HomeMy WebLinkAbout2.0 BOCC Staff Report 04.20.19924/20/92
PROJECT INFORMATION AND STAFF COMMENTS
REQUEST: Special Use Permit for wood storage
yard.
APPLICANT: Robert and Barbara Stone
LOCATION: A portion of the NE1/4 of Section 34,
T6S, R92W of the 6th P.M./aka Lot
3, Chipperfield Estates; located
south of I-70 approximately four (4)
miles on the east side of C.R. 331
SITE DATA: The site consists of 11.9 acres
WATER/SEWER: N/A
ACCESS: Access easement from C.R. 331
EXISTING AND ADJACENT ZONING: A/R/RD
I. RELATIONSHIP TO THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN
The subject property is located in District C - Rural Areas with Minor Environmental
Constraints as identified on the Comprehensive Plan Management Districts map.
II. DESCRIPTION OF THE PROPOSAL
A. Site Description: The subject property is a gently rolling hillside L-shaped
parcel. The property slopes from east to west where a wash parallels the
property line. There are some juniper scattered around the property. The
property is currently occupied by approximately twenty (20) wood piles around
the property. There are eight (8) vehicles and one (1) tractor on the property.
In addition, there are auto parts and building materials piled on the property.
Adjacent to and south of the subject property is a residence located on a knoll.
This residence looks out over the applicants entire property. North of the
property is a residence, also in view of the subject property (see enclosed maps).
B. The applicants are requesting Special Use Permit approval to allow a wood
storage yard in order to bring the existing use into compliance. The applicant
operates a fire wood sales business and stores his product on the subject
property. No retail sales is proposed.
III. MAJOR ISSUES AND CONCERNS
A. Section 3.02.03 lists a "site for extraction, processing, storage or material
handling of natural resources" as a Special Use in the A/R/RD zone.
B. The storage of unlicensed, inoperable vehicles, building materials and auto parts
is not a permitted, conditional or special use unless it is accessory to an allowable
use.
C. The primary consideration in a request of this nature is the compatibility with
adjacent properties. Staff has received numerous complaints from neighboring
residents and has initiated legal abatement procedures based on these
complaints.
D. Due to the topographic elevation of the adjoining residence, it is unlikely that
screening or fencing could obscure the proposed use.
E. In a similar application, the Board approved a Special Use Permit for Doug
Cerise/Brad Hendricks. This request is fairly similar. Enclosed is a copy of the
resolution of approval for the Cerise/Hendricks SUP.
IV. SUGGESTED FINDINGS
1. That the 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 that hearing.
3. That the proposed Special Use is compatible with the adjacent land uses.
4. For the above stated and other reasons, the proposed Special 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 has concerns about the compatibility of the proposed uses with adjacent
residences. Of particular concern are noise, dust and visual impacts. Therefore, staff
would recommend denial. However, if the Board is inclined to approve the request,
then staff would recommend the imposition of conditions similar to those m the Cerise
SUP.