HomeMy WebLinkAbout20102624.tiff BEFORE THE WELD COUNTY, COLORADO, PLANNING COMMISSION
RESOLUTION OF RECOMMENDATION TO THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
• Moved by Bill Hall, that the following resolution be introduced for passage by the Weld County Planning
Commission. Be it resolved by the Weld County Planning Commission that the application for:
CASE NUMBER: 2nd AmPF-336
APPLICANT: UQM Properties, Inc.
PLANNER: Chris Gathman
REQUEST: A Site Specific Development Plan and Amended Planned Unit Development
Plan for Del Camino Center PUD (to divide Block 2 and Block 2A into one(1)
additional lot)
LEGAL DESCRIPTION: Block 2 and Block 2A-Amendment to the Del Camino Center PUD; located in
Part of the W2NW4 of Section 14, T2N, R68W of the 6th P.M., Weld County,
Colorado.
LOCATION: Approximately 400 feet east of the East 1-25 Frontage Rd and approximately
700 feet south of CR 22.
be recommended favorably to the Board of County Commissioners for the following reasons:
1. The submitted materials are in compliance with the application requirements of Section 23-2-730 of
the Weld County Code.
2. The request is in conformance with Section 23-2-780 of the Weld County Code, as follows:
A. Section 23-2-770.A — That the proposal is consistent with the Chapter 22 and any other
applicable code provision or ordinance in effect.
1) Section 22-2-120.A R.Goal 1. Ensure that adequate services and facilities are
currently available or reasonably obtainable to serve the residential development
or district.
• Lot 2 of the proposed Amended PUD is presently served by the Central Weld
County Water District and Saint Vrain Sanitation District.
2) The proposed site is not influenced by any intergovernmental agreements or the
Regional Urbanization Area (RUA).
B. Section 23-2-770.B— That the proposed PUD Plan conforms to the PUD District in which it is
proposed to be located.
C. Section 23-2-770.C-- That the uses which would be permitted shall be compatible with the
existing or future development of the surrounding area as permitted by the existing zoning,
and with the future development as projected by Chapter 22 and any other applicable code
provision or ordinance in effect or Master Plans of affected municipalities.
This site is located within the 3-mile referral area of the City of Longmont and the Towns of
Frederick and Firestone. It is not located within a coordinated planning agreement (IGA)
boundary. The City of Longmont, in their referral dated July 26, 2010, indicated no conflicts
with their interests. The Town of Firestone, in their referral dated July 23, 2010, stated that
the property was in the Town of Firestone's growth boundary, that the site abuts a pending
residential development to be located in the Town of Firestone to the east (Cottonwood
Hollow, Filing No. 1), and asked if there are any height restrictions or architectural
requirements for the proposed future building on proposed lot 3. Any future buildings or
developments on the site will be subject to the Weld County Site Plan Review process.
Chapter 19, Article Ill of the Weld County Code outlines baseline design standards that
developments on this site shall adhere to including a maximum building height of 50-feet.
• 'nom
i
9L1u - �( ,��
Resolution 2nd AmPF-336
UQM Properties, Inc.
Page 2
• D. Section 23-2-770.D-That the USES which would be allowed in the proposed PUD District will
conform with the Performance Standards of the PUD District contained in Section 23-3-420 of
this Chapter.
Any future development within this amended PUD will be reviewed through the site plan
review process to ensure compliance with Section 23-3-420 of the Weld County Code.
E. Section 23-2-770.E — There has been compliance with Article V of this Chapter if the
proposal is located within any Overlay District identified by maps officially adopted by the
County.
F. Section 23-2-770.F— That there has been compliance with the submittal requirements of the
PUD Plan, and the PUD Plan Plat and the supporting documents satisfy the legitimate
concerns of the Planning Commission.
Effective January 1, 2003, Building Permits issued on the proposed lots will be required to
adhere to the fee structure of the County Road Impact Program. (Ordinance 2002-11)
Effective August 1, 2005, Building Permits issued on the proposed lots will be required to
adhere to the fee structure of the Capital Expansion Impact Fee and the
Stormwater/Drainage Impact Fee. (Ordinance 2005-8 Section 5-8-40)
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 agencies.
The Planning Commission recommendation for approval is conditional upon the following:
• 1. Prior to Recording the PUD Final Plat:
A. The applicant shall address the requirements of the Department of Public Works,as stated in
the referral response dated August 10, 2010. Evidence of Public Works approval shall be
submitted in writing to the Weld County Department of Planning Services. (Department of
Public Works)
B. The applicant shall attempt to address the requirements of the Mountain View Fire Protection
District as stated in their referral response dated August 5, 2010. Written evidence of such
shall be provided to the Department of Planning Services. (Mountain View Fire Protection
District)
C. The applicant shall attempt to address the concerns of the Town of Firestone as stated in
their referral response dated July 23, 2010. Written evidence of such shall be provided to the
Department of Planning Services. (Town of Firestone)
D. 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)
E. The applicant shall either submit to the Weld County Department of Planning Services a copy
of an agreement with the properties mineral owners/operators stipulating that the oil and gas
activities have adequately been incorporated into the design of the site or show evidence that
an adequate attempt has been made to mitigate the concerns of the mineral owners. Drill
envelopes can be delineated on the plat in accordance with the State requirements as an
attempt to mitigate concerns. The plat shall be amended to include any possible future
drilling sites. (Department of Planning Services)
1111
Resolution 2nd AmPF-336
UQM Properties, Inc.
Page 3
• F. The applicant shall submit a digital file of all drawings associated with the Final Plan
application. Acceptable CAD formats are .dwg, .dxf,and.dgn(Microstation);acceptable GIS
formats are ArcView shapefiles, 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)
G. The Plat shall be amended to include the following:
1) All sheets of the plat shall be labeled 2nd AmPF-336. (Department of Planning
Services)
2) The Weld County's Right to Farm Statement shall be placed on the plat per Section
22-2-20 J.A.Goal 10 of the Weld County Code. (Department of Planning Services)
3) The plat shall include a utility service block per section 27-9-40.6 of the Weld County
Code. (Department of Planning Services)
4) The Utility Easements shall conform to Section 24-7-60 of the Weld County Code
and adhere to the requirements of the Utility Board hearing (August 26, 2010).
(Department of Planning Services)
5) The plat should remove the signature block for the Department of Planning Services
and replace it with the signature block for the Weld County Planning Commission
and Board of County Commissioners. (Department of Planning Services)
6) Place the detention ponds in a drainage easement and provide a metes and bounds
description of the easement. Please label the detention ponds as"No Build/Storage
• Areas". Please label the detention ponds with the release rate and storage volumes.
(Department of Public Works)
2. The Final Plat is conditional upon the following and that each be placed on the Final Plat as notes
prior to recording:
A. 2nd Amended Final Plat for Amended Del Camino Center PUD(divide Block 2 and Block 2A
into one (1) additional lot). (Department of Planning Services)
B. Installation of utilities shall comply with Section 24-9-10 and 27-9-40 of the Weld County
Code and the Utility Board conditions. (Department of Planning Services)
C. Any future development of these lots will require site plan review approval by the Weld
County Department of Planning Services. The site plan review process is currently stipulated
in Article II, Division 3 of the Weld County Code. (Department of Planning Services)
D. Water service shall be obtained from Central Weld County Water District. (Department of
Public Health & Environment)
E. Sewer service shall be obtained from St. Vrain Sanitation District. (Department of Public
Health & Environment)
F. A stormwater discharge permit may be required for a development/redevelopment
/construction site where a contiguous or non-contiguous land disturbance is greater than or
equal to one acre in area. Contact the Water Quality Control Division of the Colorado
Department of Public Health and the Environment at www.cdphe.state.co.us/wq/PermitsUnit
for more information. (Department of Public Health and Environment)
•
Resolution 2nd AmPF-336
UQM Properties, Inc.
Page 4
G. During development of the site, all land disturbances shall be conducted so that nuisance
• conditions are not created. If dust emissions create nuisance conditions,at the request of
the Weld County Health Department, a fugitive dust control plan must be submitted.
(Department of Public Health and Environment)
H. In accordance with the Regulations of the Colorado Air Quality Control Commission any
development that disturbs more than 5 acres of land must incorporate all available and
practical methods that are technologically feasible and economically reasonable in order to
minimize dust emissions. (Department of Public Health and Environment)
Weld County's Right to Farm as delineated on this plat shall be recognized at all times.
(Department of Planning Services & Department of Public Health and Environment)
J. All signs including entrance signs shall require building permits. Signs shall adhere to Section
23-4-80 of the Weld County Code. These requirements shall apply to all temporary and
permanent signs. (Department of Planning Services)
K. Installation of utilities shall comply with Section 24-9-10 of the Weld County Code.
(Department of Planning Services)
L. Building permits shall be obtained prior to the construction of any building or structure.
Building permits are also required for signs and structures such as bus shelters if provided.
(Department of Building Inspection)
M. Personnel from Weld County Government 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
Development Standards stated herein and all applicable Weld County regulations.
(Department of Planning Services)
• N. The site shall maintain compliance at all times with the requirements of the Weld County
Departments of Public Works, Public Health and the Environment, and Planning Services,
and adopted Weld County Code and Policies. (Department of Planning Services)
O. All building plans shall be submitted to the Mountain View Fire Protection District for review
and approval prior to issuance of building permits. (Department of Planning Services)
P. Effective January 1, 2003, Building Permits issued on the proposed lots will be required to
adhere to the fee structure of the County Road Impact Program. (Ordinance 2002-11)
Q. Section 23-2-790.E of the Weld County Code-Failure to submit a PUD Plan. If no PUD Plan
application is submitted within three(3)years of the date of the approval of the PUD District,
the Planning Commission shall require the landowner to appear before it and present
evidence substantiating that the PUD project has not been abandoned and that the applicant
possesses the willingness and ability to continue with the submittal of the PUD Plan. The
Planning Commission may extend the date for the submittal of the PUD Plan application and
shall annually require the applicant to demonstrate that the PUD has not been abandoned. If
the Planning Commission determined that conditions or statements made supporting the
original approval of the PUD District have changed or that the landowner cannot implement
the PUD Plan, the Planning Commission shall recommend to the Board of County
Commissioners that the PUD District approval be revoked. If the Board of County
Commissioners agrees after a public hearing, the Board of County Commissioners may
revoke the PUD District and order the recorded PUD District reverted to the original zone
district.
•
Resolution 2nd AmPF-336
UQM Properties, Inc.
Page 5
• R. Section 23-2-790.F of the Weld County Code- Failure to Commence a PUD Final Plan - If
no construction has begun or no USE established in the PUD within one(1)year of the date
of the approval of the PUD Plan, the Planning Commission may require the landowner to
appear before it and present evidence substantiating that the PUD project has not been
abandoned and that the applicant possesses the willingness and ability to continue the PUD.
The Planning Commission may extend the date for initiation of the PUD construction and
shall annually require the applicant to demonstrate that the PUD has not been abandoned. If
the Planning Commission determines that conditions supporting the original approval of the
PUD Plan have changed or that the landowner cannot implement the PUD Plan,the Planning
Commission may recommend to the Board of County Commissioners that the PUD Plan
approval be withdrawn. If the Board of County Commissioners agrees after a public hearing,
the Board may revoke the PUD Plan and order the recorded PUD Plan vacated.
S. Section 27-8-80.B of the Weld County Code-Any PUD Zone District approved in a Final Plan
shall be considered as being in compliance with Chapter 24 of the Weld County Code and
Section 30-28-101, et seq., CRS.
T. No development activity shall commence, nor shall any building permits be issued on the
property until the amended final plan has been approved and recorded. (Department of
Planning Services)
3. Upon completion of 1 and 2 above, the applicant shall submit three (3) paper copies of the plat for
preliminary approval to the Weld County Department of Planning Services. Upon approval of the
paper copies 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 27-9-20 of the Weld County Code. The Mylar plat and additional
• requirements shall be submitted within sixty (60) days from the date of the Board of County
Commissioners resolution. The applicant shall be responsible for paying the recording fee.
Motion seconded by Erich Ehrlich.
VOTE:
For Passage Against Passage Absent
Robert Grand
Bill Hall
Tom Holton
Alexander Zauder
Erich Ehrlich
Roy Spitzer
Mark Lawley
Nick Berryman
Jason Maxey
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.
•
Resolution 2nd AmPF-336
UQM Properties, Inc.
Page 6
• 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 October 5, 2010.
Dated the 5th of October, 2010.
Ian-do-on
Kristine Ranslem
Secretary
S
•
10 -5 aol0
SUMMARY OF THE WELD COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING
• Tuesday, October 5, 2010
A regular meeting of the Weld County Planning Commission was held in the Weld County Department of
Planning Services, Hearing Room, 918 101h Street, Greeley, Colorado. The meeting was called to order by
Chair, Mark Lawley, at 1:30 p.m.
ROLL CALL ABSENT
Tom Holton
Mark Lawley
Nick Berryman
Erich Ehrlich
Robert Grand
Bill Hall
Roy Spitzer
Alexander Zauder
Jason Maxey
Also Present: Chris Gathman, Michelle Martin, and Kim Ogle, Department of Planning Services; Don Carroll,
Janet Carter and Heidi Hansen, Department of Public Works; Lauren Light, Department of Health; Bruce
Barker, County Attorney, and Kris Ranslem, Secretary.
Robert Grand moved to approve the September 7, 2010 Weld County Planning Commission minutes,
seconded by Erich Ehrlich. Motion carried.
The Chair read the first case into record.
• CASE NUMBER: o� a(AmPF-336
APPLICANT: UQM Properties, Inc.
PLANNER: Chris Gathman
REQUEST: A Site Specific Development Plan and Amended Planned Unit Development
Plan for Del Camino Center PUD (to divide Block 2 and Block 2A into one (1)
additional lot)
LEGAL DESCRIPTION: Block 2 and Block 2A-Amendment to the Del Camino Center PUD; located in
Part of the W2NW4 of Section 14,T2N, R68W of the 6th P.M., Weld County,
Colorado.
LOCATION: Approximately 400 feet east of the East 1-25 Frontage Rd and approximately
700 feet south of CR 22.
Chris Gathman, Planning Services, commented that the request is to divide two (2) existing lots into one
(1) additional lot. He stated that there is an existing access that comes off into the Frontage Road. An
existing business is located at the north end of the site under UQM Properties. The two parcels to the
south are presently vacant.
Mr. Gathman stated that any future development of the property would need to go through the Site Plan
Review process where parking, access, building locations, and landscaping would be addressed. At this
time the applicant does not have any plans to build in this area.
A referral was received from the Town of Firestone inquiring about one of their pending developments to
the east of this site (Cottonwood Hollow). They asked if there are any height restrictions or architectural
requirements for proposed future buildings on proposed Lot 3. Mr. Gathman said that currently under
Chapter 19 of the Weld County Code there is an article that gives details of the design standards for
Dacono, Firestone, and Frederick. Although currently this site is not within an Intergovernmental
Agreement area for the Town of Firestone, Mr. Gathman understands that this chapter is still in place and
would be reviewed at the time of Site Plan review.
• The existing building is served by St. Vrain Sanitation and they have indicated no conflicts with their
MIST
a4hmcp'- 3%
interests. This site is zoned PUD with Commercial (C-1 through C-3) uses as well as Industrial (I-1 and I-
2) uses.
• Don Carroll, Public Works, commented that the access is from Specialty Place and is a paved private
access road, not maintained by Weld County. This site is part of the old 1-25 MUD, which is referred to
now as the RUA. Anything built within the RUA is required to comply with all design standards (curb,
gutter, sidewalk). Staff is working with the applicant on finalizing the stormwater drainage on site. Mr.
Carroll stated that the applicants have contacted the Weld County Weed Division and added that there is
a weed plan for the open space until development occurs.
Lauren Light, Environmental Health, stated that Central Weld County Water District will serve the
subdivision and St. Vrain Sanitation will provide sewer service. Staff has no concerns with this request.
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 applicants if they have read through the amended Development Standards and
Conditions of Approval and if they are in agreement with those. The applicants replied that they are in
agreement.
Bill Hall moved that Case AmPF-336 be forwarded to the Board of County Commissioners along with the
Conditions of Approval and Development Standards with the Planning Commission's recommendation of
approval, seconded by Erich Ehrlich.
The Chair asked the secretary to poll the members of the Planning Commission for their decision. Nick
Berryman,yes; Erich Ehrlich,yes; Robert Grand,yes; Bill Hall,yes;Alexander Zauder,absent; Jason Maxey,
yes; Roy Spitzer, yes; Mark Lawley, yes; Tom Holton, absent. Motion carried unanimously.
The Chair read the following case into record.
• CASE NUMBER: USR-1742
APPLICANT: Yia&Ying Lo
PLANNER: Michelle Martin
REQUEST: A Site Specific Development Plan and Use by Special Review Permit for a Use
Permitted as a Use by Right, an Accessory Use or Use by Special Review in
the Commercial or Industrial Zone Districts (flea market and sports fields) in
the A(Agricultural)Zone District.
LEGAL DESCRIPTION: Lot B AmRE-4665 being part of the SE4 of Section 24,Ti N, R68W of the 6th
P.M., Weld County, Colorado.
LOCATION: Approximately 1/2 mile south of CR 8 and west of and adjacent to CR 13.
Michelle Martin, Planning Services, stated that this case was originally brought before the Planning
Commission on August 3, 2010 and was continued indefinitely in order to address some of the concerns
and requirements of the referral agencies and surrounding property owners.
A traffic study was conducted for the proposed development,which was reviewed by the City of Dacono. The
City of Dacono indicated in an email dated September 1,2010 that their concerns are adequately addressed
by the traffic letter and the City will not be requiring any off-site improvements to County Road 13.
Primarily, the surrounding property to the north, south,east, and west are agricultural with residences in close
proximity. Seven property owners were notified of the proposed development based on the applicant's
certificate list of surrounding property owners within 500 feet. More than 50% of the property owners sent
letters in opposition of the proposed flea market and sport fields. Some of their concerns are as follows:
decreased property values, increase of traffic, trash blowing onto neighbors property, lack of sanitation, no
medical assistance, lack of monitoring of hours of operation and number of people to the facility, lack of
screening/landscaping, and the lack of enjoyment of their own property.
• The applicant hosted a neighborhood meeting on August 14,2010 where six(6)neighbors attended. Many of
the neighbors indicated they would prefer to see the applicant relocate the facility further west towards the
motocross track. The neighbors continued to voice their concerns regarding the traffic, noise, and trash.
2
Hello