HomeMy WebLinkAbout2.0 BOCC Staff Report 06.03.1993•
BOCC 6/3/93
PROJECT INFORMATION AND STAFF COMMENTS
REQUEST: An Amendment to a Special Use Permit to
allow for the temporary alternative access
to State Highway 82 or the Blue Gravel Pit
APPLICANT: Western Slope Aggregates
LOCATION:
Located in portions of Section 25 and 26,
T7S, R88W of the 6th P.M.: more
practically described as a parcel north of
State Highway 82, across for the Ranch at
Roaring Fork (The Blue Gravel Pit).
SITE DATA: A parcel of approximately 110 acres
WATER. Existing adjudicated water rights
SEWER: Chemical Toilets / ISDS
EXISTING ZONING: A/R/RD
ADJACENT ZONING: A/R/RD, Ranch at Roaring Fork PUD,
O/S
I. RELATIONSHIP TO THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN
The subject property is located in District A - Town of Carbondale Urban Area of
Influence.
II. DESCRIPTION OF PROPOSAL
A. Site Description: The site, known as "The Blue Gravel Pit", has been operating
under a Sial Use Permit (81-384) since 1981. A vicinity map is attached on
page — /6
B. Requested Amendment- Resolution 81-384 (attached on pages 17914 )
included condition (#6), which restricted access to the pit via County Road 103
and 104. The applicants are requesting temporary access directly to State
Highway 82 to fulfill a contract with the Department of Transportation. Access
to the SH 82 site using the proposed route would be from jJuneyst, 19933 to
November 1, 1993 (See memo page / 9 - ). Access would be via two existing
roadways, the upper access being on the Blue property, and the lower route
being within SH 82 ROW. The State has approved the access request (see page
?O o 2 ). A schematic showing the location of the access roads is attached on
1
• •
page a-3- . The applicant's cover letter is attached on pages ..v--074 Due
to grade of the lower access, trucks would access the pit from the lower road,
and exit the pit to the SH 82 project via the upper road. The grade of the upper
road is approximately 5 percent.
III. MAJOR ISSUES AND CONCERNS
1. Impact Statement: Section 5.03.07 requires the submittal of an impact statement
for all industrial uses within the County that require a Conditional or Special
Use Permit. Section 5.03.07 requires the following:
1. The impact statement must show that the use shall be designed and
operated in compliance with all applicable laws and regulations of the
County, State and Federal governments, and will not have an adverse
effect on:
A.) Existing lawful use of water through depletion or pollution of
surface runoff, stream flow or ground water;
B.) Use of adjacent land through generation of vapor, dust, smoke,
noise, glare or vibration, or other emanations;
C.) Wildlife and domestic animals through creation of hazardous
attractions, alteration of existing vegetation, blockade of
migration routes, use patterns or other disruptions;
2. Truck and automobile traffic to and from such uses shall not create
hazards or nuisances to areas elsewhere in the County;
3. Sufficient distances shall separate such use from abutting property which
might otherwise be damaged by operations of the proposed uses;
A copy of the impact study submitted with the application is attached on pages
7 a9 . Staff agrees with the applicant's assertion that the proposed
amendment does not increase the impacts of the pit above current levels, with
the exception of impacts to adjacent lands from potential noise and dust.
2. Impacts on Adjacent Land: Primary impacts to adjacent lands by the
amendment to the haul route are two -fold: the impact of removing traffic from
the current CR 103/104 route; and the impact associated with the new haul
route. As staff has suggested during the Casey Concrete hearings, the current
route creates an incompatible traffic mix between industrial, residential and
school bus traffic. Due to the volume of aggregate necessary for the SH 82
project, the direct route proposed in the amendment is preferable due to safety
concerns, as well as energy conservation.
Adjacent land uses from the proposed route, namely residents from the Ranch
at Roaring Fork, could experience additional noise and dust. The'applicants
have indicated their willingness to mitigate these impacts by frequent watering
and the use of magnesium chloride. Staff suggests that these be conditions of
approval. Staff has suggested in the past that the noise impacts associated with
the alternative access would be minimal due to the volume of traffic currently
2
using SH 82. The temporary access proposed by the applicant should provide
an opportunity to assess the long-term impacts of the access alternative.
The applicants have contacted the Ranch at Roaring Fork Homeowner's
Association, and the HOA approved of the temporary access. Documentation
from the Ranch has not been reviewed, but will be presented at the hearing.
3. Traffic Impacts: The primary issue for the access amendment are the impact on
adjacent land uses (1(b) above) and the impact on truck and automobile traffic
(#2 above). Note the amendment does not increase the level of activity in the pit
itself, but only the haul route from the pit. Staff has noted the deficiencies in the
County Road 103/SH 82 intersection. Conditions of the State permit include full
acceleration/deceleration lanes for the upper access road.
IV. SUGGESTED FINDINGS
1. That proper publication and public notice was provided as required by law for
the hearing before the Board of County Commissioners.
2. That the hearing before the Board of County Commissioners was extensive and
complete, that all pertinent facts, matters and issues were submitted and that all
interested parties were heard at the hearing.
3. That the application is in compliance with the Garfield County Zoning
Resolution of 1978, as amended.
4. For the above stated and other reasons, the proposed use is in the best interest
of the health, safety, morals, convenience, order, prosperity and welfare of the
citizens of Garfield County.
V. RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends APPROVAL of the amendment based on the following condition:
1. That all verbal and written representations made by the applicants in the application
and at the public hearing shall be considered conditions of approval unless specified
otherwise by the Board of County Commissioners.
2. The amendment is valid from June lst, 1993 to November 1st, 1993. Following
expiration of the temporary access, County Road 103 and 104 will be used to access the
pit and haul product. If the applicants wish to continue to directly access SH 82, and
amendment to the SUP would be necessary.
3. Dust will be controlled by frequent watering and the application of magnesium chloride,
as needed.
4. Jake brakes will not be used, if safety is not compromised.
5. All other conditions of approval contained in Resolution 81-384 must be complied with
by the applicant. Violation of these conditions could result in revocation of the existing
SUP.
6. leo S0 3
�p�,
NAw""h Fa rNE SH 8Z Pyr wovep 13-.auo�
0
1
I- 1
.)
� J
S11 133
9,4
0
•(D
J,J•.
CR.103
PCf
tr.
w
0
0
CR. 100
To Missouri 1icigliis
1ga)[AT ROARING FORK
Fte
ri
5-25-93
Garfield County Board of Commissioners
Garfield County Courthouse
109 8th St.
Glenwood Springs, CO. 81601
Dear Commissioners,
The Board of Directors at the Ranch at Roaring Fork,
Inc. has voted to approve the temporary Special Use Permit
being applied for by Western Slope Aggregates, Inc.
This temporary Special Use Permit is to be used by
them for transporting materials from their plant to the
Highway 82 project and will use the road located on the
tract of land located just north of Hwy 82, across from
Surrey St. at the Ranch at Roaring Fork.
We are approving this temporary use in lieu of having
a rock crusher sitting across from the Ranch at Roaring
Fork, creating noise and a high level of gravel dust.
Please see that this letter is recorded and presented
at the Public Hearing on June 3, 1993.
Thank You.
Sincerely,
BoardL o f Directors
Ranch at Roaring Fork, Inc.
Kathy Loudis, President
14913 Highway 82 • Carbondale, Colorado 81623 • (303) 963-3500
r
May 27, 1993
Board of County Commissioners
109 8th St, Suite 300
Glenwood Springs CO 81601
RE: Western Slope Aggregates Special Use Permit
Board of County Conunissioners:
'Ibis letter is concerning the special permit requested by Western Slope Aggregates for the hauling
of material directly to highway 82. I support the right of Blues and Western Slope Aggregates to
supply a needed resource to the community, and strongly support the special permit, and strongly
support that it be considered as a permanent route.
I live directly north of the milling operation, closer than any other residence other than those
located on Blue's property. My decision to live there was m part due to the secluded nature and
being at the end of a dead end road. I have two pre -teen boys who travel that road to and from
school and frequently ride their bikes. In contrast, those people who reside at the Ranch, moved
there next to highway 82 being fully aware of the traffic, and that the probability of it increasing
was assured. I night understand their opposition to the routing of material trucks up 103 road if it
reduced the traffic flow on highway 82, however virtually every thick exiting the gravel operation
goes right back on highway 82. 1 don't want. to detail all of the pros and cons as I'm sure you've
heard them all but in light of the fact that if 200 trucks a day are unnecessarily routed an extra 6
miles, consider the extra dust. and pehroleurn pollutants thnist into our air on a daily basis and the
extra cost to the operators which could be totally eliminated with no change in traffic on highway
82 but a big change to the quality of life to those who chose not to locate on a major thoroughfare.
I appeal to the Board of County Commissioners to make a fair, and sensible decision based on
what is reasonable and prudent over the long term. Your job to serve your constituents is difficult
and 1 appreciate your sense of community service. Listening to the "squeaky wheel" is necessary
but the decision process needs to keep its integrity.
� inc ely,
\nn An.
lJ�/11"",,"
en Harris
0319 104 Road
Carbondale Colorado