HomeMy WebLinkAbout20110222.tiff SUMMARY OF THE WELD COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING
Tuesday, May 4, 2010
A regular meeting of the Weld County Planning Commission was held in the Weld County Department of
Planning Services, Hearing Room, 918 10th Street, Greeley, Colorado. The meeting was called to order by
Chair, Tom Holton, at 1:30 p.m.
ROLL CALL ABSENT
Tom Holton -Chair
Mark Lawley-Vice Chair
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; 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 April 6,2010 Weld County Planning Commission minutes, seconded by
Bill Hall. Motion carried.
The Chair read the first case into record.
CASE NUMBER: USR-1735
APPLICANT: Bruce&Susan MacMillan
PLANNER: Chris Gathman
REQUEST: A Site Specific Development Plan and Use by Special Review Permit for a
Home Business (custom metal working studio) in the A(Agricultural)Zone
District.
LEGAL DESCRIPTION: Lot A RE-4643; Part NW4 of Section 33,T4N, R67W of the 6th P.M.,Weld
County, Colorado.
LOCATION: East of and adjacent to CR 17 and approximately 1/2 mile north of CR 38.
Chris Gathman, Planning Services, stated that the applicant is running late and requested to move this case
later in the agenda.
The Chair read the next case into record.
CASE NUMBER: USR-1725
APPLICANT: Brian &Susan Williams
PLANNER: Michelle Martin
REQUEST: A Site Specific Development Plan and Use by Special Review Permit for a Use
Permitted as a Use by Right or Accessory Use in the Commercial Zone District
(landscaping business) in the A(Agricultural)Zone District.
LEGAL DESCRIPTION: Lot A RE-1168 being part of the NW4 SW4 of Section 21, T4N, R67W of the
6th P.M.,Weld County, Colorado.
LOCATION: East of and adjacent to CR 17 and approximately 1/4 mile north of CR 42.
Michelle Martin, Planning Services, commented that the applicant just provided her with their notice of the
mineral owners and requested that Council review this to make sure that it does meet the requirements per
the Weld County Code.
After review of the letter by Bruce Barker, County Attorney, it appears that this notice will not work; therefore
1
2011-0222
Li4rnriuinicgtu wj /-/7- ,20//
staff requested that this case be continued to the June 1, 2010 Planning Commission meeting.
Nick Berryman moved that Case USR-1725 be continued to the June 1, 2010 Planning Commission meeting,
seconded by Robert Grand. Motion carried unanimously.
CASE NUMBER: USR-1735
APPLICANT: Bruce&Susan MacMillan
PLANNER: Chris Gathman
REQUEST: A Site Specific Development Plan and Use by Special Review Permit for a
Home Business (custom metal working studio) in the A(Agricultural)Zone
District.
LEGAL DESCRIPTION: Lot A RE-4643; Part NW4 of Section 33,T4N, R67W of the 6th P.M., Weld
County, Colorado.
LOCATION: East of and adjacent to CR 17 and approximately 1/2 mile north of CR 38.
Chris Gathman, Planning Services, commented that this case is to correct a zoning violation(ZCV09-00139)
for operating an iron metal fabrication business without obtaining the necessary Weld County Zoning Permits.
This site is located in a rural agricultural area. The nearest residences are approximately 500 feet to the west
and 1000 feet to the south of this site. An irrigation pivot is located immediately to the north and east.
Ten referrals were sent to outside agencies. Six (6) referral comments were received and have been
addressed as conditions of approval and/or development standards.
This site is located within the three mile referral areas for the Towns of Berthoud, Johnstown, and Milliken.
The Town of Berthoud indicated no conflict with their interests in their referral response received January 20,
2010. No referral response has been received from either the Towns of Johnstown or Milliken.
No phone calls or letters have been received from surrounding property owners in regard to this case.
The Department of Planning Services recommends approval of this application along with the attached
development standards and conditions of approval.
Mr. Gathman added that the business is custom; therefore there are typically no outside customers. They
may have one (1) delivery a month from off-site.
Lauren Light, Environmental Health, noted that water is provided by the Little Thompson Water District. In the
information provided to Environmental Health it indicates that clients come to the site maybe 1 to 3 times a
month; therefore a condition was included that the clients need to have access to sanitary facilities. In
researching the site, staff discovered that there are two septic systems for the home onsite. One system is for
the basement and another system is for the upper level of the house. However, as mentioned in Mr.
Gathman's testimony the applicant indicated that there are no clients coming to the site. Ms. Light stated that
if no clients are coming to the site those conditions of approval could be deleted.
Heidi Hansen, Public Works, stated that County Road 17 is classified as an arterial roadway with 140 feet of
right-of-way; currently there is 60 feet of right-of-way. The existing residential access will be utilized. Staff
requested that the applicant identify the future and existing right-of-way on the plat. No stormwater drainage
measures were required as it is a low intensive use.
Susan MacMillian said that this is not necessarily a metal fabrication business but more of an artisan studio.
Her husband does sculpture and railings. She added that he goes out and measures what the client wants,
creates a design, makes the object and then installs it onsite. No signage will be located onsite.
Ms. Light commented that the septic tanks that they inspected were adequate; however there wasn't enough
information to determine if the leach fields are adequate for the house. She added that if a development
standard would be added that there are no outside employees or customers then Condition of Approval 1.6
and 1.C could be deleted.
2
After reviewing the current development standards, staff felt that they were adequate and recommended
deleting Condition of Approval 1.6 and 1.C.
Mark Lawley moved to delete Condition of Approval 1.B and 1.C as recommended, seconded by Robert
Grand. Motion carried.
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 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.
Robert Grand moved that Case USR-1735 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 Nick Berryman.
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, yes; Jason Maxey,
absent; Roy Spitzer, absent; Mark Lawley, yes; Tom Holton, yes. Motion carried unanimously.
The Chair called a brief recess and reconvened at 1:52 pm.
The Chair read the following case into record.
CASE NUMBER: USR-1732
APPLICANT: Michael& Pamela Weiss
PLANNER: Kim Ogle
REQUEST: A Site Specific Development Plan and Use by Special Review Permit for a
Kennel (up to 15 personal dogs)in the A(Agricultural)Zone District.
LEGAL DESCRIPTION: Lot B RE-3666; located in Part of the W2SW4 of Section 33, T3N, R66W of the
6th P.M.,Weld County, Colorado.
LOCATION: North of and adjacent to CR 26 and approximately 1 mile west of CR 31.
Kim Ogle, Planning Services, commented that the site is located within the three mile referral area for the
Town of Platteville. The Town of Platteville, in their referral dated January 14, 2010, indicated that they
reviewed the request and found no conflicts with their interests.
The existing kennel is in violation for the presence of too many household pets.
Surrounding properties are predominately agriculture in character. Located to the west of the property is
farmland. North of the property are two residences and dryland pasture. To the east is dryland pasture as
well.
Fourteen referral agencies reviewed the case. Six(6)referral agencies offered comments and are addressed
through the conditions of approval and development standards.
No letters or phone calls have been received in regard to this case from surrounding property owners.
The Department of Planning Services recommends approval of this case along with the attached conditions of
approval and development standards.
Lauren Light, Environmental Health, commented that the applicant has a domestic well permit. She added
that the applicants do not wish to change the well permit to commercial as it limits what they can do on their
property. Since this is 15 of their own personal dogs, there are no septic issues. Ms. Light commented that
the applicants did a good job of addressing conditions prior to this meeting.
Heidi Hansen, Public Works,commented that County Road 26 is a local gravel road. No stormwater drainage
measures were required because it is for their personal dogs and not a business.
3
Michael Weiss commented that his wife has been actively engaged over the last 16 to 20 years in dog rescue
for the local region. He added that she has a big heart and over the number of years in trying find homes for
these animals they have accumulated a number of dogs as their own.
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 read through the Development Standards and Conditions of Approval
and if they are in agreement with those. The applicants replied that they are in agreement.
Robert Grand moved that Case USR-1732 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 Bill Hall.
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, yes; Jason Maxey,
absent; Roy Spitzer, absent; Mark Lawley, yes; Tom Holton, yes. Motion carried unanimously.
The Chair read the last case into record.
CASE NUMBER: USR-1734
APPLICANT: Jimmie&Tamara James
PLANNER: Kim Ogle
REQUEST: A Site Specific Development Plan and Use by Special Review Permit for a
Home Business (feed distribution business) in the A(Agricultural)Zone District.
LEGAL DESCRIPTION: Lot A RE-2158; Part E2SE4 of Section 29,T2N, R63W of the 6th P.M., Weld
County, Colorado.
LOCATION: North of and adjacent to CR 16 and west of and adjacent to CR 65.
Kim Ogle, Planning Services, commented that this application is for a home business. The applicants are in
the feed distribution business for Kent Feeds.
The site is not located within an intergovernmental agreement area; however it does lie within the three mile
referral area for the Town of Keenesburg. The Town, in their referral dated January 14, 2010, indicated that
they reviewed the request and found no conflicts with their interests.
Access to the property is from County Road 65, maintained by Weld County.
Currently the property is in violation for the presence of a feed and seed business without an approved and
recorded Use by Special Review permit.
The business is located 150 feet from County Road 16 and approximately 100 feet from County Road 65 on a
recorded exemption parcel. Adjacent parcels to the north,east and west are also recorded exemption parcels
with residences and outbuildings.
The applicant indicates that there is no outdoor storage as the feed is stored on pallets within an existing
structure.
Surrounding property in all directions is zoned agricultural and is predominately single family homes. The
applicant provided a letter of support signed by six(6)surrounding property owners indicating no opposition to
their proposed use.
Eleven referral agencies reviewed the application. Six (6) referral agencies offered comments and are
addressed through conditions of approval and development standards. Aside from the letter of support of the
application, no letters or phone calls were received.
The Department of Planning Services recommends approval of this case along with the attached conditions of
4
approval and development standards.
Lauren Light, Environmental Health, commented that the applicants have a domestic well. There are no
issues with the septic system as no customers will be coming to the site; rather it is delivery only. The
applicant has submitted Waste Handling and Dust Abatement Plans. Ms. Light stated that there are no
concerns with this case.
Heidi Hansen, Public Works, stated that County Road 65 is a local gravel road. The applicants identified a low
point on their property which stormwater runoff collects; therefore no further requirements were requested.
Jim and Tamara James commented that they operate a feed distribution from their home. Delivery trucks
come one to two times per month. The material is stored in their building and then delivered to retail stores
throughout Colorado.
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 read through the Development Standards and Conditions of Approval
and if they are in agreement with those. The applicants replied that they are in agreement.
Robert Grand moved that Case USR-1734 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 Nick Berryman.
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, yes; Jason Maxey,
absent; Roy Spitzer, absent; Mark Lawley, yes; Tom Holton, yes. Motion carried unanimously.
The Chair asked the public if there were other items of business that they would like to discuss. No one
wished to speak.
The Chair asked the Planning Commission members if there was any new business to discuss.
Commissioner Lawley asked why this last case is any different from a farmer selling seed from his place
year round. Mr. Ogle said it is no different and that they should have a Use by Special Review permit for a
home business as well. Commissioner Holton commented that he believes this will be addressed by the
proposed code changes. Bethany Salzman provided a brief summary of the proposed code changes in
relation to Home Occupation. The proposed code changes will be brought before the Planning
Commission for review at the June 1, 2010 meeting.
Meeting adjourned at 2:18 pm
Respectfully submitted,
1Q.67 bur-
Kristine Ranslem
Secretary
5
Hello