HomeMy WebLinkAbout20073600.tiff • •
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: USR-1623
APPLICANT: Jacob&Wendy Simmons do Philip Brink
PLANNER: Roger Caruso
LEGAL DESCRIPTION: Lot B of RE-2923; Part of the NE4 of Section 20,T6N, R64W of the 6th P.M.,
Weld County, Colorado.
REQUEST: A Site Specific Development Plan and Special Use Permit for a Veterinary Clinic
or hospitals in the(A)Agricultural Zone District.
LOCATION: South of and adjacent to State Highway 392 and west of and adjacent to CR 53.
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 Weld County 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.B (A. Goal 2) allows
commercial uses which are directly related to or dependent upon agriculture to locate within
agricultural zoning when the impact to surrounding properties is minimal and where adequate
service and infrastructure are available. The proposed clinic will provide veterinary and
•
dentistry services for equines. The Development Standards, Conditions of Approval, and
Operations Standards will effectively mitigate any adverse impacts to surrounding areas. A
violation was initiated as a result of a vehicle repair facility located on the property without the
proper zoning permits. This violation has not been presented to the Board of County
Commissioners, due to their submittal of this Use By Special Review application.
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.5 of the Weld County Code provides for Veterinary clinics as
a Use by Special Review in the A(Agricultural)Zone District.
C. Section 23-2-220.A.3--The uses which will be permitted will be compatible with the existing
surrounding land uses. The surrounding area consists of rural residences to the north,south,
east and west;the closest home is located 210 feet to the west. Conditions of Approval and
Development Standards will ensure that the proposal is consistent with surrounding land
uses.
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. This proposal does not lie within the three mile referral area of any
municipality.
E. Section 23-2-220.A.5 --The site does not lie within any Overlay Districts.
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 property is Lot B of RE-
2923. The property is considered Irrigated (not prime) agricultural land by the Important
EXHIBIT
1 3
2007-3600P
• •
Resolution USR-1623
• Jacob&Wendy Simmons
Page 2
Farmlands of Weld County Map, dated 1979. However, Section 22-2-60.1.1 of the Weld
County Comprehensive Plan indicates that eighty(80)acres is considered the minimum lot
size needed for a viable farming operation and the subject property is 49 acres in size. The
clinic will encompass approximately 5 acres of the site and the remainder will be utilized for
general agricultural related activities considered Uses by Right.
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.
If this application is approved and once a plat has been recorded, the violation will be closed; however, if for
any reason this application is denied,the violation process will continue. If denied,within 90 days from denial,
all commercial equipment and activities shall be removed from the property or this case will be presented to
the Board of County Commissioners through the Violation Hearing process.
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 Weld County 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:
1) The plat shall be labeled Use by Special Review USR-1623. (Department of
Planning Services)
2) The attached Development Standards. (Department of Planning Services)
3) Indicate a forty(40)foot turning radius used for access to accommodate truck traffic
from County Road 66. (Department of Public Works)
4) A minimum of twenty-six(26)parking spaces, including two(2)spaces which adhere
to ADA standards, shall be delineated on the plat. Identify separate spaces,which
would not require backing, for trucks with trailers. Parking shall meet the
requirements of Appendix 23-B of the Weld County Code. Each parking space shall
be equipped with wheel guards when necessary to prevent vehicles from extending
beyond the boundary of the space and coming into contact with other vehicles,walls,
fences, sidewalks or planting. (Department of Planning Services, Department of
Public Works)
5) The applicant shall delineate a vicinity map which shall locate the site with respect to
adjacent roads and other major land features with a scale of 1"=2000'. (Department
of Planning Services)
6) The internal circulation shall be clearly indicated on the plat for trucks pulling trailers.
(Department of Public Works)
•
Resolution USR-1623
• Jacob&Wendy Simmons
Page 3
7) The plat shall be prepared in accordance with Weld County Code Section 23-2-
260.D. (Department of Planning Services)
B. The applicant shall submit documentation which requires the date of construction for all
proposed structures and additional information stating their typical daily requirements,
including approximate square footage of Equine Veterinary and Dentistry Clinic facility and all
ancillary uses. Additional parking spaces may be required as determined by the Department
of Planning Services taking into consideration the size of the additional structures as outlined
in Appendix 23-B of the Weld County Code. (Department of Planning Services)
C. The existing septic system serving the clinic and residence shall be reviewed by a Colorado
Registered Professional Engineer. The review shall consist of observation of the system and
a technical review describing the systems ability to handle the proposed hydraulic load. The
review shall be submitted to the Environmental Health Services Division of the Weld County
Department of Public Health and Environment. In the event the system is found to be
inadequately sized or constructed the system shall be brought into compliance with current
Regulations. Evidence of such shall be submitted in writing to the Weld County Department
of Planning Services. (Department of Public Health and Environment)
D. The applicant shall submit a dust abatement plan for review and approval, to the
Environmental Health Services,Weld County Department of Public Health and Environment.
Evidence of such shall be submitted in writing to the Weld County Department of Planning
Services (Department of Public Health and Environment)
• E. The applicant shall submit a waste handling plan(chemicals,drug disposal,carcass removal,
etc), for approval, to the Environmental Health Services Division of the Weld County
Department of Public Health and Environment. Evidence of such shall be submitted in writing
to the Weld County Department of Planning Services. The plan shall include at a minimum
the following: (Department of Public Health and Environment)
1) A list of wastes which are expected to be generated on site (this should include
expected volumes and types of waste generated).
2) A list of the type and volume of chemicals expected to be stored on site.
3) The waste handler and facility where the waste will be disposed(including the facility
name, address, and phone number).
F. The applicant shall submit and have approved a landscape, screening,signage,parking and
lighting plan. Evidence of approval shall be submitted to the Weld County Department of
Planning Services. (Department of Planning Services)
G. A storm water drainage report shall be submitted to Weld County Department of Public
Works in accordance with the referral received April 19, 2002. Construction shall not occur
until the drainage report is approved by Weld County Department of Public Works. Evidence
of such shall be submitted in writing to the Weld County Department of Planning Services.
(Department of Planning Services, Department of Public Works)
H. The applicant shall address the requirements of the Public Works stated in the referral
response received September 11, 2007. Evidence of such shall be submitted in writing to the
Weld County Department of Planning Services. (Department of Planning Services)
•
Resolution USR-1623
• Jacob &Wendy Simmons
Page 4
The applicant shall address the requirements of the Public Health and Environment as stated
in the referral response received September 28, 2007. Evidence of such shall be submitted
in writing to the Weld County Department of Planning Services. (Department of Planning
Services)
J. The applicant shall address the requirements of the Department of Planning Services,
Landscape referral as stated in the referral response dated August 29, 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 Colorado Department of Transportation
as stated in the referral response received August 28, 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 attempt address the requirements (concerns) of the Greeley — Weld
County Airport Authority as stated in the referral response received August 28, 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 two (2) paper copies of the plat for preliminary approval to the
Weld County Department of Planning Services. (Department of Planning Services)
2. Prior to Operation:
• A. A stormwater discharge permit may be required for a development.redevelopment/
construction site where a contiguous or n on-contiguous land disturbance is greater than or
equal to one acre in area. The applicant shall inquire with the Water Quality Control Division
(WQCD) of the Colorado Department of Public Health and Environment at
www.cdphe.state.co.us/wq/PermitsUnit if they are required to obtain a stormwater discharge
permit. Alternately,the applicant can provide evidence from WQCD that they are not subject
to these requirements.
3. Upon completion of 1.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)
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
sent to maps{a,co.weld.co.us. (Department of Planning Services)
5. No building or electrical permits shall 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
JACOB AND WENDY SIMMONS
USR-1623
1. The Site Specific Development Plan and Special Use Permit is for a Veterinary Clinic in the A
(Agricultural)Zone District,and subject to the Development Standards stated hereon.(Department of
Planning Services)
2. The Veterinary Clinic shall be limited to an equine practice. The addition of other animals to the
practice will require an amendment to the Special Use Permit in order to address requirements
including but not limited to, boarding, kennel location,and conformance with the Pet Animal Care and
Facilities Act. (Department of Planning Services)
3. 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)
4. Except for emergencies, hours of operation shall be from 7:00 a.m. to 5:30 p.m. Monday through
Saturday. (Department of Planning Services)
5. The applicant shall be limited to six (6) employees for the Veterinary clinic.
6. The applicant shall remove, handle, and stockpile manure from the livestock area in a manner that
will prevent nuisance conditions. The manure piles shall not be allowed to exist or deteriorate to a
condition that facilitates excessive odors,flies, insect pests,or pollutant runoff. (Department of Public
Health and Environment)
7. All liquid and solid wastes (as defined in the Solid Wastes Disposal Sites and Facilities Act,
• 30-20-100.5, C.R.S.)shall be stored and removed for final disposal in a manner that protects against
surface and groundwater contamination. (Department of Public Health and Environment)
8. 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)
9. Waste materials shall be handled, stored, and disposed in a manner that controls fugitive dust,
blowing debris, and other potential nuisance conditions. (Department of Public Health and
Environment)
10. The applicant shall operate in accordance with the approved"waste handling plan". (Department of
Public Health and Environment)
11. 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)
12. The facility shall adhere to the maximum permissible noise levels allowed in the Commercial Zone
District as delineated in 25-12-103 C.R.S. (Department of Public Health and Environment)
13. Adequate hand washing and toilet facilities shall be provided for employees and patrons of the facility.
(Department of Public Health and Environment)
14. 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)
• 15. The applicant shall supply dust suppression within 300 feet of the adjacent residences between State
Highway 392 and County Road 66(Department of Public Works)
• •
Resolution USR-1623
Jacob&Wendy Simmons
Page 6
• 16. All potentially hazardous chemicals must be stored and handled in a safe manner in accordance with
product labeling and in a manner that minimizes the release of hazardous air pollutants(HAP's)and
volatile organic compounds (VOC's). (Department of Public Health and Environment)
17. The operation shall comply with all applicable rules and regulations of the State and Federal agencies
and the Weld County Code. (Department of Public Health and Environment)
18. The facility shall utilize the existing North Weld County Water District water supply. (Department of
Planning Services)
19. If applicable, the applicant shall obtain a Storm Water Discharge Permit from the Colorado
Department of Public Health and Environment,Water Quality Control Division.(Department of Public
Health and Environment)
20. A building permit shall be obtained prior to the construction of structures or changes of use of any
building on the parcel including any sign. An electrical permit will be required for any electrical service
to equipment or building. A plot plan shall be submitted when applying for building permits showing all
structures with accurate distances between structures, and from structures to all property lines.
(Department of Building Inspection)
21. A plan review is required for each building for which a building permit is required. The Occupancy
Class will be a B Occupancy(Business). 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.
(Department of Building Inspection)
22. Building height shall be measured in accordance with the 2007 International Building Code for the
•
purpose of determining compliance with the Bulk Requirements from Chapter 27 of the Weld County
Code. Building height shall be measured in accordance with Chapter 23 of the Weld County Code in
order to determine compliance with offset and setback requirements. Offset and setback
requirements are measured to the farthest projection from building. (Department of Building
Inspection)
23. Provide a letter of approval from the Galeton Fire Protection District prior to any new permit
application. (Department of Building Inspection)
24. A Flood Hazard Development Permit shall be submitted for building constructed within the 100-year
flood plain whether the buildings are existing or new. (Department of Building Inspection)
25. The off-street parking spaces, including the access drive, shall be surfaced with gravel, asphalt,
concrete, or equivalent, and shall be graded to prevent drainage problems. (Department of Public
Works)
26. Parking lots shall conform to all standards of the American with Disabilities Act requirements.
(Department of Public Works)
27. The landscaping on site shall be maintained in accordance with the approved Landscape Plan.
(Department of Planning Services)
28. The property owner or operator shall be responsible for complying with the Design Standards of
Section 23-2-240, Weld County Code.
29. The property owner or operator shall be responsible for complying with the Operation Standards of
• Section 23-2-250, Weld County Code.
30. Personnel from the Weld County Departments of Public Health and Environment, Planning Services
and Public Works shall be granted access onto the property at any reasonable time in order to ensure
• •
Resolution USR-1623
Jacob &Wendy Simmons
Page 7
• the activities carried out on the property comply with the Development Standards stated herein and all
applicable Weld County regulations.
31. 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.
32. 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
Motion seconded by Bill Hall.
VOTE:
For Passage Against Passage Absent
Robert Grand
Bill Hall
Tom Holton
Doug Ochsner
Erich Ehrlich
Roy Spitzer
•
Paul Branham
Mark Lawley
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 November 6, 2007.
Dated the 6th of November, 2007.
Kristine Ranslem
Secretary
•
1) -o10 -aoc»
• Commissioner Lawley made a motion to accept the staff recommendation for dust abatement, seconded by
Commissioner Ehrlich.
The Chair asked the secretary to poll the members of the Planning Commission for their decision. Paul
Branham, absent; Erich Ehrlich, yes; Robert Grand, no; Bill Hall, no; Mark Lawley, yes; Roy Spitzer, yes;
Tom Holton, no; Doug Ochsner, no. Motion failed.
Tom Holton moved to delete 2.C, page 3 of the Conditions of Approval, seconded by Robert Grand.
Motion carried.
Roy Spitzer moved to add a new Number 13 in the Development Standards to read"that a permanent
adequate water supply shall be provided for drinking and sanitary purposes and supplemental bottled
water will be supplied for drivers", as per the Health Department's recommendation. Mark Lawley
seconded the motion. Motion carried.
The Chair asked the applicants if they read through 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 that Case USR-1621, 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, Mark Lawley seconded the motion.
The Chair asked the secretary to poll the members of the Planning Commission for their decision. Paul
Branham, absent; Erich Ehrlich, yes; Robert Grand, yes; Bill Hall, yes; Mark Lawley, yes; Roy Spitzer, yes;
Tom Holton, yes; Doug Ochsner, yes. Motion carried unanimously.
The Chair read the next case into record.
• CASE NUMBER: USR-1623
APPLICANT: Jacob&Wendy Simmons c/o Philip Brink
PLANNER: Roger Caruso
LEGAL DESCRIPTION: Lot B of RE-2923; Part of the NE4 of Section 20, T6N, R64W of
the 6th P.M., Weld County, Colorado.
REQUEST: A Site Specific Development Plan and Special Use Permit for a
Veterinary Clinic or hospitals in the(A)Agricultural Zone District.
LOCATION: South of and adjacent to State Highway 392 and west of and
adjacent to CR 53.
Roger Caruso, Department of Planning Services, stated that the request before the board is a Site
Specific Development Plan and a Special Review Permit for a Veterinary Clinic or hospitals in the
Agricultural Zone District.
The sign announcing the Planning Commission hearing was posted October 24, 2007 by Planning Staff.
The site is located south of and adjacent to State Highway 392 and west of and adjacent to County Road
53.
The surrounding property to the north, south, east and west are primarily single family homes with
agricultural use. There are twelve(12) property owners within 500 feet of the property in question and the
closest home is roughly 600 feet to the northwest. The Department of Planning Services has received
four letters from surrounding property owners requesting denial of the application. The memo and
attachments provided to the Planning Commission include nine letters of support from surrounding
property owners recommending approval of the application.
• The property is currently in violation due to the operation of a Veterinary Clinic without the appropriate
Special Use Permit. The violation has not yet been presented to the Board of County Commissioners
through a Violation hearing; approval of this Use by Special Review will remediate the violation.
The subject property does not lie within the three mile referral area of any municipality. I
• Fifteen referral agencies reviewed this case, ten responded favorably or included conditions that have
been addressed through development standards and conditions of approval.
The Department of Planning Services is recommending approval of this application along with the
conditions of approval and development standards.
Commissioner Ehrlich asked about the picture in the slide presentation and if the house on the right was a
separate residence. Mr. Caruso replied that was correct.
Phil Brink, 1304 Centauer Village Dr, Ste B, Lafayette, Colorado. Mr. Brink represents the applicant and
stated that Doctors Jake and Wendy Simmons operate a veterinary clinic and started from scratch. He
added that this business started out purely as ambulatory where they would go to the location of the
horses and provide care, however it has become necessary over time as their business has grown to have
some horses there that they can keep track of and watch more closely.
Commissioner Ehrlich asked if the applicants share the access coming off of County Road 53 with the
neighbor to the north. Mr. Simmons replied that the access off of County Road 53 is their private road and
the neighbor to the north accesses their property off of State Highway 392.
The Chair asked if there was anyone in the audience who wished to speak for or against this application.
Ron Farmer,25620 Hwy 392, Greeley, Colorado. Mr.Farmer commented that him and his wife are the ones
who live in the white house to the north that they have referenced to and they opposed this because they feel it
is too close to the front of their house. He added that they didn't have the opportunity to oppose this in the
beginning as it was just built with no one's knowledge. Mr. Farmer expressed problems of conflict with their
neighbors and commented that he would like to get along with the neighbors. He added that they would
support the Vet Clinic if they in turn would respect their land. Mr. Farmer stated that he does not know what
• they have applied for with regard to the hours of operation and further added that he has pictures showing
vehicles coming at dawn and at dark.
The Chair closed the public portion of the meeting.
Commissioner Ochsner stated that in the application the hours of operation are from 7:00 am to 5:30 pm
Monday through Saturday. Mr.Simmons commented that their hours of operation are generally from 8:00 am
to 5:00 pm, although they offer a 24 hour emergency service. He added that their staff is equipped with
emergency situations that might arise at any hour during the night and weekends. Mrs.Simmons added that
they don't have that many emergencies that come in after hours, however on average they might have 2 to 3
emergencies after hours Monday through Sunday. She commented that if that does happen they shut their
doors to their building to eliminate any outdoor elements.
Commissioner Ochsner commented to Mr. Farmer that as a Board they have to look at land use issues only
and expressed to the applicant and Mr. Farmer that they should try to work on mending fences between
themselves.
Commissioner Spitzer asked about the hours and how does that affect the emergencies. Mr.Caruso replied
that the hours as stated in the application, except for emergencies, are from 7:00 a.m. to 5:30 p.m. Monday
through Saturday. He added that for emergencies staff will take that as a case by case basis and if there are
complaints of excessive emergencies staff can tell them to amend their USR.
Commissioner Ehrlich asked about lighting on the premise. Mr.Caruso replied that Condition 1.F talks about
the lighting and in talking with the applicant lights would go off at the end of the business day (5:30 p.m.)
except for emergencies. He also added that when he performed a site inspection there would be no direct
flow of light from there.
• Mr. Simmons briefly explained the type of lighting outside the building. He said that his neighbors house is
north of his private road and when vehicles come in most of the lights will be projected straight west and then
turn south into their parking lot. He added that at that point there are three(3)lights on their building which
one is on the west side of the building and then 2 motion lights on the other building. Mrs. Simmons
commented that with regard to the motion lights, in order for them to come on you have to walk directly
underneath the overhang and are protected by an eave.
• Mr.Caruso commented that with the lighting plan,staff can require shields on the lights to where it will direct
the lighting downward.
Dave Snyder, Department of Public Works, recommended that dust suppression be applied in front of the
residences on the road to State Highway 392.
Roy Spitzer moved to add Development Standard#15 and renumber accordingly to read"the applicant shall
supply dust suppression within 300 feet of the adjacent residences between State Highway 392 and County
Road 66". Robert Grand seconded the motion.
The Chair asked the secretary to poll the members of the Planning Commission for their decision. Paul
Branham, absent; Erich Ehrlich, yes; Robert Grand, yes; Bill Hall, yes; Mark Lawley, yes; Roy Spitzer, yes;
Tom Holton, no; Doug Ochsner, no. Motion carried.
The Chair asked the applicants if they read through the amended Development Standards and Conditions of
Approval and if they are agreement with those. The applicants replied that they are in agreement.
Robert Grand moved that Case USR-1623, 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, Bill Hall seconded the motion.
The Chair asked the secretary to poll the members of the Planning Commission for their decision. Paul
Branham, absent; Erich Ehrlich, yes; Robert Grand, yes; Bill Hall, yes; Mark Lawley, yes; Roy Spitzer, yes;
Tom Holton, yes with comment; Doug Ochsner, yes with comment. Motion carried unanimously.
Commissioner Holton commented that he would like to see the applicant and Mr. Farmer get together
• before the Board of County Commissioners hearing to see if they can straighten out their personal
conflicts.
Commissioner Ochsner reiterated Mr. Holton's comments.
The Chair took a recess at 4:32 p.m.
The Chair called the meeting back to order at 4:44 p.m.
Weld County Code Changes
Staff: Brad Mueller, Kim Ogle and Bruce Barker
Items: Appendix 23-F
Brad Mueller, Department of Planning Services, commented that at the meeting on October 2, 2007 staff
had presented a packet of code changes to the Board. He added that what resulted from that hearing
was that the Commission recommended approval with some changes and also excluded Appendix 23-F.
Mr. Mueller also mentioned that there were a number of items that the Board had asked staff to do
additional research on, and he handed out a memo going over these.
Mr. Mueller started with the approval of Federal and State permits, as Commissioner Ochsner had asked
about the applicability of a code change that is being proposed relative to mining, specifically mining that
applies to in-situ mining and requiring that all State and Federal approvals be in place prior to submittal of
a Use by Special Review. He indicated that the question was if the rule should apply to all Use by Special
Reviews. In reviewing the current code, staff does not recommend that we make that change at this time
as it would broaden the Code fairly significantly. Furthermore, in practice, those types of other permitting
requirements can and are suggested by the referral agencies. Mr. Mueller stated that staff is comfortable
that that system is working and would try to avoid expanding the code when possible.
• Mr. Mueller said that the next question that came up deals with the requirements for Surface Use
Agreements and the timing of those and whether there was an adequate level of fairness in requiring that
those Surface Use Agreements be provided at the time of submittal of an application. Mr. Mueller
commented that staff understood and heard from the Commission clearly that on an ongoing basis they
Hello