HomeMy WebLinkAbout20120304.tiff BEFORE THE WELD COUNTY, COLORADO, PLANNING COMMISSION
RESOLUTION OF RECOMMENDATION TO THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
• Moved by Robert Grand, that the following resolution be introduced for denial by the Weld County Planning
Commission. Be it resolved by the Weld County Planning Commission that the application for:
CASE NUMBER: COZ11-0001
APPLICANT: BIG THOMPSON INVSNT HOLDINGS LLC
PLANNER: TOM PARKO
REQUEST: CHANGE OF ZONE FROM THE A(AGRICULTURAL)ZONE DISTRICT TOTHEI-3
(INDUSTRIAL)ZONE DISTRICT.
LEGAL DESCRIPTION: LOT A AND B RE-4914; PT W2 SECTION 23, T4N, R66W of the 6th P.M.,
WELD COUNTY, COLORADO.
LOCATION: EAST OF HWY 85 AND SOUTH OF COUNTY ROAD 44.
be recommended unfavorably to the Board of County Commissioners for the following reasons:
1. The submitted materials are not in compliance with the application requirements of Section 23-2-50 of
the Weld County Code.
Section 23-2-50.E.8 states "If street or highway facilities which provide access to the property are not
adequate to meet the requirements of the proposed zone district, the applicant shall supply
information which demonstrates willingness and financial capability to upgrade the STREET or
highway facilities in conformance with the Thoroughfare Plan and thereby meet the requirements of
Section 23-2-40 8.4 of this Chapter. This shall be shown by an improvements agreement or contract
guaranteeing installation of improvements by the applicant made in conformance with the County
policy on collateral for improvements."
This recommendation is based, in part, upon a review of the application materials submitted by the applicant,
other relevant information regarding the request, and responses from referral entities.
• Should the Board of County Commissioners approve the proposal,the Planning Commission recommends the
following conditions:
1. Prior to recording the Change of Zone Plat:
A. The applicant shall provide the Weld County Department of Planning Services with a Statement
of Taxes from the Weld County Treasurer showing no delinquent taxes exist for the original
parcel. (Department of Planning Services)
B. Per Section 23-2-50.B.13 of the Weld County Code,the applicant shall provide the Weld County
Department of Planning Services with evidence that the hard rock minerals have been
purchased and that a Surface Use Agreement (SUA) has been negotiated with the mineral
interest owner(s). (Department of Planning Services)
C. Per Section 23-2-50.B.14 of the Weld County Code, the application shall provide the Weld
County Department of Planning Services with evidence that an agreement or an attempt to enter
into an agreement has been made with Western Mutual Ditch Company. (Department of
Planning Services)
2. Prior to recording the Site Plan Review (SPR) Plat:
A. The drainage plan map needs to be amended to show existing and proposed culverts and/or
bridges, overall drainage area boundary, sub-area drainage boundaries, proposed flow arrows,
and the locations of proposed detention ponds. A general vicinity map at a scale of 1"=2,000'
needs to be included which shows the upstream off-site drainage areas flowing onto the
property. (Department of Public Works)
• B. The Drainage Report acreages need to be consistent with acreages described in the final plat
application. (Department of Public Works)
EXHIBIT
i2012-0304
Cosh' .••
RESOLUTION COZ11-0001
BIG THOMPSON INVSNT HOLDINGS LLC
PAGE 2
• C. Hydrologic computations for onsite and offsite flows. The site must detain all storm water runoff
generated as a result of the proposed development. The detention pond(s) must be sized to
capture the 100-year developed on-site runoff and release it at the 5-year historic runoff.
(Department of Public Works)
D. Hydraulic computations for onsite and offsite flows. The storm water system must be sized to
safely handle the offsite flows that will flow through the site. (Department of Public Works)
E. The proposed grading will need to be provided with the Master Drainage Report. Please note
that grading permits will be required for the construction of the storm water system (channels,
ponds, swales,etc), access roads, building sites, and any other activities that disturb more than
one acre of ground. (Department of Public Works)
F. If phased construction is proposed, the Master Drainage Report shall need to include a Master
Drainage Plan for the site that addresses how it will provide the necessary construction—phase
stormwater management to prevent offsite impacts by stormwater discharges. (Department of
Public Works)
G. To protect public safety and prevent offsite damages, sufficient interim Best Management
Practices (detention, erosion, and sediment control) will need to be designed, approved, and
installed prior to commencement of construction. (Department of Public Works)
H. An On-site and Off-site Geotechnical Soils Report needs to be submitted that includes a
preliminary pavement design for the roads to be constructed within the property. (Department of
Public Works)
I. The applicant needs to submit a grading permit showing: proposed grading, erosion control
•
placement, typical details for all BMPs to be utilized, and a Construction Stormwater permit from
the Colorado Department of Public Health and Environment. The permit must be stamped by a
registered professional engineer licensed in the State of Colorado. Please note that the grading
permit will not be released until the applicant has signed the improvements agreement, posted
collateral, and submitted the final plat for recording. (Department of Public Works)
J. The applicant needs to enter into an Improvements Agreement for the onsite and offsite work to
be done. Collateral needs to be submitted to and accepted by the Weld County Board of County
Commissioners prior to recording of the final plat. (Department of Public Works)
K. No Traffic Study was submitted for this Change of Zone application. The Public Works
Department will defer the traffic study until the submittal of the Site Plan Review application
documents. The detailed Traffic Study should follow the Traffic Study checklist. Roadway
improvements including but not limited to paving of CR 33 to Hwy 85(unless access will be from
CR 44), auxiliary lanes, widened radii, and relocation of accesses may be required by Weld
County Public Works or CDOT. In the absence of a Traffic Study, Public Works will determine
appropriate triggers for the roadway improvements that mitigate such issues like site distance
and large trucking traffic volumes. Once the traffic study is submitted,changes to the site layout,
turn lanes or other improvements may be required by Public Works or CDOT. The applicant
should expect to fully fund the necessary roadway improvements to mitigate for the traffic
generated by this development. (Department of Public Works)
L. An access permit cannot be granted at this time. Access requirements will be determined when
the Traffic Study is reviewed with the Site Plan Review application. Access from CR 44 will
require an easement or purchase of adjacent land and should be established at Final Plat so
that access and offsite requirements by the County or CDOT may be addressed. If access to CR
44 is not established with the Final Plat application, offsite improvements to CR 33 may be
•
triggered. (Department of Public Works)
RESOLUTION COZ11-0001
BIG THOMPSON INVSNT HOLDINGS LLC
PAGE 3
• 3. The plat shall be amended to delineate the following:
A. All sheets of the plat shall be labeled COZ11-0001. (Department of Planning Services)
B. The plat shall adhere to Section 23-2-50.C and 23-2-50.D of the Weld County Code.
(Department of Planning Services)
C. All recorded easements and rights-of-way shall be shall be shown and dimensioned on the
Change of Zone plat. (Department of Planning Services, Department of Public Works)
D. All approved accesses shall be delineated on the plat. (Dept. of Planning Services)
E. County Road 33 is a local gravel road and requires 60-foot right-of-way at full build-out.There
is presently a 60-foot right-of-way. This road is maintained by Weld County. Pursuant to the
definition of SETBACK in the Weld County Code(Section 23-1-90), the required setback is
measured from the future right-of-way line.
F. County Road 44 is an arterial road and requires 140-foot right-of-way at full build-out. There
is presently a 60-foot right-of-way. This road is maintained by Weld County. Pursuant to the
definition of SETBACK in the Weld County Code (Section 23-1-90), the required setback is
measured from the future right-of-way line.
G. The following notes shall be delineated on the Change of Zone plat:
1. The Change of Zone allows for 1-3 (Industrial) uses which shall comply with the 1-3
(Industrial)Zone District requirements as set forth in Article III, Division 4,Section 23-3-
330 of the Weld County Code. (Department of Planning Services)
• 2. Any future structures or uses on site must obtain the appropriate zoning and building
permits. (Department of Planning Services)
3. Building permits shall be obtained prior to the construction of any new building. A plan
review is required for each building. Plans shall bear the wet stamp of a Colorado
registered architect or engineer. Two complete sets of plans are required when
applying for each permit. (Department of Building Inspection)
4. New buildings shall conform to the requirements of the various codes adopted at the
time of permit application. Currently, the following has been adopted by Weld County:
2006 International Building Code, 2006 International Mechanical Code, 2006
International Plumbing Code, 2011 National Electrical Code and Chapter 29 of the Weld
County Code. (Department of Building Inspection)
5. Effective April 25, 2011, Building Permits issued on the proposed lots will be required to
adhere to the fee structure of the Weld County Road Impact Program. (Ordinance
2011-2)
6. Effective April 25,2011, Building Permits issued on the proposed lots,will be required to
adhere to the fee structure of the County Facility Fee and Drainage Impact Fee.
(Ordinance 2011-2)
7. Necessary personnel from the Weld County Departments of Planning Services, Public
Works, and Public Health and Environment shall be granted access onto the property at
any reasonable time in order to ensure the activities carried out on the property comply
with the Conditions of Approval and Development Standards stated herein and all
• applicable Weld County regulations. (Department of Planning Services)
RESOLUTION COZ11-0001
BIG THOMPSON INVSNT HOLDINGS LLC
PAGE 4
• 8. The historical flow patterns and run-off amounts will be maintained on site in such a
manner that it will reasonably preserve the natural character of the area and prevent
property damage of the type generally attributed to run-off rate and velocity increases,
diversions, concentration and/or unplanned ponding of storm run-off. (Department of
Public Works)
9. With a Site Plan Review submittal, the applicant will need to provide a Master Drainage
Report which adequately addresses the requirements listed in Weld County Code
Chapter 8, Article 10, Section 8-11-120.
10. A detailed Traffic Impact Study is required with the Site Plan Review application. Offsite
roadway and/or intersection improvements may be required.
11. Access requirements will be determined when the Traffic Study is reviewed with the Site
Plan Review application.
12. Prior to recording a Site Plan Review Plat, the applicant will be required to enter into an
Improvements Agreement for onsite and offsite Improvements. Collateral needs to be
submitted to and accepted by the Weld County Board of County Commissioners prior to
recording of the plat.
13. Prior to recording a Site Plan Review Plat, the applicant needs to submit a grading
permit showing: proposed grading, erosion control placement, typical details for all
BMPs to be utilized, and a Construction Stormwater permit from the Colorado
Department of Public Health and Environment. The permit must be stamped by a
registered professional engineer licensed in the State of Colorado. Please note that the
grading permit will not be released until the applicant has signed the improvements
•
agreement, posted collateral, and submitted the Site Plan Review plat for recording.
14. An On-site and Off-site Geotechnical Soils Report needs to be submitted prior to
recording of the Site Plan Review that includes a preliminary pavement design for the
roads to be constructed both on-site and off-site.
15. To protect public safety and prevent offsite damages, sufficient interim Best
Management Practices (detention, erosion, and sediment control) will need to be
designed, approved, and installed prior to commencement of construction.
16. All future owners shall be aware of and adhere to the 1999 U.S. 85 Access Control Plan.
17. Weld County is one of the most productive agricultural counties in the United States,
typically ranking in the top ten counties in the country in total market value of agricultural
products sold. The rural areas of Weld County may be open and spacious, but they are
intensively used for agriculture. Persons moving into a rural area must recognize and
accept there are drawbacks, including conflicts with long-standing agricultural practices
and a lower level of services than in town. Along with the drawbacks come the
incentives which attract urban dwellers to relocate to rural areas: open views,
spaciousness,wildlife, lack of city noise and congestion, and the rural atmosphere and
way of life. Without neighboring farms, those features which attract urban dwellers to
rural Weld County would quickly be gone forever.
Agricultural users of the land should not be expected to change their long-established
agricultural practices to accommodate the intrusions of urban users into a rural area.
Well-run agricultural activities will generate off-site impacts, including noise from
tractors and equipment; slow-moving farm vehicles on rural roads; dust from animal
• pens, field work, harvest and gravel roads; odor from animal confinement, silage and
manure; smoke from ditch burning;flies and mosquitoes; hunting and trapping activities;
shooting sports, legal hazing of nuisance wildlife; and the use of pesticides and
RESOLUTION COZ11-0001
BIG THOMPSON INVSNT HOLDINGS LLC
PAGE 5
• fertilizers in the fields, including the use of aerial spraying. It is common practice for
agricultural producers to utilize an accumulation of agricultural machinery and supplies
to assist in their agricultural operations. A concentration of miscellaneous agricultural
materials often produces a visual disparity between rural and urban areas of the County.
Section 35-3.5-102, C.R.S., provides that an agricultural operation shall not be found to
be a public or private nuisance if the agricultural operation alleged to be a nuisance
employs methods or practices that are commonly or reasonably associated with
agricultural production.
Water has been, and continues to be, the lifeline for the agricultural community. It is
unrealistic to assume that ditches and reservoirs may simply be moved"out of the way"
of residential development. When moving to the County, property owners and residents
must realize they cannot take water from irrigation ditches, lakes, or other structures,
unless they have an adjudicated right to the water.
Weld County covers a land area of approximately four thousand(4,000)square miles in
size (twice the size of the State of Delaware) with more than three thousand seven
hundred (3,700) miles of state and county roads outside of municipalities. The sheer
magnitude of the area to be served stretches available resources. Law enforcement is
based on responses to complaints more than on patrols of the County, and the
distances which must be traveled may delay all emergency responses, including law
enforcement, ambulance, and fire. Fire protection is usually provided by volunteers who
must leave their jobs and families to respond to emergencies. County gravel roads, no
matter how often they are bladed, will not provide the same kind of surface expected
from a paved road. Snow removal priorities mean that roads from subdivisions to
arterials may not be cleared for several days after a major snowstorm. Services in rural
areas, in many cases,will not be equivalent to municipal services. Rural dwellers must,
• by necessity, be more self-sufficient than urban dwellers.
People are exposed to different hazards in the County than in an urban or suburban
setting. Farm equipment and oil field equipment, ponds and irrigation ditches,electrical
power for pumps and center pivot operations, high speed traffic, sandburs, puncture
vines, territorial farm dogs and livestock, and open burning present real threats.
Controlling children's activities is important, not only for their safety, but also for the
protection of the farmer's livelihood.
H. The applicant shall submit three (3) paper copies of the plat for preliminary approval to the
Weld County Department of Planning Services. (Department of Planning Services)
4. Upon completion of 1. through 3. above the applicant shall submit a Mylar plat along with all other
documentation required as Conditions of Approval. The Mylar plat shall be recorded in the office of
the Weld County Clerk and Recorder by Department of Planning Services' Staff. The plat shall be
prepared in accordance with the requirements of Section 23-2-50.C&Section 23-2-50.D of the Weld
County Code. The Mylar plat and additional requirements shall be submitted within thirty (60) days
from the date of the Board of County Commissioners resolution. The applicant shall be responsible
for paying the recording fee. (Department of Planning Services)
5. The Change of Zone plat map shall be submitted to the Department of Planning Services' for
recording within sixty(60)days of approval by the Board of County Commissioners.With the Change
of Zone plat map, the applicant shall submit a digital file of all drawings associated with the Change of
Zone application. Acceptable CAD formats are .dwg, .dxf, and .dgn (Microstation); acceptable GIS
formats are .shp(Shape Files), Arclnfo Coverages and Arclnfo Export files format type is .e00. The
preferred format for Images is .tif(Group 4) ... (Group 6 is not acceptable). (Department of Planning
Services)
•
RESOLUTION COZ11-0001
BIG THOMPSON INVSNT HOLDINGS LLC
PAGE 6
• 6. In accordance with Weld County Code Ordinance 2005-7 approved June 1, 2005, should the plat not
be recorded within the required sixty (60) days from the date the Board of County Commissioners
resolution a $50.00 recording continuance charge shall added for each additional 3 month period.
Motion seconded by Benjamin Hansford.
VOTE:
For Denial Against Denial Absent Abstain
Robert Grand
Bill Hall
Tom Holton
Alexander Zauder
Benjamin Hansford
Mark Lawley
Nick Berryman
Jason Maxey
Joyce Smock
The Chair declared the resolution passed and ordered that a certified copy be forwarded with the file of this
case to the Board of County Commissioner's for further proceedings.
CERTIFICATION OF COPY
• I, Kristine Ranslem, Recording Secretary for the Weld County Planning Commission,do hereby certify that the
above and foregoing resolution is a true copy of the resolution of the Planning Commission of Weld County,
Colorado, adopted on January 17, 2012.
Dated the 17th of January, 2012.
Kristine Ranslem
Secretary
• The property that is located to the south and west of the subject site is owned by his mother. That area was
cut out of the 160 acre farm and added that she has substantial water rights on her farm and she would be
willing to rent water for the irrigation system should it be necessary in order to abate the dust.
In regard to the neighbor's objection letter of unauthorized use of her property, Mr. Pier stated that is not the
case. He submitted a 2007 Letter of Agreement with Mrs. Dreiling concerning that usage. He added that in
the letter the use that they have been making of the property was in fact recognized and approved by Mrs.
Dreiling through her attorneys some years ago. Mr. Pier said that they are not repairing any equipment on her
property. The use that is made is on occasion where larger items of farm equipment or long tractor trailer rigs
will pull out of the southeastern corner of the property onto the property to the east and turn around and come
back to the property.
Commissioner Hansford asked if he expects expansion in his towing business to more than 1 time per week.
Mr. Scott said that he doesn't see it expanding. Mr. Pier submitted photos of the land belonging to Mrs.
Dreling who filed the objection. He added that it will give you an idea of the area that she refers to in her letter.
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 Development Standards and Conditions of Approval and
if they are in agreement with those. The applicant replied that he is in agreement.
Commissioner Lawley asked staff if they intend to have screening on the entire site. Mr. Gathman said that in
looking at the site the biggest issues with screening will be from Highway 52 and the eastern and western
portion of the property. No screening would be required on the south side given that the nearest residence is
1 mile or more away.
• Robert Grand moved that Case USR11-0017, be forwarded to the Board of County Commissioners along with
the amended Conditions of Approval and Development Standards with the Planning Commission's
recommendation of approval, seconded by Benjamin Hansford.
The Chair asked the secretary to poll the members of the Planning Commission for their decision. Joyce
Smock, yes; Nick Berryman, yes; Robert Grand,yes with comment; Bill Hall,yes;Alexander Zauder, absent;
Jason Maxey, yes; Benjamin Hansford, yes; Mark Lawley, yes;Tom Holton,yes. Motion carried unanimously.
Commissioner Grand commented that the applicant has been operating for awhile and is making a good faith
effort to clean up his property. He expressed disappointment that the person who opposed this application
didn't show up at today's hearing. He believes that what the applicant is doing is an improvement to the area.
The Chair read the following case into record.
CASE NUMBER: COZ11-0001
APPLICANT: BIG THOMPSON INVSNT HOLDINGS LLC
PLANNER: TOM PARKO
REQUEST: CHANGE OF ZONE FROM THE A(AGRICULTURAL)ZONE DISTRICT TO THE I-3
(INDUSTRIAL)ZONE DISTRICT.
LEGAL DESCRIPTION: LOT A AND B RE-4914; PT W2 SECTION 23,T4N, R66W of the 6th P.M.,
WELD COUNTY, COLORADO.
LOCATION: EAST OF HWY 85 AND SOUTH OF COUNTY ROAD 44.
Nick Berryman abstained from participating in this case due to a personal conflict.
Tom Parko, Planning Services, stated that this request is for a Change of Zone from the Agricultural Zone
District to the 1-3 (Industrial) Zone District.
• The site is located south of County Road 44; east of and adjacent to County Road 33. U.S. Highway 85 is
located to the west. The property boundary is approximately 113 acres and is com.rised of two (2) lots
EXHIBIT 4
J
associated with RE-4914. The Change of Zone is not pad of a platted County Subdivision.
• The owner of record is Big Thompson Investment Holdings, do Mark Goldstein. The owner approached staff
in late summer/early fall of 2011 to talk about specifics and ideas about the property. During these initial
meetings we discussed various options that included a Planned Unit Development(PUD),a straight Change
of Zone and a Use by Special Review(USR). After consideration and dialogue, the applicant and staff came
to the conclusion that the County could support a straight Change of Zone because of its location to major
highways, infrastructure and an urban development node.
For reference, staff is basing comments and a recommendation on the following Code Sections: Chapter 23
Division 1 Sections 23-2-20 through Sections 23-2-50 and Chapter 22 Article II Sections 22-2-70 through
Sections 22-2-80. For the purpose of this hearing the Commissioners will be focused on the findings found
under Section 23-2-40.
• SECTION 23-2-40.A has been met. This deals with public notification requirements.
• SECTION 23-2-40.B is to ensure that the proposal is consistent with the goals and policies of Chapter
22. The Change of Zone should ensure that the uses will be compatible with the surrounding land
uses; that there is adequate water and sewer service; that there is access and highway facilities in
place to accommodate current and future uses; to verify that the Change of Zone is associated with
any overlay districts, that the Change of Zone will not prohibit the use of any commercial or other
viable resource development; and to ensure that the soil conditions are suitable for future buildings,
etc.
With respect to Chapter 22 and the policies therein, staff generally agrees that the Change of Zone meets the
policies for industrial development. For instance, Central Weld County Water District has a water line in
County Road 44 and wrote a letter that they can serve the property. Although no public sewer exists the
proposed Change of Zone is two lots and could accommodate septic system(s) if designed accordingly. The
• property is located in an urban development node, which simply states that any properties in this designated
area can be suited for urban scale development. Urban development nodes were established during the
Comprehensive Plan updates.
With respect to future uses, it is Staffs understanding that the Change of Zone is to market the property. If
the Change of Zone is approved the owner's zoning will include all the uses found in Chapter 23, Article III
Division 4 Sections 23-3-300 through Sections 23-3-330. A proposed code change is making its way through
a series of hearings that essentially changes Division 4 into cumulative zoning. This means that if this Change
of Zone was approved all the uses allowed in the I-1 and 1-2 Zones would be permitted in the 1-3 Zone District.
In addition,the Change of Zone establishes a framework for the owner to submit future cases to the Planning
Department on a site Plan Review(SPR)basis. However,there are some uses in the Industrial zones that still
require a Use by Special Review(USR).
This property is adjacent to County Road 33 which is not currently paved. Access to the property was
originally granted during the recorded exemption and is shown on the Recorded Exemption plat. The County
will continue to allow access to the site from County Road 33 and it is ideal that future uses use County Road
33 and head south to County Road 42. The US 85 Access Control Plan shows the intersection at County
Road 33 and US Highway 85 to be eventually closed and the road realigned to meet up with County Road 44
to the north. Improvements to the intersection on County Road 42 include a full functional signal. Future
improvements to County Road 44 include some realignment. CDOT was sent a referral but made few
comments that included a recommendation to add a development standard that the owner will acknowledge
the 85 Access Control Plan.
The number of employees proposed to be employed at this site is unknown. If the Change of Zone is
approved the applicant or owner will be required to submit a Site Plan Review(SPR)or Use by Special Review
(USR) for future uses and during this time the owner and staff will evaluate site conditions and planning.
Hours of operation is also not known at this time and will also be evaluated when the owner or applicant
submits a Site Plan Review or Use by Special Review.
5
• The proposed site is located within the three-mile referral area of the Towns of LaSalle and Gilcrest. Both
towns were sent a referral but neither commented on the case. The County does have an Intergovernmental
Agreement(IGA)in place with the Town of Gilcrest but the property is just outside the boundary and therefore
outside the scope and purview of the IGA.
Sixteen referral agencies have reviewed this case and five offered comments, some with specific conditions.
Staff did receive two inquires about the Change of Zone. One inquiry was a walk-in and the other was by
phone. However, staff has not received any formal correspondence in either favor or against this case by
phone or email.
The Department of Planning Services recommends approval of this application with the attached conditions of
approval.
Commissioner Lawley clarified if the applicant didn't get access through an easement or other means they
would have access through the Highway 85 Frontage Road. Mr. Parko stated that in the US 85 Access
Control Plan the intersection from County Road 33 to Highway 85 is slated to be closed in the future.
Therefore when that happens, the option is to either access onto County Road 33 and go south to County
Road 42 or as he understands now the applicant has worked with an adjacent landowner to the north to obtain
an easement for access onto County Road 44.
Mr. Lawley asked if an Industrial Park could potentially be created on the large lot. Mr. Parko said it is
possible and added that Lot B, which is the larger lot, would be eligible for future Recorded Exemptions. He
added that an Industrial Park layout would depend on the owner's intentions such as how many lots and the
demand. He added that if the owner has a lot of interest it would be recommended to go through the PUD
process. Mr. Lawley asked how many lots could potentially be created through the recorded exemption
process. Mr. Parko said that it is just over 100 acres and the owner could create a new lot every 5 years down
to 1 acre since there is public water available.
• Commissioner Grand asked if this is premature given the road access issues. Mr. Parko said that staff is in
support of this as they believe this area is in transition and has access to a major highway. He added that
those transportation issues will be addressed as the uses are determined and they will go through the
process. Mr. Grand is concerned that this could be a major development and is concerned with traffic impacts
and understands that some of these uses may be processed through the Site Plan Review and not heard by
Planning Commission. Mr. Parko said that those issues would be addressed and evaluated through staff and
added that much like the USR we ask for the same items such as drainage plans and traffic plans.
Lauren Light, Environmental Health, stated that water is provided from Central Weld County Water District.
She added that their detailed review would be given at the time that a Site Plan Review or Use by Special
Review application is submitted because they don't know what the user will be until then.
Heidi Hansen, Public Works, stated that since this is a straight Change of Zone they don't know who the end
users are and what the impacts will be. When the Site Plan Review or Use by Special Review application is
submitted they will review the master drainage report, traffic studies and the layout of the lot. Upon submittal
they will look at where the best access is at and if off-site improvements would be warranted.
Tim Naylor, AGPROfessionals, 4350 Hwy 66, Longmont, CO, stated that they are planning to access from
County Road 44. They have an access agreement with the owner to the north of the subject property and an
access agreement with the ditch company. They will have a traffic study prepared upon completion of the
change of zone. They will enter into an Improvements Agreement upon the Site Plan Review or Use by
Special Review approval.
The site is to be used for industrial uses with an anticipated development schedule depending on market
conditions. Rezoning the property will encourage the expansion and diversification of industrial economic
base by providing property available for industrial use. There are already industrial type activities
• occurring in 3 of the 4 corners of the intersection and there is an adjacent rail which adds an additional
industrial element to this property as well.
6
• The proposed Change of Zone is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan as the proposal will allow for
the conversion of agricultural land to industrial uses in the area designated as an urban development
node. There are adequate services, including water and roadways available to this site. An engineered
commercial septic system will be utilized until such time that a public sewer system is available. Electricity
is available through Xcel Energy. Atmos Energy will provide natural gas. It is compatible with both
existing uses and future development. The property is bordered by commercially zoned property on the
north and west adjacent to Highway 85 and County Road 44. There is a rail line adjacent to the property
on the western edge which provides additional transportation for industrial use.
CDOT has reviewed the application and indicated no concerns at this point. Mr. Naylor reiterated that they
have procured an access and ditch easement for access to County Road 44. This will be the primary
access and there is an agreement in place.
Mr. Naylor respectfully requested that this application be approved with a positive recommendation to the
Board of County Commissioners.
Commissioner Grand said that the size of the property and the unknown of what impact you will have on
County Road 44 and Highway 85 intersection is his concern. Mr. Naylor said that CDOT has included in
their U.S. 85 Access Control Plan a realignment of that area.
Commissioner Maxey asked exactly where the access is proposed from. Mr. Naylor said the access is
approximately 1100 feet east of the railroad tracks or approximately 1400 feet east of Highway 85. The
access is proposed to be 60 feet in width but the owner has also agreed to 80 feet is needed. Mr. Maxey
asked if this would be the only access. Mr. Naylor said that a secondary or emergency access would be
from County Road 33.
The Chair asked if there was anyone in the audience who wished to speak for or against this application.
• Lynette Kilpatrick, 20487 CR 33, lives west of the subject property. She agreed with Mr. Grand that it seems
premature since there are so many contingencies that County Road 33 will be closing its access to Highway
85. County Road 44 and Highway 85 is already a dangerous intersection and doesn't need an increase in
volume.
Ms. Kilpatrick is concerned about the demise of the agricultural community. This particular property has in the
past been an asset and productive. She is upset that our society seems to be wanting to build on good quality
farm soil and it's pushing the farmer to the poorer soil that needs more remediation and more water to
produce the same amount of yield. As a property owner she is also concerned with her property value. The
value of the property is based in part of the view of the surrounding area.
Ms. Kilpatrick believes that Weld County has enough industrial properties that are dispersed in all different
types of locations and doesn't see where the zoning of this particular property would be an advantage to our
County. She noted that in the presentation a septic system would be used until public sewer would be
available. She added that her property almost failed the perc test because it is at the low spot of the area and
believes that it would affect this property as well.
Commissioner Maxey asked how long she has lived there. Ms. Kilpatrick said that she has been on her
property since 2003, but grew up on property to the south since 1969.
Cheryl Klausen, 16794 CR 44, lives '/% mile east of the Peckham Elevator. She stated that they are in
opposition to the proposed zoning change from agricultural to industrial. As a neighbor to this land they would
like to see it remain agricultural. They moved here in 1968 and have seen many changes to their land but
nothing more discouraging than this. This is an agricultural area that has already lost too much land to
pavement and housing.
• Ms. Klausen is concerned with the water run-off that this will create. Their land borders to the east and
currently the water drains from the subject property towards their land and runs off into the Gilcrest-LaSalle
7
Drainage Ditch. She understands they want to build a pond that would catch the drainage but they feel this
• isn't good enough. She presented pictures showing the difficulty they had this year in growing and harvesting
the field due to wet conditions. The proposed pond will only add to the current conditions. She added that
they understand that the current owners have stopped paying their dues to the drainage ditch.
Ms. Klausen said that they are also concerned with the traffic that this will create. County Road 44 is already a
busy road and it only adds congestion and noise.
Ms. Klausen expressed concern that this is an agricultural area with no existing infrastructure to support this
type of development. They understand that the industrial zoning thinks that being located adjacent to the
railroad is positive; however the train always stops in LaSalle.
Stan Gingerich, 120 W Nelson, Keensburg, CO, stated that he farms in this area. He expressed concern
regarding the intersection of County Road 44 and Highway 85. He added that citing the railroad is not a good
reason as it cannot be affordable for one or two cars to come in. He is very concerned with the drainage on
site.
Steve Brehon, 19118 CR 44, stated that he is the Secretary/Treasurer for the LaSalle-Gilcrest Drainage Ditch.
The ditch is a voluntary drainage ditch and they can't force anyone to pay. He tried to get in contact with Big
Thompson Holdings in 2008 and sent a notice but didn't receive a reply. He asked if they are going to contain
all the water off the entire 113 acre parcel as it is a good amount that goes into the drainage ditch. Farmers
irrigate out of that ditch and cattle use it for drinking.
Jose Cervantes, 16474 CR 44, expressed concern since he has children in elementary school and not sure
what the traffic will be like. The level of traffic will increase significantly and he just wants facts on how they
are going to control the traffic.
Jen Graham, 20595 CR 33, showed on a visual map where she resides in relation to the subject property.
• Terry Wiedeman, 13434 CR 42, stated that he is a real estate broker and sold this property to the applicant.
He said that their intentions are to do the right thing and they do a good job of abiding by the rules. They plan
to develop this into industrial type sites mainly for oil and gas exploration companies. Even though there are
industrial sites around there isn't enough with the added exploration in the oil and gas industry. Mr.Wiedeman
said that he talked to Mark Goldstein,with Big Thompson Holdings, and he wasn't aware of the drainage ditch
system but he will take care of the payments.
Mr. Wiedeman said that County Road 44 is a busy road. He added that these trucks are oil and gas trucks
that are already on the road. Additional traffic might be some but they are already on the road. He doesn't
believe it will hurt the neighboring property values.
Tom Haren, 14339 CR 44, lives just over 1 mile to the west of the property. He is the owner of
AGRPROfessionals who is representing the applicant. He stated that they do more ag development than
anyone around and have been looking at areas around the County for agricultural support businesses and
have found that there is not much industrial land around. He understands the neighbors' concerns about
being next to an industrial zoned site. He said that this area has been designated as an urban development
node in the Weld County Comprehensive Plan and added that this area with a major highway, County arterial
roadway and railroad is going to commercialize and industrialize. He said that they aren't talking about several
lots developing in this parcel because it couldn't be supported by sewer. He stated that the Site Plan Review
process administered by staff is not an easy process because there are many details that are required. He
expressed that staff is very qualified and good at what they do.
Mark Jenkins, 20030 CR 33, stated that he farms directly south of the property. He is concerned with weed
control and trash and doesn't want to have to clean up after someone.
The Chair called a recess at 3:25 pm and reconvened at 3:35 pm.
• Tim Naylor said that they understand the concerns of the neighbors and community. They believe that the
8
Comprehensive Plan recognizes that area as an urban development node and it is going to become
• commercialized in the future. The businesses that can be utilized on this property could go to another site but
it would have the same issues regarding agricultural and traffic concerns. They feel that this is the appropriate
place for it to go and where the County is directing this type of business to go. With regard to the Ditch
Companies concern,during the break there was an agreement made and the owner will pay the dues. There
were concerns regarding perc tests on the property and added that all commercial businesses are required to
have an engineered designed system for commercial use. In regard to the drainage when there is an
industrial site developed a master drainage system is required for the entire site. This will eliminate the
concerns for flooding.
Commissioner Grand cited Section 23-2-50.E.8 which states that"If street or highway facilities which provide
access to the property are not adequate to meet the requirements of the proposed zone district, the applicant
shall supply information which demonstrates willingness and financial capability to upgrade the STREET or
highway facilities in conformance with the Thoroughfare Plan and thereby meet the requirements of Section
23-2-40 B.4 of this Chapter. This shall be shown by an improvements agreement or contract guaranteeing
installation of improvements by the applicant made in conformance with the County policy on collateral for
improvements." Mr. Grand said that everyone on this Board supports property rights and use of one's
property to the best and highest ability. We also certainly recognize farming conflicts that develop over time.
He added that he believes it would be wholly irresponsible for this Board to support this project with the
unknown and the traffic implications on Highway 85 and County Road 44. Accepting what we have as a
standard in the past of what is in place is not necessarily what we need to have in the future.
The Chair asked the applicant if he read through the Conditions of Approval and if they are in agreement with
those. The applicant replied that they are in agreement.
Commissioner Hall said that twice a month he will get notice from Upstate Development of desires for
properties that have this type of zoning and have rail spur, etc. He added that businesses do not want to go
through the zoning process. He was part of the Comprehensive Plan Technical Advisory Committee who
• recognized and put in the urban development nodes on the map.
The Chair reminded the audience that this case will be heard before the Board of County Commissioners on
February 1, 2012 and encouraged everyone to attend.
Robert Grand moved that Case COZ11-0001, be forwarded to the Board of County Commissioners along with
the Conditions of Approval with the Planning Commission's recommendation of denial, seconded by Benjamin
Hansford
The Chair asked the secretary to poll the members of the Planning Commission for their decision. Joyce
Smock,yes; Nick Berryman, abstain; Robert Grand, yes with comment; Bill Hall, no with comment;Alexander
Zauder, absent; Jason Maxey,yes with comment; Benjamin Hansford, yes; Mark Lawley, yes with comment;
Tom Holton, no with comment. Motion carried on vote 5-2.
Commissioner Maxey cited Section 23-2-50.E.8 and added that he is concerned about the traffic and doesn't
believe those issues have been adequately addressed. He expressed trust in staff and appreciates the
proactiveness of this case. He thinks the homeowners are now on notice that this area has been identified as
a development node; however he doesn't believe he can support it just because of the information given so
far.
Commissioner Hall commented that anybody at the time of Site Plan Review would be absolutely required to
address all of the issues including traffic.
Commissioner Grand commented that this Board certainly supports growth and development and has a strong
history of doing that but he thinks it also has a moral responsibility to consider the impact on our community
and residents and the people who are on the roads. He added that there was no information on the potential
impact on traffic on those roadways.
• Commissioner Lawley stated that he is torn. He believes that this is where development needs to occur and
9
believes it is the right place for it. However there are issues that haven't been addressed and need to be. He
believes that staff can address those issues but there is not a public process tied to the potential impacts of
something like this and he has concerns about that. He definitely supports private property rights. Given that
at this point he still has some questions concerning public safety.
Commissioner Holton commented that we have all talked about the need for shovel ready ground and that is
what this zoning gives this property. Being next to the rail it will get developed. He trusts staff to make some
of the decisions and he has seen the decisions from staff to make things right including traffic studies and
impacts of the use.
The Chair read the following case into record.
CASE NUMBER: COZ11-0002
APPLICANT: CAPITAL WEST NATIONAL BANK
PLANNER: TOM PARK()
REQUEST: CHANGE OF ZONE FROM THE PUD(PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT)ZONE
DISTRICT,WITH ESTATE USES,TO THE A(AGRICULTURAL)ZONE DISTRICT.
LEGAL DESCRIPTION: LOT B AMD REC EXEMPT RE-1452; PART SW4 SECTION 4, T6N, R67W of
the 6th P.M.,WELD COUNTY, COLORADO.
LOCATION: EAST OF AND ADJACENT TO HWY 257; NORTH OF COUNTY ROAD 72.
Tom Parko, Planning Services, stated that the property boundary is approximately 71 acres and is comprised
of one (1) lot associate with 2nd Amended RE-1452.
The Change of Zone is not part of a platted county subdivision. However, the property is associated with
Change of Zone#545 formally known as Falcon Ridge. Change of Zone#545 was approved for 38 residential
estate lots. The developer, Mr. Bret Larimer was not able to carry through with the entitlement process and
proceed to the Final Plan. The property was eventually turned over to Capital West who is now in possession
of the property.
• Following discussions with the Bank they indicated that they have no intensions to develop the property, let
alone carry it through the Final Process. The Bank is currently working with prospective buyers who would like
to purchase the property.
Staff is basing comments and a recommendation of the following code section which are similar to the last
case with the exception that Chapter 22 will reference Sections 22-2-10 through Sections22-2-20 and Chapter
23 will deal with Sections 23-3-10 through Sections 23-3-40.
• Section 23-2-40.A has been met. This deals with public notification requirements.
• Section 23-2-40.B is to ensure that the proposal is consistent with the goals and policies of Chapter
22. The Change of Zone should ensure that the uses will be compatible with the surrounding land
uses; that there is adequate water and sewer service; that there is access and highway facilities in
place to accommodate current and future uses; to verify that the Change of Zone is associated with
any overlay districts, that the Change of Zone will not prohibit the use of any commercial or other
viable resource development; and to ensure that the soil conditions are suitable for future buildings,
etc.
With respect to Chapter 22 and the policies therein, staff generally agrees that the Change of Zone meets the
policies for the agricultural zone. There are several subdivisions in the area and one of the subdivisions is
located in the Town of Windsor to the south. Most of the subdivisions are located in PUD's with Estate Uses.
There is a church located to the south on County Road 72 and there are also several rural residential and
agricultural zoned properties on recorded exemption lots.
It is Staffs understanding that the Change of Zone back to agriculture is to market the property for potential
• agricultural buyers. If the Change of Zone is approved the owner's zoning will include all the uses found in
Chapter 23 Article III Division 1 Sections 23-3-10 through Sections 23-3-40.
10
Hello