The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About1.0 Application and Supplemental InformationREQUEST: PC 10/14/92 PROJECT INFORMATION & STAFF COMMENTS Zone District Text Amendment to Section 7:05 of the Garfield County Zoning Resolutions APPLICANT: Garfield County Board of County Commissioners I. PROPOSED AMENDMENT The Board of County Commissioners has proposed to amend Section 7:05 REPLACEMENT OF MOBILE HOME, which reads as follows: "A mobile home which is a nonconforming use, or which is authorized by these regulations, may be replaced by another mobile home on the same lot provided that the replacement mobile home conforms to the requirements of the Building Code Resolution of the County, and to the performance requirements of this Resolution." to read as follows: "A mobile home which is a nonconforming use, may be replaced by another mobile home on the same lot, provided the replacement mobile home has the same amount of habitable floor area or is larger than the nonconforming mobile and it conforms to the requirements of the Building Code Resolution and Individual Sewage Disposal System Regulations of the County." Lim.pc:N Defcr-D PMeNT II. MAJOR ISSUES & CONCERNS 2. 5 oroe'ii w h 3) I .S.1) .� A. Zoning. The present language requires the replacement mobile home to conform to the performance standards of the Zoning Resolution. Section 5.03.01 (1) Mobile Home as Principal Use of the Lot requires the mobile home to have a minimum of 720 sq. ft. of floor area. The proposed amendment would allow someone with a smaller mobile home, less than 720 sq. ft., to replace it with a unit at least the same size. The replacement unit would still have to get a building permit to make sure that it is properly placed on footers, skirted and hooked up to a sewage disposal system. B. History. Recently, the Commissioners had a request to allow a mobile home less than 720 sq. ft. to be placed on a piece of property. In this circumstance, the two people involved couldn't afford and did not need a 720 sq. ft. unit. The Board did not have the authority to grant a variance, but in reviewing the issue did not see the need for a 720 sq. ft. mobile home. They feel that replacing a nonconforming mobile home with another of the same or larger size will not create a greater degree of nonconformity and may be appropriate in some circumstances. III. SUGGESTED FINDINGS 1. That the application for a text amendment was made by the County Commissioners. 2. That the meeting before the Planning Commission was extensive and complete and all facts, matters and issues were submitted and that all interested parties were heard at that hearing. 3. That the Planning Commission recommended approval of the proposed text amendment. 4. That for the above stated and other reasons, the proposed zone district text amendment as in the best interest of the health, safety, morals, convenience, order, prosperity and welfare of the citizens of Garfield County. IV. RECOMMENDATION APPROVAL, of the proposed Zone District Amendment to Section 7:05, as written. 2 . x -� + 1.s # a (00g. ) ../ h of (36.87 ACRES) r i ta#-*Oen i • ¢0 1 f aO 4) .) .: _ %1! WILDLIFE RANCH PERMIT 8 t�F o0 1 0 • 11-.011111Pk- WE MI EIS I I I 1 — ""—I1115PINIF" 7.10 naLIIP *0064.1 N t Co sn olida e rMe ropoli an Dish =" September 14, 1992 GA FIELD COUNTY • Mr. Mark Bean Director of Regulatory Offices Garfield County 109 8th Street, suite 303 Glenwood Springs, CO 81601 RE: Mesa Ridge, Phase II, Subdivision, Underground Utility Service Dear Mark, As part of the Final Plat resubdivision package being prepared by Battlement Mesa Partners for the Mesa Ridge, Phase II subdivision ( a final replat of a portion of Jack's Pocket Village Filing 5 ), we hereby submit this letter as documentation that the Consolidated Metropolitan District will serve the subject property which contains eight two family townhome sites. Mesa Ridge, Phase I1, is within the regular service area of the Consolidated Metropolitan District and we will serve the townhome sites with underground, water and sewer service from extension of our existing systems within the vicinity of Mesa Ridge.. We will enter into a main line extension agreement with Battlement Mesa Partners to fund these utility extensions, which are being scheduled for construction during spring of 1993. Sincerely, Bill J. binv lle District Manager cc: Bill Wilde, BMP P.O. BOX 6116, BATTLEMENT MESA, CO 8I636 • (303)285-9050 de ekai, /14 717=, a/w--e-•;--- 4e&ka /aX44-1-0,/ti. • S •L- 42 a-e/eVA) .41.'"%,.°1r1r) . . 14:: ..,.. th114- . 19.; . a ,k;72104/ ni '''/04..kal ..,j,,,P &I .,... .: 1 111KA [iq 474 14— .61-7/14) ..,1 D2--- 4 i'/2,./ y ?A_ .cd-eAae____, La .1 -A -tel Xh.,/ •,--,Aci. e (_2u2_7/4,(_ L/tax ---- tr IM, '*b!''' %-.. eL, a d/er-7,(4_11_ REQUEST: • • BOA 7/27/89 PROJECT INFORMATION AND STAFF COMMENTS Appeal of Administrative Determination regarding enlargement of a non -conforming use. APPLICANT: W. A. Morris I. APPEAL The applicant owns the JY Ranch automobile salvage yard, which is a non -conforming use per Section 7.00 of the Garfield County Zoning Resolution. It was proposed to add a structure to store automobile parts, separate from the other vehicles. (See enclosed pictures) Since the structure is over 120 sq. ft. in size, it is required to obtain a building permit. The County Attorney takes the position that the addition of another building to a lot/area, that is a non -conforming use, is an expansion of the non -conforming use. As such, no permit could be issued. The applicant contends that adding a building is not intended to increase the size of the operation, but to make it more efficient. (See enclosed) II. MAJOR ISSUES AND CONCERNS A. Zoning: A non -conforming use is defined as: The lawful use of a building or structure, or the lawful use of any land, as existing and lawful at the time of adoption of this Resolution or in the case of amendment, such use or building hereafter referred to as "non -conforming", may be continued although such use does not conform with the provisions of this Resolution or amendment thereto; and such use may be extended throughout the same building, provided no structural alteration of such building is proposed or made for the purpose of such extension. The Resolution allows for the expansion of a non -conforming use within a building, provided there is "no structural" alteration of the building. The addition of a building would be equivalent to making a structural alteration for the purpose of expanding a non -conforming use. 3 • M r 4 • • eci/L0/if/ii ,L ,9T/D4/ fr' 'opos t2 sett/ ,0*(4 LoG9r 9, J i 3Y R.AJCH P.O. BOX 942 • GLENWOOD SPRINGS, COLORADO 81602 • (303) 945-7892 June 26, 1989 Garfield County Zoning Board of Adjustment: On June 15, 1989 1 (W.A. Morris) submitted a letter to the Building, Planning and Legal Departments of Garfield County. 1 contend that the request falls within the scope of section 7 of the zoning resolution. The building would increase efficiency for me, but would not increase the volume of material stored. cc/jn • Respectfully Submitted: zw/40', W.A. Morris • 3Y RAJZCH P.O. BOX 942 • GLENWOOD SPRINGS, COLORADO 81602 • (303) 945-7892 T (W. A. Morris), DBA, J Y Ranch, submit that a storage shed located on the property known as the J Y Ranch, 0484 Rd. 113, Carbondale, Co., would be consistent with the present use. It would move storage operations that are ongoing into that storage shed space. The proposed storage shed would roughly occupy the penciled area of photo #1. The roof elevation would be the approximate level indicated in photo #2, which is below that of existing structures. T would welcome the opportunity to conduct the representatives of the Planning and Zoning, and Legal Departments on a tour of the premises. I believe such a tour would verify my position of non expansion of use. Specifically: Will the permit for this proposed storage shed require a variance? Respectfully submitted, W. A. Morris cc/kw