Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout20060080.tiff BEFORE THE WELD COUNTY, COLORADO, PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION OF RECOMMENDATION TO THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS Moved by Doug Ochsner,that the following resolution be introduced for approval by the Weld County Planning Commission. Be it resolved by the Weld County Planning Commission that the application for: CASE NUMBER: USR-1495 APPLICANT: Marcelle Guedner do Jess Aragon PLANNER: Michelle Martin LEGAL DESCRIPTION: Pt NE4 Section 8, T5N, R67W of the 6th P.M., Weld County, Colorado. REQUEST: A Site Specific Development Plan and Special Review Permit for a business permitted as a use by right or accessory use in the Commercial Zone District (Landscape Materials Yard) in the A(Agricultural)Zone District LOCATION: 753 feet west of CR 17 and Y:mile north of State Hwy 34. be recommended favorably to the Board of County Commissioners for the following reasons: 1. The submitted materials are in compliance with the application requirements of Section 23-2-260 of the Weld County Code. 2. It is the opinion of the Planning Commission that the applicant has shown compliance with Section 23-2-220 of the Weld County Code as follows: A. Section 23-2-220.A.1 -- The proposed use is consistent with Chapter 22 and any other applicable code provisions or ordinance in effect. Section 22-2-60 (A.Goal 4) states, "Conversion of agricultural land to nonurban residential, commercial and industrial uses will be accommodated when the subject site is in an area that can support such development. Such development shall attempt to be compatible with the region." Application materials indicate that the site can support the proposed use.Conditions of Approval and Development Standards ensure that a reasonable attempt will be made to be compatible with the region. B. Section 23-2-220.A.2--The proposed use is consistent with the intent of the A(Agricultural) Zone District. Currently the property is in violation (VI-0300014)for operating a landscaping yard without a Use by Special Review(USR). Upon approval of the USR the violation will be closed. If denied, staff would request that thirty (30) days be allowed for all business equipment and storage to be completely removed from the property before proceeding with legal action in District Court. Section 23-3-40.R of the Weld County Code provides for a business permitted as a use by right or accessory use in the Commercial Zone District 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. North of the site is pasture with a home within 400 feet. An existing animal confinement operation is east of the site. A poultry business and sod farm lie south of the site. A single family residence is within close proximity to the west of the site. Conditions of Approval and Development Standards ensure that the storage and parking areas are adequately screened from the adjacent properties. D. Section 23-2-220.A.4 -- The uses which will be permitted will be compatible with future development of the surrounding area as permitted by the existing zoning and with the future development as projected by Chapter 22 of the Weld County Code and any other applicable code provisions or ordinances in effect, or the adopted Master Plans of affected municipalities. The site lies within the three mile referral area for the Town of Windsor and the City of Greeley. The Town of Windsor indicated in a referral response received December 12, 2004 that the site is depicted as High Density Estate Residential on the Town's Land Use Plan map. However, the adjacent property to the south is depicted as Employment Corridor on the Town's Land Use Plan Map which provides for, "... areas if targeted investment centered on gateway developments activities including significant new office, commercial and housing opportunities." The Town has recommended approval o the Use by Special Review. In two referral responses received December 7 and December 30, 2004, the City of Greeley has recommended conditions that they wish to see m implemented should the proposal be approved.The City of Greeley's recommendations have - 4 been incorporated into the Development Standards and Conditions of Approval. V u 2006-0080 Resolution USR-1495 Marcelle Guedner Page 2 E. Section 23-2-220.A.5--The site does not lie within any Overlay Districts. Building Permits issued on the Lot will be required to adhere to the fee structure of County Wide Road Impact Program (Ordinance 2002-11). 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 small size of the lot limit its agricultural value. G. Section 23-2-220.A.7 -- The Design Standards (Section 23-2-240, Weld County Code), Operation Standards (Section 23-2-250, Weld County Code), Conditions of Approval and Development Standards ensure that there are adequate provisions for the protection of health, safety, and welfare of the inhabitants of the neighborhood and County. This recommendation is based, in part,upon a review of the application materials submitted by the applicant, other relevant information regarding the request, and responses from referral entities. The Planning Commission recommendation for approval is conditional upon the following: 1. Prior to recording the plat: A. If applicable, the applicant shall submit an Air Pollution Emission Notice (A.P.E.N.) and Emissions Permit application to the Air Pollution Control Division, Colorado Department of Health and Environment for emissions of criteria, hazardous or odorous air pollutants. The applicant shall submit written evidence to the Department of Planning Services that they have met the Department of Public Health and Environment requirements. (Department of Public Health and Environment) B. Submit a dust abatement plan to the Environmental Health Services, Weld County Department of Public Health & Environment, for approval prior to operation. The applicant shall submit written evidence to the Department of Planning Services that they have met the Department of Public Health and Environment requirements. (Department of Public Health and Environment) C. A stormwater discharge permit may be required for a development/redevelopment/construction site where a contiguous or non-contiguous land disturbance is grater than or equal to one acre in area. Contact the Water Quality Control Division of the Colorado Department of Public Health and Environment at www.cdphe.state.co.us/wq/PermitsUnit for more information. The applicant shall submit written evidence to the Department of Planning Services that they have met the Department of Public Health and Environment requirements. (Department of Public Health and Environment) D. The applicant shall submit a waste handling plan, for approval, to the Environmental Health Services Division of the Weld County Department of Public Health & Environment. The applicant shall submit written evidence to the Department of Planning Services that they have met the Department of Public Health and Environment requirements.The plan shall include at a minimum, the following: 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). (Department of Public Health and Environment) E. The applicant shall address the conditions (concerns) of the Weld County Department of Building Inspection as indicated in a referral response dated December 17, 2004. Written evidence of such shall be submitted to the Department of Planning Services. (Department of Building Inspection) Resolution USR-1495 Marcelle Guedner Page 3 F. The applicant shall submit a Landscape/Screening Plan for review and approval. The plan shall address the following: 1) In order to mitigate the potential negative impact and aesthetic concerns on surrounding properties,the applicant shall delineate an opaque visual screen on all sides of the property to completely screen all materials stored on the site. 2) Section 23-3-250.A.6 of the Weld County Code addresses the issue of trash collection areas. Areas used for storage or trash collection shall be screened from adjacent public rights-of-way and adjacent properties. These areas shall be designed and used in a manner that will prevent wind or animal scattered trash. 3) Section 23-3-250.B addresses operation standards for Commercial uses. The applicant shall address the issue of on-site lighting, including security lighting if applicable. Subsection F. states "any lighting ... shall be designed, located and operated in such a manner as to meet the following standards: sources of light shall be shielded so that beams or rays of light will not shine directly onto adjacent properties...." 4) The applicant has delineated one on-site sign. The signs shall adhere to Section 23-4-90.A and .B of the Weld County Code. One identification sign per principal use shall be allowed, provided that the sign does not exceed sixteen (16) square feet in area per face. (Department of Planning Services) G. The applicant shall complete all proposed improvement including those regarding landscaping, screening, access improvements and parking lot requirements or enter into an Improvements Agreement according to policy regarding collateral for improvements and post adequate collateral for all required materials. The agreement and form of collateral shall be reviewed by County Staff and accepted by the Board of County Commissioners prior to recording the USR plat. (Department of Planning Services) H. The plat shall be amended to delineate the following: 1. All pages of the plat shall be labeled USR-1495. (Department of Planning Services) 2. The attached Development Standards. (Department of Planning Services) 3. The approved Landscape/Screening Plan. (Department of Planning Services) 4. The internal road shall enter onto the sixty(60)foot access road(easement)at a 90 degree angle for a minimum of one vehicle length to provide adequate sight distance in both directions. (Department of Public Works) 5. The sixty (60) foot access easement is a joint ownership per Book 648, Reception # 1570019, and should be identified on the plat drawing. (Department of Public Works) I. The City of Greeley has jurisdiction of County Road 17 at this location.The applicant shall submit their traffic study prepared by Traffic & Transportation Engineering to the City of Greeley. The applicant shall also contact the City to verify the access permit,or,for any additional requirements that may be needed to obtain or upgrade an access permit. Written evidence that the applicant has complied with the City of Greeley requirements pertaining to the access shall be submitted to the Department of Planning Services.(Department of Public Works) J. The applicant shall address the requirements/concerns(widening of the road)of the Department of Public Works,as stated in the referral response dated December 3,2004. Evidence of Public Works approval shall be submitted in writing to the Weld County Department of Planning Services. (Department of Public Works) K. The applicant shall attempt to address the conditions(concerns)of the Windsor/Severance Fire Protection District as indicated in a referral response dated November 23, 2004. Written evidence of such shall be submitted to the Department of Planning Services.(Windsor/Severance Fire Protection District) Resolution USR-1495 Marcelle Guedner Page 4 L. The applicant shall attempt to address the non-transportation conditions (concerns) of the City of Greeley as indicated in a referral response dated December 7,2004 and December 30,2004. Written evidence of such shall be submitted to the Department of Planning Services. (City of Greeley) M. Written evidence from the oil and gas company indicating all requirements and agreements between the surface developer and the mineral owners and/or lessees have been completed shall be submitted or evidence that an adequate attempt has been made to mitigate their concerns shall be submitted to the Department of Planning Services. (Department of Planning Services) N. The applicant shall address the requirements (concerns)of the Sheriffs Office, as stated in the referral response dated November 30, 2004 to discuss the Crime Prevention Through Environmental Design program and any available options for the site. Evidence of such shall be submitted in writing to the Weld County Department of Planning Services. (Sheriff's Office) O. The applicant shall submit two (2) paper copies of the plat for preliminary approval to the Weld County Department of Planning Services. (Department of Planning Services) 2. Upon completion of 1. above the applicant shall submit a Mylar plat along with all other documentation required as Conditions of Approval. The Mylar plat shall be recorded in the office of the Weld County Clerk and Recorder by Department of Planning Services' Staff. The plat shall be prepared in accordance with the requirements of Section 23-2-260.D of the Weld County Code. The Mylar plat and additional requirements shall be submitted within thirty(30)days from the date of the Board of County Commissioners resolution.The applicant shall be responsible for paying the recording fee.(Department of Planning Services) 3. 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 mapsco.weld.co.us. (Department of Planning Services) 4. The Special Review activity shall not occur nor shall any building or electrical permits be issued on the property until the Special Review plat is ready to be recorded in the office of the Weld County Clerk and Recorder. (Department of Planning Services) SITE SPECIFIC DEVELOPMENT PLAN SPECIAL REVIEW PERMIT DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS Marcelle Geudner C/O Jess Aragon USR-1495 1. The Site Specific Development Plan and Special Use Permit is for a business permitted as a use by right or accessory use in the Commercial Zone District (Landscaping Materials) in the A(Agricultural) Zone District,as indicated in the application materials on file and subject to the Development Standards stated hereon. (Department of Planning Services) 2. Approval of this plan may create a vested property right pursuant to Section 23-8-10 of the Weld County Code. (Department of Planning Services) 3. All liquid and solid wastes (as defined in the Solid Wastes Disposal Sites and Facilities Act, 30-20-100.5, C.R.S., as amended) shall be stored and removed for final disposal in a manner that protects against surface and groundwater contamination. (Department of Public Health and Environment) 4. 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) 5. 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) 6. 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) 7. This facility shall adhere to the maximum permissible noise levels allowed in the Commercial Zone as delineated in 25-12-103 C.R.S., as amended. (Department of Public Health and Environment) 8. The facility shall utilize the existing public water supply(Little Thompson Water District). (Department of Public Health and Environment) 9. Adequate handwashing and toilet facilities shall be provided for employees and patrons of the facility. (Department of Public Health and Environment) 10. 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) 11. If applicable, the applicant shall obtain a stormwater discharge permit from the Colorado Department of Public Health & Environment, Water Quality Control Division. (Department of Public Health and Environment) 12. All pesticides,fertilizer,and other 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) 13. 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) 14. Material piles shall not exceed the height of the opaque screening. (Department of Planning Services) 15. The landscaping and screening on site shall be maintained in accordance with the approved Landscape/Screening Plan. (Department of Planning Services) 16. A plan review is required for each building for which a building permit is required. Plans shall include a floor plan. Two complete sets of plans are required when applying for each permit. (Department of Building Inspection) Resolution USR-1495 Marcelle Guedner Page 2 17. Buildings shall conform to the requirements of the various codes adopted at the time of permit application. Currently the following has been adopted by Weld County: 2003 International Building Code;2003 International Mechanical Code;2003 International Plumbing Code;2003 International Fuel Gas Code; and the 2002 National Electrical Code and Chapter 29 of the Weld County Code. (Department of Building Inspection) 18. Fire resistance of walls and openings, construction requirements, maximum building height and allowable areas will be reviewed at the plan review. Setback and offset distances shall be determined by the Weld County Code. (Department of Building Inspection) 19. Building height shall be measured in accordance with the 2003 International Building Code for the purpose of determining the maximum building size and height for various uses and types of construction and to determine compliance with the Bulk Requirements from Chapter 23 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 the building, (Department of Building Inspection) 20. The applicant shall apply dust suppression chemical (magnesium chloride or calcium chloride)on the haul road between Weld County Road 17 and the entrance to the site no less than twice a year or as determined by the Department of Public Works. (Department of Public Works) 21. The off-street parking including the access drive shall be surfaced with gravel and dust control or the equivalent and shall be graded to prevent drainage problems. (Department of Public Works) 22. Each parking space adjacent to the building shall be equipped with wheel guards or curb stops where necessary to prevent vehicles from extending beyond the boundaries of the space and from coming into contact with other vehicles, walls, fences, or plantings. (Department of Public Works) 23. The historical flow patterns and run-off amounts will be maintained on site in such a manner that will reasonably preserve the natural character of the area and prevent property damage of the type generally attributed to run-off rate and velocity increases, diversions, concentration and/or unplanned ponding or storm run-off. (Department of Public Works) 24. On-site lighting, including security lighting if applicable shall maintain compliance with Section 23-3- 250.B.6 of the Weld County Code. (Department of Planning Services) 25. Hours of operation shall be from 8:00 a.m.to 6:00 p.m.Monday through Saturday and 9:00 a.m.to 5:00 on Sunday. (Department of Planning Services) 26. The number of employees for the business shall be limited to six (6) persons as stated in the application. (Department of Planning Services) 27. Any recreational vehicle stored on the lot may not be used for overnight housing for any persons or as an office or storage structure. (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. Weld County Government Personnel shall be granted access onto the property at any reasonable time in order to ensure the activities carried out on the property comply with the Development Standards stated herein and all applicable Weld County regulations. 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. Resolution USR-1495 Marcelle Guedner Page 3 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 Board of County Commissioners. Motion seconded by John Folsom VOTE: For Passage Against Passage Absent Michael Miller John Folsom Bryant Gimlin Bruce Fitzgerald James Rohn Tonya Stobel Chad Auer Doug Ochsner James Welch 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,Voneen Macklin, 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 February 1, 2005. jDat d the 1"of February, 2005. Voneen Macklin Secretary z1 4 CASE NUMBER: USR-1495 APPLICANT: Marcelle Guedner Go Jess Aragon USR--419 5 PLANNER: Michelle Martin LEGAL DESCRIPTION: Pt NE4 Section 8, T5N, R67W of the 6th P.M., Weld County, Colorado. REQUEST: A Site Specific Development Plan and Special Review Permit for a business permitted as a use by right or accessory use in the Commercial Zone District (Landscape Materials Yard) in the A(Agricultural) Zone District LOCATION: 753 feet west of CR 17 and 1/2 mile north of State Hwy 34. Michelle Martin, Department of Planning Services presented Case USR-1495, reading the recommendation and comments into the record. The Department of Planning Services is recommending approval of the application along with the Conditions of Approval and Development Standards Doug Ochsner asked where the closest residence were located. Ms. Martin stated the residence to the west is the closest. John Folsom asked Ms. Martin if there will be retail sales at this site. Ms. Martin stated they will be selling material. Mr. Folsom asked how many vehicles per day would be at the site. Don Carroll, Public Works,stated Matt Delich did a traffic study for the applicants and is present and can be referred to. Mr. Folsom asked Ms. Martin about the number of employees. Ms. Martin stated the application indicated two full time and four part time employees. Mr. Folsom asked if this was reflected in the Development Standards. Ms. Martin clarified there will be six employees in season and two out of season and this is reflected in the Development Standards. Mr. Folsom asked about the letter from Windsor implying the property is in a flood way, if so is a flood hazard permit required?. Mr. Carroll indicated the FEMA map does not show the property being in the flood way. James Rohn asked Ms. Martin about the retail in the dairy to the north and is the dairy retail approved with a USR. Ms. Martin stated there is no USR on that site. Mr. Rohn asked if it was in violation. Ms. Martin indicated the site is not currently in violation with the County. Mr. Rohn stated the application requests a landscape materials yard with no mention of customers, has the application been adjusted. Ms. Martin stated the applicant can address this. Mr. Rohn -- asked about the pre-add. Ms. Martin stated it was approved by the Board of County Commissioners and they will be heard on February 16, 2005. Doug Ochsner asked for a summary of the history and violations on the proposed development. Ms. Martin stated the business has been operating in the past. Ms. Martin stated that Bethany Salzman, Zoning Compliance, can discuss the violations and conversations with the surrounding property owners. Ms. Salzman can also discuss the court case. Bethany Salzman, Zoning Compliance Officer, stated the neighbors do have documentation in which they are keeping track of the truck traffic. There is also a valid permit on site to continue building and they are still allowed to bring trucks to the site for personal use. There is no way to calculate how much activity is currently going on that is either business or personal. The Web site indicates the business is not open. The business does have a permit with the County to operate. James Rohn stated the application shows they will have hours of operation on Sunday and the application indicates in season. The Development Standards do not indicate the difference between in season and out of season. The Development Standard states they will be open from March through November, this would indicate no action on the property from November through March. Ms. Martin stated that was correct, personal activity is acceptable in the off season. Ms. Martin indicated it was March 15 through November 15. Rick Zier, attorney for the applicant, provided additional information for the project. Mr.Zier went through the history of the business and the processes they have gone through with Weld County. The intent is to get through this process in order to open in the spring of 2005. The applicant has ceased operation when ordered by the courts. The applicant has learned from the past processes and has done everything required of him. The neighbor issues regarding dust, noise and compatibility have been reviewed and those issues have been mitigated to the best of the applicants'ability. There is no oil and gas on site. The traffic is modest and a traffic study has been done. Access is owned by the applicant and others who share the road. The traffic for this business does not go in front of the neighbors who are in disagreement of this proposal. There are two access points, screening has been done with white fencing,and the front of the business is designed to match Windsong Ranch. The applicant has planted trees to improve the visual aspect --- of the site. The site slopes to the south therefore the materials will be on south side away from the road. The fence on the west side is approximately twelve foot above grade in some places. The prevailing wind is from north west, there are fields on the north across from the proposed site and the wind will blow across those fields. The site is all rock with very minimal dust. The material stored on site is mostly rock. The dust mitigation along the road has been done. This is a better application than the last time. The applicant has been in compliance with the court order,there has been no material accumulation to the site. There is some concern for the limitation on the time period for the operation. The issues with the hours of operation are materials can become available during the winter and would need to transfer to the site. The applicant would like to see the limitation on months of operation be deleted. James Rohn indicated the months of operation being restricted and this is what the application stated. Mr. Rohn asked if there was anything associated with a Christmas tree business located at this site. Mr.Zier stated there was nothing. John Folsom asked if there will be any retail sales at this site or will all landscaping be done off site. Mr. Zier stated there will be some retail sales and that was understood to be part of a landscape materials yard. Mr. Folsom stated the request to change the months of operation would be so the applicant could operate during the winter months. Mr. Zier indicated that was correct and the applicant would be willing to reduce the daily hours if requested by the Planning Commission. Mr. Folsom indicated there will only be two employees during the off season. Jess Aragon, applicant, presented a packet of information including pictures and reviewed the information. The photos in the packet provided evidence of the improvements that have been made to the site. Those off site improvements include; road base and road maintenance, dust abatement, screening, addition of traffic calming devices (stop sign and children playing) and culverts in the road for improved drainage. The improvements on site include screening, fencing,weed mitigation and visual improvements. There is also a building on site that contains a public restroom per a request from a previous process. Mr. Aragon indicated he will continue to maintain the roadway and Public Works has requested he widen the road to two lanes along the frontage of the property. There are two access points to the site. Mr. Aragon added the business must be visually appealing for the business to be productive. The equipment stored on site is not huge because the business is focused more on private homeowner landscaping adverse to large commercial.This allows them to have smaller quantities because homeowners are doing it themselves and the site is better organized. There are trees planted in the drainage area to absorb some of the water. Mr.Aragon continued by stating retaining walls have been added to the site. The trucks are now parked on the upper tier away from the west residence to help mitigate their concerns for noise and the fencing on the west is approximately 13 feet in height at some locations. The operation is compatible with the dairy and the soon to be commercial area to the south. The normal operation season is February 15 or March 1,depending on weather, as being the beginning and November 15 ,—• as the end of the season. Mr.Aragon would like to operate and be open on most days including the off season due to the possibility of warm weather at those times. There is an IGA between Windsor and Greeley for the autoplex on Hwy 34 and CR 17. There will be several business located in the commercial area to the south of this property. This commercial venture to the south will bring far more pollution, noise and traffic to the area than this type of business could ever dream of. Mr.Aragon added this site will not be expanded. Cindy Rubiano, applicant, provided additional information on the commercial venture that will be occurring to the south. The expectation of breaking ground is expected in the summer 2005. Mr. Aragon continued with site distances from the site to the various surrounding property owners. There is also interior screening to help buffer the upper area which is more intense. The bulk of Windsong Ranch residents are in favor of the proposed development. James Rohn asked about the first application and the concern at that time was for the access and is there a possibility to gain access from the Lind property to the south. Mr. Aragon indicated that was not a possibility, besides they have ownership access to the road they are currently using. The easement is 60 feet wide according to the deed. John Folsom asked if there will be retail sales at the site and what kind of affect that will have on the trips per day. Mr. Aragon indicated Matt Delich could address those concerns more sufficiently. Matt Delich, traffic consultant, provided additional information on the project.Traffic counts were done in September of 2004 on a Saturday which is typically the busiest for this type of business. Traffic counts are done on an hourly basis and it seems that mid afternoon on Saturday had more traffic than mid morning. There was a higher traffic count on CR 17 as well. The counts were done in September which is not the busiest time of year for this type of business but the count was 10 trip ends, therefore,the 22 trips counted by the neighbor were pretty accurate. This trip generation is higher than a residence but not a high number. The estimate for trip ends for this business is approximately 100-150 trips per day for the site. According to Mr. Delich this is not a high intensity use. The Chair asked if there was anyone in the audience who wished to speak for or against this application. ate. Mike Brower, real estate broker, agent that represented Ms. Guedner when the property was purchased. Mr. Brower indicated the pictures presented by Mr.Aragon did not contain pictures from when the property was purchased. There was no fencing and the road was in horrible condition, there were silage pits in middle of property with trash packed in them. The improvements that have been done to this property are incredible. Mr. Bower added he is a customer of TimberRock because of Mr. Aragon's willingness to help children out with fundraising activities. Mr. Bower has also referred TimberRock to several people. The business is beneficial because all new subdivision require HOA's and most subdivisions require a landscape plan. Mr. Bower added that the improvements to this site have increased the property values in the area. Access is important when selling properties and the access to this property as well as those to the west are significantly improved. John Schroeder, with Elite Rock and Stone, indicated he is in approval of the proposed project. Mr. Schroeder sells wholesale stone and this yard is the neatest in the area. Mr. Schroeder indicated that as of October 18 he has held onto a load of rock because Mr. Aragon would not allow it to be delivered to the site. Graham Strickland, employee for TimberRock, stated he was in favor of the proposal. This proposal is compatible with the surrounding area. The lot is covered with rock so the dust issue has been mitigated. The noise at the dairy farm is as significant and the same as what occurs on this property. There is several subdivision that TimberRock delivers to and assist them in their landscaping. This business will help the subdivisions that will occur in the future. Vicki Albertson,Value Pack Representative and customer of TimberRock, indicated she is happy to have this service in the area. Ms.Albertson has also worked with the applicants with their marketing specifically in their advertising and is well aware the applicants have ceased the operation according to the order. Kathy Weinmeister, neighbor, indicated her concerns with the traffic and the number of vehicles, along with dump trucks that enter the site. The road is privately maintained not public. The culvert put in by the applicant has created the need for a four wheel drive last year because of the mud that built up. Ms. Weinmeister stated she can see the semis and the people on site. Ms. Weinmeister went through the history of the proposal and the issues with the business. Ms. Weinmeister indicated the fence would not stop the sounds from exiting the site. Ms. Weinmeister indicated that cars are not the only things that create dust. TimberRock sells dirt so when there is wind there will be dust. The proposed auto mall will not infiltrate this residential area it will be further to the south of this site. Laurie Stayle, customer of TimberRock, indicated she would love to have the road that that TimberRock has created for the access. Ms. Stayle indicated the area is improving and getting better. Ms. Stayle indicated that Mr.Aragon has integrity and will do what is asked of him and she would like to see this approved. Jim Soreno, customer of TimberRock, indicated there has been no advertising done for this site. The winds are from west to east so the dairy gets most of the dust generated by the operation. (Mr. Soreno is a hot air balloonist) Tina Shimmer, neighbor to the north, indicated she has nothing against the business or the owners. They purchased their property for 4H projects and for future development. Ms. Shimmer indicated she has two concerns with the proposal. The first concern is the business was not started with the proper approvals. The second concern is the confusion about the access road. Ms. Shimmer has an attorney attempting to clarify the understanding. When she purchased the property she was informed that every owner has 30 feet out into the road along the frontage of the property. Ms. Shimmer indicated she is unable to subdivide her ground until the access is straightened out. Did the traffic study count the number of semi and dump trucks? The applicant has closed the doors but the semi has been in and out and she does not believe it is for personnel use, it has been there at night. The noise from the dump truck dumping rock is loud. The dumping of rocks during the night has got to stop. The dairy does not use the road CR 17. This is not a county road and not maintained as such. Ms. Shimmer would like to see this denied. Lin Martin, customer of TimberRock, indicated they are not operating the business. She is here today to show support for the business. This is a small family business and its continuance as a part of the community is vital. This use is compatible and exceeds the appearance of the neighborhood. Mr.Aragon has widened the road for the safety of the surrounding property owners. The dust mitigation has been done and the road materials have been applied for stability. The improvements have been made and paid for by TimberRock. The interesting aspect is none of the neighbors have stepped up and tried to work with TimberRock to pay for the improvements and they have not asked. Improvements such as buffering both internal and external have been added. Ms. Martin indicated in a rural area there will always be dust. The business looks more like a landscaped area; the supplies are not visible from the road as well as the machinery. Ms. Martin is amazed that the neighbors are scrutinizing this business when a huge auto mall will be built. That area will have noise and light pollution that far exceeds this small family business. Jim Spear,truck driver for TimberRock, indicated he is the driver of the semi and he has not brought any loads into the site during the night hours. The standard hours of operation are 7:00am to 5:00pm. The quarry closes at 4:00pm in the afternoon. The truck is parked in Greeley. Mr. Spear stated Mr. Aragon is strict with regards to the times he can load and unload. The Chair closed the public portion. Bryant Gimlin asked Mr. Carroll about widening of the road. Mr. Carroll stated the widening will be for the access road along the entire frontage of the site and the applicants are agreeable to widening that section. This was based on a safety concern that was brought up through testimony. The widening would accommodate two way traffic. The road narrows at the entrance so widening it would help accommodate traffic. There is a single culvert in the road and it would need to be widened to accommodate two land traffic. Mr. Carroll stated the ownership of the road has been an issue and according to the County records the road is a joint ownership. Mr. Morrison added he has reviewed the document that creates the road and what was done was a deed to create a separate parcel that was deeded to all owners along the roadway, it was not done as an easement or right of way. The parcel was done as a strip of ground that is jointly owned. There are some advantages and disadvantages to this. There was no evidence they did not have access or the use was limited because of the nature of that strip of land. This position has been made clear during the course of the hearing over the last couple of years. The neighbors can seek legal counsel and pursue other remedies if they do not agree. There has been no action taken as of this time. This issue has been raised but not pursued and the assumption is the access is legal but it does not preclude them from going to district court and getting a different ruling. Mr. Gimlin asked if there was anything in the covenants that discussed how maintenance would be handled and the cost shared. Mr. Morrison indicated there was nothing in the covenants and that is one of the weaknesses. As opposed to an easement or joint access agreement this is simply the property owners sharing in the ownership. Mr. Gimlin asked if Planning Commission as the County has the ability to require the owners enter into an agreement for the maintenance and widening. Mr. Morrison stated it was similar to Oil and Gas access where there is a shared use of same surface. Planning Commission could say they would like to see agreement or evidence the applicant has attempted an agreement but has assumed their share of the responsibility. Mr. Morrison added it is not appropriate to provide a veto under the way the road is set up. Planning Commission could encourage an agreement but also allow the applicant the opportunity to move forward and show they are taking care of their impacts. Doug Ochsner commented on the roadway and the applicant has shown his willingness to take care of the road. Mr. Ochsner stated he would like to see an attempt at an agreement but the applicant is in charge of taking care of the road and accepts that responsibility. Mr. Gimlin agrees there are multiple owners who benefit from those improvements. Mr. Gimlin would like to see an amicable agreement. James Rohn indicated he agrees that the neighbors on the road have a rare opportunity to have a great private road with easy access. This is a win situation for the neighbors while maintaining the access. There have been significant improvements done to the site. Marcelle Guedner, property owner, purchased the property and it was a disaster. The price was negotiated lower because of the condition of the site and the road. They were under the impression the business could be open during the application process. The owners use the site but the business is not in operation. The road is being maintained by Mr. Aragon and this includes the roadway for all the adjacent owners. Bryant Gimlin asked Ms. Guedner what her understanding was of the access road. Ms. Guedner stated she is going by what the County Attorney said which was it was as close to a public road without the County having to maintain. Mr. Gimlin asked if there was a separate deed for the separate parcel. Ms. Guedner stated that in the purchasing agreement all the easements were included; she was not given a separate deed. The assumption was any deed that came with the plat was included. Rick Zier, attorney for TimberRock, stated the applicant has tried to address all the points raised prior to the hearing. The compatibility is a function of dust, noise and traffic which in the real world occurs in the agricultural zone district. This area has agricultural uses with a few residences. This use is still adjacent to a dairy whose equipment is similar to the proposed development. There is a need for this type of business in the area with the increase of residential subdivisions. Mr. Zier added Windsor is in favor and will eventually annex the entire area. There will be major commercial uses to the south that will make this use insignificant. The road is jointly owned by all the adjacent property owners. The applicant is offering to maintain the road from CR 17 to the west property line which will be widened. John Folsom moved to amend Development Standard 25 to state the hours and months of operation be from 8:00am to 6:00pm, Monday—Saturday, March 15 through November 15 and from 9:00am—4:00pm, November 15 through March 15. Also eliminating the special Sunday hours. Also amend Development Standard 26 to state"the site shall be allowed to operate all year around." Chad Auer seconded. Bryant Gimlin suggested deleting Development Standard 26. Mr. Ochsner commented he agrees to the deletion of Development Standard 26. To limit the hours of operation by one more hour during the winter is not that big of a deal. The Chair asked the secretary to poll the members of the Planning Commission for their decision. John Folsom,yes; James Welch, no; Bryant Gimlin, yes; James Rohn, no; Chad Auer, yes; Doug Ochsner, no. Motion denied. James Rohn moved to delete Development Standard 26 and change the hours of operation from 8:00am—5:00pm to mitigate the neighbor's noise and dust issues. There was no second. Doug Ochsner moved to delete Development Standard 26. James Rohn seconded. The Chair asked the secretary to poll the members of the Planning Commission for their decision. John Folsom, yes; James Welch, yes; Bryant Gimlin, yes; James Rohn, yes; Chad Auer, yes; Doug Ochsner, yes. Motion carried unanimously. James Rohn moved to amend Development Standard 25 to state the hours of operation shall be 8:00am—6:00pm, Monday— Saturday and 9:00am to 5:00pm on Sunday during the months of March 15 thru November 15 and from 9:00am -4:00pm from November 15 to March 15. No second. Doug Ochsner indicated he likes the Development Standard as they are stated. James Rohn commented the business has to adhere to the commercial noise level. Ms. Davis stated the commercial noise level is 60 decibels. Mr. Gimlin added the noise that will be generated will be similar to an agricultural type business. John Folsom stated this case boils down to compatibility. Planning Commission tries to seek mitigation and the applicant has tried to put in place mitigations and the improvements compensate for any inconveniences. Bryant Gimlin commented the presentation provided compelling evidence to show what the applicant is capable of and willing to do. Mr. Auer agrees that compatibility is not a concern since there will be substantial development to the south. Mr. Morrison added this was an previously unsuccessful application and the applicant went through the County process necessary for a new application similar to starting with anew application. Mr.Auer stated the concern was the site development that was originally denied was moved forward on and reapplied for. Mr. Ochsner added the substantial change that was voted on previously also had concerns for the surrounding area. The commercial that is being built in the area is a substantial change. The amount of work the applicant has done could have jeopardized him because if the application was denied he is out the money for those improvements. Mr.Auer does not want to see this type of precedent set for future denied applications. Chad Auer moved to clarify 1.J to widening the access road. James Rohn seconded. Motion carried. Doug Ochsner moved that Case USR-1495, be forwarded to the Board of County Commissioners along with the Conditions of Approval and Development Standards with the Planning Commissions recommendation of approval. John Folsom seconded the motion. The Chair asked the secretary to poll the members of the Planning Commission for their decision. John Folsom, yes; James Welch, yes; Bryant Gimlin, yes; James Rohn, yes; Chad Auer, yes; Doug Ochsner, yes. Motion carried unanimously. Doug Ochsner commented this application is very consistent with the current land use, it is compatible and the presentation was done very well. James Rohn commented the original denial was based on the problems with the road being narrow and the risk of accidents. Safety is still a concern. Bryant Gimlin commented this is not a continuation of the old application. The applicant submitted a new application with substantial change. This vote is on the merits of the new application. Meeting adjourned at 4:30 pm Respectfully submitted Voneen Macklin Secretary Hello