HomeMy WebLinkAbout20100845.tiff MINUTES OF THE WELD COUNTY BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT MEETING
Tuesday, April 6, 2010
A regular meeting of the Weld County Board of Adjustment was held on Tuesday, April 6, 2010, in the
Hearing Room of the Department of Planning Services, 918 10th Street, Greeley, Colorado. The meeting
was called to order by Chair Bruce Fitzgerald at 11:00 a.m.
Roll Call Absent
William Hansen
Erich Ehrlich
Bill Hall
Bruce Fitzgerald
Benjamin Hansford
Jerry Neff
Bryant Gimlin
Jim Cosner
Also Present: Chris Gathman and Michelle Martin, Department of Planning; Stephanie Aries, County
Attorney; and Kristine Ranslem, Secretary.
William Hansen moved to approve the December 1, 2009 Weld County Board of Adjustment minutes,
seconded by Benjamin Hansford. Motion carried.
CASE NUMBER: BOA-1064
APPLICANT: Mark Powell
PLANNER: Chris Gathman
REQUEST: Appeal of an administrative decision regarding off-site directional signs
LEGAL DESCRIPTION: Lot A AmRE-659; being part of the N2SE4 of Section 29,T5N, R64W of the 6th
P.M.,Weld County, Colorado.
LOCATION: West of and adjacent to CR 53 and 1.5 miles north of CR 50.
Chris Gathman, Planning Services, commented that the applicant has a veterinary business located
approximately 1/4 mile west of County Road 53. Customers access the business via a 40-foot private
access easement. The applicant is requesting to place a sign on an offsite property that he does not own
which is adjacent to County Road 53. The sign would be placed outside of the 40-foot private access
easement and would be required to meet county setback requirements from adjacent property lines and
road rights-of-way.
The veterinary business was approved through a Use by Special Review Permit (USR-1196) in
September 1998. Condition of Approval #3 for this permit states: "Any proposed signage shall require the
appropriate building permits and shall be constructed in accordance with Section 42.2 of the Weld County
Zoning Ordinance." Section 42.2.3.2 of the Weld County Zoning Ordinance, which was in effect in 1998,
states in regard to Off-site directional signs: "Such signs shall relate only to a service or product primarily
available for the highway user (such as food, lodging, gas, repairs or entertainment) and available within
one (1) mile of a highway exit or in a community through which the highway passes."
Currently under Weld County Code Article IV Division 2 defines off-site directional signs as: "Signs
situated on premises other than those upon which the goods, services or functions being advertised are
located and giving guidance as to where, how distant and the type of goods, services or functions which
may be obtained. Such signs shall relate only to a service or product primarily available for the highway
user (such as restaurants, lodging, gas, repairs or entertainment) and available within one (1) mile of a
highway exit or in a community through which the highway passes."
The Department of Planning Services provided a written determination on December 14, 2009 to the
applicant stating that the proposed sign for the veterinary clinic does not meet the requirements of an off-
1p9I-GLfrilL'a"000 / ,
A/ O/D 2010-0845
site directional sign both according to the Zoning Ordinance in effect in 1998 and the current Weld County
Zoning Code, Chapter 23.
The applicant is appealing this decision. The applicant claims that the proposed sign meets the definition
of an off-site directional sign because County Road 53 is a paved "highway" through the Town of Kersey
(County Road 53 connects to State Highway 34 on the north side of Kersey) and is located one mile
south of the Town of Kersey. The applicant is also appealing that this sign is necessary to attract
additional customers and to provide clear directions for customers trying to locate the facility.
Mr. Gathman visited the site and said that in driving to the area you really wouldn't know that there is a
veterinary clinic located there. You can see the applicant's house but there is really no indication of a
veterinary business.
Benjamin Hansford asked how many lanes County Road 53 has. Mr. Gathman said it is a two-lane
paved road. Mr. Hansford asked what the speed limit is. Mr. Gathman replied it is 55 mph.
Mr. Hansford asked if hospital signs offsite are acceptable under the current code. Mr. Gathman believed
that any safety sign would be exempt from the Weld County Code.
Mr. Gathman requested that if this application is approved the following conditions of approval be
attached:
1. The sign shall be placed in a location to have adequate site distance in both directions.
2. Appropriate building permits shall be obtained for the sign.
3. The sign shall meet all offsets (10-feet) from adjacent property lines and setbacks (50-feet) from
the edge of future right-of-way for County Road 53.
4. The size of the sign shall be limited to 150-square feet, shall not exceed 30-feet in total height
and shall not be internally illuminated per the requirements of Chapter 23, Weld County Code.
Mark Powell, 25505 CR 53, has lived on this property the past 19 years. He obtained a Use by Special
Review Permit (USR-1196) in September 1998 and has had a sign on the north part of that property for
the past 14 years. He added that he was asked to have it removed.
Mr. Powell commented that his building, hospital and residence are visible from County Road 53 but it is
difficult to see. It is detrimental to his business and to the people that have never been there before.
Mr. Powell stated that his neighbor to the south has agreed to allow a sign under the Weld County Code
and he will obtain the appropriate permits and construct it according to building regulations.
Mr. Hansford asked Mr. Powell if he performs any emergency treatment. Mr. Powell replied yes.
Bryant Gimlin asked Mr. Powell to describe what the sign would look like. Mr. Powell said that it will be
approximately a 6 foot by 12 foot sign; however it will not be illuminated.
Mr. Hansford asked if this case was initiated by a complaint. Michelle Martin, Planning Services, stated
that the sign was originally located on a neighbor's property and they wished to have the sign removed.
Mr. Powell has since taken down the sign.
The Chair asked Mr. Powell if he has read through the Conditions of Approval and if he is in agreement
with those. Mr. Powell replied that he is in agreement.
2
The Chair asked if there was anyone in the audience who wished to speak for or against this application.
No one wished to speak.
Mr. Hansford said that since this is a rural area having an injured animal needing emergency medical
care and trying to find this place would be a serious issue. Additionally with the speed limit on the two-
lane road, if you miss the access then you have to go down a ways to hit another intersection to turn
around or do a u-turn in the middle of the road which is serious safety issue.
Bruce Fitzgerald commented that he visited the site and initially drove right by. He did turn back around
and found the address on the mailbox. Mr. Fitzgerald added that he is in favor of this request.
Benjamin Hansford moved that Case BOA-1064 be approved along with the Conditions of Approval as
proposed, seconded by Bryant Gimlin.
The Chair asked the secretary to poll the members of the Board of Adjustment for their decision. Bill Hall,
absent; William Hansen, yes; Erich Ehrlich, absent; Benjamin Hansford, yes; Jerry Neff, yes; Jim Cosner,
no; Bryant Gimlin, yes; Bruce Fitzgerald, yes. Motion carried.
Meeting adjourned at 11:21 a.m.
Respectfully submitted,
43)114;l l /7241,66M1L
Kristine Ranslem
Secretary
3
Hello