Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout20081607.tiff 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% 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 eapt via,;l 6-1- of 2008-1607 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 18th 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, I/ Kristine Ranslem Secretary 3 Hello