HomeMy WebLinkAbout20062776.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 passage by the Weld County
Planning Commission. Be it resolved by the Weld County Planning Commission that the application for:
CASE NUMBER: PZ-1094
APPLICANT: Ed Orr
PLANNER: Chris Gathman
LEGAL DESCRIPTION: W2NE4 lying south of Greeley Canal No. 2 in Section 24,T6N, R66W of the 6th P.M.,Weld
County, Colorado.
REQUEST: Change of Zone from A(Agriculture)to PUD for nine residential lots with E (Estate)uses along
with continuing oil&gas production and 32.23 acres of open space
LOCATION: South of and adjacent to State Highway 392 and 1/4 mile west of CR 37.
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 27-5-30 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 27-6-120.8.6.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 proposed site is not influenced by an Inter-
Governmental Agreement. The proposal is consistent with the aforementioned documents as
follows:
1) Section 22-4-30.D, WA.Policy 4.1 "Stormwater collection and treatment should be
considered for all development. The developer will be required to employ best management
practices in the design of all storm water facilities."
The Department of Public Works, in their referral dated February 16, 2006, indicated that
the applicant shall amend and resubmit the "Preliminary Drainage Report for New Cache
Estates PUD" dated November 3, 2005 by Drexell, Barrell & Co. for review by the
Department of Public Works prior to the Planning Commission hearing. This information
has not been amended and resubmitted to the Department of Public Works.
2) Section 27-6-70. Component Four— site design. The Department of Planning Services
and Department of Public Works will evaluate site design based upon Chapters 22, 23, 24
and 26 of this Code.
The applicants have not provided evidence that they have adequately addressed site
design in regards to drainage to the satisfaction of the Department of Public Works.
Should the Planning Commission recommend approval of The Change of Zone from A (Agricultural) to PUD
for Nine (9) residential lots with Estate uses, Planning Staff recommends the following conditions of
approval:
1. Prior to Scheduling the Board of County Commissioners hearing:
A. The applicant shall submit agreements for both the Graham Seepage Ditch Company and the
Van Gorham Ditch Company or provide written evidence that adequate attempts has been made
to address their concerns. (Department of Planning Services)
F 2006-2776
o94
Resolution PZ-1094
Ed Orr
Page 2
B. The applicant shall submit an agreement with the owner/user of the gas pipeline easement (Book
1013, reception #0194673) or provide written evidence that an adequate attempt has been made
to address their concerns. (Department of Planning Services)
C. The applicant shall show compliance with Section 27.5.30.H of the Weld County Code
D. The applicant shall provide a plan to the Department of Planning Services regarding how they
propose to address additional water for fire suppression on site.
E. The applicant shall submit a drainage report to the Department of Public Works that takes into
account the impacts of the offsite storm water.
F. The applicant shall amend the plat to relocate the septic envelopes for lot four out of the pipeline
easement.
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-1094. (Department of Planning Services)
2) State Highway 392 is under the jurisdiction and maintenance of the Colorado Department
of Transportation (CDOT). The applicant shall verify the existing rights-of-way and
documents creating the right-of-way and it shall be noted on the change of zone plat.
(Department of Public Works)
3) "Weld County's Right to Farm" as provided in Appendix 22-E of the Weld County Code
shall be placed on any recorded plat. (Departments of Public Health and Environment and
Planning Services)
4) Front side and rear utility easements are not required to be indicated on the change of zone
plat and shall be removed. (Department of Planning Services)
5) The approved road cross-section (two 12-foot paved lanes with 4-foot gravel shoulders)
shall be indicated on the plat. (Department of Planning Services)
6) The reception number for the 20' wide gas pipeline on the plat shall be corrected from
"0194673"to"1946743". (Department of Planning Services)
B. The applicant shall attempt to address the requirements/recommendations of the West Greeley
Soil Conservation District as stated in their referral received December 8, 2005. Written evidence
of such shall be provided to the Department of Planning Services. (West Greeley Soil
Conservation District)
C. The applicant shall attempt to address the requirements/recommendations of the City of Greeley
as stated in their referral received December 15, 2005. Written evidence of such shall be
submitted to the Department of Planning Services. (Weld County Sheriff's Office)
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:
Resolution PZ-1094
Ed Orr
Page 3
A. The site specific development plan is for a Change of Zone from A (Agricultural) to PUD for nine
(9) residential lots with E (Estate)Zone uses as indicated in the application materials on file in the
Department of Planning Services. The PUD will be subject to and governed by the Conditions of
Approval stated hereon and all applicable Weld County Regulations. The E (Estate) lots shall
comply with all (Estate) requirements with the exception of the setback for the bus shelter.
(Department of Planning Services)
B. 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)
C. Weld County's Right to Farm as delineated on this plat shall be recognized at all times.
(Department of Planning Services)
D. Signs shall adhere to Section 23-4-80 of the Weld County Code. These requirements shall apply
to all temporary and permanent signs. (Department of Planning Services)
E. Water service shall be obtained from the North Weld County Water District. (Department of Public
Health and Environment)
F. 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)
G. Activities such as permanent landscaping, structures, dirt mounds or other items are expressly
prohibited in the absorption field site. (Department of Public Health and Environment)
H. Primary and secondary septic envelopes shall be placed on each lot. All septic system envelopes
must meet all setbacks, including the 100-foot setback to any well. (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 Control Division of the Colorado Department of Public Health and
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 Department of Public Health and Environment, 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)
Resolution PZ-1094
Ed Orr
Page 4
M. A separate building permit shall be obtained prior to the construction of any structure.
(Department of Building Inspection)
O. 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 building permit. Residential building plans may
be required to bear the wet stamp of a Colorado registered architect or engineer. (Department of
Building Inspection)
P. Buildings shall conform to the requirements of the various codes adopted at the time of permit
application. Currently the following has been adopted by Weld County: 2003 International
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)
Q. 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)
R. 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, this includes setbacks to oil and gas
production facilities. (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 2005-8 Section 5-8-40)
U. Building height shall be measured in accordance with the 2003 International Building Code for the
purpose of determining the maximum building size and height for various uses and types of
construction and to determine compliance with the Bulk Requirements from Chapter 23 of the
Weld County Code. Building height shall be measured in accordance with Chapter 23 of the
Weld County Code in order to determine compliance with offset and setback requirements.
Offset and setback requirements are measured to the farthest projection of 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)
V. Installation of utilities shall comply with Section 24-9-10 of the Weld County Code. (Department of
Planning Services)
W. The property owner shall be responsible for complying with the Performance Standards of
Chapter 27, Article II and Article VIII, of the Weld County Code. (Department of Planning
Services)
X. 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)
Y. The site shall maintain compliance at all times with the requirements of the Weld County
Government and the adopted Weld County Code and Policies. (Department of Planning Services)
Resolution PZ-1094
Ed Orr
Page 5
Z. 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)
AA. 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)
AB. 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 sixty (60) days from the date the Administrative Review was signed a
$50.00 recording continuance charge shall added for each additional 3 month period.
6. Prior to Final Plan submission:
At least 28 days prior to submittal of the final plan application, the applicant shall submit the following
information to the Department of Public Works:
A. The applicant shall submit to Public Works stamped, signed and dated final plat drawings and
roadway/construction and grading plan drawings for review and approval. Construction details
must be included. Stop signs and streetway sign locations must be shown on the final roadway
construction plans. The current edition of the Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices
(MUTCD) shall govern the signing plan. (Department of Public Works)
B. 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)
C. 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. The final drainage report must include the following:
1) 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.
Resolution PZ-1094
Ed Orr
Page 6
2) 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.
D. The applicant shall prepare a construction detail for typical lot grading with respect to drainage for
the final 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)
7. At the time of Final Plan submission:
A. The applicant shall submit a set of sign standards as required by Section 27-6-90.E.1. of the
Weld County Code for review and approval. (Department of Planning Services, Sheriff's Office)
B. The applicant shall submit an on-site (Private) Improvements Agreement that addresses all
improvements associated with this development for review and approval. (Departments of
Planning Services and Public Works)
C. The applicant shall submit development covenants for New Cache Estates PUD. Language for
the preservation and/or protection of the absorption field envelopes shall be placed in the
development covenants. The covenants shall state that activities such as permanent
landscaping, structures, dirt mounds or other items are expressly prohibited in the absorption field
site. The covenants should also note that future owners Lots 4,5, 6 and 7 are subject to the
requirements of the pipeline right-of-way grant recorded under reception no. 01946743. The
covenants shall also address signage requirements and refer to the Weld County Code.
(Department of Public Health and Environment)
D. Intersection sight triangles at the development entrance will be required. All landscaping within
the triangles must be less than 3 and 1/2 feet in height at maturity, and noted on the final roadway
plans. (Department of Public Works)
E. The applicant shall submit a time frame for construction in accordance to Section 27-2-200 of the
Weld County Code. (Department of Planning Services)
F. Easements shall be delineated on the final plat in accordance with County standards (Sec. 24-7-
60) and Utility Board recommendations. (Departments of Planning Services and Public Works)
G. The applicant shall submit all proposed street names and lot addresses to the Weld County
Department of Planning Services for review and approval by the Mountain View Fire Protection
District, the Weld County Sheriff's Office, the Weld County Ambulance Services Department and
the Post Office for review and approval. (Department of Planning Services)
H. The applicant shall submit 3 copies of the Bylaws and Articles of Incorporation for the
Homeowners Association for review and approval. (Department of Planning Services)
I. The applicant shall contact the Vegetation Weed Management Specialist with the Weld County
Public Works Department at (970) 356-4000 ext 3770 to develop a weed management plan. The
approved plan shall be included in the Final Plan application. (Department of Planning Services)
J. The applicant shall address the requirements of the Department of Planning Services
(Landscaping referral)dated January 29, 2006. Written evidence of such shall be provided to the
Department of Planning Services. (Department of Planning Services)
Resolution PZ-1094
Ed Orr
Page 7
6. Prior to recording the final plat:
A. Original copies of the approved covenants along with the appropriate recording fee (currently $6
for the first page and $5 for subsequent pages) shall be submitted to the Weld County
Department of Planning Services. (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 enter into an on-site Improvements Agreement According to Policy Regarding
Collateral for Improvements. This agreement shall be approved by the Board of County
Commissioners. (Departments of Planning Services and Public Works)
D. The applicant shall enter into an off-site Improvements Agreement According to Policy Regarding
Collateral for Improvements. This agreement shall be approved by the Board of County
Commissioners. (Department of Public Works)
E. The applicant shall provide evidence that the voluntary capital mitigation fee has been paid along
the fee in lieu of land dedication as stated in the agreement with the Eaton RE-2 School District
and that the remaining requirements of the RE-2 School District has been addressed. (Eaton
School District RE-2)
F. The applicant shall provide copies of a signed final agreement with the North Weld County Water
District. (North Weld County Water District)
G. The applicant shall provide copies of a signed final copy of the augmentation and easement
agreement between the applicant and the Lower Poudre Augmentation Company. (Department of
Planning Services)
H. 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)
7. Prior to release of collateral:
A. Evidence shall be provided that the outlots have been deeded to the Homeowner's Association.
(Department of Planning Services)
Motion seconded by Tom Holton
Resolution PZ-1094
Ed Orr
Page 8
VOTE:
For Passage Against Passage Absent
Michael Miller
Bruce Fitzgerald
Chad Auer
Tom Holton
Doug Ochsner
James Welch
Erich Ehrlich
Roy Spitzer
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 March 7, 2006.
Dated the 7th of March, 20061
L C
Voneen Macklin
Secretary
Doug Ochsner asked what is best for applicant so he can proceed. Ms. Hatch stated that Planning Commission
has the option to decide. There are a few options; one being hear the case without the Department of Public
Health and Environment referral, recommend denial, recommend approval or continue the case. Mr. Jiricek
added that with the elimination of the need to amend the CD and not needing the State referral has sped the
process up immensely. The referral from the State would not have been done for at least a month if a CD would
have needed to be amended.
Michael Miller stated he is not comfortable with no referral from Department of Public Health and Environment.
Paul Branham indicated he agrees with the need for the referral. It seems that the time frame would be the best
for the applicant should this be continued for two weeks.
Dwain Immel, applicant, added that the continuance to March 21, 2006 is not a concern. The applicant would like
to go forward, at their own risk, and install the equipment. Mr. Miller stated the Board of County Commissioners
can give that approval the Planning Commission cannot.
Trevor Jiricek added that the case could be heard today and get a recommendation for denial and still be heard
before the Board of County Commissioners. Mr. Barker indicated this was correct but the Planning Commission
needs to provide a complete recommendation and they cannot do this without the referral from Department of
Public Health and Environment. The applicant can request a pre-ad which will speed up the process. Mr. Immel
stated they have a building permit and he would like to know if they can put the equipment in the building and not
operate. Mr. Barker stated that the Department of Planning Services could determine this.
The Chair asked if there was anyone in the audience who wished to speak for or against this application. No one
wished to speak.
Paul Branham moved to continue the case to March 21, 2006. Roy Spitzer seconded. Motion carried.
CASE NUMBER: PZ-1094
APPLICANT: Ed Orr
PLANNER: Chris Gathman
LEGAL DESCRIPTION: W2NE4 lying south of Greeley Canal No. 2 in Section 24, T6N, R66W of the 6th
P.M., Weld County, Colorado.
REQUEST: Change of Zone from A(Agriculture)to PUD for nine residential lots with E
(Estate) uses along with continuing oil &gas production and 32.23 acres of open
space
LOCATION: South of and adjacent to State Highway 392 and 1/4 mile west of CR 37.
Chris Gathman, Department of Planning Services presented Case USR-1540, reading the recommendation and
comments into the record. The Department of Planning Services is recommending denial of the application. Staff
recommends that the following conditions be added as Conditions of Approval (and subsequently renumber
remaining conditions):
Item 1.B: The applicant shall submit an agreement with the Van Gorham Ditch Company or provide written
evidence that an adequate attempt has been made to address their concerns. (Department of Planning Services)
Item 1.D (to replace existing condition 1.D): The applicant has indicated that additional water for fire suppression
shall be provided by a proposed well. The applicant shall provide written evidence to the Department of Planning
Services regarding the proposed well (location,water supply needs)to the Department of Planning Services to
forward to the State of Colorado, Division of Water for their review. Division of Water Resources comments
regarding the review of the proposed fire well shall be provided to the Department of Planning Services. (State
Colorado, Division of Water Resources, Department of Planning Services)
Remove Item 1.E—The applicants are proposing to pipe water from the Graham Seepage and Van Gorham t
Ditches off of the property to the east of the retention pond. Therefore a potential amendment to the - l
augmentation plan would not be necessary. C)*
Chris Gathman indicated that the proposed pond will be developed regardless of this application. The applican
has an agreement with Cache La Poudre for the water. There will be an underground pipe for the irrigation
anon
ditches on site that will carry water through the site. There are drill windows on site and there may be wells that
have been capped. This would cause problems with setbacks. The staff is recommending lot one be modified to
5
adjust to the wells in the area. The applicant shows lot one as less than 2.5 acres so this will need a variance.
Mr. Gathman added that the applicant may have reached an agreement with the Van Gorham Ditch Company so
this condition may be removed.
Michael Miller asked about the concern with mineral notification and that possible problem. Mr. Gathman stated
that he would defer this to Clayton Harrison from Noble Energy and also William Crews from Crews and Zeren for
the applicant.
Clayton Harrison, Noble Energy, provided their concerns. They want to protest the development. They have a
leasehold interest on the minerals but do not presently have drilling locations on site. Mr. Miller stated he wants
to address the possible notification errors. Mr. Harrison stated it was his understanding that notification was sent
to Noble Energy but to no other interest. They are a minor interest in the property. Mr. Miller asked if there was
written evidence of the other mineral interest. Mr. Harrison stated he does not have a complete list and the office
is the one that notified him of the lack of notification.
William Crews, preparer of the mineral list for the applicant, provided clarification on the mineral list in the
application. Mr. Crews indicated that Noble Energy is a leasehold owner even though the applicant believes that
Noble has breached the conditions of the lease due to no development over a long period of time and there is
litigation in the process as to the validity of the oil and gas lease that covers this area. The notice was provided to
Noble as the recorded operator on the property. Noble Energy has been designated as the representative.
Noble would be appearing on all that are subject to the agreement. The applicant notified Noble and they were
responsible to notify them. Noble has been assigned the operating rights. There are three abandoned wells and
one un-drilled location. Mr. Barker stated this testimony was adequate to certify the certification of the list of
owners. Mr. Crews stated they are contending the lease.
Doug Ochsner asked Mr. Gathman about the redesigning of lot one and the need for a variance if under 2.5
acres. Mr. Gathman stated they can request the variance through this PUD process and it will need to be called
out before the plat is recorded. Mr. Ochsner asked if this was due to it being an urban scale development, in the
PUD section the minimal lot size can be 1 ac with a gross density of 2.5 acres. Mr. Gathman stated PUD is
typically tied back to the zoning code. They can go below the minimum size of 2.5 acres in the Estate Zone
District but it needs to be called out.
Tom Holton asked what the gross overall density of the site was. Mr. Gathman stated it was approximately one
lot per 7.3 acres.
Robb Casseday, representative for the applicant, provided additional information. The applicant believes they
have addressed all the issues of concern for staff. The drill window on the corner section is not the fifth window
site; it is on the east side of the site at approximately the center. The recharge lagoon that is planned will be
done regardless of this proposal. The applicant has an agreement with Cache La Poudre which will be added to
the record. There is a letter of intent from the Van Gorham ditch company president that states negotiations are
under way and the relocation of the pipe is agreeable. The final papers will be done prior to the final plat. Mr.
Casseday continued on by addressing each of the Conditions of Approval staff is requesting to be added and
exist. Mr. Casseday stated there is a letter just entered into the record addresses the first revision of staff. The
applicant has addressed the Duke Energy pipeline by aligning the property lines and will leave it as a utility
easement throughout the site. With this being addressed on the plat it could be removed as a condition. The
requirement for the well being used for fire flow has been addressed. The applicant would like this removed due
to them being able to utilize three different options. They can both upgrade the water lines and connect to
existing lines that would give them the pressure needed. Another option is to use the water from the recharge
pond,with engineering that would meet the supply for the fire flow. There is 6-700 gallons of flow to the
subdivision. The existing well on site has the ability to convert to well for fire department use. Engineering would
go along with this. The applicant wants to study on all three options and choose the best for the fire district.
There is a signed agreement for the recharge pond. This would mean the deletion of item 1 E. The applicant has
met with Public Works regarding the drainage plans and those conditions. Drexel barrel has submitted
information addressing the conditions and requirements from Public Works. There is a permit for access from
CDOT on Hwy 392. The City of Greeley had concerns with cul-de-sacs and urban scale standards. There is no
opportunity to connect so there will be longer cul-de-sacs. There are turnabouts for emergency vehicles with mail
stops and school stops. This layout addresses any rural area design. The applicant is not sure this is urban
scale development and they would like to maintain the rural nature. They would like a variance to the curb and
^- gutter. There are walking and riding trails surrounding the lots. There are other interests in the subdivision. Mr.
Casseday stated the applicant notified Noble at the beginning of this process asking for comments. They did not
respond. There was a legal document drafted addressing the lack of comment and the lack of activity on site.
According to Noble they did not need a letter since there was no production they would not have any interest, so
6
the applicant would like to request to remove drill windows from plat.
Paul Branham asked for clarification on the drainage issue. Mr. Casseday stated there were questions
considering offsite drainage. Drexel Barrel considered the canal to be a dam to any water that would come offsite
onto this site because of the design of Hwy 392 there is one offsite area that would be an influence. Public
Works would like the applicant to consider the possibility that water could enter the drainage pond should the
canal#2 be full. The recharge pond will double as a 100year flood detention. This will handled the water on a
one time basis. This has been designed into pond and the calculations.
Peter Schei indicated they have not seen the drainage report as of yet. There needs to be room to pass the 100
year storm and information on how it will work with the pond. There is concern for some possible changes in the
future. Mr. Miller asked about the lack of a secondary access. Mr. Schei stated Public Works does not have a
standard in with regards to this. The fire and emergency personnel will sign off on this. There is adequate turn
around provided in the subdivision.
Paul Branham asked if Public Works was comfortable with verbal confirmation from the engineers or would they
rather see the document. Mr. Schei stated they would like to see the document and see the engineer take care
of at beginning of the process. The document will give verification that the work will be done to the written
standards. Mr. Branham added that if approved it could be a Condition of Approval that a drainage report would
need to be submitted. Mr. Schei stated Public Works would like to be aware of how the system will work and the
applicant should understand this also. Public Works would like to see the documentation as soon as possible to
give them time for review before the Board of County Commissioners hearing.
Pam Smith, Weld County Public Health, added that Lot 4 septic envelopes are in gas line easements and will
need to relocated. Mr. Miller asked about the septic envelope being adjacent to the lot lines and if this is
beneficial. Ms. Smith stated there is a ten foot setback to line and she is not aware of the topography in the area.
There needs to be 100 foot setback from the high water line of lake. The easement can be addressed at final
plat. A Conditions of Approval could be added to address this.
Doug Ochsner asked about the variance on street design for curb and gutter and if this was agreeable to Public
Works. Mr. Schei stated Public Works cannot grant the variance but the Board of County Commissioners can. It
is reasonable to not expect a subdivision like this to have curb and gutter.
Robb Casseday added they would like to request administrative approval of the final plat.
Doug Ochsner asked if the drill window on Lot 1 was correct. Mr. Crews stated the envelope should be removed
due to it being in error. The fifth drill location should be on the east side of the site approximately in the center. A
drill window does not mean the oil company gets the entire location of the window. It means the bottom hole of
the well must fall within envelope. There is no intent to shut out the legal rights to drill. The lease is being
disputed as to the legality of it. Mr. Miller asked if both properties are owned by the same owner. Mr. Crews
indicated Mr. Orr owns both sites.
Discussion ensued on the legality of the lease agreement. There will not be an agreement since the parties do
not agree. Mr. Orr does not believe there is an agreement due to the lack of development over the years. There
is court proceeding occurring regarding this.
The Chair asked if there was anyone in the audience who wished to speak for or against this application.
John Gerry, neighbor to the south and ditch rider for Van Gorham, indicated he is in agreement with this since they
will be piping the Van Gorham and Graham Seepage underground. The only minor concern will be traffic. Oil and
gas has been drilled in the area and produced nothing but saltwater. The water for the ditches will flow smoothly due
to a 24 inch pipe.
Clayton Harrison, Noble Energy, suggested a condition be added to acknowledge their rights under the oil and gas
lease and reach an agreement before final. Mr. Miller questioned why Noble did not respond when the initial letter
was sent. In not responding it makes the job of the Planning Commission difficult in trying to address all the concerns
especially when the applicant has made an adequate attempt.
The Chair closed the public portion
Robb Casseday added this site will be well planned. There is adequate buffering and there will be a nice recharge
facility with amenities.
7
Michael Miller asked for clarification on the recharge pond and the purpose of it. Mr. Casseday stated that Cache La
Poudre needs an augmentation pond to put water back into the basin. It is an unlined pond in which water will flow
back into the underground basin through seepage. The applicant will take actions to keep the water from being
stagnant. The flow will fluctuate as irrigation is used and it is designed to be 15 foot deep. There will be water in the
pond continuously.
Pam Smith suggested adding the following language in 1F under Prior to Scheduling the Board of County
Commissioners, "The applicant shall amend the plat to relocate the septic envelopes for Lot 4 out of the pipeline
easement."
Michael Miller proceeded with the requested amendments. The applicant wants to remove the first condition staff
suggested adding. Mr. Gathman stated the applicant is asking for an administrative review and as a result needs to
have all of the agreements and such in order before the Board of County Commissioners. This could be moved to
Prior to recording plat. The second request by the applicant was to delete 1B that addresses the easement for the
existing pipeline. Mr. Gathman stated that if anything changes it could cause concern. This should still be an issue
that needs finalization. There have been talks with Sinclair but there is nothing in writing. Mr.Gathman recommends
the language be included. The third option the applicant would like removed is 1D which addresses the water for fire
suppression. Mr.Gathman stated that it sounds like there are three proposals with regards to fire suppression and he
is not sure which proposal they want. This will need to be clarified since they are requesting administrative review at
final plat. The applicant is asking to delete 1 E addressing the piping of water for the ditches. Mr. Gathman agrees
with this.
Michael Miller asked Mr.Schei about his recommendation for denial and the requirement for the storm drainage. Mr.
Schei stated he would still like this prior to scheduling the Board of County Commissioners so they have time to
review the document. Mr.Schei state he would like language added to 1G that states"The applicant shall submit a
drainage report that takes into account the impacts of the offsite storm water." Mr. Schei stated Public Works is in
agreement with the variance request for the exception of curb/gutter and sidewalks.
Michael Miller asked if the drill window can be removed from the plat. Mr. Barker stated removing the drill windows
does not really change things. This does not modify anything that already exists. Removing the windows will not
make much difference. The applicant is asking to go through an administrative final plat and the Board of County
Commissioners will decide this.
Michael Miller asked for clarification on the applicant's evidence that they have adequately attempted to come into
agreement with the oil and gas holders. Mr. Gathman stated there was a letter sent to Noble and there was nothing
sent back. There is nothing in the Conditions of Approval or Development Standards to get agreement. Mr.Gathman
stated that all written correspondence should be submitted to the Department of Planning Services and if the
applicant would like to proceed then that is their choice. Should anything be submitted today it will be forwarded to the
Board of County Commissioners.
Tom Holton would like to see Section 27-5-30.H of the code be inserted in place of 1C. Mr.Gathman stated there is a
pending court case and if the case goes through what the affect will be. Should there be common ownership on both
sites there will not be an issue. Mr. Miller's concern is with the lack of language for an adequate attempt to obtain an
agreement, there could be future concerns. Mr. Barker suggested the applicant could show compliance to Section
27-5-30.H. and not necessarily quote the code.
Tom Holton move to delete 1C and reference Section 27.5.30.H,by stating"The applicant shall show compliance with
Section 27.5.30.H." Doug Ochsner seconded. Motion carried.
Paul Branham moved to accept staff language for the addition of 1B stating"The applicant shall submit an agreement
with the Van Gorham Ditch Company and provide written evidence that an adequate attempt has been made to
address their concerns." Tom Holton seconded. Motion carried.
James Welch stated his concern for staff recommendation on item 1D is the limitation to only the well and negating
the other two options. Mr. Gathman suggested adding the language "The applicant shall provide a plan to the
Department of Planning Services regarding how they propose to address additional water for fire suppression on site."
James Welch moved to accept the prior language for item 1 D. Tom Holton seconded. Motion carried.
James Welch moved to delete item 1 E. Tom Holton seconded. Motion carried.
8
Paul Branham moved to add a new 1 E with the following language"The applicant shall submit a drainage report to
the Department of Public Works that takes into account the impacts of the offsite storm water." Doug Ochsner
seconded. Motion carried.
^ Paul Branham moved to add a new 1F with the following language"The applicant shall amend the plat to relocate the
septic envelopes for lot four out of the pipeline easement." Doug Ochsner seconded. Motion carried.
The Board of County Commissioners would grant the waiver to curb and gutter waiver. The Planning Commission is
in favor of this.
Paul Branham moved to recommend to the Board of County Commissioners that they grant the waiver for curb/gutter
and sidewalk. Tom Holton seconded. Motion carried.
Robb Casseday asked for clarification on the approval for alternate solutions to fire suppression and is this Prior to
Scheduling or Prior to final plat. Mr. Gathman stated it was prior to the scheduling since this is proposed to be
administratively all concerns need to be addressed up front and are recognized on the plat. Mr.Casseday addressed
the letter to Noble Energy. Mr. Miller stated that letter will go towards providing evidence of an adequate attempt to
address the concerns of the oil and gas interest.
Robb Casseday agrees to the Conditions of Approval and Development Standards
Doug Ochsner commented that with the amendments he feels comfortable with this. This is classified as urban scale
and still has only 9 lots and fits well in the community.
Michael Miller indicated his only concern is the subdivision having only one access but if the fire district and Public
Works is agreeable that is fine.
Doug Ochsner moved that Case PZ-1094, 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; Michael Miller, yes; Tom Holton, yes; Doug Ochsner, yes; Paul Branham, yes. Motion carried
unanimously.
James Welch has left due to a prior commitment.
CASE NUMBER: AmPF-354
APPLICANT: James & Cheri Scott
PLANNER: Brad Mueller
LEGAL DESCRIPTION: Part of Section 4, T6N, R67W of the 6th P.M., Weld County, Colorado.
REQUEST: Amended PUD final plan to subdivide Lot 7, Shiloh Estates into four lots, three
additional lots.
LOCATION: North of and adjacent to Cornerstone Way within Shiloh Estates,which is
located north of and adjacent to County Road 72, one-half mile east of State
Highway 257.
Brad Mueller, Department of Planning Services presented Case USR-1540, reading the recommendation and
comments into the record. The Department of Planning Services is recommending denial of the application.
Michael Miller asked when the original subdivision was approved. Mr. Mueller stated it was done in 1994. Lot 7 was
designated, at the time, to have one home on site. Mr. Mueller added that open space is adjacent to the south.
Paul Branham asked about the designation of this subdivision as being urban. Ms. Mika stated that urban vs. non
urban as currently defined in the code is new. This history is five lots dictated non-urban, then eight,then nine lots.
The scale of the number of lots has changed. At the time the rules were in place this was acceptable and fit within the
concept. Mr.Ochsner stated that the non conforming description implies that the subdivision is illegal. But at the time
it was approved and followed all the rules of the county. Mr. Branham stated it is now a nonconforming urban
subdivision because it does not meet the criteria of today. Ms. Mika stated that was correct but non-conforming
implies the negative, when in fact it is an approved subdivision approved with the criteria in place at the time.
9
Hello