HomeMy WebLinkAbout20091057MINUTES OF THE WELD COUNTY BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT MEETING
Tuesday, April 21, 2009
A regular meeting of the Weld County Board of Adjustment was held on Tuesday, April 21, 2009, 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
Anita Owens
Bill Hall
Bruce Fitzgerald
Benjamin Hansford
Jerry Neff
Bryant Gimlin
Also Present: Michelle Martin, Weld County Department of Planning; Frank Piacentino, Weld County Building
Department; Don Carroll, Public Works, Cyndy Giauque (via phone), County Attorney; and Kristine Ranslem,
Secretary.
Bill Hall moved to approve the minutes of the last regular meeting of the Weld County Board of Adjustment
held on March 17, 2009, seconded by William Hansen. Motion carried.
The Chair read the case into record.
CASE NUMBER: BOA -1055
APPLICANT: Glaze Industrial Properties LLC
PLANNER: Michelle Martin
REQUEST: Variance for the encroachment of 5 cargo containers and one shed into the 10
foot offset in the 1-3 (Industrial) Zone District
LEGAL DESCRIPTION: Part NW4 of Section 20, T1 N, R66W of the 6th P.M., Weld County, Colorado
LOCATION: South of and adjacent to CR 8 and east of and adjacent to CR 27.
Michelle Martin, Department of Planning Services, stated that the applicant, Glaze Industrial Properties
LLC, is requesting a variance from the required 10 foot offset to allow five (5) cargo containers and one (1)
shed to encroach 10 feet into the offset. Therefore the structures would be approximately 1/2 foot from
the south and east property lines.
The parcel of land under consideration is located south of and adjacent to County Road 8 and east of and
adjacent to County Road 27. The address of the property is 2992 County Road 27.
The Weld County Department of Planning Services recommends this request be denied for the following
reasons:
The applicant purchased the property in February 2007 and relocated the plumbing company,
"Discount Plumbing Services, Inc." to the site without the necessary land use and building permits.
A violation was initiated on the property in July 2007 for the operation of a business without the
necessary land use and building permits. The site is approximately 0.92 acres and contains an
office, garage, and shop. The Department of Planning Services believes there is enough room to
relocate the cargo containers to meet the required setbacks and offsets. Therefore the size of the
site and the ability to move the cargo containers the Department of Planning Services does not
believe there are any special circumstances peculiar to the lot, structure or building involved and
which are not applicable to other lots, structures or buildings in the same zoning district.
The Department of Planning Services has determined that the five (5) cargo containers and shed • (fCi1i nLo,-27 al`cr>t.w
si/9
1
2009-1057
could be relocated outside of the 10 foot offset. There are no buildings or obstructions which would
prevent the containers from meeting the required 10 foot offset.
The applicants moved the business to this site without the necessary Weld County land use and
building permits. If the applicant would have contacted the Weld County Department of Planning
and Building Department before relocating the business and cargo containers to the site this
variance could have been prevented.
According to the Weld County Building Department referral dated March 19, 2009 the storage
containers do not meet the requirements for fire resistive construction for exterior walls based on fire
separation distance.
The cargo containers are moveable structures and therefore could be relocated outside of the 10
foot offset requirement and still be useable structures.
Ms. Martin showed on a visual slide that the cargo containers are currently set on railroad ties.
Bruce Fitzgerald asked Ms. Martin why we have setbacks. Ms. Martin said it is for safety reasons
between two properties.
Jerry Neff asked if the Halliburton property is located to the south and east of the site. Ms. Martin replied
yes.
Frank Piacentino, Plans Examiner Building Department, commented that the storage containers do not
meet the fire separation construction for exterior walls based on Table 602 2006 International Building
Code. The adjacent property is currently being used as a parking lot owned by Halliburton Services. The
oilfield services have submitted a letter dated January 3, 2009 stating that the storage containers have no
negative effect on their operation.
If approved by the Board of Adjustment, a condition would be included. The property owner, Glaze
Industries, LLC, will be required to submit a letter to the Weld County Department of Planning Services
stating that if any structure at the property located at 2920 CR 27 (which is the Halliburton property), are
built within 20 feet of the south and east property line of the Glaze Property, the containers will be
removed or provide a 2 -hour fire resistive construction for the exterior walls of the storage containers
adjacent to the property lines or move the storage containers to meet the setback requirements in the 1-3
Industrial Zone District. Building permits are required for the storage containers.
Mr. Fitzgerald clarified that the concern is for a fire safety issue and asked if a referral was received from
the Fire District. Ms. Martin said that a referral was sent to the Fort Lupton Fire Protection District but they
did not return a comment. Ms. Martin added that the reason this condition was added is if he does not
meet the 10 foot separation then it poses a hardship on the Halliburton site and therefore he would have
to submit the letter that Mr. Piacentino requested.
Don Carroll, Public Works, commented that County Road 27 is a strategic roadway and has 140 foot of
right-of-way at full build out. Public Works has asked the applicant to reserve the additional 40 feet from
the existing right-of-way for a total of 70 foot from centerline on County Road 27.
County Road 8 has been identified as a collector status road and they have asked to reserve an additional
10 foot towards the property line or 40 foot from centerline. Mr. Carroll added that there are some future
setbacks for this property as it sits on the corner.
Mr. Carroll indicated on a visual slide that the roadways have been annexed into the City of Fort Lupton.
Therefore Weld County does not maintain nor has any control of the right-of-way. Mr. Carroll cannot say
when the City of Fort Lupton plans to expand that area. He added that south of this site Vestas is coming
in and growth drives the expansion and widening of road sections.
2
Mr. Carroll stated that he has inspected the site and the containers do not cause an impact to Public
Works right now because they are in the southeast corner of the property; they are not protruding into any
of the current or future right-of-way. If the containers are to be relocated Public Works is requesting that
no permanent structures be placed in any of the reserved right-of-ways.
The Chair asked if the applicant wished to make any comments.
Michael Glaze, 13046 CR 8, commented that everything Ms. Martin stated was correct. He said that he
bought the property in February 2007 and the picture presented today does not show what the property
looked like when they purchased it in 2007. After he had purchased it he worked for two months to clean
up the property.
Originally there was a gas station and mechanics shop located on this property. He felt it was in
everyone's best interest to clean the corner up for safety reasons. He added that they tried to open the
corner up and make it a clear line of site for oncoming traffic.
Mr. Glaze commented that when they looked at the property prior to purchase there was a business
currently operating known as Automated Gate Services. Prior to that business there were other
businesses. He added that they were told that the property was zoned commercial.
Mr. Glaze stated that they contacted Weld County with regard to putting up a new fence and were told that
there was no permit needed for a new fence. The fence was professionally installed and they began
operating in April 2007. The cargo containers are utilized for anything that doesn't require to be heated or
cooled. The units can be locked up and added that it provides a high level of security for their tools and
items too expensive to replace.
The five containers came from their past located in the City of Brighton. He added that the containers
were professionally moved and set by a crane along the fence. These containers were not an issue until
after the property was rezoned to 1-3. After the rezoning of the property, he had a meeting with staff and
went over the layout of the property. It was pointed out that he needed to obtain permits for all the
buildings on site. After he asked about the storage containers it was brought to his attention that they
were not allowed in the 1-3 Zone District and did not meet the required setbacks.
Mr. Glaze commented that these storage containers weigh over 4000 pounds alone without any cargo in
them. It is not as simple as described to move these containers.
He added that there is no other place on this property that these storage containers can sit where it won't
conflict with his operation. When the containers were placed there it was not his idea to get around
regulations. He set them the way they suited the property and would serve the most usefulness. Mr.
Glaze commented that he talked to the people at Halliburton when he found out that these containers
were in violation. He asked them if they would have a problem with these containers and they replied that
they had no concerns. Placing these in different locations becomes an obstacle for him and his
employees to work around.
Mr. Glaze stated that he has four service trucks, three dump trucks, two trailers, five pieces of equipment,
and numerous pieces of attachments. He added that all of this needs to have room to be loaded,
unloaded and moved around safely. He understands and agrees that the setbacks are for safety reasons,
but moving these containers does not create a safer environment. It makes it more troublesome for the
operations of people coming in and out.
These containers can be moved to meet setbacks, but if the road is widened that will no longer be true.
This area will shrink down to approximately 1/2 an acre and there will be no place to move these containers
and meet the required setbacks with the exception of where they are currently set. It would be a tragic
cost of money to move them once and then move them again if and when the road widens.
With the exception of being sited by zoning compliance for operating a business, no other complaint has
3
Kristine Ranslem
Secretary
been received. He added that they try to maintain a very neat and positive appearance for operating a
business. Glaze Industrial Properties does not own any other properties. It is a small business just doing
their best to survive. They have been in business since 1995 and have evolved from working out of their
garage to what it is today.
Mr. Glaze commented that he hopes that it can be understood how important it is for them to maintain
these storage containers in the location they are in. He understands that rules have to be set for the entire
body but also understands that from time to time there are exceptions for individuals. He does not like
being that individual and doesn't take any pride in this at all but has no choice to ask for this request.
Mr. Glaze stated that Larry Richardson of the Fort Lupton Fire Protection District performs an annual
inspection on his business. At the first inspection it was pointed out that there was one item which needed
to corrected. They corrected the problem immediately and the Fire District returned for another inspection
and since that time all inspections have passed. They maintain everything as safe as possible.
Mr. Neff asked if there is a particle board divider inside these containers. Mr. Glaze said that it is a divider
to maintain some integrity between some of the more expensive items.
Mr. Neff asked if any welding equipment is stored in one of the containers. Mr. Glaze replied yes.
Mr. Neff asked if there was an underground fuel storage tank associated with the gas station. Mr. Glaze
replied no and added that prior to purchasing the property there was a phase 2 done on the property and
the storage tanks were above ground.
The Chair asked if there was anyone in the audience who wished to speak for or against this application. No
one wished to speak.
Ms. Martin pointed out that the equipment and trucks can still be parked within the future right-of-way areas;
it's just the location of the structures that wouldn't be permitted. The placement of the cargo containers
wouldn't be permitted in the future right-of-way or setback areas but the placement of equipment and trucks
can still utilize that spot on his property.
The Chair asked the applicant if they have read through the Conditions of Approval as presented by staff and
if they are in agreement with those. The applicant replied that they are in agreement but wished to ask about
the statement of if Halliburton would ever build something within 20 feet of the property line why wouldn't it be
the 10 feet. Mr. Piacentino stated that it would depend on the class of the structure. Some types of
construction and occupancies require 30 feet, some require 20 feet and some require 10 feet.
Bill Hall moved that Case BOA -1055, be approved along with the Conditions of Approval as proposed,
seconded by Jerry Neff.
The Chair asked the secretary to poll the members of the Board of Adjustment for their decision. Bill Hall, yes;
William Hansen, yes; Erich Ehrlich, absent; Benjamin Hansford, absent; Jerry Neff, yes; Anita Owens, absent;
Bryant Gimlin, absent; Bruce Fitzgerald, yes. Motion carried.
Meeting adjourned at 11:43 a.m.
Respectfully submitted,
4
Hello