HomeMy WebLinkAbout20021466 SUMMARY OF THE WELD COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING
Tuesday, May 21, 2002
A regular meeting of the Weld County Planning Commission was held Tuesday 2002, in the Weld County
Public Health/Planning Building, (Room 210), 1555 N. 17th Avenue, Greeley, Colorado. The meeting was
called to order by Chair, Michael Miller , at 1:30 p.m.
ROLL CALL
Michael Miller
Bryant Gimlin
Cristie Nicklas
Fred Walker Absent
John Folsom
Stephan Mokray
Cathy Clamp
Luis Llerena Absent
Bruce Fitzgerald
Also Present: Don Carroll, Carla Angeli, Robert Anderson, Sheri Lockman, Chris Gathman, Char Davis,
Bethany Salzman, Lauren Light
The summary of the last regular meeting of the Weld County Planning Commission held on, 2002, was
approved as read.
CASE NUMBER: USR-1386
APPLICANT: Brett& Chrisann Reese
PLANNER: Carla Angeli
LEGAL DESCRIPTION: South east corner of the E2, SW4 of Section 27, T6N, R65W of the 6th
P.M., Weld County, Colorado.
REQUEST: A Site Specific Development Plan and a Special Review Permit for a bed
and breakfast facility(lodging for guests within the existing house) in the
A(Agricultural)Zone District.
LOCATION: North of and adjacent to WCR 64 ("O" Street) and approximately Y2 mile
west of WCR 45.
Carla Angeli, Department of Planning Services, read a letter requesting a continuance to July 16, 2002. The
applicant is addressing well permit issues.
John Folsom moved to continue Case-1386 to July 16, 2002. Stephan Mokray seconded. Motion carried.
CASE NUMBER: USR-1380
APPLICANT: Richard McMahan for Saddler Arena
PLANNER: Lauren Light
LEGAL DESCRIPTION: Lot A of RE-3101; part of the S2 of Section 9,T7N, R67W of the 6th P.M.,
Weld County, Colorado.
REQUEST: A Site Specific Development Plan and a Special Review Permit for an
Equestrian Events Center including commercial roping/rodeo arena,animal
training and boarding, livestock sales facility, equestrian events and
concession sales. Included is an additional request for a Commercial
Recreational Facility which includes Antique shows and auctions, canine
events, boat and recreational vehicle shows in the A (Agricultural) Zone
District.
LOCATION: North of and adjacent to State Hwy 14;approximately 1/2 mile east of WCR
17/State Highway 257.
Lauren Light, Department of Planning Services, read a letter requesting a continuance until June 18, 2002.
The applicant is addressing mineral interest owners.
Stephan Mokray moved to continue Case USR-1380 to June 18, 2002. Cristie Nicklas seconded. Motion
wnacnt (11-111.0— ob/o3/2Ja_ 2002-1466
carried.
Case Number: USR-1383
Applicant: Javier Fernandez and Gabriela Gutierrez
Address: 3051 Western Drive, Hudson, CO 80642
Request: A Site Specific Development Plan and a Special Review Permit for a
Commercial Roping Arena in the A(Agricultural)Zone District
Legal Description: Lot 19, Vantage Acres Filing 2, being part of the SW4 Section 17, T1 N,
R65W of the 6th P.M., Weld County, CO
Location: North of and adjacent to Weld County Road 8 and west of and adjacent to
Western Drive
Sheri Lockman,Department of Planning Services presented Case USR-1383,reading the recommendation
and comments into the record. The Department of Planning Services is recommending denial of the
application.
Michael Miller asked about the existing structures on the site. Ms. Lockman stated there is a residence and
some additional out buildings. The roping arena is already in place. Mr. Miller asked about the well permit.
Ms.Lockman stated that the well is limited to the use for the home. The Division of Water Resources stated
it would need an Augmentation plan to permit the well for a use such as this and it could run 10-50 thousand
dollars.
John Folsom asked if there was an open violation on the site. Ms. Lockman indicated that there was an
open violation for the roping arena and a trucking business being run from the site. The trucking business
is not permitted in a subdivision so it will need to be removed. Mr. Miller asked if the trucking business
would have to be removed regardless if this application was passed or not. Ms. Lockman indicated it would
have to be removed.
Brian Larson,representative for the applicant, provided some additional information with regard to what the
applicant is willing to address. The applicant is willing to establish the well in order to meet the requirements
of the county and state. The applicant, in addition, will place the septic system on site as per the
requirements if the application is approved. The Augmentation Plan will be done upon approval. The
roping arena is an Agricultural use and will enhance the surrounding areas. The main concern seems to
be the water and septic system. These items will be addressed upon approval of the application.
Cathy Clamp asked about the indicated 60 parking spaces while there could be 200-300 people in
attendance. There is also no trailer parking indicated on any of the information provided. Mr. Larson stated
there is an area to the north that would address some of the parking issues. The 200-300 people is a very
aggressive number. Ms. Clamp asked about the historic attendance for the rodeos. Mr. Larson indicated
that he did not have an exact number but there is a report from the Weld County Sheriff. The report
indicates that there seemed to be no problems with the parking or anything that was going on. The report
states that all the vehicles were parked in the field to the north and not on WCR 8. Mr. Larson indicated that
there were approximately 200 people in attendance at the previous events. Ms. Clamp stated that some
of the concern for the surrounding owners was the parking of the audience.
John Folsom asked about the number of contestants and number of cattle. Is there a need for more than
one head of cattle per participant. Mr. Larson indicated that he was not sure of the numbers needed but the
numbers may be at a very aggressive rate.
Michael Miller asked Don Carroll, Department of Public Works, about the maximum number of parking
spaces based on the size of the lot and the use of trailers. Mr. Carroll, stated that there are 60 spaces
indicated and there is additional parking available to the north. In this situation vehicles and trailers are split
out to mitigate some of the traffic problems. Mr. Carroll indicated that the maximum number would be
around 100 spaces and there is some language in the Development Standards that addresses the parking
on WCR 8. Internal parking will need to be utilized.
The Chair asked if there was anyone in the audience who wished to speak for or against this application.
Kim Delmont, neighbor, stated concerns with the amount of people and the noise in a family atmosphere
subdivision. This has a large effect on the surrounding property owners. The neighbors were not notified of
any of the events held last year and there was an event on Mothers Day. This caused several problems with
the neighbor as BBQ were disrupted and the neighbors were forced to stay in their homes. Several neighbors
called the Sheriffs Office to complain. The Public Address system used was a large system. This use is not
compatible with the subdivision and this use directly effects everyone that lives there. The need for livestock
to be on site approximately 3-5 days prior to the event would throw the application into the Livestock
Confinement Operation. The number of contestants stated does not include the spectators. On the two
events that were held last year there was approximately 200-300+ people on the property. The whole
community would be adversely effected because of one property owner. The petition that were signed and
submitted covers 90% of the neighborhood which is approximately a one to two square mile. Mr. Folsom
asked about the Sheriff coming out to the property and if it was at the same time all the problems were
occurring. Ms. Delmont stated that within 10-15 minutes after the Sheriff was there the site was shut down
and trailers were leaving. The noise was shut down also and the applicant was unable to provide the permit
that was required for an event like that to take place. Mr. Miller asked about the parking of the cars on WCR
8 or on the lot. Ms. Delmont stated she could not state if the cars were on WCR 8 or not. Ms. Clamp asked
about the Public Address system and if the Public Address was not there would the noise be the same. Ms.
Delmont stated that it was enough noise to not want to be at home.
Rick Delamont, neighbor, indicated concerns with the well system being very shallow. The depths are
approximately 50-55 feet. The possible contamination to the wells because of the increase in livestock and
the wells being so shallow is a large concern. There has been no discussion as to how the manure will be
dealt with. The dust is another issue and how it will be controlled. The Public Address system was heard from
a long distance. Mr. Delmont lives within 300 yards away and was essentially trapped in his house.
Dave Lavanway,neighbor,stated that the noise from the events in question sounded like they were right next
door to him and he lives approximately 3/4 mile away. Mr. Lavanway drove to the site and there were cars
parked everywhere. Some of the major concerns are the noise,traffic, dust and people. Mr. Lavanway has
been in the area for 28 years and likes the quiet. The rest of the neighbors should not suffer for the financial
gain of one person.
Doug Welch,neighbor,President of the South Weld County Citizens for Organized Growth. The primary area
of concern is the area between Lochbuie and Hudson. This residential neighborhood is not an appropriate
site for the commercial venture being requested. There are over 90 residential units within one mile of the
project property. The area was developed in the 1960's and the homes were build at that time. These homes
are maintained and there has been new construction in the area. This proposal will increase traffic on all the
neighborhood streets posing a hazard to the residents and their property. The stream of cars heading to the
event will cause an abundance of dust on the gravel roads. The traffic will disrupt the quiet of the
neighborhood, safety and privacy of the residents. The trash is another issue. There will be an abundance
of trash and it will detract from the neighborhood and be another possible health hazard. Environmental
concerns with the land and the native vegetation. It will not be able to sustain growth with the expected
volume of people. This will subject the neighborhood to blowing sand and dust as well as erosion. The animal
units is a concern because of the need for the livestock to be on premises several day prior to the event
causing it to fall under the Livestock Confinement Operation. The water source is another issue with regard
to the availability. There is only domestic water, no irrigation. The proposed use is not compatible with
existing and planned use in the neighborhood. There are 19 people in attendance who are in opposition. Mr.
Folsom asked if there are any other commercial ventures in the area. Mr.Welch stated that there is a dairy
farm and sod farm near the location.
Michael Miller asked Char Davis, Department of Health, about the Livestock Confinement Operations
regulations. Ms. Davis indicated that there is a development standard addressing those regulations. Ms.
Clamp asked about the decibel range for the noise level in a residential area and if it could be achieved
without the Public Address system. Ms. Davis indicated that the range is 50 decibels which is equivalent to
a private business office or light auto traffic at 100 feet. Ms.Clamp asked if there was any way that this could
be achieved by a rodeo. Ms. Davis indicated that it could not.
Ray Gilackim,neighbor, has issues with the noise. If this is approved he will want to sell the property and not
be able to. Mr. Gilackim will need to disclose the information about the arena to the new owners or risk being
sued. There is not only a Public Address system but a band as well. After the events in question,there were
beer cans and trash all over the place. The site was packed with people on horseback, kids, trucks, cars,
horse trailers and people everywhere. There were a couple emergency vehicles responding to the area.
There have been animals that have gotten out and the site looks like a two day party. The people that are
attending are from outside the area. The safety concerns, public drinking and the applicant not being
responsible for anything is a major concern for the neighbors. A huge issues is the noise but it is much more
than just that. How is the applicant going to control the people and the consumption of alcohol. The applicant
has done nothing to appease or address any of the neighbors concerns.
Rick Fallen, neighbor, they did not move out there for this type of venue.
Wally Post, neighbor, reiterated that the neighbors are not for this proposal. It is not an appropriate use for
the property.
Ruby Pettinger,adjacent neighbor,stated that there were approximately 225 cars within the fence. There was
drinking and fighting. The major concern is for possible weapons on the property.
Mike Watkins,neighbor,''V2 mile from the site. The traffic issue is a major concern. Mr.Watkins counted over
200 vehicle some parked on both sides of WCR 8 and on Western Drive. There is a blind corner and people
in attendance were driving around the area intoxicated. The noise is unbelievable and constant. The event
went on for days and well into the night. The wells in the area are very shallow. The State has addressed this
concern in their letter. There is also the fire issue. This year is very dry which creates a larger than normal
hazard. The neighborhood maintains their yards but the balance of the land is in grass. This property was
not designed for this type of venue. The applicant cannot take responsibility for the contestants and the
audience for that large of a crowd. There is going to be an issue with home value and the standard of living
if this is allowed. There are neighbors that run small businesses out of the home that effect no one. The
neighborhood is in strong opposition of this project.
Ken Madsen, neighbor,has some concerns with the law enforcement issues. There is a blind corner located
in close proximity to his house and he witnessed a drag race between two trucks with trailers around that blind
corner and down the dirt road. The amount of alcohol was evident. There is a question as to whether the
Sheriffs Department can provide adequate enforcement.
The Chair closed the public portion of the hearing.
Brian Larson,reiterated that if this is granted the applicant will comply with all the standards and requirements
that are required. Ms. Clamp asked if he felt the noise level of a residential neighborhood could be obtained
with this type of activity going on. Mr. Larson indicated that it could not be achieved by anyone in the
neighborhood. There are horses on the property and it is an Agricultural neighborhood.
Cristie Nicklas stated that there has been total disregard for the public safety and welfare with the use of this
property. This cannot be mitigated with development standards for the protection of the neighborhood.
Gristle Nicklas moved that Case USR-1383, be forwarded to the Board of County Commissioners with the
Planning Commissions recommendation of denial based upon Section 22-2-60 B1 A Goal 2. It is not
compatible with the surrounding uses and residential area. 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. Motion carried unanimously.
Case Number: USR-1382
Planner: Lauren Light
Applicant: Veterinary Properties LLC
Address: 1907 15f Avenue, Greeley, CO 80631
Request: A Site Specific Development Plan and a Special Review Permit for a
Veterinary Clinic in the A(Agricultural)Zone District
Legal Description: Lot A of RE-2948; Pt. of the W2SE4 of Section 26, Township 6 North,
Range 66 West of the 6th P.M., Weld County, Colorado
Location: North of and adjacent to Weld County Road 64 (O Street) and
approximately 1/4 mile west of Weld County Road 35
Lauren Light, Department of Planning Services presented Case USR-1382, 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.
Wade Schumacher, applicant, goal is to build a quality large animal vet facility in the area. The demand is
large for this area. There is currently one that was built in 1970 and the demand has far outgrown the facility.
The facility will be 70% equine in the practice with remainder made up by beef cows and some 4H animals.
The site will consist of a large barn type structure that will not be holding any animals there long term. The
goal is to cure them and send them home.
Cristie Nicklas asked about the current property being in the City of Greeley. Dr. Schumacher stated that the
property that is currently being practiced out of is in the City of Greeley. Ms. Nicklas asked if the referral from
Greeley had been reviewed with regard to the development code standards needing to be met. Dr.
Schumacher stated that the one concern is with the landscaping issues. There is a yard A referred to and the
requirement for a large shade tree. The majority of the clientele is pick-ups and trailers and this would inhibit
the view from the property.
The Chair asked if there was anyone in the audience who wished to speak for or against this application.
Dean Vanderaen, neighbors, stated he had some previous concerns but has met with Dr. Shawn Bott. Dr.
Bott was able to provide some clarification and address a majority of those concerns. Lighting of the area is
another question. Mr. Miller added that the lighting is regulated to not be intrusive on neighboring properties.
There is some concerns with the possibilities for the future use of the ground. Mr. Miller added that if another
use were to be proposed for the site it would have to come for another review in front of the Planning
Commission.
The Chair closed the public portion of the hearing.
Cristie Nicklas moved that Case 1382, 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. Motion carried unanimously.
Case Number: USR-1385
Planner: Chris Gathman
Applicant: William Ward
12524 Weld County Road 251/2
Request: A Site Specific Development Plan and a Special Review Permit for a Use
by Right, an Accessory Use, or a Use by Special Review in the
Commercial or Industrial Zone Districts(Slide in truck camper sales,indoor
storage of slide in truck camper parts, embroidery/sewing of slide in truck
camper cushions and hats and jackets and sales of hats and jackets)in the
A(Agricultural)Zone District
Legal Description: Lot A of RE-2235; part of the SW4 NE4 Section 31, Township 3 North,
Range 66 West of the 6th P.M., Weld County, Colorado
Location: East of and adjacent to Weld County Road 251/2 , Approximately 1/2 mile
south of Weld County Road 28
Chris Gathman,Department of Planning Services presented Case USR-1385,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.
Cristie Nicklas asked Mr. Morrison about the notification and the changes to the description. Mr. Morrison
stated that if the Planning Commission feels that the title would have led someone to not appear then could
ask for a continuance. Mr. Gathman and Mr. Morrison discussed the possibility of it affecting the outcome
of the hearing. Mr. Miller stated he would have an issue with new campers on the lot for sale and the storage
of the old ones that are in need repair. Ms. Nicklas indicated that the development standard that was added
addressed the issue of everything that needed repairs will be stored inside and nothing outside. Mr. Mokray
asked how the development standard differentiated between the old and the new campers. Mr. Gathman
indicated that the application states the main sales will be camper tops and those can be stored outside. The
RV's deal with service and repair work and this will come at a later date. Mr. Miller asked if it was a realistic
thing especially if the parts for the RV that was needing repair were not available. Ms. Clamp indicated that
there is no room. Mr. Gathman indicated that the existing building is very large and capable of handling all
the vehicles and parts that would be needed for the repairs.
John Folsom asked about the sign size. Mr. Gathman indicated that the staff has recommended the 36
square foot size sign. The applicant requested a 120 square foot sign in his application The staff thought it
was reasonable for the area. Mr.Folsom asked about the display of the camper tops and their visibility to Hwy
85. Mr. Gathman stated that there still will need to be some landscaping for the site along Hwy 85. Mr.
Folsom asked if there were any permits for the operation of the embroidery. Mr.Gathman indicated that there
is no USR at the site right now for that particular use. This application will address it. Mr. Miller stated that
the building was done and then the permits were applied for. Mr.Gathman stated that was his understanding.
Mr. Folsom asked if the house needed to be brought up to code. Mr. Gathman stated that the house was not
part of the business. Mr. Folsom indicated that there should be some development standard to address
watering of the landscape. Mr. Gathman indicated that a plan will be submitted to DPS to address the
watering of the landscaping. This will be done prior to scheduling of the Board of County Commissioners
hearing. The applicant is applying for a permit to provide permanent water to the site. This could take
approximately one to two years. The landscaping plan would address those issues until the permit is issued.
Mr. Folsom stated that the sign will be for identification purposes only. Mr. Morrison indicated that the
standard is for a use by right and this a proposed use that is not a use by right. Ms. Clamp indicated that the
new development standard#6 should include the RV storage and the parts.
Bill Ward, applicant, provided some clarification to the project. The proposal is to sell slide campers at the
site. The building is large so that repairs can be done inside for not only safety purposes but for the
convenience and comfort of the clients. The large building encapsulates the smaller one that was originally
used for embroidery. Mr. Ward stated that he does have a permit for the construction of the building. Mr.
Miller asked about clarification on the permits for the original building. Mr.Ward indicated that the adjacent
property to the north was the building that was built without the permits. This property is under separate
ownership.
The Chair asked if there was anyone in the audience who wished to speak for or against this application. No
one wished to speak.
Cathy Clamp moved to moved to amend Development Standard#6 to state"No storage of RV or parts and
accessories shall be allowed outside." Stephan Mokray seconded. Motion carried
Stephan Mokray moved that Case USR-1385,be forwarded to the Board of County Commissioners along with
the Conditions of Approval and amended Development Standards with the Planning Commissions
recommendation of approval. Cathy Clamp 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. Motion carried unanimously.
Case: Comprehensive Plan
Planner: Robert Anderson
Robert Anderson, Department of Planning Services, distributed a memo depicting minor corrections. The
memo addresses the changes page by page.
Michael Miller suggested that the document go page by page. The board will add their corrections in at that
time.
In addition to punctuation, spacing, capitalization changes the DPS has corrected the following:
Page#
1 add "22-2-60 Prime Farmland &22-2-70 Nonprime Farmland" renumber
5 change B.Heritage to Tradition,add"Weld County's Right-to-Farm statement may be found
in Appendix 22_H" to end of paragraph,
6 spelling correction "northern"
12 delete "from owner's in E.
17 delete the word "than" in F.
19 delete (1) in A.
24 add "indicating that the competition for land and water will continue."to end of A.
25 renumber Sec#'s to end of article due to reinsertion of 22-2-60 Prime, standardize Policy
format through end of document
26 delete the word "to" in C.1.
27 2 D's re-letter 2n°D to E and subsequently renumber entire section,delete word"to"in F.2.
29 delete the word "preservation" in 22-2-90(formerly 22-2-70)A.
32 delete the word "is"from C.2.c.
34 insert the word "and" in B.2.b.
37 add the word "impacts"to end of F.1.
39 2 C's re-letter 2n°C to D and subsequently renumber entire section,
43 2 F's re-letter 2n° F to G and subsequently renumber entire section,
47 insert the ending "ever"to the word "when"
48 change the word "percepts"to "precepts" in 22-3-30.A.2.
49 delete duplicate "Classification Plan" in 22-3-60.D.
52 Change 1 to"of' in 22-3-110. A.
57 insert the word "the" in D.2.b. after"Management programs and"
59 delete 1st instance of"the"from 22-4-90
63 insert the word "between"after"be obtained" in 22-5-10.A.
66 2 l's re-letter 2n° Ito J and subsequently renumber entire section,
The Planning Commission made additional minor corrections while reviewing the document.
Michael Miller asked Arlan Marrs if there was anything he wanted to add. Mr. Marrs stated that a good job
was done on the document and it was presentable to the Board of County Commissioners.
Michael Miller asked Bruce Barker,Weld County Attorney,about the process. Is the version that is adopted
today sent to the BCC and accepted or rejected. Mr. Baker stated that the PlanningCommission either
approves or denies the changes. The BCC will consider putting that into ordinance form and it becomes
a part of the code. Mr. Barker stated that the BCC will consider the document and comments coming from
staff, the committee and the public. This document is not intended to replace the old but to amend the
affected portions.
The Chair asked if there was anyone in the audience who wished to speak for or against this application. No
one wished to speak.
Cristie Nicklas moved to approve the amended Comprehensive Plan. Stephan Mokray seconded.
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. Motion carried unanimously.
Michael Miller volunteered to be present at the Board of County Commissioners hearing to assist in presenting
the amendments that were voted on. Ms. Nicklas volunteered to accompany. Mr.Anderson stated that the
tentative dates are for the last week of June with the second reading the third week of July. Mr. Barker will
consider the document in an informal setting. This will be decided at the first reading and will occur in
between the first and second reading. Mr. Barker suggested for Mr. Miller and Ms. Nicklas be available for
two meetings. Mr.Anderson indicated that when the dates are set an email message will be sent informing
the Planning Commission of those dates.
Meeting adjourned at 4:30p.m.
Respectfully submitted
Voneen Macklin
Secretary
Hello