The URL can be used to link to this page

Browse Search

Home My WebLink About20082005.tiff Memorandum TO: Board of County Commissioners I CDATE: June 9, 2008 FROM: Brad Mueller COLORADO Department of Planning Services RE: Code Changes: New Land Use Process CC: Bruce Barker Planning Services Staff recommends approval of the attached proposed Code changes. These changes are in conjunction with the new land use process, as discussed in the memo to the Planning Commission dated May 12, 2008. The Board of County Commissioners reviewed these changes in a work session on April 14, 2008. The Planning Commission heard these proposals on May 20,2008,and is recommending approval. There have been no changes to the proposal since the time of the Board work session. Since the Planning Commission hearing, however, Planning Staff has discovered a section of the Code that was overlooked for this series of Code changes. Section 27-7-40 (PUD Final Plan) provides a process that is parallel to the one for minor subdivision final plans and major subdivision final plans. Staff request that the Board consider and approve the changes proposed below, in addition to those forwarded from the Planning Commission. These proposed changes are consistent with those of other, similar processes. Additional Land Use Application Process Code Chances (as of 6/6/08) * New text is highlighted; deleted text is stricken through. w ARTICLE VII PUD Final Plan: -s Step Three . ;, ,' Sec. 27-7-40. Review procedure for final plan. A. Intent. The intent of this Section is to outline the criteria for evaluation for the final plan. B. Duties of the Department of Planning Services. n, 2A/c0067- �} 1. Any person wanting to apply for a PUD final plan review shall arrange for a pre-application ff law conference with the Department of Planning Services. The Department of Planning Services shall be t�2 responsible for processing all applications for a PUD final plan once a completed application is submitted. e.3,d The Department shall have the responsibility to ensure that all application procedures and requirements are met prior to any official action. 2008-2005 1 2. In the event the Department of Planning Services determines that the final plan submittal is consistent with the previous sketch plan and change of zone submittals,and if a specific development guide was submitted for the change of zone application, the Planner shall: a. Send the application to referral agencies for review and comment. The agencies shall respond within twenty-eight (28) days after the application is mailed. The failure of any agency to respond within twenty-eight (28) days may be deemed a favorable response. All referral agency review comments are considered recommendations to the County. The authority and responsibility for approval and denial of a final plat application rests with the County. The referral agencies include those listed in Subsection 27-4-30.B.1 of this Chapter. b. The Planner shall review the final plan application and approve, or conditionally approve, the application if the applicant has demonstrated compliance with Subsections C.1 through C.8 below. 3. In the event that the Department of Planning Services determines that the final plan submittal is not consistent with the previous sketch plan and change of zone submittals,and/or a conceptual development guide was submitted for the change of zone application, the Planner shall: a. Set a Board of County Commissioners hearing date within sixty(60) days after the complete applieation has been submitted. b: a.Send the application to referral agencies for review and comment. The agencies shall respond within twenty-eight (28) days after the application is mailed. The failure of any agency to respond within twenty-eight (28) days may be deemed a favorable response. All referral agency review comments are considered a recommendation to the County for approval and denial of a final plan application. The referral agencies include those listed in Section 27-4-30.B4 of this Chapter. b. Prepare a staff recommendation for the Board of County Commissioners addressing all aspects of the application. Planning staff recommendations will determine compliance with Subsections CA through C.8 below. c. Set a Board of County Commissioners hearing date. d. An applicant may conduct a Neighborhood Meeting with area landowners. Such meeting is not required,but may be recommended by the Planning Services staff to encourage communication between a land use applicant and the neighbors. e. Arrange for legal notice of said hearing to be published once in the newspaper designated by the Board of County Commissioners for publication of notices. At the discretion of the Board of County Commissioners, a second notice may be published in a newspaper which is published in the area in which the PUD plan is proposed. The failure to publish the second notice shall not create a jurisdictional defect in the hearing process. The date of publication shall be at least fourteen(14)days prior to the hearing. f. Give notice for the proposed final plan and the public hearing date to those persons listed in the application as owners of property located within five hundred (500) feet of the parcel under consideration,and owners and lessees of the mineral estate on or under the parcel under consideration. Such notification shall be mailed,first class,not less than fifteen(15)days before the scheduled public hearing. Such notice is not required by state statute and is provided as a courtesy to the owners and lessees of the mineral estate on or under the parcel. Inadvertent errors by the applicant in supplying such list or the Board of County Commissioners in sending such notice shall not create a jurisdictional 2 defect in the hearing process,even if such error results in the failure of a surrounding property owner or owners and lessees of mineral estates to receive such notification. g. The Department of Planning Services shall post a sign for the applicant on the property under consideration for a PUD final plan. The sign shall be posted adjacent to and visible from a publicly maintained road right-of-way. In the event the property under consideration is not adjacent to a publicly maintained road right-of-way, one(1) sign shall be posted at the point at which the driveway(access drive)intersects a publicly maintained road right-of-way. The sign shall be posted at least fifteen(15) days prior to the hearing and evidenced with a photograph. f. Prepare a staff recommendation for the Board of County Commissioners addressing all aspects of the application. Planning staff recommendations will determine compliance with Subsections C.1 through C.8 below. 3 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 passage by the Weld County Planning Commission. Be it resolved by the Weld County Planning Commission that the application for: CASE NUMBER: Ordinance 2008-XX APPLICANT: Weld County PLANNER: Brad Mueller REQUEST: Repealing and reenacting,with amendments,Chapter 2(Administration),Chapter 23 (Zoning), Chapter 24 (Subdivisions), and Chapter 27 (Planned Unit Development), of the Weld County Code. be recommended favorably to the Board of County Commissioners for the following reasons: SEE ATTACHED DOCUMENTS Motion seconded by Nick Berryman. VOTE: For Passage Against Passage Absent Robert Grand Bill Hall Tom Holton Doug Ochsner Erich Ehrlich Roy Spitzer Paul Branham Mark Lawley Nick Berryman 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 May 20, 2008. Dated the 20th of May, 2008. rtilvilva_ ,�) Kristine Ranslem Secretary CHAPTER 2 Administration ARTICLE III Planning and Zoning Matters Sec. 2-3-40. Requests for pre-advertising on land use applications. Board of County Commissioner hearings will be scheduled as soon as practical after a Planning Commission hearing,where applicable in a land use case. A land use applicant can request that the Board of County Commissioners hearing be scheduled earlier,in which case pre-advertisement noticing must take place. The following procedures shall apply to a request for pre-advertising on a land use application: A. The applicant shall submit a letter to the Department of Planning Services, to be forwarded to the Clerk to the Board's office when requesting pre-advertising for a Board of County Commissioners hearing for a land use application. The letter shall set forth the reasons why the applicant is requesting the pre- advertisement. An administrative fee of one hundred dollars($100.00) shall accompany the letter. CHAPTER 23 Zoning ARTICLE II Procedures and Permits Division 1 Amendments to Zoning Map Sec. 23-2-20. Duties of Department of Planning Services. B. Upon determination that the application submittal is complete, the Department of Planning Services shall: 1. Set a Planning Commission hearing date within sixty(60)days. 4`1 ,N PPL 1 5 4i ., J Move B)(land B.' to become B.1 and B.2. Add new B.3 and B.4. Re-number sub-paragraphs as necessary: )-19 1. Refer the application to the following agencies, when applicable, for review and comment. The agencies named shall respond within twenty-eight (28) days after the mailing of the application by the COUNTY. The failure of any agency to respond within twenty-eight (28) days may be deemed to be a favorable response to the Planning Commission. The reviews and comments solicited by the County are intended to provide the COUNTY with information about the proposed Change of Zone. The Planning Commission and Board of County Commissioners may consider all such reviews and comments and may solicit additional information if such information is deemed necessary. The reviews and comments submitted by a referral agency are recommendations to the COUNTY. The authorityth.J-. sr—AD/for making the decision to approve or deny the request for Change of Zone rests with the officials of the Board of County Commissioners. a. The planning commission or governing body of any town and county whose boundaries are within a three-mile radius of the parcel under consideration for a Change of Zone. b. The planning commission or governing body of any city or town that has included the parcel in its MASTER PLAN area or Intergovernmental Agreement. c. Department of Public Health and Environment. d. Department of Public Works to review the engineering aspects of the proposal. e. Colorado Department of Health. f. Colorado Geological Survey. g. Colorado Historical Society. h. Colorado Department of Transportation. i. Colorado Water Conservation Board. j. U.S. Army Corps of Engineers. k. U.S. Soil Conservation Service. 1. U.S. Forest Service. m. U.S. Bureau of Land Management. n. Any irrigation ditch company with facilities on or ADJACENT to the parcel under consideration. o. Any other agencies or individuals whose review the Department of Planning Services,Planning Commission or Board of County Commissioners deems necessary. 2. Prepare staff comments for use by the Planning Commission addressing all aspects of the application, its conformance with Chapter 22 of this Code, and the Comprehensive Plan or MASTER PLAN of affected municipalities, Intergovernmental Agreements, sound land USE planning practices, comments received from agencies to which the proposal was referred and standards contained in this Chapter. 3. Set a Planning Commission hearing date. The Board of County Commissioners public hearing may also be set, and be given legal notice and posting, concurrent with setting of the Planning Commission hearing date and in accordance with Section 23-2-40.A. Otherwise,the Board of County Commissioners public hearing shall be set after the Planning Commission hearing. 4. An applicant may conduct a Neighborhood Meeting with area landowners. Such meeting is not required,but may be recommended by the Planning Services staff to encourage communication between a land use applicant and the neighbors. Division 4 Uses by Special Review Sec. 23-2-210. Duties of Department of Planning Services. B. Upon determination that the application submittal is complete,the Department of Planning Services shall: 1'l� 1. Set a Planning Commission hearing date within sixty(60)days. ('j • j 6'' {� ;�; Move BY4 and B.%to become B.I and B.2. Add new B.3 and B.4. Re-number sub-paragraphs as necessary: 1. Refer the application to the following agencies, when applicable, for review and comment. The agencies named shall respond within twenty-eight (28) days after the mailing of the application by the COUNTY. The failure of any agency to respond within twenty-eight(28)days may be deemed to be a favorable response to the Planning Commission. The reviews and comments solicited by the COUNTY are intended to provide the COUNTY with information about the proposed Use by Special Review. The Planning Commission and Board of County Commissioners may consider all such reviews and comments and may solicit additional information if such information is deemed necessary. The reviews and comments submitted by a referral agency are recommendations to the COUNTY. The authority and responsibility for making the decision to approve or deny the request for a Special Review Permit rests with the of€eials-o€ the Board of County Commissioners. a. The planning commission or governing body of any town and county whose boundaries are within a three-mile radius of the parcel under consideration for a Use by Special Review Permit. b. The planning commission or governing body of any city or town that has included the parcel in its MASTER PLANNING area or Intergovernmental Agreement. c. Department of Public Health and Environment. d. Department of Public Works to review the engineering aspects of the proposal. e. County Extension office. f. Colorado Department of Health. g. Colorado Geological Survey. h. Colorado Historical Society. i. Colorado Department of Transportation. j. Colorado State Division of Wildlife. k. Colorado State Engineer,Division of Water Resources. 1. Colorado State Oil and Gas Conservation Commission. m. Colorado Water Conservation Board. n. U.S. Army Corps of Engineers. o. U.S. Soil Conservation Service. p. U.S. Forest Service. q. U.S. Bureau of Land Management. r. Federal Aviation Administration. s. Federal Communications Commission. t. The appropriate fire district. u. Any irrigation ditch company with facilities on or adjacent to the parcel under consideration. v. Any other agencies or individuals whose review the Department of Planning Services, Planning Commission, or Board of County Commissioners deems necessary. 2. Prepare staff comments for use by the Planning Commission addressing all aspects of the application, its conformance with in Chapter 22 of this Code and any other applicable code provision or ordinance in effect, adopted master plans of affected municipalities, sound land use planning practices, comments received from agencies to which the proposal was referred, and standards contained in this Chapter. 3. Set a Planning Commission hearing date. The Board of County Commissioners public hearing may also be set, and be given legal notice and posting, concurrent with setting of the Planning Commission hearing date and in accordance with Section 23-2-230.A. Otherwise,the Board of County Commissioners public hearing shall be set after the Planning Commission hearing. 4. An applicant may conduct a Neighborhood Meeting with area landowners. Such meeting is not required,but may be recommended by the Planning Services staff to encourage communication between a land use applicant and the neighbors. Division 5 Special Review Permits for Major Facilities of Public Utility or Public Agency Sec.23-2-330. Duties of Department of Planning Services. B. Upon determination that a submitted application is complete,the staff of the Department of Planning Services shall: 1. Set a Planning Commission hearing date within sixty(60)days. Move B.5 and B.6 to become B.1 and B.2. Add new B.3 and B.4. Re-number sub-paragraphs as necessary: 1. Refer the application to the following agencies, when deemed applicable by the Department of Planning Services,for review and comment. The agencies named shall respond within twenty-eight(28) days after the mailing of the application by the COUNTY. The failure of any agency to respond within twenty-eight (28) days may be deemed to be a favorable response to the proposal. Such agencies may request and be granted additional time for review of such proposals upon approval by the Director of Planning Services. The reviews and comments solicited by the COUNTY are intended to provide the COUNTY with information on the proposal. The Planning Commission may consider all such reviews and comments, and may solicit additional information if such information is deemed necessary. The reviews and comments submitted by a referral agency are recommendations to the COUNTY. The authority and responsibility for making the decision to approve or deny the proposal rests with the crca. the Planning Commission. a. The planning commission of any town or county whose boundaries are within three(3)miles of the proposed site or if the proposed site is located within any town's comprehensive planning area. b. Department of Public Health and Environment. c. Department of Public Works. d. Colorado Geological Survey. e. Colorado Department of Transportation. f. U.S. Forest Service. g. Any irrigation ditch company with facilities within or ADJACENT to the site under consideration. h. Utility companies with underground lines which might be affected by the DEVELOPMENT. i. Special service districts which may provide service to the DEVELOPMENT. j. State Engineer, Division of Water Resources. k. Natural Resource Conservation Service. 1. Any other agencies or individuals whose review the Department of Planning Services deems necessary. 2. Prepare staff comments and recommendations for presentation at the Planning Commission hearing, addressing all aspects of the application,its conformance with this Chapter and Chapter 22 of this Code and comments received from referral agencies. 3. Set a Planning Commission hearing date. 4. An applicant may conduct a Neighborhood Meeting with area landowners. Such meeting is not required,but may be recommended by the Planning Services staff to encourage communication between a land use applicant and the neighbors. CHAPTER 24 Subdivisions ARTICLE III Minor Subdivisions Sec. 24-3-30. Processing and review procedure. Any person wanting to apply for a sketch plan review shall arrange for a pre-application conference with the Department of Planning Services. The Department of Planning Services Planner shall be responsible for processing all minor subdivision sketch plan applications in the unincorporated areas of the County. The Department of Planning Services shall also have the responsibility of ensuring all application submittal requirements are met prior to processing the application. Once a complete application is submitted,the Planner shall: Sec. 24-3-60. Final plat processing and review procedure. Any person wanting to apply for a minor subdivision final plat review shall arrange for a pre-application conference with the Department of Planning Services. The Department of Planning Services Planner shall be responsible for processing all minor subdivision final plat applications in the unincorporated areas of the County. The Planner shall also have the responsibility of ensuring all application submittal requirements are met prior to processing the application. Once a complete application is submitted: A. The Planner shall schedule a Planning Commission meeting date within sixty(60)days. f xpl t F G C,( ' Move and'to become A and B. Add new C and D. Re-number sub-paragraphs as necessary: p' M A. The Planner shall refer the application to referral agencies, when applicable, for review and comment. The agencies shall respond within twenty-eight(28)days after the mailing of the application by the County. The failure of any agency to respond within twenty-eight(28)days may be deemed to be a favorable response to the Planning Commission. The reviews and comments solicited by the County are intended to provide the County with information about the proposed minor subdivision. The Planning Commission and Board may consider all such reviews and comments and may solicit additional information if such information is deemed necessary. The reviews and comments submitted by a referral agency are recommendations to the County. The authority and responsibility for making the decision to approve or deny the request for a minor subdivision rests with the Board of County Commissioners. B. The Planner shall prepare a recommendation for the Planning Commission addressing all aspects of the application, including: 1. Compliance with this Chapter,Chapter 23 of this Code,the zone district in which the proposed use is located,and any adopted intergovernmental agreements or master plans of affected municipalities. 2. Comments received from referral agencies. 3. Comments received from surrounding property owners and owners and lessees of the mineral estate. C. Set a Planning Commission hearing date. The Board of County Commissioners public hearing may also be set,and be given legal notice and posting,concurrent with setting of the Planning Commission hearing date and in accordance with this Section. Otherwise,the Board of County Commissioners public hearing shall be set after the Planning Commission hearing. D. An applicant may conduct a Neighborhood Meeting with area landowners. Such meeting is not required,but may be recommended by the Planning Services staff to encourage communication between a land use applicant and the neighbors. ARTICLE IV Major Subdivisions Sec. 24-4-30. Preliminary plan. C. Preliminary plan processing and review procedure. 1. The Planner shall be responsible for processing all preliminary plan applications in the unincorporated areas of the County. The Planner shall also have the responsibility of ensuring all application submittal requirements are met prior to processing the application. Once a complete application is submitted: a. The Planner shall sehedule a Planning Commission meeting date within ninety(90)days after the complete applieation has been submitted. (d Sc f Move C.1 and C.1 1q to become C.l.a.and C.1.b. Add new C.1.c.and C.1.d. Re-number sub-paragraphs as /",, ecessary: I • d a. The Planner shall refer the application to referral agencies,when applicable,for review and . d comment. The agencies shall respond within twenty-eight (28) days after the mailing of the d 1•C. application by the County. The failure of any agency to respond within twenty-eight(28)days may be deemed to be a favorable response to the Planning Commission. The reviews and comments solicited by the County are intended to provide the County with information about the proposed preliminary plan. The Planning Commission and Board may consider all such reviews and comments and may solicit additional information if such information is deemed necessary. The reviews and comments submitted by a referral agency are recommendations to the County. The authority and responsibility for making the decision to approve or deny the request for a preliminary plan rests with the Board of County Commissioners. The preliminary plan referral agencies include: 1) The Planning Commission or governing body of any city, town or county whose boundaries are within a three-mile radius of the parcel under consideration for a preliminary plan or if the parcel under consideration for the preliminary plan falls within an urban growth boundary as defined and adopted in any approved intergovernmental agreement. 2) Department of Public Health and Environment. 3) Department of Public Works. 4) Colorado Department of Health. 5) County Extension Office. 6) Colorado Geological Survey. 7) Colorado Department of Transportation. 8) Colorado State Division of Wildlife. 9) Colorado State Engineer, Division of Water Resources. 10) Colorado State Oil and Gas Conservation Commission. 11)U.S. Army Corps of Engineers. 12) U.S. Soil Conservation Service. 13) The appropriate school district. 14) The appropriate fire district. 15) Any irrigation ditch company with facilities on or adjacent to the parcel under consideration. 16) Any other agencies or individuals whose review the Planner,the Planning Commission or the Board deems necessary. b. The Planner shall prepare a recommendation for use by the Planning Commission addressing all aspects of the application including: 1) Conformance to this Chapter and Chapter 23 of this Code for review and approval. 2) Comments received from referral agencies. 3) Comments received from surrounding property owners and owners and lessees of the mineral estate. 4) Compatibility of the proposed minor subdivision with the existing or future development of the surrounding areas as permitted by the existing zoning and with the future development as projected by Chapter 22,and the Comprehensive Plan or Master Plan of affected municipalities and intergovernmental agreements. c. Set a Planning Commission hearing date. The Board of County Commissioners public hearing may also be set, and be given legal notice and posting, concurrent with setting of the Planning Commission hearing date and in accordance with this Section. Otherwise,the Board of County Commissioners public hearing shall be set after the Planning Commission hearing. d. An applicant may conduct a Neighborhood Meeting with area landowners. Such meeting is not required,but may be recommended by the Planning Services staff to encourage communication between a land use applicant and the neighbors. Sec. 24-4-40. Final plat. A. Any person wanting to apply for a major subdivision final plat review shall arrange for a pre-application conference with the Department of Planning Services. An applicant shall submit a complete final plat application with the required number of application copies and application fee to the Planner. The required number of application copies shall be determined by the Planner. Final plats that are intended to make minor changes to existing subdivisions may request a waiver of some conditions during the Planning Staffs approval. The applicant shall contact Planning Services for direction. ARTICLE V Resubdivision Sec. 24-5-20. Resubdivision for vacation of right-of-way. F. Resubdivision for the vacation of right-of-way review procedure. 1. Any person wanting to apply for the vacation of a right-of-way shall arrange for a pre-application conference with the Department of Planning Services. Upon receipt of a complete resubdivision application,the Department of Planning Services will schedule the request before the Board of County Commissioners within sixty(60) days. In the event a utility easement is affected, the Department of Planning Services shall schedule the request on the first available Utilities Coordinating Advisory Committee meeting before presenting the request to the Board. Sec. 24-5-30. Resubdivision for changes to lot lines. C. Review procedures for a resubdivision for changes to lot lines. 1. Any person wanting to apply for review of a resubdivision for changes to lot lines shall arrange for a pre-application conference with the Department of Planning Services. Upon receipt of a complete resubdivision application,the Department of Planning Services will schedule the request before the Board of County Commissioners within forty five(15)days. Sec. 24-5-40. Resubdivision for redesign, addition or vacation. C. Review procedure. 1. Any person wanting to apply for review of a resubdivision for redesign or addition of new lots, or vacation of all or portions of a subdivision, shall arrange for a pre-application conference with the Department of Planning Services. Upon receipt of a complete resubdivision application,the Department of Planning Services will schedule the request before the Board of County Commissioners within sixty(60) days. ARTICLE VII Resubdivision Subdivision Design Standards Sec. 24-7-10. Compliance required. All subdivisions approved by the Board shall comply with the following general standards: CHAPTER 27 Planned Unit Development ARTICLE IV PUD Sketch Plan: Step One Sec. 27-4-30. Duties of Department of Planning Services. A. Any person wanting to apply for a PUD sketch plan review shall arrange for a pre-application conference with the Department of Planning Services. The Department of Planning Services shall be responsible for processing all applications for a PUD sketch plan. Sec. 27-6-120. Review procedure for change of zone. A. Intent. The intent of this Section is to outline the criteria for evaluation of a change of zone by the Department of Planning Services, the Planning Commission and the Board of County Commissioners. B. Duties of the Department of Planning Services. Any person wanting to apply for a PUD change of zone review shall arrange for a pre-application conference with the Department of Planning Services. The Department of Planning Services shall be responsible for processing all applications for a change of zone to a PUD Zone District. The Department shall have the responsibility to ensure that all application procedures and requirements are met prior to any official action. Once a complete application is submitted in compliance with Section 27-5-30 of this Chapter, the Planner shall: 1.- Set a Planning Commission hearing date within sixty(60)days after the complete application has t% Move B.2 to become B.1,and move B.6 to become B.2. Add new B.3 and B.4. Re-number sub-paragraphs as tOk necessary: (3- I.y ,I 1. Send the application to referral agencies for review and comment. The agencies shall respond within twenty-eight(28)days after the application is mailed. The failure of any agency to respond within twenty-eight (28) days may be deemed a favorable response. All referral agency review comments are considered a recommendation to the County for approval and denial of a change of zone application. The referral agencies include those listed in Section 27-4-30 of this Chapter. 2. Prepare a staff recommendation for use by the Planning Commission addressing all aspects of the application. Planning staff recommendations will determine if: a. The proposal is consistent with any intergovernmental agreement in effect influencing the PUD and Chapters 19,22,23, 24 and 26 of this Code. b. The uses which would be allowed in the proposed PUD will conform with the performance standards of the PUD Zone District contained in Article II of this Chapter. c. 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 of this Code or master plans of affected municipalities. d. The PUD Zone District shall be serviced by an adequate water supply and sewage disposal system in compliance with the performance standards in Article II of this Chapter. e. The street or highway facilities providing access to the property are adequate in functional classification,width and structural capacity to meet the traffic requirements of the uses of the proposed PUD Zone District. f. An off-site road improvements agreement and an on-site improvements agreement proposal is in compliance with Chapter 24 of this Code,as amended,and a road improvements agreement is complete and has been submitted, if applicable. g. There has been compliance with the applicable requirements contained in Chapter 23 of this Code regarding overlay districts, commercial mineral deposits and soil conditions on the subject site. h. Consistency exists between the proposed zone district, uses and the specific or conceptual development guide and concerns identified in sketch plan comments provided pursuant to Section 27-4- 40 of this Chapter have been adequately addressed. 3. Set a Planning Commission hearing date. The Board of County Commissioners public hearing may also be set, and be given legal notice and posting, concurrent with setting of the Planning Commission hearing date and in accordance with this Section. Otherwise,the Board of County Commissioners public hearing shall be set after the Planning Commission hearing. 4. An applicant may conduct a Neighborhood Meeting with area landowners. Such meeting is not required,but may be recommended by the Planning Services staff to encourage communication between a land use applicant and the neighbors. ARTICLE VII PUD Final Plan: Step Three Sec. 27-7-40. Review procedure for final plan. A. Intent. The intent of this Section is to outline the criteria for evaluation for the final plan. B. Duties of the Department of Planning Services. 1. Any person wanting to apply for a PUD final plan review shall arrange for a pre-application conference with the Department of Planning Services. The Department of Planning Services shall be responsible for processing all applications for a PUD final plan once a completed application is submitted. The Department shall have the responsibility to ensure that all application procedures and requirements are met prior to any official action. 5-acs-a00% SUMMARY OF THE WELD COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING Tuesday, May 20, 2008 A regular meeting of the Weld County Planning Commission was held in the Southwest Weld County Conference Room, 4209 CR 24.5, Longmont, Colorado. The meeting was called to order by Chair, Doug Ochsner, at 1:30 p.m. ROLL CALL ABSENT Doug Ochsner-Chair Tom Holton -Vice Chair Nick Berryman Paul Branham Erich Ehrlich Robert Grand Bill Hall Mark Lawley Roy Spitzer Also Present: Jacqueline Hatch, Brad Mueller,Department of Planning Services;Don Dunker,Department of Public Works; Lauren Light, Department of Health; Bruce Barker, County Attorney, and Kris Ranslem, Secretary. Robert Grand moved to approve the May 6, 2008 Weld County Planning Commission minutes, seconded by Tom Holton. Motion carried. The Chair read the case into record. —• CASE NUMBER: USR-1652 APPLICANT: JAR Holdings LLC do Daniel Rodarmel PLANNER: Jacqueline Hatch LEGAL DESCRIPTION: Part of the NE4 of Section 1,T2N, R68W of the 6th P.M.,Weld County, Colorado. REQUEST: A Site Specific Development Plan and a Special Review Permit for a Use by Right,an accessory use,or a Use by Special Review in the Commercial or Industrial Zone District(Parking and Storage for a Concrete Company)in the A (Agricultural)Zone District. LOCATION: West of and adjacent to CR 13 and approximately 1/2 mile south of CR 26. The Chair asked Jacqueline Hatch, Department of Planning Services, if they wish for this case to remain on the Consent Agenda. Ms. Hatch replied yes. The Chair asked the applicant if they wish for this case to remain on Consent. The applicant replied yes. The Chair asked if there was anyone in the audience who wished to speak for or against this application. No one wished to speak. Tom Holton moved that Case USR-1652, 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 Mark Lawley. Motion carried. CASE NUMBER: Ordinance 2008-XX APPLICANT: Weld County PLANNER: Brad Mueller REQUEST: Repealing and reenacting,with amendments,Chapter 2(Administration),Chapter 23 (Zoning), Chapter 24 (Subdivisions), and Chapter 27 (Planned Unit Development),of the Weld County Code. Brad Mueller, Department of Planning Services, stated that the series of code changes that are presented are from a work— session that was held with the Planning Commission on March 18th concerning a new land use // / process. He added that to describe it as a new land use process is probably an overstatement of what is really a retooling of our existing process. On March 18`h we discussed the changes to our standard land use process,which would be to emphasize pre-application meetings and to ensure that Public Works and Public Health have an opportunity to look at the completeness of the application before it gets started. Another very significant change is to not schedule the Planning Commission hearing upon receipt of an application, but rather send it onto referral agencies first and let it get through that process and then schedule a hearing with the Planning Commission. The other major change would be the introduction of the possibility of neighborhood meetings. Mr. Mueller commented that the feedback that staff received back from the Planning Commission was that the neighborhood meetings should not be made mandatory, but those should always remain an option in cases where they are suggested. Commissioner Ochsner commented that he had the opportunity to attend a couple of neighborhood meetings that the Town of Windsor hosted. He mentioned that they have just started this process as well and it hasn't been very productive as it basically turned into a complaint session. There were no information or ground rules given at the beginning of these meetings. Mr.Ochsner recommended that there needs to be some kind of an agenda set for these types of meetings. He also suggested that a full presentation be made for the public to understand instead of just presenting what the plan is. Mr.Ochsner stated that it is a great idea, but he has not had a pleasant experience from the ones he has attended. Mr. Mueller appreciated Commissioner Ochsner's comments and mentioned that there are definitely good and bad ways to manage neighborhood meetings. Mr. Mueller stated that the intention is not to require or even suggest neighborhood meetings in most cases. It will be reserved only for situations where there is a perceived benefit both on the part of the applicant and staff going to the neighborhood so that they can be informed about the application being processed and also where there is a landowner or developer sincerely interested in trying to get feedback on a specific design. It is a great opportunity to hear those comments, digest them a little bit and potentially make voluntary changes to the design being proposed for the subdivision. He mentioned that what can happen without the benefit of that meeting is if those ideas come to light in a hearing, a hearing such as this is not the appropriate place to try to negotiate or bounce ideas or brainstorm a design. Therefore, you are too locked in at that point. The developer is fully invested at that point and will become defensive with that plan. The landowners get defensive because they feel like the hearing process doesn't allow them some opportunity to make suggestions. A neighborhood meeting can offer a good process for some open dialogue. Mr. Mueller agreed with Commissioner Ochsner that it is very important to set up some ground rules and an agenda at the beginning of those types of meetings. One thing that needs to be made clear very quickly is that it is not the quasi-judicial decision process. The elected officials and commissioners cannot be there because they need to make an objective decision. Staff would only be there to clarify what the rules and requirements are, but would not be interjecting opinions or support or lack of support for a certain project. Mr. Mueller commented that with those ground rules made up front he has seen these meetings be very successful. Commissioner Ochsner said that he feels the neighborhood meetings are a great idea but they have to have some ground rules and there has to be some education taken place to make them run efficiently. Commissioner Grand mentioned that they have the same issue in the Keenesburg area dealing with the Pioneer Community. The Pioneer Community was very aggressive and had numerous meetings. However there were probably only 3 or 4 substantive meetings. He added that it is a matter of communication and the end result is if these meetings aren't handled right it doesn't have the productivity it can potentially have. Mr. Mueller stated that these are the changes to the process that were discussed at the work session on March 18th with the Planning Commission. He added that staff did subsequently meet with the Board of County Commissioners at a similar work session on April 14, 2008. The outcome of both work sessions was direction to continue forward implementing that process,which we've done both through policy changes and now with the code changes that we are bringing forward today. The code changes themselves are really a reiteration of the same basic theme for each of the different land use processes that we have. Mr. Mueller mentioned that there has also been some administrative moving around of the order of what needs to be submitted as part of an application to make it more logical. Beyond that, all of the changes are directly related to the items that were discussed at the March 18th work session 2 Commissioner Holton asked if this new process will be faster than what it is currently. Mr.Mueller commented that their intent is to offer better customer service and to make the actual process,which includes recording the plat,faster. He added that what you are not necessarily aware of is that staff has several cases that have gone through the complete process but haven't been recorded because of the conditions of approval, etc. The goal is to be able to try and do some of that on the front end so that it can go fast on the back end. He added that staff will never delay requests of the applicant if they desire to schedule a Planning Commission hearing. The hope is to get the referrals back, give the applicant a chance to respond to some of those comments and then schedule a hearing. Right now, by having to set the hearing immediately upon receipt of the application, the referral period is ending literally just 3 or 4 weeks before the hearing. The applicant gets those comments and then they don't have time to respond to it and to make changes to it and therefore you don't see any changes made other than conditions of approval. This would give people a chance to revise their plans or make adjustments. Commissioner Hall asked if there would be a limit to the amount of time that the referral agencies have to get their comments back to staff. Mr. Mueller stated that none of that changes and added that code states right now that there is a 28 or 30 day referral period. He added that there is language in there that suggests that if a referral agency doesn't respond then it will be assumed that they have no issues or comments. Mr. Mueller indicated that there is an effort to make sure the referral agency makes their comments in that time frame. Commissioner Grand clarified that this request encompasses the discussions that we have had in our work session as well as the Board of County Commissioner's work session. Mr. Mueller stated that it is correct. Robert Grand moved that Case Ordinance 2008-XX, be forwarded to the Board of County Commissioners along 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; Paul Branham,yes; Erich Ehrlich, absent; Robert Grand,yes; Bill Hall,yes;Mark Lawley,yes; Roy Spitzer, yes; Tom Holton, yes; Doug Ochsner, yes. Motion carried. The Chair asked if any of the Planning Commission members had any other code changes they would like to discuss. There was no comment. Meeting adjourned at 1:51 p.m. Respectfully submitted, Kristine Ranslem Secretary 3 Memorandum TO: Planning Commissioners 111 ' DATE: May 12, 2008 C FROM: Brad Mueller COLORADO Department of Planning Services RE: Code Changes: New Land Use Process CC: Bruce Barker Following is a summary of changes proposed to the Weld County Code,to be presented for consideration by the Weld County Planning Commission on May 20, 2008, at the Southwest Weld Service Center. History The attached Code changes are all related to the new land use review process that has been discussed with developers, consultants, and County officials during the last six months. This new land use process is designed to assist future land use applicants by providing a process that is more efficient, ensuring that applications are ready for full consideration when presented at Planning Commission and County Commissioner hearings. The attached memo from March 10 (revised April 14)was previously provided to the Planning Commission and the Board of County Commissioners. The memo summarizes why changes are needed and what aspects of the process would change. It also indicates which changes to the Code and Planning Department policies would be required to implement the new land use review process. The Planning Commission discussed these ideas in a work session on March 18. The main change that resulted from that discussion was to clarify that neighborhood meetings only would be recommended as appropriate, and not required. Similarly, the Board of County Commissioners reviewed the proposed new process in a work session on April 14. They supported the basic idea and encouraged Planning Staff to continue with the implementation. While some of the policy aspects of the process, such as the pre- application meeting, already have been implemented, adopting these Code changes will allow the entire process to be implemented. Proposed Code Changes The specific proposed changes to Chapters 2, 23, 24, and 27 are attached. Though the changes may appear voluminous, many of the same ideas are repeated to account for all the different types of land use cases(change of zone, PUD's, subdivision, etc.). The most notable changes are: (1)requiring a pre-application conference for all land use types (this requirement is currently listed for some types and not others); and, (2) eliminating the requirement for an immediate scheduling of the Planning Commission hearing. Also,the existing referral process is re-located in the Code so that the list of processing is in its correct sequential order. Staff Recommendation: Approval The proposed changes are consistent with earlier discussions about the proposed new land use process,and they have been reviewed by the Health and Public Works Departments, as well as the County Attorney's Office. The Code changes are also consistent with the future goals and needs of the County set out in Chapter 22(Comprehensive Plan)and other applicable code provisions currently in effect. As such, Planning Services staff recommends approval of the proposed changes. Memorandum TO: Planning Commission & Board of County Commissioners IllikDATE: March 10, 2008 (Revised April 14, 2008) FROM: Brad Mueller COLORADO Department of Planning Services RE: Proposed land use processing changes CC: Thomas Honn, Planning Services Staff, Public Works & Health Departments Overview The Department of Planning Services is proposing a series of changes to the general land use process, designed to assist applicants by providing a process that is more efficient and ensures that projects are ready for full consideration at hearing. A secondary goal is to lessen the number of conditions of approval and to shorten the amount of time required to record the plat. Need & Purpose For several years, staff has periodically discussed the standard land use process,evaluating its efficiency and effectiveness. The Planning Commission and land owners have also, in the past,expressed some concerns with how cases were prepared for hearing, and the time it takes to address conditions of approval after a hearing. On November 11, 2007, staff met with landowners, developers, and planning consultants to get feedback about the current process and input into some proposed changes. (See the attached meeting notes.) This group commented that they felt that there were ways that the application process, the period after referrals are received, and the staff report format could be improved. The new process was proposed to the group, and they generally responded favorably. There were various questions about the specifics of the proposed process, as well as suggestions for improvements. Proposal There are a number of features that would change under the revised general process. (See the attached flow charts.) • "Required" Pre-Application Meeting for all cases going to hearing, and site plan review applications. These are already encouraged, but the new process intends to provide potential applicants a formal, standardized, and consistent pre-application meeting. The goal is: 1)to give "bad news"about obvious non-compliance items up front, so engineering or consulting fees are not unnecessarily spent;and,2)to identify exactly what is required with the application submittal, so as to not create delays caused by incomplete submittal packets. • Completeness Review would now include an opportunity for input from the Public Works and Health Departments. Currently, even though Planning may determine that an application is complete, the referral process may reveal—over a month later—that something fundamental is missing (e.g., a certain type of traffic report), which causes delays or creates a condition of approval for something that could nonetheless fundamentally revise the design. 1 • Provide Planning Referral Comments&Meet Applicant After Referrals. Applicants currently only receive comments the week before the Planning Commission hearing, with little opportunity to make revisions based on the referral comments. The proposed process is designed to increase communication with the applicant early in the process by providing both written comments and an opportunity to meet with staff prior to the Staff Report being produced. • Set Planning Commission Hearing Date. This is the most significant proposed change. Currently, the PC hearing is set for within 60 days, regardless of the complexity of the case, or whether substantial issues present themselves during review. The result has been cases that are not "ripe" — not ready for hearing —when they come to the Planning Commission. The new process would remove the requirement to necessarily hold a hearing within 60 days. The goal is to work with the applicant to have a case that is generally ready for hearing. Benefits will include more focus on the key issues at the hearing,and less conditions of approval. This process is not intended to delay an applicant's appearance before the Planning Commission, and an applicant could request scheduling at any time, if they felt they were unnecessarily being delayed. • Neighborhood Meetings do not occur under the current process. Staff will encourage an applicant to meet with neighbors to discuss a proposal,in those cases when it seems appropriate and advantageous to the process. Planning staff would facilitate the meeting and assist by providing factual information only. • The County Commissioner Hearing Date normally would be scheduled at the same time as the Planning Commission,to take place approximately one month after the Planning Commissioner hearing. • Recordation of the Plat should be able to take place sooner after the final hearing, with less conditions of approval to be resolved prior to recordation. Next Steps This report and proposal was presented to the Planning Commission on March 18 for general discussion and their reaction. The Planning Commission generally supports the proposed changes. The one main suggestion was to encourage Neighborhood Meetings, rather than mandate them. A similar work session was held with the Board of County Commissioners on April 14. The Board asked a variety of questions, including addressing the Health Department's concerns about how often their department may be asked to handle a given case. The Board of County Commissioners was also presented with a list of which Sections of the Weld County Code would be required to change. The Board indicates that they generally support the proposed changes, and they asked staff to continue forward with its implementation. Planning Staff will again contact representatives of the development community to get additional input and to advise the community of plans to move forward with the Code changes and implementation of the process. While some of the proposed changes to the land use process only require policy changes in the way that the Department conducts business, other of these changes will require revisions to the Code. Staff will next prepare the appropriate Code changes and take them through the hearing process. Code changes should be completed by mid-summer 2008. Finally, any changes in process will be communicated by posting information on the department web site, updating the Procedure Guides that are handed out to potential applicants, and through discussion with landowners who call or visit the offices. Attachments: Current Land Use Process Flow Chart Proposed Land Use Process Flow Chart Meeting notes, November 11, 2007, Forum with Development Community 2 PROPOSED APPLICATION PROCESS ) Pre-Agacation Meeting / (unless wenredl GwmpWemu Renew of Application Submittal I days Cplete Mp6albn Submitted 1 outCave \\ // (AAMUM's Let.Roan Qmsr (man Application J I PO t 6WIkWm InMmation b ) 1\\ MOCn.RN011CO.Mq et praPnc kr Makin Casa Retrials ae days 1 RMartW pen Field OW Iy 9Y PNob L. Pleasing Referral Comments 14 days JJ IMleminn Applicant Meeting NeYJMw11.qu ol })) is required C Se Heam6 Dale lnr9 PC 6 SOLOCC Neighborhood Mrbgm / ApplicaM 60 fep days FWMWdlyd cant Rideauof S f NotNOYhaeonJ Crony Rse Slav ent olSPO's Internal PeNanevC SUndialaal t eMM arming ® review of ornament. ® SPOI Sand Planning Plming Commission Hasping '4, rPlnmp Stall peels sign for SOCC NNIYg J SIDWnC o Change- We PmappllrMk NOCC Hearing 30 data• 10 pi Con MW Conditions 6Dprps'el 1 Complete On/Oll Site Droll Paper PIW Mwrenwnb Agreement M ew Revi and Approval—p. dRNCa- /gpNSW 1 Recpd P15(51 Current Flow for Processing Pre-Application Encouraged Application Submitted • Review for Completeness • Set Case ► Set PC Date • Send ReferralsSend out to SPO& Mineral Notification i Perform Field Check ► Post Sign i Write Draft Comments • Mail out Comments p,CConditions of ) Approval PC Hearing --i Prior to BOCC BOCC Hearing L Prior to PC Recording Hello