Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1.0 Appeal Request Letter 11.10.2011Phil Vaughan Construction Management, Inc. 1038 County Road 323 Rifle, CO 81650 Ph. 970 - 625 -5350 Fax 970 -625 -4522 Email: phil@ovcmi.com November 10, 2011 Mr. Fred Jarman Director - Garfield County Building and Planning Department 108 81h Street, Suite 401 Glenwood Springs, CO 81601 Dear Fred, Thank you for your attached reply of November 9, 2011 regarding the Williams Field Services Company, LLC- Battlement Mesa Communications Facility. Please consider this letter a request for an appeal of the Planning Director's Determination to the Garfield County Board of Adjustment as described in the Garfield County Unified Land Use Resolution of 2008 (ULUR), as amended Section 12 -106 (C)(1)(b) Appeals -Board of Adjustment and Section 1- 303(B)(2)- Powers and Duties. We will follow the procedures as set forth in ULUR Section 4 -302- Appeal of an Administrative Interpretation of these Regulations. As per ULUR section 4- 502(G), please find below our "Statement of Appeal ". Statement of Appeal Please find attached the following attachments for reference: 1. November 9, 2011 Email from Fred Jarman- Director's Determination 2. Communications Facility Lease Exhibit A dated 10 /21 /11 3. Monopine communications tower mock -up 4. November 7, 2011 Requested Zoning interpretation from Fred Jarman 5. Garfield County Assessor Map 2407 -172 with redlines and notations regarding the location of the proposed communications facility. 6. Garfield County Assessor's Parcel report for parcel 2407- 083 -00 -185 7. Garfield County Assessor Map 2407 -181- notes the Western extent of parcel 2407- 083 -00 -185 8. Garfield County Assessor Map 2407- notes the entirety of parcel 2407- 083 -00- 185 9. Resolution 82 -121- Battlement Mesa PUD Section 9.7 (3) attached. Page 1 of 3 We are requesting an appeal to the Garfield County Board of Adjustment of the attached November 9, 2011 Director's Determination. Williams Field Services Company, LLC has leased a 36'x25' parcel from Battlement Mesa Land Investments Parcel 3, LLC as described on the attached Communications Facility Lease Exhibit A dated 10/21/11. This parcel is within the Battlement Mesa Planned Unit Development and is located within the Public, Semipublic, and Recreation (PSR) zone district. The parcel will be utilized for the installation of a 36' tall monopine communications tower and an accessory equipment building approximately 100 sq. ft, in size. Please find attached a mock -up of the monopine communications tower. As per the attached November 7, 2011 Requested Zoning interpretation from Fred Jarman, the proposed communications facility is a use -by -right in the PSR zone district. This location was chosen because of the proximity to the Century Link central office (formerly US West Communications). Please see Garfield County Assessor Map 2407- 172 for a vicinity map of the location. This site is also desirable because of the large ravine to the North that has a number of Cottonwood trees that provide a visual buffer from adjacent parcels. We have also designed a monopine communications tower that has the appearance of a tree versus a standard lattice -type communications tower. This property is a unique parcel that is U- shaped and connects at 2 locations to Spencer Parkway and a single location on East Battlement Parkway. Please see the attached Garfield County Assessor's Parcel report for parcel 2407- 083 -00 -185. As per paragraph (2) of the Director's Determination, we disagree that the lot line separating the subject parcel from the apartments is a rear yard setback. Because of the unique U -shape of this lot, we contend that this is a side -yard and thus the setback is 10 feet as per Resolution 82 -121- Battlement Mesa PUD Section 9.7 (3) attached. As per paragraph (3) of the Director's Determination, we disagree that the US West Communications parcel is a corner lot. Please see the attached Garfield County Assessor Map 2407 -172 with redlines and Assessor Map 2407 -181. The US West Communications parcel fronts and accesses East Battlement Parkway. There is no other public access or right -of -way on the East, North or West side of this parcel, thus the parcel is not a corner lot. Additionally, we contend that because of the unique shape of this parcel, that the lot line separating the U S West Communications parcel from the subject parcel is a side -yard as well and thus the setback is 10 feet as per Resolution 82- 121- Battlement Mesa PUD Section 9.7 (3) attached. Page 2 of 3 We additionally would like to address the issue of the monopine communications tower and placement of the pole in relationship to the sideyard setback. We believe that the communications tower is the primary use of the monopine structure. The "branches" of the monopine are adornments meant to beautify the communications structure. We would ask that the Garfield County Board of Adjustment rule that the monopine pole and baseplate be located outside of the 10 foot sideyard setback, but that the "branches" of the monopine are adornments and may project into the 10 foot sideyard setback. We believe that this ruling of the Board of Adjustment would be within the spirit of the land use code and the Battlement Mesa Planned Unit Development. In conclusion, we believe that the November 9, 2011 Director's Determination and interpretation of this issue is incorrect. As per the ULUR section 4- 302(B), we believe that the following criteria have been met and exceeded by our comments above and materials attached: 1. The technical meaning of the provision is being appealed. Applicant's Reply: This is the basis of our appeal. 2. Evidence as to the past interpretation of the provision. Applicant's Reply: We have no evidence as to past interpretation of this provision. 3. The effect of the interpretation on the intent of this code. Applicant's Reply: We believe that our requested interpretation will not oppose the intent of the land use code and will not injure adjoining property owners. We would ask that the Garfield County Board of Adjustment rule in our favor regarding this appeal. Thanks again for your assistance and please contact me with questions. Sincerely, q,\,44:z-d> Philip B. Vaughan President Phil Vaughan Construction Management, Inc. Page 3 of 3