Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout6.0 Resolution 2013-73Reception #: 841911 1011112013 11 21 II GM Joan Cabal-too 1 of 14 Rec Fee SO 00 Doc Fee 0 00 GARFIELD r.OUPJTY CO STATE OF COLORADO ) )ss County of Garfield ) At a regular meeting of the Board of County Commissioners for Garfield County, Colorado, held in the Commissioners Meeting Room, Garfield County Plaza Building, in Glenwood Springs, on Monday, the 6th day of July, 2009, there were present: John Martin Tresi Houpt Mike Samson Ed Green Deb Quinn Jean Alberico , Commissioner Chairman , Commissioner , Commissioner , (absent) County Manager Assistant County Attomey , Clerk of the Board when the following proceedings, among others were had and done, to -wit: RESOLUTION NO. a p 13- 73 A RESOLUTION CONCERNED WITH THE DENIAL OF A SPECIAL USE PERMIT FOR A CONTRACTORS YARD ON A 36.36 ACRE PARCEL OF PROPERTY OWNED BY AUGUSTUS AND JENNIFER HAMPSON LOCATED AT 1177 COUNTY ROAD 259 (JEWELL LANE), RIFLE, COLORADO PARCEL NO. 2127 - 273 -00 -267 Recitals A. The Board of County Commissioners of Garfield County, Colorado, received an application from Augustus and Jennifer Hampson (the "Applicant'), for a Special Use Permit for Contractors Yard. B. The Contractors Yard is approximately .25 acres in size and part of an overall 36.36 acre tract of land, located at 1177 County Road 259 (the "Property"). C. The Property is located within the Northwest Southwest and Southwest Northwest Section 27, Township 5 South, Range 92 West of the 6th P.M. D. The Property is located within the Agricultural/Residential/Rural Density zone district (AARD) in which a Special Use Permit for a Contractors Yard requires approval through a Special Use Permit process pursuant to Section 5.03 of the Zoning Resolution of 1978. 1 1111 M1 Iki+ri.fi■l 1161NAM WIN 11 11 1 RecepUton#: 841911 10/1112013 11 21,1/ R1 Jean Alberico 2 of 14 Rec Fee SO 00 Doe Fee 0 00 GARFIELD COUNTY CO E. The Board of County Commissioners is authorized to approve, approve with conditions, or deny a Special Use Permit pursuant to Section 5.03 of the Zoning Resolution of 1978. F. The Board of County Commissioners opened a public hearing on July 6th, 2009, upon the question of whether the Special Use Permit application should be approved, approved with conditions, or denied, during which hearing the public and interested persons were given the opportunity to express their opinions regarding the application. The Board of County Commissioners closed the public hearing and the record on July 6th, 2009, to make a final decision. G. The Board of County Commissioners on the basis of substantial competent evidence produced at the aforementioned hearing has made the following determinations of fact: 1. That proper public notice was provided as required for the hearing before the Board of County Commissioners. 2. That the public hearing before Board of County Commissioners was extensive and complete; all pertinent facts, matters and issues were submitted; and that all interested parties were heard at those hearings. 3. That the proposed Special Use Permit for a Contractors Yard is not in the best interest of the health, safety, convenience, order, prosperity and welfare of the citizens of Garfield County in that; a. The Application does not comply with all required standards set forth in the Zoning Resolution of 1978, including the requirement for the design to minimize impact on and from adjacent land uses per Section 5.03.03 and therefore does not adequately demonstrate compatibility with the surrounding area; and b. The traffic impacts as shown in the impact statement for Industrial Operations cannot be adequately mitigated. RESOLUTION NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Board of County Commissioners of Garfield County, Colorado, that based on the determination of facts set forth above, the Special Use Permit to allow a Contractors Yard as Augustus and Jennifer Hampson is hereby denied. 2 1111 P1'r,Vi" '.1 I Nft'lrili.N 'tfit W+L4iRi t IF 11111 Reception4: 841911 3O 11 Doc 06 OD GARFIELD COUtJTY co Dated this 7th day of October. 2013. ATTEST: GARF[ i COUNTY BOARD OF COUN ` Y COMMISSIONERS, GA UNTY, COLORADO rk of the Board of rk of the Board of County Commissioners Upon motion duly made and seconded th f, regoing Resol n was adop r .d by the following vote: COMMISSIONER CHAIR JOHN F. MARTIN COMMISSIONER MIKE SAMSON COMMISSIONER TRESI HOUPT , nay , aye , aye 3 BOCC 0716/2009 00 Equipment parking area (prior to earthen berm) II. AUTHORITY Pursuant to 9.03.04 of the Zoning Resolution of 1978, as amended, an application for a Special Use Permit shall be approved or denied by the BOCC after holding a public hearing thereon in conformance with all provisions of the Zoning Resolution. III. BACKGROUND OF PROCESS Section 9.02.03 Zoning Resolution of 1978, as amended, states that the BOCC may refer a request for SUP to the Planning Commission for its review and recommendation. A referral memo was generated and presented to the BOCC; the application was not referred to the Planning Commission. IV. ZONING & ADJACENT USES The parcel is zoned ARRD, as are the surrounding parcels, excepting the BLM parcel. The subject parcel is 36.36 acres. Map indicates that the adjacent parcels range from 21 to 113 acres in size: • (380) Shepherd - 36 acres, • (285) Bailey, occupied by tenant (Crawford)- 113 acres, • (260) Dykstra- 39 acres, • (261) Milton- 36 acres, • (Lot 4, Silt Heights Sub.) Patrick- 21 acres. (Two parcels lack permitted residential structures — individuals occupy camper trailers with and without on -site sanitary systems.) -3 11111 1711=1,NISIG IfMN KA,■11 MC rrit! M111111 11111 ReeeptlonR' 841911 f0-11/20'3 '1 21 11 AM Jean Alberico r., of 14 Rev twe S0 00 00c Fee 0 00 GARFIELD COUNTY CO • Consider a Request for a Special Use Permit for a Contractor's Yard Within the ARRD Zone District- Applicants; Augustus and Jennifer Rainpson,1177 CR 259, Silt - Dusty Dunbar Melody Massey was representing the applicants and the applicants were present. This is a continued meeting and Chairman Martin swore in the speakers. Planner Dusty Dunbar submitted the following exhibits: Exhibit A -Mail Receipts; Exhibit B - Proof of Publication; Exhibit C - Garfield County Zoning Regulations of 1978 as amended; Exhibit D - Garfield County Comprehensive Plan of 2000; Exhibit E - Application; Exhibit F - Staff memorandum; um; Exhibit G - Staff PowerPoint Presentation; Exhibit H - E-mail with attached comment letter from Garfield County Road & Bridge Department Administrative Foreman Jake Mall, dated May 4, 2009; Exhibit 1- E -mail from Garfield County Environmental Health Department Director dim Rada, dated May 20, 2009; Exhibit 1- E -mail from Garfield County Vegetation Management Department Director Steve Anthony, dated July 1, 2009; Exhibit K - E -mail and attachment from Rifle Fire Protection district, Fire Inspector Jason Clark, dated May 14, 2009; Exhibit L - Citizen comment letter, Terry Kirk, 1500 CR 259, Rifle, dated May 8, 2009; Exhibit M - Citizen comment letter, Karen/Bob Miller, 520 CR 259, Rifle, dated May 16, 2009; Exhibit N - Citizen comment letter, Keith Gilslrap, vacant parcel on CR 259, Rifle (mailing address; PO Box 781, New Castle), dated May 19, 2009; Exhibit 0 - Citizen comment letter, Jennifer Shepherd, 1171 CR 259, Rifle, dated dune 3, 2009; Exhibit P - Citizen comment letter, Kyle/April Constanzo, 4412 CR 233, Rifle, dated June 4, 2009; Exhibit Q - Citizen comment letter, Alan/Linda Dwire, 1164 CR 259, Rifle, dated June 5, 2009; Exhibit R - Citizen comment letter, Sherry Liske, 1451 CR 259, Rifle, dated June 8, 2009; Exhibit S -• Citizen comment letter, Craig Seal, 1102 CR 259, Rifle, dated July 1, 2009; Exhibit T - Citizen comment letter, Chris Pepe; Exhibit U -- Rick and Lolita Shaffer, and Exhibit V- comment letter Melissa Waldron. Chairman Martin entered Exhibits A - V into the record. Planner Dusty Dunbar explained: REOUESF This application was deemed `technically complete' before December 31, 2008, and hence is being considered under the `Old Code', the Zoning Resolution of 1978. As Amended The application is to consider a Special Use Permit for a Contractor's Yard whose main propose is store heavy equipment on a residential property in the A/R/RD Zone district. The Applicants seek permission to utilize a small portion of their property (11,000 sq. ft.) for parking heavy trucks, trailers, implements, storing straw and to utilize an existing enclosed garage for storage and minor repair. Augustus & Jeemifer Hampson operate Rocky Mountain Environmental Concerns (RMEC). No employees work onsite. The employees that are assigned to drive the equipment to the site arrive and park their personal vehicles or carpool in a vehicle in an area adjacent to the garage, then drive to the job sites with the equipment (Once the • equipment is on the job, it generally stays on the job site and employees commute to the job site rather than 1177 Jewell Lane.) STAFF RECOMMENDATION Staffrecominends approval of the proposed Special Use Permit allowing a "Contractor's Yard" with the following conditions: 1. All representation made by the Applicant in the application and as testimony in the public bearing before the Board of County Commissioners shall be conditions of approval, unless specifically altered by the Board of County Commissioners. 2. The Applicant shall comply with all performance standards identified in §5.03.07 and §5.03.08 of the Garfield County Zoning. Resolution (11'1978. as amended,- 3. The use of the site shall be between the hours of 6 a.m. and 7 p.m. daily. a. Volume and sound generated shall comply with the standards set forth for residential neighborhoods in the Colorado Revised State Statute (CRS) 25 -12 -103, except as detailed in (b). b. Any repair and maintenance activity requiring the use of equipment that will generate noise, odors, vapors, vibration or glare beyond the property boundaries will be conducted within the building, and those activities that cannot be performed inside the structure shall be in compliance for those residential standards in CRS 25 -12 -103. 4. Any new lighting to be installed shall be downcast and directed to the interior of the property. 5. The truck and equipment storage area shall be limited to that depicted in the application. 6. The number of vehicles and pieces of equipment listed in the application shall be the maximum permitted with this Special Use Permit, those being: • 2 Tractors: Massey- Ferguson 5470 Tractor, Massey Ferguson 941 Tractor • 2 Seeders: Bowie 100- gallon Ilyrdoscede r, 6' Drill Seeder, • 2 Straw- handling pieces: Firm B40 Straw Blower, Finn 8' Straw Crimper, Z 1111 % Philii.117101,01, I. Fill F.PM'111.i 11111 Receptionkl: 841911 1 6 or 140ReerFEee1SO100 PM Alberleo 00rGARFIELD C0111L/TY CO • 2 Excavators: Kobelco ED150 Excavator, CAT 304CCR Mini- excavator, • 1 Loader. single -axle tractor for hauling equipment on a trailer: CAT924G Loader, • 2 Backhoe/skid steer CAT420D Back Hoe; CAT247B Skid Steer, • 3 trailers: 20' Flatbed trailer, B&B 30' Flatbed Traver, 20' Tilt -deck Trailer, • 1- Heavy Disc Cultivator- 8' • 1- ATV - Rhone ATV 7. On -site parking for vehicles used to transport employees to this site shall be limited to two (2) vehicles that are not owned by the Hampsons. 8. All requirements of Garfield County Road and Bridge shall be met, including the installation of a stop sign that conforms to the MUTCD, and all vehicles shall have proper oversize/overweight permits, applied for and issued at the Road and Bridge Department 9. A plan for road maintenance and dust abatement to the satisfaction of Garfield County Road & Bridge Department and the Garfield County Planning Department Project Engineer shall be developed and implemented by the Applicant 10. Loading or unloading equipment in the Garfield County right -of -way is prohibited. 11. To help ensure safe operations and courtesy in the residential neighborhood in which the Special Use Permit is to be sired, the Applicant shall hold a safety meeting no less than annually with all employees, with documentation (employee/employer signatures) to be maintained on file for a period of one year. 12. No materials and wastes shall be deposited upon the property in such way that they may be transferred off the property by any reasonably foreseeable natural causes or fora. 13. The Applicant shall prepare and submit a Spill Containment and Cleanup Management Plan (SCCMP) to utilize Best Management Practices shall implement the plan in conduct of this permit to meet all local, County, State and Federal regulations, comply with CRS 30-20 -105. In addition, the Applicant shall satisfy the requirements of the Rifle Fire Protection District that being to schedule an inspection of the facility and completing the Hazardous Materials form provided by the Rifle Fire Protection District. 14. No more than 600 gallons of oil in conjunction with this use may be stored on site at any time. That accumulation must be stored in compliance with all requirements set forth in all local, State, County and Federal regulations for the proper storage of used oil and other chemicals. 15. Permits required in the exedution of this Special Use Permit shall have be secured from Garfield County prior to the initiation of the activity requiring a permit. 16. Any new fencing on the parcel shall comp ly with the `Wildlife Friendly' Standards set forth by the Colorado Division of Wildlife (DOW). 17. The Special Use Permit shall be limited to the equipment listed and shall be governed by the conditions of approval set forth by the BOCC. Any substantial expansion of the number or type of vehicles / equipment or change to the permit shall be considered only with an application for a Major Impact Review Permit Amendment of the use as per the new Unified Land Use Resolution 01 2008, as amended (ULUR). Deb Quinn wanted to clarify some of the conditions - 8, 9 and l3 had requirements for submission of certain things but there is no time line on when they should be submitted. Dusty stated that 15 is rather inclusive. It says the requirements say permits required in the execution of this special use permit shall have been secured from Garfield County prior to the initial activity requiring the permit. Deb stated these are not permits. Dusty said on 8 and 9 she had no objections melting them arequirement. The only part we have gotten crosswise with special use permits of late is requiring a building permit. This particular one she does not see any objections to making these all qualified that they should be in place prior to the issuance of the special use permit Dusty asked Deb Quinn if she took exception to item 15, which permits require in the execution of the special use permit shall have been secured from Garfield County prior to the initiation of the activity requiring the permit. Deb said she did not have a problem with that one. Dusty asked if she wished to modify any of the Ianguagc of the conditions to set forth a requirement. Deb said only the ones she mentioned. Chairman Martin said they would review those if this goes forward. Melody explained as Dusty stated Rocky Mountain Environmental Concerns, of which Mac and Jennifer Hampson are the principals, is a small business, which provides consulting, materials and labor for reseeding, weed control, 2 XlII rii 111111.14iikrii 11111rii„Ktiff. NC IW1l lR111 ii 111 Reception#; 841911 10f1112013 11 21 ti AM Jean Alberica 7 of to Pre Fee $O 00 Doc Fee 0 00 GARFIELD COINHTY .70 other businesses, individuals and agencies. The use is compatible with the agricultural enterprises of the area and they are seeking to legitimize this use and mitigate any impacts of the use. Rocky Mountain Environmental Concerns and the majority of their work takes place off of the property. They go to the site to complete the work. She knows there was a question about the equipment going out to jobs. According to Mac and Jennifer starting in March or April, the equipment to be used on the jobs usually goes to a job and then goes directly from job site to job site, as a cost saving measurement Usually the equipment will return to the site in December where ft sits on the property fora few months until it can be used again. Employees do come to the property briefly to punch in and have safety meetings every Monday. Sometimes employees go directly from the job to their home; sometimes they come back to the property. As Dusty stated, most of the equipment used and maintained by Rocky Mountain Environmental Concerns is agricultural equipment, If you look at the pictures they provided, it is no different from many of the equipment on the surrounding properties. The Hampsons have built a berm, as you saw, to scaeen the equipment and the property is clean and organized. Melody went over the materials again that are stored on the property. We had continued this hearing so that we could have a meeting with the neighbors. They called all the neighbors on County Road 259, left messages to let them know about the meeting. They had a meeting on June 22 and it was scheduled to educate the neighbors about what was going on. Melody prepared a handout for the neighbors giving information and seven neighbors showed up. Out of seven, they received five positive reactions. Concerns on the impacts of the road; the Hampsons maintain a small portion of County Road 259 at no charge to their neighbors. h is approximately a I ,700-foot section of County Road 259. They spent about S75,000 per year over the past three years for dust suppression, fading, and plowing this section. They have been grading on average five to seven times a year. If you went to someone else that would be about S1,000 to $1,500 per time. The Hampsons plan to continue this practice. On snow removal, they have plowed the neighboring driveways and the 1,700 -foot section of the mad for 2008 and 2009 for a total of 14 times for a cost of $2,800.00. Traffic: Dusty talked a little about this and the survey the Hampsons took included installing a camera at the bottom of their driveway in January 2009 and took a survey from January to May. The camera took sill pictures of cars and they were able to calculate the number of road use trips on County Road 259. This included the Hampsons, Rocky Mountain Environmental Concerns and three of their other neighbors. They calculated the trips over a five - month period; the Hampson and his business accounted for approximately 25% and the other 75% were the other neighbors. The employees leave once in the morning and return once in the evening. The work is not done on the property, as Dusty stated, there are no clients coming in and out of the property on a regular basis. The Hampsons are trying to do the right thing here. Many of the neighboring properties currently employ uses similar to what the Hampsons are doing or more industrial uses; but they have not received special use permits for these uses. The Hampsons are attempting to legitimize their business and ate happy to comply with the staff recommendations and the County requirements. They have already put up a berm. The Hampsons have sought to improve their neighborhood by maintaining this portion of County Road 259. They have hydro- seeded portions of neighboring properties at no charge and they try to eliminate noxious weeds from their property. They have screened their equipment to make the property more visually appealing, which will add value to the surrounding properties. A little bit about Rocky Mountain Environmental Concerns - they are an environmental and community minded company. One thing they have done recently is they sponsored an earth day clean up in 2009 and donated their time, their employees and their equipment to clean up and recycle trash in a local public area Ripe GQS. The approval of this contractor's yard will assure that this use is done in a limited area that meets or exceeds the County standards, and can be screened and guided by the requirements of the Land Use Code. Commissioner Haupt stated they have heard a couple of suggestions on vehicles that transport employees to the site Back in the conditions there is a two - vehicle limit, in your equation Dusty, there was a three- vehicle suggestion. If they all come in the morning and leave in the evening, do they come together and leave together? What this condition says is no more than two vehicles, that are not owned by the Hampsons can be parked at the hone during the work hours. Augusta (Mac) stated that his employees also chive his vehicles. They come in the company vehicle and then leave in the company vehicle. It is hard to sit here and have a set of absolutes we are a seasonal business. Jennifer is from a farm background, he is from a landscaping and construction background and we farm the oil field. They are usually the only people that anyone is happy to see because it means everyone else is leaving and there will be green grass again. Seasonally, as Dusty described, there are times when they are busier and in the wintertime, they really do not do a whole lot. During the winter last year, there were three staffers there. They came in the morning and stayed in the shop all day working on equipment and organizing things for the coming year and left at the end of the day. Two of them commuted together and one drove by himself only two cars coming in and out. Since it is not very active, he and his wife for the most part, only leave the house two or three times a week In the summertime, there is a potential for more people. They have been sensitive to that this year and in the fact, they have been trying 3 111 Arab P ?f,RfAffr.l 11*.ril litr Mt RIO" 110 t Receptien4: 841911 IC 'I.2013 f! 21 if AM Jean Alberico S 4 '4 R.,c cee 30 00 Doc Fee 0 00 GARFIELD COUNTY CO to have people meet in to or meet at commuter lots to pick up temporary employees. Instead of having the temporary workers come to the house, they have them go to Wal -Mart and pick them up there, or the commuter lot in Silt. They are doing this in order to try to mitigate and minimize traffic. The permanent employees use company vehicles. Commissioner Houpt stated, daily there is a purpose for having the staff congregate at the shop. Augusta stated for safety meetings. It is the law to have safety meetings and it is law we have to put ow men in our vehicles before they go out to the job site. Given the industry we work in, they are strictly regulated. They are also a federal and state contractor, stormwater and seeding is a very big thing for the States EOT and for federal jobs. We have to adhere to all of their things; we do not have the ft+eedoms that other businesses do in their inherence to the letter of what is required by law as far as our employees. Terry Kirk, 1500 County Road 259, Rifle. He drives past this place every day. Of the items mentioned that will be stored on this property, they failed to mention the fact that there is probably 50 or more concrete jersey barriers stored there in plain view from County Road 259. He knows he saw them go up there; those trucks were approximately 80 thousand pounds per truck going up that mad. Our CR259 is not a very big road, it is a chip sealed. It has been patched numerous times with asphalt. He thinks this was chip sealed a year and a half ago and it has already gone to hell. At the intersection of 259 Road and Stilt Mesa Road, there is a blind hill to the west and to the east the vegetation along the side of the highway, which is back off the edge of the road. It is still very limited visually. You have to pull way out in the middle almost to the center of the westbormd lane of Silt Mesa Road to see all the way down and at the same time look to the west to see over the hill. He is concerned about irrigation water on the Mesa that is our only source of water. He thinks that ditch runs right along the bottom side of their property, which means any contamination that would be spilled on that property would just directly deposit into that irrigation ditch Dust from the gravel road going up that way; Terry Fitzpatrick put in a cul- de-sac and extended the road. Terry does not know if that is the end of the road or if 259 Road goes up further; but there is a considerable amount of damage done to that cul-de -sac already. If they are in fact repaving that; it is a wonderful thing and the County should thank them. It has no affect on the rest of the people, they have three neighbors that use that road north of where 259 takes a dog like to the right. This is a very difficult corner to negotiate with a pickup truck and a horse trailer, let alone semis, winch trucks pulling 40 and 50 -foot trailers loaded with 80 thousand pounds. It is a 90- degree turn from north to the east, its uphill and it is very narrow with a fall off to the lower side. They used to have a school bus that came up just past that 90- degree turn that is where the children would get on the bus. The school no longer sends a bus up to the top of that hill. The children either have to walk or ride bicycles, or are taken to the comer of Silt Mesa Road and 259 Road. Commissioner Haupt asked where the corner was that he was referring. Terry showed her on the map. It is dangerous the way it is, let alone having more truck traffic. By heavy traffic, he does not mean a lot of as much as the weight capabilities that the trucks have. Many of the people who live in this neighborhood are in fact contractors, just from that map, there is a neighbor who rents equipment and they have a shop in Silt on zoned property. There is another drywall contractor with a shop in Grand Junction. Terry is a contractor and has zoned property in Garfield County. Gilsirap is a field contractor and has zoned property in Garfield County. North of Terry's house is Glen Street; they are also contractors and have rented commercial industrial property in Garfield County. Just east is Dave Santee, he is a contractor and has rented property, not on Silt Mesa. Our area is ctearly zoned agricultural and not industrial. The uses these people are asking for is definitely an industrial use. It would benefit only one person to approve their request. It would not benefit any of the other people up there. Linda Dwire, 1166 County Road 259 guesses their issues are the dust problem and we have had them previously except for the last couple of months. They have been maintaining it; but who is to say they will continue to maintain this. Her question is; will they continue to do this. They say they maintain this road and in fact, they have not. Another problem is the noise; every morning at 6:00 am, one of their employees honks their born and she does not know if it is to tick them off Our dogs are not out there are no animals on that mad at that time and so she would watch to see where the vehicle went and it did go to the Hampsons residence. The traffic and the impact of the heavy loads are a concern. We have had our irrigation taken out by their trucks because it is a sharp corner. By the time the truckers realize this they have already gone by, or they have to back up to make that corner, they have wiped out our irrigation system. The speeding: The employees or the Hampsons themselves, not suns who it is but she knows they come down that gravel road and skid because they are going too fast. They put the brakes on and end up spinning their tires and throw gravel all over making dust problems. Commissioner Samson asked Linda, you say the big heavy trucks have taken out your irrigation ditch a time or two: Linda said it is the cement. When they have a heavy load on a flat bed or any kind of semi, they have to make the sharp comer they have to back up. Her husband went out and said, "Hey you guys you're taking out my irrigation 4 1111 ��� i�' �1 '�i' +4'i 1�j�114�'1 '� 141,10I.Nit 11111 Receptlantl: 841911 '0.'1 12013 11 21 11 Aft Jean Alberica 0 of 14 Roc Fee SO 00 Dec Fee 0 00 GARF1F i D system, you have taken it out twice ", so her husband put rocks up there as a berm to deter them. Her husband said I know it is not your fault; there is not enough room to make these turns. Linda did not know what company the driver was from; this is just what her husband told her. Commissioner Samson asked; since you last talked to them has it happened again. Linda said they do not talk to the Hampsons there is so much animosity on their side; we just stay away from them. Erin Ellsperman, 700 County Road 259, lives just north of the Millers. Erin stated she did not know the Hampsons. She does not have any issue with someone helping the environment and reclaiming the land that is destroyed. Her main concern is the speeding on the road. She has a young son who rides his bikes and she personally rides horse back on the BLM property. They drive excessively fast. Erin said she has lived there for seven years now, you know the neighborhood, and you know the vehicles. The speed limit in 35 mph and sometimes it has to be a minimum of 60 mpr for these people. The semis too are a concern due to the use of their airbrakes; it is noisy. She wants safety in the area add she wants to be able to walk her dogs down her road and to be able to ride her horse without them being spooked. These people have not done anything to me directly; but they do drive very fast. As your heading north, you can see their property and things that are going on. Shawn Crawford and wife Tammy - they do not have an actual address yet; however, the long narrow parcel belongs to them. They do drive past the Hampsons going to their property. Pretty much everything has already been said but he wanted to add the concrete barriers that Teny Kirk mentioned are an eyesore. In addition, whenever they take them out to a project and use the semis to haul the heavy equipment it is a concern. The additional truck traffic and all the dust prevention has not been too bad the last couple of months; but they actually bought property in May of last year and there has been very little maintenance done to that part of the road. The possibility of real estate prices dropping in the area due to a construction yard is a concern. He is in a construction business himself and he works for an employer. It does not mean he wants to see this type of business in an agriculturally zoned community where he bought property and plans to eventually build a house. Jennifer Shepherd is the closest neighbor to the Hampsons and secs their property every day. Every morning she hears their trucks. Shawn when you said you own that narrow spot; I live next to them. If you own that she is unaware, because she thought she owned that. Shawn explained where the property was and it borders her property. Jennifer said she thinks k is almost a personal thing because she counts on Mac to plow her driveway during the winter. She bottoms out on some of the potholes because they are not being maintained. She asked them to help her out so she could go to and from wok She has two boys in sports and she thinks she is probably a good percentage of the traffic going up and down the driveway. She goes home two or three times a day and then she has to get animals or kids and go back out She is probably the reason fora lot of dust as well. She has come across some of the equipment coming off their property, never a big truck, but they are larger than her car. They are courteous; they drive off where they can and it is a common driveway. It is not a road and it is a single car lane. Even if there are two small cars trying to go up the driveway someone has to yield to the other car. That corner is dangerous; she thinks for just even hauling a truck and trailer. It is dangerous if you are in a car and she thinks it is probably safer in a bigger truck because you can see higher up. She jogs up and down Jewel Lane regularly and she can say there is not one person who passes her that is going the speed limit It is not just the Hampsons; it is everyone. It has been very scary. There has been a couple of times she was tempted to carry a stick and hold it out there and let the car hit it because it is so close to her while jogging down the road. The speed problem is across the board for everyone. She said she would be honest; she is not sure if she does the speed limit; she does not know what it is. There is no sidewalk; it is a country road and running up and down Silt Mesa Road is dangerous. They have done the seeding at the end of the driveway for free. She thinks they are an asset to the community and if you could look out and you can walk 20 paces from her house, you can see it is not an eyesore. She hears the back -up beeper whenever they are unloading and it is not any worse than the dogs that echo through the entire valley. She would actually like them to keep their equipment there; she can actually get up her driveway plowed in the wintertime and the potholes can be fixed. Lee Kirk lives on County Road 259. She thinks that was a wonderful testimonial as to how these people have helped. If they had been that way to the rest of the neighbors, we would not be here today. Everyone she knows on that road has had these people spray gravel at them as they came out of what is their driveway. The 170- foot section that they are so proud that they are maintaining is there driveway essentially; it is not officially County Road 259. As you swerve past that S turn to get onto 259, it has been dangerous and it has been incredibly rude. There has not been much mentioned of a material yard which is extensive on this 36 -acre property and they are highly visible from our road. We have worked long and hard to be where we are, which is a quite a county rural dead -end road. Everyone that is out there is doing their own little thing in an agricultwal rural setting. Most of these people are in fact contractors that have commercial yards off their properties on commercial property Iocated elsewhere. 5 ■III t 1iI1 IMI F MI +' I. 101trieilleAlilii 11 111 Reception#: 841911 10,11/2013 11 21 11 AM Jean Alberioo 10 or 14 Rec Fee $0 00 Doc Fee 0 04 GARFIELD COUNT' r) As her husband said, this is not going to benefit anyone other than the Hampsons, and evidentially Mrs. Shepherd She thinks it is totally of the character of the neighborhood and you should disapprove it They have been doing this for 2-3 years already without permission and if you do permit this, how will you monitor the activities. How and who is going to police this? It is okay to say you can do this, this, and not that, but who polices this, no one does. That is why it has existed as long as it has. As far as she knows there is only one other neighbor who is doing the same thing without a permit. It has been an issue with the neighbors; but no one reported them that she knows of and she is not going to do it today. It is a quiet neighborhood; we all know each other. We know the cars and these people have been difficult since the day they moved in. That is her impression and she gets along with all the other neighbors. Commissioner Houpt asked if the material yards were separate from the garage area. Lee said yes they are Commissioner Houpt wondered, indicating on a photo, if those were the materials. Lee said there are easily two or three dozen jersey barriers sitting... Commissioner Samson asked Terry; in your letter you wrote, the covenants on most of and possibly all of the adjoining acreage state that no contractor's yards will be allowed in this area. Terry stated yes; there are covenants that say no contractor's yards will be permitted on any of the areas from the cattle guard in. He does not know what happened north, if they are part of that or not It was the Jewels property at one time. Ke imy Elder had some of that property and he does not know if be included those covenants in that deed or not. All the surrounding landowners have covenants that say it is not a permitted use. Fifteen parcels in there have that covenant. Commissioner Samson asked Dusty if she knew anything of this. Dusty said covenants are applied by subdivisions in the county and there are covenants on some of the areas that have been created by subdivisions. The county does not enforce covenants; they are enforced by Homeowners Associations and are the volition of the applicant that creates the subdivision on which that restriction or permission may be exercised. The county code, our present code, requires covenants of some sort be developed for all of the new development that is going on to address those sort of things. Parcels that are created through action in the State, which she suspects this parcel was as it is in excess of 35- acres, do not require covenants. The special use permit consideration does not have a strong involvement with that requirement; because there are covenants adjacent to the parcel that may or may not be an issue. You cannot apply covenants from one parcel onto someone else's parcel if they do not have that requirement on the parcel. There is nothing that puts this subject parcel out of compliance as to a covenant They are not part of those covenants; they were created as part of the subdivision rules and this parcel was not created as a part of a subdivision. Unless it was created as a State action, which does not require covenants, it is an option not a requirement. Special use permits are completely guided and directed by the Board of County Commissioners. One of the reasons that the contractors yards, under the old code were not considered in platted subdivisions were because they often had smaller parcels. Language is in place that may or may not make it appropriate to consider this action. This parcel was not part of a platted subdivision and has no covenants on it to guide that Terry stated that 13 or 14 years ago Dave Santee was man enough to come to all the neighbors and say he would like to do a contractors yard on his 40 -acre parcel. The 35 -acres do not really have anything to do with anything other than it could be expanded into a 36 -acre industrial park. It is bad enough someone is asking for an 11,000 square foot industrial park. Santee came to the neighbors, said he wanted to do his business there and everyone agreed it would not be a good idea and he went away and leased an area elsewhere to do his log business. Craig Seal, 1102 County Road 259. He has felt no negative impact from their business. Their employees have been friendly with him. He knows there have been some standing concerns about the way the property may look. He thinks they are earthy type people who will keep it as clean and orderly as possible. If you were to question them on that, he thinks you could go through all of the Silt Mesa area and question the other properties on their cleanliness and orderliness. Again, he would Like to state he does not have any problems with their operation and it is not affecting him negatively. You have to appreciate the fact they have taken the time and the money to come before the Board to make it legal. Commissioner Houpt asked Mr. Seal to talk about the corner next to his property; some concern about bow safe it is for large vehicles. Craig said Iooking at the map on safety issues; he does not drive up and down that comer so he is not seeing any people running into his yard or any real potential issues that he could state. Dusty would like to make a point of clarification; the jersey barriers were mentioned as part of the analysis under 3 of 503. 6 III Ag6 wl��i 1P�Z ti}i e't � rtel. �11111 ll ta 4� fortl'2013 11 2f 11 OM Jean g1berico 11 of 14 Rec Fee SO 00 Doc Fee 0 00 GARFIELD COUNTY CO Melody wanted to make a few points after some of the comments. There obviously are some tensions in this neighborhood and perhaps people are standing up and saying things because they do have personal issues here. We will try to keep this to what is applied for One thing she would like to point out after Mr. Kirk made comments about how this is the only business in the area etc. After doing a search of the Secretary of State's records, they found 11 businesses that have their principal place of business at locations along County Road 259, She is happy to give than as another exhibit. Some of those belong to some of the people sitting here today. The Hampsons are here today to try to make their business legitimate and they want to keep it focused on what they are willing to do for their property and what they are willing to do to mitigate their use. As far as the semi truck traffic being complained of and the heavy traffic along the road, she thinks they have explained that to the Board. Mac and Jennifer can actually tell you how often semis come to the property. Augusta stated there are several issues. The first is the irrigation issue for the Dwires; that was completely settled when the Patrick's put in their subdivision. They were required to expand the entrance and move that irrigation tap and now they have expanded that entryway to a 45 -foot wide apron as per the counties requirements. That road is now a county road to the end of the cul- de-sac in the language with the HOA that the Patrick's finished. That County Road was turned over to the Patrick's and we maintain it They had an agreement with the Patrick's that they would maintain that road and the County. That is a County Road up to the end of the cul- de-sac so half of it is a public road. That is well known to the Dwires and the Kirks as they exercise the right to drive up and down it regularly. The Dwires problem with their irrigation was addressed when the Patrick's had to open up the apron of that road and it's accessed to County Road 259, Jewel Lane, to a 45 -foot wide apron so semi traffic could enter there to facilitate the building of homes in the subdivision. The next thing; Terry Kirk had no problem with the jersey barriers until I stopped buying them from him. End of story. Otherwise, the semi traffic we receive - the rack truck comes up about once a week with some materials, maybe three times per month. It is a 10 wheeler and driven by a guy who lives on Silt Mesa; Herb. Some of the people may know him; he has been here for 50 years or so. He is a local and has gandkids that live up there; he does not speed, it is that simple. The other semi traffic is relatively non-existent once again, we have two pieces of equipment, one a large farm tractor and another excavator that actually requires a semi to move. Obviously, the large farm tractor should not be anything out of place on Jewel Lane. It has been an agricultural center forever; there are large farm tractors on many of the properties. The large excavator only comes in and out a few times a year as stated in the permit request When it leaves it usually leaves for 4 to 5 months at a time and then it comes back briefly to be serviced and goes back out, or it sits in the lot until it is needed The jersey barriers were a fluke; a client bought than from us and the client has since gone out of business and deserted them. They are presently for sell and until they sell them, they really do not have anything else they can do with them. To move them once would be preferable as opposed to moving them around the lot as expressed by everyone here. As far as the appearance of our home affecting property values in the area that is ridiculous. There are junk yards everywhere around our house and I do mean junk yards. Some of them consist of several acres of junk, highly visible and not screened. They have helped everyone around them who has wanted help; those who have been aggressive with them and used to being able to kill people's animals to make them back off have found that we respond differently. Sony if they are used to people backing off but that is not my style. Melody said they are not aware of any covenants. There are no covenants in Mac and Jennifer's title work. They have not been provided any other covenants from any of the surrounding areas that show there is any prohibition from a contractor's yard. She has a list of the Secretary of State's records if you would hie them regarding other businesses in the area that do not bane special use permits. She can leave it to the Board if they would like them submitted. Augusta wanted to state that Mr. Kirks home faces a home that has a trucking and heavy equipment repair business registered that regularly has semis coming out logging trucks ironically that he has had no complaint about at all. Commissioner Haupt asked Dusty, is this an application for the contractor's yards that is up by the house and for the material storage yard. Those are fairly extensive. Dusty said the jersey barriers she did not associate that because they are not part of the ongoing operation and are represented as being removed as soon as they can sell them. Commissioner Houpt said it was represented that was where they stored things for their business. Dusty said those particular things related to the business are also agricultural in nature, storing straw could occur any place on the parcel. She did not feel for that particular kind of material that it was industrial in nature, commercial in nature and needed to be included in the yard area of the contractor's yard. The major mitigation we were focusing on was the heavy equipment that was outside of the rural type of neighborhood; but we can certainly modify the dimensions or requirements of where those particular things are stored and screened. Commissioner Houpt said, without an application for those material yards; it can really only be agricultural use. 7 1111 in, NOIlfrI:P 14. *lrriiillik Wfrire .lia,IW7 Ii'l 11 � Reception #: 841911 10`1112013 11 21 11 Apt Joan Alberico 12 of 14 Rec Fee SO 00 Dec Fee 0 00 GARFIELD COUNTY CO Dusty said it is a type of material that is also used tor agncwnnal use and we do not regulate those. She did not feel ft was an issue; but they could certainly entertain a modification to designate where you would lice to see those set and put them adjacent and expand the site plan for those particular materials and lump them up near the berm. Because it was straw and straw was an agricultural commodity and mulch is agricultural, she was less concerned and less focused on that We did talk about the jersey barriers and if you want to make a condition for approval to set a timeline on removal of those, we can. Normally they do not have barriers delivered to the site. Melody said the barriers were the wrong sine and they are going to sell them. You could give them a timeline and if they do not sell them, they could move them to the shop area. A motion was made by Commissioner Samson and seconded by Commissioner Houpt to close the Public Hearing. In favor. Houpt aye Samson — aye Martin - aye Commissioner Samson said he assumed that in the past contractors yards if they meet the stipulations in the agricultural zone, have been approved. Commissioner Houpt said not necessarily. If they are compatible with the nature of the neighborhood that is why she is troubled today. She is not sure she is completely convinced they are compatible with this neighborhood. Contractor'g yards are very controversial; wherever you are unless you are in a commercial or light industrial or industrial area. They generate heavy traffic and because when you typically purchase a piece of property in a rural area, you do not anticipate having that use next door to you. For that reason, historically it has been a unique situation with every application, but it is never easy_ Commissioner Samson stated, so depending on the neighborhood, you do deny them based on those reasons and other times you do not. Is the use of a contractor's yard defined as agricultural? Commissioner Haupt said no it is an industrial use a commercial use. Commissioner Samson asked why staff in an agricultural zoned area would approve an industrial contractor's yard. Dusty said the special use is considered with conditions to mitigate any adverse effects on adjacent properties and there are stringent performance standards for containing any kind of adverse affect from going onto another property. That is why they developed a spill containment permit and require screening, and require consideration from other county.. Commissioner Samson said, because in some agricultural settings, such as a gas company buys something way down Parachute Creek... Dusty explained that ca not be a contractor's yard. A contractor's yard has to be an individual business; it cannot be a corporate entity lace oil and gas. Commissioner Samson said okay, just a private person and it is zoned agriculture and its way out in the middle of nowhere; in that situation you look at it and say, no neighbors, no big deal; he wants to put a contractors yard. Dusty said it is easier to permit that however there have been a number of contractor's yards for plumbing contractors, for an excavation company, for another heavy equipment firm whereby she calls it a guy in a truck kind of permit; Whereby the equipment goes home with the independent businessman and the consideration by the Board is based on how to adequately mitigate whatever potential adverse effects may be present that would adversely influence the neighborhood. So no, it is not always involved; some things are ill quite small parceled areas where they do have neighbors and mitigation efforts by the Board have included vegetation screens, sizeable fences, earth and berms, enclosures within a business, restrictions hours of operations and the like. That was the reason we came up with an individual and small sized spill containment permit that was well below the thresholds of the EPA requirement, which were hundreds of gallon that Garfield County wanted to keep a tight finger on any kind of potential adverse drainage and spill. Chairman Martin said to answer the question; you can allow a special use within the zone district. If the conditions of approval have mitigated your concerns, it would be approved. If the conditions do not mitigate the circumstances sad create more of a problem, you should deny. Commissioner Houpt said we heard some testimony today about the school district not sending a school bus up this road anymore. They typically would not do that unless there is some kind of safety concern on the road. That concerns her when you have families on a rural road and you are hauling large equipment back and forth. ft is probably one of her major concerns about this and she does not think you can mitigate that because the use is storing large equipment and allowing employees to come up every day and leave every day from the site; there is a lot of traffic generated. Chairman Malin said on that you have to remember we have not approved this and it is not in there yet; but the school district has chosen to do what they have done without this permit So issuing this permit in a positive would not really change their opinion right now. They have already made their decision. Commissioner Houpt said she is not talking about their decision; she is talking about how we approach the road situation. B 111111WWWWWIEWANIATARPINANNIE111 Reception#: 841911 13/cf 141Rec1Fee SO 00 DoceRoel0e00cGARFIELD C0 iITY Co Chairman Martin stated you have to have the finding to say negative on this one and that would not be a positive finding. Deb Quinn wanted to read the code section that allows for denial. It is the old code Section 503.11 – Denial of Special Use: The County Commissioners may deny any request for special use based on the lack of physical separadon in terms of distance from similar uses on the same or other lots, the impact on traffic volume and safety or on utilities, or any impact that the special use, which it deems injurious to the established character of the neighborhood where zone districts in which such special use is proposed to be looted. Those are the denial standards and it is any one of those. Chairman Martin stated one or more. Commissioner Houpt – I make a motion, I don't know where it will go; but we need to move this discussion forward, that we deny this special use permit on the basis of traffic safety along County Road 259 and the feeling I have received after reviewing the materials and bearing testimony lnday,—i is not within the character of the neighborhood. Commissioner Samson – Second, coavince me. Commissioner Houpt said anytime you are permitting a use that is simply for storage of large equipment that is used on a regular basis, you are going to have impact to a road and to a neighborhood Commissioner Samson said, in ow Land Use Code, we not have specific industrial zones far those purposes specifically, correct. Commissioner Houpt said yes. Chairman Martin said for industrial areas, yes they are very limited, maybe three in the entire county. He also stated commercial is different; you have three different levels of commercial. Commissioner Houpt said the use is not just for parking machinery that has been taken to different sites; it is also for the home office ofa company, where they require employees to come on a daily basis. [t expands the use ofa contractor's yard to an office that holds meetings on a regular basis with employees. There are the material handling yards that were not even brought into this discussion. She does not know what that can expand into. Commissioner Samson stated if the material is straw, yes that is agricultural. Commissioner Houpt showed a picture of the jersey barriers; it means that anything that is dropped off could be stored there too. Dusty said that is not what was represented in the application. Chairman Martin said we have to be careful of that because we are going to start regulating hay bales and start folks covering with a silver one instead ofa yellow one and what have you. Commissioner Houpt said maybe that should have been covered in this report. Chairman Martin said in reading the recommendations from the road and bridge folks; all of the model traffic code that is applicable, as well as everything from 2 to 3 to 5 axel vehicles require permits before they go on any county road. They cannot exceed 80 thousand pounds and he thinks they need to adhere to the weight restrictions based upon die rod and bridge folks in that particular area. It may not be BO thousand pounds; but they have to abide by that one. If they do not they are in violation ofa traffic violation and not a zoning issue. Dusty wanted to contribute about the school bus turnarounds; the school district has been reluctant to allow its school buses to exit hard surfaced areas for fear they may be stuck. If there is no house occupied that warrants the bus going down there, they have been less and less willing to go into places that is a little dicier surface. Dusty thinks that is the reason that they do not enter into that cul-de -sac. Commissioner Houpt asked, are there no kids serviced by the bus. Dusty said there are kids served by the bus; but the school district prohibits its bus drivers from going into a place where the MUTCD required turnarounds. They cannot back up even if it is surfaced. There are requirements from the school district that are related to their guidelines for safety and not necessarily for the configuration of the roadway. Commissioner Haupt stated that is not every school district because she sees one every day that backs up to be able to turn around. She does not think we have cul-de -sacs in all of our areas; but we will accommodate that. I am not second- guessing your statement The people who bought into this area had an expectation that it would be residential/agriculture. Some of them even have covenants on this property. She stated she knows it does not transfer onto this property; but it is still part of that neighborhood. If there are 11 other businesses doing business out there without a special use permit, with heavy equipment; she would feel the same way. She has not been convinced that this is an appropriate location for this. Chairman Martin stated the motion has been made and seconded. 9 •III 11 %1i 11.17 M1111910:111r114ti141?M'i h111,111111 Reeept long : 841911 1011112013 11 21 11 AM Jean Alberioo 14 of 14 Roc Few SO DO Doc Fee 0 00 GARFIELC :e.Rllw , 70 Commissioner Houpt stated they me seeing a lot of industrial and commercial activity move into rural Garfield County and it is impacting a lot of people who are living in the county. She thinks we need to be careful about how we allow that to grow. Chairman Martin said he thinks there is another side to that. It is extremely hard to get anything within municipalities because of their restrictive land use. It is very obvious they will go outside of a city to try; is this the right location, we'll find out If it is the wrong location, we will find out. However, it is trying to stay alive, it is trying to do business, it is trying to keep people working and it is trying to get along with the neighbors. However, you want to look at it; but it is an attempt to stay in business and an attempt to employee people, which sometimes benefits everyone. However, he does not always like what he sees too. Commissioner Samson said if we deny, we are not precluding them from locating somewhere else to continue their business. Chairman Martin stated no, and also the request that you are making, a decision in error and to show the other 11 businesses that you have not required them to do such, which then turns into a code enforcement and violation on the other 11 people. We will have our hands full there as well. Or, you can say it is going to be agriculture and that's all it's going to be and you can't drive your tractors if it isn't too wide. You cannot have your heavy equipment there no matter if its ditch cleaning to mowing your field, to herding sheep and your cattle truck is too big, and you cannot take that up there. You have to have the right fmdings for this. Have they met all of the requirements, do we have the flexibility, is it the right decision based upon these recommendation, or not. That is what you need to make a decision on. That is what has been presented to us. Therefore, the motion is to deny based on traffic-and out of character for the neighborhood. In favor. Houpt - aye Samson - aye Opposed - Martin - aye 1 p