HomeMy WebLinkAbout20050182 HEARING CERTIFICATION
DOCKET NO. 2005-10
RE: CHANGE OF ZONE, CZ#1065, FROM THE A (AGRICULTURAL) ZONE DISTRICT TO
THE 1-3 (INDUSTRIAL) ZONE DISTRICT - ARNHEIM, LLC
A public hearing was conducted on February 2, 2005, at 10:00 a.m., with the following present:
Commissioner William H. Jerke, Chair
Commissioner M. J. Geile, Pro-Tem
Commissioner David E. Long
Commissioner Robert D. Masden
Commissioner Glenn Vaad
Also present:
Acting Clerk to the Board, Esther Gesick
Assistant County Attorney, Lee Morrison
Planning Department representative, Chris Gathman
Health Department representative, Pam Smith
Public Works representative, Peter Schei
The following business was transacted:
I hereby certify that pursuant to a notice dated January 14, 2005, and duly published January 19,
2005, in the Fort Lupton Press,a public hearing was conducted to consider the request ofArnheim,
LLC,for a Change of Zone, CZ#1065,from the A(Agricultural)Zone District to the 1-3 (Industrial)
Zone District. Lee Morrison, Assistant County Attorney, made this a matter of record. Chris
Gathman, Department of Planning Services,presented a brief summary of the proposal and entered
the unfavorable recommendation of the Planning Commission into the record as written. He gave
a brief description of the location of the site, which currently has an office and outdoor storage
approved under Use by Special Review#1402 on two acres of the site. He stated there is also an
existing single family residence on the site,and if the property is rezoned,the house will need to be
designated as a Non-conforming Use or be vacated. He gave a brief description of the surrounding
land uses,and stated the site is within the three-mile referral area for the Cities of Brighton and Fort
Lupton. Mr.Gathman stated the Board previously approved Use by Special Review Permit#1402
(USR-1402)in 2002,for the existing storage and office facility. If this Change of Zone is approved,
USR-1402 will need to be vacated and the applicant will need to submit a Site Plan Review for the
existing uses. He stated on November 14, 2000, the County entered into an Intergovernmental
Agreement (IGA) with the City of Fort Lupton, and pursuant to that agreement, rezoning is
considered to be development. He stated Fort Lupton has expressed concern with approval of this
request because the County will no longer be able to ensure that the property is developed in
accordance with the IGA. He further stated several uses allowed by right in the I-3(Industrial)Zone
District would require a Site Plan Review,although review by the Planning Commission and Board
of Commissioners would not be required. Mr. Gathman stated the Planning Commission did
recommend denial of this application with a vote of five to one. In response to Commissioner
Masden, Mr. Gathman stated the primary reason for denial was based on inconsistency with the
Fort Lupton IGA. He explained the property is outside of the Urban Growth Boundary; however, it
is within the three-mile referral area. Responding to Chair Jerke, Mr. Morrison stated most of the
agreements include termination dates; however, many are considered to remain in effect if both
2005-0182
cc' ,4, x MfIEP> N? c?8OSPL1668
HEARING CERTIFICATION - ARNHEIM, LLC (CZ#1065)
PAGE 2
parties continue to honor the terms beyond that date. Chair Jerke commented in the past four years
the County has approved various Change of Zone and Use by Special Review Permits in the area
north of Weld County Road 6,and he questioned why the Planning Commission had concerns with
a similar request from this applicant on a property south of Weld County Road 6. In response to
Commissioner Long, Mr.Gathman stated one of Fort Lupton's primary concerns is that some of the
uses allowed by right would only require a Site Plan Review, which is an administrative process.
Mr. Morrison added the Site Plan Review process does not include a provision for review by elected
officials or the public.
Pam Smith, Department of Public Health and Environment, stated the original plat indicated a
notation of an existing residence that was to be removed;however,the applicant is now requesting
to keep that structure. She stated she located two septic permits for the address, dated 1978 and
1980; however,she needs additional review of the original permits to clarify whether they are for the
structure. She further stated the existing shop does have a septic system that was permitted in
2003. If approved,Ms.Smith proposed the Board add language requiring the applicant to work with
staff to clarify the permits and verify that it is adequately sized. Responding to Commissioner
Masden, Ms. Smith stated all of the permits may be in order; however, she has not had an
opportunity to verify the information. Mr. Morrison stated the Fort Lupton IGA states it was in effect
until June 30, 2004, and the parties shall annually review the agreement to determine if it should
continue in effect for a year thereafter. It further stated the agreement may be terminated at any
time; however, he is not aware that any such action has taken place. He further stated Fort Lupton's
referral indicates concern based on the application which would allow 1-3(Industrial)zoning and an
urban-type use outside its Urban Growth Area,yet within the referral area. He stated regardless of
the terms of the agreement,urban uses are generally discouraged outside of an Urban Growth Area,
which also relates to the availability of sewer in a non-urban area.
Peter Schei, Department of Public Works, stated the property has a Nonexclusive Access
Agreement which extends through the property to a storage facility on the west side. He stated the
property will be accessed from Weld County Road 27, which is classified as a minor arterial and
requires 110 feet of right-of-way; however,the applicant will be held to the request from the City of
Fort Lupton of 120 feet. Mr.Schei stated staff was not provide with much transportation information
at the Change of Zone phase,although,issues such as drainage,parking,etcetera,will be reviewed
at the Site Plan Review. In response to Chair Jerke, Mr. Schei stated the Draft Resolution does
include the language requiring 120 feet of right-of-way. He questioned whether a haul route could
be pre-determined since an industrial use will likely be located on this property. Mr. Schei stated
staff has included Conditions #2.1.11 and #2.1.12 to be added as notes on the plat to alert the
applicant to potential improvements. Chair Jerke stated he would like the applicant to provide
testimony regarding the future intersection improvements at Weld County Roads 6 and 27.
(Clerk's Note: Faulty tape resulted in the loss of applicant's testimony on public record.) The
applicant was represented by Paul Gesso, Banks and Gesso, LLC.
No public testimony was offered concerning this matter. In response to Commissioner Vaad
regarding the proposed Lupton Lakes Annexation, Mr. Carroll stated the plan is to mine 385 acres,
which will result in a lined water storage reservoir. Commissioner Masden commented it will likely
include some commercial development, parks and trails. Commissioner Vaad stated Fort Lupton
2005-0182
PL1668
HEARING CERTIFICATION - ARNHEIM, LLC (CZ#1065)
PAGE 3
indicated water storage on the site may be appropriate if development is proposed following the
mining. Mr. Carroll stated the plans indicate there will be three ponds that are 86 acres, 175 acres,
and 22 acres. He stated his drawing does not show any housing development.
Responding to Chair Jerke, Mr.Gesso stated he and the applicant have reviewed and concur with
the Conditions of Approval as proposed. Ms. Smith proposed adding the following language as
Condition#2.F to state,"All septic systems located on the property shall have appropriate permits
from the Weld County Department of Public Health and Environment. The Department of Public
Health and Environment found two permits for 1571 Weld County Road 27. The applicant shall work
with the Department of Public Health and Environment to clarify the permits on file and to make sure
the existing septic systems are adequately sized. In the event the system is found to be inadequate,
the system must be brought into compliance with the current Individual Sewage Disposal System
(I.S.D.S.)Regulations." Mr. Gathman requested the Board add a new Condition of Approval#2.G
to state,"If the applicant is to keep the existing house for residential use and/or outside office use,
the applicant shall provide evidence that the existing commercial well is appropriately permitted for
the existing building,or provide evidence that another adequate water supply has been obtained."
In response to Chair Jerke, Mr. Gathman stated the well permit is unclear as to whether it is for the
existing building, or whether it is also adequate for the new structure. Chair Jerke suggested
including a Condition to address a haul route if required by the future use. Mr. Schei suggested
adding a new Condition #2.1.13 to state, "At the time of Site Plan Review, the applicant will be
required to prepare a haul route with respect to the proposed development." The Board indicated
concurrence with the proposed amendments and to reletter and renumber accordingly. In response
to Commissioner Vaad, Mr. Gathman stated the Site Plan Review process includes design and
setback requirements;however,there is not a specific requirement for screening of outdoor storage.
He stated staff can propose screening as a Condition of Approval, although,there is not a specific
requirement. Responding to Commissioner Geile,Mr.Gathman agreed that although the applicant
has indicated a proposed use,this Change of Zone application does not hold them to those plans
and they could submit a Site Plan Review for any use allowed in the 1-3 (Industrial)Zone District.
He further stated the applicant will likely keep the existing facility,and they will be required to submit
a Site Plan Review for the existing use, which will not come before the Board for review.
Commissioner Masden moved to approve the request of Arnheim, LLC., for a Change of Zone,
CZ #1065, from the A (Agricultural) Zone District to the 1-3 (Industrial) Zone District, with the
Conditions of Approval as entered into the record and modified. In response to Chair Jerke, Mr.
Morrison stated the Board will need to cite the reasons for approval because it is potentially at odds
with the Fort Lupton IGA. Commissioner Masden stated the application is in conformance with
Sections 23-2-230.6.1 through B.5. Mr. Morrison suggested addressing the language which
encourages the County to disapprove urban development outside the Urban Growth Area,but with
in the municipal referral area, to the extent legally possible. In the past the Board has cited the
rationale that there is no other reasonable economic use for the property without the rezoning. He
explained one reason for not following that requirement of the IGA is if it is not legally possible to
deny the request,i.e.denial would constitute a taking by denying all reasonable economic use of the
property. Commissioner Masden stated there has been adequate testimony which supports that
the site is not suitable for agricultural use because it does not have any water for farming,and there
is an easement going through the middle, therefore, it is not subject to the terms of the IGA. The
motion was seconded by Commissioner Long.
2005-0182
PL1668
HEARING CERTIFICATION -ARNHEIM, LLC (CZ#1065)
PAGE 4
Commissioner Geile stated he wishes he had the opportunity to reconsider the other 1-3(Industrial)
uses that have already been approved in the area because he feels the County has an obligation
to recognize and work with the communities of Fort Lupton and Brighton as they try to establish
intergovernmental agreements between themselves. He stated they also have Comprehensive
Plans that are very complex. He expressed concern with not having a designated user or project
that will be located on this property. He stated there is no water with this property,therefore, it will
likely become an urban area. He stated the County does have an IGA with Fort Lupton, and the
communities are working to establish other IGA's and Comprehensive Plans. He expressed
concern with granting approval which will give the developer the opportunity to locate any of the uses
which are allowed underthe 1-3(Industrial)Zone District,which may have a negative impact on the
area. He stated he does not support granting a Change of Zone solely for marketing purposes,and
there is a compatibility issue with the potential 385-acre development to the north. Commissioner
Geile stated he agrees with the recommendation for denial from the Planning Commission.
Commissioner Vaad commented he was opposed until he heard testimony regarding the IGA clause
which does allow the Board to approve a use in the event that a denial would result in a taking or
elimination of any economical use of the property. He stated it is unlikely that the worst-case
scenario of uses which are allowed under the 1-3 (Industrial) Zone District will take place on this
property.
Commissioner Long concurred with Commissioner Vaad and stated in the overall scope of the area,
it does appear to be compatible,there is no water associated with the site,and it is not suitable for
agricultural use.
Chair Jerke stated the applicant has provided justification for the Change of Zone,the site is in the
path of development, and denial may result in a taking of the land. He stated at a recent EDAP
meeting the discussion indicated that increasing the amount of inventory for economic development
is a very high priority. There being no further discussion, and upon a call for the vote, the motion
carried four to one,with Commissioner Geile opposed. The hearing was completed at 11:45 a.m.
2005-0182
PL1668
HEARING CERTIFICATION -ARNHEIM, LLC (CZ#1065)
PAGE 5
This Certification was approved on the 7th day of February, 2005.
APPROVED:
Elea�� BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
+a WELD COUNTY, COLORADO
1861 tiFt. . Lielealt% /G t l v✓
William H. rke, Chair
® c ry Clerk to the Board
eile, Pro-Tern
BY://11-1"-4-4
Deputy Clerk to the Board
D vid E. Long
TAPE #2005-09 k
Robert D. Masden
DOCKET#2005-10 Ae�a�a,t,l �( ��
Glenn Vaad c _
2005-0182
PL1668
EXHIBIT INVENTORY CONTROL SHEET
Case CZ#1065- ARNHEIM, LLC, C/O BANKS AND GESSO, LLC
Exhibit Submitted By Exhibit Description
A. Planning Staff Inventory of Items Submitted
B. Planning Commission Resolution of Recommendation
C. Planning Commission Summary of Hearing (Minutes 11-16-2004
and 10-19-2004)
D. Clerk to the Board Notice of Hearing
E. Clerk to the Board Notice of Unfavorable Recommendation
(11-24-2004)
F. Planning Staff Certification and Photo of sign posting
G. Applicant 11X17 Zoning/Land Ownership Map and CD
of electronic version, dated 02/02/2005
H.
J.
K.
L.
M.
N.
O.
P.
Q.
R.
S.
T.
U.
Hello