HomeMy WebLinkAbout20060249.tiff BEFORE THE WELD COUNTY, COLORADO, PLANNING COMMISSION
RESOLUTION OF RECOMMENDATION TO THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
Moved by James Welch, that the following resolution be introduced for denial by the Weld County Planning
Commission. Be it resolved by the Weld County Planning Commission that the application for:
CASE NUMBER: PZ-1095
APPLICANT: Sonja Stonestreet
PLANNER: Sheri Lockman
LEGAL DESCRIPTION: Pt of Lot 2 of RE-2690; pt SE4 of Section 31, T8N, R67W of the 6th P.M.,
Weld County, Colorado.
REQUEST: Change of Zone from A(Agriculture)to PUD with Estate Zone used for Nine
(9) Residential Lots (Waterford Hill PUD).
LOCATION: 1/2 mile north of CR 86 and
be recommended unfavorably to the Board of County Commissioners for the following reasons:
1. The submitted materials are in compliance with the application requirements of Section 26-5-30 of the
Weld County Code.
2. The submitted materials are not in compliance with Section 27.6.120 of the Weld County Code as
follows:
A. Section 27-6-120.8.6.a The proposal is consistent with any intergovernmental agreement in
effect influencing the PUD and Chapters 19(Coordinated Planning Agreements), Chapter 22
(Comprehensive Plan), Chapter 23(Zoning), Chapter 24(Subdivision)and Chapter 26(Mixed
Use Development) of the Weld County Code. The proposal is inconsistent with the
aforementioned documents as follows:
a. Section 23-1-90 defines Urban Scaled Development as developments exceeding nine
(9) lots and/or located in close proximity to existing PUDs, subdivisions, municipal
boundaries or urban growth corridors and boundaries. The present property owner,
Sonja Stonestreet,submitted an application for a Recorded Exemption and a nine lot
PUD Change of Zone on September 21,2005. The proposed nine lot subdivision and
the Recorded Exemption will create a total of ten lots. Staff comments at the Sketch
Plan phase stated, "The lots being created by the Recorded Exemption and the PUD
process exceed the nine (9) allowed in a non-urban area. Should you proceed with
nine(9) lots in the PUD the Department of Planning Services will have no option but
to recommend denial at the Change of Zone Phase".
b. Section 22-2-80.A. Conflicts exist particularly between residential development and
existing rural land use that can negatively impact the County. Tension is occurring
not only from restrictions on normal farming practices, but also from resistance to
change and growth. It is important that County representatives and officials recognize
their role in reducing the conflicts between development and rural uses. Consistent
interpretation and administration of this Chapter and Chapters 19, 23, 24, 26 and 27
of this Code will help in the reduction of conflict Using these documents to make
consistent land use decisions reinforces its usefulness as an information and
decision-making tool on land use decisions made by private parties, as well as public
officials. The Department of Planning Services staff has consistently interpreted the
intent of the Weld County Code to be that a recorded exemption used in conjunction
with a subdivision of nine(9) lots, results in urban scale land development.
c. Section 22-2-110.6 UGB.Goal 2. Concentrate urban development in or adjacent to
existing municipalities,an approved intergovernmental agreement,the I-25 Mixed Use
Development area,urban growth boundary areas,urban development nodes,or where
urban infrastructure is currently available or reasonably obtainable. The proposed
location for this subdivision is not located in any of the defined urban areas, and the
site is unable to be served by urban infrastructure such as municipal sanitary sewer.
2006-0249
Resolution PZ-1095
Sonja Stonestreet
Page 2
d. Section 22-2-190.C. R.Policy 3.1 states,"The County should encourage an efficient
form of urban residential development by directing urban residential growth to those
areas where urban services and infrastructure are currently available or reasonably
obtainable". Locating urban scale developments outside of urban growth boundary
areas is not considered efficient, nor is sanitary service available to serve the
proposed urban subdivision.
e. Section 23-3-520.6 Common open space. Common open space shall be provided
in a PUD District. The amount and type of common open space shall be
proportioned according to the type of uses, buildings or structures to be contained
in the PUD District. Common open space shall be designed to be useful to the
occupants and residents of the PUD District for recreational and scenic purposes.
The Common open space in a PUD District shall be owned and maintained in
perpetuity by an organization established solely for such ownership and maintenance
purposes. The applicant is proposing 3 outlots.Outlot A is a 1.979 area reserved for
the stormwater detention pond. Outlot B is 0.757 acres located adjacent to Cactus
Hill Lateral Ditch. Neither of these outlots will be useful to the residents of the PUD
for recreational or scenic purposes as they are exclusively for the use of the
detention pond and irrigation ditch. Outlot C is 0.014 acres at the entrance to the
subdivision. It is intended to contain the development sign. However, the
landscaping,bus shelter and cluster mailbox are all proposed to be placed within the
road right-of-way or on Lot 1.
Sage Hill PUD is being proposed 1/4 mile south of the site. Because of the location
of Sage Hill and the numerous developments currently in the process or recently
approved in this area,Planning staff has determined that Waterford Hill PUD should
be required to include a 15%open space component. Planning Staff concurs that
Outlot C meets the intent of Section 23-3-520.B. However,the PUD would need an
additional 4.436 acres to meet the 15% open space requirement per Section 27-6-
80.B.7 of the Weld County Code.
B. Section 27-6-120.6.b- The uses which would be allowed in the proposed PUD will conform
with the Performance Standards of the PUD Zone District contained in Article II, Chapter 27
of the Weld County Code.
The applicant has not met the following performance standards as delineated in Sections
through 27-2-210 of the Weld County Code.
1) Section 27-2-60— Common open space—Common open space is defined as any
usable parcel of land or water unimproved and set aside, dedicated, designated or
reserved for public or private use or for the use and enjoyment of owners or
occupants of land adjoining or neighboring such area. Common open space
includes landscape areas that are not occupied by buildings or uses such as storage
or service areas, private courtyards, parking lots and islands The amount and
type of common open space provided in a PUD Zone District shall be proportional
to the intensity of the zone districts called for in the PUD or uses specified in the
application, unless specifically delineated in Chapter 26. Common open space shall
be designed to be useful to the occupants and/or residents of the PUD Zone District
for recreational and scenic purposes. Common open space in the PUD Zone District
shall be owned and maintained in perpetuity by an organization established
specifically forsuch ownership and maintenance purposes.The application does not
include the required 15% usable open space. Further, the application is unclear as
to what type of recreational opportunities and amenities are available within the
common open space areas.
2) Section 27-2-140.—Nonurban scale development—Nonurban scale developments
are developments comprised of nine (9) or fewer residential lots, located in a
nonurban area as defined in Chapter 22 of this Code, not adjacent to other PUDs,
subdivisions, municipal boundaries or urban growth corridors. Nonurban scale
Resolution PZ-1095
Sonja Stonestreet
Page 3
development shall also include land used, or capable of being used, for agricultural
purposes and including development which combines clustered residential uses and
agricultural uses in a manner that the agricultural lands are suitable for farming and
ranching operations for the next forty (40) years. The Department of Planning
Services staff has consistently interpreted the intent of the Weld County Code to be
that a recorded exemption used in conjunction with a subdivision of nine (9) lots,
results in urban scale land development.
3) Section 27-2-190. — Urban scale development. Urban scale developments are
developments exceeding nine (9) lots and/or located in close proximity to existing
PUDs,subdivisions,municipal boundaries or urban growth corridors and boundaries.
All urban scale developments shall pave the internal road systems of the
development. Urban scale development requires support services such as central
water, sewer systems, road networks, park and recreation facilities and programs,
and storm drainage. The application proposes an urban scale development without
the appropriate open space facilities.
This denial recommendation is based upon compliance with Chapter 27 requirements.
Should the Board of County Commissioners choose to approve the Change of Zone from A (Agricultural) to
PUD for nine (9) residential lots, the Planning Commission recommends the following be included as
Conditions of Approval:
1. Prior to Scheduling the Board of County Commissioners hearing:
A. The applicant shall submit a copy of a reconfigured plat which includes 15% usable open
space. As proposed Outlots A and B do not meet the definition of Common Open Space as
listed in Section 27-2-60 of the Weld County Code. (Department of Planning Services)
B. The applicant shall either submit to the Department of Planning Services a copy of an
agreement with the properties mineral owners and lessees stipulating that the oil and gas
activities have adequately been incorporated into the design of the site or indicate the 400'
x 400' and the 800' x 800' drilling envelope locations per state statute. (Department of
Planning Services)
C. The applicant shall either submit to the Department of Planning Services a copy of an
agreement with North Poudre Irrigation Company stipulating that the ditch activities have
adequately been incorporated into the design of the site or indicate how the concerns of the
ditch company have been addressed. (Department of Planning Services)
2. Prior to recording the Change of Zone plat:
A. The plat shall be amended as follows:
1) All sheets of the plat shall be labeled PZ-1095. (Department of Planning Services)
2) County Road 15 is classified by the County as a local road (Weld County Roadway
Classification Plan,June 2002)adjacent to the proposed development requiring a 60-foot
right-of-way.The applicant shall verify the existing right-of-way and the documents creating
the right-of-way shall be noted on the change of zone plat. If the right-of-way cannot be
verified, it shall be dedicated on the final plat. (Department of Public Works)
3) County Road 86 is classified by the County as a local road (Weld County Roadway
Classification Plan,June 2002) adjacent to the proposed development requiring a 60-foot
right-of-way.The applicant shall verify the existing right-of-way and the documents creating
the right-of-way shall be noted on the change of zone plat. If the right-of-way cannot be
verified, it shall be dedicated on the final plat. (Department of Public Works)
Resolution PZ-1095
Sonja Stonestreet
Page 4
4) Internal roads are required to meet Weld County criteria for a PUD. The internal roadway
right-of-way shall be sixty(60)feet in width including cul-de-sacs with a sixty-five(65)foot
radius, and dedicated to the public. The cul-de-sac shall be revised on the plat.
(Department of Public Works)
5) The entrance gate island shall be located such that there is a 100-foot perpendicular
'staging' area for vehicles entering the exiting the subdivision, measured from the
centerline of County Road 15. (Department of Public Works)
6) The applicant shall submit additional information for review and approval.The information
shall address the comments of Kim Ogle, Landscape Architect for the Weld County
Planning Department on a referral response dated October 17, 2005. (Department of
Planning Services)
7) Weld County's Right to Farm Statement as indicated in Appendix 22-E of the Weld County
Code shall be delineated on the plat. (Department of Planning Services)
8) The location of the entrance sign shall meet the required setback of fifteen (15)feet from
adjacent properties and the offset of ten(10)feet from the road right-of-way per section 27-
6-90.E.4.d of the Weld County Code. (Department of Planning Services)
9) If the applicant is proposing to release water from the detention pond at the historical rate,
the plat shall delineate an easement for the release of the water onto the surrounding
property. (Department of Planning Services)
10) All outlots shall be clearly labeled and the acreage listed. (Department of Planning
Services)
11) The Certificate Blocks shall be amended to reflect Appendix 26-P of the Weld County
Code. (Department of Planning Services)
12) The plat shall indicate the median at the entrance as an outlot that will be owned and
maintained by the Homeowners Association. (Department of Planning Services)
13) The applicant has proposed to put the cluster mailbox, pedestrian shelter and landscaping
materials within the road right-of-way at the entrance of the development. The applicant
shall submit a reconfigured plat for review and approval by County Staff. The plat shall
position the mailbox, pedestrian shelter and landscaping material on Outlot(s) which will
be owned and maintained by the Homeowners Association. The applicant shall submit
evidence that the school and postal district have approved the new locations for the
pedestrian shelter and mailbox. (Department of Planning Services)
C. 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)
3. The Change of Zone is conditional upon the following and that each shall be placed on the Change of
Zone plat as notes prior to recording:
A. The site specific development plan is for a Change of Zone from A(Agricultural)to PUD for nine
(9) residential lots and open space as indicated in the application materials on file in the
Department of Planning Services.The lots will adhere to the uses allowed in the E(Estate)Zone
District except for minimum lot size which shall be one (1)acre. The PUD will be subject to and
governed by the Conditions of Approval stated hereon and all applicable Weld County
Regulations. (Department of Planning Services)
B. All landscaping within the site distance triangles must be less than 3%feet in height at maturity.
(Department of Planning Services)
Resolution PZ-1095
Sonja Stonestreet
Page 5
C. A Home Owner's Association shall be established prior to the sale of any lot. Membership in the
Association is mandatory for each parcel owner. The Association is responsible for liability
insurance, taxes and maintenance of open space, streets, private utilities and other facilities.
Open space restrictions are permanent. (Department of Planning Services)
D. The internal roadways of gated communities shall be maintained by the Homeowners
Association. (Department of Public Works)
E. The Weld County Sheriff's Office has limited traffic enforcement powers on roadways within
subdivision that are not maintained by the County. (Sheriff's Office)
F. Weld County's Right to Farm as delineated on this plat shall be recognized at all times.
(Department of Planning Services)
G. Construction on the site shall occur before April 1 and after August 15 to minimize impacts to
habitat for ground nesting birds. (Division of Wildlife)
H. Water service shall be obtained from North Weld County Water District. (Department of Public
Health and Environment)
I. This subdivision is in rural Weld County and is not served by a municipal sanitary sewer system.
Sewage disposal shall be by septic systems designed in accordance with the regulations of the
Colorado Department of Public Health and Environment,Water Quality Control Division and the
Weld County Code in effect at the time of construction, repair, replacement, or modification of
the system. (Department of Public Health and Environment)
J. A stormwater discharge permit may be required for a development/redevelopment/construction
site where a contiguous or non-contiguous land disturbance is greater than or equal to one acre
in area. Contact the Water Quality Control Division of the Colorado Department of Public Health
and the Environment at www.cdphe.state.co.us/wq/PermitsUnit for more information.
(Department of Public Health and Environment)
K. During development of the site, all land disturbances shall be conducted so that nuisance
conditions are not created. If dust emissions create nuisance conditions, at the request of the
Weld County Health Department,a fugitive dust control plan must be submitted.(Department of
Public Health and Environment)
L. In accordance with the Regulations of the Colorado Air Quality Control Commission any
development that disturbs more than 5 acres of land must incorporate all available and practical
methods that are technologically feasible and economically reasonable in order to minimize dust
emissions. (Department of Public Health and Environment)
M. If land development creates more than a 25-acre contiguous disturbance, or exceeds 6 months
in duration,the responsible party shall prepare a fugitive dust control plan,submit an air pollution
emissions notice, and apply for a permit from the Colorado Department of Public Health and
Environment. (Department of Public Health and Environment)
N. A$10,931.13 cash-in-lieu of land dedication fee shall be paid to the Windsor School District at
the time of building permit submittal. The School District is responsible for collecting this fee.
(Department of Planning Services, School District RE-4)
O. Building permits shall be obtained prior to the construction of any building.(Department of Building
Inspection)
P. A plan review is required for each building for which a building permit is required.Plans shall bear
the wet stamp of a Colorado registered engineer or architect. Two complete sets of plans are
required when applying for each permit. (Department of Building Inspection)
Resolution PZ-1095
Sonja Stonestreet
Page 6
Q. Buildings shall conform to the requirements of the codes adopted by Weld County at the time of
permit application. Current adopted codes include the 2003 International Residential Code;2003
International Building Code; 2003 International Mechanical Code; 2003 International Plumbing
Code; 2003 International Fuel Gas Code; 2002 National Electrical Code and Chapter 29 of the
Weld County Code. (Department of Building Inspection)
R. Each building will require an engineered foundation based on a site-specific geotechnical report
or an open hole inspection performed by a Colorado registered engineer. Engineered
foundations shall be designed by a Colorado registered engineer. (Department of Building
Inspection)
S. Building height shall be measured in accordance with the applicable Building Code(currently 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. Property lines shall be clearly identified and all property pins shall
be staked prior to the first site inspection. (Department of Building Inspection)
T. All signs including entrance signs shall require building permits.Signs shall adhere to Section 23-
4-80 and Section 23-4-110 of the Weld County Code. These requirements shall apply to all
temporary and permanent signs. (Department of Planning Services)
U. Effective January 1,2003,Building Permits issued on the proposed lots will be required to adhere
to the fee structure of the County Road Impact Program. (Ordinance 2002-11) (Department of
Planning Services)
V. Effective August 1, 2005, Building Permits issued on the subject site will be required to adhere
to the fee structure of the Capital Expansion Impact Fee and the Stormwater/Drainage Impact
Fee. (Ordinance 2002-11) (Department of Planning Services)
W. Installation of utilities shall comply with Section 24-9-10 of the Weld County Code. (Department
of Planning Services)
X. The property owner shall be responsible for compiling with the Performance Standards of
Chapter 27, Article II and Article VIII, of the Weld County Code. (Department of Planning
Services)
Y. Weld County 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. (Department of Planning Services)
Z. The site shall maintain compliance at all times with the requirements of the Weld County
Departments of Public Works, Public Health and the Environment, and Planning Services, and
adopted Weld County Code and Policies. (Department of Planning Services)
AA. No development activity shall commence on the property,nor shall any building permits be issued
on the property until the final plan has been approved and recorded. (Department of Planning
Services)
BB. The applicant shall comply with Section 27-8-50 Weld County Code,as follows: Failure to submit
a Planned Unit Development Final Plan - If a PUD Final Plan application is not submitted within
three (3) years of the date of the approval of the PUD Zone District, the Board of County
Commissioners shall require the landowner to appear before it and present evidence
substantiating that the PUD project has not been abandoned and that the applicant possesses
the willingness and ability to continue with the submission of the PUD Final Plan. The Board may
extend the date for the submission of the PUD Final Plan application and shall annually require
Resolution PZ-1095
Sonja Stonestreet
Page 7
the applicant to demonstrate that the PUD has not been abandoned. If the Board determines that
conditions or statements made supporting the original approval of the PUD Zone District have
changed or that the landowner cannot implement the PUD Final Plan, the Board of County
Commissioners may, at a public hearing revoke the PUD Zone District and order the recorded
PUD Zone District reverted to the original Zone District. (Department of Planning Services)
CC. The PUD Final Plan shall comply with all regulations and requirements of Chapter 27 of the Weld
County Code. (Department of Planning Services)
4. The Change of Zone plat map shall be submitted to the Department of Planning Services'for recording
within thirty(30)days of approval by the Board of County Commissioners.With the Change of Zone plat
map, the applicant shall submit a digital file of all drawings associated with the Change of Zone
application. Acceptable CAD formats are .dwg, .dxf, and .dgn(Microstation); acceptable GIS formats
are .shp (Shape Files), Arclnfo Coverages and Arclnfo Export files format type is .e00. The preferred
format for Images is .tif(Group 4) ... (Group 6 is not acceptable). (Department of Planning Services)
5. In accordance with Weld County Code Ordinance 2005-7 approved June 1, 2005, should the plat not
be recorded within the required thirty (30) days from the date of the Board of County Commissioners
resolution a $50.00 recording continuance charge shall be added for each additional 3 month period.
(Department of Planning Services)
6. At the time of Final Plan submission:
A. The applicant shall submit an Improvements Agreements According to Policy Regarding
Collateral For (on-site) Improvements with the final plan application. This agreement must be
reviewed by County Staff and shall be approved by the Board of County Commissioners prior to
recording the final plat. (Departments of Public Works and Planning Services)
B. The applicant shall submit draft covenants for review by County Staff. The covenants shall
address comments made by the Weld County Sheriff's Office, the Colorado Division of Wildlife
and the Weld County Department of Public Health and Environment. (Departments of Planning
Services, Public Health and Environment, Weld County Sheriff's Office and the Division of
Wildlife)
C. In accordance with Section 2-13-70.H of the Weld County Code,the applicant shall designate a
name for the interior road that is identified the north-south cul-de-sacs as "Way' and the east-
west cul-de-sacs as"Place". The applicant shall contact Lin Dodge with Weld County Building
Inspection to discuss street name options and obtain new addresses with the appropriate street
names. (Building Inspection)
D. All copies of the final plan application shall include a copy of the corrected street name and
addressing from Weld County Building Inspection. (Department of Planning Services)
E. The applicant shall include evidence in the final plan application that the appropriate postal district
has reviewed the corrected addressing and interior street name. (Department of Planning
Services)
F. County Road 15 is classified by the County as a local road(Weld County Roadway Classification
Plan, June 2002) adjacent to the proposed development requiring a 60-foot right-of-way. If the
right-of-way cannot be verified, it shall be dedicated on the final plat. (Department of Public
Works)
G. County Road 86 is classified by the County as a local road (Weld County Roadway Classification
Plan, June 2002) adjacent to the proposed development requiring a 60-foot right-of-way. If the
right-of-way cannot be verified, it shall be dedicated on the final plat. (Department of Public
Works)
H. The applicant shall prepare a pavement design prepared by a professional engineer submitted
with the final plan materials. (Department of Public Works)
Resolution PZ-1095
Sonja Stonestreet
Page 8
I. Easements shall be shown on the final plat in accordance with County standards (Sec.24-7-60)
and/or Utility Board recommendations. (Department of Public Works)
J. All easements(front,side, and rear lot,etc...)shall be shown on the final plat in accordance with
Chapter 27, Article IX (PUD Mapping requirements)of the Weld County Code. (Department of
Public Works)
K. Intersection sight distance triangles at the development entrance(s) will be required. All
landscaping within the triangles must be less than 3Y feet in height at maturity, and noted on the
final roadway plans. (Department of Public Works)
L. The applicant shall submit to Public Works stamped, signed and dated final plat drawings and
roadway/ construction & grading plan drawings for review with the final plan application and
approval. Construction details must be included. (Department of Public Works)
M. Stop signs and street name signs will be required at all intersections and shown as a signing plan
on final roadway plans. The current edition of the Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices
(MUTCD) shall govern the signing plan. (Department of Public Works)
N. A final drainage report stamped, signed and dated by a professional engineer licensed in the
State of Colorado shall be submitted with the final plan application. The 5-year storm and
100-year storm drainage studies shall take into consideration off-site flows both entering and
leaving the development. Increased runoff due to development will require detention of the
100-year storm developed condition while releasing the 5-year storm existing condition. The final
drainage report shall include a flood hazard review documenting any FEMA defined floodways.
The engineer shall reference the specific map panel number, including date. The development
site shall be located on the copy of the FEMA map. (Department of Public Works)
Q. The applicant shall prepare a construction detail for typical lot grading with respect to drainage
for the final plan application. Front, rear and side slopes around building envelopes must be
addressed. In addition, drainage for rear and side lot line swales shall be considered. Building
envelopes must be planned to avoid storm water flows, while taking into account adjacent
drainage mitigation. (Department of Public Works)
P. Final drainage construction and erosion control plans (conforming to the drainage report)
stamped, signed and dated by a professional engineer licensed in the State of Colorado shall be
submitted with the final plan application. These plans (stormwater management plans)may be
based on Urban Drainage methodology. (Department of Public Works)
Q. The final plat shall designate two (2) septic system envelopes on each lot. All septic envelopes
must meet all setbacks. (Department of Public Health and Environment)
7. Prior to recording the final plat:
A. The applicant shall enter into Improvements Agreement According to Policy Regarding Collateral
for Improvements. The agreement shall be approved by the Board of County Commissioners.
(Departments of Planning Services and Public Works)
B. The applicant shall submit Certificates from the Secretary of State showing the Homeowners
Association has been formed and registered with the state. (Department of Planning Services)
C. The applicant shall submit finalized covenants and the appropriate recording fee(currently$6 for
the first page and $5 for each additional page) to the Department of Planning Services.
(Department of Planning Services)
D. The applicant shall submit a copy of a finalized Water Service Agreement between the applicant
and North Weld County Water District for service to the PUD. (Department of Planning Services)
Resolution PZ-1095
Sonja Stonestreet
Page 9
E. The applicant shall submit evidence that the water tap intended to service the outlot at the
entrance to the subdivision has been transferred to the Homeowners Association. (Department
of Planning Services)
F. The applicant shall submit a digital file of all drawings associated with the Final Plan application.
Acceptable CAD formats are .dwg, .dxf, and .dgn (Microstation); acceptable GIS formats are
.shp(Shape Files),Arclnfo Coverages and Arclnfo Export files format type is.e00. The preferred
format for Images is .tif (Group 4) ... (Group 6 is not acceptable). (Department of Planning
Services)
8. Prior to the release of collateral:
A. The applicant shall submit recorded deeds which transfer ownership of the outlot(s) to the
Homeowners Association. (Department of Planning Services)
Motion seconded by Roy Spitzer
VOTE:
For Passage Against Passage Absent
Michael Miller
Bruce Fitzgerald
Erich Ehrlich
Roy Spitzer
Chad Auer
Doug Ochsner
James Welch
Tom Holton
Paul Branham
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 January 3, 2006.
Dated the 3r° of January, 2006.
Voneen Macklin
Secretary
CR35.
Sheri Lockman, Department of Planning Services read a letter requesting a continuance to February 7,
2006 for mineral notification.
The following items will be heard:
CASE NUMBER: PZ-1095
APPLICANT: Sonja Stonestreet
PLANNER: Sheri Lockman
LEGAL DESCRIPTION: Pt of Lot 2 of RE-2690; pt SE4 of Section 31, T8N, R67W of the 6th P.M.,
Weld County, Colorado.
REQUEST: Change of Zone from A(Agricultural)to PUD with Estate Zone used for
Nine (9) Residential Lots (Waterford Hill PUD)
LOCATION: / mile north of CR 86 and west of and adjacent to CR 15.
Sheri Lockman, Department of Planning Services presented Case PZ-1095,reading the recommendation and
comments into the record.The Department of Planning Services is recommending denial of the application.
The site is located 1/2 mile north of County Road 86 and west of and adjacent to County Road 15 and the
surrounding properties are agricultural in nature. No correspondence has been received from surrounding
property owners. The present property owner, Sonja Stonestreet, submitted an application for a Recorded
Exemption and a nine lot PUD Change of Zone on September 21, 2005, The proposed nine lot subdivision
and the Recorded Exemption will create a total of ten lots. The Department of Planning Services staff has
consistently interpreted the intent of the Weld County Code to be that a Recorded Exemption used in
conjunction with a subdivision of 9 lots, results in urban scale land development. This subdivision is not
located in any of the defined urban areas. Further,Sage Hill PUD is being proposed 1/4 mile south of the site.
Because of the location of Sage Hill and the numerous developments currently in the process or recently
approved in this area, Planning staff has determined that Waterford Hill PUD should be required to include a
15% open space component. The applicant is proposing 3 outlots. Outlot A is 1.979 acres reserved for the
stormwater detention pond. Outlot B is 0.757 acres located adjacent to Cactus Hill Lateral Ditch. Neither of
these outlots will be useful to the residents of the PUD for recreational or scenic purposes as they are
exclusively for the use of the detention pond and irrigation ditch. Outlot C is 0.014 acres at the entrance to the
subdivision. It is intended to contain the development sign. However,the landscaping, bus shelter and cluster
mailbox are all proposed to be placed within the road right-of-way or on Lot 1. A copy of the letter from
Woodrow and Sobel, the Attorneys for the properties mineral owners is included in your packet. Should the
applicant not come to an agreement with Andadarko, drilling envelopes will be required and Anadarko will be
notified of the Board of County Commissioners hearing so that they can be present to voice their concerns.
Doug Ochsner asked for clarification on the location of the Recorded Exemption(RE). Ms. Lockman indicated
that lot B of the RE would be the 70 acres south of the site. Mr. Ochsner asked if there was currently a
residence on site. Ms. Lockman stated this was open farm ground.
Jim Martel, attorney representing the applicant,provided additional clarification on the proposal and addressed
two specific issues of concern. The Anadarko agreement is in second draft form and needs nothing more
than signatures. The concern with the ten lots adverse to nine can be addressed very simply. The applicant
choose to apply for both since there was going to be an agreement with Anadarko. Planning staff has
interpreted the code and determined the exemption to be part of the subdivision due to the timing of the
applications. The large lot of the RE would be the tenth lot in the process. The important aspect is there is no
place in regulations that actually says that the second RE lot has to be considered a part of the subdivision.
The applicant does not disagree with the possible interpretation but would add that they have not conveyed
any land in the last year to evade the regulations. Should the application for the subdivision be done a year
from now the Department of Planning Services would not have any concerns. The lower 70 acres of the
proposed RE will be maintained by the applicant and there is a farm lease in place for the next year. The
second issue pertaining to the open space and landscaping, the applicant would like a waiver of the open
space requirement. The applicant contends that the open space is more suitable to the individual lots adverse
to designed open space that will not be utilized by the homeowners. The size of the lots provides for view
corridors and allows for adequate recreation on the individual lots. There is the ability to divert from the open
space requirement as long as the intent of the code is met and the applicant feels the large lots will do this.
The common open space requirement would seem more appropriate if the homes were clustered with a more
intense development.
Doug Ochsner asked about the location of the entire parcel. Mr. Martel indicated the size was a total of 104
acres. The subdivision will encompass 30 acres while the remaining 70 acres will continue to be farmed.
Paul Branham asked about the open space requirement and if staff believes those identified are not adequate.
Mr. Branham asked for clarification on whether the applicant wanted the Planning Commission to consider
the open space as part of the lots. Mr. Martel indicated they would prefer that the Planning Commission waive
the open space requirement in light of the open lots and openness of those lots. The entrance will not be
open space and the drainage could be open space due to the view corridor.
The Chair asked if there was anyone in the audience who wished to speak for or against this application.
Mark Straface, representative for Anadarko, read a letter dated September 28, 2005, which has been
submitted as evidence addressing their concerns. Ms. Lockman indicated there is a new letter and Anadarko
would like to see an agreement in place at the time of final plat. Ms. Lockman added there is a condition in
place addressing those concerns.
The Chair closed the public portion of the hearing.
Paul Branham asked Ms. Lockman about the comment made regarding the timing of the applications and if
they were separated by a year staff would not have a concern. Ms. Lockman stated there is truth to that;the
intent of the Weld County Code is that the applicant cannot use congruent applications to obtain more lots.
The intent is to not have two minor subdivisions come in at the same time on the same location to avoid being
considered an urban scale development. Staff would not have a concern if this was applied for in one year.
Mr. Branham stated that the lower half is still farming and this in effect meets the intent. Ms. Lockman stated
that they came in at the same time and it technically means there are ten lots.This would also mean there are
overlapping applications. There is one property and they are applying for two separate processes to obtain
essentially ten lots.
Doug Ochsner stated the 15% open space is in the code for PUD, there are no requirements for minor
subdivisions at this time. Ms. Lockman stated the only waivers from a PUD for the open space is for non
urban scale developments. There is no requirement for open space in a minor subdivision. Ms. Lockman
quoted Section 27-6-80-B.7 which defines the urban scale open space element.
Roy Spitzer asked about the tenth lot and the size being 70 acres. Ms. Lockman stated that was correct. Mr.
Spitzer asked if this was a technicality. Ms. Lockman stated she has seen applications denied due in part to
this but in that instance there were other circumstances. Mr.Ochsner added there have been cases in which
the applicant applied for nine lots with the tenth lot RE to be sold off and a home placed on that. Technically
that would make a ten lot subdivision. In this circumstance it is not the intent of the applicant to sell the tenth
lot off. The lot B of the RE will continue to be owned by the same applicant and farmed.
Jim Martel added that the applicant would be happy to put a restriction on the 70 acre lot in that it will not be
divided or sold in the upcoming year. The farm lease can be included in the application.
Doug Ochsner asked if the RE lot was sold this would not be a concern. Ms. Lockman stated that if it was
done in the same year it would still be discussed. The issue is if the applications are done at the same time,
the code specifies one year. The evasion is easier when the applications are done at the same time, but as
time goes by it is more difficult to prove.
Roy Spitzer indicated he was troubled with the ten lots but not sure where to draw the line. Mr. Spitzer asked
if an application would have come in after the year timeframe would the same objections be issued. Ms.
Lockman stated there would be no concerns. Ms. Lockman provided clarification on the different processes
and what each entailed. Mr. Spitzer asked if this were eight lots would it make a difference. Ms. Lockman
stated there have been some that have done this so the issue would not have to be addressed.
Roy Spitzer asked if the stormwater detention pond could be considered open space. Ms. Lockman stated it
could be if the design included a dual use.
James Welch asked about the urban scale and the proximity to some of the other subdivisions and how this
was addressed in the code. Ms. Lockman stated there are two instances in the code in which it address this.
One addresses 1/4 mile while the other indicates close proximity. This area has developed so quickly so the
mile is contiguous to another subdivision property.
Doug Ochsner asked if the interior road will be paved. Drew Scheltinga,Public Works,stated this was a gated
community with an internal paved road that will be maintained by the HOA. The road will not be dedicated to
the public.
Paul Branham added the applicant has no intent to bypass the regulations with regards to the ten lots. The
concern is with the open space and he will not be in acceptance due to open space.
Doug Ochsner asked if there were any physical limitations separating the subdivision and the RE. Mr. Martel
stated that all the lots could be down sized to create larger open area and make the drainage a duel purpose.
The problem becomes the maintenance that is not necessary to this type of development. The open space is
more of a burden than a benefit. The larger lots and lack of open space provides for recreation on the lots
while the open space would not be used anyway.
Mike Ketterling, engineer for the project, added that he lives in a subdivision with open space that is nothing
more than weeds and their HOA is trying to determine who should be responsible to maintain. The open
space does not really make sense in this type of design.
Doug Ochsner agrees with the comment about open space. This application is a PUD so the applicant can
ask for what they want. This makes this a better more creative subdivision. There are places with open
spaces that are not controlled and this makes the open space more of a mess. Mr.Ochsner would be willing
to waive the open space requirement.
Paul Branham stated that there needs to be open space, but not sure that the 15 % is the right amount.
Roy Spitzer indicated he is still troubled by the regulations of the ten lots. The irregular shape for farming is
difficult to understand and hard for farming. The open space needs to be there so he will be against this
proposal.
James Welch stated that the open space lots can become a mess and he is not in favor of open space. The
ten lots is a concern though. It may not be the intent of the applicant to evade but it is creating ten lots. There
is nothing to stop the applicant from selling.
James Welch moved that Case PZ-1095,be forwarded to the Board of County Commissioners along with the
Conditions of Approval and Development Standards with the Planning Commissions recommendation of
denial. Roy Spitzer seconded the motion.
The Chair asked the secretary to poll the members of the Planning Commission for their decision. Roy
Spitzer, yes; James Welch, yes; Chad Auer, yes; Doug Ochsner, no; Paul Branham, yes. Motion carried.
Doug Ochsner referred to Section 21-3-90 which addresses the nine lot subdivisions. The intent of the code is
to regulate subdivisions of ten lots by having ten for sale lots by one owner. This is not the intent of this
applicant and they are going for a nine lot subdivision which is the intent of the code.
Meeting adjourned at 2:40 p.m.
Respectfully submitted
\1� t
Voneen Macklin
Secretary
Hello