HomeMy WebLinkAbout2.0 Staff Report• •
PROJECT INFORMATION AND STAFF COMMENTS
PROJECT NAME: Commercial Park Special Use Permit Request
OWNER: Mae and Wes Holder
LOCATION: 12 miles Southwest of New Castle south
of I-70, off the I-70 frontage road.
WATER: Adjudicated spring
SEWER: Two existing septic systems
PROPOSED ROADS:
ADJACENT ZONING:
Access to the site is the 1-70 frontage
road and an existing access to the property.
The applicant has also secured a State Highway
permit to establish a new access to the
frontage road which would serve the shop area.
A :-
North: A/R/RD (North of 1-70)
South: A/R/RD (South of the river)
East: A/R/RD
West: A/I
RELATIONSHIP TO THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN:
The proposed site is within the New Castle Urban Area of Influence
DESCRIPTION OF THE PROPOSAL:
The applicant's proposal is to bring his pre-existing non -conforming uses into
compliance with the regulations, and to expand one of those uses. At present,
the applicant has a fabrication shop, a stick -built residence, and a mobile home
on the 3.59 acre tract. Recently, the applicant expanded the welding ship,
erecting a 30' x 60' metal addition, more than doubling the size of the existing
shop. The applicant also wishes to relocate the present mobile home site to a
location approximately 100 feet north of where the mobile home now sits. The
applicant proposes to rent the mobile home to an elderly couple, who will look
after the place when the Holder's are away.
All sewer, water and electrical hook-ups are in place. As mentioned previously,
the applicant has an adjudicated spring which serves the property and there are
two existing septic systems in place to serve the residential units.
The applicant indicates that there is some glare, noise and smoke associated with the
fabrication operations. However, it appears that most of this is contained within
the shop buildings.
REVIEW AGENCY COMMENTS:
1. Town of New Castle- no comments at the time of the agenda mailing.
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 Commissioner 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 proposes special use conforms with Section 5.03 of the Garfield County
Zoning Regulations.
RECOMMENDATION:
Approval with the following conditions:
1. All proposals of the applicant shall be considered conditions of approval unless
stated otherwise by the Board of County Commissioners.
2. The uses in the commercial park shall be limited to the following:
a. a fabrication operation
b. residential uses (to include one main residence and one mobile home used as
a caretaker's unit)
Page 9
3. The applicant shall secure all necessary permits for the expansion of the
metal sbuilding and the mobile home.
4. The applicant shall abide by the Garfield County Sign Code.
8-q- 82.
127 -
-TOL.Av• k.)e-t-LD (53S+1 k4e1--
Page 10
TOWN OF NEW CASTLE
BOX 166
NEW CASTLE, COLORADO 81647
TELEPHONE: 984-2311
July 29,
Terry L. Bowman
Planner - Planning Department
2014 Blake Ave.
Glenwood Springs, CO 81601
RE: Special Use Permit
Holder Commerical Park
Dear Terry,
The New Castle Planning and Zoning Commission, at their
regularly scheduled meeting of July 28, 1982, unanimously
voted to recommend approval of the Holder Commerical Park
special use permit application. The Commission recommends
that the visual impacts of the application be closely reviewed.
Respectfully,
\ictx.cjc
Steve Vasilakis, Chairman
P & Z Commission
cc: Delbert Dawson, Mayor
cc: Jim Drinkhouse, County Commissioner
• •
• •
AUG 101982 , a
GRJFLELD. C . PLMHER
August 4, 1982
Box 1274
Littleton, CO 30160
Board of County Commissioners
Garfield County, Colorado
County Court House
Glenwood Springs, CO 81601
Re: Holder Commercial Park Special Use Permit
Gentlemen:
Mrs. Holder has forwarded a Public Notice docu-
ment to me and requested that I indicate receipt of
the document.
The property is located across the river from
property which I own inSection4. It is my opinion
that the proposed use of the land is consistent with
present and proposed land uses in the area. Mr. and
Mrs. Holder have operated their business on the land
for many years and should be, in my view, permitted
to improve their facilities to accomodate their busi-
ness needs.
Thank you for the opportunity to comment on the
proposed change.
Ver/ truly yours
Gene R. Hilton