Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2.0 BOA Staff Report 08.23.2004PROJECT INFORMATION AND STAFF COMMENTS REQUEST: APPLICANT: LOCATION: I. DESCRIPTION OF THE PROPOSAL BOA 8/23/04 MLB Administrative Appeal of an interpretation of the Garfield County Zoning Resolution concerned with an interpretation of the conditions of approval for a Special Use Permit in the Agricultural/Residential/Rural Density Zone District. Pine's Stone Company, Inc. and 3P Properties, LLC 0600 County Road 113 A. Site Description: The subject property is located south of the Highway 82 and County Road 113 intersection, at 0600 CR 113. The property presently is used for the processing, storage and material handling of natural resources. There is a building on the property that is used for processing of stones and as office area. B. Request: The appellant is contesting a determination by Mark Bean, Director, Building and Planning Department, regarding a condition of approval in Resolution No. 92-078. Condition No. 1 states "all proposals of the applicant shall be considered conditions of approval unless stated otherwise by the Board of County Commissioners". In the request for the special use permit, the application states that "vehicle use to this new property would be 0-10 vehicles per day". In the minutes of the meeting from 1992, which were used to clarify this determination, a statement is made that "the applicants are expecting approximately 10 truck trips per day bringing in raw materials to be stacked or loaded and brought back to the retail operation site". In the letter being appealed, it was conceded that the "10 vehicle" trips per day referred to "10 truck trips" per -1- day, regardless of the type of truck. Also noted in the letter is the fact that this determination was made as a result of inquiries by private citizens regarding the conditions of approval. II. MAJOR ISSUES AND CONCERNS A. Zoning: Section 9.04 states that an individual may appeal a determination of an administrative official of the County that results in the person not being able to obtain a permit. Section 9.04 states the following: 9.04 ADMINISTRATIVE APPEAL & INTERPRETATION 9.04.01 Applications: Appeals to the Zoning Board of Adjustment ("Board') may be taken by any person aggrieved by his inability to obtain a permit (other than a Special Use Permit), or by the decision of any administrative officer or agency based upon or made in the course of the administration or enforcement of the provisions of this Resolution. Appeals may also be taken by any officer, department, board or bureau of the County affected by the grant or refusal of a permit, other than a Special Use Permit, or by other decision of an administrative officer or agency based on, or made in the course of the administration or enforcement of this Resolution. Appeals to the Board must be made in writing and filed with the Board within seven (7) days of the action or decision appealed and a copy shall be given by the appellant to any official or agency from which the appeal is taken. A timely appeal stays all proceedings in furtherance of the action appealed from, unless any officer or agency from whom the appeal is taken certifies to the Board, after the notice of appeal shall have been filed with him, that by reason of the facts stated in the certificate, a stay, in his opinion, would cause imminent peril to life and property, in which case proceedings shall not be stayed otherwise than by a restraining order which may be granted by a court of record or the Board upon proper application. No restraining order shall be issued by the Board except after notice to the officer or agency from whom the appeal is taken and only if due cause is shown. 9.04.02 Action by the Board of Adjustment: The Board shall have the powers and duties to hear and decide appeals as set forth in Section 9.05.03 of this Resolution. The concurring vote of four (4) members of the Board shall be necessary to reverse any order, requirement, decision or determination of any administrative official or agency or to decide in favor of the appellant. -2- The appellant has made a timely appeal of the determination and the Board will need to make a determination. B. It is staff's position that the special use permit approved in 1992 was approved with conditions related to vehicle travel based on the use of the property for an ancillary storage area to a retail site on commercial zoned property closer to Highway 82. The transcript from the meeting in 1992 indicates that the vehicle trips discussed at the meeting, were for trucks delivering material to the site for storage, trucks taking material from the site to the retail site on Highway 82 and pick-ups coming to order stuff. On top of pg. 5 , the bottom of pg. 8 and top of pg. 9 of the transcript appear to be only times that vehicle traffic is discussed. In all cases it refers to trucks related to both delivery to the site, delivery from the site to the retail site on Highway 82 and customer pick-ups. The statements made by the Pine's on pgs. 8 and 9 relate to the 10 trips per day, based upon the intended use of the property primarily as a storage facility. There was no real discussion of traffic related to any of the possible contemplated future use of the property, other than negative impacts of traffic from any possible retail sales. There is no implied approval of larger numbers of vehicle trips to the site, nor is it requested in the hearing. The discussion in the hearing makes it sound like vehicle trips to the site will be minimal. In summary, the application states 0-10 vehicles per day, the conversations in the minutes clarify that the 10 trips per day are for a variety of types of trucks, not just delivery trucks. The activities on the property presently are far more extensive than any contemplated use of the property during the hearing before the Board of County Commissioners in 1992. The owners were given latitude in the past due to vaguely written conditions of approval in Resolution No. 92-078, but the 10 vehicle (truck) trips per day is one of the clearer issues in the discussion. The Board of County Commissioners have required other property owners with older special use permits to amend their permits to deal with changes in the conditions of approval in the original permit to deal with changed circumstances. This permit condition needs to be clarified and that should occur in a public hearing before the Board of County Commissioners, in which the applicant and the neighbors would be given an opportunity to provide testimony for the Board of County Commissioners to consider.. IV. SUGGESTED FINDINGS 1. That the application for an appeal of an administrative interpretation was found to be consistent with the requirements of Section 9.04 of the Garfield County Zoning Resolution of 1978, as amended. 2. That the public meeting before the Zoning Board of Adjustment was extensive and complete, that all facts, matters and issues were submitted and that all interested parties were heard at the meeting. -3- LEAVENWORTH & KARP, P.C. ATTORNEYS AT LAW LOYAL E. LEAVENWORTH SANDER N. KARP DAVID H. McCONAUGHY JAMES S. NEU JULIE C. BERQUIST-HEATH SUSAN W. LAATSCH NICOLE D. GARRIMONE ANNA S. ITENBERG MICHAEL J. SAWYER TERESA L. HOCK EDWARD B. OLSZEWSKI Leo Jammaron, Chairman Zoning Board of Adjustment 108 8th Street, Suite 201 Glenwood Springs, CO 81601 1011 GRAND AVENUE P. O. DRAWER 2030 GLENWOOD SPRINGS, COLORADO 81602 Telephone: (970) 945-2261 Facsimile: (970) 945-7336 Iel@lklawfirm.com Re: Notice of Appeal June 30, 2004 RECEIVED JUN 3 0 2004 GARFIELD COUNTY BUILDING & PLANNING DENVER OFFICE:* WAZEE EXCHANGE BUILDING 1900 WAZEE STREET, STE. 203 DENVER, COLORADO 80202 Telephone: (303) 825-3995 Facsimile: (303) 825-3997 *(Please direct al! correspondence to our Glenwood Springs Office) Dear Chairman Jammaron and Members of the Zoning Board of Adjustment: I represent Pine's Stone Company, Inc. and 3p Properties, LLC. 3p Properties is the owner of the property at 0600 County Road 113. Pine's Stone Company, Inc. operates a wholesale business engaged in the processing, storage, and material handling of natural resources, commonly referred to as Pine's Stone Yard. This business is being operated pursuant to a Special Use Permit that was granted by the Board of County Commissioners of Garfield County on August 18, 1992, by Resolution No. 92-078, a copy of which is attached as Exhibit A. My clients are appealing an erroneous interpretation of the Special Use Permit made by a County administrative official or agency as permitted by Section 8.02.03 and 9.04.01 of the Garfield County Regulations. Specifically, my clients appeal a determination made by Mark L. Bean, the Director of the Building and Planning Department, as set forth in his letter of June 23, 2004, a copy of which is attached as Exhibit B. Mr_ Bean has, in our view, erroneously concluded that my clients are limited to 10 truck trips entering the property per day, including pickup trucks. It is the appellant's position that the implied vehicle limitation of ten vehicles per day applies solely to delivery trucks, either delivering materials to the site that have been purchased by my client, or deliveries from the site to wholesale customers. The Special Use Permit does not specifically contain a vehicle per -day limitation. Rather, the Special Use Permit, at paragraph 1, provides that: 1. All proposals of the applicant shall be considered conditions of approval unless stated otherwise by the Board of County Commissioners. There are references to per -day limitations both in my clients' application for the Special Use Permit and in the minutes from the public hearing held before the County Commission. It is based on these 1121104}[11uns;Pi,csSianc-17774n1.-sV.mm.ra,.zoning lio rd 1 wpd LEAVENWORTH & KARP, P.C. Leo Jammaron, Chairman Zoning Board of Adjustment Page 2 June 30, 2004 incorporated proposals that Mr. Bean has made his interpretation. The basis for the appellants' position that Mr. Bean's interpretation is in error is as follows: 1. In 1992, in the Special Use Permit application, a copy of which is attached as Exhibit C, my clients, who were not sophisticated in land use matters and did not have a professional assisting them in the application, stated "vehicle use to this new property would be zero to ten vehicles per day." 2. In paragraph 2.B. of the staff report prepared by the County, a copy of which is attached as Exhibit D, the staff stated: "The Pines estimate approximately ten (10) trips per day will be generated by the storage use." However, in paragraph 3.C. the true nature of the vehicle trips was clarified: "The ten (10) estimated daily truck trips to the site may generate dust problems for the adjacent residential units if the existing driveway is not improved." 3. More revealing are the minutes of the public hearing held on August 10, 1992, a copy of which is attached as Exhibit E, which state: "The applicants are expecting approximately ten truck trips per day bringing them raw materials to be stacked or loaded and brought back to the retail operation site." 4. This is further confirmed by a letter to my clients from Mark Bean dated 9/14/93 in which he states: "In the Special Use Hearing before the Garfield Board of County Commissioners, it was represented that ... you expect ten (10) truck trips per day to either bring in raw materials or take them back to the retail site (i.e. 82 & Cattle Creek)." See Exhibit F. Thus, the minutes of the meeting, and as interpreted by Mr. Bean, reflect that the applicants proposal was for a maximum of ten truck deliveries to or from the site per day. At my request, my clients compiled a list over a nine day period of deliveries to the site and deliveries from the site by Pine's Stone. That information is summarized below. Date Semi Deliveries Pine's Stone Total to Site Deliveries Wed. - 5/12 3 6 9 Thurs. - 5113 1 4.5 5.5 Fri. - 5/14 2 0 2 Sat. - 5/15 2 0 2 Mon. - 5/17 2 2.5 4.5 I.}20oatpicacstYi0c'sSmic-I777.Ldlcrsvamn ron-Zaiing Bo rd -I .xpd LEAVENWORTH & KARP, P.C. Leo Jammaron, Chairman Zoning Board of Adjustment Page 3 June 30, 2004 Tues. - 5/18 2 5 7 Wed. - 5/19 1 3.5 4.5 Thurs. - 5/20 1 4.5 5.5 Fri. - 5121 1 3 4 Therefore, it is clear that my clients are in compliance with the representation made during the public hearing as incorporated in the Special Use Permit that there would be no more than ten truck trips. The interpretation of Mark Bean to include pickup trucks not making deliveries, but owned by employees who are simply driving to work, is irrational. It makes no sense whatsoever to determine that a violation of the Special Use Permit has occurred simply because an employee chooses to drive a pickup truck to work rather than an automobile. Moreover, unless the pickup truck is making deliveries, it is contrary to the representation my clients made to the Board of County Commissioners, as reflected in the minutes, that there would not be more than ten deliveries by trucks to and from the site per day. In 1992, at the time of the application, Pine's Stone was a very small business with two full time and two part time employees. Originally, my clients thought they would maintain the highway location at the corner of Cattle Creek for retail sales, and use the 0600 County Road 113 property as storage. However, in 1993, the retail location was closed following the receipt from Mark Bean of a letter dated February 4, 1993 making it clear that wholesale sales could occur at the 0600 County Road 113 location. See Exhibit G. Please be advised that there are no retail sales that occur at the property. Pine's Stone strictly sells on a wholesale business basis. Wholesale customers do sometimes visit the yard to look at samples, but no retail sales occur. Pine's Stone has approximately 30 customers with whom they do the bulk of their business. My clients have been generating its wholesale business in the same manner for over a decade. Today, the business has ten to twelve full time employees. Certainly there are more cars that come and go from the site due to the increased number of employees. However, employees' cars or pickup trucks coming to work and leaving were never intended to be included in the 0 to 10 vehicle trips per day as is clear from the Minutes of the August 10, 1992 hearing. Garfield County should also be aware of the significant contributions my clients make to the economy of Garfield County. All but one of their employees live in Garfield County, and they all earn far above average wage and receive substantial benefits. Approximately 95% of my client's revenues come from outside the County, bringing significant dollars into the County from outside sources. 1:f20041ClinnslPincsSmno-1777\L t sVesnmaron-Zoning Board-I.wpd LEAVENWORTH & KARP, P.C. Leo Jammaron, Chairman Zoning Board of Adjustment Page 4 June 30, 2004 In conclusion, my clients respectfully ask that the Zoning Board of Adjustment overturn Mr. Bean's interpretation that the representation regarding per -day vehicle trips applies to anything other than delivery trucks delivering materials to the site and trucks delivering materials from the site to contractors. We will be at your hearing on this appeal to discuss this matter with you further. LEL:bsl Enclosure cc: Pines' Stone Company, w/enc. Don K. DeFord, Esq., w/enc. Mark L. Bean, w/enc. Steve Hackett, w/out enc. 1.uo04lClIcntsPinc'sSionc 1777LL.nrcrsVammaro. -Zoning Board-I.xpd Very truly yours, LEAVENWORTH & KARP, P.C. Lo E. Le •.2 worth EXHIBIT A RECORDED AT %� O'CLOCK A.N. AUG i 9 1992 REC # 438117 MILDRED AtSDQRF, COUNTY'. CLEM( 1 STATE OF COLORADO ) )ss County of Garfield ) BOOK 839 °tSESS3 At a regular meeting of the Board of County Commissioners for Garfield County, Colorado, held in the Commissioners' Meeting Room, Garfield County Courthouse, in. Glenwood Springs on , T esday , the l8tlday of August A.D.19. 92 _ . there were present: �/ Arnold L Mackley , Commissioner Chairman Elmer (Mickey) Arbaney Commissioner • MarianL_Smith , Commissioner non DeFord , County Attorney (Absent ) Mildned_Alsclorf , Clerk of the Board Chuck Deschenes County Administrator when the following proceedings, among others were had and done, to -wit RESOLUTION NO. 92-078 A RESOLUTION CONCERNED WITH THE APPROVAL OF A SPECIAL USE PERMIT APPLICATION FOR PAM AND PAUL PINE (PINE'S STONE YARD). WHEREAS, theBoard ofcounty Commissioners of Garfield County, Colorado, has received application frond Pam and Paul Pine for allowing the processing, storage and material handling of natural resources on the following described tracts of land: Located in the SWW of Section 7, T7S, R88W of the 6th P.M. (in the State of Colorado and the County of Garfield); and WHEREAS, the Board held a public hearing on the 10th day of August 1992, upon the question of whether the above-described Special Use Permit should be granted or denied, at which hearing the public and. interested persons were given the opportunity to express their opinions regarding the issuance of Said Special Use Permit; and WHEREAS, the Board on the basis of substantial competent evidence produced at the aforementioned hearing, has made the following determination of fact: 1. That proper publication and public notice was provided as required by law for the hearing before the Board of County Commissioners. . BOOR 839 PAGESS9 2. That the hearing before the Board of County Commissioners was extensive and complete, thatall pertinent facts, matters and issues were submitted and that all interested parties were heard at that hearing. 3. That the application is in compliance with. the Garfield County Zoning Resolution of 1978, as amended. 4. For the above stated and other reasons, the proposed use is in the best interest of the health, safety, morals, convenience, order, prosperity and welfare of the citizens of Garfield County. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Board of County Commissioners of Garfield County, Colorado, that the Special Use Permit be and hereby is authorized permitting the the processing,storage and material Iia dling of natural resources on the above described tract of land upon the following specific conditions .I. All proposals of the applicant Shall be considered conditions of approval unless stated otherwise by the Board of County Commissioners. 2. That limited processing (cutting and shaping) of materials on the site will be limited to • daylight hours. 3. All delivery and staring b211 occur Monday through Friday during daylight hours. Delivery of material on the site during the weekends will be limited to mirirli7P the impact of the use oa adjacent residential uses. 4: . A11 non.licensed on inoperable vehicles and assorted equipment will be removed from tbe site. S. The applicants will construct a berm on the south side of the property, and will plant landscape screening along the property's frontage with Cattle Creek Road (CR. 113). Dated this /R 'day of 4u10s7 , A.D. 19.92 ATTEST: GARFIELD COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS, GARFIELD COUNTY, COLORADO of the Board y (`,},airman Uponmotion duly made and seconded the foregoing Resolution was adopted by the following vote: Arnold L. Mackley Elmer (Buckey) Arbaney Aye Aye Marian I. Smith ,Aye Loyal E. Leavenworth, Esq. Leavenworth & Karp P.O. Drawer 2030 Glenwood Springs, CO 81602 Garfield County BUILDING & PLANNING DEPARTMENT June 23, 2004 Re: Zoning Violation - 0600 County Road 113 Dear Mr. Leavenworth: RECEIVED JUN ' 5 2604 LEAVENWORTH & KAR9 PC. The Building and Planning Department and the County Commissioners of Garfield County have received citizen complaints concerning the operation of the Pine's Stone Company on property they control at 0600 County Road 113. On April 29, 2004, our Code Enforcement Officer sent Notice of Violation to Mr. and Mrs. Pine. We have received a response from your office on their behalf. As you are certainly aware, Resolution No. 92-078 authorized issuance of a Special Use Permit for Paul & Pam Pine for the subject property. Although there has been a great deal of discussion about the parameters of that Special Use Permit since its issuance in August of 1992, the Board of County Commissioners (BOCC) has neither been asked for nor have they authorized amendment of that Resolution. As the Pines have been previously advised, that Resolution specifically incorporated all representations of the applicant. In their written application for that Special Use Permit, the applicants (Paul & Pam Pine) represented the following: "Vehicle uses to this new property would be 0-10 vehicles per day." You will note that in their representations the Pines did not delineate or limit the type or character of "vehicle" to which this representation would apply. In a subsequent report from the Garfield County Staff, and at the public hearing at which the Pine request was considered, the staff of the County stated that the vehicles represented by the Pines would be trucks. Even the Staff's construction of the Pines' actual representation did not limit the type of truck to which the ten (10) vehicle limitation would apply. Therefore, I do not believe that your limitation of the ten (10) vehicular trips per day to "semi -trucks" is supported by your client's representations, the staff construction of those representations, the BOCC approval resolution or the record in this application. It is my position, as the Chief Building Official for Garfield County, that the ten 108 8th Street, Suite 201, Glenwood Springs, Colorado 81601 (970) 945-8212 (970) 285-7972 Fax: (970) 384-3470 June 23, 2004 Mr. Leavenworth Page 2 (10) vehicle trips per day limitation in the Special Use Permit technically applies to all vehicles. As a result of a previous interpretation of my staff, I am willing to accept a limitation on the definition of vehicles to "trucks." However, I am not willing to accept any limitation on that definition as to the type of truck. Therefore, 1 believe that the ten (10) vehicle per day limitation will be enforced as to all types of trucks, including pick-up trucks, in determining whether or not to enforce the provisions of the Garfield County Zoning Resolution in relation to the Pine property. Through this correspondence, I am addressing the current issue that has been brought to the attention of this office by private citizens. By omission, I am not conceding that the remainder of the Pine operation is in compliance with the conditions of their Special Use Permit. As I have indicated in previous correspondence, if you disagree with the administrative construction set forth in this correspondence you or your client are free to seek administrative relief through the Garfield County Board of Adjustment. Thank you for your consideration in this matter. Sincerely, Mark L. Bean, irector Building & Planning Department MLS/DKD/jkm cc: Don K. DeFord, Garfield County Attorney Garfield County Board of County Commissioners Calvin Lee, Esq. brucLaLresmovemal. USE PERHIT Dates July 1 1992 Applicants Pine's Stone Co., Inc.' Paul and. Pam Pine Address of Applicant: P.O. Box 514, Glenwood Springs, CO 81602 P I Special/ donditiona1 Uses A/R%RD. 3.02.03 Site for (extraction), processing, storage or material handling of natural resources. EXHIBIT 's c Legal Description* See attachOd. Practical Description'(locatlon with respect to highways, county roads, and residences): 6/10th of a mile off Hwy. 82 on Cattle Creek Rd. (County Rd. 113), just past J Y;Ranch,.residences to south, west,'•and east sides have partial view of property. Requirements: 1. plans and epecifilcations for proposed use (hours of operation, no. of vehicles/day, location and size of Structures, etc.,) 2. Existing or propos4d method of sewage, source of disposal and water. Road; access and other information deemed necessary to 'explain proposed .use. 3. A vicinity map drawn to scale depicting the subject property, location, and use of building and structures on adjacent lots. . . 4. An impact statement on the proposed use where required by Sections 5.03-5.03.12 of zoning Regulations. 5. A copy of Assessor,'s map showing property; and a listing of all adjoining iSroperty owners of said property. 6. A base fee of $ 1DO Q© shall be charged for each application and shall be submitted with the application, additional charges may be imposed if County review costs exceed the base fee. Attach a copy of proof of ownership for your property tdeed,••title insurance). If public notice is required, notice provided by the Planning Department shall be sent out at least five (5) days prior to hearing by return -receipt mail to all the above noted adjoining property owners. Mailing is the applicant's responsibility and proof of mailing must be presented at the hearing. Additionally, the same ' notice shall be' published one (1) time in the official County newspaper at least fifteen (15) days prior to such hearing date. Applicant shall bear the cost of publication and be responsible for presenting, the "Proof of Publication" at the hearing.• The above information is correct to, the best .off my knowledge. Appl cant .. h 4 424.4, ----•- PINE'S STONE COMPANY • FINE QUALITY MATERIALS AND RELIABLE SERVICE Request for Special Use Permit 71-92 Pines Stone Co., Inc. is located at Cattle Creek & Highway 82 and holds a five year lease on this corner. Our primary sales and business functioning will continue at this location due to its highway frontage. The purpose of the property further down Cattle Creek is primarily for storage due to our outgrowing the lot at the highway. The stone would be stored in the same manner as it is at our current location.. At some time in the future we may build a building for storage ana prslops . 1) Our regular businesshours are 8-5:30 Monday through Friday and a 1/2 day Saturday, during the summer. Vehicle use to this new property would be 0-10 vehicles per day. 2) Source .of water - well on site. (Minimal usage with no current need.) Disposal - No current need is anticipated; a leach field system would be put in if necessary. Access by County Road 113 (Cattle Creek Road). Driveway entrance already in, may need tobe widened. 3) Special use is for south side of road only (approximately 4 acres). It is our intention to build a berm to the south side to lessen any visual impact on our south side neighbor; also to include tree planting along Cattle Creek Road (see vicinity map A). 4) Not applicable. 5) Assessors map: see map B. Property owners: see enclosed sheet. ) Proof of ownership (letter enclosed). PROJECT INFORMATION AND STAFF COMMENTS BOCC 8/10/92 REQUEST: • Special Use permit to allow for the. processing, storage and materia] handling of natural resources. APPLICANT. • Pines Stone! Yard (Pam and Paul Pine, busines owners) A portion olr the SW'/. of Section 7, T7S, R88W bf the 6th P.M.; located on the north side. of Cattle Creek Road (CR 113), 1/2 mile north of State Highway. 82, . STTEDATA: The proposed site consists of 4.0 acres WATER/SEWER: . Well on :property/No Septic Proposed LOCATION. ACCESS. •,'Access diredtly off of Cattle Creek Road (CR 1;13) EXISTING AND ADJACENT,ZOi G' A/R/RD L RELATIONSHIP TO THE COMPREHENSTVEPLAN The subject property is located in District C - Rural Areas with Minor Environmental Constraints as identified on the Comprehensive Plan Management Districts Map. II. DESCRIPTION OF THE PROPOSAL A: . Site Description: The,subjectproperty is a gently rolling square-shaped parcel approximately 300 feet from Cattle Creek. The site sloes from north to south • where Cattle Creek parallels the property line. Scattered sagebrush and native • grasses are scattered. around the property: The site is currently .occupied by assorted agricultural _equipment, an abandoned car ;and, scattered building materials_ A review of the Flood Insurance Rate Map, for this portion of Cattle Creek indicates that the property is located in one C, which indicates areas of minimal flooding. None of the property appears to be located within the regulated floodplain. . . . . .Adjacent to the subject property are single-family residential uses to the east, west and south. These residences look out over the applicants entire site. North of the property is an undevelopedsteep slope, with a BLM parcel further to the north. A primitive access driveway, on what appears to be an easement from the adjacent property to the west, provides access to the site. The applicants have stated the potential need to improve this driveway. •A vicinity map is attached as Exhibit 1 on page 4. The property is currently owned by Albert Herring, .,who has indicated his . support of the application, and contends that he will sell the property to the Pines if a Special Use Permit is granted. See Mr. Herring's 6±92 letter; attached as Exhibit 2 on page 5. • B. Project Description; The applicants are requesting a;Special Use Permit to permit the processing, storage and g of natural resources on a site approximately 1/2:mile east of the current business ]location. The primary sales and processing would continue at its present locatkn. No retail sales are proposed at this location. In essence, the Pine's have outgrown the storage . capacity .of the existing facility. The Pines estimate approximately ten (10) trips. per day will be generated by the storage use. . The applicants are proposing storing the stone in the same manner as at the current location, using bailing wire and fencing to secure rock and stone piles approximately three (3). to four (4) feet high. At some time in the future, the applicants state that they may build a structure for stor4ge and processing. The applicants cover letter is attached as Exhibit 3 on page 6. III. MAJOR ISSUES AND CONCFRNS - A_ Section 3.02.03 lists a "site for extraction, processing, storage or material handling of natural resources" as a Special Use in the A/R/RD zone. 13 The storage of unlicensed, inoperable vehicles, building Materials and auto parts is not a permitted, conditional or special use unless it isaccessory to an allowable use. Based on the orderly storage on the Pine's principi}l business location, the proposed use could be seen as an improvement on. the visual impact of the property on adjacent property owners. • C. The primary consideration in a request of this nature is the compatibility with, adjacent properties. Residential uses are located to. the! west, east and south of the SUP site. The applicants have proposed' a berm on: the south. side . of the property to lessen the visual impact of the proposed] use. In addition, the applicants are proposing to plant screening trees along Cattle Creek Road to mminirni7e the visual impacts of the. proposed use. Staff recommends that the construction of aberxn and the additional landscaping beconditions of approval for the SUP. The ten (10) estimated daily truck trips to the site may generate dust problems for the adjacent residential uses if the existing driveway is not improved. The processing of the rock and stone (cutting, etc..) at this site does present compatibility issues related primarily to noise impacts on the adjacent residences. This is particularly true due to the absence of any permanent 2 structure to contain the noise from processing equipment. N. 1. That the proper publication and public notice was provided as required by law for the hearing before the Board of County Commissioners. 2. That the hearing before the Board of County Commissioners was extensive and complete, that all pertinent facts, matters and issues were submitted and that all interested parties were heard at that hearing. 3. That the proposed Special Use is compatible with the adjacent land uses. 4. For the above stated and other reasons, the proposed Special use is in the best interest of the health, safety, morals, convenience, order, prosperity and welfare of the citizens of Garfield County. V. RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends approval of the Special Use Permit based on the following conditions: 2. z• l 3.} All delivery and stacking shall occur Monday through Friday only; between the a hours of 8:00 A.M. and 5:00 P.M. The delivery or transfer of natural resources That all verbal and written representations made by the applicants in the: application and at the public hearing shall be considered; conditions of approval unless specified otherwise by the Board of County Corpmissioners. M _ p.ag.)-4170aGGuf-eft4li Li t- Priv ss�y� 04 f3 c a K may occur during the weekends, but only during daylight hours. 4.) That all non -licensed or inoperative vehicles and assorted equipment currently on the site will be removed prior to the issuance of the SUP. . • 5.) Prior the issuance of a Final SUP, the applicants will provide the County with a landsoape Ia that describes the Iocation of the 1ierm on the south and landscape screening along. Cattle Creek Road. . The applicants will widen and gravel the existing primitive driveway to control dust generated by. truck deliveries. . : WILL. b.) o brg Alatiew f PERM rr raom r•oaq' p*,," ! P�T4nEu 7-. 3 , . ., S E E\ \ , •‘ ,14 ... t \ , No. 2393-6 EL*71.pArc"...;:.:,-!:[.:• ' .:;..„,;."..i.; i ..,74 • . 1 ,- --- . 7.32 EA ..• • '• ' (en) CURRENT RETAIL» -.LOCATION ',,1I1 L) 31 PROPOSED LOCATION -F • ---1,,, k \ - \ .4 I S - i e MAP Exhibit 1 Vicinity Map Pine's Stone Yard Special Use Permit 10' 111 I. al" If .•••4 • .4. (092 • ;• ; : 2.. RESIDENTIAL USES 1,1 • • •+3; • • '•• W.. • • • • ,;• I 0 8.) Lit rt7rTypiry \•{107) . ScALL--• /0 b.ditcry tI �n c. 77;71,4:J LCA OWM 1z� C©NsENT PINE'S STONE COMPANY FINE QUALITY MATERIALS AND RELIABLE SERVICE 310 wI A/1er7- j% S73. a-, a- deo rc7„ t-41.11L5rr . Arps Le'[1Eg.. PINES STONE COMPANY • ANE QUALITY MATERIALS AND RELIABLE SERVICE Request for Special Use Permit 7-1-92 Pine's Stone Co.., Inca is located'at Cattle Creek & Iiighway 82 and holds a five year lease an .this corner. Our primary. sales and business functioning will continue at .this location due to its highway frontage. The purpose.of the property furtherdown Cattle Creek is primarily for storage.due to our.outgrowing the lot at the highway. •The.stone would.be stored in the same manner as it is at our current location. At some time in -the future we may build a building for storage and processing. 1) Our regularbusiness hours are 8-5:30 Monday through Friday and a 1/2 day Saturday during the summer. Vehicle use to this new property would be 0-10 vehicles per day. 2) Source of. .water - well: on site. (Minimal.usage with no current ned.) Disposal -- No current need is anticipated; a leach field .• system would be put in if. necessary..' Access by .County Road 113 '(Cattle Creek. Road). Driveway entrance already in, may need to be widened. Special use is for south side 'of road only (approximately 4 acres). It is our intention to build a berm to thje south side to lessen any visual impact on our south side neighbor; also to include tree planting along Cattle Creek Road (see vicinity map A) I) Not .applicable. . i) Assessors map: see map B. Property owners:. see enclosed sheet. ') Proof of ownership (letter enclosed). .0000xiwee A'. .,►#► fitter . */ JO August, 1992 - Page 447 EXHIBIT E PROCEEDINGS OF THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS. GARFIELD COUNTY. COLORADO August 10, 1992 RE GRAD King disc 3 month rental of John Deere grader from Honnen Equipm-- that • has 65 hours on it. 100% of the rental would apply to d purchase pric PUBLIC HEARING FOR STORAGE OF NATURAL RESOURCES; LOCATED ON CATTLE CREEK ROAD 1/2 MILE NORTH OF HWY 82- APPLICANT: PINE'S STONE CO Chairman Pro Tem Arbaney swore in the applicants, Paul and Pam Pine, and all people wishing to speak.. Pam Pine explained that she obtained addresses of all adjacent property owners from the Assessor's office. Dave Michaelson stated that he double checked the notices. Dave introduced two return receipts and legal notice as Exhibit A. Exhibit B is the application and Exhibit C is the staff report. Chairman Pro Tera Arbaney entered Exhibits A through C into the record. Dave explained that this is a,request for a Special Use Permit to allow. for processing, storage and material handling of natural resources in connection with Pine's Stone Yard. The site they are proposing is not their present retail site, it is a 4 -acre site approximately 1/2 mile from their existing retail location. The property is owned by Mr. . Albert Herring and there is a letter in the staff report indicating his consent for the Pine's application for a Special Use Permit. The site is about 300' away from the Cattle Creek drainage, gently sloping and undeveloped. There are several pieces of agricultural equipment on the site now that'the Pines have agreed to remove from the site if they are granted a Special Use Permit. Dave stated that he had reviewed the Flood Insurance Rate Map and none of the property is located within a regulated flood plain. There are several adjacent residential uses next to the site. Dave stated that he heard nothing from the neighboring residents and the Pines have spoken to them. The Pines are requesting a permit to store surplus rock and natural resource material similar to what they have on their site on Cattle Creek. Dave stated that the Pine's storage yard is a neat facility. Dave said that the main consideration with any permit like this Is compatibility. In the application the Pine's have proposed a berm on the south side of the property. (Staff feels this is a good idea and should be a condition of approval) and the planting of screening trees along the road to mitigate the impact to neighboring residents. The applicants are expecting approximately 10 truck trips per day bringing in raw materials to be stacked or'loaded and brought back to the retail operation site. Dave discussed staff recommendations and stated that the Pines have agreed that no cutting and shaping of the rocks will occur on that site. They have mentioned that they may build a structure out there and Dave stated that there should not be any problem with processing or chipping the stone irn the enclosed structure but it may be a problem now with the neighboring residents. Dave said the staff recommended delivering and stacking to occur Monday through Friday only between 8:00 A.M. and 5:00 P.M. with delivery or transfer of natural resources may occur during the weekends but only during the daylight hours. Dave stated that the landscape plan was intended only to indicate the type of trees to be planted. Dave stated that No. 6 be deleted and instead read "The applicants will obtain a driveway permit from Road and Bridge prior to the construction of the driveway." Paul Pine stated that they had heard from of the surrounding property \owners and everything was positive. Paul said they would like to be moble to do some cutting at the property and be able to do some retail sales in case the property where they are located is sold. They,are becoming more of a wholesale operation which involves a lesser amount of traffic. After discussion regarding sales at the property, Dave stated that he would check with Don and Mark to see if the code interpretation of extraction, processing, storage or material handling of natural resources includes retail sales. If this includes retail sales, then there is no problem. Pam Pine said that they would plant Russian Olives or cottonless cottonwood trees as this is what a soil analysis said would grow best August, 1992 -- Page 448 PROCEEDINGS OF THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS. GARFIELD COUNTY, COLORADO August 10, 1992 there and they would place them far enough from the road so as not to have a problem. After Al Herring wash sworn in, he stated that the Pines have leased the property from him for five years. The Pines really cleaned up the property and have an option to purchase the property. Al stated that they are excellent tenants. Commissioner Smith made a motion that the Public Hearing be closed. Commissioner Arbaney stepped down as Chairman Pro Tem and seconded the motion; carried. Commissioner Smith made a motion that a Special Use Permit to allow for the processing, storage and material handling of natural resources be granted to Pine's Stone Yard for Pam and Paul Pine for a site on Cattle Creek with all of the recommendations and findings of staff as part of the approval. Under Item No. 3 the recommendation will be during daylight hours rather than 8:00 A.M. to 5:00 P.M. and under Item No. 6 the applicants shall obtain a'driveway permit from the Road and Bridge Department for a new driveway and limited processing can occur on the site. Commissioner Arbaney stepped down as Chairman Pro Tem to second the motion; carried. PUBLIC HEARING FOR A HOME OCCUPATION; LOCATED,A C.R. 206 AND C.R. 301 OUTSIDE PARACHUTE -AP CANT: DAN WIEGNER Chairman Pro Tem Arbane - ore in every • a wishing to speak at the hearing. Dave Michaelson•st- d tha here were no noticing or mailing requirements for a home occupati.a. Dave said Exhibit A would be the Staff Report and Exhibit B is t'- ap• ication. Dan Wiegner submitted photographs which become Exhicit C. C ='rman Pro Tem Arbaney entered Exhibits A through C into t'- record. Dave explained the Dan Wiegner is applying for a Conditional Use Permit to allow home occupation on a piece of propeFty southeast of the Town of Parachute. The site is approximately 1/2 acre in size. The property is located on tsouth side of p!R. 301 near the northwest corner of C.R. 301 and Wes t` Battlement Parkway. The property is currently occupied by a sin• e story rsidence, a garage and two outbuildings. The applicant a.- requesting to operate a small studio for antiques and other collectib.es,/out of the existing structure and an adjacent accessory building. •:n Wiegner is proposing interior remodeling only to accomodate t `u - of the site. Dave stated that this would be a low volume busi ess t would be conducted in a living room atmosphere with much of e busine s conducted through the mail He will be the sole employe- of the busi -ss. Dan Weigner would serve as a finder of collectible-. Dave stated hat the Staff recommended approval with the stipula on that any expansion or modification of the home occupation shall re• ire the applicant to file a new Conditional Use Permit application; a sign permit shall be obtained and a building permit will be obtained for the proposed remodeling. Dan Wiegner discussed his busines •lans with theommissioners. Commissioner Smith made a motion that he Publ,c Hearing be closed. Commissioner Arbaney stepped down as Ch-'rman%Pro Tem and seconded the motion; carried. Commissioner Smith made a motion that a •ndi Tonal Use Permit for a home occupation be granted to Dan Wiegn for and located in the Green Subdivision located southeast of the T of Pa -chute and the conditions and recommendations of th staff with e request for a sign permit and a building permit. Commissioner Arbane stepped down as Chairman Pro Tem and seconded the motion; carried. MOUNTAIN VIEW BUILDING DISCUSSION There was discussion about the Moun .in Vie /-- Building and any proposed moves and the affect upon Rich Alary' budget. There was discussion about Department of Social Services, Ve'-rans, Nursing with Prenatal and Extension as possible departments m• i•g. There were questions about obtaining the appropriate inform. ion -.out what changes can be done to make the building comply with ,'A. S..ris Mental Health is August, 1992 - Page 452 PROCEEDINGS OF THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS, GARFIELD COUNTY, COLORADO August 18, 1992 and long time residents have confirmed that the Simms Junk Yard has been in existhnce since the late 1960s or early 1970s. Earl stated that he had a crusher in there now and an outside salvage yard in there taking things. He said he would like to establish a pre-existing use tb give him time to dispose of some of the collectible items that are there. Earl stated/ that hewanted to keep the sawmill. Earl said that the salvage yard would be a lot smaller and neater. Earl stated that the family should remove their items within the next six months. Michael Watts discussed the ;.conditions of the property stating that the only way to establish the pre-existing use is to make an agreement with Earl as to what would be allowed. Commissioner Arbaney said that he felt a trip out there would be necessary to establish a baseline. Chairman Mackley said that they wuld try to come some time after the first of September. / Michael said that S anglers and JY are the only salvage yards in the County. Earl stat d that he felt he might be able to keep his salvage operation smaller. RESOLUTIONS FOR APPROVAL OF SPECIAL USE PERMIT FOR PAUL AND PINE STONE, PINE'S STONE YARD AND APPROVAL OF CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT FOR DAN WIEGNER Dave Michaelson'discussed the Special Use Permit for Paul and Pine Stone stating that he had written them.a letter informing them that retail sales are not allowed with this Special Use Permit. If they wanted to do retail sales at that location, it would be necessary to pursue a zone amendment change. Commissioner Smith made a motion that the Chairman be authorized to sign a resolution concerned with the approval of a Special Use Permit Application for Pam and Paul Pine, Pine's Stone Yard, and a resolution concerned with the approval of a Conditional Use Permit Application by Dan Wiegner; Commissioner Arbaney seconded the motion; carried. SECTION 125 PLAN Commissioner Smitdiscussed Section 125 plans that can be used for dependent health care premiums, optical and child care and suggested that this be discusser at the next Personnel meeting. PAYABLE CLAIMS Regarding the bills, Comrissioner Smith mad a motion that the payable claims against the County for the second n of July be approved; Commissioner Arbaney seconded the motion- carried. EXECUTIVE SESSION -DISCUSS ROAD., AND BRI GE CONTRACT Commissioner Arbaney made a motion thlat the Board go into Executive Session to discuss potential litigation; Commissioner Smith seconded the motion; carried. Commissioner mith made a motion that the Board come out of Executive Session and econvene as the Board of County Commissioners. Commissioner Arb ey•.seconded the motion; carried. 4 Commissioner Arbaney looked at/a tar sand sample and was impressed that the County may be able to use it in building roads. King Lloyd, Road and Bridge Supervisor for Garfield County, was sent a video on tar sand. it / COMMENTS FROM CITIZENS NQT ON AGENDA Ken Call, County Assessgr, is sworn in and -testes he is recommending approval of an abatement. It is personal pr••erty, schedule #P320287 for $20.55, in regards/to Media Consultants s edule. Commissioner Smith made a motion that it be approved; Commi- ioner Arbaney seconded the motion; carrief A date is being s for September 14, 1992, at 4:1for comments by Gregory Bevers r arding an abatement. The amount is $1,520.05. Commissioner Arbney made aimotion to set this dat-• Commissioner Smith seconded the motion; carried. September 14, 1993 Paul & Pam Pine P.O. Box 514 Glenwood Springs, CO 81602 Mr. & Mrs. Pine: GARFIELD COUNTY BUILDING AND PLANNING Recently, a review of your Special Use Permit was conducted by the Building and Zoning staff of Garfield County. This review brought to light three (3) specific areas in which itis believed the Special Use Permit, granted you by the Garfield Board of County Commissioners on August 10, 1992, is being violated. These areas are: 1. The use of the Cattle Creek location as the primary and only business location for Pine's Stone Yard: -Your request for a Special Use Permit specifically states that a) you have a five (5) year lease at 82 and Cattle Creek , b) the primary sales and business functioning will continue at the 82 site and c) the purpose of the Cattle Creek property is primarily for storage. -In the Special Use Hearing before the Garfield Board of County Commissioners, it was represented that a) you requested a permit to store surplus rock and natural resources, b) you expect ten (10) truck trips per day to either bring in raw materials or take thein back to the retail site (i.e. 82 & Cattle Creek). -Resolution #438117 granted you the ability to a) store natural resources on the Cattle Creek property as long as deliveries are Monday through Friday during daylight hours and b) the ability to perform limited processing (Le. cutting and shaping). The Board of County Commissioners only rules on what is specifically requested in a Special Use Permit application and the hearing. These specific uses are the basis for a signed resolution. This limited use of the Cattle Creek location was reiterated again to 109 8T1-1 STREET, SUITE 303 • 945-82121625-55711285-7972 • GLENWOOD SPRINGS, COLORADO 81601 Paul & Pam Pine September 14, 1993 Page 2 you by Mark Bean in. his letter of January 15, 1993 when he states "it is staff's position that the entire transfer of your operation would be a violation of both the Zoning Resolution (for uses in A/R/RD Districts) and your Special Use Permit". 2. The construction of a building (single -wide mobile home) which is being used as an office: -Your request for Special Use Permit states that "at some time in the future we may build a building for storage and processing" -In your letter of January 14,1993 to Mark Bean, you ask him to confirm that "Only a building permit would be required for the construction of an office/warehouse structure". His response was that the construction of a warehouse would be consistent with the S.U.P. and that only a building permit would be needed. This letter specifically omits the authorization of an office on the Cattle Creek site. A site investigation confirms that a structure has been erected and is being use on the property. But, to date no buildingpermit has been applied for or granted, plus this structure is being used for an office vs. a warehouse. This use was not part of the S.U.P. request nor was it granted by the Board. In fact, it was represented in the application and in the hearing that the sales and business .functions were to continue at another location. This coupled with the fact that the use of a single -wide mobile home is not a legitimate use within the A/R/RD Zone District makes the office structure doublely illegal. • 3. Limited effort has been made to screen the property: - At the S.U.P. hearing, you committed to construct visual screening of the activities which were to be conducted on the Cattle Creek property. - This screening commitment was made binding in Resolution #438117. Specifically, condition #5 requires you to construct a berm and landscape screening. Paul & Pam Pine September 14, 1993 Page 3 Staff is aware that a berm has been constructed and trees have been planted, but it is believed that neither of these, in their present form, provide the required visual screening of the Stone Yard activity from either County Road 113 or adjacent neighbors which was the intent of the condition. It is staff's opinion that all of these issues must be brought into compliance within the next thirty (30) days by adherence to conditions of approval in Resolution #438117 and. representations made to receive the approval. Another option is to apply for a modification of the S.U.P. approved by going back to a public hearing before the Board. I sincerely hope that these issues can be resolved quickly with a minimum amount of inconvenience to you and I thank you in advance for your cooperation. Thank you, Michael E. Watts Codes Enforcement MEW/sa !0 t: [:;. EXHIBIT � G GARFIELD COUNTY REGULATORY OFFICES AND PERSONNEL February 4, 1993 Paul & Pam Pine P.O. Box 514 Glenwood Springs, CO 81602 RE: Resolution No. 92-078 Dear Mr. & Mrs. Pine: Based on your various conversations and your 1/21/93 letter stating that you will not allow or advertise for any retail sales and only store and wholesale the materials, you will be in compliance with Resolution No. 92-078. The resolution approves the processing, storage and material handling of natural resources. "Material handling" is defined as the loading and unloading of goods, materials and products, whether industrial or commercial, in bulk, excluding the operations of extraction, processing, fabrication or storage. Wholesale sales would seem to be a logical part of a bulk loading, storage and unloading of goods. If you have any further questions, feel free to call or write to this office. Mark L. Bean, Director Regulatory Offices and Personnel MLB/sa