HomeMy WebLinkAbout20121838.tiff SUMMARY OF THE WELD COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING
Tuesday, July 3, 2012
DP A regular meeting of the Weld County Planning Commission was held in the Weld County
Administration Building, Hearing Room, 1150 O Street, Greeley, Colorado. The meeting was called to order
by Chair, Tom Holton, at 1:30 p.m.
Roll Call.
Present: Benjamin Hansford,Jason Maxey,Joyce Smock,Mark Lawley,Nick Berryman,Robert Grand,
Thomas Holton.
Absent/Excused: Alexander Zauder, Bill Hall.
Also Present: Kim Ogle, Chris Gathman, Diana Aungst, Michelle Martin and Tom Parko Department of
Planning Services; Don Carroll, Department of Public Works; Lauren Light and Mary Evett, Department of
Health; Brad Yatabe, County Attorney, and Kris Ranslem, Secretary.
I" Motion: Approve the June 19, 2012 Weld County Planning Commission minutes, Moved by Robert
Grand, Seconded by Joyce Smock. Motion passed unanimously.
CASE NUMBER: USR12-0022
APPLICANT: ROBERT L SELTZER FAMILY TRUST
PLANNER: CHRIS GATHMAN
REQUEST: A SITE SPECIFIC DEVELOPMENT PLAN AND USE BY SPECIAL REVIEW
PERMIT ANY USE PERMITTED AS A USE BY RIGHT,AN ACCESSORY USE,OR
A USE BY SPECIAL REVIEW IN THE COMMERCIAL OR INDUSTRIAL ZONE
DISTRICTS (OUTSIDE RECREATIONAL VEHICLE STORAGE AND MISC.
STORAGE)PROVIDED THAT THE PROPERTY IS NOT A LOT IN AN APPROVED
OR RECORDED SUBDIVISION PLAT OR LOTS PARTS OF A MAP OR PLAN
FILED PRIOR TO ADOPTION OF ANY REGULATIONS CONTROLLING
SUBDIVISIONS IN THE A(AGRICULTURAL)ZONE DISTRICT.
LEGAL DESCRIPTION: LOT D REC EXEMPT RE-4482;PART SW4/W2SE4 SECTION 34,Ti N,R67W OF
THE 6TH P.M.,WELD COUNTY, COLORADO
LOCATION: NORTH OF CR 2; EAST OF AND ADJACENT TO CR 19.
Chris Gathman, Planning Services, presented Case USR12-0022, reading the recommendation and
comments into the record. There were four(4)letters of opposition from three surrounding property owners.
These letters noted a number of concerns and issues, including but not limited to, 1)that the business is not
an agricultural related use, 2) impacts on property values, 3)traffic impacts, 4)traffic safety, 5) inadequate
facilities for customers,6)environmental impacts from leaking fluids from vehicles and trash,7)potential for
storage of industrial vehicles and equipment on the site, 8)fire protection concerns,9)potential for crime,theft
and vandalism, 10) potential of dumping waste from RV's on site, 11) concern for precedent for more
commercial development in the area. Additionally,staff received two(2)letters from property owners north of
the site stating that they had no concerns or opposition to this request. The Department of Planning Services
recommends approval of this application with the attached conditions of approval and development standards.
Commissioner Lawley asked what the miscellaneous storage would be. Mr. Gathman said that he is trying to
get more clarification on that as well; however the applicant would be able to answer that question.
r' Don Carroll, Public Works,reported on the conditions of approval and development standards included
in the staff report. He stated that County Road 19 is classified as an arterial roadway. Mr. Carroll noted that
there were 469 vehicles on County Road 19 in 2011. The applicant is proposing an additional 21 trips during
Phase 1 and an additional 43 trips during Phase 2 on that roadway.
Lauren Light, Environmental Health,noted that the application states that no water or sewer facilities or
1
Orr)mum t eaut,c'"tia
7_/l, _aCicZ 2012-1838
dump station on site. According to Environmental Health Policy, if there will be more than 10 people on site
during the day, then permanent water and sewage disposal facilities are required. She added that the
applicants are requesting a waiver from the required permanent water and sewer facilities. Ms.Light reported
in the conditions of approval and development standard included in the staff report.
Bob Rickard announced that he is the agent for the Robert Seltzer Family Trust. He introduced Dave
Meyer.
David Meyer, Vertex Construction Services, stated that they are representing the applicant. The applicant
currently operates three(3)other similar RV storage facilities within the metropolitan area. He noted that the
facility operator,Craig Paulson,has over 18 years experience operating similar facilities. At full build out they
anticipate this site to have 800 spaces. He added that the site will encumber approximately 16 acres. Mr.
Meyer stated that they have complied with all the Fire and Emergency requirements, including a proposed
secondary access to the facility. There is a 24 hour secured gate with a light and security camera. While
there will be no full-time employee on site there are other local employees who would be available to rent out
spaces. They feel they have tried to mitigate the concerns with the neighbors. They are asking for a variance
of the required permanent water and bathroom facilities because of the infrequency of use.
With regard to the miscellaneous storage, the majority of the storage will be boat and RV's however they
intend to allow some flexibility. He added that there will be no construction material storage or hazardous
material storage allowed on site.Commissioner Lawley asked Mr. Meyer to clarify the miscellaneous storage.
Mr. Meyer said that they would like to work with the Planning Department on limiting the area or what can be
stored there.
Commissioner Maxey inquired what type of screening the applicant is proposing, given the elevation. Mr.
Meyer stated that they are proposing a cedar privacy fence along the roadway.
Craig Poulsen, 2385 Indian Paint Brush Drive, Littleton, CO, stated that with regard to the miscellaneous
storage they can get specific language that should help clear that up. He added that this will be a clean
operation. Mr. Poulsen stated that they could place a fence on top of a berm that would help with the
screening. He added that many of their clients have complained that the sap from trees have damaged their
vehicles.
is The Chair asked if there was anyone in the audience who wished to speak for or against this application.
Steve Neal, 4465 1 E 115 Avenue, Thornton, CO, stated that he owns the lot across the street from the site.
They purchased the lot for its agricultural area and the views and added that they intend to construct a home
in the future. He is opposed to this request as they don't want the view of RV storage, decrease in property
values,crime,traffic and noise. He added that many of the neighbors have invested a lot of money in building
their homes there. He has owned the property for 12 years.
r Kennard Knudson, 305 CR 19, Brighton, CO, stated that he lives directly across the subject site. He is
opposed to this request as his home is currently valued at $1 million and is concerned that the value will
decrease significantly. Mr. Knudson added that he is also concerned with the quality of life and the traffic
congestion during peak times on Friday and Sunday afternoon for 800 spaces. He has lived there since 2001.
Jeanne Ware, 845 CR 19, Brighton, CO, stated that she lives '/z mile away from the site. She was
disappointed that she was not notified of this development but learned of it through her neighbors.She added
that this proposal will make an impact on them as well. Ms.Ware stated that she loves the rural nature of the
area and added that County Road 19 has a lot of traffic and she is very concerned with traffic safety. She
asked the Planning Commission to consider their impacts and their homes and urged them to deny this
request. She has lived there since 2001.
► Vicki Knudson, 305 CR 19, said that the homes in the neighborhood are custom homes valued from
$600,000 to $1 million. They looked at this area as an investment. In addition, they have considered
2
subdividing their property for additional homes and this RV Park will be devastating to these investments.
Di' Tim Seltzer,33641 CR 83, Briggsdale,CO,stated that he represents the Robert Seltzer Family Trust.He
said that they have owned the property since 1914 and were active farmers until Westminster wanted the
water rights from the property. The Chair asked Mr.Seltzer if he could address the public comments after the
public portion of the hearing is closed.
► Lori Wellhouse,773 CR 19,stated that she has lived there a couple of years and enjoys the open space
and the incredible beauty of the area. They have had to endure a lot of traffic just with the oil and gas traffic
and it has recently died down. She is concerned with traffic safety with the additional traffic with RV's and
campers.
D' Tim Seltzer said that they located the park because of site specific reasons. He added that there is a hill
northwest of the site that slopes to the site. He said that his mother lives directly north of the facility and added
that they wouldn't place this park there if she didn't like it. Since the water on site dried up, farming on this
parcel is not an option. He believes it is compatible with the area since the Dry Creek proposal sits to the
south,east and west of the site.Additionally,there is a 24 inch gas main that runs through the property as well
as other pipeline right-of-ways throughout the remaining parcel since the 1950s. Mr.Seltzer said that they will
monitor what will be stored on the property.
Commissioner Lawley proposed that the water and sewer issue be resolved after the miscellaneous storage is
clarified. He is not opposed to alternative requirements or no requirements but feels that the miscellaneous
aspect needs to be defined. He added that this could be worked out between the applicant and staff.
Robert Grand moved to modify the requirements of the water and sewer facilities. Maxey expressed that he is
concerned that there will be a lot of people out there
Robert Grand moved to modify Condition of Approval 1.C and Development Standards 10 through 12,
seconded by Nick Berryman.
Vote: Motion passed (summary: Yes =4, No = 3, Abstain = 0).
Yes: Benjamin Hansford, Joyce Smock, Nick Berryman, Robert Grand.
No: Jason Maxey, Mark Lawley, Thomas Holton.
Robert Grand moved to delete Condition of Approval 1.C and Development Standards 10 through 12,
seconded by Nick Berryman.
Vote: Motion passed (summary: Yes =4, No = 3,Abstain =0).
Yes: Benjamin Hansford, Joyce Smock, Nick Berryman, Robert Grand.
No: Jason Maxey, Mark Lawley, Thomas Holton.
Commissioner Holton expressed the need for screening for this facility. He asked if a plan has been
presented to staff. Mr. Gathman said that they have requested a screening plan; however they have not
received anything yet. The applicants are proposing screening along the roadway on County Road 19.
Motion: Modify Condition of Approval 1.H to include a landscape/screening plan, Moved by Jason
Maxey, Seconded by Benjamin Hansford.
Motion passed unanimously.
r The Planning Commission discussed the miscellaneous storage issue and the consensus was to further
define it. Mr. Meyer said that they would like to work with staff to further define that so everyone knows what
might be allowed out there prior to the Board of County Commissioners hearing.
The Chair asked the applicant if he read through the amended Development Standards and Conditions of
3
Approval and if they are in agreement with those. The applicant replied that he is in agreement.
► Motion: Forward Case USR12-0022 to the Board of County Commissioners along with the amended
Conditions of Approval and Development Standards with the Planning Commission's recommendation of
approval, Moved by Robert Grand, Seconded by Nick Berryman.
Vote: Motion carried by unanimous roll call vote (summary: Yes = 7).
Yes: Benjamin Hansford,Jason Maxey,Joyce Smock, Mark Lawley,Nick Berryman, Robert Grand,Thomas
Holton.
Commissioner Smock liked that the applicant intends to work with the surrounding property owner.
Commissioner Maxey cited Section 22-2-20.G A.Goal 7, Policy 7.2 and encouraged the applicant to work with
the surrounding property owners to make this a compatible site.
Commissioner Grand feels that the property owners have a right to use their property as long as it meets the
County Codes. He recommended that the applicants resolve the miscellaneous storage area to provide a
facility with the quality as indicated by the owners.
Commissioner Holton cited Section 22-2-20.1.3 A Policy 9.3 regarding mitigating impacts on the facility by a
landscape and screening plan.
The Chair called a recess at 3:22 pm and reconvened the hearing at 3:31 pm.
DP CASE NUMBER: USR12-0026
APPLICANT: STERLING ENERGY INVESTMENTS LLC
PLANNER: KIM OGLE
REQUEST: A SITE SPECIFIC DEVELOPMENT PLAN AND SPECIAL REVIEW PERMIT FORA
NON-1041 MAJOR FACILITY OF A PUBLIC UTILITY(ONE(1)GREATER THAN
10-INCH NATURAL GAS TRANSMISSION PIPELINE)IN THE A(AGRICULTURAL)
ZONE DISTRICT
LEGAL DESCRIPTION: THE PREFERRED ROUTE CROSSES THE S2SW4 SECTION 2;S2E2 SECTION
2; SE4SE4 SECTION 3; S2SW4 AND SW4SE4 SECTION 4; S2S2 SECTION 5;
W2SW4 SECTION 6; SE4SW4 AND S2SE4 SECTION 6; NE4NE4 SECTION 9;
N2NW4 AND NW4NE4 SECTION 10; NE4NE4 SECTION 10 TOWNSHIP 9
NORTH,RANGE 59 WEST;N2S2 SECTION 1;E2SE4 SECTION 2;SE4 SECTION
8;S2S2 SECTION 9;W2SW4 SECTION 10;S2E2SW4 AND S2SE4 SECTION 10;
S2S2, E2E2 SECTION 11; NE4 SECTION 19 TOWNSHIP 9 NORTH, RANGE 60
WEST OF THE 6TH P.M.,WELD COUNTY COLORADO
LOCATION: WEST-EAST ALIGNMENT COMMENCES AT CR 101 AND TERMINATES AT
CR 117. GENERALLY LINE IS LOCATED ON NORTH SIDE OF CR 106,THEN
AT CR 107 HEADS NORTH TO CR 108 THEN EAST TO TERMINUS.
Kim Ogle, Planning Services, presented Case USR12-0026, reading the recommendation and
comments into the record. The Department of Planning Services recommends approval of this application
with the attached conditions of approval and development standards. In addition, Public Works and
Environmental Health presented their reports and stated that they have no concerns with this request.
Stuart Asselin, Bobcat Lane, Littleton CO, Executive Vice President for Sterling Energy Investments,
stated that he has read the staff report and has no concerns. They have requested early release of building
permits and have begun construction. In response to Ms.Smock's inquiry,Mr.Asselin stated that the pipeline
is 10 inches in diameter.
The Chair asked if there was anyone in the audience who wished to speak for or against this application. No
one wished to speak.
The Chair asked the applicant if he read through the amended Development Standards and Conditions of
4
Approval and if they are in agreement with those. The applicant replied that he is in agreement but asked that
Condition of Approval 1.6 and 1.C be removed as those items have been completed.
Motion: Delete Condition of Approvals 1.B and 1.C, Moved by Robert Grand, Seconded by Benjamin
Hansford.
Motion passed unanimously.
Dr Motion: Approve Case USR12-0026 along with the Conditions of Approval and Development
Standards, Moved by Jason Maxey, Seconded by Benjamin Hansford.
Vote: Motion carried by unanimous roll call vote (summary: Yes = 7).
Yes: Benjamin Hansford,Jason Maxey,Joyce Smock,Mark Lawley,Nick Berryman, Robert Grand,Thomas
Holton.
D` CASE NUMBER: PUDZ12-0002
APPLICANT: PODTBURG SONS DAIRY LLC
PLANNER: CHRIS GATHMAN
REQUEST: REQUEST TO AMEND THE CHANGE OF ZONE PLAT OF SIERRA ACRES
PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT (PZ-1089 TO ALLOW A SINGLE-FAMILY
RESIDENCE TO BE BUILT ON OUTLOT 3.
LEGAL DESCRIPTION: OUTLOT 3,SIERRA ACRES PUD;BEING PART OF SECTION 19,T6N,R66W OF
THE 6TH P.M.,WELD COUNTY, COLORADO
LOCATION: WEST OF AND ADJACENT TO CR 27 AND SOUTH OF AND ADJACENT TO
STATE HIGHWAY 392.
CASE NUMBER: PUDF12-0001
APPLICANT: PODTBURG SONS DAIRY LLC
PLANNER: CHRIS GATHMAN
REQUEST: REQUEST TO AMEND THE FINAL PLAT OF SIERRA ACRES PLANNED UNIT
DEVELOPMENT(PF-1089)TO ALLOW A SINGLE-FAMILY RESDIENCE TO BE
BUILT ON OUTLOT 3.
LEGAL DESCRIPTION: OUTLOT 3 SIERRA ACRES PUD;BEING PART OF SECTION 19,T6N,R66W OF
THE 6TH P.M., WELD COUNTY, COLORADO.
LOCATION: WEST OF AND ADJACENT TO CR 27 AND SOUTH OF AND ADJACENT TO
STATE HIGHWAY 392.
Chris Gathman, Planning Services, presented Cases PUDZ12-0002 and PUDF12-0001, reading the
recommendation and comments into the record. The Department of Planning Services recommends approval
of these applications with the attached conditions of approval. In addition, Public Works and Environmental
Health presented their reports and stated that they have no concerns with this request.
Staff recommended adding a Condition of Approval to PUDF12-0001 which reads "Activities such as
landscaping (i.e. planting of trees and shrubs) and construction (i.e auxiliary structures, dirt mounds, etc.)
activities are expressly prohibited in the designated absorption field site."
Motion: Add Condition of Approval to PUDF12-0001 as recommended by Staff, Moved by Robert Grand,
Seconded by Jason Maxey.
Motion passed unanimously.
Tim Naylor,4350 Hwy 66, Longmont CO,stated that the applicants are requesting a change of zone and
amended final plat to construct a residence on Outlot 3 of Sierra Acres. The applicants have owned Outlot 3,
which is adjacent to their existing dairy. Outlot 3 is separated by an irrigation ditch and has a separate access
onto County Road 27 from the Sierra Acres Subdivision.
The Chair asked if there was anyone in the audience who wished to speak for or against this application. No
one wished to speak.
5
The Chair asked the applicant if he read through the amended Conditions of Approval and if they are in
agreement with those. The applicant replied that he is in agreement.
Motion: Forward Case PUDZ12-0002 to the Board of County Commissioners along with the Conditions
of Approval with the Planning Commission's recommendation of approval, Moved by Jason Maxey,
Seconded by Benjamin Hansford.
Vote: Motion carried by unanimous roll call vote (summary: Yes =7).
Yes: Benjamin Hansford,Jason Maxey,Joyce Smock, Mark Lawley, Nick Berryman, Robert Grand,Thomas
Holton.
Motion: Forward Case PUDF12-0001 to the Board of County Commissioners along with the Conditions
of Approval with the Planning Commission's recommendation of approval, Moved by Jason Maxey,
Seconded by Benjamin Hansford.
Vote: Motion carried by unanimous roll call vote (summary: Yes = 7).
Yes: Benjamin Hansford,Jason Maxey,Joyce Smock, Mark Lawley,Nick Berryman, Robert Grand,Thomas
Holton.
CASE NUMBER: USR12-0027
APPLICANT: STEVE&SHERYL GULLEY
PLANNER: DIANA AUNGST
REQUEST: A SITE SPECIFIC DEVELOPMENT PLAN AND USE BY SPECIAL REVIEW
PERMIT FOR MINERAL RESOURCE DEVELOPMENT FACILITIES INCLUDING:
OIL AND GAS SUPPORT AND SERVICE (WATER HAULING) IN THE A
(AGRICULTURAL)ZONE DISTRICT.
LEGAL DESCRIPTION: LOT D REC EXEMPT RE-3963; PART N2 SECTION 17,T6N, R64W OF THE 6TH
P.M.,WELD COUNTY, COLORADO.
LOCATION: SOUTH AND ADJACENT TO CR 70 AND APPROXIMATELY ONE-QUARTER
MILE WEST OF CR 53.
Diana Aungst, Planning Services, presented Case USR12-0027, reading the recommendation and
comments into the record. Staff has received eight(8)letters in opposition to this request from surrounding
property owners which include concerns of speed, dust and noise from the trucks including the use of jake
brakes and low water pressure. In a conversation with the applicant,they stated that they held a neighborhood
meeting on Saturday, June 30th and the applicant has agreed to take action to try to mitigate some of these
concerns. The Department of Planning Services recommends approval of this application with the attached
conditions of approval and development standards.
r Don Carroll,Public Works, reported on the conditions of approval and development standards included
in the staff report. The access will be onto County Road 70,which is classified as a local, gravel road. The
applicant is proposing that 100 percent of the traffic will go west of the site to County Road 51. If there will be
traffic going east then dust control will need to be addressed.
Lauren Light, Environmental Health,reported on the conditions of approval and development standards
included in the staff report. They have no concerns with this request.
I► Jeff Wright,A&W Water, 1892 Denver Ave, Ft. Lupton CO,stated that this site was a temporary site. Mr.
Wright said that they are estimating 300 gallons per minute from the hydrant provided by North Weld County
Water District. He noted that he talked to the 4 property owners in opposition. In addition, they held a
neighborhood meeting on Saturday with several landowners in the area. Originally they proposed 90%of the
truck traffic from County Road 70 out to County Road 51 with the remaining 10% east to County Road 53;
however after that meeting they decided to route 100%of the traffic to County Road 51. Mr.Wright added that
they intend to provide mag chloride dust control and impose 35 mph speed limits. In addition, no lighting is
proposed on site.
6
r The Chair asked if there was anyone in the audience who wished to speak for or against this application.
Dennis Francen,25343 CR 70,stated that 3 months after he moved in North Weld County Water District had
installed a water line and he assumed it was to improve water pressure. He and his brother who lives
adjacent to him have put the mag chloride on CR 70 in front of their home. With truck traffic accessing the
water hydrants he is concerned with dust, noise, etc. He said that there are no accommodations that A&W
could make from devastating his family farm's property value and quality of life. He is opposed to this request.
r Brent Fancen, 25455 CR 70, stated that the farm has been in the family for 87 years. He has endured
the last 2 years with the existing water trucks and he can no longer enjoy his evenings outside because of the
noise and dust. He has estimated that in Phase 1 there would be one truck every 10 minutes and with Phase
2 there would be one truck every 5 minutes and he feels this is unbearable.
Dave Uhrich, 31386 CR 51,stated that there is a water hydrant on his property on the corner of County
Road 51 and County Road 70 that they would sell or rent to the applicant and believes that if the applicant
would move to this site this would solve many of the concerns.
r Cindy Haugen,33976 CR 53,noted that because the traffic won't be traveling on County Road 53 it won't
impact her so much. However,she added that with her windows and doors closed the truck traffic still rattles
her house and dust is a huge problem out there.
Jerrod McGraw, 26254 CR 70, stated that he is in support of moving the site to the corner of County
Road 51 and County Road 70. He has children who travel County Road 70 and is concerned with their safety
as well as all those impacted on County Road 70. He added that the truck radius is not adequate on County
Road 70 and County Road 53.
Ken Starman,33431 CR 53, inquired how often mag chloride will be applied as well as the maintenance
of the road. Mr. Starman said that from the meeting on Saturday they were told that A&W Water will not
sublease;however he questioned if they will only see A&W trucks or contracted trucks. He is very concerned
about the decreased water pressure and added that he is worried if a fire is started, will there be enough
water. He is also concerned about traffic safety.
Winifred Pfeif stated that they cannot open windows or doors because of the noise and dust. She noted
several accidents on the intersection of County Road 392 and County Road 51.
r Jim Ambrose, 33618 CR 53, stated that he was told that the new water line was to improve water
pressure. He added that dust and noise are big problems. He appreciated the meeting held by A&W Water.
Mr.Ambrose said that he is concerned with the potential of multiple wells located east of the site and then the
traffic going east.
r Lin Walter stated that they have a lot of concerns with the proposed site regarding dust control and water
pressure. There is too much traffic already without adding more trucks.
Lynann Dunker, 33504 CR 53, stated that they live in an agricultural area and added that they are
concerned with the fire hydrants providing required water pressures for the safety of their homes and
buildings.
The Chair closed the pubic portion of the hearing and called a recess at 5:17 pm. The Chair called the
meeting back to order at 5:24 pm.
r Mr.Wright addressed the concerns from the public. With regard to the water pressure they do not have
any more information to provide. The other hydrant locations have been used by other trucking companies;
7
however this site will be used only by A&W Water and will not be leased to other operators. They intend to
use this site as long as it is necessary. In response to Mr. Holton's question, a draft of the improvements
agreement is in place however it will be finalized at the Board of County Commissioner hearing. He added
that dust suppressant will be applied on an as needed basis.
Commissioner Grand asked about the alternative recommendation. Mr.Wright said that because they are this
far along they would like to see it through;however it may be considered. He noted that there would be other
land owners affected with the alternative hydrant.
Staff stated that the applicant has requested to amend or remove some conditions of approval and
added that staff is in support of deleting Condition of Approvals 1.B, 1.F.5, 1.F.6, 1.F.7 and amending
Condition of Approval1.E.
Motion: Delete Condition of Approval 1.B, Moved by Robert Grand, Seconded by Benjamin Hansford.
Motion passed unanimously.
Motion:Amend Condition of Approval 1.E,and delete Condition of Approvals 1.F.5, 1.F.6,and 1.F.7, Moved
by Mark Lawley, Seconded by Benjamin Hansford.
Motion passed unanimously.
The Chair asked the applicant if he read through the amended Development Standards and Conditions of
Approval and if they are in agreement with those. The applicant replied that he is in agreement.
Motion: Forward Case USR12-0027 to the Board of County Commissioners along with the amended
Conditions of Approval and Development Standards with the Planning Commission's recommendation of
approval, Moved by Mark Lawley. The motion died to lack of second motion.
Motion: Forward Case USR12-0027 to the Board of County Commissioners along with the amended
Conditions of Approval and Development Standards with the Planning Commission's recommendation of
denial, Moved by Robert Grand, Seconded by Benjamin Hansford.
Vote: Motion passed (summary: Yes = 5, No = 2, Abstain = 0).
Yes: Benjamin Hansford, Jason Maxey, Joyce Smock, Nick Berryman, Robert Grand.
No: Mark Lawley, Thomas Holton.
Commissioner Berryman said that he struggles with the magnitude of the traffic in this case. He believes it
would be appropriate to locate along a paved highway where they are not accessing some of the dirt roads
that causes some of these concerns. If there were less traffic volume he might have supported this request.
Commissioner Smock commented that if there is an alternative location it should be explored.
Commissioner Hansford echoed the Commissioner's comments.
Commissioner Grand expressed empathy for A&W Water since they cannot control the water pressure issues
with North Weld County Water District. However we need to respect property rights for the surrounding
residents as well.
Commissioner Maxey cited Section 23-2-220.A.3 regarding compatibility issues. He is concerned with the
additional traffic on the roadway. He encouraged the applicant to work with the surrounding property owners
and hopefully find a better location suitable for everyone.
Commissioner Lawley understands the residents' concerns; however he believes moving that site either
direction will have the same issues.
Commissioner Holton encouraged A&W Water to look for more remote sites.
8
CASE NUMBER: ORDINANCE 2012-4
PLANNER: TOM PARKO
REQUEST: IN THE MATTER OF REPEALING AND RE-ENACTING,WITH AMENDMENTS,
CHAPTER 20 IMPACT FEES, CHAPTER 23 ZONING AND CHAPTER 24
SUBDIVISIONS,AND CHAPTER 29 BUILDING REGULATIONS,OF THE WELD
COUNTY CODE.
Robert Grand left the meeting at 5:47 pm.
Tom Parko,Planning Services,introduced the proposed code changes to Chapter 20 Impact Fees,
Chapter 23 Zoning,and Chapter 29 Building Regulations of the Weld County Code.
The first proposed code change is to exempt law enforcement and fire stations as well as Grange Halls from
the required impact fees. In addition,if a residence is destroyed from fire and they need to rebuild they will be
exempt from the required impact fees as well.
Under Section 23-1-90,the next code change deals with clarifying the definition of water skiing and excluding
this from USR's.
The next code change is in regard to minor amendments to USR's under Section 23-2-285. This proposed
change will add a requirement that notice of hearing is to be published in the paper at least 10 days prior to a
hearing.
Mr.Parko noted that there will be no action required today for the proposed code change under Section 24-8-
40P as further discussion will follow with the Board of County Commissioners.
The last code change deals with Chapter 29 Building Code in regard to large water tanks.These water tanks
are above ground storage tanks. Mr.Parko said that they believe that no building permits should be required
for these as long as these are certified by an engineer that they meet the building code requirements.
i` Motion:Forward Ordinance 2012-4 to the Board of County Commissioners along with the Planning
Commission's recommendation of approval,Moved by Mark Lawley,Seconded by Jason Maxey.
Motion carried unanimously.
Meeting adjourned at 6:00 pm.
Respectfully submitted,
Digitally signed by Kristine Ranslem
„� i yi n,__I_,� Location:1555 N 17th Ave
' sucn� �t/i�c(� Date:2012.07.0909:41:19-06'00'
Kristine Ranslem
Secretary
9
Hello