HomeMy WebLinkAbout20020384.tiff BEFORE THE WELD COUNTY, COLORADO, PLANNING COMMISSION
RESOLUTION OF RECOMMENDATION TO THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
Moved by Cristie Nicklas 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: S-621
PLANNER: Sheri Lockman
APPLICANT: Scott&Crystal Johnson
LEGAL DESCRIPTION: Lot 46, Corrected First Filing, Beebe Draw Farms, being pad of Section
8, T3N, R65W of the 6th P.M., Weld County, CO.
LOCATION: West of and adjacent to Essex Drive North. For a more precise
location, see legal.
REQUEST: PUD Final Plan to vacate a utility easement
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 27-7-30
of the Weld County Code.
2. The request is in conformance with Section 27-7-40.C of the Weld County Code, as follows:
a. Section 27-7-40.C.1--That the proposal is consistent with Chapters 19, 22 ,23 ,24 and
26 of the Weld County Code and any intergovernmental agreement in effect influencing
the PUD. The proposed PUD Final Plan is consistent with all the applicable chapters of
the Weld County Code. The proposed vacation of a utility easement does not
substantially change the subdivision. Further, the site is not influenced by any
intergovernmental agreements.
b. Section 27-7-40.C.2--That the uses which would be allowed in the proposed PUD will
conform with the performance standards of the PUD Zone District contained in Article II,
Chapter 27 of the Weld County Code. The affected utility companies and the Weld
County Utility Board have reviewed the proposal to ensure that the design of the utility
easements is satisfactory. The proposal does not affect any other performance
standard.
c. Section 27-7-40.C.3 --That the uses which would be permitted will 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 vacation of the utility easement
should have no affect on future development, therefore, this criteria is not applicable.
d. Section 27-7-40.C.4 --That adequate water and sewer service will be made available to
the site to serve the uses permitted within the proposed PUD in compliance with the
performance standards in Article II, Chapter 27 of the Weld County Code. The site will
be served by Central Weld County Water District and an Individual Sewage Disposal
System.
e. Section 27-7-40.C.5 --That street or highway 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. The vacation of the utility
easement should have no affect on street or highway facilities.
f. Section 27-7-40.C.6— In the event the street or highway facilities are not adequate, the
n applicant shall supply information which demonstrates the willingness and financial
capacity to upgrade the street or highway facilities in conformance with the
Transportation Sections of Chapters 22, 24 and 26, if applicable. The vacation of the
utility easement should have no affect on street or highway facilities. 4 e
man
2002-0384
Resolution
Scott& Crystal Johnson
Page 2
g. Section 27-7-40.C.7--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. Mineral deposits
and soil conditions were addressed at the original Beebe Draw Final Plan. Further, the
site does not lie within a overlay district.
h. Section 27-7-40.C.8--If compatibility exists between the proposed uses and criteria listed
in the development guide, and the final plan exactly conforms to the development guide.
The proposed PUD Final Plan uses are compatible with the criteria listed in the
developmental guide.
This recommendation is based, in part, upon a review of the application materials submitted by the
applicant, other relevant information regarding the request, and responses from referral agencies.
The Planning Commission Department of Planning Services' Staff recommendation for approval is
conditional upon the following:
1. Prior to recording the PUD Final Plat:
A. The applicant shall obtain a certificate from the County Treasurer showing no delinquent
taxes or special assessments on the property for submittal to the Weld County
Department of Planning Services . (Department of Planning Services)
B. The applicant shall submit a paper copy of the plat for preliminary approval to the Weld
County Department of Planning Services.
C. The applicant shall create a digital file of all drawings associated with the Final Plan
application for submittal to the Weld County Department of Planning Services .
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)
D. The Plat shall be amended to include the following:
1) The most recent version of Weld County's Right to Farm as listed in Section 22,
Appendix 22-E of the Weld County Code. (Department of Planning Services)
2. The Final Plat is conditional upon the following and that each be placed on the Final Plat as
notes prior to recording:
A. The uses permitted on replatted Lot 46, Corrected First Filing, Beebe Draw Farms
Planned Unit Development are R-1 (low density residential)as described in the
application materials on file with the Weld County Clerk to the Board and set forth in the
Weld County Code. (Department of Planning Services)
B. All dwelling units shall be located a minimum of 300 feet from oil and gas drill sites and
production facilities. (Department of Planning Services)
C. Central Weld County Water District shall provide the water supply to the Planned Unit
Development. The water supply system shall be provided consistent with the
requirements of Section 27-2-210 of the Weld County Code and LaSalle Fire Protection
District fire safety requirements. (Department of Planning Services)
D. The applicant, metropolitan district, and/or homeowner's association shall provide and
maintain all roads internal to the Planned Unit Development as indicated on the plat for
Corrected First Filing, Beebe Draw Farms. (Department of Planning Services)
Resolution
Scott& Crystal Johnson
Page 3
E. The Beebe Draw Farms Metropolitan District shall comply with the amended Road
Maintenance and Improvement Agreement regarding impacts to Weld County Roads
signed on April 9, 1988. (Department of Planning Services)
F. No noxious or offensive activity shall be carried on upon any lot, nor shall anything be
done thereon which may become an annoyance or nuisance to the neighborhood. Junk
vehicles may not be stored on any lot.A junk vehicle shall be construed to be any
inoperative vehicle. No other junk items shall be stored there i.e., used building
materials or any other matter. (Department of Planning Services)
G. No permanent disposal of wastes shall be permitted at this site. No lot shall be used or
maintained as a dumping ground for rubbish. All trash, garbage, or rubbish shall be
disposed of in a neat and orderly manner at a facility authorized to accept such waste
materials. Any expenses incurred for the disposal of such waste materials shall be the
sole responsibility of the owner of any such lot. (Department of Planning Services)
H. The areas shown as greenbelt and recreation on the PUD plan plat may be used for
utility easements. (Department of Planning Services)
Lot 46, Corrected First Filing, Beebe Draw Farms has received a setback variance from
the north property line for the residence. In accordance with BOA-1008 the variance for
setback is solely for the single family dwelling in relation to the north property line. Any
other use or structure associated with Lot 46 must comply with all setback requirements.
Should the single family dwelling be replaced at any time, a minimum setback and
offset of 50 feet from all lot lines shall be satisfied. (Department of Planning Services)
r
J. Only one horse per acre shall be kept on any lot. A fraction of an acre shall be rounded
to the next highest whole acre for determining the number of horses per lot. No other
livestock may be kept on a lot. (Department of Planning Services)
K. An applicant for a residential building permit shall submit evidence to the Weld County
Department of Planning Services that the required building information has been
submitted to the Architectural Control Committee and the Committee has had a
reasonable opportunity for review prior to permit approval. (Department of Planning
Services)
L. Fugitive dust must be confined on this site. (Department of Planning Services)
M. Weld County Septic Permits are required for the proposed residential homes and shall
be installed according to the Weld County Individual Sewage Disposal Regulations.
(Department of Planning Services)
N. Conflicts with existing easements will be resolved prior to construction of roads, utilities
or other facilities. (Department of Planning Services)
3. Upon completion of 1 and 2 above the applicant shall submit a Mylar plat along with all other
documentation required as conditions of approval. The Mylar plat shall be recorded in the office
of the Weld County Clerk and Recorder by Department of Planning Services' Staff. The plat
shall be prepared in accordance with the requirements of Section 27-9-20 and 27-9-40 of the
Weld County Code. The Mylar plat and additional requirements shall be submitted within sixty
(60) days from the date of the Board of County Commissioners resolution. The applicant shall be
responsible for paying the recording fee.
Resolution
Scott& Crystal Johnson
Page 4
Motion seconded by Stephan Mokray.
VOTE:
For Passage Against Passage
Michael Miller
Bryant Gimlin
Cristie Nicklas
Cathy Clamp
Fred Walker
Stephan Mokray
John Folsom
Luis Llerena
Bruce Fitzgerald
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 5, 2002.
Dated the 5`"of February, 2002.
J Ca p--6O--)a_c_
Voneen Macklin
Secretary
r
The Chair asked if there was anyone in the audience who wished to speak for or against this application. No
one wished to speak.
Jf asked if conferences between staff and the committee would not make the process easier. These
conferences would eliminate some of the three was discussions. Mm stated that he suggest staff presents
the case, the committe present the outline with details fo the intent, then public comment and then calla
special meeting on Feb 26 at 10:00am.
Ra stated that the only concern is for public notfication. Mm asked for clarification wiht regard tothe
notififation. Bb stated that we need to notify municipallities or counties before the 26th. Arlan stated that the
committee has spent the time going throught the document. This documetn the committee is willing to stand
by as the comp plan. Bb stated that pc makes the final decision and then it goes to bocc and then they make
a decision. Sm asked if there will be a committe that will continue to do the revisions on the document. Bb
stated that it is a requirement to udate the document every five years. Bb stated that some of the comments
from planning staff will be incorpoorated into the final versiom of the document. Arlan stated that the current
plan spells out what is required for each of the fact that pc is supposed to recommend for approval or denial.
Bb stated that state statue says that pc will make a recommendation Bb stated that the process tah
tis gone through is the committee's recommendation will be there and the pc will have additional comments
but the base of the document will say the same. Monica mika provided some clarificatiom with regard to the
case load that the pc has.
Mike stated tha tthe fifth of march will be used for addressing staff comments and a presentaion fom the
committe and having a special meeting the 12 of march.
mm adjourn the meeting and reconvened at 130 to determine what the final pain of attack will be. Jf
seconded the motion
moved that Case , be forwarded to the Board of County Commissioners along with the Conditions of
Approval and Development Standards with the Planning Commissions recommendation of approval.
seconded the motion.
The Chair asked the secretary to poll the members of the Planning Commission for their decision. John
Folsom, ; Stephan Mokray, ; Michael Miller, ; Bryant Gimlin, ; Cathy Clamp, ; Cristie Nicklas, ; Fred Walker,
; Luis Llerena, ; Bruce Fitzgerald, . Motion carried unanimously.
CASE NUMBER: S-621
PLANNER: Sheri Lockman
APPLICANT: Scott& Crystal Johnson
LEGAL DESCRIPTION: Lot 46, Corrected First Filing, Beebe Draw Farms, being part of Section 8,
T3N, R65W of the 6th P.M., Weld County, CO.
LOCATION: West of and adjacent to Essex Drive North. For a more precise location,
see legal.
REQUEST: PUD Final Plan to vacate a utility easement
Sheri Lockman, Planner, Department of Planning Services presented Case S-621, 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.
John Folsom asked about the Board of Adjustment variance to the setbacks and the issue at hand regarding
the vacation of the easement. Ms. Lockman stated that the Planning Commission is being asked to grant a
vacation of the utility easement. The Board of Adjustment has already granted the variance for the setback
from the lot line.
Crystal Johnson, applicant, provided clarification with regard to the easement and the fact that half of the
house is in that easement. There is open area along two sides of the property which contains equestrian
riding space.
The Chair asked if there was anyone in the audience who wished to speak for or against this application. No I
one wished to speak. K
W r
John Folsom asked if there is any potential that this easement will be needed by a utility and if the land to the
north is a part of Beebe Draw.Ms. Lockman stated that the property north was not a part of Beebe Draw. The
applicant was denied fora final plan. They have since been approved at a substantial change hearing. There
is a chance a new final plan will be submitted at a later date. Ms. Lockman stated that the Utility Board was
assured that the easement will stay on three sides of the lot. Mr. Morrison stated that the property is part of
Beebe Draw just not an approved plat. It is owned by the developer and is zoned correctly.
Cristie Nicklas moved that Case S-621, be forwarded to the Board of County Commissioners along with the
Conditions of Approval and Development Standards with the Planning Commissions recommendation of
approval. Stephan Mokray seconded the motion.
The Chair asked the secretary to poll the members of the Planning Commission for their decision. John
Folsom,yes;Stephan Mokray,yes; Michael Miller,yes;Bryant Gimlin,yes;Cathy Clamp,yes;Cristie Nicklas,
yes; Fred Walker, yes; Luis Llerena, yes; Bruce Fitzgerald, yes. Motion carried unanimously.
CASE NUMBER: USR-1365
APPLICANT: Alvin Garcia/Annabelle Canzona
PLANNER: Chris Gathman
LEGAL DESCRIPTION: Lot 11, Espanola Subdivision, being in the NW4 of the NE4of Section 36,
T6N, R66 of the 6th P.M., Weld County, Colorado.
REQUEST: A Site Specific Development Plan and a Special Review Permit for a
Restaurant, including a Drive-In Restaurant as a Use by Right in the
Commercial (C-1)Zone District in the A(Agricultural)Zone District .
LOCATION: West of and adjacent to 25th Avenue and approximately 250 feet south of
WCR 64 ("O"Street).
Chris Gathman,Department of Planning Services presented Case USR-1365,reading the recommendation
and comments into the record. The Department of Planning Services is recommending denial of the
application. If the application is approved the Department of Planning Service recommends the Conditions
of Approval and Development Standards attached be accepted also.
Luis Llerena asked if the applicant is planning an addition. Mr. Gathman stated that there will be no
additions to the building. Mr. Llerena asked if the possibility of having the restaurant component as a drive
up and leave facility and not the drive thru idea. Mr.Gathman stated that the existing parking is being used
for the store now.
Cathy Clamp asked if the kitchen is already installed or is it needing to be installed. Mr.Gathman stated that
there will be a need to install a commercial hood and address some building code issue. Mr. Mokray asked
about a building violation. Mr. Gathman stated that the original facility was at a different location and was
them moved to the existing home. The store was originally in the basement and it was eventually moved
to a vacant garage area. They never obtained final inspections in order to take care of the violation. Mr.
Mokray asked about the possible need for special accommodations for frying. Char Davis, Department of
Public Health and Environment stated that the inspector does not have issues with the use as proposed,just
the parking.
Beneranda Marquez,applicant, provided clarification with regard to the use proposed. There would not be
a need for a large amount of parking due to the fact that the customers will not spend any more than three
to five minutes in the facility. Ms. Marquez added that she will be doing no frying at the facility. There is the
possibility of deliver.
Cathy Clamp asked about the business and if the existing parking spaces were filled for any length of time.
Ms. Marquez stated that the area is not busy and most are local that have no need to drive. The majority
of the business walks. Ms. Clamp asked if there is a need and desire from the customers. Ms. Marquez
stated that the clientele is awaiting approval.
The Chair asked if there was anyone in the audience who wished to speak for or against this application. No
one wished to speak.
Beneranda Marquez has some issues with the size of the hood required for the commercial business. Ms.
Davis, Department of Public Health stated that the hood that they have now is satisfactory for the use right
Hello