws' Staff does not test these emissions but believes that since the only emissions comes fromthe exhaust from vehicles that are licensed by the county and the state to comply with federalair quality laws, this standard is assumed to be met.
4) Emission of heat, glare, radiation andfumes: every use shall be so operated that it doesnot emit heat, glare, radiation
-or f,umis which suisnntially int"ry"i" iii the existinguse of adioining properfit or which constitutes a pubiic nuisance "or hazard. Flaring ofgases' aircruft ulorning signals, reflective paiiting of storage toiii, ii other suchoperations which.may be-requiredby law is sayeS o-i air poftution ciitrol measuresshall be exempted from this provision;
Staff Finding
There are no significant heat, glare, radiation, and fumes generated from the use as the truckssit parked on the property. only minimal engine heat and ir-., from exhaust will occur as thetrucks leave and enter the property at fairly random intervals. As a result, Staff finds thisstandard is met.
5) Storage area. salvage yard, sunitary lundfill and mineral waste disposal areas:
a) Storage of Jlammable _o-r explosive solids or gases shall be in accordance withaccepted standards and laws and sha.ll comply iittt tt , national, stute and localJirecodes and written recommendations/commiitsTro* the appropiiate localprotectiondistrict regarding compriance with the appropiioii ,od"ri'
Staff Finding
The Applicant proposes to erect several diesel fuel tanks on the site that will be filled on aweekly basis in order to provide fuel to the trucks used in the daily operations of thebusiness' The standard above relates directly to the storage of flammable or explosivesolids or gases, should the Board approve the requested permit, Staff suggests a conditionof approval require that storage of fuel shall comply with the national, ,t"ul", and local firecodes and the Applicant shall provide writter recommendations/comments from theappropriate local fire protection district regarding compliance with the appropriate codes tothe county.
b) At the discretion of the lo-unt1t commissioners, all outdoor storogefacitities may berequired to be enclosed by fence, landscaping or woll adequaTe"i-iinc"at su"l,fac ilitie s fro m adj a c e nt p rop e rty ;
Staff Finding
The Applicant provided a minimal response to this standard. Because the property is flat theproposed uses will be visible from all the surrounding properties. The Applicant indicatedthey would provide berming and trees / shrubs but d-id not specif, where these would be
12
aranged on the site plan or whether or not it would effectively screen the storage areascontaining trucks, fuel tanks, pipe racks, and associated machinery from adjacentproperties. As a result, Staff finds this standard has not been met.
c) No materials or wastes^shall be deposited upon a property in such form or mannerthat they may be transferred off thi prop"rty ty niy iouinablyfoieseeable naturalcauses or forces;
Staff Finding
The Applicant indicates there will be no storage of materials or waste which could betransferred off the property by any reasonably foreseeable natural causes or forces. It
appears the Applicant has included a dumpster to contain waste materials on the site and it
is highly unlikely trucks llarge equipmeni stored on the property will be transferred offtheproperty by any reasonably foreseeable natural causes oi foi."r. Should the Board approve
the request, Staff suggests this standard be included as an on-going condition of approval.
d) S!or!'g9 of Heavy Equipment will only be allowed subject to (A) and (C) above andthe following standards:
i' The minimum lot size is five (5) acres and is not a platted subdivision.
Staff Finding
The parcel contains approximately 35 acres and is not located in a platted subdivision.
Staff finds this standard is met
ii' The.equtpment storage area is notpluced any closer than 300fLfrom any existingreside ntia I dwe lli ng.-
Staff Finding
There are no residential dwellings in the vicinity (300 feet) of the property. This standardis met.
iii' ljl:y:f:::t storage will be enclosed in an area with sueening at teast eight (8)l:l.i:,-ff.:.s!:r,o^:.! ?.!:ry:t(frof view at the same etevation or'tiiir:.-si;Z;;i;'smsy tnctude bermtn-9, landscaping, sight obscuringfencing or a combination ifany of these methodi
Staff Finding
At present, the storage area is not screened from adjacent properties. The Applicantintends to plant trees / shrubs and install berms on the property; however, the Applicant
has not proposed any landscaping or fencing plan that demonstrates that the storage area
can be concealed / screened. As a result, Staff finds this standard has not been met.
iv. Any repair and muintenance activity requiring the use o.f eguipment that will
ff iif it'i#if i;,f{li"!;f ::i:l?;;!il::t;1^,#i":#!ff?;;:!,;i*:_gtfi;;
l3
o
Staff Finding
Should the Board approve the request, Staff suggests this standard be included as an on-
going condition of approval so long as the operation exists on the property.
v. Loading and unloading of vehicles shall be conducted on private property and
may not be conducted on any public right-of-way.
Staff Finding
The Applicant states the storage area is simply to park the tnrcks and no loading or
unloading activity takes place on the property. Should the Board approve the request, Staff
suggests this standard be included as an on-going condition of approval so long as the
operation exists on the property.
e) Any storage areufor uses not associated with natural resources shall not exceed ten
(10) acres in size.
Staff Finding
The area devoted to storage of these trucks appears to be less than 10 acres in size. Staff
finds this standard has been met.
fl Any lighting of storage area shall be pointed downward and inward to the property
center and shaded to prevent direct reflection on adjacent properA.
Staff Finding
Regarding lighting, the Applicant proposes to install minimal lighting for security pufposes.
Should the Board approve the request; Staff recommends that all exterior lighting shall be
the minimum amount necessary and all exterior lighting will be directed inward and
downward, towards the interior of the property and be shaded to prevent direct reflection on
adjacent property.
6) Water pollution: in a case in which potential hazards exist, it shall be necessary to
install safeguards designed to comply with the Regulations of the Environmental
Protection Agency before operation of the facilities may begin. All percolation tests or
ground water resource tests as may be required by local or State Health OfJicers must be
met before operation of the facilities may begin.
Staff Finding
In this case, it appears the diesel fuel tanks are the only potentialhazard on the property that
may be a threat related to water pollution. The Applicant indicated the area that will contain the
tanks will be lined so that if a spill were to occur, it would be appropriately contained. Should
the Board approve this request, Staff suggests it shall be necessary for the Applicant to install
safeguards designed to comply with the Regulations of the Environmental Protection Agency
before operation of the facilities may begin. All percolation tests or ground water resource tests
as may be required by local or State Health Officers must be met before operation of the
facilities may begin. The Applicant shall demonstrate that the property can sustain an ISDS as
well as the fuel tank containment area has been designed to comply with the Regulations of the
Environmental Protection Agency before operation of the facilities may begin.
t4
1)
VI. SUGGESTED FINDINGS
1' That proper public notice was provided as required for the hearing before the Board ofCounty Commissioners.
2' That the hearing before the Board of County Commissioners was extensive and complete andthat all interested parties were heard at that meeting; however, not all pertinent facts, matters
and issues were submitted at the meeting
3 ' That for the above stated and other reasons, the proposed conditional use permit is not in thebest interest ofthehealth, safety, morals, convenience, order, prosperity and welfare of thecitizens of Garfield County.
4' That the application is not in conformance with the Garfield County ZoningResolution of1978, as amended.
VII. STAFFRECOMMENDATION
Staffrecommends the Board of county Commissioners deny the request for a Special use permit toallow for Industrial Support Facilities which include Warehouse / Staging Facilities for Beverly and
Po'g Teter on a property located at 16605 State Highway 6, just west of the Interstate -70Interchange at Rulison, Colorado finding that the following standards have not been adequatelysatisfied:
Section 5.03
based o,, uccepted engineering
tners slrull either be in place o7
2) stre,q.t impr?yem:!^ts-:!:.ly!!::, a-ccommodate traffic vo.rum-e generated by the proposed use
f:d^i"_f.:::!!: safe;co.nvenient access to the ut, ti"iit-riinii-b;7; ii;;;-ir"{hail be constructedtn conjunction with the proposed use;
3) Design,o{*f USC TS tl!t_!:r!mi_ze impact,on andfrom qdjacent-uses of land
of the lot dnd byI o c a.tio n of i ylp 1t s itl e
p r o te ct e stab lis h e d n e i g h b o r h o o d c h a ra cte r:;
a manner ds to
(A) Existing lawful use of water through depletion or pollution of surface run-ofJ) stream/lowor ground water;
(B) Iypocls on adiacent land from the generation of vapor, dust, smoke, noise. glare orvibration, or other emanations;
(C) Irypacts on wildlde and domestic onimals tlroysh the creation of hazardous ottractions,alteration of existing native vegetation, blockade"of migration ,oit"r,irr: pntt"ros or otherdisruptions;(D)Affirmatively to undfrom such uses and
15
standards and approved bv the Botsltall be construbied in coi$unction
rd of Countv Comilss
witli the priposed use;
their impacts to areas in the County;
P31mit1 may be granted for those ut"t iith provisions that provide adequate ntitigation for thefollowing:
(A) A plan for site rehabilitation must be approved by the County Commissioners before apermitfor conditional or special use wiit^be issuei;
(1) Volume of sound generated shall comply with the standards setforth in the Coloraclo RevisedStatutes at the time uny new applicatioi is made.
(5) Storage area, sulvage yard, sanitary landfill and mineral waste disposal areas:
(A) sto'oe" gfiIo!'ynblt shall be in accordance with acceptedstandards and laws and shall "o*ply iiifin ootional, state qnd lical fire codes andwritten recommendations/commeiti from the appropriate local protection districtregurding compliance with the appropriate codes; '
(D) S-torage of Heayt Equipment will only be allowed subject to (A) and (C) above and thefollowing standards:
at least eight (8)
feet in height and obscured from view at the same elevation or lower. Screening mayinclude berming,landscaping, sight obscuringfencing or u combination of any of thesemethods.
VUI. RECOMMENDED MOTION
"I move to deny the request for a Special Use Permit for Industrial Support Facilities which wouldinclude Warehouse / Staging Facilities for Beverly and Doug Teter on a property located at 16605State Highway 6, just west of the Interstate -70 Interchange at Rulison, Colorado.
t6
o tioIIg
EXHIBIT
MEMORANDUM
To:
From:
Re:
Date:
Fred Jarman
Steve Anthony
Comments on the Naugle SUp
March 26,2004
Thanks for the opportunity to comment on the PUD. My comments are as follows:
1. Noxious Weeds
Inventory and mapping-The applicant shall map and inventory the
property for County listed noxious weeds.
weed Management-The applicant shall provide a weed management plan
for the inventoried noxious weeds.
2. Landscaping
A. The applicant has stated in response to Item 5 of your January 14,2004
letter, that they will provide landscaping. This is just a suggestion on my
part; the county may want the applicant to provide a more detailed
landscaping plan that would name the species to be planted and the
location of the trees.
A.
B.
GARFIELD COUNTY
Common name
Leafy spurge
Russian knapweed
Yellow starthistle
Plumeless thistle
Houndstongue
Common burdock
Scotch thistle
Canada thistle
Spotted knapweed
Diffuse knapweed
Dalmation toadflax
Yellow toadflax
Hoary cress
Saltcedar
Saltcedar
Oxeye Daisy
Jointed Goatgrass
Chicory
Musk thistle
Purple loosestrife
Russian olive
NOXIOUS WEED LIST
Scientific name
Euphorbia esula
Acroptilon repens
Centaurea solstitalis
Carduus acanthoides
Cynoglossum fficinale
Arctium minus
Onopordum acanthium
Cirsium Arvense
Centaurea maculosa
Centaurea dffisa
Linaria dalmatica
Linaria vulgaris
Cardaria draba
Tamarix parviflora
Tamarix ramosissima
C h ry s anth emum I euc anth eum
Aegilops cylindrica
Cichorium intybus
Cardutts nutans
Lythrum salicaria
Elaeagnus angustifulia
A3/ 16/ 2Zo4 22:84 525882'7 ROAD AND BRIDGE
GARIIELD COI]NTY
Building & Pl@tfrrg Deptaent
Reryiov Agcncy Form
Dac Sent;Mrrch 16,20o4
Conncntr Ilue Mrrch 31,2fiN
Name ofapplicaion: Harry and RlrondrNurgl+ SUP
Sent to: Garlicld Countv Rord end Bridce DcDt.
Garfield Couflty requests your oomment in review of this project. Pleasc notifr thc
Planning UArnmcntinthc errcnt you lnc unable to rcspond by ths deedlinc. This form
may be used br your responso, or 1ou mry anrch your ovm addilional sheets as
nccessrry. lVritten @mmentB msy bc mrilod, o.rnaild orfaxed to:
Garfietd County Building & Planning
Steff contecl : Frcd Jaroran
lo9 86 Stnee+, Suite lot
Glenwood Springs, CO t1601
Fa:<: 970-384-'470
Phonc: 97GlN5-8212
Generd comments: Gsrfiold Qqrnty Roed snd BridgeDep|rtrrcn!
this Soeciaf UsePersrit r*ifwiltac efreA any osrntyroads.
Name of rwiew agerry: Garfield Cqrnty Rgrd.aad Bridgc Dcot , .
By: Jrke B. tvlall Drte March 17- 200tt
Rcr'isod 3l3OM
B3/30/2bA4 L4:32 -_ _978?487214Er1- reLU ."r,"o TRAFF ICa3leRT B+;s4pn p
Gaqfield County
RE6IDN337ege4?47a
ttutLETNG & pr.ANNtNG oeiiirilil^;
I
I
TO:
F'ROM:
RE:
Date;
PAOES:
Dan Rougsin_ permjtting Unit Marrqgcr
Fred .Iarnan, .$eniqr ptanncr, (iarfi ctd County
Nauglc /'l'ctor $pecial Urp pennit
March 25,20$4
trd' ir,.lu,linB covrf,
I
Dan.
As promird. herc is rhe N.age^lreter proposar thar I spoke rp y.u about on the phoac atthe inter.sootion of I-70 and iil. lZi ,t n'uiiJ*.
Take a look and let me know via FAX fi email ifu pcrmit is needcd. .Ihanks.
S_l,gd, Dept_ of Trursporrai on
i,ffi:,?"1*J.".ff1x, ,*trr&rd Junction, CO EISOI
Very Truly'Yours.
recon^rnJ t/,qt /L /u-t/op.rsR.4 z
nfPl? Fo. A H-7 Ar r.r s P.rq, f ,
-D *uT,, b,<X Tfr/4..*rs frthniufrO
1fi9 ,\th.$ltret. ,luitu 201, Glenr+yxtd Spt.ings, Cotarodo gl60t(gzq e4i-snz (qzu Jtts_zg7t '^ 'ii,
f,)ry.t8,1_.j470
EXHIBIT
=lt-J
ideiJ'n-;,lidi;lj
FAX: 970.3E 4.i4ZO
EXHIBIT
Fled Jarman
Steve Anthony
Friday, April 02, 2OO4 11:39 AM
4t5t2004
To: Fred Jarman
Subject: Naugte
HiFred
Beverly Teter calred today re: weeds and randscaping at Naugre sUp.she had just got the lettei yesterday-stating that rn" "n"uo"Jiolrovioe
a weed map and inventory.she told me that their permit was before th-e Commissionlis on lllonoay, she didrlt know what some of theseweeds looked like.
I said l'll send you a weed booklet and if you see anything that is on the county List make a commitment totreat it' I am not real concerned as this ii a pretty dry siti and they probably dorft have much of a weedproblem.
As far as the landscaping goes, I told her I thought my suggestion of provide a landscaping plan was meant tobe help the applicant-l eipiained that if they p.oiided a plli on laper it would be easier if anyone had issueswith the landscaping to make the changes io the plan ,"rcu. ,ir.ing the changes when the trees were in theground.
Anyway I said l'd send you an email letting you know that I am ok with their plans to identify any potentialweeds once they get their weed booklet
Steve
-
t
Flpr OZ 04 O3: t2p
,-,
I{I
\
gvf "a s7028 59?o 48
EXHJBiT
GRAND VALLEY
FIRE PROTECTION DISTRTCT
1777 E,^ BATTLEMENT PARKWAY
PO BOX 29s
PARACHUTE, CO 81635
(e70) 2ss-elle, F'Ax (970) 28t9748
April2, 2004
Fred Jarmon
Garfield County Building & Planning Dept-
109 8d'Street, Suite 303
Glenwood Springs, CO 81601
Subject. Fire Protection Plan for Harry & RhondaNaugle
Mr. Jarmon,
I have reviewed the applicant's request and have verified that it lies within the Grand Valley Fire
Protection District. The District offers the following comments regarding the application:
o Page 5 of Mr. Jarmon's letter to applicant - (A) No storage of flammable or
explosive solids or gases are to be at this site.
o Page 5 of Mr. Jarmon's letter to applicant - (C) No storage of materials or waste
is expected.
As long as the above conditions are not changed, i.e. the facility becornes a repair and
maintenince facility, the Grand Valley Fire Protection District has no further concerns regarding
this project.
IfI can be ofany assistance, I can be reached at (970) 285-91 19, or cell (970) 285-985 I'
,ft gAlCL<J
David A. Blair
Fire Chiel GVFPD
Xc: FIarry & Rhonda Naugle
File