Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout20060753.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: PZ-1102 APPLICANT: Trinity Properties LP PLANNER: Sheri Lockman LEGAL DESCRIPTION: Part of Section 7, T6N, R63W of the 6th P.M., Weld County, Colorado. REQUEST: Change of Zone from Agriculture to PUD for 17residential lots, 2 non- residential agricultural outlots and .8 acres of open space along with oil & gas production. (Deer Meadows ) LOCATION: North of and adjacent to CR 70 approximately 1/2 mile east of CR 61. 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 26-5-30 of the Weld County Code. 2. The submitted materials are in compliance with Section 27.6.120 of the Weld County Code as follows: A. Section 27-6-120.B.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 proposed site is not influenced by an Inter-Governmental Agreement nor is the site within the three mile referral area for any municipality. The proposal is consistent with the aforementioned documents as follows: Section 22-3-50.8.1, P.Goal 2 "Require adequate facilities and services to assure the health, safety and general welfare of the present and future residents of the County." The proposed PUD will be serviced by individual wells and individual sewage disposal systems will handle the effluent flow. In a referral dated January 9, 2006,the Weld County Department of Public Health and Environment has indicated that the application has satisfied Chapter 27 of the Weld County Code in regards to water and sewer service. The referral response dated January 10, 2006 from the State of Colorado, Division of Water Resources indicates that the applicant needs to obtain well permits for the 19 proposed wells and water court decrees for the Augmentation Plan to replace depletions from the wells. Conditions of approval ensure that these will be included in the Final Plan application. B. Section 27-6-120.8.6.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. Section 27-2-20,Access standards—All PUD developments will be served by an internally paved road system according to County standards.An exception to paving may be granted by the Director of Public Works for residential PUDs of nine (9) lots or less located in nonurban areas as defined in Chapter 22 of the Weld County Code, when the PUD is not located within close proximity to other PUDS, subdivisions and municipal boundaries, and when access to the PUD is not from a public road which is paved or will be paved within a year of approval of the PUD." The proposed development is an urban scale development in that it is adjacent to Briggsdale and exceeds 9 lots. Therefore an exception to pavement may only be granted by the Board of County Commissioners. Section 27-2-40, Bulk requirements—The applicant has included auxiliary quarters as an allowed use on Lots 1 through 17. Section 27-2-50, Circulation—Conditions of approval require that all references to on-street parking be removed from the covenants. 4. EXHIBIT 2006-0753 *1102. Resolution PZ-1102 Trinity Properties Page 2 Section 27-2-55, Cluster PUD— Conditions of Approval ensure that the applicant will meet the criteria of a Cluster PUD including the requirement that at least two-thirds(2/3)of the total area of the property be reserved for forty(40)years for agricultural purposes. Further, the density of the PUD does not exceed two (2) residential units for each thirty-five (35)acres. Section 27-2-90, 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 gowth corridors and boundaries. All urban scale developments shall pave the internal road systems of the development. The proposed development is adjacent to Briggsdale and exceeds 9 lots. The Weld County Planning Commission is recommending the Board of County Commissioners waive the requirement for paving. The applicant has met the remaining performance standards as delineated in Section 27-2- 10. The Conditions of Approval and Development Standards ensure compliance with Sections 27-2-20 through 27-2-210 of the Weld County Code. C. Section 27-6-120.8.6.c - That the uses which would be permitted shall be compatible with the existing or 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 or master plans of affected municipalities. The proposed site is not influenced by an Inter-Governmental Agreement nor is the site within the three mile referral area for any municipality. D. Section 27-6-120.B.6.d-That the PUD Zone District shall be serviced by an adequate water supply and sewage disposal system in compliance with the Performance Standards in Article II the Weld County Code. The proposed PUD will be serviced by individual wells and individual sewage disposal systems will handle the effluent flow. Conditions of approval ensure that all well permits and the associated Augmentation Plan will be completed prior to recording the Final Plat. E. Section 27-6-120.B.6.e-That street orhighway facilities providing access to the property are adequate in functional classification, width, and structural capacity to meet the traffic requirements of the uses of the proposed PUD Zone District. In a referral dated January 12, 2006, the Weld County Department of Public Works has required that the applicant build County Road 70 in accordance with Weld County standards for local gravel roads the entirety of the frontage associated with the proposed cluster PUD terminating at the eastern entrance of the subdivision. The applicant is required to contact the property owner south of and adjacent to the property to offer notification of the reserved 60 feet of right of way for the expansion of County Road 70 as well as relocate the existing property line fence south to the appropriate right of way. F. Section 27-6-120.8.6.f - An off-site road improvements agreement and an on-site improvements agreement proposal is in compliance with Chapter 24 of the Weld County Code as amended and a road improvements agreement is complete and has been submitted, if applicable. Conditions of approval ensure that the applicant will complete Improvements Agreements for on-site and off-site development. The applicant is required to include dust suppression in the off-site agreement. G. Section 27-6-120.8.6.g- That there has been compliance with the applicable requirements contained in Chapter 23 of the Weld County Code regarding overlay districts, commercial mineral deposits, and soil conditions on the subject site. At the Sketch Plan phase the Colorado Geological Survey indicated that high groundwater is an issue on the site. Conditions of Approval require the applicant to submit additional information regarding seasonal depths to groundwater for building sites to determine if basements and crawl spaces are feasible. Resolution PZ-1102 Trinity Properties Page 3 H. Section 27-6-120.8.6.h-Consistency exists between the proposed zone district(s),uses,the specific or conceptual development guide.The submitted Specific Development Guide does accurately reflect the performance standards and allowed uses described in the proposed zone district, as described previously. This approval recommendation is based upon compliance with Chapter 27 requirements. The Change of Zone from A (Agricultural) to PUD is conditional upon the following: 1. Prior to recording the Change of Zone plat: A. All sheets of the Change of Zone plat shall be labeled Deer Meadows Cluster PUD,PZ-1102. (Department of Planning Services) B. The applicant shall submit to the Department of Planning Services a recorded Correction Deed from Rocky D.Tannehill and Mid Coast Development, Inc.,a Colorado Corporation to Trinity Properties, L.P. to address the errors listed by Security Title Guaranty Co. in the Title Insurance Commitment included in application materials.(Department of Planning Services) C. The plat shall be amended as follows: 1) Internal roads shall meet Weld County criteria for a PUD. The internal roadway right-of-way shall be sixty (60) feet in width . A typical section of interior roadway shall 26 foot wide gravel road with four foot aggregate base course. Roadside drainage shall be contained within the right-of-way.The applicant in the Sketch Plan materials indicates a gravel interior roadway system.Section 27-2-20 states:All PUD developments will be served by an internally paved road system according to County standards. (Department of Public Works) 2) The plat shall indicate the median at the entrance a tract that will be owned and maintained by the Homeowners Association. (Department of Planning Services) 3) The plat shall indicate the location of the 20 foot pipeline easement as specified on the Nonexclusive Pipeline Easement recorded on July 12, 2005 under Reception Number 3302490, in addition to the approximate location of the pipeline which is currently being shown. (Department of Planning Services) 4) Outlot B indicates three areas which are for potential recharge ponds.The plat shall include easements for access and usage of these areas. (Department of Planning Services) D. 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 seventeen (17) residential lots, two (2) non-residential agricultural outlots and .8 acres of open space along with oil and gas production as indicated in the application materials on file in the Department of Planning Services. Lots 1 through 17 will adhere to the uses allowed in the E (Estate)Zone District except auxiliary quarters shall be allowed.Outlot A and B will adhere to the uses allowed in the A(Agricultural)Zone District except only nonresidential agricultural accessory buildings shall be allowed.Tract 1 and 2 are open space and shall contain the development sign, mail kiosk,water storage tank and potential bus shelter.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) Resolution PZ-1102 Trinity Properties Page 4 B. Outlots A and B shall be restricted to farming and ranching operations and be free from development for any other uses for a period of forty (40) years from the date the final plan is approved. (Department of Planning Services) C. Auxiliary quarters shall comply will all requirements listed in Section 23-1-90 of the Weld County Code. (Department of Planning Services) D. All landscaping within the site distance triangles must be less than 3'/z feet in height at maturity. (Department of Public Works) E. A Homeowner'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) F. Weld County's Right to Farm as delineated on this plat shall be recognized at all times. (Department of Planning Services) G. Water service shall be obtained from individual wells. (Department of Public Health and Environment) H. 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) I. 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) J. 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) K. 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) L. 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) M. A separate building permit shall be obtained prior to the construction of any structure including the mail kiosk, bus shelter and the monument sign. (Department of Building Inspection) N. A plan review is required for each building for which a building permit is required. Two complete sets of plans are required when applying for each permit. Residential building plans may be required to bear the wet stamp of a Colorado registered architect or engineer. (Department of Building Inspection) Resolution PZ-1102 Trinity Properties Page 5 O. 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) P. Each residential 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) Q. Fire resistance of walls and openings, construction requirements, maximum building height and allowable areas will be reviewed at the plan review. Setback and offset distances shall be determined by Chapter 23 of the Weld County Code. (Department of Building Inspection) R. 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. When measuring buildings to determine offset and setback requirements, buildings 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) S. 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) T. 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) U. In the Engineering Geology Report by Terra Logics Consulting, LLC dated May 23, 2005 recommendations were made regarding testing for radon,testing well water for methane and the construction of perimeter drains to mitigate the affects of shallow groundwater.Property owners should follow these recommendations. (Colorado Geological Survey) V. It is recommended that Oil and gas structures within Outlot A shall be fenced to avoid tampering. (Department of Planning Services) W. All 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) X. Installation of utilities shall comply with Section 24-9-10 of the Weld County Code. (Department of Planning Services) Y. 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) Z. 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) AA. 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) Resolution PZ-1102 Trinity Properties Page 6 BB. 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) CC. 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 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) DD. 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 applicable Post Office shall be contacted regarding the bus/mail pullout. The applicant shall provide to the Department of Planning Services written documentation indicating the Post Office design standards and delivery requirements have been met. The location of the mail kiosk shall be shown on the final plat. (Departments of Planning Services) B. The applicant shall submit evidence to the Weld County Department of Planning Services with the final plan application that all proposed street names and lot addresses have been reviewed by the appropriate Post Office. (Department of Planning Services) C. The final plat shall indicate the location of the entry sign, possible bus shelter and water storage tank within the open space tracts. The location of the structures shall meet all required offsets and setbacks and shall not be located within utility easements.(Department of Planning Services) D. The applicant shall include a copy of the proposed street name and addresses with the Final Plat application forms for review and approval by referral agencies.(Department of Planning Services) E. To determine if basements or crawl spaces are feasible, the applicant shall submit additional information regarding seasonal depths to groundwater for building sites. (Colorado Geological Survey) F. The applicant will be required to apply dust suppression chemicals to adjacent county roadways and in front of impacted existing homes along the proposed traffic route. This would include an offsite improvements agreement for a term that would include future developments for that term. (Department of Public Works) Resolution PZ-1102 Trinity Properties Page 7 G. The applicant shall submit an Improvements Agreement According to Policy Regarding Collateral for(on-site)Improvements with the final plan application. This agreements 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) H. 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) I. 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) J. 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) K. 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) L. 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 each final plan(phase)application. These plans(stormwater management plans) may be based on Urban Drainage methodology. (Department of Public Works) M. Easements shall be shown on the final plat in accordance with County standards and/or Utility Board recommendations. (Department of Public Works) N. Intersection sight distance triangles at the development entrance(s) will be required. All landscaping within the triangles must be less than 3%feet in height at maturity,and noted on the final roadway plans. (Department of Public Works) O. The final plan shall include a Landscape Plan for the proposed entryway. (Department of Planning Services) P. The applicant has submitted preliminary covenants for Deer Meadows.The covenants shall be amended to include the following: 1) A Manure and Stormwater Management Plan for the indoor/outdoor arena on Outlot A. (Department of Public Health and Environment) 2) A Management Plan for the water storage tank for fire suppression.(Department of Public Health and Environment) 3) A notification that use of the North Side Lateral Ditch right-of-way is prohibited unless approved by the Directors of the Ditch Company. (North Side Lateral Ditch Company) 4) Preliminary covenants indicate that a Open Space Management Plan will be developed with the assistance of the CSU Cooperative Extension.The applicant shall submit evidence that the Plan has been completed and that it has been incorporated into the covenants. (Colorado Division of Wildlife and the Department of Planning Services) Resolution PZ-1102 Trinity Properties Page 8 5) Sections 11.10.o and 10.11ee.4 of the preliminary covenants discuss on street parking. The covenants shall be amended to state that on street parking will not be allowed. (Department of Planning Services) 6) Section 11.10.bb states that no owner shall change the drainage pattern unless the change is approved by the Architectural Review Committee. Section 11.10.bb shall be amended to state no owner shall change the drainage pattern unless the change is approved by the Architectural Review Committee and the Weld County Department of Public Works. (Department of Planning Services) 7) The mineral rights under the site are not owned or leased by the applicant. Section 11.10.i shall be amended to indicate drilling may occur. (Department of Planning Services) 8) The applicant shall address dust abatement and maintenance of the internal roadway. 7. Prior to recording the final plat: A. The applicant shall submit evidence that a cash in lieu of land dedication fee has been paid to the Platte Valley School District. (Department of Planning Services) 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 evidence that the covenants have been approved by the County Attorney's Office. (Department of Planning Services) D. A finalized and recorded agreement for the administration of replacement water and recharge ponds with New Cache la Poudre Irrigating Company shall be submitted to the Department of Planning Services. (Department of Planning Services) E. The applicant shall enter into Improvements Agreements According to Policy Regarding Collateral for Improvements for on and off-site improvements. These agreements shall be approved by the Board of County Commissioners. (Departments of Planning Services and Public Works) F. Finalized covenants and the appropriate recording fee(currently$6 for the first page and $5 for all others)shall be submitted to the Weld County Department of Planning Services for recording at the Weld County Clerk and Recorders office. (Department of Planning Services) G. 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). (Dept. of Planning Services) H. The applicant shall submit well permits for the 19 proposed wells and the water court decrees for the Augmentation Plan to replace depletions from the wells. (Division of Water Resources) I. A agreement for the administration of replacement water and recharge ponds with New Cache la Poudre Irrigating Company shall be included in the Final Plan application. (Department of Planning Services) J. The applicant must have in place with Anadarko Entities and their leasees an agreement for the compatible development for the surface estate and oil and gas estates or they shall provide evidence of an attempt to reach such agreement. Resolution PZ-1102 Trinity Properties Page 9 8. Prior to release of collateral: A. The applicant shall submit evidence that the two irrigation wells,the open space tracts and Outlot A have been deeded to the Deer Meadows Homeowners Association. (Department of Planning Services) B. The applicant shall submit evidence that the Galeton Fire Protection District has approved the construction of the 5,000 gallon water tank. (Department of Planning Services) Motion seconded by Tom Holton 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 February 7, 2006. Dated 7th day of February, 2096. Voneen Macklin Secretary .;2 - 1 - zoos Tom Holton moved to amend Development Standards #19 and #20 according to staff recommendations. Erich Ehrlich seconded. Motion carried. Robb Casseday agrees to the Development Standards and Conditions of Approval. Chad Auer moved that Case USR-1540, be forwarded to the Board of County Commissioners along with the Conditions of Approval and Development Standards with the Planning Commissions recommendation of approval. Tom Holton seconded the motion. The Chair asked the secretary to poll the members of the Planning Commission for their decision. Roy Spitzer, yes; Erich Ehrlich, yes; James Welch, yes; Chad Auer, yes; Tom Holton, yes; Doug Ochsner, yes; Bruce Fitzgerald, yes; Paul Branham, yes. Motion carried unanimously. CASE NUMBER: PZ-1102 APPLICANT: Trinity Properties LP PLANNER: Sheri Lockman LEGAL DESCRIPTION: Part of Section 7, T6N, R63W of the 6th P.M., Weld County, Colorado. REQUEST: Change of Zone from Agriculture to PUD for 17residential lots, 2 non- residential agricultural outlots and .8 acres of open space along with oil & gas production. (Deer Meadows) LOCATION: North of and adjacent to CR 70 approximately 1/2 mile east of CR 61. Sheri Lockman, Department of Planning Services presented Case PZ-1102, 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. Trinity Properties LP c/o Ed Flynn has applied for a Change of Zone from Agricultural to PUD for 17 residential lots, 2 non- residential agricultural outlots and .8 acres of open space along with oil and gas production. The sign announcing the Planning Commission hearing was posted January 6 by Planning Staff. The site is located north of and adjacent to County Road 70 &approximately'A mile east of County Road 61. Surrounding properties are a agricultural in nature and Barnsville is adjacent to the site along the north edge of the property. 16 referral agencies reviewed this case, 12 responded favorably or included conditions that have been addressed through development standards and conditions of approval. Deer Meadows is a cluster PUD.As such 2/3 of the total area of the property must be reserved for forty(40)years for agricultural purposes. And the density of the PUD can not exceed two(2)residential units for each thirty- five(35)acres. The applicant has included enough acreage to attain 17 residential lots. Although this does exceed the 9 lots normally allowed in a non-urban area, it is Planning Staffs interpretation of the code that the number of residential lots allowed in a cluster PUD is entirely computed by the acreage in the subdivision. The proposed PUD will be serviced by individual wells and individual sewage disposal systems. There is a pending augmentation Plan for the irrigation wells. The Final Plan application is required to include the well permits for the 19 proposed wells and the water court decrees for the Augmentation Plan to replace depletions from the wells. Ann Johnson,representative for applicant, provided clarification on the proposal. The project location is north of and adjacent to Weld County Road (WCR) 70 and west of and adjacent to the right of way for WCR 63. The site is not located adjacent to a municipality or other PUD's, subdivisions, municipal boundaries or an urban growth corridor or boundary. The property is located in close proximity of Barnesville,6 miles southeast of Galeton, 4 miles northeast of Gill, and 8 miles northeast of Kersey. This project is not a standard PUD. It follows Cluster provisions. This project follows the definition of Non Urban Scale Development which includes, "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 40 years." This project follows the Cluster provision of Article X,Chapter 27 as well as the standard PUD process of Chapter 27 in that a minimum of 2/3 of the property acreage will be reserved for a minimum of 40 years. (66.7% or 202.6 acres in Outlots A and B). Proposed agricultural I. conservation easement for a minimum of 40 years. Agricultural buildings are permitted as necessary. r Intended use as pasture, a potential indoor/outdoor arena and to preserve the site's natural features. There are some very severe areas with a gully in the middle and the terrain needs to be preserved. There will be 17 Z c Estate/residential Lots clustered around the existing site which equates to 28.8% of the site. The lots will X range in size between 3.2—10.2 acres with auxiliary quarters as defined in Section 23-1-90. The right-of-way r J and open space tracts equate to 13.4 acres or 4.41%of the site and the outlots will be utilized for the bus stop location, signage, mail kiosk,water storage tank. The applicant has worked with referral agencies including the Kersey School District, the Galeton Fire Protection Distirct, Post Office, Sheriff, Weld County Public Works, Planning and Environmental Health to mitigate concerns prior to this hearing. This proposal meets and exceeds portions of the review and approval criteria for a Cluster Non Urban PUD Change of Zone in the Weld County Code. The applicant is asking for a favorable recommendation to the BCC and staff approval of final plat. Doug Ochsner asked where nearest residences were located. Ms. Johnson stated there are homes on CR 61.5 and CR 70, which is next to the west property line. James Welch asked about a railroad right-of-way spur that was to be on the site. Todd Hodges, representative for the applicant, indicated that was no longer there and it was not in the title work. The Chair asked if there was anyone in the audience who wished to speak for or against this application. Joyce Johnson, neighbor, indicated her concerns. She lives 1/10 mile west and there are also two other residences within 1/4 mile. They have some concerns which are:an increase in population and the fact it would either double or triple the residences in the area. Domestic water is another concern,what effect will these wells have on their wells. There is wildlife habitat and specific movement patterns in the area. The dust and traffic on the gravel road to Hwy 392 is a concern. There has been some drilling of wells in the area. A large concern would be impacts from the septic systems. Do not want neighbors from the city complaining about noises and smells. Don Magnuson, representative of Cache La Poudre irrigation and the Lower Poudre Augmentation Company, indicated their issues. The applicant is putting a plan together for well augmentation identified as recharge and the land owners have been cooperative. The agreement is not completed but is very close. The recharge will be applied to the augmentation for wells and the Lower Poudre. The agreement is approved in concept but needs to be finished. There are also some easement that need to be finalized. Platting of easements will address the concerns. Tom Holton asked for clarification on the recharge pit. Mr.Magnuson stated the pond will detain the water and it will percolate back to the aquifer. This will replace what is being pumped from the site. There are two ponds slated for this site. They will augment the domestic wells first and then the capicty wells second. Mr. Holton asked where the ponds will be located. Mr.Magnuson stated they will be on the south and west portion of the property. The ponds are existing but need some clean up. Mr. Holton asked if this would be seasonal or year around. Mr. Magnuson stated it would be seasonal. Paul Branham asked if there is a chance the wells will have impact on the Johnson wells or will the recharge take care of that. Mr. Magnuson stated there should be no impact on the wells. The augmentation wells will be 100 feet deep which makes it easier to replace depletion. Mary Beth Sobel,attorney for Anadarko,added they submitted their objections in letter format that have been given to the Planning Commission members. The only objection to this is due to the oil and gas interests. The oil and gas lease to the property is a past agreement. There are four wells on site in the quarter sections in the south east quarter. Anadarko would like to have the agreements finalized before approval of the final plan. There have been three drafts done. Ms. Lockman stated there could be a Development Standard added indicating the applicants attempt to comply with the concerns but since the applicant has already placed the 400 foot and 800 foot boxes on the plat for building it was not added. Department of Planning Services wants to see the agreements prior to scheduling the final so those agreements can be reviewed prior to the final. A condition should be added at prior to submittal an agreement should be reached or that it is included in the final plan submission. The agreement should be submitted to Department of Planning Services staff for review. Brian Tooley,attorney for United States Exploration Inc., provided issues for the proposal. The applicant has worked in good faith but some material issues need to be done. Their request is that any final application be contingent upon an agreement. The agreement should not be difficult. The roads in the area will need to be able to handle heavy loads and maintaining them as gravel would be accepted. The Chair closed public portion. Annie Best Johnson, provided clarification. The Division of Wildlife provided a referral indicating the wildlife would be free flowing. The applicants have worked with agencies for weed managements, lot management and will maintain good conservation techniques. The Right to Farm Act will be on the plat and it deals with the smells and such associated with farming and agricultural areas. The dust will be addressed with suppression in a proportionate share agreement. The notices were done correctly. There are also Conditions of Approval A&B that will be deleted as well as 1 C. Mr. Brent Cohen will address the Oil and Gas leases. Brent Cohen, attorney for the applicant, provided clarification on the oil agreements. They are being worked on and there are small things that need to be resolved. Those issues will be easy to resolve. The outlot B be will be for mineral development by virtue of the conservation easement. Mr.Cohen asked that Ms.Lockman restate the Conditions of Approval addressing the desire for the agreements to be given to staff prior to the final plan for review purposes. Mr.Cohen recommends there be an"or" added to be consistent with the PUD ordinances. The statement could say"....or shall provide written evidence that an adequate attempt has been made to mitigate the concerns of the mineral owners of the property." Ms. Lockman agrees but would not support staff approval at final without the agreements. Mr. Cohen states that if there is no written agreement staff will decide rather an adequate attempt has been made. Mr. Cohen stated that he is comfortable in having the agreements resolved. Mr. Cohen added that there is no paving to the site and paving internally could cause problems with maintenance due to the heavy loads of the oil and gas trucks that will be using the roadway. The southern most portion of the site has been drilled. Mr. Fitzgerald asked if the request was to not have the internal roadway paved. Mr. Cohen indicated that was correct. Tom Holton asked where the language for the oil and gas was located. Mr. Cohen stated it is in the PUD ordinance Section 27-5-30.H. Anne Best Johnson continued with the list of Conditions of Approval that are being asked to be amended. The applicant would like Public Works to approve the addition of a proportionate share of dust suppressant on page 4 item F and page item I the way written it alludes to the applicant being solely responsible and not a proportionate share of their impact on the road. Mr.Ochsner asked what that share was. Mr.Schei stated it has not been currently worked out. It will be done before the Board of County Commissioners hearing but it is typically referred to the final plat. If the change of zone is not approved there will be no need for an offsite agreement. The proportionate share is a standard request. Change of Zone plat note item 3U on page 7 implies Oil and Gas operators will determine the fencing and the applicant would like this removed. The standard should not be the responsibility of the applicant if the operators do not believe it is in their best interest to fence. Would like this removed. Forrest Leaf, engineering,addressed the wells and water levels. The wells are drilled 200 feet and are not in an alluvial aquifer but deeper. This is a better quality of water. Once this plan is approved by the State Engineer or by decree by water court the well permits will be issued. At that time the State engineer will require that all wells within 600 feet be identified. It will also require identification of any impact on those wells. The wells will be protected by the State regulations. Andy Jones, attorney for the applicant, provided clarification on the legal issues on the water supply. The process indicates that there is a need to have wells and also be able to replace the water utilized with the same amount of water. Therefore,they will provide recharge water to be put into ponds that will percolate to the aquifer to balance out the depletion. Presently there is a pending case which will be heard in August of this year. Normally cases are settled out of court and this is anticipated. In worst case they will have court and get a decree for the augmentation plan by mid October. This decree will indicate how many wells will be on the site. The applicant would like to continue with the final plat submittal during this process but the conditions require well permits to be issued prior to the submittal of the final plat. The applicant would like to resolve the water issues then record. That would be the modification requested. Ms. Lockman stated that there is no detriment in moving this (Condition 6.A)to Prior to Recording 7.H. Anne Best Johnson continued with concerns regarding the applicability of Condition 6B. Pam Smith, Department of Public Health, stated that the standard in the code what implies that there must be a community water source. The first sentence is not applicable since they are planning individual wells. Ms. Johnson continued with the request to remove the requirement for the internal paved roadway and all its references. The applicant would like gravel. The references are located on page 3 item B; page 5 item D1, page 9 item 6K,and any other reference to paving. Requiring an internal paved road does not reflect the area they defeat the rural nature. The gravel roads will be improved to county standards. Furthermore, the Weld County Roads providing access to the site are to be constructed by the applicants and will be in gravel. These conditions discourage Cluster because the intent of the Cluster Article was to be Non Urban with the benefit to the County of preserving Agricultural Land or special site features. The trade-off in preserving this features/property is the increased density. The PUD process expresses the desire of the County to evaluate development proposals in a process that encourages flexibility and variety. (22-1-50.D.3.f) Consider the design of roads with adjacent land uses. (Transportation, T.Goal 3). Standards for development of Non Urban Scale developments:Weld County Public Works approved an internal gravel road on January 6,2006. The width, depth of the roadway will be designed to meet the Weld County Public Works standards and regulations and meets the criteria for the Cluster Development Plan. The internal roadway is proposed to be maintained by the Homeowner's Association. The internal roadway is proposed to be gravel based on the "rural"nature of this development,access from an existing county road that is gravel and the fact that this is a "non-urban"type development based on the Cluster PUD criteria similar to a Minor Subdivision. The access is from an existing county road that is gravel and the applicants are constructing the gravel road. Paul Branham questions the internal paving and rather it could be removed. Ms. Lockman indicated it could be. Peter Schei stated there can be a paving waiver but the PUD criteria require paving on the internal roadway. Dust suppression will be in the vicinity due to the use of heavy equipment on internal roadways. Typically the roads to well heads are not built for this so they will need to be modified. This heavy equipment needs a transport permit from Public Works and this is monitored. Mr. Fitzgerald asked if the county assesses a fee to move equipment. Roy Spitzer added that a paved road will need more maintenance than gravel and will the HOA handle this. Mr. Schei stated that the HOA may have difficulties maintaining the gravel road due to the heavy equipment use. r Erich Ehrlich stated that this request is for a change of zone from agricultural to PUD but it seems like there is mixed uses on the land including mining, oil and gas drilling, residences, pasture and a potential arena. Mr. Hodges stated that the outlots are under conservation easements for 40 years and the uses are consistent with the code to preserve for future ranching. The mining would not occur for hard rock. The oil and gas is standard with other developments,since this is a large site there will be several drill sites accommodated. The uses on the lots are estate type so they kept the lots larger and spread them out over property. The arena is a possibility but not certain but would fit in the area. Outlot A will be maintained by the HOA and outlot B will remain the property owners. Erich Ehrlich has been excused for a prior commitment. Tom Holton asked for clarification on the internal dust problems. Mr. Schei stated that the internal roadway will not be covered by the proportionate share but the external is proposed for an offsite improvements agreement. The internal road is the Homeowners Associations responsibility. If gravel is approved for the internal roadway the HOA covenants will need to address the dust suppression and maintenance. Todd Hodges stated if gravel was approved they will add dust mitigation to the covenants and it will be submitted as part of the onsite improvements agreements. First issue page 3 dealing with the internal roadway. Roy Spitzer indicated it seems logical to have gravel but the maintenance is a concern. Mr. Spitzer asked if there was a point in which the county would take over the road. Mr.Schei stated the roadway would need to be built to county standards before they would take it. Doug Ochsner agrees that gravel would be adequate especially if there was suppressant. All were in agreement. Sheri Lockman suggested the following language"the internal roadway right-of-way shall be 60 feet in width.A typical section of interior roadway shall be 26 foot wide gravel road with four foot aggregate base course on the final plat." This would be placed on page 5 as D 1. Staff would also like to strike page 9 items 6 K. Staff indicated they would amend their recommendations in the comments. Doug Ochsner moved to approve the suggested language and above referenced amendments. Tom Holton seconded. 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;Tom Holton,yes; Doug Ochsner,yes;Bruce Fitzgerald,yes; Paul Branham, yes. Motion carried unanimously. Second would be the internal dust abatement issue. Paul Branham indicated he believes the Planning Commission should address dust abatement. Ms. Lockman indicated that on page 10 item T, staff has asked for the covenants to be addressed. The language could be added as item T 8. The language would need to include dust abatement and maintenance of the interior roadway. Tom Holton moved to add T.8 language that addresses dust abatement and maintenance of the internal roadway. Chad Auer seconded. 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;Tom Holton,yes;Doug Ochsner,yes;Bruce Fitzgerald,yes; Paul Branham, yes. Motion carried unanimously. Mr. Fitzgerald moved on to external dust control and the applicant's proportionate share. Mr.Auer asked what that share would be. Mr. Schei indicated that the proportionate share has been the typical language. Mr. Fizterald asked whether the equation for the proportionate share included from the entrance to a main roadway. Mr. Schei stated that was correct and the traffic count will be utilized to determine the share. In the improvements agreement there will be long term criteria for the dust suppression. Page 9 Item I addresses the dust suppression on the frontage roadway from Hwy 392 to the entrance. The applicant would like to make this a proportionate share and not be responsible for the entire cost. Mr.Schei stated vehicle trips and concerns for dust by the homeowners. Dust suppression will still need to be done in front of the existing structures due to the increase that this development will cause. Mr.Auer again asked what the proportionate share would be. Mr. Schei stated it would be 100%. Mr. Welch stated a neighbor was on CR 70 and the condition does not address that area. Mr.Schei stated it could and language should be added to include CR 70 in the dust abatement. The sentence should be amended to read " adjacent any existing or future homes between state Highway 392 and the main entrance to the property, also along CR 70 to the west of the property." Mr. Morrison asked if this was specific to residences and not a general application. Mr. Schei stated it was. Doug Ochsner indicated his concern regarding future structures. The applicant should not be responsible for the entire dust abatement for future structures. Mr.Schei stated dust abatement should be limited to the term of the agreement be it five or ten years. Mr. Hodges proposed that the language be flexible so that the applicant will submit a dust abatement plant that will review the traffic count and work with Public Works directly and have it finished at the final plat. Mr. Hodges recommended removing page 9 Item I fourth sentence and readdressing. The offsite improvements agreement will include portions of CR 70 and CR 61.5 to Hwy 392. Peter Schei proposed the following language. "The applicant will be required to apply dust suppression chemicals to adjacent county roadways and in front of impacted existing homes along the proposed traffic route. This could include an offsite improvements agreement for a term that would include any future developments for that term." This recommended language would be for page 9 Item I. Chad Auer moved to delete page 9 item I and replace with the above language. Doug Ochsner seconded. 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;Tom Holton,yes; Doug Ochsner,yes;Bruce Fitzgerald,yes; Paul Branham, yes. Motion carried unanimously. Doug Ochsner indicated that the applicant would like Item 6 A on page 8 to be deleted and moved to 7 H. This addresses the water augmentation. Ms. Johnson indicated Conditions 6A and 6C are related and should both be moved. Ms. Lockman would like to remove the word"draft"from 6C. These would be moved to 7H. Chad Auer moved to move 6A and 6C to 7H and amend 6C to delete the word draft. 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;Tom Holton,yes; Doug Ochsner,yes;Bruce Fitzgerald,yes; Paul Branham, yes. Motion carried unanimously. Roy Spitzer moved to delete 6B. Doug Ochsner seconded. 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;Tom Holton,yes; Doug Ochsner,yes;Bruce Fitzgerald,yes; Paul Branham, yes. Motion carried unanimously. Paul Branham moved to delete 1C and add 7J. The language will consist of"The applicant must have in place with Anadarko Entities and their leasees an agreement for the compatible development for the surface estate and oil and gas estates or they shall provide evidence of an attempt to reach such agreement." Chad seconded. 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;Tom Holton,yes; Doug Ochsner,yes;Bruce Fitzgerald,yes; Paul Branham, yes. Motion carried unanimously. The next issue was regarding fencing of the oil and gas facilities. Sheri Lockman stated that the sheriff department had asks for fencing. The applicant would like this removed. Ms. Johnson stated that the Anadarko representative was the one who requested that be removed. Ms. Sobel, representative for Anadarko, stated they understood the responsibility was being shifted from the applicant to the oil companies. This is a safety issue that is important due to the residences in the area. The oil companies would be objecting to the cost being absorbed by the oil companies. Ms. Johnson indicated it would not be a shift of responsibility it is taking the responsibility away from the applicant to put fencing where the oil and gas companies may not want them. The fencing is better determined by the oil and gas companies and the applicant in their agreement rather than a requirement. Mr. Morrison stated that if the condition is deleted and the record relays that the deletion is not being done so as not to include fencing but to show the issue will be addressed by the oil and gas companies and the applicant in their agreement it should be addressed. The Oil and Gas Commission may not require fencing at all times. If no agreement was reached it will be brought back at the Board of County Commissioners hearing. This can be better addressed in an agreement rather than a permit. Mr. Auer stated his concerns that deletion of the condition would make neither property responsible for fencing. Brent Cohen added the principal concern for the provision is the applicant is fencing something they do not have the right to fence. The request is to let the applicant address this with the oil company. Mr. Fitzgerald asked if the intent is to make this a part of the agreement with the oil and gas company. Mr. Cohen stated it will be addressed with the understanding that the oil company may not want fencing. Paul Branham suggested deleting 3U and add language that would make sure the issue was addressed in an agreement. Mr. Ochsner indicated that would be repetitive since there is a condition that the oil and gas companies concerns need to be addressed. Mr.Auer thinks this would cause a safety concern. Paul Branham moved to amend 3U to state that"It is recommended that Oil and Gas structures within outlot A be fenced to avoid tampering. Roy Spitzer seconded r The Chair asked the secretary to poll the members of the Planning Commission for their decision. Roy Spitzer,yes;James Welch,yes;Chad Auer, no;Tom Holton,yes; Doug Ochsner,yes; Bruce Fitzgerald,yes; Paul Branham, yes. Motion carried unanimously. Ms. Johnson asked that items on page 4 item 1A and 1B and page 5 item B be deleted due to having been addressed. Chad Auer moved to delete 1A and 1B and 2B. Doug Ochsner seconded. 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;Tom Holton,yes; Doug Ochsner,yes;Bruce Fitzgerald,yes; Paul Branham, yes. Motion carried unanimously. Todd Hodges indicated he is in agreement with the amended Conditions of Approval and Development Standards as amended. Doug Ochsner indicated it was a good proposal and the applicant has worked with the appropriate parties. Doug Ochsner moved that Case PZ-1102, be forwarded to the Board of County Commissioners along with the Conditions of Approval and Development Standards with the Planning Commissions recommendation of approval. Tom Holton 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;Tom Holton,yes;Doug Ochsner,yes;Bruce Fitzgerald,yes; Paul Branham, yes. Motion carried unanimously. Chad Auer commented he is in agreement with everything except the fencing of oil and gas structures. He believes it should still be put up for safety reasons. Meeting adjourned at Respectfully submitted Voneen Macklin Secretary • Hello