HomeMy WebLinkAbout20042968.tiff HEARING CERTIFICATION
DOCKET NO. 2004-92
RE: SITE SPECIFIC DEVELOPMENT PLAN AND USE BY SPECIAL REVIEW PERMIT#1474
FOR A USE PERMITTED AS A USE BY RIGHT OR ACCESSORY USE IN THE
COMMERCIAL ZONE DISTRICT(OFFICE AND STORAGE FOR A DAIRY SUPPLY AND
SERVICES BUSINESS) IN THE A (AGRICULTURAL) ZONE DISTRICT - GARY AND
CAROL VANDER WAL
A public hearing was conducted on October 27, 2004, at 10:00 a.m., with the following present:
Commissioner Robert D. Masden, Chair- EXCUSED
Commissioner William H. Jerke, Pro-Tem
Commissioner M. J. Geile
Commissioner David E. Long
Commissioner Glenn Vaad
Also present:
Acting Clerk to the Board, Carol A. Harding
Assistant County Attorney, Lee Morrison
Planning Department representative, Michelle Martin
Health Department representative, Char Davis
Public Works representative, Peter Schei
The following business was transacted:
I hereby certify that pursuant to a notice dated October 8, 2004, and duly published October 13,
2004, in the Fort Lupton Press,a public hearing was conducted to consider the request of Gary and
Carol Vander Wal fora Site Specific Development Plan and Use by Special Review Permit#1474
for a Use Permitted as a Use by Right or Accessory Use in the Commercial Zone District(office and
storage for a dairy supply and services business)in theA(Agricultural)Zone District. Lee Morrison,
Assistant County Attorney, made this a matter of record. Chair Pro-Tem Jerke explained the options
to the applicant with only four Commissioners present. Gary Vander Wal,applicant,stated he would
proceed. Michelle Martin, Department of Planning Services, presented a brief summary of the
proposal and entered the favorable recommendation of the Planning Commission into the record
as written. She provided proof of posting, marked Exhibit J,and stated the uses are compatible with
surrounding land uses,which are residential and agricultural. Of twelve referrals sent to agencies,
Ms. Martin stated eleven responded favorably or included comments,which have been addressed
with Conditions of Approval or Development Standards. Ms. Martin stated the Planning Commission
required the applicant to submit a Drainage Plan, which has been reviewed by the Department of
Public Works. She stated staff believes Conditions of Approval#1.F and#1.G have been addressed
and can be deleted from the Resolution. Ms. Martin displayed overhead pictures of the site and,
using the Plot Plan included in the record, indicated the proposed location of the structure and the
existing driveway. She stated the entire site is within the floodplain, not the floodway.
Char Davis, Department of Public Health and Environment, stated the site is serviced by a North
Weld County Water District tap and a permitted septic system. She stated the applicant is installing
a new engineered system for the new building.
2004-2968
PL1746
(Jr ; PL "id, /7/Z_c6-o) 7/-4,2 OV
HEARING CERTIFICATION - GARY AND CAROL VANDER WAL (USR #1474)
PAGE 2
Peter Schei, Department of Public Works, stated stormwater drainage is a major concern for the
site, and the drainage report required by the Planning Commission has been submitted and
reviewed. He stated his review indicated that in a 100-year storm condition, there would not be a
significant increase in the flow rate. He stated the Plot Plan demonstrates the accommodations that
have been made, and the drainage report has not shown that building the shed has impacted the
stormwater accumulation significantly. He discussed the location of two concrete lined swales that
will be installed to provide a passageway for any stormwater. Mr. Schei also stated the location of
the building was moved to this spot because of the impact to adjacent properties. Commissioner
Vaad stated he has talked to the adjacent property owner on the west,who told him the backup of
stormwater was caused with building up the roadway. Mr. Schei responded that he is uncertain
whether a Flood Hazard Permit was obtained prior to work being done on the driveway. Responding
further to Commissioner Vaad, Ms. Martin stated it is uncertain whether the amendment submitted
to the previous Flood Hazard Plan covered the road or the residence. Chair Pro-Tem Jerke stated
the Army Corps of Engineers submitted a letter; however,Commissioner Vaad indicated the letter
discussed only the construction of the building and did not included the previous adjustment made
to the land. Responding to Commissioner Vaad, Ms. Martin stated the roadway would not have
been addressed previously. Responding further to Commissioner Vaad, Mr. Schei stated the
drainage report indicates the two swales will allow water to pass through without backing up onto
the adjacent property, and the Engineer accommodated that possibility through the installation of
the swales and the exit of the water from the site to the river. Mr. Schei stated he is not aware of
anything else that can be done to make other accommodations. He also stated embankments and
volumes in Flood Hazard areas need to be significant, and velocities need to be substantial in order
to have an effect. He stated this situation creates ponds, and it would require a detailed study to
determine whether the rise would cause problems to the west of the property. Commissioner Vaad
stated the issue is whether upon approval, which is based on the assumption that the road was
previously permitted, the County would become liable for future damage. He stated the
accumulation of water is the problem since not all stormwater can pass under the bridge and it
appears the road embankment created the problem. Mr. Schei responded that those concerns
need to be addressed and the problem mitigated through removal of the road or lowering the
elevation of the road. Responding to Chair Pro-Tem Jerke, Mr.Schei stated there is no site distance
or safety concerns from the access onto Weld County Road 388, even with a diagonal access,
since the terrain and topography are flat and nothing blocks the site distance.
Gary Vander Wal, applicant, stated his main concern was the flood problems,which he first heard
about at the Planning Commission hearing. He stated he tried to accommodate the situation by
having engineers survey the property, review all elevations,and create a drainage plan to improve
the drainage situation over what it was when he purchased the property. He stated getting rid of the
culvert and putting in a concrete swale makes more sense to him for handling stormwater, and he
will install two swales. Mr.Vander Wal stated he moved the location of the proposed building upon
recommendation by the engineer, to accommodate the concerns of the adjacent property owner.
He stated it appears the new building is not creating the problem,but the problem was created when
the roadway was constructed, and he was not involved with that, although the problem of
stormwater retention needs to be addressed. Mr. Vander Wal stated his business is a service
business for dairies,and he needs the building for storage of parts and rental equipment. He stated
the dairies are his customers,and he travels to them,they are not serviced on site. Mr.Vander Wal
2004-2968
PL1746
HEARING CERTIFICATION - GARY AND CAROL VANDER WAL (USR #1474)
PAGE 3
stated he tried to address all the potential problems with his application. Responding to
Commissioner Vaad, Mr.Vander Wal stated he purchased the property in April,and the sellers and
realtor represented no problem with the property. He stated he sold a property in Windsor and is
moving his business to this location. Responding to Commissioner Geile, Mr.Vander Wal stated
the realtor talked to individuals at the Planning Commission and made an effort to see potential
problems; however, he gave the impression there should not be a problem.
Philip Mathis, adjacent property owner, stated he has been dealing with the stormwater problem
since 1977 when the house was originally constructed. He stated he talked to Commissioner Vaad
last year,when the leassor said the owner stated he would raise the road as high as necessary to
sell the property. He stated stormwater flows through very fast, sometimes three feet deep,and it
flows over a large area which would not be handled with a small swale. Mr. Mathis stated the road
pushes water back onto his property,and the road should be completely removed with the concrete
installed at the base level. He stated the road acts as a dam, holding the water on his property.
Responding to Chair Pro-Tem Jerke, Mr. Mathis stated the work done to elevate the road raised the
stormwater accumulation approximately four inches. Responding to Chair Pro-Tem Jerke, Ms.
Martin stated the flood maps currently in use were adopted in 1982;therefore,the same maps would
have been used. She clarified that the original permit and description was for the house and
property; however, it did not include the road. Ms. Martin also stated a Building Permit at that time
would have required the applicant to show adequate access. Responding to Commissioner Vaad,
Mr. Schei stated the drainage report does not refer to the 100-year flood or discuss the impact the
suggested modifications to the road will have, and that it would take a significant study to see
whether there would be a problem. He stated the plan only provides a reasonable accommodation
to the development of this shed and its effect, and it does not investigate the condition of that road
prior to the embankment. Mr. Schei stated since testimony indicates the homeowner to the west
has seen water four inches higher, it is obvious any property in the area is of concern; however,the
technical questions of frequency, volume and velocity would be determined by a comprehensive
study instead of a simple drainage plan. Responding to Commissioner Geile, Mr. Schei stated a
culvert may resolve the problem; however, that would leave the potential of the culvert being
blocked. The engineer has recommended removing the existing culvert and installing the swale in
the road to remove any chance for obstruction. He stated the swale is the engineer's attempt at
mitigation of the problem,although the reportdoes not totally answer that question. Responding to
Chair Pro-Tem Jerke, Mr.Schei clarified there are two swales proposed, one near the new building
and one near the adjacent road. He stated this plan was submitted after the Planning Commission
hearing, in an attempt to eliminate the ponding situation by providing a dip across the access drive,
as well as creating an embankment for the pad of the building and a second dip on the south of the
building to allow water to drain to the river. Mr. Schei also stated the impact of the
recommendations are not addressed in the report. Responding to Chair Pro-Tem Jerke, Mr.Schei
stated the dip is approximately 50 feet long, and the recommendation is to move the road from its
present elevation down to ground level. Mr.Schei stated the existing topography is contoured,and
since the current roadway is 12 to 18 inches in depth, removing the entire amount of fill should allow
the water to cross the road.
Mr.Vander Wal stated the engineer also discussed the possibility of constructing a ditch along the
western property line, since the property drops off towards the river. He stated he is willing to do
2004-2968
PL1746
HEARING CERTIFICATION - GARY AND CAROL VANDER WAL (USR #1474)
PAGE 4
that if the Board wishes, and that,although the top is flat,the property does drop off about half-way
through. Mr.Schei stated that would be a possible solution;however,the effect on the surrounding
area would have to be determined. He stated there could be water backing up from other areas in
the neighborhood,and the entire area has to be assessed. After further discussion, Char Pro-Tem
Jerke stated it is obvious the applicant is spending money to provide mitigation to the best of his
knowledge at this time. Responding to Chair Pro-Tem Jerke, Mr.Vander Wal stated he has read
the Conditions of Approval and Development Standards and is in agreement with them. Responding
to Commissioner Geile, Mr.Vander Wal stated he did ask whether the house had been flooded,but
the previous owner responded that water never reached the house,and the inspection provided for
the house was good.
Commissioner Vaad stated he did look at the property after his discussion last year with Mr. Mathis,
and it appears a swale in place of the culvert would handle the incremental amount of runoff,
although it will probably still flood with a large storm. Responding to his question regarding the
County's exposure to liability, Mr. Morrison stated this question is addressed in a different form of
action,therefore,there may be some liability. Mr. Morrison stated evidence has been provided that
the water has raised four inches,and the recognized regulatory rise is one foot,therefore,that offers
some protection. He also stated he is not entirely comfortable with the County's position.
Responding to further questions, Kim Ogle, Department of Planning Services, stated in the five
years he has been employed,staff has never done a Flood Hazard Permit fora road,except for one
that actually crossed a County Road. Mr.Ogle stated staff typically does not address access when
processing Flood Hazard Permits. Responding to Chair Pro-Tem Jerke, Mr. Morrison stated the
action of the Board on this date would not preclude action of any other individual from seeking
redress, and it would take a more detailed engineering study to prove, either way.
Chair Pro-Tem Jerke stated he finds the applicant has certainly attempted to provide adequate
mitigation with the installation of two swales,which appears to be the most expeditious manner in
which to get the excess water to the river. He stated the home has been in place for seven years,
with water on the property at least twice during that time, although there has been no apparent
damage to the home. He also stated since this is a shed there are no health, safety, and welfare
issues, and with the applicant trying to provide mitigation of the flooding problem, he is in support
of the request.
Commissioner Geile discussed the underground storm drainage at Walmart, and that the reason
for having culverts is to direct the water through; however, with a storm event, the backup water
would overflow culverts. He stated since testimony indicates that solution is not realistic and the
swales would allow water to drain through the property and reach the river, he is satisfied the
problem will be solved. Therefore, he is also in support.
Commissioner Vaad stated he is more comfortable with the proposal than he was at the beginning
of the hearing. Responding to his question, Mr.Schei stated the drainage plan does not specify the
length of the swales, although it is submitted on the plat by scale and is approximately 50 feet.
Commissioner Vaad stated that with the understanding that the swale is at least 50 feet at the road's
lowest elevation, he feels it will most likely deal with five inches of incremental flooding; therefore,
reasonable accommodation has been made. He also stated the adjacent property owner is not
2004-2968
PL1746
HEARING CERTIFICATION - GARY AND CAROL VANDER WAL (USR#1474)
PAGE 5
limited from further recourse if something happens. Therefore, Commissioner Vaad moved to
approve the request of Gary and Carol Vander Wal for a Site Specific Development Plan and Use
by Special Review Permit#1474 for a Use Permitted as a Use by Right or Accessory Use in the
Commercial Zone District (office and storage for a dairy supply and services business) in the A
(Agricultural)Zone District, based on the recommendations of the Planning staff and the Planning
Commission, with the Conditions of Approval and Development Standards as entered into the
record, with the deletion of Conditions of Approval #2. F and #2.G requested by staff, which are
Conditions of Approval #1.F and #1.G in the Draft Resolution. The motion was seconded by
Commissioner Long, and it carried unanimously.
There being no further discussion, the hearing was completed at 11:45 a.m.
This Certification was approved on the 1st day of November 2004.
APPROVED:
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
WELD COUNTY, COLORADO
EL
' ��� : l� rca,Gy %1/ EXCUSED
_ Robert D. Masden, Chair
Iasi Q -1 ! my Clerk to the Board
�� k:is A �4 ,�
®LIt, William H/erke, Pro-Tern
/-
Deputy Clerk to the Board
. 'eile
TAPE #2004-49 A-:-.
,a
Da '. . Long
DOCKET#2004-92
Glenn Vaad
2004-2968
PL1746
EXHIBIT INVENTORY CONTROL SHEET
Case USR #1474 - GARY AND CAROL VANDER WAL
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 06/01/2004)
D. Clerk to the Board Notice of Hearing
E. Applicant Letter re: Size of Sign (06/01/2004)
F. Prima Oil and Gas Co Letter of Consent (06/07/2004)
G. Landmark Engineering Ltd. Letter re: Drainage Report (08/30/2004)
H. Landmark Engineering Ltd. Letter re: Septic System Design (08/30/04)
Prima Oil and Gas Company Letter re: Royalty Interest Owners
(09/07/2004)
J. Planning Staff Posting of sign affidavit (2 pages)
K. Michelle Martin, Planner Memo dated 10/27/04 requesting deletion of
conditions.
L.
M.
N.
O.
P.
Q.
R.
S.
T.
U.
V.
ATTENDANCE RECORD
HEARINGS ARE AS FOLLOWS ON THIS 27TH DAY OF OCTOBER, 2004:
DOCKET#2004-92 - USR#1474 - GARY AND CAROL VANDER WAL
DOCKET#2004-94 -AM USR#991 - DUKE ENERGY FIELD SERVICES
PLEASE legibly write or print your name and complete address.
NAME ADDRESS
John�Do�ey �� p^ , , I'•/� 123 Nowhere Street, City, State,a Zip
A/�\1�c.4/UY�U�/1 LU9-�( //liy„�, � � �D wy �.( �p�/N4�D/� � gU�Jr�C`�
7D
rt_
//ANr//aiJoN �5-444%--' '�'L�5.��(��1//,2.1' cute...? , r's:�z't'��-n9[,//cc) ?,c2.9i3
v_5'J &i c & Yo /7;-k)
6c-4r' y 122 717-, 766 G itccp CA
9 2_ 6 3OO - /f p 3,9Y //-(P y
Hello