HomeMy WebLinkAbout20040612.tiff BEFORE THE WELD COUNTY, COLORADO, PLANNING COMMISSION
RESOLUTION OF RECOMMENDATION TO THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
Moved by John Folsom, along with the amendments to Condition P & Y, 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: AmPZ-613
APPLICANT: Cattail Creek Group LLC do George DuBard
PLANNER: Sheri Lockman
LEGAL DESCRIPTION: Lot C of RE-2637;being part of the SW4 of Section 9,T6N, R66W of the 6th
P.M., Weld County, Colorado.
REQUEST: Change of Zone from A(Agricultural)to PUD for 8 lots with Estate Zone Uses
and 1 lot with Agricultural Zone Uses along with 7.19 acres of open space (Cattail Creek).
LOCATION: North of and adjacent to CR 70 ; approximately 800 feet east of CR 29
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 26-5-30 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 22-2-190.D.2.b,PUD.Policy 4.2"A planned unit development which includes
a residential use should provide common open space free of buildings, streets,
driveways or parking areas. The common open space should be designed and
located to be easily accessible to all the residents of the project and usable for open
space and recreation...."
Section 27-2-60 of the Weld County Code, which addresses common open space
requirements states"...in nonurban scale developments with a minimum eighty-acre
agricultural outlot, the preservation of the agricultural outlot may be considered to
meet the intent of the common open space requirement."The application includes
109.56 acres to be used for agricultural purposes.All buildings will be required to be
located in the adjacent five (5) acre building envelope.
The applicant has also included 7.19 acres of open space which includes a
landscaped area to buffer the adjacent home to the west.
2) Section 22-3-50.8.1, P.Goal "Require adequate facilities and services to assure
the health, safety and general welfare of the present and future residents of the
County." The proposed PUD will be serviced by North Weld County Water District
for potable water and fire protection requirements. Individual sewage disposal
systems will handle the effluent flow.
3) Section 22-2-60.D,A.Goal "Conversion of agricultural land to nonurban residential,
commercial and industrial uses will be accommodated when the subject site is in an
area that can support such development. Such development shall attempt to be
compatible with the region. "The referral agencies have indicated that the proposal
can be supported in this area. Further, the applicant has considered landscaping,
building envelopes, road placement and the retention of a 114 acre agricultural lot
in an attempt to remain compatible with the region.
B. Section 27-6-120.6.b- The uses which would be allowed in the proposed PUD will conform X
with the Performance Standards of the PUD Zone District contained in Article II, Chapter 2 w
4
of the Weld County Code.
2004-0612 man
Resolution AmPZ-613
Cattail Creek LLC
Page 2
Section 27-2-20,Access standards—The applicant has proposed that the lots be served by
an internal paved roadway built to County standards.
Section 27-2-35, Buffering and screening—The application includes a strip of landscaped
open space along the west side of the proposed estate lots to help minimize the impact on
the adjacent home. The applicant has also included building envelopes to maximize the
distance that the homes can be built from the adjacent properties.
Section 27-2-40, Bulk requirements— The a pplicant has chosen t o a dhere tot he bulk
requirements of the A(Agricultural)zone district for Lot 9. Lots 1 through 8 shall adhere to
the bulk requirements of the E (Estate)zone district.
The applicant has also met the remaining performance standards as delineated in Section
27-2-10. The Conditions of Approval and Development Standards ensure compliance with
Sections 27-2-20 through 27-2-220 of the Weld County Code.
C. Section 27-6-120.6.c- That the uses which would be permitted shall 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 proposed site is not influenced by an Inter-Governmental Agreement. The City of
Greeley and Towns of Eaton and Severance are all within the three mile referral area. All
indicated no conflicts with their interests.
D. Section 27-6-120.6.d- That the PUD Zone District shall be serviced by an adequate water
supply and sewage disposal system in compliance with the Performance Standards in Article
II the Weld County Code. The proposed PUD will be serviced by North Weld County Water
District for potable water and fire protection requirements.The Weld County Attorney's Office
has approved the water agreement between North Weld and the a pplicant. Individual
sewage disposal systems will handle the effluent flow. The Weld County Department of
Public Health and Environment has indicated in a referral response dated January 20, 2004
that the application has satisfied Chapter 27 of the Weld County Code in regard to water and
sewer service.
E. Section 27-6-120.6.e- 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 Weld County Public Works Department has required the applicant enter into an
agreement with the County to proportionately share the cost of improving County Road 70
from the western most access road, easterly to paved County Road 31. The cost will be
based on a proportion of the traffic generated by the development to the existing traffic.
F. Section 27-6-120.6.f - An off-site road improvements agreement and an on-site
improvements agreement proposal is in compliance with Chapter 24 of the Weld County
Code as amended and a road improvements agreement is complete and has been
submitted, if applicable.
Conditions have been included which require the applicant to enter into an Improvements
Agreement in accordance with Section 27-6-120.6.f of the Weld County Code for all on-site
improvements to Cattail Creek PUD along with a proportional share of the cost to improve
County Road 70.
G. Section 27-6-120.6.g - 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.
Resolution AmPZ-613
Cattail Creek LLC
Page 3
A portion of the property along the eastern edge lies with the 100-year flood plain. The
applicant has indicated a 200 foot setback from the ditch for all structures and septic
envelopes. The Weld County D epartment o f Public Works has required t hat the final
drainage report take into account the flood plain.
Effective January 1,2003, Building Permits issued on the lot will be required to adhere to the
fee structure of the County Road Impact Program. (Ordinance 2002-11)
H. Section 27-6-120.6.h- Consistency exists between the proposed zone district(s), uses, the
specific or conceptual development guide.
The submitted Specific Development Guide does accurately reflect the performance
standards and allowed uses described in the proposed zone district,as described previously.
The applicant is requesting that the Final Plan be administratively reviewed. The Department
of Planning Services' staff concurs with this request.
This approval recommendation is based upon compliance with Chapter 27 requirements.
The Change of Zone from A (Agricultural) to PUD for 8 lots with Estate Zone Uses and 1 lot with
Agricultural Zone Uses along with 7.19 acres of open space is conditional upon the following:
1. Prior to scheduling the Board of County Commissioners hearing:
A. The applicant shall submit to the Weld County Department of Planning Services a signed
copy of an agreement with the properties mineral owners which stipulates that oil and gas
activities have been adequately incorporated into the design of the site and that mineral
owners concerns have been mitigated or the applicant shall submit evidence that the mineral
owners concerns have been addressed. (Department of Planning Services)
2. Prior to recording the Change of Zone plat:
A. The plat shall be amended to include the following:
1) All pages of the plat shall be labeled AMPZ-613. (Department of Planning Services)
2) The bus shelter and mail kiosk shall be placed within open space and not upon Lot
1. (Department of Planning Services)
3) Internal roads shall meet Weld County criteria for a PUD. The internal roadway
right-of-way shall be 60-feet in width including cul-de-sacs with a 65-foot radius,and
dedicated to the public. The typical roadway section of interior roadway shall be
shown as two 12-foot paved lanes with 4-foot gravel shoulders on the change of
zone plat.The cul-de-sac edge of pavement radius shall be 50-feet. Stop signs and
street name signs will be required at all intersections. (Department of Public Works)
B. County Road 70 is classified by the County as a local road and requires a 60-foot
right-of-way. The applicant shall verify the right-of-way and the documents creating the
right-of-way shall be noted on the change of zone plat. If the right-of-way cannot be verified,
it shall be dedicated on the final plat.(Department of Public Works)
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:
A. The site specific development plan is for a Change of Zone from A(Agricultural)to PUD for
eight (8) lots with Estate Zone Uses and one (1) lot with Agricultural Zone Uses along with
7.19 acres of open space as indicated in the application materials on file in the Department
of Planning Services and subject and governed by the Conditions of Approval stated hereon
and all applicable Weld County Regulations. (Department of Planning Services)
Resolution AmPZ-613
Cattail Creek LLC
Page 4
B. Water service shall be obtained from the North Weld County Water District. (Department of
Public Health and Environment)
C. 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)
D. Preservation and/or protection of the absorption field envelopes shall require that permanent
landscaping,structures,dirt mounds or other items are expressly prohibited in the absorption
field site. (Department of Public Health and Environment)
E. If required,the applicant shall obtain a storm water discharge permit from the Water Quality
Control Division of the Colorado Department of Public Health and the Environment. Silt
fences shall be maintained on the down gradient portion of the site during all parts of the
construction phase of the project. (Department of Public Health and Environment)
F. 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 Health Department, a fugitive dust control plan must be submitted.
(Department of Public Health and Environment)
G. 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 which are technologically feasible and economically reasonable in order
i- to minimize dust emissions. (Department of Public Health and Environment)
H. If land development creates more than a 25 acre contiguous disturbance, or exceeds 6
months induration,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)
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)
J. Weld County's Right to Farm as delineated on this plat shall be recognized at all times.
(Department of Planning Services)
K. Stop signs and street name signs will be required at all intersections. (Department of Public
Works)
L. All signs including entrance signs shall require building permits.Signs shall adhere to Section
23-4-70 and 27-6-90 of the Weld County Code. These requirements shall apply to all
temporary and permanent signs. (Department of Planning Services)
M. All landscaping within the sight triangles must be less than 3% feet in height at maturity.
(Department of Public Works)
N. Installation of utilities shall comply with Section 24-9-10 of the Weld County Code.
(Department of Planning Services)
O. The applicant shall provide a pavement design prepared by a professional engineer to be
submitted at time road subgrade has been established.The Engineering Geology Report for
Proposed Cattail Creek PUD,dated March 18,2003, by Church &Associates, Inc. stated a
geotechnical investigation is recommended for the roadway/pavement structure with respect
to soil, groundwater and traffic conditions. (Department of Public Works)
Resolution AmPZ-613
Cattail Creek LLC
Page 5
P. Building is prohibiting within the 200-foot setback from the seepage area. (Department of
Public Works)
Q. Building shall follow recommendations made in the Engineering Geology Report, dated
March 18, 2003, by Church &Associates, Inc. (Department of Public Works)
R. The developer shall provide future property owners with a copy of the Engineering Geology
Report, dated March 18, 2003, by Church &Associates, Inc. (Department of Public Works)
S. Building permits shall be obtained prior to the construction of any building or structure,
including the bus shelter. (Department of Building Inspection)
T. A plan review is required for each building. Plans shall bear the wet stamp of a Colorado
registered architect or engineer. Two complete sets of plans are required when applying for
each permit. (Department of Building Inspection)
U. Buildings shall conform to the requirements of the codes adopted by Weld County at the time
of permit application. Current adopted codes include the 1997 Uniform Building Code, 1998
International Mechanical Code, 1997 International Plumbing Code, 2002 National Electrical
Code and Chapter 29 of the Weld County Code. Weld County intends to adopt the 2003
International Building, Residential, Mechanical, Plumbing and Fuel Gas Codes on or about
March 1, 2004.(Department of Building Inspection)
V. Each 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)
W. Building h eight, protection of w alls and openings and separation o f buildings of m fixed
occupancy shall be in accordance with the Building Code. Setback and offset distances shall
be determined by Chapter 23 of the Weld County Code.(Department of Building Inspection)
X. Building height shall be measured in accordance with the 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 from the building.
(Department of Building Inspection)
Y. 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)
Z. 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)
AA. The site shall maintain compliance at all times with the requirements of the Weld County
government, and adopted Weld County Code and Policies. (Department of Planning
Services)
BB. 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)
Resolution AmPZ-613
Cattail Creek LLC
Page 6
CC. 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 two(2)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)
DD. 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. At the time of Final Plan:
A. County Road 70 is classified by the County as a local road and requires a 60-foot
right-of-way. If the a pplicant was unable t o v erify the right-of-way and the documents
creating the right-of-way at the change of zone, the right-of-way shall be dedicated on the
final plat. (Department of Public Works)
B. The applicant will be required to enter into an agreement with the County to proportionately
share the cost of improving County Road 70 from the western most access road,easterly to
paved County Road 31. The cost will be based on a proportion of the traffic generated by the
development to the existing traffic. This agreement shall be submitted with the final plat
materials. This agreement shall be approved by the BOCC prior to recording the final plat.
(Department of Public Works)
C. Additional right-of-way shall be required adjacent to the bus pullout area equivalent to the
width of the pullout lane. The right-of-way will be dedicated on the final plat. (Department of
Public Works)
D. Roadway and grading plans along with construction details will be required with the final plan
submittal. (Department of Public Works)
E. Easements shall be shown in accordance with County standards and Utility Board
recommendations, also dimensioned on the final plat. (Department of Public Works)
F. The applicant shall submit an on-site (Private) Improvements Agreement with the final plat
application that addresses all improvements associated with this development, per
compliance with Section 24-9-10 of the Weld County Code. This agreement shall be
approved by the BOCC prior to recording the final plat. (Departments of Planning Services
and Public Works)
G. A final drainage report stamped,signed and dated by a professional engineer licensed in the
State of Colorado shall be submitted with the final plan application. 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
Resolution AmPZ-613
Cattail Creek LLC
Page 7
100-year storm developed condition while releasing the 5-year storm existing condition.
(Department of Public Works)
H. The final drainage report shall include 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. (Department of Public
Works)
The applicant shall prepare a construction detail for typical lot grading with respect to
drainage at final plan. 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)
J. Final drainage construction and erosion control plans, conforming to the drainage report,
shall be submitted with the final plan application. (Department of Public Works)
K. The applicant shall show and name all irrigation systems in the development on the final plat,
including ditch easements. Any increased drainage into an irrigation system shall be
corroborated with the appropriate owner. The applicant shall provide a confirmation letter
from the ditch owner addressing these issues along with the final plat application.
(Department of Public Works)
L. Intersection sight-distance-triangles at the development entrance will be required. All
landscaping within the triangles must be less than 31/2 feet in height at maturity, and noted
on the roadway plan. The bus shelter and mailbox kiosk must be place outside the
intersection sight distance triangles. (Department of Public Works)
r
M. The Weld County Department of Public Works has indicated that additional right-of-way shall
be required adjacent to the bus pullout area equivalent to the width of the pullout lane. Eaton
RE-2 School District has indicated that an eighty(80)foot by fifteen(15)foot bus pullout shall
be required. The applicant shall indicate on the plat a bus pullout area that will satisfy both
Public Works and the School District. The right-of-way will be dedicated on the final plat.
(Departments of Planning Services and Public Works)
N. Evidence shall be provided to Weld County Department of Planning Services from the
applicable Post Office stating that the proposed mail box location meets their design
standards and delivery requirements. Should a single pedestal mail box not be the preferred
standard, written evidence from the applicable Post Office shall be provided stating the
contrary. (Department of Planning Services)
O. 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)
P. The applicant shall submit a request to a Weld County Building Technician for an address
for Lot 9 . The interior roadway name was not indicated on the plat. North/south running
roadways shall be designated "Way' or "Drive. The subdivision street name and lot
addresses shall be submitted to the Eaton Fire Protection District,the Weld County Sheriffs
Office,Ambulance Services and the Post Office for review.Written evidence of approval shall
be submitted to the Weld County Department of Planning Services.(Department of Planning
Services)
Q. Irrigation water will be deeded to the Homeowners Association prior to recording the final plat
Written evidence shall be submitted to the Weld County Department of Planning Services.
(Department of Planning Services)
R. The applicant shall submit development covenants for Cattail Creek PUD. Language for the
preservation and/or protection of the absorption field envelopes shall be placed in the
development covenants. The covenants shall specifically state that activities such as
permanent landscaping,structures,dirt mounds or other items are expressly prohibited in the
Resolution AmPZ-613
Cattail Creek LLC
Page 8
absorption field sites. Further, the fencing recommendations indicated by the Colorado
Division of Wildlife shall be incorporated. (Department of Public Health and Environment)
S. The applicant shall submit information regarding the creation of the Home Owners
Association. (Department of Planning Services)
T. Prior to recording the applicant shall submit evidence that all requirements listed in the
referral dated January 8, 2004 from the Eaton School District have been met. (Department
of Planning Services)
U. The applicant shall submit a Landscape and Buffering Plan for review and approval which
addresses the following:
1) Proposed plantings, include a seed mixture recommended by NRCS;
2) Method of irrigating lots and open space;
3) Construction plans for the bus shelter;
4) A proposed weed management plan approved by Ron Broda, Weld County Weed
Specialist;
5) A sign plan in accordance with Section 27-6-90.E.1 of the Weld County Code.
(Department of Planning Services, Sheriff's Office)
V. The applicant shall submit a digital file of all approved 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)
6. Prior to construction:
A. Stop signs and street name signs will be required at all intersections. (Department of Public
Works)
7. Prior to the release of any building permits:
A. Complete plans for the site shall be submitted for review by the Eaton Fire Protection District.
(Department of Planning Services)
Motion seconded by Stephen Mokray
,r—
Resolution AmPZ-613
Cattail Creek LLC
Page 9
VOTE:
For Passage Against Passage Absent
John Folsom
Bryant Gimlin
Stephen Mokray
Bruce Fitzgerald
James Rohn
Tim Tracy
Doug Ochsner
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 3, 2004.
Dated the 3rd of February, 2004.
11 /� I v
\,,O U L.'r--t l l 0* f 1. i--
Voneen Macklin
Secretary
-- CASE NUMBER: AmPZ-613
APPLICANT: Cattail Creek Group LLC c/o George DuBard
PLANNER: Sheri Lockman
LEGAL DESCRIPTION: Lot C of RE-2637; being part of the SW4 of Section 9, T6N, R66W of the
6th P.M., Weld County, Colorado.
REQUEST: Change of Zone from A (Agricultural)to PUD for 8 lots with Estate Zone
Uses and 1 lot with Agricultural Zone Uses along with 7.19 acres of open
space (Cattail Creek).
LOCATION: North of and adjacent to CR 70 ; approximately 800 feet east of CR 29.
Michael Miller excused himself due to potential conflict of interest.
Sheri Lockman, Planner, Department of Planning Services presented Case AmPZ-613, 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
Bruce Fitzgerald asked about the intent of the condition dealing with the post office. Ms. Lockman stated
that staff would like to catch the issue of addressing before a problem arises. Mr. Fitzgerald asked if staff
would like a single pedestal type delivery. Ms. Lockman stated that staff requests the Postal Service
recommendation in writing so no issues arise. Delivery is typically done with a neighborhood delivery next
to a bus pull off.
John Folsom asked for clarification on the past processes of this case to help orientate the Planning
Commission members. Ms. Lockman asked Mr. Morrison is this was relevant. Mr. Morrison stated it was
relevant to the Planning Commission but not to the decision. It would be helpful so Planning Commission
focuses on the current development adverse to the prior. Ms. Lockman read the resolution from the
Board of County Commissioners giving the reasons for the approval of the substantial change.
Doug Ochsner asked Ms. Lockman why this was a PUD and not a minor subdivision. Ms. Lockman
stated the applicant chose this process. With a minor subdivision there are limitations. The applicant
could not have done the agricultural lot in a minor subdivision. A minor subdivision does not have the
open space included for the buffering. For what the applicant wanted a PUD was a better application.
John Folsom asked about the removal of prime farm ground and if there is irrigation water with this. Ms.
Lockman stated that the large agricultural lot is under a pivot sprinkler. The applicant intends to keep this.
Mr. Folsom stated that this would be classified under USDA regulations as being prime farm ground. Ms.
Lockman stated that a portion of the ground in not classified as prime.
Anne Best Johnson, representative for the applicant from Todd Hodges Design, provided clarification on
the project. The hearing today is based on the direction of the Board of County Commissioners at the
change of zone process. This is a non urban scale development. Eight lots are on the least productive
ground. There is an 114 acre agricultural lot that is irrigated by a center pivot. The flood plain is located in
those no build areas. There will be common open space located on site. There is a draft copy of the
covenants submitted. Domestic water will be provided by North Weld County Water District. There will be
septic tanks for the lots. Access to the agricultural lot will remain the same. This proposal does meet the
criteria for the a change of zone. Ms. Johnson reviewed sections of the code in which the applicant is
compliant. The applicant is retaining 80% of the agricultural land and the right to farm statement will be on
placed on the plat. The applicant has concerns with Condition I that deals with the internal road. The road
will be paved and after a year, when the road it up to County standards, the applicant is asking the County
to accept maintenance. This roadway will be named. Another concern is with Condition P concerning the
labeling of the ditch. This is not a ditch it is a seep area. Another small concern is a typographical error.
In Condition Y the language should be complying not compiling. Ms. Johnson addressed Mr. Fitzgerald
concerns with the post office. A letter is sent to the post office to make sure the addresses are not
duplicated or confusing. The post office is also asked what type of boxes they prefer. After the change o'
zone a list of addresses is obtained and submitted to the Post Office for and their recommendation are
incorporated into the final plat.
James Rohn asked about the HOA being in charge of the internal road. Mr. Schei stated the intent is to #
pave the internal road and when the road is brought to county level the county will accept the g
anon
maintenance. Ms. Lockman clarified that the HOA is not responsible if they petition to the County after the
year and are accepted.
Doug Ochsner asked about the common open space and what is going to be there. Ms. Johnson stated
that the common open space will be seeded in a grass/dry land mix. There is a landscape buffer on the
back of Lots 8-6. Mr. Ochsner asked if the larger area will be dry land or irrigated. Ms. Johnson clarified
that it will be irrigated in a dry land mix.
Stephen Mokray asked for clarification on the separate parcel attached to the 114 acre irrigated lot. Ms.
Johnson stated it is a building envelope for Lot 9.
The Chair asked if there was anyone in the audience who wished to speak for or against this application.
Debra Paige, neighbor, stated she represented of a group of neighbors. She further stated that the
change of zone was denied by the Board of County Commissioners. The buffering and screening is good
but does not buffer the affected properties. Ms. Paige's property will not be buffered, they sit on a hill and
look down onto the site. The proposal is at the lowest point in the area. This proposal does not meet the
requirements of Section 27-6-70 4. This use is incompatible with the surrounding area. There has been
no changes other than lines on a map. 173 people have signed a petition that was submitted with the
previous application. There is no way to prevent encroachment onto the other properties due to Coal
Bank Creek. There is no way to buffer this development from the neighbors. The irrigation is not
adequate to the area for the residences that are being proposed. 1/2 share of Larimer Weld water, in a
good year, would provide water for only four or five two inch irrigation tubes. This water may be available
but no likely. These lots will dry up when there is no water available. The applicant has not come up with
a reliable irrigation plan. The application fails to meet the requirements of Section 27-6-60.5. The
applicant has not provided the 15% required for the common open. The agricultural out lot and
unbuildable parts of the lots are what is being used in the calculation. Section 27-6-80 A& B indicates the
common open space requirement. This application remains incompatible with the surrounding land uses.
There is no adequate buffer to the neighbors or no adequate irrigation water. Ms. Paige wants Planning
Commission to continue to deny this application. Ms. Paige, speaking as a land owner, indicated she was
appreciative of the meeting that was held for the land owners. The issue with the meeting was Cattail
Creek wanted to know what would make the surrounding owners happy. They were told when they the
bought their lot that all the land surrounding them would remain agricultural land and there was no future
development planned. If something was planned it could not happen for 10 years. The center pivot
leaves little room for common open space. There is no privacy or buffer except for seeding or trees. The
buffering will take years to mature. This will be an ongoing construction phase until all home are built.
This is not a farmer who has farmed the ground all his life, it is a developer who lived on the ground,
moved and developed Cattail Creek. This is about money but not at the expense of the residents.
Bryant Gimlin asked Ms. Lockman about the petition. Ms. Lockman indicated that the letters that were
passed out before the hearing was all that there was. Ms. Paige stated the petition was not re-submitted.
James Rohn asked who Ms. Paige purchased her land from. Ms. Paige indicated she purchased her land
from a member of the LLC who is trying to develop this.
John Folsom asked Ms. Paige how many acres were on her parcel. Ms. Paige stated it was 10 acres.
There is a hay field that is about 8 '/s acres with 10 shares of Woods Lake water. This is not enough to
irrigate the hay crop. The applicant cannot do it with what they are proposing.
Chair closed the public portion.
Ann Best Johnson, representative, provided clarification on some of the issues brought forward. A
photograph was presented to address some of the issues. The picture was taken at the mid-point of lot 3
looking south along the eastern property boundary. This area is the seep area. This area is not steep.
Mr. Rohn asked for clarification regarding the location of the picture. Todd Hodges, Todd Hodges Design,
provided clarification with regards to where the photo was taken from.
Ms. Johnson continued to address the issues brought forward by the public portion of the meeting. The
development is attempting to be compatible in accordance with Section 22-2-60 D. 20% of the property is
in common open space and buffer areas. Those buffer area are not intended for active recreational uses
just as a buffer. 80%of the land is under a center pivot. The intent of the common open space has been
meet. Section 22-1-120 C2 of the Comprehensive Plan talks about the fairness in the land use procedure.
The referrals have came back supporting the project. The irrigation report was submitted with the
application material. There is water available from North Weld County Water District along with the
proposed system.
Bryant Gimlin clarified that there is water on the lots for landscape but how does the applicant plan to
water the buffer areas. Dave Help, property manager, stated that there will be dry land pasture mix which
will need little irrigation. It has not been watered in the last three years. The area where the trees are will
have a drip system supplied off the land water or possibly North Weld Water.
John Folsom moved to change Condition P language from "ditch"to"seep area"and Condition Y correct
the spelling. Doug Ochsner seconded. Motion carried.
Doug Ochsner is concerned about the water situation and rather there is adequate water to irrigate the
lots and buffer area. The purchasers will understand this and know that it will not produce great crops.
Mr. Gimlin asked if Mr. Ochsner is satisfied with the water, there is not adequate water to produce plush
lots.
James Rohn indicated his concern over the minor flood hazard area and the movement of the homes to
the side of hill in a draw closer to a potential hazard with the creek. It would be safer to place them on top
of the hill which would have reduced Lot 9 but for safety it would have been more appropriate.
John Folsom moved that Case AmPZ-613, be forwarded to the Board of County Commissioners along
with the Conditions of Approval and Development Standards with the Planning Commissions
recommendation of approval. Stephen 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; Bryant Gimlin, yes; James Rohn, no; Doug Ochsner, yes; Bruce
Fitzgerald, yes. Motion carried.
Mr. Rohn commented his reason for denial was based on Section 22-3-50.P.1 &2
CASE NUMBER: AmUSR-227
APPLICANT: Cornish Plains Livestock LLLP
PLANNER: Michelle Katyryniuk
LEGAL DESCRIPTION: Part of the N2 of Section 4, T6N, R63W of the 6th P.M., Weld County,
Colorado.
REQUEST: Site Specific Development Plan and Special Review Permit for a
Livestock Confinement Operation (3,000 cattle) in the A(Agricultural)
Zone District.
LOCATION: South of and adjacent to CR 74; 1/4 mile east of CR 65
Michelle Katyryniuk, Planner, Department of Planning Services presented Case AmUSR-227, 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 original USR and the number of cattle. Ms. Katyryniuk stated the original
USR was limited to the number of pens. Mr. Folsom asked if they were increasing the facility. Ms.
Katyryniuk stated they were. Mr. Miller asked how many head are they running now. Ms. Katyryniuk
indicated she is unaware of the exact number. Mr. Fitzgerald asked if they were currently out of
compliance. Ms. Katyryniuk indicated that they were because they were reducing the acreage therefor
exceeding the number of animal units allowed by right. Mr. Fitzgerald asked if the application was due to
compliance or reduction in the number of acres. Ms. Katyryniuk indicated it was for both issues. Mr.
Miller asked in what way were they out of compliance? Ms. Katyryniuk stated that the number of pens has
increased which increased the number of animal units.
Clar Orr, representative for the applicant, provided clarification. This feedlot has been in existence since
1973. The number of cattle was specified in the Planning Commission resolution and it was 20,000 cattle
and 25,000 lambs. The pen size was never increased to hold the number of livestock that was approved
Hello