HomeMy WebLinkAbout20081888.tiff BEFORE THE WELD COUNTY, COLORADO, PLANNING COMMISSION
RESOLUTION OF RECOMMENDATION TO THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
• Moved by Mark Lawley,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: USR-1633
APPLICANT: Spicer Ranches, LTD
PLANNER: Kim Ogle
LEGAL DESCRIPTION: SW4 of Section 27,T7N, R65W of the 6th P.M.,Weld County, Colorado.
REQUEST: A Site Specific Development Plan and Special Use Permit for an Agricultural
Service establishment primarily engaged in performing agricultural, animal
husbandry and horticultural services on a fee or contract basis, including Rodeo
and Roping Arenas(indoor and outdoor), in the A(Agricultural)Zone District.
LOCATION: North of and adjacent to CR 76 and East of and adjacent to CR 43.
be recommended favorably to the Board of County Commissioners for the following reasons:
1. The submitted materials are in compliance with the application requirements of Section 23-2-260 of
the Weld County Code.
2. It is the opinion of the Planning Commission that the applicant has shown compliance with Section
23-2-220 of the Weld County Code as follows:
A. Section 23-2-220.A.1 -- The proposed use is consistent with Chapter 22 and any other
applicable code provisions or ordinance in effect. Section 22-2-60.D A.Goal 4 states:
"Conversion of agricultural land to urban scale residential,commercial and industrial uses will
be considered when the subject site is in an area that can support such development. Such
development shall attempt to be compatible with the region.This goal is intended to address
conversion of agricultural land to non-urban uses. Once converted, this land is less
conducive to agricultural production." The site consists of one-hundred and sixty(160)acres
•
and the U.S.D.A.Soils Maps of Prime Farmlands of Weld County dated 1979 indicate that the
soils on this property are"prime". The applicant is utilizing approximately eighteen(18)acres
for the roping arena and the rest will be used for agricultural related activities such as crop
production and grazing.
B. Section 23-2-220.A.2--The proposed use is consistent with the intent of the A(Agricultural)
Zone District. Section 23-3-40.B.17 and Section 23-3-40.B.18 of the Weld County Code
provides for agricultural service establishments primarily engaged in performing agricultural
animal husbandry or horticultural services on a fee on contract basis including Commercial
Rodeo Arenas and Commercial Roping Arenas,to include both indoor and outdoor arenas as
a Use by Special Review in the A(Agricultural)Zone District. A violation,ZCV07-01045,was
initiated due to the operation of an indoor and outdoor arena being used commercially on the
property without the proper zoning permits. Approval of this Use by Special Review would
remediate the violation.
C. Section 23-2-220.A.3--The uses which will be permitted will be compatible with the existing
surrounding land uses. The site is bordered by agricultural uses. Single family residences
are located on properties to the south and west of the site. Development Standards and
Conditions of Approval will ensure that this use will be compatible with surrounding land uses.
The nearest home is approximately Y. mile to the north, and no comments have been
received from surrounding property owners.
D. Section 23-2-220.A.4 -- The uses which will be permitted will be compatible with future
development of the surrounding area as permitted by the existing zoning and with the future
development as projected by Chapter 22 of the Weld County Code and any other applicable
code provisions or ordinances in effect, or the adopted Master Plans of affected
municipalities. The site is not located within three miles of a municipality.
•
EXHIBIT
2008-1888
LA I2 1633
Resolution USR-1633
Spicer Ranches, LTD
Page 2
• E. Section 23-2-220.A.5--The site does not lie within any Overlay Districts.
Effective January 1, 2003, Building Permits issued on the subject site will be required to
adhere to the fee structure of the County Road Impact Program. (Ordinance 2002-11)
Effective August 1, 2005, Building permits issued on the subject site will be required to
adhere to the fee structure of the Capital Expansion Impact Fee and the
Stormwater/Drainage Impact Fee. (Ordinance 2005-8 Section 5-8-40)
F. Section 23-2-220.A.6--The applicant has demonstrated a diligent effort to conserve prime
agricultural land in the locational decision for the proposed use.The U.S.D.A. Soils Maps of
Prime Farmlands of Weld County dated 1979 designated the soils on this property as"prime"
and the applicant use utilizing approximately 18 acres of the 160 acre parcel for the indoor
and outdoor arena, associated parking and circulation patterns.
G. Section 23-2-220.A.7 -- The Design Standards (Section 23-2-240, Weld County Code),
Operation Standards (Section 23-2-250, Weld County Code), Conditions of Approval and
Development Standards ensure that there are adequate provisions for the protection of
health, safety, and welfare of the inhabitants of the neighborhood and County.
This recommendation is based, in part, upon a review of the application materials submitted by the applicant,
other relevant information regarding the request, and responses from referral entities.
The site is currently in violation (ZCV07-01045), if this Use by Special Review application is approved, the
property will be in compliance once the Use by Special Review plat is recorded. If denied,all commercial use
must be removed from the property; otherwise, the violation case will proceed accordingly.
• The Planning Commission recommendation for approval is conditional upon the following:
1. Prior to recording the plat:
A. The plat shall be amended to delineate the following:
B. Each plat sheet shall be labeled USR-1633. (Department of Planning Services)
C. The Use by Special Review plat shall be prepared in accordance with Weld County
Code Section 23-2-260.D. (Department of Planning Services)
D. The attached Development Standards. (Department of Planning Services)
4. The approved Landscape/Screening Plan. (Department of Planning Services)
5. The approved Lighting Plan. (Department of Planning Services)
6. The applicant shall delineate the trash collection area. (Department of Planning
Services)
7. The applicant shall delineate all on-site parking. Parking for the indoor and outdoor
roping arena(s)shall be one-hundred and fifty(150)spaces with sixty(60)percent of
the total, i.e., ninety(90) reserved for tractor/truck and trailer parking.
8. Driveways and parking areas shall be surfaced with gravel. The type of gravel and
location of the driveways and parking areas, including existing, shall be delineated
on the plat. (Department of Planning Services)
• 9. The applicant shall clearly delineate the Use by Special Review boundary in
comparison to the property boundary. (Department of Planning Services)
Resolution USR-1633
Spicer Ranches, LTD
Page 3
• 10. County Road 43 is a paved collector road, which requires 80 feet of right-of-way at
full build out. There is currently 60 feet of right-of-way. An additional 10 feet of right-
of-way shall be delineated on the plat as future County Road 43 right-of-way. This
road is maintained by Weld County. The applicant shall verify the existing right-of-
way and the documents creating the right-of-way. (Department of Public Works)
E. The applicant shall either submit a copy of an agreement with the property's mineral
owner/operators stipulating that the oil and gas activities have been adequately incorporated
into the design of the site or show evidence that an adequate attempt has been made to
mitigate the concerns of the mineral owner/operators. Drill envelopes can be delineated on
the plat in accordance with the State requirements as an attempt to mitigate concerns. The
plat shall be amended to include any possible future drilling sites. (Department of Planning
Services)
F. The applicant shall enter into an Improvements Agreement according to policy regarding
collateral for improvements and post adequate collateral for all transportation(access drive,
parking areas, et cetera) and non-transportation (plant materials, fencing, screening, et
cetera). The agreement and form of collateral shall be reviewed by County Staff and
accepted by the Board of County Commissioners prior to recording the USR plat.
(Department of Planning Services)
G. The applicant shall submit a Lighting Plan for approval to the Weld County Department of
Planning Services. (Department of Planning Services)
E. A change of use permit will be required on the arena for the use proposed. The new use
will be probably classified as an A-4. Final determination of all code requirements and
final classification will be done at the plan review stage when the permit is submitted.
• Plans will require the wet stamp of a Colorado registered architect or engineer. A
sprinkler system will not be required and unlimited size is permitted per section 507.3 of
the 2006 International Building Code based on the information given in the land use
application. The occupant load in the mezzanine needs to be posted addressing a
maximum load of 150 occupants and have two exits. In addition to section 507.3 of the
IBC a fire alarm system will need to be installed with manual fire alarm boxes.
(Department of Building Inspection)
F. Building height shall be measured in accordance with the 2006 International Building Code
for the purpose of determining the maximum building size and height of various uses and
types of construction and to determine compliance with the 2006 International Building Code.
(Department of Building Inspection)
G. The applicant shall attempt to address the requirements of the Weld County Sheriffs Office
as stated in the referral response dated November 13, 2007. Evidence of such shall be
submitted in writing to the Weld County Department of Planning Services. (Department of
Planning Services)
H. The applicant shall address the requirements of the Weld County Department of Public
Health and Environment as stated in the referral response dated November 15, 2007.
Evidence of such shall be submitted in writing to the Weld County Department of Planning
Services. (Department of Planning Services)
The applicant shall address the requirements of the Weld County Department of Public
Works as stated in the referral response dated November 14, 2007. Evidence of such shall
be submitted in writing to the Weld County Department of Planning Services.(Department of
Planning Services)
•
Resolution USR-1633
Spicer Ranches, LTD
Page 4
• J. The applicant shall address the requirements of the Weld County Department of Planning
Services, Landscape referral as stated in the referral response dated October 10, 2007.
Evidence of such shall be submitted in writing to the Weld County Department of Planning
Services. (Department of Planning Services)
K. The applicant shall address the requirements of the Weld County Department of Building
Inspection as stated in the referral response dated October 18,2007. Evidence of such shall
be submitted in writing to the Weld County Department of Planning Services.(Department of
Planning Services)
L. The applicant shall address the requirements of the Eaton Fire Protection District as stated in
the referral response dated December3,2007. Evidence of such shall be submitted in writing
to the Weld County Department of Planning Services. (Department of Planning Services)
M. The applicant shall submit a written request to vacate SUP-190 for a Feedlot approved for
H.H. Miller in 1973. (Department of Planning Services)
N. The applicant shall submit two (2) paper copies of the plat for preliminary approval to the
Weld County Department of Planning Services. (Department of Planning Services)
2. Upon completion of 1. and 2. above the applicant shall submit a Mylar plat along with all other
documentation required as Conditions of Approval.The Mylar plat shall be recorded in the office of
the Weld County Clerk and Recorder by Department of Planning Services' Staff. The plat shall be
prepared in accordance with the requirements of Section 23-2-260.D of the Weld County Code. The
Mylar plat and additional requirements shall be submitted within thirty(30)days from the date of the
Board of County Commissioners resolution. The applicant shall be responsible for paying the
recording fee. (Department of Planning Services)
• 3. In accordance with Weld County Code Ordinance 2005-7 approved June 1, 2005, should the plat not
be recorded within the required thirty(30)days from the date the Board of County Commissioners
resolution a $50.00 recording continuance charge shall added for each additional 3 month period.
(Department of Planning Services)
4. The Department of Planning Services respectively requests the surveyor provide a digital copy of this
Use by Special Review. Acceptable CAD formats are .dwg, .dxf,and .dgn(Microstation);acceptable
GIS formats are ArcView shapefiles,Arclnfo Coverages and Arclnfo Export files format type is .e00.
The preferred format for Images is.tif(Group 4).(Group 6 is not acceptable). This digital file may be
senttomaps@co.weld.co.us. (Department of Planning Services)
5. The Special Review activity shall not occur nor shall any building or electrical permits be issued on the
property until the Special Review plat is ready to be recorded in the office of the Weld County Clerk
and Recorder. (Department of Planning Services)
•
SITE SPECIFIC DEVELOPMENT PLAN
SPECIAL REVIEW PERMIT
DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS
Spicer Ranches, Limited
•
USR-1633
1. A Site Specific Development Plan and a Special Use Permit for Agricultural Service establishment
primarily engaged in performing agricultural,animal husbandry and horticultural services on a fee or
contract basis, including Rodeo and Roping Arenas (indoor and outdoor), Commercial, in the A
(Agricultural)Zone District,and subject to the Development Standards stated hereon. (Department of
Planning Services)
2. Approval of this plan may create a vested property right pursuant to Section 23-8-10 of the Weld
County Code. (Department of Planning Services)
3. Public Water shall be provided by the North Weld County Water District. (Department of Planning
Services)
4. The hours of operation shall be limited to Monday — Sunday from 8:00 a.m. until 11:00 p.m.
(Department of Planning Services)
5. The number of attendees shall not exceed one-hundred and fifty(150) in the indoor arena and two-
hundred and fifty (250) for the indoor and outdoor arena combined. (Department of Planning
Services)
6. The Use by Special Review shall be limited to one employee. (Department of Planning Services)
7. Should noxious weeds exist on the property or become established as a result of the proposed
development the applicant/landowner shall be responsible for controlling the noxious weeds, pursuant
• to Chapter 15, Articles I and II of the Weld County Code. (Department of Public Works)
8. Animal and feed wastes, bedding, debris and other organic wastes shall be disposed of so that
vermin infestation, odors, disease hazards, and nuisances are minimized. Such wastes shall be
removed at least weekly from the facility and disposed by a commercial hauler. (Department of
Public Health and Environment)
9. All liquid and solid wastes (as defined in the Solid Wastes Disposal Sites and Facilities Act,
30-20-100.5, C.R.S., as amended) shall be stored and removed for final disposal in a manner that
protects against surface and groundwater contamination. (Department of Public Health and
Environment)
10. No permanent disposal of wastes shall be permitted at this site. This is not meant to include
those wastes specifically excluded from the definition of a solid waste in the Solid Wastes
Disposal Sites and Facilities Act, 30-20-100.5, C.R.S., as amended. (Department of Public Health
and Environment)
11. Waste materials shall be handled, stored, and disposed in a manner that controls fugitive dust,
fugitive particulate emissions, blowing debris, and other potential nuisance conditions.
(Department of Public Health and Environment )
12. The applicant shall operate in accordance with the approved "waste handling plan". (Department
of Public Health and Environment)
13. Fugitive dust and fugitive particulate emissions shall be controlled on this site. The facility shall be
operated in accordance with the approved dust abatement plan at all times. (Department of
Public Health and Environment)
• 14. This facility shall adhere to the maximum permissible noise levels allowed in the Commercial
Zone as delineated in 25-12-103 C.R.S., as amended. (Department of Public Health and
Environment)
Resolution USR-1633
Spicer Ranches, LTD
Page 6
• 15. Adequate handwashing and toilet facilities shall be provided for patrons of the facility. (Department
of Public Health and Environment)
16. Sewage disposal for the facility shall be by septic system. Any septic system located on the
property must comply with all provisions of the Weld County Code, pertaining to Individual
Sewage Disposal Systems. (Department of Public Health and Environment)
17. The installation of the septic system shall comply with the Weld County I.S.D.S. flood plain policy.
(Department of Public Health and Environment)
18. The operation shall comply with all applicable rules and regulations of the State and Federal
agencies and the Weld County Code. (Department of Planning Services)
19. Effective January 1, 2003, Building Permits issued on the subject site will be required to adhere to the
fee structure of the Weld County Road Impact Program. (Ordinance 2002-11) (Department of
Planning Services)
20. Effective August 1, 2005, Building permits issued on the subject site will be required to adhere to the
fee structure of the Capital Expansion Impact Fee and the Stormwater/Drainage Impact Fee.
(Ordinance 2005-8 Section 5-8-40) (Department of Planning Services)
21. The landscaping on site shall be maintained in accordance with the approved Landscape/Screening
Plan. (Department of Planning Services)
22. The lighting on site shall be maintained in accordance with the approved Lighting Plan. (Department
of Planning Services)
• 23. A plan review is required for each building for which a building permit is required. Plans shall include
a floor plan. Plans shall bear the wet stamp of a Colorado registered architect or engineer. Two
complete sets of plans are required when applying for each permit. Provide a Code Analysis Data
sheet provided by the Weld County Building Department with each building permit application.
(Department of Building Inspection)
24. Each building will require an engineered foundation based on a site-specific geotechnical report or an
open hole performed by a Colorado registered engineer. Engineered foundations shall be designed
by a Colorado registered engineer. (Department of Building Inspection)
25. Buildings shall conform to the requirements of the various codes adopted at the time of permit
application. Currently the following has been adopted by Weld County: 2006 International Building
Code; 2006 International Mechanical Code; 2006 International Plumbing Code; 2006 International
Fuel Gas Code; and the 2005 National Electrical Code and Chapter 29 of the Weld County Code.
(Department of Building Inspection)
26. Building height shall be measured in accordance with the 2006 International Building Code for the
purpose of determining the maximum building size and height of various uses and types of
construction and to determine compliance with the 2006 International Building Code. (Department of
Building Inspection)
27. Fire resistance of walls and openings, construction requirements, maximum building height and
allowable areas will be reviewed at the plan review. Setback and offset distances shall be determined
by Chapter 23 of the Weld County Code. (Department of Building Inspection)
28. Placing of a sign stating"Warning: Parking Lot May Flood" (Department of Public Works)
• 29. Placing of signs with the intent to prevent overnight or extended parking of vehicles in the floodway,
excluding agricultural equipment, etc. (Department of Public Works)
Resolution USR-1633
Spicer Ranches, LTD
Page 7
• 30. A letter of approval from Eaton Fire Protection District is required prior to the issuing of the
building permit.
31. The applicant shall submit evidence of an Air Pollution Emission Notice (A.P.E.N.)and Emissions
Permit application from the Air Pollution Control Division, Colorado Department of Health and
Environment, if applicable. Evidence of approval shall be submitted to the Department of
Planning Services. (Department of Public Health and Environment)
32. The property owner shall allow any mineral owner the right of ingress or egress for the purposes of
exploration development,completion,recompletion,re-entry,production and maintenance operations
associated with existing or future operations located on these lands. (Department of Planning
Services)
33. The property owner or operator shall be responsible for complying with the Design Standards of
Section 23-2-240, Weld County Code. (Department of Planning Services)
34. The property owner or operator shall be responsible for complying with the Operation Standards of
Section 23-2-250, Weld County Code. (Department of Planning Services)
35. Personnel from the Weld County Government shall be granted access onto the property at any
reasonable time in order to ensure the activities carried out on the property comply with the
Development Standards stated herein and all applicable Weld County regulations. (Department of
Planning Services)
36. The Special Review area shall be limited to the plans shown hereon and governed by the foregoing
standards and all applicable Weld County regulations. Substantial changes from the plans or
• Development Standards as shown or stated shall require the approval of an amendment of the Permit
by the Weld County Board of County Commissioners before such changes from the plans or
Development Standards are permitted. Any other changes shall be filed in the office of the
Department of Planning Services. (Department of Planning Services)
37. The property owner or operator shall be responsible for complying with all of the foregoing
Development Standards. Noncompliance with any of the foregoing Development Standards may be
reason for revocation of the Permit by the Board of County Commissioners. (Department of Planning
Services)
Motion seconded by Tom Holton.
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 6, 2008.
Dated the 6th of May, 2008.
Kristine Ranslem
Secretary
•
•
54 o`3
SUMMARY OF THE WELD COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING
Tuesday, May 6, 2008
• 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, 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 U _
Bill Hall [ 2
Mark Lawley N
Roy Spitzer LU
_y+
Also Present: Chris Gathman, Kim Ogle, Department of Planning Services; Don Dunker, Department of
Public Works; Lauren Light, Department of Health; Bryon Horgen, Building Department; Cyndy Giauque,
County Attorney, and Kris Ranslem, Secretary.
Paul Branham moved to approve the April 15,2008 Weld County Planning Commission minutes,seconded by
Bill Hall. Motion carried.
Robert Grand entered the meeting at 1:32 p.m.
The Chair read the case into record.
• CASE NUMBER: USR-1649
APPLICANT: Hall-Irwin Corporation
PLANNER: Chris Gathman
LEGAL DESCRIPTION: SW4 NE4 and W2 SE4 of Section 25,T6N, R67W of the 6th P.M.,Weld County,
Colorado.
REQUEST: A Site Specific Development Plan and a Special Review Permit for Mineral
Resource Development Facility including Open Pit Gravel Mining(Dry Pit mining)
and materials processing, a Concrete Batch Plant, an Asphalt Batch Plant, an
Asphalt/Concrete Recycling Plant,Materials Blending,and Import of Materials in the
A(Agricultural)Zone District.
LOCATION: South of and adjacent to CR 64.75 and west of and adjacent to CR 23.75.
Chris Gathman, Department of Planning Services, stated that the applicants are requesting a continuance to
the June 3, 2008 Planning Commission meeting. He added that the applicant needs to fulfill some
outstanding issues with surrounding property owners. Planning staff is supportive of this request.
The Chair asked if there was anyone in the audience who wished to speak for or against this application. No
one wished to speak.
Mark Lawley moved that Case USR-1649, be continued to the June 3, 2008 Planning Commission meeting,
seconded by Tom Holton. Motion carried unanimously.
— CASE NUMBER: USR-1633
APPLICANT: Spicer Ranches, LTD
PLANNER: Kim Ogle
LEGAL DESCRIPTION: SW4 of Section 27,T7N, R65W of the 6th P.M.,Weld County, Colorado.
REQUEST: A Site Specific Development Plan and Special Use Permit for Roping Arenas,to
include both indoor and outdoor arenas,commercial, in the(A)Agricultural Zone
• District.
LOCATION: North of and adjacent to CR 76 and East of and adjacent to CR 43.
EXHIBIT
tir.vn„vlicat-om -51/9-ape%) I
ust 4.33
Kim Ogle, Department of Planning Services,stated that this case is for a Site Specific Development Plan and
a Special Use Permit for an Agricultural Service establishment primarily engaged in performing agricultural,
animal husbandry and horticultural services on a fee or contract basis, including Rodeo and Roping Arenas
• (indoor and outdoor), in the A(Agricultural)Zone District.
The applicant is David Meyring, Managing General Partner of Spicer Ranches Limited,represented by Linda
Hulse of Casseday Creative Designs.
This case was continued at the request of the applicant at the December 4, 2007 and April 1,2008 Planning
Commission hearing, as the applicant desired additional time to address and resolve the concerns presented
in the referrals by the Departments of Public Works and Building Inspection.
This case was initiated for processing through a Code violation (Case Number ZCV07-01045) due to the
operation of an indoor and outdoor arena being used commercially on the property without the proper land use
(zoning) permits. Approval of this Use by Special Review would remediate the violation.
The site is located North of and adjacent to County Road 76 and east of and adjacent to County Road 43.
The site is not located within three miles of a municipality. The uses which will be permitted will be compatible
with the existing surrounding land uses. The property is 160 acres in size with the permit boundary located
within this tract of land on approximately 18 acres. The uses which will be permitted will be compatible with
the existing surrounding land uses as the site is surrounded by agricultural land uses and rural single family
residences to the south and west of the site. The nearest home is approximately%mile to the north, and no
comments have been received from surrounding property owners. The Lone Tree Creek is the natural
western boundary of the USR and Owl Creek is the natural boundary to the south. Harper Feedlots(Lambing
operation)lies to the east and south of the site. Per the application materials, there are six property owners
within 500 feet of this application.
The site consists of an existing arena for small rodeos which, per the application materials, occur
predominately in the winter months; with areas for parking of vehicles and trailers, holding pens and hay
storage. Surrounding lands not associated with the special use permit remain in irrigated pasture with
• improvements associated with the farming operation.
Lone Tree Creek and Owl Creek impact the property. The FIRM Community Panel maps delineate
floodplain and an unmapped floodway within the property. There is an existing Flood Hazard
Development Permit approved in April 2001. Should there be any future development to structures the
applicant will be required to obtain a new Flood Hazard Development Permit. A study was prepared by an
adjacent and upstream citizen that was reviewed by Public Works who have accepted the findings and
therefore the delineation of the Floodway boundary for this property.
Water Service is provided by North Weld County Water District with ISDS sanitary sewer to handle the
effluent flows.
The indoor roping arena was permitted in 2001 under permit number BC-01000217 for a 65,000 square
foot structural steel building used for a personal roping arena. The current structure was classified as "U"
Occupancy(personal use of horse barn and arena)to an A-4 Occupancy(commercial roping arena).
Seventeen (17) referral agencies reviewed this case, with thirteen (13) agencies providing comments,
some with specific conditions of approval that have been incorporated into staff comments.
Staff received no telephone calls or letters of inquiry. Staff did receive an electronic mail inquiry for how
this facility was permitted.
The Department of Planning Services has reviewed case number USR-1633, and recommends approval
to the Planning Commission, with the attached Conditions of Approval and Development Standards.
Mr. Ogle indicated that he had handed out a memorandum that has a slight modification to one of the
amendments of the plat. It is located on Page 5 of staff comments Number 1.A.7.which increases the
• parking numbers and the ratio between single passenger parking vehicles and trailer parking.
Linda Hulse, Casseday Designs, 55 S Elm, Eaton CO. Ms. Hulse stated that they have been working with
2
planning staff on Development Standard#5 and would like to change the wording from 150 attendees in the
indoor and outdoor area combined to 150 attendees indoor and 250 total attendees on-site. She indicated that
the parking that they laid out right now is based on that proposed number of people.
• Ms. Hulse stated that the owner would like to also change the title from Roping Arena to Equine Facility.
Commissioner Branham referred to the hours of operation as stated in Development Standard #4. He
commented that he assumed that they would have activities going on out there during the week. He asked if
there would be training classes, etc. Ms. Hulse replied that they would prefer hours of operation from 8:00
a.m. to 11:00 p.m. seven days a week.
Commissioner Ochsner referred to one of the earlier correspondence that they received which stated that
improvements adjacent to the north property line appear to encroach onto lands under the ownership of Craig
Weichel. He asked if that has been resolved. Ms. Hulse stated that she didn't believe that it was encroaching.
Ms. Hulse stated that Mr. Weichel's property is further west of the applicant's property. She indicated on a
map where the properties lie.
Mr. Ogle stated that the applicant's entire site is 160 acres and so the entire site came under review and not
only the 18 acres for the USR. He mentioned that there is a structure that is close to the property line.
Fred Kaiser, 37440 CR 43, stated that he is the manager of Spicer Ranches. Mr. Kaiser stated that there is a
processing facility for cattle which he believes is right on the boundary. He mentioned that they had originally
owned that triangle and sold it to them so there is a 20 or 30 foot right-of-way. He added that there has never
been a problem with an encroachment before.
Mr.Ogle referred to the plats that were submitted and stated that that there is a manufactured home and pole
barn that sits on top of the property line. Ms. Hulse stated the drawing that Mr. Ogle is referring to is correct.
Mr. Ogle commented that the pole barn will need to be moved. Mr.Kaiser stated that it is not a pole barn, but
it is a mobile home. Ms. Hulse said that she will need to talk to Ken Alles&Associates as to the notation on
the plat.
• Commissioner Ochsner asked Mr.Ogle if that is something that can be worked out between the applicant and
staff. Mr. Ogle responded that it will be a condition that will need to be resolved prior to recording the plat.
Dun Dunker, Department of Public Works,stated that County Road 43 is a paved collector road and currently
has a 60 foot right-of-way and they will require 80 foot of right-of-way at full build out. Traffic counts on that
particular road show 510 average daily traffic. The USR will add an additional 150 vehicle trips per event
based on some of the applicant's numbers. However, since the applicant has just requested to change that
number it will increase it to 250 vehicle trips per event.
Commissioner Ocshner asked if that will affect any maintenance issues. Mr. Dunker stated that we can work
that out in the maintenance agreement with the applicant. He added that County Road 43 is more than able to
handle that amount of traffic.
Mr. Dunker stated that the indoor roping arena has a footprint of 198 feet by 325 feet or 1.48 acres. The site
is within the FEMA floodplain for Lone Tree Creek. All the parking will be in the floodplain but outside of the
floodway. The building site is outside of the floodplain as well as the floodway.
Mr. Dunker said that since the use is changing to a Commercial Use in an Ag Zone they are going to require
that they perform water quality in which they will have a small detention pond to capture all of the runoff from
the arena and the parking lot. Mr. Dunker added that he is currently working with the Engineer to finalize all
the calculations and he will have that drainage report into Mr. Dunker prior to the Board of County
Commissioner's hearing. He further added that he is confident that all the numbers will get worked out.
Commissioner Lawley asked where it drains to now. Mr. Dunker said that it drains to the low point in the Lone
Tree Creek. Commissioner Lawley asked if it will be released into the creek. Mr. Dunker replied yes.
• Commissioner Berryman asked what the purpose of the detention pond is. Mr.Dunker stated that it will keep
the sediments, oil drippings, etc from going into the creek.
3
Mr. Dunker requested to add two (2) Development Standards. He stated the first would be Development
Standard #28 to include that on the west side of the bridge a sign be placed facing west to read "Warning,
parking lot may flood during rain events."
• Mr. Dunker commented that the next proposed Development Standard#29 would include some signs right
along the flood way of Lone Tree Creek to state"No Parking Beyond This Point". Mr. Dunker explained that
the reason they want these signs is so that no vehicles will be parked in the floodway.
Commissioner Holton asked what the purpose is of not having them park in the floodway. He added that if it
starts to rain they can move their vehicles. Mr. Dunker replied that is true, however their fear is that they will
disconnect their trailers and then they wouldn't have time to reconnect their trailers and get them out of there.
Commissioner Holton clarified then if they were worried about the trailers that are unhooked from the trucks
rather than just having vehicles parked in the floodway. Mr. Dunker replied that he would be less concerned
with that but then that way they would be assured that they wouldn't be parked overnight. He added that what
they are more worried about is anything getting washed downstream and plugging up down below so the water
can't pass.
The Chair asked for the Department of Public Health's comments. Lauren Light, Environmental Health stated
that they are served by North Weld County Water District and the Department is asking for dust handling and
waste handling plans. As far as the septic system,this is a commercial facility and it will need to be designed
by an Engineer and will have to go through the Board of Health. If they exceed 2,000 gallons per day they will
have follow state requirements. Because it will serve over 20 people per day they are required to apply for a
classified injection well permit through the EPA. This will be considered a large capacity septic system and
they cannot put the septic system in the floodplain, however they are allowed to place septic systems in the
floodway.
Bryon Horgen, Building Official, stated that he has met with the applicants and they have discussed the
requirements of the sprinkler system. He added that they have resolved any concerns and it is in agreement
with the Fire District.
• Paul Branham moved to amend Condition of Approval 1.A.7 to read"The applicant shall delineate all on-site
parking. Parking for the indoor and outdoor roping arena(s)shall be one-hundred and fifty(150)spaces with
sixty (60) percent of the total, i.e., ninety(90) reserved for tractor/truck and trailer parking." Robert Grand
seconded the motion. Motion carried.
Paul Branham moved to amend Development Standard#4 on Page 8 to read"The hours of operation shall be
limited to Monday—Sunday from 8:00 a.m. until 11:00 p.m.", seconded by Mark Lawley. Motion carried.
Paul Branham moved to amend Development Standard#5 on Page 8 to read"The number of attendees shall
not exceed one-hundred and fifty(150)in the indoor arena and two-hundred and fifty(250)for the indoor and
outdoor arena combined", seconded by Bill Hall. Motion carried.
Commission Holton asked Mr. Dunker what the purpose is of proposed Development Standard #28 as
recommended by Public Works. He mentioned that by adding this it sounds like we are taking over the
insurance company's responsibility to delineate this and asked if that is the County's responsibility to do this
for a USR. Mr. Dunker replied that the proposed Development Standard#28 is just a general warning sign to
people that if they are going to park in there, that during rain events the area could flood. Mr. Dunker added
that he believes that because it is in the 100 year floodplain it is a safety item and they should at least have a
warning sign to let the people know that the possibility exists.
Commissioner Holton commented that he understands the concern. He asked with regard to the proposed
Development Standard#29 if they would allow them to park farm equipment or stack hay. Mr. Dunker said
that the intent of#29 is to keep that area clear because it is in the floodway. Mr. Dunker suggested that we
could change the wording to say that there will be no vehicles parked beyond this point and then farm
machinery would be exempt from that.
• Mr. Kaiser said that he fully understands what Mr. Dunker says and respects that. However if they could put
up a sign right along the creek that said no overnight parking and then if someone wanted to park overnight
they could park up higher out of the floodway. He added that they could work out the language to say
4
something like no parking in this area or within 200 or 400 feet of the creek.
Commissioner Holton asked Mr. Dunker if that would satisfy him with those suggestions. Mr. Dunker replied
• that he wouldn't feel comfortable with it but they could work out some language with the applicant that they
both can agree to.
Bill Hall moved to add Development Standard #28 stating that they would need a sign stating, "Warning:
Parking Lot May Flood",with the appropriate language to be worked out by the applicant and the Department
of Public Works, seconded by Paul Branham.
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, no;
Roy Spitzer, yes; Tom Holton, no; Doug Ochsner, yes. Motion carried.
Roy Spitzer moved to add Development Standard#29 with the intent to prevent overnight or extended parking
of vehicles in the floodway and this would exclude agricultural equipment, etc with the language for the
signage to be worked out between the applicant and the Department of Public Works. Robert Grand
seconded the motion.
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 there was anyone in the audience who wished to speak for or against this application. No
one wished to speak.
The Chair asked the applicant if they have read through the amended Development Standards and Conditions
of Approval and if they are agreement with those. The applicant replied that they are in agreement.
Mark Lawley moved that Case USR-1633, 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 Tom Holton.
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 with comment; Doug Ochsner, yes. Motion carried unanimously.
Commissioner Holton commented that he was glad to see what Public Works has done on this as it
seems they applied a lot of common sense to these issues. He appreciated that.
The Chair opened up the meeting to the public for any general comments. No one wished to speak.
The Chair asked the Commissioners if they had any new business or code changes they would like to
address. Robert Grand shared an article in the paper in which the Director of Planning Services wrote
regarding the Planning Commission and thanked him for doing so.
Brad Mueller reminded the Planning Commission of the retreat on May 20, 2008 at 11:00 a.m. prior to the
Planning Commission hearing at 1:30 p.m. Commissioner Ochsner asked that if any of the
Commissioners cannot attend to please let staff know.
Meeting adjourned at 2:21 p.m.
Respectfully submitted,
Kristine Ranslem
•
Secretary
5
-/-LC
Colorado.
• REQUEST: A Site Specific Development Plan and Special Use Permit for any use permitted as
a Use by Right, an ACCESSORY USE, or a Use by Special Review in the
COMMERCIAL or Industrial Zone Districts, (Lawn Tree and Care Business)
provided that the property is not a Lot in an approved or recorded subdivision plat or
lots parts of a map or plan filed prior to adoption of any regulations controlling
subdivision and One (1) SINGLE-FAMILY DWELLING UNIT per LOT other than
those permitted under Section 23-3-20.A(addition of future single-family home)in
the A(Agricultural)Zone District.
LOCATION: South of and adjacent to"F"Street and 1/8 mile west of"C"Street.
Chris Gathman, Department of Planning Services, stated that the applicant, Jay Woods, has just
requested to continue this hearing until June 3, 2008 due to several outstanding issues. He added that
they still need to evaluate whether to annex to Greeley or to revise their application.
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 to continue Case USR-1651 to June 3, 2008, seconded by Paul Branham. Motion
carried unanimously.
CASE NUMBER: USR-1633
APPLICANT: Spicer Ranches, LTD
PLANNER: Kim Ogle
LEGAL DESCRIPTION: SW4 of Section 27,T7N, R65W of the 6th P.M.,Weld County, Colorado.
REQUEST: A Site Specific Development Plan and Special Use Permit for Roping Arenas,to
include both indoor and outdoor arenas, commercial, in the(A)Agricultural Zone
District.
LOCATION: North of and adjacent to CR 76 and East of and adjacent to CR 43.
• Kim Ogle, Department of Planning Services, stated that applicant is requesting a one month continuance
of this case so that they can address conditions in a referral from the Department of Building Inspection.
He added that staff is supportive of this request.
The Chair asked if the applicant had anything they would like to add.
Linda Hulse, Casseday Creative Designs, commented that they have become aware of some conditions
that they thought were taken care of and were not. She added that they would like the chance to talk to
the Building Department to resolve these issues. Ms. Hulse stated that they are requesting a continuance
to the May 6, 2008 meeting.
The Chair asked if there was anyone in the audience who wished to speak for or against this application. No
one wished to speak.
Robert Grand moved to continue Case USR-1633 to May 6, 2008, seconded by Roy Spitzer. Motion carried
unanimously.
Meeting adjourned at 1:47 p.m.
Respectfully submitted,
l jN,' 1r-L-)f . 11/2E-hr\
Kristine Ranslem
Secretary
•
idfr
• The Chair asked Ms. Hippely if they wish to have this case remain on Consent. Ms. Hippely stated that at
this time they would like to pull this case from the Consent Agenda and request that it be continued to the
January 8, 2008 meeting.
The Chair asked if there was anyone in the audience who wished to speak for or against this application. No
one wished to speak.
Paul Branham moved that Case USR-1606 be continued to the January 8, 2008 Planning Commission
meeting, seconded by Erich Ehrlich. Motion carried unanimously.
Paul Branham moved that Case USR-1631, 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, Roy Spitzer seconded the motion. Motion carried unanimously.
The Chair read the following case into record.
CASE NUMBER: USR-1628
APPLICANT: TARH E&P Holdings, L.P.
PLANNER: Chris Gathman
LEGAL DESCRIPTION: W2NE4SE4 of Section 23,T6N, R66W of the 6th P.M.,Weld County, Colorado.
REQUEST: A Site Specific Development Plan and a Special Review Permit for oil and gas
production facilities(two oil and gas wells)in the A(Agricultural)Zone District.
LOCATION: Approximately 1/4 mile north of CR 66 and approximately Y mile west of CR 35.
Chris Gathman, Department of Planning Services, stated that he received correspondence from the
representative for the applicant. He added that he is unable to attend the hearing today and they request that
this case be continued until January 8, 2008.
• The Chair asked if there was anyone in the audience who wished to speak for or against this application. No
one wished to speak.
Roy Spitzer moved that Case USR-1628 be continued until January 8, 2008, seconded by Tom Holton.
Motion carried unanimously.
The Chair moved to Case Number USR-1633 and read it into record.
CASE NUMBER: USR-1633
APPLICANT: Spicer Ranches,LTD
PLANNER: Roger Caruso
LEGAL DESCRIPTION: SW4 of Section 27,T7N, R65W of the 6th P.M.,Weld County,Colorado.
REQUEST: A Site Specific Development Plan and Special Use Permit for Roping Arenas,to
include both indoor and outdoor arenas,commercial,in the(A)Agricultural Zone
District.
LOCATION: North of and adjacent to CR 76 and East of and adjacent to CR 43.
Roger Caruso, Department of Planning Services, stated that Linda Hulse, who is the representative for
Spicer Ranches, LTD is requesting a continuance to the April 1, 2008 Planning Commission meeting to
resolve the Department of Public Works and Department of Health concerns. Mr. Caruso commented
that staff recommends the continuance be granted until the April 1, 2008 Planning Commission hearing.
The Chair asked if there was anyone in the audience who wished to speak for or against this application. No
one wished to speak.
Roy Spitzer moved that Case USR-1633 be continued until April 1,2008,seconded by Robert Grand. Motion
carried unanimously.
• The Chair read the following case into record.
CASE NUMBER: USR-1632
APPLICANT: Verizon Wireless
PLANNER: Hannah Hippely
1
LEGAL DESCRIPTION: Part of the NE4 NE4 of Section 29,T5N, R64W of the 6th P.M.,Weld County,
•
Colorado.
REQUEST: A Site Specific Development Plan and Special Review Permit for a Major Facility
of a Public Utility(telecommunications facility including a 100 foot windmill, panel
antennas and an equipment shelter)in the A(Agricultural)Zone District.
LOCATION: Approximately 1 mile north of CR 52 and west of and adjacent to CR 53.
Hannah Hippely, Department of Planning Services, stated that USR-1632 is an application made by
Verizon Wireless for a Site Specific Development Plan and Special Review Permit for a Major Facility of a
Public Utility(telecommunications facility including a 110 foot tower and windmill, panel antennas and an
equipment shelter) in the A(Agricultural)Zone District
The site is located south of Kersey, Approximately 1 mile north of County Road 52 and west of and
adjacent to County Road 53.
The property to the north is located within the Town of Kersey, to the northeast the zoning is PUD Estate,
the remaining surrounding property is zoned agricultural. Numerous Use by Special Review permits exist
in the area.
The sign announcing this Planning Commission meeting was posted by staff on November 21, 2007.
Ten referral agencies reviewed this proposal. Six responded and either stated that they did not have a
conflict with the use or expressed concerns that have been addressed through the Conditions of Approval
and Development Standards.
Ms. Hippely stated that Planning Staff is recommending the approval of this application. She added that
because this is a Major Facility of a Public Utility the Planning Commission, in this case, is the last
approving body.
• Commission Spitzer asked to see the picture looking northeast to Kersey again. Ms. Hippely showed the
picture from the presentation. Commissioner Ochsner asked if there were any pictures of what the tower
would look like. Ms. Hippely showed the board the pictures from the presentation.
Ms. Hippely commented that the applicant originally proposed a self-supporting lattice tower with a
windmill. She added that Planning Staff is requesting that they change this to be a monopole structure
because they feel that the visual impact will be actually less with the monopole than with the attempt to
disguise this as a windmill.
Commissioner Branham asked what the monopole would look like. Ms. Hippely said that she is not sure
what the specific design is and the applicant can address that a little better. She added that she did do a
little research on some other types of towers and passed the pictures around to the Planning
Commissioners.
Commissioner Spitzer asked if the windmill is only for decoration. Ms. Hippely replied that was correct.
Ann Closser, 4305 Darley Av, Boulder, commented that with her is Kelly Harrision who has done a lot of
field work on this project and also David Bourne who is the Senior Radio Frequency Engineer for this
project and he has also designed this particular installation. Ms. Closser commented that she has a photo
rendering of what the windmill design would look like and also a drawing which illustrates the monopole
and passed those out to the Planning Commissioners to compare.
Ms. Closser stated that as you can see they have illustrated the lattice design with the windmill at the top.
She added that they have shown on the drawing, in hatch marks, future antennas. However they are not
future antennas for Verizon Wireless, but rather a potential co-locater if somebody were to come down the
pike and say we need an installation in this geographic area. Ms. Closser expressed that they feel this
• windmill design is more appropriate given the Agricultural setting.
Commissioner Holton asked if their preference is for the windmill design. Ms. Closser replied that it is
their preference; however it is not to say that they wouldn't go with the monopole design. Commissioner
Holton asked if it is because of the visual aspects of it and further asked if it costs more for this design.
Ms. Closser responded that it is more expensive to install, but they think from an aesthetic standpoint it is
• more compatible with the surrounding area.
Commissioner Ochsner asked if this design has been used anywhere else. Ms. Closser said that it has
been used by other carriers. She referred to Mr. Bourne to better answer that question. David Bourne,
RF Engineer for Verizon Wireless, 17235 Opal Hill Dr, Parker, CO, commented that he couldn't think of
any case with regard to his sites where they have built the windmill design. However there is one where
they co-located on an existing windmill and that is around I-25 and Highway 7. Mr. Bourne added that
there are a number of these around the area. Commissioner Ochsner asked if he feels these fit into the
scenery. Mr. Bourne indicated that it is subjective and depends on the height of it and where they are
located. He added that he doesn't really have an opinion that every cell site that looks like a windmill is a
good idea.
Commissioner Hall asked if the monopole would give them the same opportunities. Mr. Bourne replied
that it would and from an engineering standpoint, as far as which one performs better, they are going to
perform exactly the same
The Chair asked if there was anyone in the audience who wished to speak for or against this application. No
one wished to speak.
Commissioner Branham referred to Page 4, Condition 2 with regard to"increasing the size of the windmill so
that it is in proper scale to the tower." Mr. Branham asked what they mean by"in proper scale". Ms. Hippley
said that Staffs issue with this windmill design is that they don't think it will look anything like a windmill. She
added that if you imagine a 100'tower with a ten foot circle on top of it,they believe that the windmill portion of
it is out of proportion with the rest of the tower to actually appear to be a windmill. Ms. Hippely commented
that the antenna will be wider in diameter than the actual windmill on top.
• The Chair asked if the Department of Public Health had any comments. Char Davis, Department of Public
Health, said that she didn't have anything to add to this.
The Chair asked if the Department of Public Works had any comments. Dave Snyder, Department of Public
Works, commented that they don't have any issues with this case.
Bill Hall moved to accept Staffs recommendation on a monopole, seconded by Erich Ehrlich.
Commissioner Spitzer said that he likes the recognition of the history of the area and realizes that it is hard to
make a 100'tower look like an operating windmill. He added that he appreciates the applicant's design to be
compatible with the area, and doesn't have any strong feelings about it one way or the other.
Commissioner Branham commented that this is an issue that everyone will look at this tower for a few days
and then they will drive by it and will never see it. He added that he is not sure if this will make any difference
if it is a windmill or anything else. He expressed that if Verizon Wireless is willing to spend the extra money to
make it look nice and fit in with the community, he thinks that it would be okay to have the windmill.
Commissioner Lawley commented that he likes the windmill concept, but it does look a little out of proportion
with regard to the windmill and the rest of the tower.
The Chair asked the applicants if they read through the Development Standards and Conditions of Approval
and if they are agreement with those. The applicants replied that they are in agreement, however she
commented that they favor the windmill design.
Commissioner Ochsner said that he loves the idea of trying to disguise the pole and being a little creative. He
added that he is not sure if a 100'windmill will look out of place for him or not because he can't visualize that.
• The Chair asked the secretary to poll the members of the Planning Commission for their decision. Paul
Branham, no; Erich Ehrlich, yes; Robert Grand, no; Bill Hall, yes; Mark Lawley, no; Roy Spitzer, no; Tom
Holton, no; Doug Ochsner, no. Motion failed.
Paul Branham moved to delete Condition 2 on page 4 which would make it permissible to have the windmill
atop the tower, seconded by Tom Holton. Erich Ehrlich voted no.
• The Chair asked the applicants if they agree to the amended Development Standards and Conditions of
Approval and if they are agreement with those. The applicants replied that they are in agreement.
Roy Spitzer moved to approve Case USR-1632, seconded by Tom Holton.
The Chair asked the secretary to poll the members of the Planning Commission for their decision. Paul
Branham,yes; Erich Ehrlich,yes; Robert Grand,yes; Bill Hall, yes; Mark Lawley, yes; Roy Spitzer, yes;Tom
Holton, yes; Doug Ochsner, yes. Motion carried unanimously.
Meeting adjourned at 2:13 p.m.
Respectfully submitted,
Kristine Ranslem
Secretary
•
•
Hello