HomeMy WebLinkAbout2.0 Staff ReportBoard of County Commissioners — Public Hearing Exhibits
Federal Express — Warehouse and Distribution Facility
Limited Impact Review (File LIPA-7988)
Applicant is CLH Properties, LLC
September 8, 2014
Exhibit Letter
(Numerical)
Exhibit Description
1
Public Hearing Notice Information
2
Proof of Publication
3
Receipts from Mailing Notice
4
Photo evidence of Public Notice Posting
5
Garfield County Land Use and Development Code, as amended
6
Garfield County Comprehensive Plan of 2030
7
Application
8
Staff Report
9
Staff Presentation
10
Referral Comments from Colorado Parks and Wildlife (dated August 25,
2014)
11
Referral Comments from Garfield County Road and Bridge (dated July
16, 2014)
12
Referral Comments from Garfield County Road and Bridge (dated
August 7, 2014)
13
Referral Comments from the Colorado Division of Water Resources
(dated August 15, 2014)
14
Referral Comments from Garfield County Vegetation Management
(Dated August 24, 2014)
15
Referral Comments from the Garfield County Sheriff's Office (Dated
August 18, 2014)
16
Referral Comments from CDPHE Air Pollution Control Division (Dated
August 14, 2014)
17
Invoice from the West Divide Water Conservancy District (Dated August
18, 2014)
18
Referral Comments from Glenwood Springs Fire Department (Dated
August 26, 2014)
19
Referral Comments from Mountain Cross Engineering (Dated August
28, 2014)
20
Referral Comments from the City of Glenwood Springs (Dated August
26, 2014)
%'i �12 ��ln ( ti LC
tit � , �
eect►f-;P C) _see .5
01( Gc7)cve l -�
BOCC 9/8/2014
File No. LIPA-7988
DP
PROJECT INFORMATION AND STAFF COMMENTS
REQUEST Land Use Change Permit - Limited Impact
Review for a Warehouse and Distribution
Facility.
APPLICANT — PROPERTY OWNER CLH Properties, LLC (Federal Express)
ASSESSOR'S PARCEL # 2185-271-00-008
PROPERTY SIZE 8.92 acres
LOCATION The property is located at 1097 County Road
116 (Airport Center Road), Glenwood Springs,
CO. It is located south of the City of
Glenwood Springs in SE Qtr of NE Qtr & in NE
Qtr of Section 27, Township 6 South, Range
98 West of the 6th Principal Meridian, Garfield
County
ACCESS The facility is accessed by County Road 116
(Airport Center Road).
EXISTING ZONING The property is zoned Commercial General
(C/G)
I. GENERAL PROJECT DESCRIPTION
The Applicant is requesting a Limited Impact Review for a 27,000 square foot
Warehouse and Distribution Center on an 8.92 acre parcel located south of the City of
Glenwood Springs. The facility is to be operated by FedEx Ground Package System,
Inc. (FedEx Ground) and is to serve eastern Garfield County. The facility is not
intended to serve the general public and is expected to operate 6 days per week for
trailer operations and 5 days per week for delivery and pickup operations. The facility is
to be fully fenced and gated and is to employ 14.5 FTE workers (9 full-time and 9.5
part-time) and is expected to generate 230 single trips per day at full build out. All
access is to be via Midland Avenue and Airport Road. The facility is proposed to
operate 24 hours per day, 6 days per week.
1
The facility will be located directly east of the Glenwood Springs municipal airport and
the City limits. The property is surrounded by light industrial uses and some residential
uses. Water is to be available to the site from a 3/4" line from the City of Glenwood
Springs. In order to accommodate the necessary fire flows and irrigation requirements,
the facility will have a 200,000 gallon water storage tank located in the northeast corner
of the property along the Roaring Fork River. Wastewater is to be handled by a new
Onsite Wastewater Treatment System (OWTS).
The Applicant had previously petitioned the City of Glenwood Springs for annexation,
but the Applicant decided not to pursue annexation after discussions with the City. On
August 21, 2014, the City Council reviewed the proposal as referred by Garfield
County. At this meeting, the City Council voted to recommend the BOCC deny the
application and outlined a number of reasons as further discussed in this report.
Vicinity Map
lzi=nyMap
The S. 92 acre pzope ty is eastsoutheast of the Gfeuwaad 5
ofs Airport
2
Proposed Site Plan
.2.11101,0 K retA ),1 MPIC
)
St101,534,711.6.1122
A94 150
UN,110110, XRCI311
Ur.
r- I
1111;;.•
\ \
;
\ a:, ‘,
\ :
\ \
ri
*
„.„
' Rohm 1
; 111).
Building Elevations
View of single family home on subject property from Airport Center Road
View of Subject Site from Airport Center Road
5
View of Airport Center Road in Front of Subject Site
II. LOCATION - SITE DESCRIPTION
The parcel is currently developed with a single family home that is to be removed
before construction of this proposed facility. The majority of the 8.92 acre parcel is
native vegetation consisting of sagebrush, grasses and juniper. The surrounding area
is primarily light industrial, airport, residential and the Roaring Fork River. The
surrounding County zoning is Commercial General and Commercial Limited across the
River while the City of Glenwood Springs adjacent zoning is Industrial and Residential.
III. PUBLIC COMMENTS AND REFFERAL AGENCY COMMENTS
Public Notice was provided for the Board's public hearing in accordance with the
Garfield County Land Use and Development Code, as amended. No public comments
have been received at this time. Comments from referral agencies and County
Departments are summarized below and attached as Exhibits.
1. Garfield County Consulting Engineer, Chris Hale, Mountain Cross Engineering:
(See Exhibits 19)
6
• The Onsite Wastewater Treatment System (OWTS) will require permitting
through the Garfield County Building Department.
• All site plans should be updated to show only one access. All access permits
should by obtained.
• The traffic analysis does not address how the traffic will impact the
intersection of Highway 82 and 27th Street. The Applicant should address
this intersection and/or why this intersection was not evaluated.
• The Applicant proposes to not provide detention for storm water peak
attenuation as required in Section 7-204.C.3.a of the LUDC.
• The Applicant should address how the bio -retention ponds that are proposed
conform to Section 7-204.C.3.d of the LUDC.
• The Storm Water Management Plan does not provide evidence that the site
is covered under the CDPHE Permit. A copy of the coverage letter should be
submitted to Garfield County once obtained.
• The plan sheets show that a 3/" water service tap is to provide fire protection
and potable supply to a fire pump and storage tank. No details were included
for this equipment. The Applicant should provide engineering information and
obtain approvals from the Fire District.
2. Garfield County Road and Bridge Department: (See Exhibits 11 and 12)
• Comments state that the access road is under City of Glenwood Springs
jurisdiction. In addition, all anticipated road impacts are expected to be on
City maintained roads. No impacts are expected on County maintained
roads.
3. Garfield County Vegetation Manager: (See Exhibit 14)
• The submitted noxious weed inventory is acceptable.
• It is recommended that the Dalmation Toadflax be treated on the site. In
addition, Diffuse Knapweed is common in the area and any occurrences of
Diffuse Knapweed should be treated.
• It is recommended that the identified noxious weeds be treated prior to
construction with satisfactory confirmation of the treatment submitted to the
Garfield County Vegetation Manager by October 31, 2014.
• Conflicting information was provided regarding fertilization in the hydroseed.
Staff recommends that fertilizer not be utilized in the hydroseed as it tends to
favor the establishment of weeds. It is requested that the Applicant clarify
whether fertilizer will be used in the hydroseed.
• The Applicant has indicated that the total area to be landscaped is 68,309
square feet, or 1.56 acres. As a result, a revegetation security of $3750 (1.5
acres x $2500 per acre) is recommended to be held by the County until
successful revegetation is established.
4. Glenwood Springs and Rural Fire Protection District: (See Exhibit 18)
• As the facility is proposed to have a gate at the main access, the Applicant
needs to install a Knox key switch, which can be obtained from the Fire
Department.
• If the facility is not able to be connected to the City of Glenwood Springs
water supply, then all other options need to be further discussed with the Fire
Department.
• The building needs to be equipped with a fire sprinkler system that is
designed and installed to National Fire Protection Association (NFPA) 13
standards. The fire alarm system needs to be designed and installed to
NFPA 72 standards for sprinkled buildings and adhere to Glenwood Springs
Fire Departments amendments to the 2009 edition of the International Fire
Code (IFC).
• The site will be required to have at least one fire hydrant and possibly two,
depending on final Fire Department review.
5. Colorado Parks and Wildlife: (See Exhibit 10)
• No adverse impacts to wildlife are expected as a result of the project.
• As a result of high bear activity in the area, CPW recommends that all refuse
containers be bear -proof.
6. Colorado Division of Water Resources (DWR): (See Exhibit 13)
• The DWR has no objection to connecting to City of Glenwood Springs water
system.
• Ivan Franco of the DWR notes that "In any scenario that includes a water
well or surface diversion, the applicant should note that the stream system is
over -appropriated, that as any potential water right is subject to curtailment,
and is therefore not adequate for year-round use without an augmentation
plan. Also, the applicant will be required to make an application with this
office for a new non-exempt commercial well permit, should a well be
included in the final water supply plan."
7. Garfield County Sheriffs Office: (See Exhibit 15)
• Jim Sears of the Garfield County Sheriff's Office has indicated that he does
not have any comments or concerns about the proposed development.
8. CDPHE — Air Pollution Control Division (APCD): (See Exhibit 16)
• The development may be required to obtain a permit from the APCD.
9. Garfield County Emergency Management:
• The Garfield County Emergency Management Office has indicated that there
are not any comments or concerns about the proposed development.
8
10. City of Glenwood Springs: (See Exhibit 20)
• City circulated the application among Staff and reviewed the Garfield County
proposal with the City Council.
• The City Council met on August 21, 2014 and voted to recommend that the
BOCC deny the application. Council based this vote on the following findings
as quoted from the comment letter dated August 26, 2014:
i. There are currently significant shortcomings in the South Glenwood
transportation infrastructure. This project will impact Airport Road
(largely unpaved), Midland Avenue from 4 Mile Road to 27th Street
intersections at S Grand and S. Glen and no immediate opportunities
to construct the South Bridge for emergency egress from S.
Glenwood and Four Mile areas. Any County approval should obligate
the developer to make contributions to the upgrading of Airport Road
and other system deficiencies.
ii. Public safety concerns with increased truck traffic and with lack of
pedestrian facilities, increased noise, etc.
iii. Truck traffic has a greater deleterious effect on road pavement and
structure than do passenger cars.
iv. Concerns with impacts on the airport including safety concerns with
truck traffic at the runway's south end and building encroachments
into the transitional surface parallel to the runway.
v. Lack of sufficient water and sewer service without connections to the
City's systems.
vi. Need for land dedication to accommodate west touchdown for the
South Bridge.
vii. Need for protections on the hillside above the river and below the
developed portion of the site.
viii. Need for protection of riparian areas along the riverbank.
ix. No design standards for building or site development.
• Recommendation to add signs with flashing red lights and additional signage
that states, "Yield to landing and departing aircraft" at the location where
Airport Center Road crosses in front of the runway.
11. Other agencies that did not submit comments include: the Colorado Department of
Public Health and Environment (Water Quality Control Division and Air Pollution
Control Division).
9
IV. STAFF COMMENTS AND ANALYSIS
In accordance with the Land Use and Development Code, the Applicant has provided
detailed responses to the Submittal Requirements and applicable sections of Article 7,
Divisions 1, 2, and 3, including Section 7-1001 Industrial Use Standards. The
Application materials include an Impact Analysis and related consultant reports,
technical studies, and plans.
7-101: Zone District Regulations
The proposed use demonstrates general conformance with applicable Zone District
provisions contained in the Land Use and Development Code and in particular Article 3
standards for the Commercial General zone district.
7-102 Comprehensive Plan and Intergovernmental Agreement
Garfield County has an Intergovernmental Agreement (IGA) for Development Review
with the City of Glenwood Springs as signed on May 7th, 2001 (Reception number
580572). This IGA designates this development as a "Major Development Application"
as it is would create a commercial building over 20,000 sq. ft. The subject parcel is
directly adjacent to City parcels and is eligible for annexation. The Applicant had
previously petitioned the City of Glenwood Springs for annexation, but decided to
develop in the County instead. Consistent with the IGA, County staff has referred this
application to the City to receive comments that have been incorporated within this
report.
The Comprehensive Plan 2030 designates the site as Urban Growth Area as it is within
the City of Glenwood Springs Urban Growth Boundary. Excerpts from the Land Use
Description Section Chapter 2 and Chapter 3 - Section 1, Urban Growth Areas and
Intergovernmental Coordination, as well as the City of Glenwood Springs
Comprehensive Plan of 2011 are provided below.
Garfield County Comprehensive Plan of 2030
Chapter 2 — Growth in Urban Growth Areas
The Plan recognizes the need for existing municipalities to be able to gradually
expand into immediately surrounding areas. The county supports and
encourages orderly expansion of existing communities. This Plan recognizes
existing municipal plans and strongly supports and encourages infill and
redevelopment of existing communities. These growth areas are the preferred
locations in Garfield County for growth that require urban level services. They
are also the preferred locations for commercial and employment uses that can
take advantage of supporting infrastructure and a close by client base that
reduces travel demands. The most effective way to encourage growth in
10
designated and planned UGAs will be by ensuring the following:
1. Each municipality's plan for its UGA is incorporated into the Garfield County
Comprehensive Plan.
ii. Urban developments in the UGAs are encouraged to annex into the
respective municipality.
If there is a public benefit to allowing development within a UGA prior to
annexation, the County and municipality will cooperatively endeavor to
facilitate such development through such means as:
1. County zoning in the UGAs adjusted to a close approximation of
the municipality's plans.
2. Development in the UGA is required to obtain a local review with
comment (not approval) before submitting for county review.
3. A procedure for municipal/county review and recommendation to
the Board of County Commissioners will be developed in an IGA with
each community.
4. Each community is expected to extend services and
infrastructure to development in the UGA that substantially complies
with their plan for the UGA (landowners and the respective municipality
are strongly encouraged to enter into pre -annexation agreements that
provide commitments with respect to extensions of services and
infrastructure, densities, etc.).
Section 1 - Urban Growth Areas and Intergovernmental Coordination
Garfield County has worked with municipalities to direct development to
UGAs where public services and infrastructure are provided in an efficient
and cost-effective manner. Intergovernmental cooperation between
municipalities and other public agencies has demonstrated successful
collaboration and has resulted in the creation of new partnerships and
collaborative efforts on behalf of the residents of the county.
Poiicies:
1. Within defined UGAs, the County Comprehensive Plan, land use code
revisions, and individual projects, will be consistent with local municipal
land use plans and policies.
2. Projects proposed adjacent to local municipalities requiring urban
services will be encouraged to annex into the affected jurisdiction if
contiguity exists.
3. Development in an UGA will have land use and street patterns that are
compatible with the affected municipality.
11
4. Within a locally planned UGA, development applicants will be required
to obtain project review comments from the local community prior to
submitting for county review. The process should be defined in an
executed IGA.
City of Glenwood Springs Comprehensive Plan of 2011
Urban Growth Boundary (UGB)
The Urban Growth Boundary represents an area that can support urban -level
development. Urban development is characterized by densities typical of
urbanized areas and by the types of services required to support that
development such as water, wastewater, roads, police and emergency services,
and other similar services. It also represents an area of future annexation.
Although this area lies outside of the city and is subject to Garfield County land
use requirements, according to the Garfield County Comprehensive Plan,
development and land use within the Urban Growth Boundary should be
consistent with the future land use objectives of the municipality. Both the
Garfield County and Glenwood Springs Comprehensive Plans recommend
entering into Intergovernmental Agreements to assure mutually acceptable land
use and development within the Urban Growth Boundary and to determine a
process by which land use proposals will be evaluated by both jurisdictions.
The Urban Growth Boundary has been determined using the following criteria:
• Ability of the City to provide adequate infrastructure, particularly water service,
to new development without placing undue burdens on the City' s ability to
meet current municipal demands while maintaining adequate levels of service.
• Areas where there would be a public benefit for the City to manage growth,
giving consideration to visual impacts, economic impacts and benefits, open
space and environmental benefits, and impacts on schools and other public
facilities.
• Areas which, if annexed to the City, would simplify the city limits and provide
unity of services.
• Location of existing topographical features which serve as opportunities or
constraints to development.
Low Density Residential
Low Density Residential is a designation for land that is outside of the city limits
but within the urban growth area. This designation consists of single-family
residential development that is intended to maintain a rural character.
Appropriate development densities will be determined bv, among other things,
12
current land uses, topographic constraints, existing and future utility
connections, and existing road networks.
Riverside Protection
Land and habitat along the Colorado and Roaring Fork rivers should be
protected. These areas are indicated with a blue cross hatch on the Future Land
Use Map (Maps 2.1, 2.2, 2.3).
Hillside Preservation
Glenwood Springs is defined by prominent ridge lines, steep slopes, varied
unstable geologic conditions, rock outcroppings, and extensive vegetation.
Development of hillside areas requires special care. Hillside preservation areas,
those with slopes in excess of twenty percent, are indicated on the Future Land
Use Map with a green cross -hatch. Development is discouraged in these areas
unless it is at very low densities, in limited areas and done with little impact
(physically and visually) to the hillsides.
Land Uses Outside City Limits but within the Urban Growth Area
Future land use designations have been applied to properties within the Urban
Growth Area. It is intended that these properties within the Urban Growth
Boundary be annexed into the city at some point in the future. Among other
things, these future land use designations take into account current uses,
topographic constraints, existing/future utility connections, existing road
networks, and land uses on adjacent properties.
Values and Vision for Economic Development
Despite a decent level of diversification in the Glenwood economy, the region
surrounding the city is greatly influenced by the mining, oil and gas, and
construction -related industries. The influence that these industries have on the
region makes Glenwood Springs susceptible to the associated boom and bust
economic cycles that are typical of western Colorado. Therefore, the City must
work to further diversify its economy in order to minimize the impacts of boom
and bust cycles. While taking steps to continue diversifying the economy, the
City should focus efforts on attracting high -paying jobs to help offset the
abundance of low-paying jobs associated with the robust tourism and service
industry.
13
Community Goals Supported by Economic Development
• Maintain Glenwood's role as a regional center
Policies to Enhance Economic Development
• The City should encourage the development of a well-trained workforce.
• The City should continue to make improvements that enhance the
communitys quality of life and that make Glenwood Springs a place that is
attractive for new businesses and their employees.
• The City should actively pursue businesses and industries whose operations
and products are compatible with the Glenwood Springs vision.
Strategies and Actions to Promote Economic Development
Attract Diverse Businesses and Industries - The City should diversify the
economy in at least three major ways: creating a community where
employers/employees want to live, creating opportunity for new and expanding
local businesses, and actively seeking targeted businesses.
Ensure an Attractive Community - Good jobs are provided by good employers.
Good employers will locate in communities where they and their employees will
want to and can afford to live.
Allocate Adequate Land - Adequate land for new industries and businesses is
limited within city limits. However, what is available will need to be zoned to
allow a business easy development. The City should consider revising the
zoning code to allow for more flexibility of uses for a structure or site in order to
better respond to the industrial and commercial real estate market.
An adequate supply of attractive and accessible office space for professionals is
also important. The City should consider adaptive reuse of structures and land
availability prior to contacting targeted businesses. For new office and retail
opportunities, the City should help facilitate redevelopment of existing retail
buildings in order to meet evolving retail markets and community needs. To
better understand the types of commercial office space needed in the
community, the City should conduct an analysis on the amount of space
currently existing.
Options immediately adjacent to the city limits and within the Urban Growth
Boundary should also be examined for the ability to accommodate business and
industry. An example site is the parcel north of the Glenwood Springs Mall in
West Glenwood where the City could assist in preparing it to become a mixed -
14
use office area or business park. The City should also consider partnering with
governments or organizations to plan and possibly develop an industrial park in
the immediate area.
In accordance with the Garfield County Comprehensive Plan Policies, "Within defined
UGAs, the County Comprehensive Plan, land use code revisions, and individual
projects, will be consistent with local municipal land use plans and policies." To this
end, the Garfield County Comprehensive Plan defers to the land use goals and policies
of the local municipalities for land within the UGA.
The City of Glenwood Springs Comprehensive Plan identifies the subject property as
Low Density Residential along with certain protection areas on the subject property,
including Hillside Preservation and Riverside Protection (See excerpts above). It is
Staffs opinion that provided the City's policies on economic development as well as
the language within the Low Density Residential designation that states that
"Appropriate development densities will be determined by, among other things, current
land uses, topographic constraints, existing and future utility connections, and existing
road networks," the application is in general conformance with the Garfield County
Comprehensive Plan 2030.
7-103 Compatibility
The Applicant has also provided information describing the character of the area and
adjacent land uses. The request demonstrates general compatibility with adjoining
uses that are primarily light industrial, airport, residential and agricultural as well as
many of the City's stated policies, strategies and actions in regard to promoting
economic development.
The property potentially falls within the avigation easement for the City of Glenwood
Springs airport. This easement is further defined within the City's Airport Layout Plan.
This Plan identifies a 7:1 transitional surface within which encroachment is limited. The
Applicant did not provide evidence as to whether or not the building would fall within
the defined transitional surface. In addition, through conversations with City staff, it is
understood that rough calculations show the building could be within this easement
area. As a result, Staff suggests a condition of approval requiring the Applicant to
determine whether the building falls within this transitional surface as defined in the
City's Airport Layout Plan. This analysis should be conducted by a certified land
surveyor and results should be reviewed by City staff who are familiar with the Plan.
Should the analysis require a change in the building or site layout, any modified plans
would need to be further reviewed by County Planning staff and referred back out to
any effected agencies for additional comment.
15
Surrounding Land Use and Aerial Map
16
Glenwood Springs Comprehensive Plan
17
7-104 & 105: Source of Water & Waste Water Systems
The Applicant is proposing to serve the Warehouse and Distribution Center with a 3/"
water line from the City of Glenwood Springs. The Applicant has provided a letter from
the City of Glenwood Springs Public Works Director indicating the ability and
willingness to serve the development via a 3/4" line. This service from the City began in
1957 and is currently serving a single family home. The property would need to annex
into the City to obtain increased municipal water service. A letter from the Applicant's
engineer, Michael Erion, PE, states that "Conservatively assuming the existing tap can
deliver 5 gallons per minute (gpm) of flow to the proposed building, the existing service
line is adequate to provide for the potable "in-house" uses for the employees, irrigation
and fire protection for the proposed project with use of on-site storage." Mr. Erion goes
on to explain that "The fire protection supply for the building sprinkler system and the
firefighting water would be provided with on-site storage. Approximately 200,000
gallons would be required including roughly 20,000 gallons (estimated -actual will be
based on building materials and size of building) for building sprinklers and 180,000
gallons (1,500 gpm for 2 hours) for firefighting. The 200,000 gallons could be filled by
the 3/" service line in 28 days prior to the date the fire protection system must be
operational." The Applicant has proposed to place the 200,000 gallon water storage
tank in the northeast corner of the property along the Roaring Fork River.
The Applicant originally proposed potentially serving the facility with either an exempt
commercial well or a surface diversion from the Roaring Fork River. Staff has reviewed
the application with the understanding that the 3/4" City water line is the proposed
alternative. Comments from the DWR has indicated that either a well or surface
diversion will require an augmentation plan as both sources are over appropriated. To
this end, the Applicant has provided an augmentation plan as well as an invoice from
the West Divide Water Conservancy District (Exhibit 17) but this will not be needed
based on the Applicants representation that the facility will be served by a 3/" City
water line.
Wastewater is to be provided by a new Onsite Wastewater Treatment System (OWTS).
The Applicant has identified a location south of the parking area for the OWTS and has
provided percolation tests for that location. These tests show that an OWTS can be
successfully installed and operated at this location.
7-106: Public Utilities
The Applicant has demonstrated that adequate public utilities will be available to serve
the proposed use.
18
7-107: Access & Roadways
Access to the property is from City owned and maintained streets via Airport Center
Road, Airport Road and Midland Ave. The submitted traffic study anticipates all traffic
using Airport Center Road, Airport Road and Midland Ave. The facility is not to be open
to the public, so the traffic generation projections are limited to employees, delivery
vans and tandem tractor trailers. The delivery vans are expected to be 30 ft. long while
the tandem tractor trailers are expected to be approximately 70 ft. long. 82 passenger
vehicles, 29 30 ft. vans and 4 70 ft. tandem tractor trailers are expected to access the
site each day at full operation. Total ADT to the site at full operation is expected to be
230 (115 vehicles). Of this 230 ADT, approximately 91 are expected to occur between
7 and 8 AM (47 trips) and 5 and 6 PM (44 trips). This amounts to a 151.32% increase
in ADT on Airport Center Road (152 ADT to 382 ADT) and a 2.85% increase on
Midland Ave between Sopris Dr. and 27th St. (8065 ADT to 8295 ADT) based on first
year operations compared to projected background traffic (current traffic plus 2%
annual increase). The traffic impact analysis concludes that "baCed on the analysis
contained within this report, all studied intersections and roadways are anticipated to
operate at an acceptable LOS with the addition of the project traffic." The studied
intersections included (and indicated on the map below) 27th St/Grand Ave,
Midland/27th St, Midland/Sopris Dr, Midland/4 Mile Rd, and Airport Center Road/Project
Driveway. No additional road improvements are suggested as a result of the traffic
impact analysis and the only traffic control device recommended is a stop sign at the
exit to the proposed facility. This application has been reviewed by Garfield County
Road and Bridge (see exhibits 11 and 12) indicating that the traffic generated by the
proposed project would primarily impact City maintained streets.
The application was also reviewed by the Garfield County consulting engineer, Chris
Hale, who noted that the Traffic Impact Analysis did not consider the 27th Street /
Highway 82 interchange. Staff suggests a condition of approval requiring the Applicant
to address this intersection and/or explain why this intersection was not evaluated (see
access and intersection study map below).
19
Studied Access Routes to the Proposed Site
Studied Intersection
The application was also reviewed to the City of Glenwood Springs staff and City
Council. The referral letter from the City recommends that the BOCC deny the
application mostly due to inadequate road infrastructure (see photos below) and public
safety concerns from overall truck and passenger vehicle traffic as a result of vehicle -
pedestrian and vehicle -aircraft conflicts. In addition, the City has indicated that a land
dedication is necessary in order to accommodate the South Bridge. Although the
application reviews overall traffic flow in terms of Level of Service (LOS) at select
intersections, the application as submitted does not address the City's concerns. In
conversations with the City Engineer, Terri Partch and City Community Development
Director, Andrew McGregor, Staff understands that the City would like to see
improvements made to 2253 linear feet of Airport Road from the southern edge of
Cardiff Glenn to the turnoff for Airport Center Road. The cost of improving this section
of roadway is estimated at $585,000 not including grading or retaining walls. The
proposed street cross section is below:
20
Airport Road Roadway Section
55'0
2'h"
rr"Curb &
r Gutter
WO"
2.6"
Curb &
Gutter
11'0" ( 5'0".
Sidewalk
Bike Lone
Landscape
Area
Travel Lane
Travel Lone
Sidewalk
Bike lane
e�x
- lcrid sccpe
Area
To this end, Staff recommends a condition of approval requiring the Applicant to come
to an agreement with the City for specific improvements to be made to Airport Road
and Airport Center Road to address their adequacy and safety concerns or contribute
$585,000 to the City to do the improvements. A development plan and agreement
would need to be in place before issuance of the Land Use Change Permit.
In addition, the City would like to obtain a land dedication from the developer in order to
accommodate the landing of the South Bridge. With the provided site plan, it appears
that the southernmost portion of the property will remain unused and is generally too
steep for other development (see the south bridge concept plan below). Staff suggests
a condition of approval requiring the applicant to develop a plan with the City to
determine a specific amount of land dedication for the South Bridge landing. If so
desired by the City, this dedication plan and agreement would need to be in place
before issuance of the Land Use Change Permit.
21
South Bridge Concept Plan
Meyers
Boiler
'{4
Subject
Parcel
Location
Holy Cross
Electric
Pitikin
Glenwood
•Aviation
22
Airport Road at End of Cardiff Glenn
Airport Road
23
Airport Road and Airport Center Road Intersection
Airport Center Road at End of Runway
24
Airport Center Road in Front of Proposed FedEx Facility
7108: Natural Hazards
The Application provides information on natural hazards including information on soils,
geology, and slopes associated with the site as identified through Garfield County GIS.
The site is within an identified Septic System Constraints due to a high water table
along the Roaring Fork River. The proposed development and OWTS are to be located
outside this constraint area, however. The information supports a determination that
the proposed use is not subject to significant natural hazard risks. All proposed
development is to occur more than 35 feet from the ordinary high water mark of the
Roaring Fork River as well as outside the designated floodplain.
7-109: Fire Protection
The Applicant is proposing to install a 200,000 gallon water storage tank for firefighting
a e a uvu ei proposing a
and fire sprinklers. It is anticipated that with the 3/4" water line from the City, it will take
28 days to fill the 200,000 gallon tank. Once this tank is filled and the fire protection
systems are operational, all daily water needs and irrigation are to be provided by the
3/4" line.
The Application was referred to the Glenwood Springs and Rural Protection District.
The comments received from Ron Biggers, Deputy Fire Marshal for the Glenwood
Springs Fire Department, indicated several concerns. Most notable of the concerns
was access and water supply. Mr. Biggers noted that should the facility be gated, the
Applicant will need to obtain a Knox key switch from the Fire Department; and, should
25
a connection to City water not be made, the Department asks for further review (staff
has reviewed this application assuming connection to City water based on the supplied
can and will serve letter from the City Public Works Department). In addition, the
Department requested review for the sighting of the fire hydrant(s). Provided the low
flows and the estimated 28 days it will take to fill the 200,000 gallon water storage tank
from the 3/4" City water line, Staff suggests a condition of approval that the whole fire
protection system be reviewed and accepted by the Fire Department prior to issuance
of the Land Use Change Permit.
The Application was also referred to the Garfield County contract engineer, Chris Hale
of Mountain Cross Engineering. Mr. Hale noted that no details were included for the
water service or fire protection equipment including the fire pump or storage tank. Staff
suggests a condition of approval that engineered details for the water supply and fire
protection equipment be reviewed and accepted by the Garfield County contract
engineer prior to issuance of the Land Use Change Permit.
7-201: Agricultural Lands
The site is currently not used for agriculture and no impacts on nearby agricultural
activities are expected.
7-202: Wildlife Habitat Areas
The Applicant has provided a wildlife habitat study completed by Colorado Wildlife
Science, LLC (dated July 18, 2014). The study concludes that "As with most
development in western Colorado, the implementation of the proposed project will have
some direct and indirect effects on wildlife and wildlife habitat. The property, however,
is embedded in a highly developed landscape, It is adjacent to an airport and
surrounding properties are occupied with dense residential and commercial
development. Although the proposal will result in the direct loss of vegetation and
habitat, given the surroundings and indirect impacts of the existing development, this
loss will be negligible." A review of the application by Perry Will of CPW (Exhibit 10)
agrees, stating that "CPW staff does not anticipate any adverse impacts to wildlife as a
result of this project..." The letter does go on to make the following suggestion: "Given
the number of bear related incidents that have occurred in the area of the proposed
project, the proponent must utilize bear -proof garbage containers for all trash
generated at this facility. Garbage must be 100% secured in these certified bear -proof
containers to eliminate any attractants for bears or other wildlife species." Staff suggest
a condition of approval requiring certified bear -proof refuse containers.
No other threatened, endangered, proposed, candidate or other sensitive species were
noted to occur in the project area. However, several noxious weeds were found on the
site. A recommendation from Steve Anthony of the Garfield County Vegetation
Management Office suggests that the identified Dalmation Toadflax and any Difuse
Knapweed, which is common in the area, be treated with confirmation of treatment
26
provided to the Vegetation Manager by October 31, 2014. Staff suggests a Condition of
Approval that requires satisfactory confirmation that the identified noxious weeds be
treated prior to October 31, 2014.
7-203: Protection of Water Bodies
The site location is adjacent to the Roaring Fork River. In addition, the City
Comprehensive Plan identifies this stretch along the River for Riverfront Protection as
well as Hillside Preservation. The steep slope going down to the river is proposed to
remain in its natural state with this development. All development is also to occur more
than 35 feet back from the River. In order to ensure protection of the Hillside, staff
suggests a condition of approval requiring all disturbance and development to occur as
indicated on the submitted site plan in order to limit disturbance to the hillside. In
addition, conversations with City staff indicate that their preferred method for Riverfront
Preservation is to dedicate a fisherman's easement. The purpose of this easement is to
allow fisherman to wade and anchor along the property lines. This easement would
extend 5 feet up from the high water mark and extend to the center of the River or to
the farthest extent of the property line, whichever is greater. Staff suggests a condition
of approval that the Applicant designate a fisherman's easement meeting this criteria
along the banks of the Roaring Fork River.
7-204: Drainage and Erosion (Stormwater)
The Applicant has provided a copy of the Storm Water Management Plan (SWMP) and
Drainage Report for the facility. The Garfield County contract engineer has reviewed
these documents and has provided several comments concerning a lack of compliance
with Section 7-204.C.3.a and a need to demonstrate compliance with 7-204.C.3.d.
Specifically, the Applicant has proposed to not provide detention for storm water peak
attenuation (that post -development discharge rates do not exceed pre -development
discharge rates) and has not demonstrated that the bio -retention ponds meet the
requirements in the LUDC. Staff recommends a condition of approval that the Applicant
modify the site plan, SWMP and Drainage Report to demonstrate compliance with
Sections 7-204.C.3.a and Section 7-204.C.3.d. As an alternative, for Section 7-
204.C.3.a the Applicant may demonstrate compliance with Section 4-118 to request a
waiver from this specific standard. These amended plans and reports or request for
waiver will need to be provided to the Garfield County contract engineer for review and
acceptance prior to issuance of the Land Use Change Permit. In addition, Mr. Hale
noted that the SWMP does not provide evidence that the site is covered under the
CDPHE permit. Staff suggests a condition of approval requiring the Applicant to submit
a coverage letter to Garfield County once it is obtained.
7-205: Environmental Quality
No hazardous materials are anticipated to be stored onsite. In addition, no air pollution
aside from vehicles is expected. The application was referred to CDPHE Air Pollution
27
Control Division (APCD) and Water Quality Control Division (WQCD) for their review.
The APCD indicated that a permit may be necessary, but it is unlikely because there
are no additional air emissions outside of vehicles and Glenwood Springs is not in Non -
Attainment. No comments have been received from WQCD.
7-206: Wildfire Hazards
Map 7, Wildfire Susceptibility, of the Garfield County Community Wildfire Protection
Plan (CWPP) does not rate this property. However, the 30 meter wildfire hazard GIS
mapping shows the property as "low". In addition, the CWPP Wildfire Intensity GIS map
show the property as "Low" to "Moderate". As a result, it is Staff's opinion that the
wildfire risk on this property is within manageable levels.
7-207: Natural and Geologic Hazards
See Section 7-108, above.
7-208: Reclamation
The Applicant has included a landscaping plan that addresses re -vegetation and
reclamation. This plan was reviewed by the Garfield County Vegetation Manager,
Steve Anthony. Mr. Anthony states that the noxious weed inventory, seed mix and
landscaping materials are acceptable. The treatment of identified noxious weeds prior
to construction is recommended as is a revegetation security (bond) in the amount of
$3750.
7-301 & 302: Compatible Design, Parking, and Loading
The 26,795 square foot building (2,656 square feet of office and 24,140 square feet of
warehouse) is proposed to be a standard warehouse / industrial style metal building.
Provided the generally industrial surrounding property uses, this kind of architecture
appears to be appropriate for this location. Access to the site is entirely vehicular with
no proposed sidewalks or non -vehicular infrastructure along with basic landscaping
proposed as a measure of reclamation and revegetation. The 70 proposed parking
spaces far exceeds the County requirement of 23 spaces for the square footage of
proposed office and warehouse space. The Applicant is proposing five loading spaces
for tractor trailers while Section 7-302(B) requires the warehouse facility to have two. In
addition, vehicular circulation appears to meet the requirements in the LUDC.
Staff understands that the Applicant would like to have 70 parking spaces, far in
excess of the 23 spaces required, because the additional spaces are necessary for
vehicular and truck storage. In addition, although the facility only has 14.5 FTE
employees, many of the shifts overlap. As a result, it is anticipated that roughly twice
as many spaces are needed as there will be employees.
28
7-303: Landscaping
As an industrial use, landscaping submittals and standards are not applicable to the
proposal.
7-304: Lighting
The application proposes cutoff lighting with minimal light protrusion outside the
development area. It appears that the proposed lighting meets the County's lighting
standards.
7-305 Snow Storage
Adequate portions of the site plan including areas adjacent to the proposed parking
area are available for snow storage.
7-306 Trails
The Applicant has not proposed any sidewalks, trails or other multi -modal connections
to the site.
7-1001 INDUSTRIAL USE STANDARDS
The Applicant represents that the facility will comply with all the Industrial Use
Standards contained in Section 7-1001. The following summary addresses the
applicable provisions.
A. Residential Subdivisions
The facility is located on a tract of property adjacent to the Glenwood Springs airport
within Garfield County and is not within a platted subdivision.
B. Setbacks
The LUDC requires a setback of 100 feet from a proposed industrial use to the
property line of a property used residentially_ The proposed industrial facility is
approximately 550 feet from the nearest residentially used property line and appears to
be able to meet the 100 foot setback as prescribed in the LUDC. Although the
proposed use will be setback only 50 feet from the north property line, the adjacent
property to the north (owned by the United States Forest Service) is used for storage
and is also industrial in nature.
C. Concealing and Screening
All activities aside from parking are to take place within the proposed warehouse and
office building. As this property is not zoned Industrial, all storage, fabrication, service
and repair operations "shall be conducted within an enclosed building or have
29
adequate provisions, based on location and topography, to conceal and screen the
facility and/or operations from adjacent property(s)" (Section 7-1001(C)).
D. Storing
The materials to be at the site will be concealed within a building and will not be
transferred off the property by any foreseeable natural causes. No hazardous materials
are anticipated to be on the site, however, all industrial products and wastes must be
stored in accordance with all applicable state and federal regulations.
E. Industrial Wastes
No hazardous wastes will be stored in the facility.
F. Noise
This facility is not anticipated to generate any noise outside that generated by vehicular
and truck traffic. The Applicant has represented that "This site will not generate vapor,
dust, smoke, noise, glare or vibrations at any significant levels nr at nuisance levels
beyond the property boundary. There will be sound generated by truck and vehicular
traffic to the site, but that will not exceed normal ambient levels."
G. Ground Vibration
No ground vibrations are expected from the site.
H. Hours of Operation
The facility will operate in excess of those outlined in the LUDO (7AM to 7PM Monday
through Saturday). The Applicant would like to operate the facility 24 hours per day, 6
days per week. The decision-making body has the ability to alter the permitted hours of
operation for the facility.
I. Interference, Nuisance, or Hazard
No other nuisance or ground vibration hazards are anticipated based on type of use.
V. SUPPLEMENTAL AND ADDITIONAL STAFF ANALYSIS
See Exhibit 17, Invoice from the West Divide Water Conservancy District.
No other supplemental materials were submitted after the application was determined
Technically Complete.
V. STAFF RECOMMENDATION
Staff understands that the City, who owns and maintains all roadways accessing this
development, considers Airport Road and Airport Center Road to be inadequate to
support the proposed use. In addition, referral comments from the City and
conversations with City staff indicate that the Applicant and the City have not agreed
30
on a plan to improve the roadways to support the proposed use. Considering that an
agreement has not been developed between the two parties and a strong letter from
the City Council has been submitted recommending that the BOCC deny the
application, the BOCC generally has three options: deny the application, continue the
application to allow the Applicant and City time to come to an agreement, or approve
the request with conditions addressing these issues. These options are outlined below.
1. DENIAL
SUGGESTED FINDINGS
1. That proper public notice was provided as required for the hearing before the
Board of County Commissioners.
2. The hearing before the Board of County Commissioners extensive and
e 11 a e1�J aleve 10..1 J was l.i/l60,1 IJ� tl V
complete, that all pertinent facts, matters and issues were submitted and that
all interested parties were heard at that meeting.
3. That for the above stated and other reasons the proposed Land Use Change
Permit for CLH Properties, LLC (Riverside FedEx Facility) is NOT in the best
interest of the health, safety, convenience, order, prosperity and welfare of
the citizens of Garfield County.
4. That the application is in general conformance with the 2030 Comprehensive
Plan, as amended.
5. That the application has NOT adequately met Section 7-107, Access and
Roadways, of the Garfield County Land Use and Development Code, as
amended.
2. CONTINUANCE
At the discretion of the BOCC, this application can be continued to a date certain. This
continuation would be to allow the Applicant time to meet with the City in order to come
to an agreement on road improvements necessary to meet the needs of the proposed
development.
3. APPROVAL WITH CONDITIONS
SUGGESTED FINDINGS
1. That proper public notice was provided as required for the hearing before the Board
31
of County Commissioners.
2. 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 meeting.
3. That for the above stated and other reasons the proposed Land Use Change Permit
for CLH Properties, LLC (Riverside FedEx Facility) is in the best interest of the
health, safety, convenience, order, prosperity and welfare of the citizens of Garfield
County.
4. That with the adoption of conditions, the application is in general conformance with
the 2030 Comprehensive Plan, as amended.
5. That with the adoption of the Conditions of Approval the application has adequately
met the requirements of the Garfield County Land Use and Development Code, as
amended.
RECOMMENDED CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL
The following recommended conditions of approval are provided for the Board of
kt?:5
County Commissioners consideration.
1. That all representations made by the Applicant in the application shall be
conditions of approval, unless specifically altered by the Board of County
Commissioners.
2. That the operation of the CLH Properties, LLC Warehouse and Distribution Center
(Riverside FedEx Facility) shall be done in accordance with all applicable Federal,
State, and local regulations governing the operation of this type of facility.
3. The Applicant shall control fugitive dust during the construction and operation of
the site.
4. The facility shall maintain compliance with Section 7-306 Lighting, with all lighting
to be directed inward and doward toward the interior of the site.
5. Facilities and storage tanks shall be painted a non -glare neutral color to lessen
any visual impacts.
The -Applicant shall control all noxious weeds during construction and operation of
t
e site.
UOperation of the site as proposed is permitted 24 hours per day, Mondarthroug
Settif
8. A minimum of a 200,000 gallon water storage tank shall be provided onsite and as
demonstrated in the proposed site plans for use in firefighting and operating the
fire sprinklers. Should demand for fire protection water exceed a total of 200,000
gallons, the tank shall be enlarged to meet the requirements as recommended or
necessitated by the International Building Code, the International Fire Code, the
fire protection district, the Garfield County Building Department or the project
engineer. This tank shall be painted a non -reflective neutral earth tone color.
9. The proposed Onsite Wastewater Treatment System (OWTS) shall obtain all
necessary County permits.
10. As a result of high bear activity in the area, all outdoor refuse containers must be
certified bear -proof.
11. The SWMP does not provide evidence that the site is covered under the CDPHE
permit. The Applicant shall submit a coverage letter to Garfield County once it is
obtained.
12. With exception to the control of noxious weeds, no development or disturbance of
the hillside along the Roaring Fork River shall occur unless identified in the
approved site plan.
Conditions Prior to Issuance of Permit
13. All Dalmation Toadflax shall be treated on the site. In addition, as Diffuse
Knapweed is common in the area, any occurrences of Diffuse Knapweed should
be treated as well. These noxious weeds shall be treated prior to construction with
satisfactory confirmation of the treatment submitted to the Garfield County
Vegetation Manager by October 31, 2014. This treatment and confirmation shall
be completed prior to issuance of the Land Use Change Permit.
14. Conflicting information was provided regarding fertilization in the hydroseed. The
Applicant shall clarify this issue to the satisfaction of the Garfield County
Vegetation Manager prior to issuance of the Land Use Change Permit.
15. The Applicant has indicated that the total area to be landscaped is 68,309 square
feet, or 1.56 acres. As a result, a revegetation security of $3750 (1.5 acres x
$2500 per acre) shall be provided prior to issuance of the Land Use Change
Permit. This security shall be held by Garfield County until vegetation has been
successfully reestablished according to the Reclamation Standards section in the
Garfield County Weed Management Plan. The Reclamation Standards are cited in
Sections 4.06, 4.07 and 4.08 of the Garfield County Weed Management Plan
(Resolution #2002-94).
33
°.s rinkler systems, Knox key and access shall be finalized with the Fire
he fire protection systems design including fire hydrants, water storage tank,
•
r`�D-•artment. The Applicant shall provide the Planning Department with the final
\ ;ode igns as agreed to by the Fire Protection District prior to issuance of the Eand
(/_ • - . - - The site plans shall be updated with any changes made to
t fire protection system.
17. Engineered details of the water supply infrastructure, equipment and fire
protection systems shall be reviewed and accepted by the Garfield County
contract engineer prior to issuance of the Land Use Change Permit. If necessary,
the site plans shall be updated with any changes made to the water supply
infrastructure, equipment or fire protection system. )
(�-L•rSc c, C! �. '�'`y`` 1'-X445
1e Thi Applicant shall mo• fy the site plans, SWMP and Drainage Report to
demotrate compliance with Sections 7-204.C.3.a (post -development peak
discharge, rate does not exceed pre -development peak discharge rate) and
Section 7404.C.3.d (bio -retention ponds conform to standards) of the LUDC.
Should the\Applicant wish to obtain a waiver from Sections 7-204.C.3.a,
compliance w h Section 4-118 is required. These amended plans and reports or
request for wa shall be provided to the Garfield County contract engineer for
review and acc - ptance prior to issuance of the Land Use Chang Permits
0 'LS be &i %r, J/ <v.PMecJ Lf /)0 ,to o�,� i-o"k
19. The raffic I pact Analysis did not consider the 27th Street / ' ighway 82
interchan. -. Prior to issuance of the Land Use Change Permit, the Applicant shall
address this intersection and/or explain why this intersection was not evaluated.
This evaluation shall be reviewed and accepted by the Garfield County consulting
engineer prior to issuance of the Land Use Change Permit.
- ) i7 -7/ -�o� ^ 1�f—`�-'^e-
The Applicant shall either contribute $5:5,000 to the City for road improvements
or come to an agreement with the City for specific improvements to be made to
Airport Road and Airport Center Road to address the stated dedication, adequacy
and safety concerns. A development plan and agreement shall be in place before
issuance of the Land Use Change Permit.
cl c�t'(( /)C,%,)ti / 1-`2
The Applicant shall develop a plan with the City to determine a specific amount of
land dedication for the South Bridge landing, if any. This dedication plan and
agreement shall be in place before issuance of the Land Use Change Permit.
Should the City determine that a dedication is not necessary, a letter from the City
stating such shall be provided to the County.
22. The Applicant shall demonstrate whether the proposed building encroaches on
the 7:1 transitional surface as described in the City's Airport Layout Plan. This
analysis shall be conducted by a licensed surveyor. The results of this survey
shall be reviewed by City staff. Should it be found that the building encroaches
into the 7:1 transitional surface, the Applicant shall submit amended plans to the
34
Garfield County Planning Department for additional review and referral to effected
agencies prior to issuance of the Land Use Change Permit.
23.: The Applicant shall establish a fisherman's easement along the Roaring Fork
River to allow fisherman to wade and anchor along the property line. This
easement shall be five feet above high water mark to the center of the river or the
furthest extent towards the centerline, whichever is greater. This easement
language and revised site plans shall be reviewed and accepted by the Garfield
County Community Development Department prior issuance of the Land Use
Change Permit, Tfie a isdocurrTent strati- -r rded-w th tne Garfield
Geunty-Clerk , J✓
35
EXHIBIT
1
Garfield County
PUBLIC HEARING NOTICE INFORMATION
Please check the appropriate boxes below based upon the notice that was conducted for your public
hearing. In addition, please initial on the blank line next to the statements if they accurately reflect the
described action.
0✓ My application required written/mailed notice to adjacent property owners and mineral
owners.
Mailed notice was completed on the 5th
day of August , 2014.
All owners of record within a 200 foot radius of the subject parcel were identified as
shown in the Clerk and Recorder's office at least 15 calendar days prior to sending
notice.
All owners of mineral interest in the subject property were identified through records in
the Clerk and Recorder or Assessor, or through other means [list]
Owners were identified through the Garfield County Clerk & Recorder Records
■ Please attach proof of certified, return receipt requested mailed notice.
El My application required Published notice.
Notice was published on the 7th day of August
■ Please attach proof of publication in the Rifle Citizen Telegram.
, 2014.
IMP
application required Posting of Notice.
Notice was posted on the 5th day of August
4
, 2014.
Sim
Notice was posted so that at least one sign faced each adjacent road right of way
generally used by the public.
I testify that the above information is true and accurate.
Name: Da
Signature:
Date: August 5, 2014
Ad Name: 10439932D
Customer: Western Slope Consulting
Your account number is: 1023467
PROOF OF PUBLICATION
THE RIFLE
GHRF Cl ELEG
STATE OF COLORADO,
COUNTY OF GARFIELD
I, Michael Bennett, do solemnly swear that I am
Publisher of The Rifle Citizen Telegram, that the
same weekly newspaper printed, in whole or in part
and published in the County of Garfield, State of
Colorado, and has a general circulation therein; that
said newspaper has been published continuously
and uninterruptedly in said County of Garfield for
a period of more than fifty-two consecutive weeks
next prior to the first publication of the annexed legal
notice or advertisement; that said newspaper has been
admitted to the United States mails as a periodical
under the provisions of the Act of March 3, 1879, or
any amendments thereof, and that said newspaper is a
weekly newspaper duly qualified for publishing legal
notices and advertisements within the meaning of the
laws of the State of Colorado.
That the annexed legal notice or advertisement was
published in the regular and entire issue of every number
of said weekly newspaper for the period of 1
consecutive insertions; and that the first publication
of said notice was in the issue of said newspaper dated
8/7/2014 and that the last publication of said notice was
dated 8/7/2014 the issue of said newspaper.
In witness whereof, I have here unto set my hand this
08/07/2014.
Michael
Bennett, Publisher Publisher Subscribed and sworn
to before me, a notary public in and for the County of
Garfield, State of Colorado this 08/07/2014.
My Commission Expires 1110111015
amela J. Schultz, Notublic
My Commission expires:
November 1, 2015
1
EXHIBIT
PUBLIC NOTICE
TAKE NOTICE that CLH Properties. LLC has applied to the Board of County Commissioners, Garfield
County, Stale of Colorado, to request approval fora Limited Impact Review on a 8.7 -acre parcel located
an Airport Center Road (AKA County Road 116) in the County of Garfield, State of Colorado; to -wit
Legal Description: A tract of land described as follows (the 'Permit Parcel°):
A Parcel of land situated in the Southeast Quarter of the Northeast Quarter and in the Northeast Quarter
of the Southeast Quarter of Section 27, Township 6 South, Range 89 West of the Sixth Principal Meridian,
County of Garfield, State of Colorado. said parcel lying westerly of the centerline of the Roanng Fork Riv-
er and being more particularly described as follows:
Beginning at a point in said Centerline of the Roaring Fork River from which the East Quarter Comer al
said Section 27 bears approximately S88°20'00'E, 786.50 feel; thence upon said centerline S11'55'12'W,
163.83 feet to the Southeast Comer a1 a Parcel of land described In Book 348 at Page 87 of the Garfield
County Public Records; thence departing said cethreenterline and upon Inc boundary line of said Parcel re-
t to the east -
corded
ht of way IncIof a 300 foot airrpe 87 the lortiRu way Strip; 2) N26.1200'W, 100 8 feet upon 174.13 said easterly
right of way; 3) N01 40 00 E, 208.83 feet to the westerly line of a Parcel of Land described In Book 275 at
Page 346 of saki Public Records; thence departing said lands described In Book 3488 at Pa28.49 feet to the eastern right of way line described ge 87 and up -
aid
Book 343 at
N16' x'westerly, . 1e030.19'00'W, ) N 3; 912 W, 52 35 said 3) with alt bearingsthe
contained hereinbaseded upon,
N18°5186'W, 239.57 feet; 4) N21°05'54'W, 119.29 feet; thence departing said easterly right of way fine
N69'? 1'48'E, 470.20 feet more or less to said centeriine of the Roaring Fork River, thence upon said
centerline o1 the Roaring Fork River the following two (2) courses: 1) S09'55'31 E, 346.20 feet; 2)
S07'00'00'E, 660.40 feet to the Point of Beginning. Containing 8.70 Acres more or less.
The above-described Permit Parcel is a portion of the properly owned by the Applicant as of July 25,
2014, which is described as follows (the 'Ownership Parcel'):
A Parcel of Land Situated In the Southeast 04 Ne 14 and In the Ne A Se 14 Of Section 27, Township 6
South, Range 89 West of the 6th Principal Meridian, County of Garfield, Slate of Colorado. Said Parcel
Lying Westerly of the Center of the Roe ng Fork River and Being Mare Particularly Described As Fallows:
Beginning at the Centerline of the Roaring Fork River, from Which the East Quarter Comer of Said Sec-
tion 27, a GLO Brass CAP Standard Monument Bears 5 88° 20' 00' E a Distance of 786.50 FL; Thence
S07° 00' 00' E along Said Centerline a Distance of 5.11 Ft.; Thence S 11° 55' 12' E along Said Center-
line a Distance of 167.56 Ft. to the Southeast Comer of That Parcel Described In Book 348 at Page 87 of
the Garfield County Records; Thence 5 63° 48' 00' W along the Southerly Line o1 Said Parcel, a Distance
of 310.00 Ft.; Thence N 26' 12' 00' E along the Westerly Line o1 Said Parcel, a Distance of 176.64 Ft.;
Thence N01 Degree 40' 00' E along the Westerly Line of Said Parcel, a Distance 01204,14 Ft. to the
Westerly Line of That Parcel of Lend Described in Book 275 at Page 346 of the Garfield County Records;
Thence N 30° 19' 00' W along the Westerly Line o1 Said Parcel, a Distance of 438.00 FL to the Southerly
Line 01 That Parcel of Land Described in Book 343 at Pape 365 of the Garfield County Records; Thence N
15° 57' 00' W a Distance of 9.21 Ft.; Thence N 13° 19 17' W along Said Westerly Line, a Distance of
52.35 Ft.; Thence N 18° 51' 56' W along Said Wesledy Line, a Distance of 239.57 FI.; Thence N 21° 05'
54' W a Distance 01119.29 FI.; Thence N 69° 11' 48 E along the Northerly Line of Said Parcel, a Dis-
tance 01470.20 Ft. to the Northeast Comer of Said Parcel at the Center of the Roaring Fork River; Thence
S09° 59' 48' E along the Eastedy Line of Said Parcel, and along the Center of Said River, a Distance of
348.19 Ft.; Thence S07° 00' 00' E along the Easterly Line of Said Parcel and along the Center of Said
River, a Distance of 655.29 Ft. to the Point of Beginning. Excepting Therefrom the Right of Way for
County Road. County of Garfield, State of Colorado
The Applicant and the City of Glenwood Springs have agreed to exchange quitclaim deeds to correct an
error In the legal description for the Ownership Parcel. which is expected to be completed prior to the
hearing with the Garfield County Board of County Commissioners. The resulting full parcel lobe owned
by the Applicant as of the hearing date will stili include the entire Permit Parcel and will he described as
follows (the 'Revised Ownership Parcel'):
A Parcel of land situated in the Southeast Quarter of the Northeast Quarter and in the Northeast Quarter
of the Southeast Quarter of Section 27, Township 6 South, Range 89 West of the Sixth Principal Meridian,
County of Garfield, State of Colorado. said parcel lying westerly of the centeriine of the Roaring Fork River
and being more particularly described as follows:
Beginning ata point In said Centerline of the Roaring Fork River from which the East Quarter Comer of
said Section 27 bears S88'39'07'E, 785.29 feet; thence upon said centerline 611 °55'12'W. 248.88 feet to
the Southeast Comer of a Parcel of land described In Book 348 at Page 87 of the Garfield County Public
Records; thence departing said centerline and upon the boundary line of said Parcel recorded In Book 348
at Page 87 the following Three (3) courses: 1) 863'48'00'W, 121.621eet to the easterly right of way line of
a 300 foot airport Runway Strip; 2) N26°12'00°W, 167.49 feet upon said easterly right of way; 3)
N01'40'00'E, 208.83 feet to the westerly line of a Parcel of Land described In Book 275 at Page 346 of
said Public Records; thence departing said lands described In Book 348 at Page 87 and upon said
westerly line N30°19'00'W, 428.49 feet to the eastern right of way fine described in Book 343 at Page 365
of said Public Records; thence upon said eastem right of way the fallowing four (4) courses; 1)
N15°57'00'W, 9.21 feet; 2) N13°19'17'W, 52.35 feet; 3) with all bearings contained herein based upon,
N18°51'56'W, 239.57 feet: 4) N21'05'54'W, 119.29 feet; thence departing said easterly right of way line
1469°11'48°E, 470.20 feet more or less to said centerline of the Roaring Fork River: thence upon said
centerline of the Roaring Fork River the following two (2) courses: 1) 509'55'31E, 346.20 feet: 2)
S07°00'00°E, 660.40 feet to the Paint of Beginning. Containing 8.92 Acres more or less
Practical Descriotfon• 1097 County Road 116, Glenwood Springs, CO. It is located south of the City of
Glenwood Springs in SE Qtr of NE Otr 8 in NE 01, of Section 27, Township 6 South, Range 98 West of
the 61h Principal Meridian, Garfield County and is part of a property known by Assessor's Parcel No.
218527100008.
Description of Reouest' This is a Limited Impact Review Land Use Change Permit to construct an
approximately 27,000 square Warehouse and Distribution Center. The overall property is approximately
8.92 acres. The Property is zoned Commercial General (GG).
All persons affected by the proposed project are invited to appear and state their views, protests or
support. If you cannot appear personally at such hearing, then you are urged to stale your views by letter,
as the Board of County Commissioners will give consideration to the comments of surrounding property
owners, and others affected, In deciding whether to grant or deny the request The application may be
reviewed at the office of the Planning Department located at 108 9th Street, Suite 401, Garfield County
Plaza Building, Glenwood Springs. Colorado between the hours o1 8:30 a,m- and 5:00 p.m., Monday
through Friday.
A Board of County Commissioners Public Hearing on the application has been scheduled for the
8th day of September, 2014, 011:00 P.M. in the Carbondale Town Hall Meeting Room - Carbondale
Town Hall, 511 Colorado Ave., Carbondale, Colorado.
Planning Department
Garfield County
Published in the Citizen Telegram August 7, 2014. (10439932)
I 1.1 L.1 UDLJU LJLJLJLJJJ LJ
L-4
0013 wnisti
4 -de '9MS Xi!.
a
0
30 NO N01133S
7009 1680 0000 17411_3794
911 OV021 AIN1103 LIZ1
CIIIVOIS1111J.,
1'5 0 c
m '4o
o
V1 (1'
1ST
• M
• CI)
CD
E
2 <
0>0
m
111
a 33
1.4
m
cl 0
m
a :13
D
D
vooz ken/clad ' Li.ge um) Sd
10008 wrna8 an.sawou
GLENWOOD SPRINGS, CO 81601
D
T E T
bbU UUUU ( 0
Pueblo. CO 81002-0918
8
tr+
144
CA
CA
e.-_-
000
P
2 io
P 3
33
0
a
09-
:07
11
EXHIBIT
M
0 CO
cp
>
—r -
to
2 m
no C)
TI
—j
a
0:
a.
7009 1680 0000
R -00"
04
-49
(")
O
z
7.7
01 ;
t ig
0
0
0
cc
.0,,3 a6elsod le101.
40)
0
g 3
,7,7
00(00
ri Pa!IIV00
_ .
1748
0. 0
01
3817
C.4
L
000
P
P
o 3 g
e.
0
F,
04a
I:5 0 C
m
3 '
'•:•• 0
— ES'
m —
o co
0 al
g
0 0
151
a 33
(o M
n 0
M
.11
tel
•
0:
MkelikM,T407its-k-RiPi
oC
s 33 m 41. cn
0
m ._
ops`
0 > 0
r
c
M
qn
M
oICt
W
gad ' L L8£ wioJ
O
uuuu .u, _,u ,J
m — N
W
N.)
.+
'.p
CC)C
mit 33 :t3
!✓i
-4
m -co
fri
0 > a*
y `�
c
37
m
a n
M
S
C
S
7009 1680 0000 1748 0824
8.
3NV-1 3SOOD
P.
n Q n
0
pO
O
W
d
W
0
O
= W N �nn
am <
a _ a a
.j ❑❑❑ m m
n,
°' 0 3 g
wp a3
ru
Q.
❑ K II 0
g 1 ii Z
O N
P3
y
PAIMMAERIOALME
t70(2 fuenJgad ' L L8£ LwOA Sd
3dieo08 wnyad oiysewoa
oos111•zo-s6saoe
l L8£ WJoj Sd
m
cr
N
0
w
w
t-�
(UU1 .1,bOU UUUU
1, t. @--^`_r O 3 11
7009 1680 0000 1748 3909
sand N aieisod le
C
and P01111.100
r,
b 3 '
� m �
2
t
w
D
.�
a
0
0
2)
O
0
u
m 0
a
cp
a
a
N d
7 3
a
f
a
❑❑
0 0
01
npa yo area .0
0
Soc
m33
in
ci-�
•V
Mcri
i,N r
0 33
m
4 C?
1a0
0
S
.l,
glum
CZ
3
t 1 .LOUD UUtsf t„d,_.J4f'7U JUJJ
-o
O
3
Co
m
2
0
O
O
Icheoeu mole
�1b
i
tJ
0
a 33
D - O
- ❑❑❑
2 n g
Lt.! „ tJ 3 3
cr. B
t.n
111 G
0
C+i w
0
2
S 0 C
° m o)
eixi
013
m•
Wim_.
C7 CO
ca
o b 0
a
Gi
0 33
M
o c)
tb
faea -
:Moieq ssaippe ,Genua
3
5
0 m 0
Zm O D D
O O a 0
<l N
C3 0
rn cn
m11)
M
CD
ic%'
G
t �
2m
q0
m
alrt40 w(11a
400Z iiienJga j ' G L8£ =JOA sc
ieoea wrney a
4002 ,Uenig9A ' G
ieoeH opsawoo
D
D
m
LU
!T
rL
EN SPRINGS. CO 81601
f U 1 .LO UU UU 1 '1U .J L.
I]:d2LLS 1-118 ;i1 I O l
0
g
7_
•V4.
O.
t
:Moieq sseAppe Gan!
2
3
3
a
0
o m
0
o D
0 a
N
m m
C13
3787
7009 1680 0000 1748
120 Midland Ave, Suite 140
3
0
O
0
c
ead Pe!ltua0
p
ED
r --
m
C7
Cl
W
0
o
• F
EMIAINXLCGIOIL40111041
m
U.S. Postal Service;,.,
CERTIFIED MAIL , RECEIPT
(Domestic Mali Only; No Insurance Coverage Provkled)
IS SECTION ON DELIVERY
Postage
Certified Fee
Returr Receipt Fee
(Endorsement Required)
Restreted Delivery Fee
Endorsement Required;
tC.
Total Postage & Fees .$h $0.49 ', /2O1I4
RUDD AVIATIO
$ $0.49
$3.30
Here
street. Apr7vo.; 132 PARK AVE
or PO Box NO.
oty, State, zIP'4 BASALT, CO 81621-9338
delivery address below: 0 No
/tail 0 Express Mail
i 0 Retum Receipt for Merchandise
ail 0 C.O.D.
Slivery? (Extra Fee)
0 Yes
00 1,748 3848
PS Form 3811, February 2004
Domestic Return Receipt 102595.02-M-1540
August 25, 2014
COLORADO
Parks and Wildlife
Department of Natural Resources
Glenwood Springs Area Office
0088 Wildlife Way
Glenwood Springs, CO 81601
Dave Pesnichak
Senior Planner - Garfield County
Building and Planning Department
108 81" Street, Suite 401
Glenwood Springs, CO 81601
RE: Riverside FedEx Facility (Garfield County File# LIPA - 7988)
Dear Mr. Pesnichak,
Colorado Parks and Wildlife (CPW) has reviewed the submitted application materials for
the proposed Riverside FedEx facility in Glenwood Springs. CPW staff does not anticipate
any adverse impacts to wildlife as a result of this project, but would like to recommend
one requirement for inclusion on the applicant's permit:
1. Given the number of bear related incidents that have occurred in the area of the
proposed project, the proponent must utilize bear -proof garbage containers for
all trash generated at this facility. Garbage must be 100% secured in these
certified bear -proof containers to eliminate any attractants for bears or other
wildlife species.
Colorado Parks and Wildlife appreciates the opportunity to review and comment on this
project. If there are any questions or needs for additional information don't hesitate to
contact Land Use Specialist, Taylor Elm at (970) 947-2971 or District Wildlife Manager,
John Groves at (970) 947-2933.
Sincerely,
erry Wi Area Wildlife Manager
Cc. John Groves, District Wildlife Manager
Dan Cacho, District Wildlife Manager
Taylor Elm, Land Use Specialist
File
Bob O !Nosciri . Ouator Colorado Parks and W dalife • Parks and Wildlife Commas ion. Robrn W Bray • Chris Castilian. Sammy • Jcarme I !or=
Bill Kane, Clair • Gaspar ['miaow • Dale Pial • Jams Pnbyl *Jan= Vigil • tkun Wingfcld • MiclzOe Zimmerman • Ala Zip
EXHIBIT
Garfield County
Road & Bridge
To whom it may concern Date: July 16,2014
The Address of:
1097 County Road 116
Glenwood Springs, Co.
81601
Garfield County Road & Bridge does not show any record of a driveway permit at that address.
The said address is in the City of Glenwood Spring street system and is not longer under
Garfield County Road & Bridge. Any driveway permits would need to go through the City of
Glenwood.
Any questions please call me.
Mike Prehm
Garfield County Road & Bridge
Foreman/District 1
(970) 945-1223 Office
(970) 618-7109 Cell
(970) 945-1318 Fax
David Pesnichak
From: Michael Prehm
Sent: Thursday, August 07, 2014 6:09 AM
To: David Pesnichak
Subject: Riverside FedEx Facility
David,
EXHIBIT
The proposed FedEx facility located at 1097 County Road 116 (Airport Road) will have no impact on the Garfield County
road system. Traffic generated by this facility will not be traveling on any County road.
Any questions please contact me.
Mike Prehm
Garfield County Road & Bridge
Foreman/Glenwood District
(970) 945-1223 Office
(970) 945-1318 Fax.
(970) 618-7109 Cell
1
David Pesnichak
From: Franco - DNR, Ivan <ivan.franco@state.co.us>
Sent: Friday, August 15, 2014 9:20 AM
To: David Pesnichak
Cc: Alan Martellaro - DNR; Jake DeWolfe - DNR
Subject: CLH Properties LIPA-7988
Mr. Pesnichak,
This office has reviewed the proposal by the applicant to construct a FedEx warehouse and distribution facility
at 1097 County Road 116 in Glenwood Springs. The applicant has not proposed to split or change the size of
the existing parcel. Water demands would include drinking and sanitary uses for approximately 14 employees,
and the irrigation of approximately 20,000 square -feet of trees and shrubs. The applicant has put forth several
alternative sources in a preliminary water supply analysis. The waste water would be handled through a sewer
connection with the City of Glenwood Springs. Given the preliminary nature of the application, we can only
offer the following general comments at this time.
The applicant has proposed the use of either and existing or new connection to the City of Glenwood Springs
Municipal water supply system. This office would have no objection to the use of a legal municipal supply.
The applicant goes on to propose the drilling of a new commercial non-exempt well to service the facility or a
surface diversions from the Roaring Fork River or some combination of the three water supply sources
(Municipal, Well, Surface Diversion). In any scenario that includes a water well or surface diversion, the
applicant should note that the stream system is over -appropriated, that as any potential water right is
subject to curtailment, and is therefore not adequate for year-round use without an augmentation plan.
Also, the applicant will be required to make an application with this office for a new non-exempt
commercial well permit, should a well be included in the final water supply plan.
If you or the applicant have any questions please feel free to contact me at this office.
Sincerely,
Ivan Franco, E.I.T.
Water Resources Engineer
P 303.866.3581 / F 303.866.2223
1313 Sherman Street, Room 818, Denver, CO 80203
ivan.franco@state.co.us / www.water.state.co.us
1
August 24, 2014
Garfield Coun
Dave Pesnichak
Garfield County Community Development Department
Vegetation Management
RE Riverside FedEx LIPA-7988
Dear Dave,
Thank you for the opportunity to comment on this permit.
The noxious weed inventory provided in the Ecological Assessment is acceptable.
Staff requests that the applicant treat the infestations of the County listed noxious weed, Dalmatian toadflax (Linaria
dalmatica) found on-site prior to construction. The Ecological Assessment did not mention, the County listed noxious
weed - Diffuse knapweed (Centaurea diffusa), however it is common in the area and should be removed and bagged
from the site if located on-site and in the flowering stage.
Please submit confirmation of noxious weed treatment to the Vegetation Management Office by October 31, 2014.
The seed mixes and landscape materials listed on the Construction Document L1.01 are acceptable.
There is conflicting information provided in regards to fertilization. Under Native Seed Mix Schedule the note states that a
15-40-5 fertilizer will be used with the hydromulch mix. On the same sheet, under Weed Management Notes, Item 3, it is
stated that fertilizers will not be used in hydroseeded areas due to fertilizer use favoring "weeds over native perennial
species." Staff agrees with the latter statement and requests that fertilizers not be used in hydroseeding.
Under Landscape Calculations (Sheet L1.01), the applicant indicates that the total area to be landscaped is 68,309
square feet or 1.56 acres. Staff will use that figure to recommend a revegetation security of $3750 (1.5 acres x $2500 per
acre).
The security shall be held by Garfield County until vegetation has been successfully reestablished according to the
Reclamation Standards section in the Garfield County Weed Management Plan. The Reclamation Standards at the date
of permit issuance are cited in Sections 4.06, 4.07 and 4.08 of the Garfield County Weed Management Plan (Resolution
#2002-94).
Please let me know if you have any questions.
Sincerely,
Steve Anthony
Garfield County Vegetation Manager
0375 County Road 352, Bldg 2060
Rifle, CO 81650 Phone: 970-945-1377 x 4305 Fax: 970-625-5939
David Pesnichak
From: Jim Sears <jsears@garcosheriff.com>
Sent: Monday, August 18, 2014 10:56 AM
To: David Pesnichak
Subject: CLH Properties - Riverside FedEX Warehouse and Distribution Facility
EXHIBIT
I I 5"
David,
After review of the submitted documents, the Sheriff's Office does not have any comments or concerns with the
submitted application. The hard copy of the application will be placed in relay today returning to you.
Thank you,
Jim Sears
Emergency Operations Sergeant
Garfield County Sheriff's Office
107 8th St.
Glenwood Springs, CO 81601
970-945-0453 (Office)
970-987-2871 (cell)
1
August 14, 2014
COLORADO
Department of Public
Health & Environment
Dedicated to protecting and improving the health and environment of the people of Colorado
David Pesnichak
Garfield County Building and Planning Dept.
108 Stn St., Suite 401
Glenwood Springs, CO 81601
RE: Riverside Fed Ex Facility- Garfield County
Dear Mr. Pesnichak:
On August 5, 2014, the Colorado Air Pollution Control Division (APCD) received a request for
an air quality determination concerning Riverside Fed Ex Facility -Garfield County. APCD staff
has reviewed the request and has determined that the following provisions of the Colorado Air
Quality Regulations apply to the project.
All sources of potential construction project air emissions in Colorado are required to obtain a
construction permit unless specifically exempt from the provisions of Regulation No. 3. Go to
the website www.colorado.gov/cdphe/APCD to view this regulation - click on Air Quality
Regulations, then Regulation No 3. Section II.D.1 lists which projects are exempt from
requirements of the regulation. In addition, you will need to establish whether you are in an air
quality attainment or non -attainment area, by accessing the information at
www.colorado.gov/cs/Satellite/CDPHE-AP/CBON/ 1251595265316.
Once it has been determined that an Air Pollution Emissions Notice (APEN) is required, the
next phase of air permitting involves submission of an Application for Construction Permit
for each facility and one APEN for each emission source. A source can be an individual
emission point or group of similar emission points (see Regulation No. 3, Part A). Both APEN
reporting and permit requirements are triggered by uncontrolled actual emission rates.
Uncontrolled actual emissions are calculated based upon the requested production/operating rate
assuming no control equipment is used. In general, an APEN is required for an emission point
with uncontrolled actual emissions of any critical pollutant equal to or greater than the quantities
listed below:
4300 Cherry Creek Drive S., Denver, CO 80246-1530 P 303-692-2000 www.colorado.gov/cdphe
John W. Hickenlooper, Governor 1 Larry Wolk, MD, MSPH, Executive Director and Chief Medical Officer
AREA
UNCONTROLLED ACTUAL EMISSIONS
Attainment Area
2 tons per year
Non -attainment Area
1 ton per year
All Areas
Lead emissions: 100 pounds per year
Sources of non -criteria reportable pollutants have different reporting levels depending upon the
pollutant, release point height and distance to the property line. Please see Regulation No. 3
Appendix A and C to determine the appropriate reporting level for each pollutant, and for a list
of non -criteria reportable air pollutants.
However, none of the exemptions from an APEN filing requirement shall apply if a source
would otherwise be subject to any specific federal or state applicable requirement. Information
concerning submittal of revised APEN is also given in Regulation No. 3, Part A. An APEN is
valid for five years. The five year period recommences when a revised APEN is received by the
Division.
If you have any questions regarding your reporting or permitting obligations, please contact the
Small Business Assistance Program at 303-692-3148 or 3175.
Land development construction activities (earth moving) that are greater than 25 acres or more
than six months in duration will require an APEN from the Air Division and may be required to
obtain an air permit. In addition, a start-up notice must be submitted thirty days prior to
beginning a land development project.
Please refer to the website wwu'.colorado.gol/cdphe/APCD for information on APEN forms.
Click on Construction Permit and Compliance Forms, then click on the menu item that applies to
your project.
If you have any questions or need additional information, please call the phone number(s) listed
above, or you may call/ e-mail me directly at 303-692-3127 / jim.dileou state.co.us.
Thank you for contacting the Division about requirements for your project or permit.
Sscerely,
James A. DiLeo
NEPA Coordinator
Air Pollution Control Division
Colorado Department of Public Health and Environment
4300 Cherry Creek Drive S., Denver, CO 80246-1530 P 303-692-2000 www.colorado.gov/cdphe
John W. Hickenlooper, Governor 1 Larry Wolk, MD, MSPH, Executive Director and Chief Medical Officer
West Divide Water Conservancy
District -General Stored Water
818 Taughenbaugh Blvd. g101
P. O. Box 203 (970) 625-5461
Rifle, CO 81650
waterici wdwcd.org
BILL TO
KW Glenwood Springs, LLC
941 Orange Avenue #512
Coronado, CA 92118
EXHIBIT
1 7 --
DATE
INVOICE
8/18/2014
10362
Please reference the
Invoice # on your check.
Due Upon Receipt.
Total
S136.68
On any shared well non-payment of any portion of the fees due deems the
whole contract cancelled.
CONTRACT #
ACRE FEET
RATE
IDENTIFICATION
140821 KWG(a)
1
In/Commercial
DESCRIPTION
QTY
RATE
AMOUNT
Augmentation Water Contract
Colorado River Augmentation Plan Assessment
Recording Fee
1
1
1
61.68
55.00
20.00
61.68
55.00
20.00
Due Upon Receipt.
Total
S136.68
On any shared well non-payment of any portion of the fees due deems the
whole contract cancelled.
G�N�o4a spR/h,
0EPAR
EXHIBIT
August 26, 2014
To: David Pesnichak< Garfield County Planner
From: Ron Biggers, Deputy Fire Marshal, Glenwood Springs Fire Department
RE: File number LIPA-798. Name CLH Properties -riverside FedEX Warehouse and
Distribution Facility, applicant CLH Properties LLC., Contact person Davis Farrar
(Western Slope Consulting, LLC), Location South of Glenwood Springs adjacent to
Glenwood Springs Airport, parcel #218527100008
Comments
Assess: There shall be unobstructed Fire Department assess around the entire building. On
the submitted plans there appears to be fencing around the building with an assess gate
on the south west corner for vehicles to enter this area. If this gate is a controlled assess
one it shall have a Knox key switch installed on its exterior west side to permit Fire crews
assess to the area around the building. A Knox key box shall be installed on the exterior of
building 5'-6' above finished grade above the sprinkler system Fire Department Connection
(FDC). In the secured Knox box, keys to the building's exterior/interior doors shall be place in it
for the Fire Departments use to assess the building without breaking door. The general
contractor
shall discuss finial placement of the Knox key switch and Knox key box with the Fire Department
staff
before installing them. The application to order the Knox products is obtained from the
Glenwood
Springs Fire Department Administration office located at 806 Cooper Avenue, Glenwood Springs.
Fire Protection Water Supply: The best option to meet the fire flow and automatic fire
protection systems demands is for the owners to connect to the City of Glenwood Springs
municipal water supply. If this connection is not possible the applicant mentions a couple
of other options in their application to meet these water demands like; Fire pump required for
all,
large tank, pond (must also meet water demand in winter when surface is frozen), Roaring Fork
River water or a combination of these options. If the connection to the City water supply is not
made then all the other options shall be discussed with the Glenwood Springs Fire Department
staff prior to the owners and their engineers design the system permanent fire flow water
supply system.
0EPAR
Required Building Fire Protection Systems: The building shall have an automatic fire suppression
system installed in it. The system shall be designed and installed to National Fire Protection
Association (NFPA) 13 standards for the occupancies housed in the building. The building shall
have a fire alarm system installed in it that is designed to NFPA 72 standard for a fire sprinkled
building and Glenwood Springs Fire Departments amendments to the 2009 edition of the
International Fire Code (IFC).
Fire Hydrants: The site will require at a minimum one fire hydrant and possibly two to be
installed on it.
Hydrant location shall be approved by the Fire Department staff prior to installation.
Premises Identification: Reference Section 505 of the 2009 (IFC).
The above are my comments on this application at this time, more may follow if the project moves
forward. Please contact me if you or the applicant have questions on the above comments.
Required Building Fire Protection Systems: The building shall have an automatic fire suppression
system installed in it. The system shall be designed and installed to National Fire Protection
Association (NFPA) 13 standards for the occupancies housed in the building. The building shall
have a fire alarm system installed in it that is designed to NFPA 72 standard for a fire sprinkled
building and Glenwood Springs Fire Departments amendments to the 2009 edition of the
International Fire Code (IFC).
Fire Hydrants: The site will require at a minimum one fire hydrant and possibly two to be
installed on it.
Hydrant location shall be approved by the Fire Department staff prior to installation.
Premises Identification: Reference Section 505 of the 2009 (IFC).
The above are my comments on this application at this time, more may follow if the project moves
forward. Please contact me if you or the applicant have questions on the above comments.
August 28, 2014
Mr. David Pesnichak
Garfield County Planning
108 8th Street, Suite 401
Glenwood Springs, CO 81601
MOUNTAIN CROSS
ENGINEERING, INC.
Civil and Environmental Consulting and Design
EXHIBIT
1 /
RE: Review of Riverside FedEx Warehouse and Distribution Facility: LIPA-7988
Dear David:
This office has performed a review of the documents provided for the Limited Impact Review
application of the Riverside FedEx Warehouse and Distribution Facility for CLH Properties.
The submittal was found to be thorough and well organized. The review generated the following
comments:
1. The project narrative evaluates 'options for providing the proposed site with sanitary services.
The project plan sheets only show an onsite wastewater treatment system (OWTS). The
OWTS will require permitting through the Garfield County Building Department.
2. The Applicant proposes to obtain an access license from the City of Glenwood Springs. The
application materials propose two accesses. The plans should be revised to show one access.
3. The traffic analysis does not address how the traffic will impact the intersection of Highway
82 and 27"' Street. The Applicant should address this intersection and/or why this
intersection was not evaluated.
4. The Applicant proposes to not provide detention for storm water peak attenuation. A waiver
should be requested from Section 7-204.C.3.a of the LUDC.
5. The Applicant should address how the bio -retention ponds that are proposed conform to
Section 7-204.C.3.d of the LUDC.
6. The Storm Water Management Plan does not provide evidence that the site is covered under
the CDPHE Permit. A copy of the coverage letter should be submitted to Garfield County
once obtained.
7. The plan sheets show that a 3/4" water service tap is to provide fire protection and potable
supply to a fire pump and storage tank. No details were included for this equipment. The
Applicant should provide engineering design for review. The Applicant will need to obtain
approvals from the Fire District.
Feel free to call if you have any questions or comments.
Sincerely,
Mountain Cross Enin
s Hale, PE
Inc.
8261/2 Grand Avenue, Glenwood Springs, CO 81601
P: 970.945.5544 F: 970.945.5558 www.mountaincross-eng.com
MEMORANDUM
EXHIBIT
2.0
August 26, 2014
TO: Dave Pesnichak, Garfield County Community Development
FROM: Andrew McGregor, Community Development Director 't` -'4 -
RE: LIPA-7988 CLH Properties — Riverside Fed Ex Warehouse and Distribution Facility
Thanks for providing the City of Glenwood Springs with the opportunity to comment on the
above -noted application for a Fed Ex facility in South Glenwood adjacent to the airport. In order
to provide your office and the County Commissioners with the most comprehensive and detailed
comments, we circulated the application to various relevant City staff. Staff comments are
attached and are generally self- explanatory.
Due to the potential for significant impacts associated with this application, we also presented
this application to the City Council at their meeting on August 21St for their comments. Council
was presented the application materials by staff in advance of the meeting and provided with a
brief presentation by City Staff. At the conclusion of their discussion, Council voted to
recommend to the Board of County Commissioners that they deny the application due to the
issues outlined in the staff report and the significant impact to the transportation infrastructure
that is wholly inadequate to accommodate this use.
The following is a list of issues that have been raised by staff during their review of the
annexation , zoning and development applications and included in the August 21 Staff Report.
o There are currently significant shortcomings in the South Glenwood transportation
infrastructure. This project will impact Airport Road (largely unpaved), Midland Avenue
from 4 Mile Road to 27th Street has operational and structural failures, Sunlight Bridge
has structural and capacity issues, 27th Street intersections at S Grand and S. Glen and no
immediate opportunities to construct the South Bridge for emergency egress from S.
Glenwood and Four Mile areas.. Any County approval should obligate the developer to
make contributions to the upgrading of Airport Road and other system deficiencies.
o Public safety concerns with increased truck traffic and with lack of pedestrian facilities,
increased noise, etc.
o Truck traffic has a greater deleterious effect on road pavement and structure than do
passenger cars.
o Concerns with impacts on the airport including safety concerns with truck traffic at the
runway's south end and building encroachments into the transitional surface parallel to
the runway.
o Lack of sufficient water and sewer service without connections to the City's systems.
o Need for land dedication to accommodate west touchdown for the South Bridge.
o Need for protections on the hillside above the river and below the developed portion of
the site.
o Need for protection of riparian areas along the riverbank.
o No design standards for building or site development.
We appreciate your consideration of the City's input in this application.
PLANNING ITEM: 33-14
SUBJECT: GarCo Review – FedEx Distribution Facility
CITY ATTORNEY (Jan Shute) – No legal comments for GarCo review. Would be a good idea to
submit to Transportation Manager/Assistant Public Works Director to obtain safety comments from City
Airport Committee.
CITY MANAGER (Jeff Hecksel) – Transportation infrastructure in this area is not sufficient to support
this use.
POLICE DEPARTMENT (Terry Wilson) – Same as prior review—Significant developments should
not be permitted in this area until South Bridge is built and/or Midland Ave. and 27th St. Bridge are
significantly improved. Traffic from this project should be kept out of adjacent neighborhoods.
PUBLIC WORKS DIRECTOR (Robin Millyard)
ASSISTANT PUBLIC WORKS DIRECTOR(Dave Betley)
BUILDING DEPARTMENT (Patrick Seydel)
CITY ENGINEER (Terri Partch) - Through the recent traffic impact analysis performed for several
annexation and development proposals, I have become increasingly aware of the poor state of our City's
transportation system on the south side of Glenwood Springs. The current issues that I am aware of
include the following:
• The north bound turn lane from SH82/Glen Avenue is under capacity. Dual turn lanes are needed to
clear the number of cars wanting to turn west onto 27th Street.
• 27th Street does not have the right of way necessary to accommodate a dual turn lane.
• The intersection at 23" Street and South Grand Avenue is frequently blocked by people wanting to
turn onto South Grand Avenue.
• This blockage at 23' and South Grand Avenue causes cars to back up to the west, through the 27th
Street Bridge and the roundabout at 27th and Midland.
• The 27th Street Bridge has a sufficiency rating of 42.2 out of 100, a score which is lower than the
Grand Avenue Bridge. If Federal or State funds are used, the sufficiency rating is so low that that it
cannot be rehabilitated, it must be replaced. The bridge is functionally obsolete, structurally deficient
and scour critical. It is also under capacity.
• South Midland Avenue from 27th Street south to Four Mile Road is in terrible condition. Poor drainage
has caused many areas of subgrade failure, and during the winter months causes large potholes.
• The intersection of Mount Sopris Drive and Midland Avenue is highly congested today under school
traffic conditions, and is projected to go to failure by 2020.
The construction of the South Bridge is projected to siphon approximately 1/3 of the projected traffic
from 27th Street in the 20 year planning time frame. Its construction would provide the following benefits:
• It will serve as a critical evacuation route for residents of south Glenwood and the Four Mile Canyon
area.
• It allows some additional development and redevelopment to occur in both southern Glenwood
Springs and in the Four Mile Canyon Area of Garfield County.
• The project would eliminate the need for the following the right of way acquisitions and capital
projects:
a. Right of way acquisition for two additional lanes on 27th Street between South Grand Avenue and
SH82/Glen Avenue
b. Road and drainage construction for two additional lanes on 27th Street
c. Reconstruction of the 27th Street Bridge to a minimum of four lanes. Realignment of the bridge to
meet the intersection of SH82 for optimum operational performance.
d. Potential relocation of at least five condominium units at Cotton Wood Landing.
e. Addition of another lane on the east side of the 27th Street Roundabout.
At this time, without additional annexations, developments or redevelopment proposals, I anticipate that
the City will need to fund $35 million to $50 million dollars worth of capital improvements to rebuild the
existing roadways and bridges and to provide emergency access to the residents of south Glenwood and
Garfield County.
The Traffic Impact Analysis for the proposed Federal Express Distribution Facility does not accurately
describe the existing conditions of the City system, and does not accurately project future impacts. Larger
specific issues in the study include:
• Traffic counts were performed in June of 2014. This count date misses the heavy use of the south
Glenwood road system during the school year.
• Traffic counts were scaled up to account for school traffic, but only at the intersection of Mount
Sopris Drive and Midland Avenue. No scaling was applied to the other intersections.
• No traffic counts and analysis were performed at the intersection of 27th Street and South Grand
Avenue, an intersection that heavily contributes to congestion in the system.
• No 20 year projections were done for the system.
Fed Ex proposes to add 230 additional truck trips to the City's system during the AM and PM peak hours.
I believe that this will have a significant impact on the City's already taxed system.
Due to the poor state of our existing infrastructure and the large need for capital improvements from 27th
Street south, the City should request that the County ask the developer for a contribution toward the
needed capital improvements for the area.
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DIRECTOR (Andrew McGregor)
WATER/WASTEWATER (Buddy Burns) — If the developer moves forward with City water and
sewer extensions, refer to comments dated 7/29/14. If they choose to only utilize the existing 3/4" water
service, note the following:
(1) There shall be no interconnection between the existing 3/4" water service and any other water source.
(2) It is highly recommended that the developer look at water quality on any other water source.
FIRE DEPARTMENT (Ronald Biggers)
CITY ELECTRIC (Doug Hazzard)
STREETS & ALLEYS (Rick Turner)
PARKS AND RECREATION (Tom Barnes)
FINANCE DIRECTOR (Mike Harmon)
AIRPORT COMMISSION (Jim Terry) — Would it be possible for the applicant to install illuminated
stop signs on both ends of the south end of the runway where the stop signs are now? Signs with
flashing red lights and additional signage that states, "Yield to landing and departing aircraft." With the
increased semi -truck and automobile traffic, the improved signage may improve safety for the motorists,
pedestrians and pilots. On a hot, windy, summer day, there have been numerous times that I was
thankful that there were no cars or trucks on the roadway, lined up with the centerline of the runway,
while landing to the north.
SOURCE GAS (Westerman & Green)
CENTURYLINK (Jason Sharpe)
WEST GLENWOOD SANITATION DIST. (Scott Leslie)-
.14400D Spit
August 26, 2014
To: David Pesnichak< Garfield County Planner
From: Ron Biggers, Deputy Fire Marshal, Glenwood Springs Fire Department
RE: File number LIPA-798. Name CLH Properties -riverside FedEX Warehouse and
Distribution Facility, applicant CLH Properties LLC., Contact person Davis Farrar
(Western Slope Consulting, LLC), Location South of Glenwood Springs adjacent to
Glenwood Springs Airport, parcel #218527100008
Comments
Assess: There shall be unobstructed Fire Department assess around the entire building. On
the submitted plans there appears to be fencing around the building with an assess gate
on the south west corner for vehicles to enter this area. If this gate is a controlled assess
one it shall have a Knox key switch installed on its exterior west side to permit Fire crews
assess to the area around the building. A Knox key box shall be installed on the exterior of
building 5'-6' above finished grade above the sprinkler system Fire Department Connection
(FDC). In the secured Knox box, keys to the building's exterior/interior doors shall be place in it
for the Fire Departments use to assess the building without breaking door. The general
contractor
shall discuss finial placement of the Knox key switch and Knox key box with the Fire Department
staff
before installing them. The application to order the Knox products is obtained from the
Glenwood
Springs Fire Department Administration office located at 806 Cooper Avenue, Glenwood Springs.
Fire Protection Water Supply: The best option to meet the fire flow and automatic fire
protection systems demands is for the owners to connect to the City of Glenwood Springs
municipal water supply. If this connection is not possible the applicant mentions a couple
of other options in their application to meet these water demands like; Fire pump required for
all,
large tank, pond (must also meet water demand in winter when surface is frozen), Roaring Fork
River water or a combination of these options. If the connection to the City water supply is not
made then all the other options shall be discussed with the Glenwood Springs Fire Department
staff prior to the owners and their engineers design the system permanent fire flow water
supply system.
GLENWOOD SPRINGS OFFICE
The Denver Center
420 Seventh Street, Suite 100
Glenwood Springs, Colorado 81601
Telephone (970) 947-1936
Facsimile (970) 947-1937
GARFIELD & HECHT, P.C.
ATTORNEYS AT LAW
Since 1975
www.garfieldhccht.com
September 5, 2014
VIA US MAIL AND EMAIL
David Pesnichak, Senior Planner
Garfield County Planning Division
108 8th Street, Suite 401
Glenwood Springs, CO 81601
dpesnichak(4arfield-county.com
Re: FedEx Facility
Dear David:
EXHIBIT
David McConaughy
dmcconaughy@garfieldhecht.com
Thank you for your detailed staff report and for meeting with us earlier this week
regarding the upcoming hearing with the Board of County Commissioners. As we discussed, our
client is generally okay with the proposed conditions of approval but would request that the
Board consider the following changes. Several of these requests relate to timing issues and the
fact that our client's real estate contract with the current owner is contingent upon issuance of the
land use permit. As such, for example, our client cannot grant an easement until it holds title to
the property, which will not happen until after issuance of the land use permit. Accordingly, we
have proposed making some of these conditions triggered after the land use permit when our
client will have ownership and control of the property.
Condition 7. Please revise to clarify the proposal is for operations 7 days per week, 24 hours per
day (not just Mon -Sat).
Condition 16. Please consider making this a condition of building permit, not the land use
permit.
Condition 18. Please consider making this a condition of building permit.
Condition 20. At the hearing, the applicant will address the issue of traffic impacts generally
including the proposed payment amount, which we understand is not tied to any applicable fee of
Garfield County itself. We are also uncertain whether the City would even accept a payment of
traffic fees not tied to any contract or permit from the City. Additionally, we have some concern
about constructing improvements to Airport Road that may be obliterated by the future
construction of the South Bridge and could be a waste of money and effort. Our engineer will
address this at the hearing.
Aspen • Avon • Basalt • Glenwood Springs • Rifle
® Printed on recycled paper
GARFIELD & HECHT, P.C.
Nevertheless, if the City is
improvements to Airport Road and
project would be ready for issuance
agree to pay the requested traffic fee
condition as follows:
David Pesnichek
Garfield County Planning Division
September 5, 2014
Page 2 of 3
willing to commit to constructing and completing the
Airport Center Road prior to the expected time that the
of a Certificate of Occupancy, then the Applicant would
amount of $585,000 to the City. We propose revising the
The Applicant shall either contribute $585,000 to the City of Glenwood Springs
for road improvements or come to an agreement with the City for specific
improvements to be made to Airport Road and Airport Center Road to address the
anticipated traffic impacts of the project. If the Applicant and the City are unable
to reach an agreement, then the Applicant shall submit proof that the $585,000
has been deposited into an escrow account, which shall be released to the City
upon completion by the City of the proposed improvements to Airport Road and
Airport Center Road as identified by the City in its written comment letter. If the
City fails or refuses to complete such improvements prior to the time that the
Applicant would otherwise be entitled to issuance of Certificate of Occupancy but
for fulfillment of this condition, or by May 1, 2015, whichever first occurs, then
the Applicant shall be entitled to complete the remaining improvements itself and
apply the escrow funds towards such costs. If, as of March 15, 2015, the City has
refused to accept the payment or to authorize or perform any construction work
on Airport Road and Airport Center Road as provided herein, then the Applicant
shall be relieved of this condition.
Condition 21. The applicant is committed to facilitating construction of the South Bridge
because it will benefit the project. However, there are challenges associated with the uncertain
plans and location of the proposed bridge. Additionally, if this condition is to be included then
we would like to see an alternative similar to the wording of Condition 20. As written in the
initial staff report, the condition could be read to grant the City unilateral discretion to approve or
not approve (or perhaps not even to consider) any agreement with the applicant. This would
effectively cede the County's land use authority to the City by granting it a veto power on the
project.
At the hearing, the Applicant's engineer will present testimony and evidence to show that the
$585,000 contribution referenced above (Condition 20) far exceeds the proportionate share of
traffic impacts caused by the project to Airport Road and Airport Center Road. To offset that
contribution, therefore, the Applicant requests reimbursement of the fair market value of the
dedication parcel at such time as it may be needed for the bridge.
We propose the following:
The Applicant shall meet with the City to develop a plan to determine a specific
location and amount of land to dedicate for the South Bridge landing, if any. This
dedication plan and agreement shall he in place before issuance of any building
permit. Should the City determine that a dedication is not necessary, a letter from
the City stating such shall be provided to the County, and this condition shall not
1111145
® Printed on recycled paper
GARFIELD & HECHT, P.C.
David Pesnichek
Garfield County Planning Division
September 5, 2014
Page 3 of 3
apply. If the City does not provide such a letter, and if the City and the Applicant
do not reach a mutually -acceptable agreement by October 17, 2014, then the
Applicant shall instead grant the County a 10 -year option to acquire the
dedication parcel at a location to be determined on the southern tip of the parcel,
with a right of way not to exceed 55 feet in width. The Applicant shall be entitled
to reasonable compensation for the actual fair market value of the dedication
parcel at the time of its conveyance to the County or the City, as applicable,
which shall include the costs of relocating or replacing any utilities or other
improvements that would interfere with the bridge project. If the parties cannot
agree on the amount of compensation informally, then the procedures set forth in
C.R.S. § 38-1-121 shall apply. The form of the option agreement shall be subject
to review and approval by the County Attorney prior to issuance of building
permit.
Condition 23. Please revise the final sentence of this condition as follows:
The easement document shall be prepared and submitted prior to issuance of the
Land Use Change Permit for approval by the County Attorney and shall be
recorded after transfer of the Property to KW Glenwood Springs, LLC and prior
to the issuance of a certificate of occupancy.
We need to consult with the current landowner and may have additional suggestions or
requests at the time of the hearing. If you have any questions in the meantime, please do not
hesitate to contact me. Thank you.
Very truly yours,
HT, P.C.
cc: Kelly Cave, Fsq. (e-mail only kcave(a)garfield-county.com)
Frank Hutfless, Esq. (e-mail only flmtfless(4arfield-county.com
DHM/kjt
1111145
Printed on recycled paper