The URL can be used to link to this page

Browse Search

Home My WebLink About830259.tiff RESOLUTION RE: ACCEPT WITHDRAWAL OF APPLICATION FROM ROY MATHEWS (WILLIAM RAY ADAMS, SR. , AUTHORIZED AGENT) , CONCERNING USE BY SPECIAL REVIEW, ONE SINGLE FAMILY DWELLING UNIT PER LOT WHEREAS, the Board of County Commissioners of Weld County, Colorado, pursuant to Colorado statute and the Weld County Home Rule Charter, is vested with the authority of administering the affairs of Weld County, Colorado, and WHEREAS, a public hearing was scheduled before the Board of County Commissioners on the 18th day of May, 1983 , and continued to the 25th day of May, 1983 , at the hour of 2 : 00 o 'clock p.m. in the Chambers of the Board of County Commissioners for the pur- pose of hearing the application of Roy Mathews, c/o William Ray Adams, Sr. , 1500 West 92nd Avenue, #219 , Thornton, Colorado 80229 , for a Use by Special Review for one single family dwelling unit per lot other than those permitted under Section 31 . 2 . 1 of the Weld County Zoning Ordinance on the following described real estate, to-wit: The W2, Section 14 , Township 1 North, Range 66 West of the 6th P.M. , Weld County, Colorado WHEREAS, on the 25th day of May, 1983 , William Ray Adams , Sr. , authorized agent for Roy Mathews, requested that the application for a Use by Special Review Permit on the above described property be withdrawn, and WHEREAS , the Board found it appropriate to accept said with- drawal request. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Board of County Com- missioners of Weld County, Colorado that the request for with- drawal of the Use by Special Review application from Roy Mathews for one single family dwelling unit per lot be, and hereby is, accepted. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED by the Board that the applicant shall, apply for a Planned Unit Development and the fees for such appli- cation shall be waived and said application shall be pre-advertised and processed as quickly as possible. pLoloq 830259 Page 2 RE: WITHDRAWAL OF USR APPLICATION - MATHEWS The above and foregoing Resolution was , on motion duly made and seconded, adopted by the following vote on the 1st day of June, A.D. , 1983 . BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS ATTEST: F' /iyt/ WELD COUNTY, COLORADO Gtv. Weld County Clerk and Recorder 1 _ and Clerk to the Board Chuck Carlson, Chairman By: d i 24-112-;:-.1 T. )1/2„,i_ epu • my Clerk JT. Martin, Pro-Tem APPROVED AS TO FORM: _Ste Vv Gene R. Brantner County Atto ney Norman Carlson cqueinejon s.n DAY FILE: June 1 , 1983 HEARING CERTIFICATION DOCKET #83-27 RE: USR, ONE SINGT,F FAMILY DWELLING PER LOT OTHER THAN THOSE PERMI'FIED UNDER SNJIION 31.2.1 OF WELD COUNTY ZONING ORDINANCE - ROY MATHEWS A public hearing was conducted on May 25, 1983 , 1983 at 2:00 P. M. , with the following present: Chuck Carlson Chairman John Martin Pro Tem Gene Brantner Commissioner Norman Carlson Commissioner Jacqueline Johnson Commissioner Also present: Acting Clerk to the Board, Tommie Antuna Assistant County Attorney, Lee D. Morrison Planning Department Representative, Rod Allison The following business was transacted: I hereby certify that pursuant to a notice dated May 2, 1983, and duly published on May 5, 1983, in the La Salle Leader, a public hearing was held for the purpose of considering a Use by Special Review for a single family dwelling per lot other than those permitted under Section 31.2.1 of Weld County Zoning Ordinance for Roy Mathews. This Hearing was continued from May 18, 1983, in order to give the Com- missioners a chance to view the property in question and study this matter further. Mr. Morrison, Assistant County Attorney, was present and explained that this matter had been continued from May 18, 1983. Rod Allison, Planning Department representative, said that the Planning Commission recommendation had been read • into the record at the last Hearing. He said he wanted to correct a clerical error on the Resolution. He said that the Resolution should read that all of the Planning Commission members were in favor of passage of the, unfavorable recommendation. Mr. Allison said that the Planning staff had no new evidence to submit concerning this case. Mr. William Ray Adams, Sr. , representing the applicant, came forward to answer any questions the Board might have. Commis- sioner N. Carlson voiced his concerns that this was presented as a Use by Special Review rather than a Subdivision Exemption or a Planned Unit Development. He said that he felt this type of ground would be enhanced by this type of develop- ment. The Chairman asked if each home would be able to get water. Mr. Adams said that he had spoken to the State officials about this and they had assured him that permits would be issued to drill shallow or deep wells on this property. After further discussion concerning the wells, Mr. Adams said 100 gallons per minute were available according to the Water Resources consultants. This is from a shallow well. Mr. Allison said that the Division of Water Resources indicates that their information shows a water quality of poor at this location. The Division said they would recommend approval if the water quality is acceptable to the County Health Department. The County Health Department indicated that there is no problem, if the occupants wish to drink this water that is their business. Commissioner Brantner again voiced his concerns about the method being used for this application. Mr. Allison said the Planning staff had recommended that they apply for a Planned Unit Development permit. He said they had discussed the problems associated with applying for a Use by Special Review. Commissioner N. Carlson asked whether the Board could grant the applicants a PUD. Mr. Morrison said the Board could not take that action today. Mr. Allison explained the procedure for receiving a PUD Final Plan. Commissioner Martin said he feels that this ground is no good for anything else. He feels the best use for this land is to put people on it. Commissioner Martin made comments regarding the Comprehensive Plan. He feels that the applicants should be allowed to build on this property. The Chairman said he wanted to know if the applicants were aware of dust blowing problems which might occur on this property. Mr. Adams said they were. Mr. Morrison asked how future homeowners on this land would be made aware of the proper uses of this land. Mr. Adams said they would be notified by letter. Commissioner N. Carlson said he was concerned if this USR is approved, no Development Standards could be applied to this land. Commissioner N. Carlson moved that the applicants be allowed to apply for a Planned Unit Development and waive the fees. Commissioner Martin seconded this notion. Linda McKenna asked why a stipulation could not be put on this Use by Special Review and any future buyers would have to abide by this stipulation. The Chairman explained that in a Planned Unit Development this could be done easily, whereas, with a Use by Special Review this is not feasible. The time element for a Planned Unit Development application will Page 2 RE: HEARING CERTIFICATION - MATHEWS probably be an additional 45-60 days from the date of submittal. Commissioner Johnson explained the reasons why she is going to vote against the nation. She said that the Comprehensive Plan should be followed, and if it is not the right Plan then it should be looked at. Mr. Morrison said there are two things which can be done regarding this application. One, the applicants could be asked to withdraw their application or it could be denied. Another method, it could be tabled and considered beyond when the PUD is considered. The motion passed by the following vote: Commissioners Brantner, Martin and N. Carlson voted yea; Commissioner Johnson voted nay; and Chairman C. Carlson abstained. Mr. William Ray Adams, Sr. , representing the applicant, withdrew the application for a Use by Special Review. APPROVED: ‘71/17 rJ ry.J BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS ATTEST: - WELD COUNTY, COLORADO Weld County Clerk and Record ABSTAINED and Clerk to the Board Chuck Carlson, Chairman qty County Cl }F- J Martin,if P —ro-Te�m� �A ) 11 yebS (AYE) e R. Brantner (AYE) Norman Carlson ()O„,(,, u'itiLS)Le\,-..„ (NAY) Logue'Q Johns TAPE #83-56 DOCKET #83-27 LHR 587 DAY FILE: June 1, 1983 ATTENDANCE RECORD TODAY ' S HEARINGS ARE AS FOLLOWS : MAY 25 , 1983 DOCKET # 83-28 - USR, Western Paving Construction Co. 2/ 2 / 7 DOCKET # 83-27 - USR, Ray Mathews L^' /L..- Cr? DOCKET # PLEASE write or print legibly your name, address and the DOC 4 (as listed above) or the applicants name of the hearing you are attending . NAME ADDRESS HEARING ATTENDING ;'C -�. z _ Tri i$ A- n9 .Jct C-11 ;Er, - rite$t_,. ` kr /1,x'7 C �L.f�-'A> R-1A 'Y i ) i 6'1 // N, - 2:///H lL/Mk; sr: /CC) ,:t; Yz 7/,'ply"// 7,'/';/,%—TUT u /^ ck Ic�Y/NZ;e �I20 L/ 30'�` Sl. 'V171( t e:derby Il,v/4 , J..i'� �. j4ct) q.. , \'.y f-1 (c..'. � c, '.v tii, . 1`Ys I'?llAc- C1CA(A;-i /l rt [ 1 �I HEARING CERTIFICATION DOCKET #83-27 RE: USR, ONE SINGI.F FAMILY DWELLING UNIT PER LOT, ROY MATHEWS (Before this Hearing began the Chairman Pro-Tem explained that there are only 4 Commissioners present and applicant may request a continuance.) A public hearing was conducted on May 18 , 1983 at 2:00 P. M. , with the following present: Chuck Carlson Chairman , Excused John Martin Pro Tem Gene Brantner Commissioner Norman Carlson Commissioner Jacqueline Johnson Commissioner Also present: Acting Clerk to the Pnard, Tommie Antuna Assistant County Attorney, R. Russell Anson Planning Department Representative, Rod Allison The following business was transacted: I hereby certify that pursuant to a notice dated May 2, 1983 and duly published in the La Salle Leader on May 5, 1983, a public hearing was held on May 18, 198.3, for the purpose of considering the Use by Special Review for one single family dwelling unit per lot other than those permitted under Section 31.2.1 of the Weld County Zoning Ordinance for Roy Mathews. Mr. Anson, Assistant County Attorney, read the application into the record. Mr. Allison read the recommenda- tion from the Weld County Planning Commission into the record. The Planning Commission recommended that this application be denied and their reasons for said recommendation were read into the record by Mr. Allison. William Ray • Adams, Sr. , representing the applicant, came forward and explained this applica- tion to the Board. He said this area is dryland and will be irrigated with wells and no farm animals will be raised in this area for commdreial or business type venture. Hearing was held in Ft. Lupton, they initially did not recommend approval or denial, but at second hearing they did agree to service fire, police and schools to this area. He said that because of shifting sands, this ground is not good for farming. He explained the accesses from Road 8 and Road 10. Mr. Adams said that the State had said individual well permits would have to be obtained on this property, but they foresee no problems. There is ample water for shallow wells for in-home use and also for deep wells, with the State approving either one. Linda McKenna said that Hudson School District would accept the children from this area. John McKenna, also appearing for the applicant, said that it should be brought up that the County had gone in and removed several loads from this land without the permission of the owner. Commissioner Brantner voiced concern about the County removing this soil without permission. Mr. Allison said that the Planning Commission was concerned about the way this Use by Special Review application is being used, to create seven lots for single family dwelling purposes only. He said if someone came forward with a Use by Special Review application for a horse operation, then they could justify a residential dwelling in association with their intensive agri-business. This is normally the way a Use by Special Review application is used. Mrs. McKenna said this would be fine, but how Could this be cut down to a minimum size which is affordable by them. Mr. Allison said the owner would have to be willing to sell a parcel of ground which they could afford and would accomodate her proposed horse operation. Commissioner Martin said that the applicant would be better off with a Planned Unit Development. Mr. McKenna said they had been told not to apply for a Planned Unit Development by the Planning Department. Mr. Allison said that this application was thoroughly discussed concerning proper application procedures and his depart- ment recommended that the only way for a Use by Special Review to be used was in association with intensive farm operations. He explained that this proposal was initiated prior to his employment with the Planning Department, but he did discuss this matter with the previous planner, and he made it quite clear how it was being handled. Mr. Allison said that his department was not in the business of advising the applicant which method should be used, but they do explain which way is most appropriate. Mr. Adams said that Mr. Allison had explained the problems which might arise at this hearing, but he had already spent too much money at this point. Commissioner Martin asked what would be entailed in changing this application at this time. Mr. Allison explained that it is quite a different procedure, which would include submitting a Page 2 RE: Hearing Certification - USR, Mathews sketch plan, then a Change of Zone to PUD, and then a final PUD plan. He said the procedure is different. (TAPE CHANGE #83-51) After further discussion, Commissioner N. Carlson moved to deny this application and allow the applicants to apply for a PUD and waive the fees. Commissioner Brantner seconded the motion. Commissioner N. Carlson said he felt that the applicants were misled because the Zoning Ordinance does not allow division of land under a Use by Special Review. Mr. Allison said the reason they could divide the land is because no acreage is less than 35 acres. Commissioner Johnson said that she wished to view the area before she voted on this matter. Commissioner Brantner said he also had a problem with this. After further discussion, Commissioner Brantner withdrew his second, thus the motion died for lack of a second. Commissioner Johnson then roved to continue this matter until May 25, 1983. Commissioner Brantner seconded the motion and it carried unanimously. APPROVED: BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS AluEST: '' ,Wi�'., 4G.. - WELD COUNTY, COLORADO Weld County Clerk and Recorder EXCUSED and Clerk to the"Board Chuck Carlson, Chairman Deputy County-Clerk J . Martin, Pro-Tem it e R. Brantner Norman Carlso SSIetil n TAPE #83-50 and 83-51 DOCKET #83-27 LHR 587 DAY FILE: May 25, 1983 ATTENDANCE RECORD TODAY ' S HEARINGS ARE AS FOLLOWS : DOCKET # SIJ -3 I - JA-:- - �. '9)14/,,..y 210-- Cis '_ DOCKET # S3 - a- -y�� r - ti S -M,/ - l_e� Z DOCKET # $3 -�7 - 1/f7 271. /uw-a_ k Sg- s+ ga -a4. _ 7v�"c�� Ilt. ' PLEASE write or print legibly your name, address and the DOC # (as listed above) or the applicants name of the hearing you are attending . NAME ADDRESS HEARING ATTENDING =�t --c 1 �'� C C- `-S \, •\ '``. -VC ' �-> I �i I L. I (r�: k_1t1/4Yi- .�� V 11 1I PI'.-1 A) (W (---.--c---,7 C;// .-- „(�-'ix^'.. '/f-j /5 O✓ t.ci' L / 7 �c, / j7-1-j - 7 7 1 l/`f f/-r�(.:� /�/'ai'eId c T /i�%i,'.j- ��J / L0 /.,. .• /7 3`"/ /- /I, '��-J,,l:% ,---) / T,^ (I ‘ - U S 4, ` • 5 ,:0-'/ - k� i;ti.+ 1 .'A A .7i7�• .,o -z-�1`_ 7 i OT ' \ v V)414>> ri _ -4)1-1 O/1\11 Ss 00 Ln, r1 t ,�vl�1P--,� t11.'uiD - <4-ri6 i1 c /f'-17P' -,:-i n,_ ` / ,�i%%' % �r-c -i (r3e -S 5 - .' ` J,E -.7:O11y,J- ,TA 192 ; rx7 n 44 ,7 r-, x /Y/ _ 7 NOTICE Pursuant to the zoning laws of the State of Colorado and the Weld County Zoning Ordinance, a public hearing will be held in the Chambers of the Board of County Commissioners of Weld County, Colorado, Weld County Centennial Center., 915 10th Street, Greeley, Colorado, at the time specified. All persons in any manner interested in the Use By Special Review are requested to attend and may be heard. BE IT ALSO KNOWN that the text and maps so certified by the Weld County Planning Commission may be examined in the office of the Clerk to the Board of County Commissioners, located in the Weld County Centennial Center, 915 10th Street, Third Floor, Greeley, Colorado. DOCKET NO. 83-27 APPLICANT Roy Mathews (William Ray Adams, Sr. ) c/o William Ray Adams, Sr. 1500 West 92nd Avenue, #219 Thornton, CO 80229 DATE: May 18 , 1983 TIME: 2: 00 P.M REQUEST: Use By Special Review - One single family dwelling unit per lot other than those permitted under Section 31.2.1 of WCZO LEGAL DESCRIPTION The Wi, Section 14, T1N, R66W of the 6th P.M. , Weld County, Colorado DATED: May 2, 1983 PUBLISHED: May 5, 1983 ''�,f , NUIh5 = a;Iv118 Iti i w40,, 12 uJi4 a.E 3 ^sui E .i $ o.,« iitisiR"1*ki, aiii g watt .. s 3• t = el jy{ N lie l t,sgs, ..t.istod lis≥saai 01 a J S C G t T L .°. �C it-- se .s. C G ` C R G G j /7. G T u = z t a T '° m ro a 5 U E , o 3 J' , c < L a U < -, c. 1, ..: 0 — t E C E ✓. „ E C L .v.. 7., .‘• G : 6 S G > — (._ 'J L C )�, GS� 4 J re 0. ,- n° N _ e_.). - , = 0 .00 V c — - m u - — C \t. < O 1 w c ec .0 " c o c l0'1 •'° = >, y i. a w '" w — _ .�. t. c 4 'ti c t„„ i t z - - s k >.tm E c - . = Ik 5 — ,��\'` c c �' '_ c c c 7 Q _ _ �. 0s W . : _ r ' c e u` ° Y e . y G - n a ° ` '•. t(� Y' eY. Q , � j. G w - c L f r - ie _ G 7 ,- + Nkec C = — - E .c .c L es • G u S C L L �G L J ° V = y G_ ; c ° ~ 9 F ° U ... C r ^. C _ a J C. G S DATE: Apr: 28 , 1983 TO: The Board of County Commissioners Weld County, Colorado ROM: Clerk to the Board Office Commissioners: If you have no objections, we have tentatively set the following hearing for the 18th day of May, 1983 , at 2 : 00 P.M. Docket No. 83-27 - Roy Mathews (William Ray Adams, Sr. ) , USR, one single family dwelling unit .per lot other than those permitted under Section 31 . 2 . 1 of WCZO • OFFICE OF THE CLERK TO THE BOARD BY;7�y} J �.. 7ts_' Deputy The above mentioned hearing date and hearing time may be scheduled on the agenda as stated above. BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS WELD COUNTY, COLORADO .d e diumVP OFFICE OF WELD COUNTY CLERK AND RECORDER DEPARTMENT OF CLERK TO BOARD PHONE (3031 356-4000 EXT. 223 C. P.O. BOX 459 GREELEY, COLORADO 80631 COLORADO 013/4 444 April 25, 1983 ;.1Y G $? ). 4044 Roy Mathews (William Ray Adams, Sr.) c/o William Ray Adams, Sr. 1500 West 92nd Avenue, #219 Thornton, Colorado 80229 Dear Mr. Mathews: f Your application of a Use by Special Review for a one single family dwelling unit per lot has been recommended unfavorably to the Board of County Commissioners by the Planning Commission. The legal description of the property involved is described as the W1, Section 14, T1N, R66W of the 6th P.M. , Weld County, Colorado. If you wish to be heard by the Board of County Commissioners, it will be necessary for you to indicate your request by signing the bottom of this letter and returning it to this office. Regular hearing procedures will then be followed. This includes publishing a Notice of Hearing in the legal newspaper, an expense to be paid by you prior to the hearing date. In order to proceed as quickly as possible, we must receive your reply by May 5, 1983. If we are not in receipt of your request by that date, the matter will be considered closed. Sincerely, BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS WELD COUNTY, COLORADO CHUCK CARLSON, CHAIRMAN I wish to have a hearing on this matter brought before the Board of County Commissioners. I agree to pay for the legal advertising expense. QC/bf BEFORE THE WELD COUNTY, COLORADO PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION OF RECOMMENDATION TO THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS Date April 19, 1983 Case No. USR # 550:83:13 APPLICATION OF Roy Mathews (William Ray Adams, Sr.) ADDRESS c/o William Ray Adams, Sr. , 1500 West 92nd Avenue, #219, Thornton, Colorado 80229 Moved by Fred nfis 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 one single family dwelling unit per lot located on the following described property in Weld County, Colorado, to-wit: The W1, Section 14, T1N, R66W of the 6th P.M. , Weld County, Colorado be recommended (frinint y) (unfavorably) to the Board of County Commissioners for the following reasons: 1. The applicant has not demonstrated that the proposal is in compliance with the Weld County Comprehensive Plan as required in Section 24.3.1.1 of the Weld County Zoning Ordinance. The applicant proposes to divide a two-hundred-eighty (280) acre parcel of dryland in the "A" (Agricultural) Zone District into seven (7) large parcels ranging from thirty-five (35) to forty (40) acres, each being eligible for a single family dwelling. The following Comprehensive Plan Policies, listed on page 61 and 62 of the Comprehensive Plan, apply to this type of large lot residential development: Motion seconded by Tack Holman Vote: For Passage Against Passage Fred Otis Wilbur Wafel Ed Reichert Bill Diehl Bob Ehrlich Jack Holman Jerry Kiefer The Chairman declared the Resolution passed and ordered that a certified copy be forwarded with the file of this case to the Board of County Commissioners for further proceedings. CERTIFICATION OF COPY I, Bobbie Good , Recording Secretary of 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 April i1 1983 and recorded in Book No. VIII of the proceedings of the said Planning Commission. Dated the 21 day of April , 1983 . cb e\ a.L.- (\o,A% Secretary \ USR-550:83:13 Roy Mathews A Use by Special Review Permit for one (1) single family dwelling unit per lot other than those permitted under Section 31.2.1 of the Weld County Zoning Ordinance The W1, Section 14, T1N, R66W of the 6th P.M. , Weld County, Colorado Approximately 2.25 miles southeast of Fort Lupton on Weld County Road 8 1. "New residential developments which are not closely connected to and served by municipal utilities and services shall be discouraged." The proposed development conflicts with this Comprehensive Plan Policy Statement because it is not within a municipality growth plan for residential development. The Future Land Use Plan for Fort Lupton indicates this area is reserved for agricultural purposes. In a hearing on April 14, 1983, the Fort Lupton Planning Commission recommended that the proposal be returned to the Department of Planning Services without a recommendation because the subject site is outside any conceivable residential growth area. 2. "Proposals for new residential developments adjoining existing municipalities shall be encouraged so long as they conform to the desires of the towns as expressed in their comprehensive plans." The Fort Lupton Planning Commission did not indicate that this proposal conformed with their Comprehensive Plan. 3. "Existing municipalities are the best and most efficient sources of public goods and services which are necessary to serve new residential developments. These municipalities will be encouraged to improve their ability to serve new developments and will be looked to for service of all new developments within their corporate areas, in annexable areas immediately adjacent to the town and even those areas not immediately available for annexation, but within a reasonable service distance from the municipality." The town of Fort Lupton does have several vacant tracts of land identified for low density residential use in their General Plan. 2. The applicant has not demonstrated that the proposal is consistent with the intent of the "A" (Agricultural) Zone District as required in Section 24.3.1.2 of the Weld County Zoning Ordinance; specifically the minimum lot size requirement for dryland, which is one-hundred- sixty (160) acres. On page one (1) of the submitted application materials, the applicant indicates a desire to associate livestock breeding as a use on the proposed lots. In the past, parcels of ground less than the minimum lot size in the "A" (Agricultural) Zone District have been created for intensive farm operations with the Use by Special Review procedure. In addition, a residence could be justified to oversee the intensive farm operation. However, there are no assurances that the land would be used for intensive farm operation purposes. The proper way to use the Use by Special Review procedure to create additional dwelling lots on less than the minimum lot size is in conjunction with an intensive farm operation proposal. 3. The applicant has not demonstrated that the proposal is consistent with the future development of the surrounding area as projected by the Comprehensive Plan or Master Plans of affected municipalities as required in Section 24.3.1.4 of the Weld County Zoning Ordinance. The future plans that have been adopted by the County and the city of Fort Lupton for this subject site and surrounding area are agricultural. The following is a policy statement regarding uses in areas intented to remain agricultural in nature. -2- USR-550:83:13 Roy Mathews A Use by Special Review Permit for one (1) single family dwelling unit per lot other than those permitted under Section 31.2.1 of the Weld County Zoning Ordinance The W1/2 Section 14, T1N, R66W of the 6th P.M. , Weld County, Colorado Approximately 2.25 miles southeast of Fort Lupton on Weld County Road 8 Page 44 "In order to minimimize conflicting land uses and minimize the cost of new facilities and services to the taxpayer, industrial, commercial, business and residential development will be encouraged to locate adjacent to the existing twenty-seven (27) incorporated towns and in accordance with the comprehensive plans and stated wishes of each community" The applicant is proposing the creation of seven (7) lots and residences approximately thirty-five (35) to forty (40) acres each. Since dryland farming parcels of this size cannot provide a livable wage, there will be additional pressure in the future to further subdivide parcels of ground if this request is approved. RA:rg -3- Date: A_ it 19, 1983 CASE NUMBER: USR-550:83:13 NAME: Roy C. Mathews REQUEST: A Use by Special Review Permit for one single family dwelling unit per lot other than those permitted under Section S1.L.1 of the wuZO LEGAL DESCRIPTION: W1, Section 14, T1N, R66W of the 6th P.M. . Weld County LOCATION: Approximately 2.25 miles southeast of Fort Lupton on Weld County Road 8 THE DEPARTMENT OF PLANNING SERVICE'S STAFF RECOMMENDS THAT THIS REQUEST BE DENIED FOR THE FOLLOWING REASONS: 1. The applicant has not demonstrated that the proposal is in compliance with the Weld County Comprehensive Plan as required in Section 24. 3.1.1 of the Weld County Zoning Ordinance. The applicant proposes to divide a two-hundred-eighty (280) acre parcel of dryland in the "A" (Agricultural) Zone District into seven (7) large parcels ranging from thirty-five (35) to forty (40) acres, each being eligible for a single family dwelling. The following Comprehensive Plan Policies, listed on page 61 and 62 of the Comprehensive Plan, apply to this type of large lot residential development: 1. "New residential developments which are not closely connected to and served by municipal utilities and services shall be discouraged." The proposed development conflicts with this Comprehensive Plan Policy Statement because it is not within a municipality growth plan for residential development. The Future Land Use Plan for Fort Lupton indicates this area is reserved for agricultural purposes. In a hearing on April 14, 1983, the Fort Lupton Planning Commission recommended that the proposal be returned to the Depart- ment of Planning Services without a recommendation because the subject site is outside any conceivable residential growth area. 2. "Proposals for new residential developments adjoining existing municipalities shall be encouraged so long as they conform to the desires of the towns as expressed in their comprehensive plans." The Fort Lupton Planning Commission did not indicate that this proposal conformed with their Comprehensive Plan. 3. "Existing municipalities are the best and most efficient sources of public goods and services which are necessary to serve new residential developments. These municipalities will be encouraged to improve their ability to serve new developments and will be looked to for service of all new developments within their corporate areas, in annexable areas immediately adjacent to the town and even those areas not immediately available for annexation, but within a reasonable service distance from the municipality." The town of Fort Lupton does have several vacant tracts of land identified for low density residential use in their General Plan. 2. The applicant has not demonstrated that the proposal is consistent with the intent of the "A" (Agricultural) Zone District as required in Section 24.3.1.2 of the Weld County Zoning Ordinance; specifically the minimum lot size requirement for dryland, which is one-hundred- sixty (160) acres. On page one (1) of the submitted application materials, the applicant indicates a desire to associate livestock breeding as a use on the proposed lots. USR-550:83:13 Roy C. Mathews A Use by Special Review Permit for one single family dwelling unit per lot other than those permitted under Section 31.2.1 of the Weld County Zoning Ordinance. Wz, Section 14, T1N, R66W of the 6th P.M. , Weld County, Colorado Approximately 2.25 miles southeast of Fort Lupton on Weld County Road 8 April 20, 1983 Page 2 In the past, parcels of ground less than the minimum lot size in the "A" (Agricultural) Zone District have been created for intensive farm operations with the Use by Special Review procedure. In addition, a residence could be justified to oversee the intensive farm operation. However, there are no assurances that the land would be used for intensive farm operation purposes. The proper way to use the Use by Special Review procedure to create additional dwelling lots on less than the minimum lot size is in conjunction with an intensive farm operation proposal. 3. The applicant has not demonstrated that the proposal is consistent with the future development of the surrounding area as projected by the Comprehensive Plan or Master Plans of affected municipalities as required in Section 24.3.1.4 of the Weld County Zoning Ordinance. The future plans that have been adopted by the County and the city of Fort Lupton for this subject site and surrounding area are agricultural. The following is a policy statement regarding uses in areas intented to remain agricultural in nature. Page 44 "In order to minimimize conflicting land uses anc minimize the cost of new facilities and services to the taxpayer, industrial, commercial, business and residential development will be encouraged to locate adjacent to the existing twenty-seven (27) incorporated towns and in accordance with the comprehensive plans and stated wishes of each community." The applicant is proposing the creation of seven (7) lots and residences approximately thirty-five (35) to forty (40) acres each. Since dryland farming parcels of this size cannot provide a livable wage, there will be additional pressure in the future to further subdivide parcels of ground if this request is approved. RA:rg FIELD CHECK FILING NUMBER: USR-550:83:13 DATE OF INSPECTION: April 13, 1983 _ NAME: William Ray Adams, Sr. REQUEST: Create seven (7) houses and seven (7) lots on 280 acres LEGAL DESCRIPTION: W'4. Section 14. T1N. R66W of the 6th P.M. LAND USE: N Agricultural production (pasture) E Agricultural production (pasture S Pasture and large lot residential (Country Estates) W Agricultural production ZONING: N Agricultural LOCATION: Approximately 2.25 miles southeast E Agricultural of Fort Lupton on Weld County Road 8 S Agricultural W Agricultural COMMENTS: Access to the site is from Weld County Road 8 and Weld County Road 10, both gravel roads. There are no improvements on the subject site. The terrain consists of rolling hills. The subject site appears to be used for pasture. BY: a od Allison, Current Planner II RA:rg CASE SUMMARY SHEET Case Number: USR-550:83:13 Size of Parcel: 280 acres, more or less Request : A Use by Special Review Permit for one (1) single family dwelling unit per lot other than those permitted under Section 31.2.1 of the Weld County Zoning Ordinance. Staff Member to Contact: Rod Allison Possible Issues Summarized from Application Materials: It is the Planning staff's opinion that the applicant is attempting to use the Use by Special Review procedure to create a large lot residential subdivision. It is appropriate to use the use by special review procedure to create a residence on a lot smaller than the Agricultural District minimum lot size when there is an intensive farm operation (dairy, feedlot, etc.) on the smaller lot. The intent would be a residence is needed to oversee the intensive farm operation. The applicant is proposing to develop seven (7) homes on 280 acres of dry land. Each home would have 35 to 40 acres of dry land for farming. The Planning staff has not received information about any proposed intensive farm operations. Since 35 to 40 acres of dry land farming cannot provide a livable wage, it is the staff's opinion that there could be additional pressure to further subdivide this proposal for residential tracts in the future. This location is not within any town growth plan for large lot residential development. For these reasons, it is the opinion of the Department of Planning Services staff that the applicant, by using the Use by Special Review application, is attempting to evade the requirements and statement of purposes (Section 1-3) of the Weld County Subdivision Regulations. The applicant should proceed with a Change of Zone from "A" (Agricultural) to "R-1" (Residential) for this kind of proposal. • ▪ S• " ' 'I• •- . _ _:Ounor- --- ) I ) 5/.• I _• ` bI rN. " '/ --- et j•� a n'•a la . •!: r.•••L• a a I • : • • 7�1 �— r 1.• • • I �, • � li 11 M Y ', I 'N 1> 1• ' -I �INIMr Air)N I\ 1 •• 'I0 I Iii I n ' � �` a(.... . I I ' n u J �( _ •I • zx tl^ n • V _ v I n a n a..0.. z. w m v �� (n e• • N� \•Q 2 li PO.•ILI E\ I II r \� I • s_: L _\ 1.1n • is eIlii r• --_•_ - ,- ), I II - - as w L 2$- _ _ _ ' _ • z• i \» •; w • •• L.w a \ •- • a • • )a w • fir~ \L.� \�� ' • ___ nn ▪ <•.. Lp i Y • O.I • I f i . .. " I le r � � :.. �• rya. . e `el , � ' I 1• • i �•s i • I �. I .16„la ' • ! i / I . i r .._� aufin a u • i .. 1- - ---�. 0 I z) z • ` • �zo ' a e a u � I e n �\ o• l -- \1\l RANCH( a ' ••A • [ �a AAIST0 iiE ` e \l e • F(a L.' •• • • 1 v. ▪ ' zr z• ' a .'. . :f1)•• • �'1,, • L g .. •� L a •a •�L°' •• • —z•\°" xr �� I )a ' --•-- - a1 fie" .. . • • • na'o• p I •l3 .l ••)•�\[I :1#,' �_�I ,p1 1 mirror • • f j a 76 i,t 7 R1 ' 'a a'- . ' 4 \ 111•W •, , ).``I H F.e • L ,_ • )) QC's / )a _ I )�I•! / a :1 r..crr. L▪'• '" ;[•y Qat LU TGN ,• I _. _ .. ' •• • • • • al_ / �1 C. Di cv.• r „ • • pr •� _�'••• t• • •• u V� ' 9 NY • i r �• •r ror lr• • r \ f 1°70? •Y°B I • • 0' �� d n •. 004.: a • f Cdr: ) 1 .. • :0;H h1.17:14:, / 2 •° ('] :e )) . . 1 zo F 0 a Gan 1 Woi iF •1 � 9 O • V I •� ''•.�-. 1 -�/ - tann • re Q H .L •• ° Y1 ' .�.i - - - - ? ti rrs� al lILT \ a• • k. •• > • it �`/' •�Ia•'ruff: I UNE• LA: "' "Y ` 67 W _ I / ' . • \ 1 R.66W. I 1 '\,, l t. ;C./ R.65W. 1: . :/; °,t,' C O U NT Y ‘',11 l u rovas'• ,o • .•1? 21 23 25 27 29 31 33 35 37 39 41 43 45 47 49 • S.r s t :tfa k.rS .'wx -e, rsw•tW Y m3z la1Mt �9 dA � �ts: :-:,,P,-YY-�"` yM� 9 s '. '> %?�i' ry t ` k,- fi y` 1 -''‘ *a 4 !Y -€ $ t�� 4^ '{� air *-- 2.,,,..5n�iY,,;'' ",S., 1 g y`^y�'»y � -40itty sa4 '"' ,"•. M e. �s x M G i•.Y'q .v «.. -:Y,Yi+fi "e ' a 'y .3s '2E1M �. ', ..* "" An '$ ,4 t.�, ' rr i e.,,....;;;,,, +",,% l} yr c m ,, -i' R, - 1y, s ,i 's '''' 't • „; Rb 1p 'iterttnie.9' '. � . '�M aYESy IY •i 4,tk `"�'+ - •.. y.., � •,yam k' rr -'�t *" '; 4' V,*�"' Y4: yam r • " ., rs $ ≥< �."' .,>s _ kx',([t �� r.ys, 'e." . " �� , `a,� "�� - .;:.:'&..7F“.7 � qt. t s 't- :tfcA. .: m " �-its, y s 1 4Lh VS Y3 4 '4Y}.\ :.,'.'4,-.S.et MS T £ W„ i }.ice µ % }��yy. N v _4° • t'G ei vs t i .* r*c j;tt= t $ e k'`...4 ,R , °Sl vs, 1�- o ,i+rt 4 Y 1uvS`z'nMt.^.' Lx:i .:.'a4Ye% „ �' �3 y fr et tr .+5 is :r _ rw,� tic; ..=.ft_5 1�... ht 4 * 1 .-fit 11 'P t" Y y 4 XI' ;. �rry 1. �y ..,,. .. x ; " k.sak•-7s"•: „s O.`'i ...444444"�Y Tic‘ P ,� kF s•l;K } �y Y \ it _! ,< � :::�� -fix 24±:" t gg 1 t"--°"t it 7 I 4I 4._ Y r $3(7 Ys � - — t +'u''`'rn "- � 'i'., ,t,v �� t r o !n : t"- 7-y. X6 •'.c..,_'", ti, _.-..r;••'---- t'.,�` ,.' �e�rr . r: 1 );x xo..''ca4'4K3C. . •,i• _a': �, ''Iw`'-1 t i eSIXI NA t 1 r 4 �'V c_ ..a, ie. Fri i '' r -4.. 4 G �.._' -1 • � __ _ APPLICATION USE BY SPECIAL REVIEW Department of Planning Services, 915 Tenth Street, Greeley, Colorado Phone - 356-4000 - Ext. 400 Case Number Date Received .3 •'- 'Y:? - Application Checked by 1217 - -" -- Application Fee 155_,...,n Receipt Number IF- 72. 3 Recording Fee Receipt Number TO BE COMPLETED BY APPLICANT: (please print or type, except for necessary signature) I (we) , the undersigned, hereby request hearings before the Weld County Planning Commission and the Weld County Board of County Commissioners concerning the pro- posed Special Review Permit of the following described unincorporated area of Weld County Colorado: AL D CESC —,, ofRIPTION OF SPECIAL REVIEW PERMIT AREA:West .,i l , Section 14, T " LEGAL DESCRIPTION of contiguous property owned upon which Special Review Permit is proposed: West half of, Section 14, T 1 N, R 66 W Property Address (if available) N/A PRESENT ZONE Agraculturel OVERLAY ZONES N/A TOTAL ACREAGE 280 PROPOSED LAND USE Rural Residential, EXISTING LAND USE Agraculturel, (I SURFACE FEE (PROPERTY OWNERS) OF AREA PROPOSED FOR REZONING: Name: Mr. Roy C. Mathews Address: 96 Lookout Mountain Road, City Golden, zip 80401 Home Telephone # 526 — 1460 Business Telephone # 526 - 1460 Name: N/A Address: N/A City N/A ZiP N/A Home Telephone # N/A Business Telephone # N/A Name N/A Address: N/A City N/A Zip N/A Home Telephone # N/A Business Telephone # N/A APPLICANT OR AUTHORIZED AGENT (if different than above) : Name: Mr. William Ray Adams Sr. Address: 1500 W. 92 nd. Ave # 219 City Thornton, Zip 80229 Home Telephone # 428 — 1689 Business Telephone # 428 — 1689 Owner(s) and/or lessees of mineral rights on or under the subject properties of record in the Weld County Assessor's Office: Name: Mr. Roy C. Mathews Address: 96 Lookout Mountain Road, City Golden, Zip 80401 Name: N/A Address: N/A City N/A zip N/A Name: N/A Address: N/A City N/A Zip N/A __ I hereby .depose.and. state_under-_the-Denaiit?es of nerjurvthat all statements, __ proposals and/or plans submitted with or contained within this application are true and correct to the best of my knowledge. COUNTY OF WELD STATE OF COLORADO ) �2≥ §c,y /c j Signature: Owner o? Authorized Agent Subscribed and sworn to before me this y day of vv,,..„0„ SEAL �k\O. �ea NO ARY PUBLIC\ My commission expires My Commission expires Feb. 13, i*� Janr'ary, 28, 193 _ '.'eld County Commissioners 915 Tenth fltreet Greeley, Colorado C_)(-(t1 The blest One Half of: 'section 14, Township 1 , North, Range 66, Nest, veld County, Colorado. " ;TATT1'2 NT u Dear Commissioners: Comprehensive Plan: • 1)' " In order to promote the agricultural economy and to enhance and maintain tLe quality of life And inviromment in Weld County, Developments that utilize non — productive rural land, and water surplusses will be encouraged, particularly where irrigated farm land can be preserved as agricultural greenbelts, and open space ." Answer: 1 ) In Proposing use of the described land, Vie hope to he able to, (1 ) Raise Livestock of various species so as to improve the breeding, and help in their growth. In order to do this properly, it is necessary to be available at all times. This Proposal would improve upon the Land, for it would become much more productive then it id at the present time, or then it has been in the past years, as it has only been utilized as a pasture area during the winter mounths of the year, as well as some people trying to use it for, (1 ) A motorcycle race course, (2) Skidoo raceing, and (3) Persons wish have NO bussines . with guns, useing Livestock as their Targets. This is very destructive of the Property, and the Livestock, and can be greatly reduced by the addition of the seven homes, and residents of the One Half of the above mentioned Section of held County, Colorado, for there would be much less chance of persons trying to KILL Livestock, and tear up what vegitation there is. . Comprehensive r-lan: 2) " Flood 'Mains end other unsafe or unsuitable areas for building • shall he kept open and free to accommodate the acts of nature. " Answer: 2) The area of Land under Proposal. is NOT that of a Flood Plain area, or is there anvieograph]cal _ault Areas. ( 1 ) A ( Con' t. ) Comprehensive Alan: C 3) " To prevent Urban - Arts cultural land use conflicts that would hamper, or restrict a: ric.rlture. " Answer: 3) ':+e feel. ths ± ,i Proposal, ( If Anerovud ) would HOT in any way, (1 ) infliet, (d) !Le strict, or V ) T'amoer existing agri- cultural urr, nst would aid to the agriculture in the area. Comprehensive 11- 7.) To encoer3 ,;He orderly rosrt.h and a re sonabl.e transition from urban to rural land uses. " Answer: 7,) As there will 1.v!T he more then One residence located on each of the seven parcels Proposed, 1, eated within the Half section without a zoning change, as for a zoning change would restrict the amount or Livestock per parcel, he also do NUT have any future intentions o' _over > razeing any Livestock, hut we do NuT uecessar( ly need tt,. City type of present restrictions either. Comprehensive Plan: n 5) " To maintain economy in governmental expenditures. Answer: 5) This Proposed, ( If considered for approval ) should NOT in ( an-; way add to the planned, or existing governmental expenditures. Comprehensive Plan: 6) " To insure that new development pays it' s own share of public construction, and service costs. " Answer: 6) Public construction, and service costs, Will NOT be an added expense; as there are already existing public services serveing the surrounding residences. This added proposal ( If approved ) will NOT be of a hardship, or burden to the existing public services already available. ( please see attached letters in support of this statement. ) Comprehensive Plan: 7) " To prevent rural areas from becomming the dumping grounds for Land uses that are NOT wanted elsewhere. " Answer: 7) As we agree that the dumping area is unsightly, and untidy or " An Eye Sore " .•u matter what type of dumping it might • be. Although rai.seing Livestock is most def£inately Not wanted in the areas of the illy, or Town:;, It is in the country, ( This is a Land use that is NOT considered dumping. ) Comprehensive Plan: t) To preserve the high production of prime lands of agricultural ( uses. Answer: S) The Land located within this One Half of Section under Proposal is at this time of Low Productivity for agricultural use. / (2)X ( Con' t. ) If the 1-ronoral le approved for. improvement and future development, Then the nrrieulturai vnl.ne will be upgraded. Comprehensive rder: 9) " To promote 1e 1M 5e of local e ricuitcral service and sarsliey beeritrssend indusi.rv. " An ewer: ?) rromotinn will i m • ceomld i _heel by the rei si ng of 1 ivr;storic, ?rid the ferdin7 a d crn of, Thror •h the purchase , of feed, medical ssp1Ie.r, and ecuiptment t, pe of purchases, The up-cren will be real zed by t e losal husri_necses, and farmers well as the ranchers in the community. Comprehensive Ilan: 10) 1—e, " Any use of prime irrigated farm lend for use other then agricultural will be criticnly reviewed. " Answer: 19) 1—a, The Pronoserl land is NOT that of prime irrigated farm land, he also do LOT Propose a change of zoning, But • as well as having homes we also with to have the land to utilize f:a,' a'ricul tural purposes. Comprehensive Flan: 19) 1—b, " The expansion of Agri—bussiness and Industry will be, encourared. n Answer: 19) 1_h, Although the expansion of Agri—busniness and Industry will be utilized to some degree the Proposed parcels will NOT be Totaly bussiness motivated. Comprehensive Plan: 1c) 1—c, " Inirrstria7., Busniness, Commercial, and Residential development will be encouraged to locate near existing towns. Development of these non—agricultural intrests in the rural areas will require Planned Unit Development supported by economic and invironmental impact statements. " Answer: • 1fl) 1—c, This Proposal is to locate near the town of Fort Lunton. Comprehensive Plan: 1n) 1—d, " Transfer of water from Agricultural, to other uses, will only be encouraged when the water is surplus to' Ariri.cultnral needs in the local areas. " Answer: 1g) 1—d, The water will. be used for Domestic use, and the upkeep of some vrnious types of Livestock. As to surplus or surfiriL we ! sr, ( Please refer to the enclosed water report preparers. by; dater .tesources Consultants Inc. ) ( 3 ) X ( Can' t. ) C-,mnrehensive Plan 10) 1-e, " Orly- these developments that do LOT contribute to it or surface pollution will he encouraged. " water, , r Answer: 10) 1-n, . -,o,n, l bsisv put. the Guard of Ilannln* Commissioners, ill NOT hr a contributor to hater ; n)lnt.inn, GP G ;ri'ace ioll!ition, Although at times ii will noraihley add minimal .air pollution to an extent Dine to t e personal ups. of Automobiles, and some smell_ Hem eflui_ptmr.t,l., Comprehensive Ilan: 19) 1-r, " ilura] development of non-productive lands, and wsltsr odll be encouraged, particularly where productive, irrigated farm land can be preserved as Agricultural Greenbelts, and Open Space. " Answer: 10) 1-f, 'no Proposed land area is of low productivity, and is non-irrigated, also it is ONLY partialy productive during certien limes of the year, at an extreamly low productive rate. Comprehensive Plan: 10) 1-7, " Construction in flood plains, seep areas, geological fault areas, and other danger, or undesirable building areas will he discouraged. " Answer: 10) 1-g, The Proposed areas where any construction will take place is NOT in a flood plain area, or a seep area. As to conformation of this pease refer to the existing water report, Also there are NO geological. fault areas to the Proposed development sites, For more information on this matter please refer to the attached 40 page soil. repo.'t and summery. There are NO other Danger areas, Other then the, " Acts of God ", ie; Tornatoes, or Electrical Storms, with are Weather related. Comprehensive Plan: 11) 2—a, " New developments NOT served by existing municipal utilities will be discouraged. " An swer: 11) 2—a, The rroposed parcels of land DO have existing Access to Electrical lower through " The Public Service Co. of Colorado ", or " Union R. E. A. Inc. of Brighton, Uich are already either located on, or near the Proposed Section of land. Water will be supplied through the use of Individual Wells to be drilled on the Individual ( Proposed parcels. Sewage Disposal will be taken care of by the use of Individual Septic Systems to be installed on the irilivia:, l ironored sarce.ls, and for Natural Gas supplies, iropane will be utilized, ( Please see attached letter of support from " Union Rural Electric Association, Inc. " ) 1/ ( 4 ) /t� ( Con' t.• ) `. Comprehensive Ilan: • 11) 2_b, " Erw residential developments adjoining existing municipalities r.no.oura :d in a.ccor:3cncc with the local comprehensive .1 " Annwsr:11) 2—b,, The On.,,;—.•;;: iinive of k c:rt• Lupt n at this time is in . t...e process c)+ being reviser's and is unavailable at t his time, but shell be comp7.i t., u.i' h at future dates if' f bis froi'onal ii;s c xesptod for this 1ievission of the West one hair r: ;�ecti.on i.1, To'..i n,hip .� , Borth, Itan,r,e (A, West, 'Weld Coutkt7,-, Co i or.:,de. c ( 5 ) c . ( Can' t. ) ( Com rehen ,ive Lien: •p 1) 2—c, ° i . a. municipalities will be encouraged to expand i their r r• I f sr t i l l i nr. to nerve new residential developments. 1 ) i ,. „Ye �.vi.� �i :-.i.t, near the e-a t �:T —c, ,ri , t. t i,�,.n I e subdivisions i n s � ;..,�n, ale 3 r existing n onn; 1 . 'i re should Lr. rrobleMS with the local mlnielpelitlie to have to expand ., this time, or in the dint.ent ftt.rre to rontin>.e to nerve the iroponed nren. Comprehensive 'Ilan: p 12) " in uli lend use decisions, The '-iroad itffect of transfer 3—a, of water usage wich may result from the proposals at • hand shall be taken in to ar,count.. Answer: 12) 3—a, The weeny usage for the Proposal wich is before you at this time, fill be from Individual. 'Jells for Domestic ices and the r; .ising of some various types of Livestock, Rabbits aid huts. ie; Horses, Rabbits, Chickens, Dogs, And Farm type of towel . flomerahensive flan: 12) ?_h, " An adeenw. be water supply shall be a primary prerequsite for any new land developments. Answer: 12) 3—b, For, Information of the adequatecy of the water supply for the Parcels up for consideration at this time, ( Please refer to the prepared water report before you. Comprehensive Plan: 12.) 3—c, " Strong communication lines between the county and various agencies wich control the water supply shall he developed and maintained. " Answer: 12) 3—°' There should he NU problems in this aera die to we!'_s that will he drilled on the individual sites wich will NOT be used other then for domestic purposes, and that will be of adequate supplies as per the water report prepared by , ',dater Resources Consultents. ( Please refer to the attached water report. ) l ( 6 ) Al ( Con' t. ) CComprehensive Flan: 12) l-d' " The rablic roa.i.s of providing Domestic and Industrial,.iehnr •s.' rI minimized. " hnswer: 12) 3—d, The pehThc srtsof water inder Propose] will he minimizea in an fur ri7. l*are is ":U 6117 water available to ter Section ender consideration, And water usage, will be from Indi"iHin' -lolls drilled and maintained on the indivirltri7 Pert+1s, ( If approved for development. ) Comprehensive Ilan: 13) /-s , " Accens to future mineral resource development shall he conniulered in all land .Ines. " Answer: 13) 4—a, As, to the amount of mineral resources that are NOT al reer'.v 1br.in ' extracted, ( 'rah :.e1.ls ) , Please refer to the „ t- Investigation " attached, �lerort of a Leo cchni.cal Investiq , Soil tent,ard Attaberg Summery, and Report on the Proposed land area for Improvement, and Development. Comprehensive Plan: 13) L—b, " Lends shall NOT be mined unless a rehaoilitation plan is approved by The Board of County Commissioners. Answer: 13) 4—b, The land under this present Proposal is NOT being planned for minnimg purposes as the Parties that plan to use these Parcels will NOT have the rights to minerals nor hold any of the above rights. Comprehensive Plan: 13) 4-2—a, " Flood Plains and other unsuitable areas for building shall be kept Open and Free to accomodate the acts of Nature. " Answer: 13) 4-2—a, The present Porposal before you for the division of land is NOT located within any of the following e (1) Flood Plains, (2) Unsafe areas, or (3) arastable areas, with would cause them to be Unsafe for Building or Constriction. • Comprehensive Plan: Body of 13) 4-2—h, " Anv land use that will. pollute any streams, tr gr, Subsurface Aquifer, Aquifer Recharge, The. Air or the surrounding surface will require the development of a propper Treatment Facility or Invironmental Protection opperation before said land use can b : allowed. " Answer: 13) 4-2—h, The „r the land under Proposal at this time, or in ( 7 ) A' ( .;o;i.' t. ) tim future, :sill HOT pollute any streams, or Bodies of water, Ar there are IUiU located on, or within at least Onr: I'=31'r idle of the i roposed land use areas. (1uhrurr: r^. Alui fern, or t►nui fern for reeharg,:: will po.ilut.c. ' aithr , :,c£„z.lr; The Wells will be rn;'ci-tr.•,,tod in rtrcordench with all Ferlral, )or?E 1 'nwr 'r.7v' rnin” t.I',c'. .installation of said * A.11s, also Iii iivi.clual. site we I is will be installed and drilled by recognized exports. ::arface areas shall 1:ept in R. n'•tat., i n I Urrlpr]r. manor also due to 3o 1nt7 O•r:Ii nanern nn by law, ':o any pollution will. NOT be. allowed. Furthermore the i it will Ul'r1Y be polluted to a m i.nimn] extent by the added Automobiles, And some small] farm ecluiptmr.nt. Comprehunsive 13) rroI.n.^,el) cranryen in land use will be supported by an lnvi.ronmental lm})z ct ':tato:cent prepared by reconi zed experts. " Answer: swer: 13) 4,-2—c, There will he NO changes in land use that are not already belting utilized wiLhin n the surrounding Sections of land, at this time or in the future, because this proposal is for Rural Residentual & agricultural use. t . • ( 8 ) ( ( Con' t. ) Comprehensive i]an: 1/,) 5—a, " Maintain the flood plains of Rivers, Creeks, And Gulches i.n an U: an ;,tale tirouTh i.Ce adul,tion of flood plains, An'i .Za.`lmren Conservation i,onnin5,. " Answer. 1/) 5—a, r err Will_. . Le i,U problems with any .fivers, Creeks, or Gulches Oaensan; The existing land area has t01,111 ii of the aiu,vr. ,or.ntid on, or through it, As well as the lard ,•r -• v1'i in a Slone ,lain. Comprehensive Alan: 14) 5—b, " limiest other lands defined a:: .suitable open space areas. " Answer: 1/,) `>—h, :sr ironosed land is NOT an Open .Space Area for Recreational purposes, Only for Residental, And Arrricultural use. Comprehensive Pan: 14) 5—n, " 11eintain the Integrity, And Soundness of existing Communities by encouraging permanent Open Space, " Greenbelts ", around each Town. " Answer: (I 14) 5-c, The Proposed land area is NUT an area wich cuold be classified as " Greenbelt " area. due to being NON- • Irrigated either by Natural, or Artifcial Irrigating Systems. Comprehensive flan: 15) 6—a, " The thoroughfare system shall be developed on a regional. - scale. " Answer: 15) 6—a, The Proposed land use area has existing Roads that connect to Hiways, ( See Blue Prints ) , The existing Roads are as follows; Weld County Road No. 8 located across the South End of Section 14, Also Weld County Road Co. 10 connecting to the Northwest corner of Section 14, extending West to Hiway 85, There is a Private Roadway extending from the Northwest corner of Section 14, Eastward along the extream North end of the Vest One Half of Section 14, Belonging to and maintained by The Panhandle Eastern Pipeline Company, But by e cement Only, ( Please see attached Right—of— Way letter. ) Comprehensive Plan: • 15) 6—b, Thoroughfare facilities shall be developed as a unified, Intergraded system, wich includes controled-access routes, Arterial and collector street*, And in the Cities, And where warrented, Terminal Facilities, And : .11,1 i n Transportation moutes. " Answer: 1.`.) (-b, The Proposed land has existing roads for access to and l9 ) K • ( Con' t. ) from all vropos:ed parcels, l elease s,pe r. xplanation in pnraraph 15) (.-a, " itnswer ", Also please refer to, :.Zi7}-.t,-of fr .L.c.t.nr ). Comprehensive Flan: 15) `-0, If rnei ijties ,:,hall be oti3 i z'd t,rr It p , ,vj. ;t.h .•KLr nt no-,•v'+te. 1$ hn :rer: 1`i) (-,—A, '!',e ! rnr.- --ed nrn ofl l inrl urn ss� n' l•1 lurve Ii(: difricnitin;r ,ith . 1:i use of exi .:t:.in7 ron':^, And hiwnyss. 'there should bs .(J volume of t. n1'ii.r impact on those axi stin;- roadr., bw1 ii.u.,ys due to this; eropo-al. Comprehensive Ilan: 15) h—d, " i:rw and i lmrnvel fr+oil i ties shall be provided in Trr.vf:l Corridors >•►ii 'rF major service defficiencier exist, or in corridors ',rich wil 1 become cri ticaly overloaded by 1990. „ Answer: 1' ) (_d, The i'ropns ed land uses s;hos:1 cl add difficulties in this Rraa dne to the existing Hurray^, (1) I — 76, and (2). U.r. — 35. Comprehensive elan: ( 14)) 7—e, " Any development that will create an undue burden on existing public facilities and will deminish the capacity level of service shall. be discouraged. " Answer: 16) 7-•a, There will be DO added undue burdens to the existing Public_ Fazilities, or enough Homes or Families to deminish the Capacity Level of Service, But this Proposal shell add to the existing communities -Tax Revenues, and Cash Flow within the Towns Bussinesses. ( Please refer to the attached letters of support from, School district, Union: R.E.A. Inc. , of Brighton, and the supporting Signatures from the surrounding residents. ) • ( 10 ) /~ i • Con't.t•. ) (7 r_omprchensive tlnn: 1A) 7—h, " All new develc+r.ments rhnl.l have comp]rate and adequate Util.itir^ and iublis service and tap fees, And nervier; c. j. and t.nx rr:venu'' vrom ^).l new developments, •,; :+ 1 ',� . :�f•1''i i'1 entl.;� hi 'h to protect the existing i•p.is.. •lrrr r ^r'd nor's LIr !n t'S,r Ili.4 developments. n 1f ) '/—b, «l1 V•`.4?a.t e.:;, Ui1117ic ;;r rviee Tap Fc'.( ' s nre High '.,nour,'3 to hrot•eet u es from ineroasoci by Standards al.refiriy I. h.r the Fub1 ie Utilities Commission, and by the vuiJel ines rot by Union R. F. A. Inc. of Brighton, so as NOT to Increase Costs to the already existing Consun i ergs. I ii ) if Conrt. ) C. Corr .rchcnsive Ilan: 1`.) 7—c, " rraliferst5on of service districts shall be deposed i.41 ]n clnnsoli ',elinn of Oxistin' districts shall be camerae-re r,hen it tenric to i Tarove the efficiency seri -oreaare nr [he enrtrl c''. r nervier-. Districts in the area of this 1ro ,.1 ,. i le;nifit from the ailed families, by their •edried need'; to consume services from these Service ui^tricts. C 4 ( 12 ) • • • ( inn'1 , ) �r� r�reh• n.^.�ve 1✓7 an: ( 1(-) 7—d, " ''F Yi.ona I . t.i nn of service, rind facilities shall be ot'pored it' It t•ri 1 l lead 1..0 growth cri.ch i. I:UT compatible ..; 3 h i '; �� •;,:,�;•t••:-• �:' titc Tow,- ]nvnlvFr1. n J- 1'•) '� 1'I,.•rc ..':ta•�?.�l I.�'i' .r er�ou;.*1� a-ided. Homes or Families to crc•:ete r. •r r,roo;ems to 1.he existir.;r Towns arouri,1 13 i ronoaed i,•cn Var .i wc&Lopraeiit, 'iut the needs of f rw .S•umil i r';; should be an kID to normal Town D .sires. --(A14.2) . • C./ I • l u'AR•= / n • 2 - 2O - .3'3 4 • ( 13 ) • A VX7/r —EFV ESOUITES CONSULTANTS , Nc• 2765 South Colorado Boulevard•Suite 218•Denver,Colorado 80222•(303)757-8513 January 4, 1983 Mr. Roy Mathews 96 Lookout Mountain Road Golden, Colorado 80401 WRC File: 1468/1 Dear Mr. Mathews: In regards to your proposed development of the W1/2 of Section 14, Township 1 North, Range 66 West in Weld County, Colorado, the following is a brief summary of the hydrogeologic environment of the area with some recommendations and suggestions pertaining to the water supply plan for the proposed development. The location of the project and the seven subdivided lots is shown in Figure-1. It is our understanding that the proposed development entails subdividing approximately 280 acres with seven separate lots ranging in size from 35 acres to ( 42 acres. The proposed water supply plan will be from individual exempt wells supplying water for in-house purposes only. The proposed wastewater treatment is through the use of septic systems. Based on an average occupancy of 3.5 persons per residential unit (per lot), a water supply of 100 gallons per person per day, we estimate the water supply requirements per unit to be 0.382 acre-feet per year (127,750 gallons per year or 0.25 gallons per minute) . The property lies within the partially saturated outcrop area of the Arapahoe aquifer and is covered with a 2-feet to 15-feet layer of eolium (wind blown sand, • silt, and clay). There are no prominent alluvial systems (river or stream gravels) from which to obtain water. The Arapahoe aquifer can maintain yields of greater than 100 gallons per minute (gpm) within the Denver Basin proper, but because this area is near the aquifer outcrop (3 miles to 4 miles), a more reasonable estimate is 10 gpm to 30 gpm. For your purposes, a well which maintains a sustained yield of 2 gpm to 5 gpm is sufficient if the proper storage facilities are incorporated. Wells drilled to depths ranging from 250-feet to 400-feet should produce enough water to meet the proposed water requirements. If the drilling is done with air and water rather than mud, the depth to the first water encountered should be noted along with the yield, and if possible, the static water level. If the yield appears to be sufficient, continue drilling another 100-feet (for purposes of well-bore storage) and again test for yield. If the yield is not sufficient, �- continue drilling to 400-feet and test the well every 100-feet. MR. ROY MATHEWS January 4, 1983 - 1468/1 Page Two The quality of water in this area are extremely variable and dependent on local environments, but due to the nearness to the aquifer outcrop, we suspect dissolved-solids concentrations which may be high in sulfate, sodium, and iron. We recommend, at such time when the wells are drilled, water samples be tested to insure the suitability of the water for domestic purposes. In conclusion, we believe that adequate water supply, provided from individual wells drilled on each site, can be maintained to meet the in-house water requirements for the proposed development. Prior to commencing any drilling, well permits must be secured from the Colorado Division of Water Resources (State Engineer's Office) . All applicable requirements of the Colorado Division of Water Resources must be complied with prior to putting the water to the proposed uses. If you have any questions related to the contents of this letter report, please call. Ver truly yours, • WAT R RESOURCES C NSULTA T , IN . oti:i+mr, C `: 0y. Q. fi rt GIST C. s L T. F. files 1 Senior drogeologist ho LI✓ i JAL .0 I. :,,�'• C ' ,;.` A. S. Andrews, P.E. President Attachment: Figure-1 cc: \Mr__William Adams TFG/ASA/crk —/ a' R. 88 W.' ;v ;,�� C Q intlmil nI - U p ' 069 6 O • 11 1 ��y �\? 5,50 • ///`ill/ Vii' C2QI Oo 1 1741 ° s 63Q C:9 O I N. M P-\�� ith ounll ° Cil a\\_ / PROJECT AREA H 1 14 O & S �° Z ) . ,, Is il s° o 7- il ( ,to \ o \)\ c°—' ‘”-z) z\ _ _ __ -_Li.,,: _ ___ \ ,N © 50:5 © ____ ___ _ t \� __ _____ 5 , ./( ( w r = z 1 &,,, l \\\\\\JJJ 1 s 5070 �/ m G,` O 0 0 0 1 ] °5]x �s Ja 23 23 -s°]° © 2 0� h �\ D 2i b )) .I ( , ,,,, .: ,_ 'Km) to x „.0 stso G r—r, 1:, a '\ \---- _5C; C7 0 \i)le)r -- 1% r__ _-•/ c .'%-m-K7 it ki\611\ H\ ) 5 O ,,,:( c c . _ , LEGEND Q LOT DESIGNATION GROUND WATER SUPPLY PLAN ( PROPERTY BOUNDARY LOCATION MAP SCALE: 1"= 2000' WATER RESOURCES CONSULTANTS, INC. JANUARY, 1983 x.. �I�/ ;L ` 7 51 UNION RURAL ELECTRIC ASSOCIATION, INC. P.O. Box 359 (303) 659-0551 o rh Brighton, Colorado 80601 ENTERPRISE 222 January 21 , 1983 Mr. William Adams 1500 W. 92nd Ave. Space 219 Thornton, Co 80229 Dear Mr. Adams: Union Rural Electric Association, Inc. has the right and ability to provide the electrical facilities to Section 14, Township I North, Range 66 W, of the 6th P.M. Union Rural Electric Association, Inc. has no objection t ' to your subdividing the West one half of said section and will provide the electrical facilities to each of the lots in accordance with our Line extension policies and Rules and Regulations on file with the Public Utilities Commission, State of Colorado. If I can be of any assistance in this matter please feel free to contact me. Sincerely, UNION RURAL ELECTRIC ASSOCIATION, INC. Dorthy Rugg es Contract Administrator "A Consumer - Owned Utility Serving Five Front Range Counties" Janruary, 28, 1983 To; Mr. William Ray Adams Sr. 1500 West 92 nd. Ave, Space # 219 Thornton, Colorado 80229 From; Mr. /rCFf6p/C ccy,14N iz'ocot, tZ at�.O775c'Y &',41€'ooL. /?c+, ec4 ffc,OSo ld OLca. .koCo /,2 Subject; Section 14, Township 1 , North, Range 66, West, Weld County, Colorado. Dear Mr. Adams: In regards to a response to your request of a supporting letter from the school district serving the above mentioned section of property, We offer no objections to your future proposal in this matter, and feel that there will be no added hardships or costs to the district, in handling your needs by the providing of school services available to you in the future, or to aid in the needs of your proposal to Weld County. We will be looking forward to serving you and the new comers to the area, and the school district in the future. If I can be of any help in this matter please feel free to contact me in the future. Sin��cerely,, Mr. Supervisor / PANHANDLE EASTERN PIPE LINE COMPANY P. 0. BOX 127 BRIGHTON, COLORADO 80601 7 September 27, 1982 Weld County Commissioners 915 Tenth Street Greeley, CO 80631 Dear Commissioners: Mr. Bill Adams, who is representing Mr. Roy Matthews in the development of the West Half of Section 14, Township 1 North, Range 66 West, Weld County, Colorado, has requested that I respond to you in regard to a roadway on this property that was built by Panhandle Eastern. As you are aware, Panhandle Eastern owns and operated a coin- ( ) pressor station, known as Dougan Station, and the access to this station is the above referenced roadway, which runs in an East-West direction along the extreme North edge of Section 14. Our interest in this roadway is by easement only. We offer no - - objections to the use of this roadway by potential landowners, or their authorized agents, of this development site. Sincerely, PANHANDLE EASTERN PIPE LINE COMPANY Robert J. Clair Right-of-Way Supervisor RJC/ms J October 17, 1982 Weld County Commissioners 915 Tenth Street Greeley, CO. 80631 Dear Commissioners: The following is an accurate list of Names, Addresses, and Signatures of the Residents and Property Owners wit1+t*r a One halt Mile Radious of the West One half of: Section 14: Township 1, North, Range 66, West, Weld County, Colorado. The intent of the above named list is to show the Support of the Residents and Property Owners in the future Development of the above named Aera of the County of Weld, within the State of Colorado, for the purpose of EfopefuLl3r Updateing and the Bettering of the Community. " THANK YOU " Any and all Support and Considerations in this matter from yourself, ( and the Department is Gratefully Appreciated. Sincerely, 7 Vey �/ . William Ray Adams Sr. Authorized Agent WRAs/aa \\_ NA2,7S ( RMIDFITTS AND / OR PROPERTY O( _RS • 'I please print or type _C NAM ADDRESS, TOWN / CITY, SIGNATURE STATE AND ZIP CODE. i I. Mic,, Roy c, MATHEVJS yE Loobecur Mt RP, ,{P C '7/,.�.a1,U-1) • �oz9 ✓✓ /� J _. /�5 . (Cu zAn.�c. 1�1 f n�Qr�.�l/t r� eE,�+' �n The it.Lt .�'f'. �pa�r�n/ %f7 i/��/ iC 3. ,) .-1, ' A/ 0,1 ,, ,t:-J.--.2_, -. ? 57 ' 7 'ii., , r.? . /'� , r l d. , 1 ✓ �� / ) C 4. '1:.--+ti.� c� _-c~A_ ik�L+r,,r1- - ,V o 3 o )1 ?cc C 1k,c c%� c tuf i rI d . -17 .e ^n 11 ( - 7) , -.1- , �• d / £ • �C_ . -Cc-f' 5. ir, Long �:)e e 0970 �� A: .9, �� , -6c4-„,....)4,_ E., 0.p. , c e, Q city_ r',,,.;. ' eo Box in 13pfcHro/J ca, FA O1Yr?rtPL.- r'f?s -"4 : 7 1 9, ' 10, !" It. k-2_?:,....,:- LT- 12, 1 f , 14, 15 1c, i 17. 18. i i , y -- -- 1 20. 21. z, NA}•71_-;S/' ? ID':..:TS ASD / cR no ?Tr r ?S 1 please print or type AAss, ADDRESS, TOWN / CITY, SIGNATURE _ STATE AND ZIT COT. I -I - 2c, !'L1,, �u 2.-1- ))7.3 ON �z /7-c-it. ' • ��.ic_-r 1,�� et..' - J z� /, ? _ .t': :-,� .-t , / �ti�,.�u . (: ' r t �zi/C D - ✓ .ra �l :�- . -)✓-.'✓. .4.1 1..) 7,:;:_z., (:lit. _ )1)-1 a 4-'t 711 C.!! V'• : --`. I" U Z9' / ` l �'lr l ' l f- r ''(� I 30 t «\C c} \L)'f—(\x/ I - 3/. /_ _ y/ r._,....„2_,...._- - 2 75 (C, C?' ','I �;� _ =�i"�� 32' E �.c% f- )-77"./., . 1-�JriJi' i3/I >�li.�- - -,�J�1)/ �1,:/711,CU✓ �i�f'/Jr_i ,_ I2r�.li+t r=--t I::::" 35• 3c 37 I 33, y0 yZ. v-! . H ) y5 `/ MAILING LIST USR 550 Roy C. Mathews Robert A. Elliott 96 Lookout Mountain Road 17186 Weld County Road 8 Golden, CO 80401 Brighton, CO 80601 Larry R. Loehr Suzanne M. Tanguay 15851 Weld County Road 10 2929 Mathews Street Ft. Lupton, CO 80621 Ft. Lupton, CO 80621 Public Service Co. of Colorado Ira P. Daigle 323 Denver Avenue 8810 East 88th Avenue Brighton, CO 80601 Henderson, CO 80640 Raymond L. Wiseman William D. Hunt 1776 South Jackson 16406 Weld County Road 8 #200 Ft. Lupton, CO 80621 Denver, CO 80210 Mildred I. Burr Panhandle Eastern Pipeline Co. 1052 South Newton P.O. Box 1348 Denver, CO 80219 Kansas City, MO 64141 Mary Ann Valenzuela Martin Brothers 2931 Tate Avenue 219 Pacific Avenue Ft. Lupton, CO 80621 Ft. Lupton, CO 80621 Nicols Appelhams Howard E. Binder Jr. 2871 Tate Avenue 15370 Weld County Road 10 Ft. Lupton, CO 80621 Ft. Lupton, CO 80621 Howard Taft Norvelle, Jr. Western Slope Gas Co. 2932 Tate Avenue P.O. Box 840 Ft. Lupton, CO 80621 Denver, CO 80201 William F. and Mary Lou Bunja Orvan J. Bennett 2872 Tate Avenue 15087 Weld County Road 8 Ft. Lupton, CO 80621 Ft. Lupton, CO 80621 A.E. Pilkington 25 Cherry Street Denver, CO 80220 Lenard A. Brandt 17747 Weld County Road 8 Brighton, CO 80601 Harvey T. Stitt P.O. Box 17 Blackhawk, CO 80422 { — t �ti it— x III 1 " _ 4 Pyf a .III LI - i -1 r _ - £ .. 1 _ • / --- - - 7 - - t- _ _ )I • Dui • I�i ,,^) � _- _ _ 2.-.-... yyy t } i ₹ s F 7 , = - FORT LUPTON GFNERAL PLAN FUTURE LAND USE and MAJOR STREET PLAN ••revised June 1973•• C PLANNING AREA MAP I .OOPTEO BY THE FORT L U.TON PLANK NO cONNIs°oN TRUSSRAY or r..o very low density residential 1 public 1°" � I w°N � —1 low density residential park,open space med.-high density residential floodplain II industrial agriculture ADOPTED ST THE FORT LUPTON BOARD Of TRUSTEES THISALOAY OF fu 1p"' on. �:_= expressway minor arterial ' "" u u u major arterial .�_ collector RT � � CLERR I0S:.IIon.I IRIS m.o.n ImnNM.I,p.II Eqm 1155110°.o.ml1nl of He.un° .e.l. Ina - 4 5'^.^I uy.,IR.551.1051 OI n..FUI.I In.H5,.n AF1.I Ia... llnooda. Hello