Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout20042594.tiff BEFORE THE WELD COUNTY, COLORADO, PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION OF RECOMMENDATION TO THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS Moved by Tonya Strobel, that the following resolution be introduced for denial by the Weld County Planning Commission. Be it resolved by the Weld County Planning Commission that the application for: CASE NUMBER: MZ-547 APPLICANT: Olando Ltd. Liability Company PLANNER: Sheri Lockman LEGAL DESCRIPTION: Lot B RE-2016; Pt of the SE4 of Section 16, T6N, R64W of the 6th P.M., Weld County, Colorado. REQUEST: Minor Subdivision Change of Zone from A (Agricultural) Zone District to E (Estate)for nine (9) residential lots. (Owl Creek Estates). LOCATION: North of and adjacent to Hwy 392; '/ mile east of CR 53. be recommended unfavorably to the Board of County Commissioners for the following reasons: THE PLANNING COMMISSION'S STAFF RECOMMENDS THAT THIS REQUEST BE DENIED FOR THE FOLLOWING REASONS: 1. The submitted materials are not in compliance with Section 23-2-30 of the Weld County Code as follows: A. Section 23-2-30.A.1.The proposal is not consistent with Chapter 22 of the Weld County Code. Section 22-2-60.D. (A.Goal 4.) -- 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. This goal is intended to address conversion of agricultural land to nonurban uses. Once converted, this land is less conducive to agricultural production. The site is less than 1000 feet from an existing dairy. The dairy is permitted for 3,600 head of cattle by Amended Use By Special Review Permit 820. The applicant has included the Right-to-Farm Statement, however, Planning Staff believes that an inadequate attempt has been made by the applicant to ensure compatibility. B. Section 23-2-30.A.2. states`That the uses which would be allowed on the subject property by granting the Change of Zone will be compatible with the surrounding land uses."Given the close proximity to the existing dairy, Conditions of Approval and Development Standards can not ensure compatibility with surrounding properties. This recommendation is based, in part, upon a review of the application materials submitted by the applicant, other relevant information regarding the request, and responses from referral entities. Should the Board of County Commissioners choose to approve the Change of Zone from the A(Agricultural) to E (Estate) Zone for nine (9) lots Planning Staff recommends the following be attached as Conditions for approval: 1. Prior to scheduling a Board of County Commissioners hearing: A. OG.Policy 1.1 of the Weld Comprehensive Plan states "new planned unit developments or subdivisions should be planned to take into account current and future oil and gas drilling activity to the extent oil and gas development can reasonably be anticipated." Application materials include a letter from Petroleum Development Corporation stating that they do not object to the development. However, no comments were included from the remaining mineral lessees and owner. The applicant shall either submit to the Weld County Department of Planning Services a copy of an agreement with the properties mineral owners and lessees stipulating that the oil and gas activities have adequately been incorporated into the design o the site or indicate the 400' x 400' and the 800' x 800' drilling envelope locations per state statute. 2004-2594 4y Resolution MZ-547 Olando Land Page 2 B. County records indicate that Owl Creek is an active ditch.The applicant shall contact the ditch company. Either a copy of an agreement with the ditch owner, stipulating that the ditch activities have adequately been incorporated into the design of the site shall be submitted to the Weld County Department of Planning Services or the applicant shall show evidence that an adequate attempt has been made to mitigate their concerns. (Department of Planning Services) C. There are two water wells located on the property in the vicinity of Lots 1 and 5. (Well permit numbers 228114 and 228115) that are not identified on any maps or discussed in the application. The applicant shall submit information regarding the proposed use of these wells to the Department of Planning Services for review. (Department of Public Health and Environment) 2. Prior to recording the Change of Zone Plat: A. The Change of Zone plat shall be amended to delineate the following: 1) All pages of the plat shall be labeled MZ-547 2) State Highway 392 right-of-way shall be shown as seventy-five (75) feet from centerline. (CDOT) 3) Access to State Highway 392 will require compliance with the existing permit from the Colorado Department of Transportation (CDOT), including: rights-of-way, reservations, improvements, and future expansion. The State Highway right-of-way shall be clearly identified or labeled on the change of zone plat.(Department of Public Works) 4) In a referral dated June 4, 2004, the Platte Valley School District has indicated that a 100 foot turn around point near to Highway 392 should be designated for safe pickup and drop off of students. The plat shall be amended to meet the Districts requirements. Evidence of School District approval shall be submitted to the Department of Planning Services. (Platte Valley School District) 5) The applicant shall submit written evidence from the Postal Service indicating that delivery will be to individual lots. If a community box is required, the plat shall be amended to include a pull off area outside of the road right-of-way. The pull off area will be reviewed by the Departments of Planning Services and Public Works and the Colorado Department of Transportation(if applicable)to determine adequacy prior to approval. (Department of Planning Services) 6) 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 should 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 Planning Services) 7) The applicant shall indicate the location of the proposed subdivision sign. The sign should be located on property to be owned and maintained by the Home Owners Association,outside of the sight distance triangle. (Department of Planning Services) 8) The applicant shall indicate the required setback in accordance with Section 23-3- 440. L of the Weld County Code from the existing well head located on Lot 1. (Department of Planning Services) Resolution MZ-547 Olando Land Page 3 B. The applicant shall submit two(2)paper copies of the plat for preliminary approval to the Weld County Department of Planning Services.Upon approval of the paper copies the applicant shall submit a Mylar plat and 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).The Mylar plat shall be recorded in the office of the Weld County Clerk and Recorder by Department of Planning Services'Staff. The Mylar plat and additional requirements shall be submitted within thirty(30)days from the date of the Board of County Commissioners approval. The applicant shall be responsible for paying the recording fee. (Department of Planning Services) 3. The Change of Zone is conditional upon the following and each shall be placed on the Change of Zone plat as notes, prior to recording: A. The Change of Zone allows for Estate uses and shall comply with the Estate Zone District requirements as set forth in Section 23 of the Weld County Code. The Minor Subdivision shall consist of nine (9)residential lots. (Department of Planning Services) B. Water service shall be obtained from the North Weld County Water District. (Department of Public Health and Environment) C. A Weld County septic permit is required for each proposed septic system, which shall be installed in according to the Weld County individual sewage disposal system regulations. Each septic system shall be designed for site-specific conditions, including, but not limited to: maximum seasonal high groundwater, poor soils, and shallow bedrock. (Department of Public Health and Environment) D. 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) E. 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) F. 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 to minimize dust emissions. (Department of Public Health and Environment) G. If land development creates more than a 25-acre contiguous disturbance,or exceeds 6 months in duration, 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) H. The access located at the southwest corner of the site is exclusively for accessing of the oil and gas structures located on the site. The access shall be removed upon completion of oil and gas production. (CDOT) Weld County's Right to Farm, as stated on this plat, shall be recognized at all times. (Department of Planning Services) J. The site shall maintain compliance at all times with the requirements of Weld County Government. (Department of Planning Services) Resolution MZ-547 Olando Land Page 4 K. Weld County Government 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) L. Installation of utilities shall comply with Section 24-9-10 of the Weld County Code. (Department of Planning Services) M. 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 along with the enforcement of covenants. (Department of Planning Services) N. 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) O. Building permits shall be obtained prior to the construction of any building. (Building Inspection) P. 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. (Building Inspection) Q. Buildings shall conform to the requirements of the codes adopted by Weld County at the time of permit application. Current adopted codes include the 2003 International Building Code; 2003 International Mechanical Code; 2003 International Plumbing Code; 2002 National Electrical Code and Chapter 29 of the Weld County Code. (Building Inspection) R. 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. (Building Inspection) S. Building height shall be limited to the maximum height allowed per International Building Code Table 503. Wall and opening protection and limitations shall be in accordance with International Building Code Table 503. Separation of buildings of mixed occupancy classifications shall be in accordance with International Building Code Table 302.3.2 and Chapter 3. Setback and offset distances shall be determined by the Chapter 23 of the Weld County Code. (Building Inspection) T. Building height shall be measured in accordance with the 2004 International 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. (Building Inspection) U. All landscaping within the sight distance triangles must be less than 3% feet in height at maturity. (Department of Public Works) V. The Weld County Sheriff's Office has limited traffic enforcement powers within subdivisions where the roadways are not maintained or adopted by the County. (Sheriff's Office) Resolution MZ-547 Olando Land Page 5 W. Effective January 1, 2003, Building Permits issued on the proposed lots will be required to adhere to the fee structure of the County Road Impact Program. (Ordinance 2002-11) (Department of Planning Services) 4. At the time of Final Plat: A. Prior to recording the final plat, the applicant shall provide written evidence from Platte Valley School District which indicates that the $750 per lot cash-in-lieu fee has been paid. (Department of Planning Services) B. Prior to recording the final plat,the applicant shall submit a signed Water Service Agreement with North Weld County Water District. (Department of Planning Services) C. Prior to submitting the final plan application, the applicant shall contact Lin Dodge with the Weld County Building Inspection Department to obtain preliminary addresses for the lots. (Department of Planning Services) D. Prior to submitting the final plan application,the applicant shall contact the appropriate postal service for review of the preliminary addresses and street name. Evidence of review by the postal Service shall be submitted to the Department of Planning Services. (Department of Planning Services) E. The final plan application packets shall include copies of the preliminary addresses and street name for review by the appropriate referral agencies. (Department of Planning Services) F. The Weld County Sheriff's Office has indicated that the entrance sign should include a detail of the subdivision and addresses. The final plan application shall include a detail of the sign which addresses the Sheriffs Office concerns. (Sheriffs Office) G. 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 final roadway plan. (Department of Public Works) H. The applicant shall submit to Public Works stamped,signed and dated final plat drawings and roadway / construction & grading plan drawings for review (with the final application) and approval. Construction details must be included. This is consistent with County Code: Sec. 24-3-50, "The minor subdivision final plat submitted shall contain the original signatures and seals of all parties required."(Department of Public Works) Stop signs and street name sign locations must be shown on the final roadway construction plans. Stop signs and street name signs will be required at State Highway 392. (Department of Public Works) J. The applicant shall submit an Improvements Agreement According to Policy Regarding Collateral For Improvements(Private Road Maintenance)with the final plan application. This agreement must be reviewed by the Departments of Public Works and Planning Services and shall be approved by the Board of County Commissioners prior to recording the final plat. (Departments of Public Works and Planning Services) K. The applicant shall submit covenants for Owl Creek Estates.The covenants shall be approved /0— by the Weld County Attorney's Office prior to recording the final plat. (Department of Planning Services) L. The applicant shall submit paperwork regarding the incorporation of the Home Owners Association. The paperwork shall be approved by the Weld County Attorney's Office prior to recording the final plat.(Department of Planning Services) Resolution MZ-547 Olando Land Page 6 M. The Final Drainage And Erosion Control Report for Owl Creek Estates dated May 21, 2004, by North Star Design must be revised and resubmitted to Public Works. The engineer must address a larger off-site tributary watershed area showing the'big picture'drainage surrounding the proposed development.The engineer shall discuss a possible flood hazard of Owl Creek, especially the inundation area along the creek caused by a 100-year storm, since the creek crosses SH 392. The State Highway may restrict the flows of Owl Creek during a major storm event. (There may be areas of lots that adjoin Owl Creek,which are not suitable for building.) The engineer shall specifically research and document the 100-year storm, and the over-topping event of Howards Lake. There does not appear to be any consideration for an over-topping event of the lake and the potential damaging effect on residential homes downstream. (Department of Public Works) N. 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 100-year storm developed condition while releasing the 5-year storm existing condition. 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) O. 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) P. Final drainage construction and erosion control plans (conforming to the drainage report) stamped,signed and dated by a professional engineer licensed in the State of Colorado shall be submitted with the final plan application. (Department of Public Works) Q. Easements shall be shown in accordance with County standards and / or Utility Board recommendations on the final plat. (Department of Public Works) R. Prior to recording the final plat, the applicant shall submit a digital file of all 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). (Department of Planning Services) Motion seconded by Bruce Fitzgerald Resolution MZ-547 Olando Land Page 7 VOTE: For Passage Against Passage Absent Michael Miller John Folsom Bryant Gimlin Bruce Fitzgerald James Rohn Tonya Stobel Chad Auer 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 August 3, 2004. Dated the 3r°of August, 2004. v\ Voneen Macklin Secretary ?-5 ;,.r/ Mike Harvey indicated the border on the map is the four sides that are presently vacant ground. There will be a single access to the area which will be across the street from the fire station. The parking will be in the driveways and not on the streets. Lee Morrison asked if the modular home meets the definition of manufactured home in accordance to code? Mr. Harvey indicated it does meet the definition in accordance to the Weld County Code. Mr. Morrison added that the nature of the construction of the homes be described in accordance to the code definition. Mr. Morrison stated that a manufactured home is built to HUD standards and has permanent installation with a pitched roof. This is also considered a site built structure according to the code. Ms. Martin read the definition of manufactured home from the Weld County Code and added the application specifically states stick built or manufactured. Michael Miller asked if any Development Standard or Condition addresses the 6 foot fence. Ms. Martin indicated there is a Development Standard to attempt to address the concerns for the City of Greeley, which requested the 6 foot fence. Bryant Gimlin moved that Case MJF-1062, be forwarded to the Board of County Commissioners along with the Conditions of Approval and Development Standards with the Planning Commissions recommendation of approval. Doug Ochsner seconded the motion. The Chair asked the secretary to poll the members of the Planning Commission for their decision. Michael Miller, yes; Bryant Gimlin, yes; James Rohn, yes; Tonya Strobel, yes; Doug Ochsner, yes; Bruce Fitzgerald, yes. Motion carried unanimously. CASE NUMBER: MZ-547 APPLICANT: Olando Ltd. Liability Company PLANNER: Sheri Lockman LEGAL DESCRIPTION: Lot B RE-2016; Pt of the SE4 of Section 16, T6N, R64W of the 6th P.M., Weld County, Colorado. REQUEST: Minor Subdivision Change of Zone from A (Agricultural) Zone District to E (Estate)for nine(9) residential lots. (Owl Creek Estates). LOCATION: North of and adjacent to Hwy 392; '/2 mile east of CR 53. Sheri Lockman, Department of Planning Services presented Case MZ-547, reading the recommendation and comments into the record. The Department of Planning Services is recommending denial of the application. Michael Miller asked if the previous application made it through Board of County Commissioners or was it withdrawn. Ms. Lockman stated the PUD was denied but it was not presented by this applicant. This applicant came back with a substantial change and now the minor subdivision change of zone. Todd Hodges, representative, provided clarification regarding the project. The prior owner had a PUD and was approved by Planning Commission but not the Board of County Commissioners. In November 2003 a substantial change was done and approved by both the Planning Commission and Board of County Commissioners. The applicant is therefor back to the minor subdivision change of zone. The access has been centrally located with the permits needed through CDOT. The drill sites have been delineated on the plat along with the well sites. The applicant has been working on agreements with the two existing well sites but those are not complete yet. The primary land uses are agriculture and residential. Mr. Hodges went through photos from various locations on the site. Staffs denial is based on the location to the approved dairy to the east and compatibility with it. This proposal will be governed with covenants not like the surrounding area. The surrounding area was largely created with the recorded exemption process. The applicant has discussed the proposal with the owner of the dairy and there has not been any objections. The dairy was approved throug the amended USR process. The dairy was required to operate with existing and future land uses in the area which are minor subdivisions. The large lots lend themselves to a higher and greater use than the exiting agricultural use. Bryant Gimlin asked Mr. Hodges about lot A and if it exited onto Hwy 392. Mr. Hodges indicated that it doe• and there was no other option. Mr. Hodges indicated that there is a Condition for the Oil & Gas that if it goe• away their access goes away. This access has been approved through CDOT. Mr. Gimlin asked if draft covenants were done. Mr. Hodges indicated they have not been. Mr. Gimlin asked if he would be willing to place something in the covenants that addresses the dairy? Mr. Hodges stated it could be discussed with the applicants. Mr. Morrison stated that there is a provision in State Law that addresses this issue. Mr. Gimlin's intent is to make sure the lot owners were informed of the dairy. Doug Ochsner asked for clarification on the covenants and rather animals were allowed. Also what type of subdivision is envisioned are they large homes, agricultural homes with animals? Mr. Hodges stated that the animal units will be as allowed with the Estate Zone District. This subdivision would allow one animal unit per acre and the intent is to allow for animal units,4H projects and gardening type uses. Mr. Hodges indicated that this was the highest and best use for the property since it was not productive based on the water. Mr. Ochsner asked if there was any water that went with any of the lots. Tammy Ellerman,provided clarification with regards to the water and homes. The homes will be stick built nice homes. They will be able to have 4H projects with niece barns. The covenants will address most of the issue brought forward today. There are 2 shares of Larimer and Weld Irrigation water. The delivery varies every year. Michael Miller asked if there is no irrigation water how are the owners going to maintain the lots. Ms. Ellerman stated that dryland farming can be done. The water can be kept with the ground but the concern is who will irrigate the land. There would need to be one person who would be responsible. Mr. Miller stated that lots of this size without water become nothing but weeds it is important to have water available. It is not required in the code but encouraged since there will be animals on the lots. It is very difficult to maintain large lots with no water. Ms. Ellerman indicated that on the east side there was some sub-irrigation. Mr. Miller asked Mr. Hodges about the previous application being denied because of lot size. Mr. Hodges indicated that some was based on lot size,open space and maintenance of that open space. The lots in the previous application were smaller and clustered. Ms. Lockman read excerpts from the minutes of the denied COZ which addressed the reasons for denial. Mr. Miller indicated that it was stated the way the lots are laid out was a higher and greater use than current land use especially when there is no water. The land can currently grow crops,what happens if it is broken up and all the water is removed, this is not a better use. Mr. Hodges stated that the existing water is not adequate for the operation or financially feasible for agricultural production. The higher and best use would be the smaller lots with the 4H projects that would graze animals on dryland. James Rohn asked Mr. Schei about his referral and clarification. Mr. Schei indicated there is no place in County Code that requires a minor subdivision to be paved. Public Works cannot require a minor subdivision to be paved. The applicant has indicated the interior roadway would be paved and Public Works will accept the roadway when the warranty period is up. Mr. Rohn asked Mr. Morrison if there was a way to put a condition that it must be paved. Ms. Lockman indicated that the Condition is already present based on the applicants willingness to pave the interior road. The Chair asked if there was anyone in the audience who wished to speak for or against this application. Julie Boiles, neighbor, objects in part because the Sheriff's Office does not have ability to absorb any more service. Mr. Miller clarified that this is a typical statement that is on every application. Ms. Boiles continued that the previous application that was denied was in part for the adequacy of the water. The new development has eliminated the open space and added homes to the plan,the total acreage is still the same. It will require more water for the landscaping of subdivision lots. The agreement with North Weld Water District has not been signed. The water district will restrict delivery when CBT water is less than 50%. The neighbor cannot buy any more water because of the drought. There is such a water shortage around the state it is hard to understand developing more. The third objection is the preservation of agriculture ground in this county putting a subdivision close to a municipality will defeat the purpose of the right to farm clause and it is inconsistent with the development in the area. The density is greater then anything within miles. The elimination of the open space defeats the rural living incentive. The neighborhood will be affected with the increase of homes including the noise and increase on demand for services. There will also be an increase in traffic on Hwy 392. The increase of 86 trips per day would be incredible. The semi traffic has increased in the area. There will be increased conflicts with increase development in the area. The covenants should be included in the application to provide additional information as to what is expected. The County can either continue to develop or continue to farm but we will not be able to do both. Cynthia Vance, neighbor on Hwy 392& CR 55,opposes the development. The traffic is 55 mph but there are many accidents. There has been an increase in traffic along the highway with lots of semi trucks that do not slow down. There is little water pressure in the area. People in the area have constantly complained about the dairy to the Board of County Commissioners for the last 8 years. Ms. Vance does not recommend an additional 9 homes in the area. Darryl Delka, neighbor, indicated concerns with the development. Mr. Delke has questions on the quality of homes that will be built. The neighbors have no idea of what is being proposed. There are no homes on the property presently. There was water included in the sale of the original property now there are only two shares. This is an existing acreage that was farmed with water. The sub-irrigation property sets at the bottom of the hill. If the ground is dryland and once it is grazed clean it does not come back without applying water to it. The dairy is still a problem along with the noise. Mr. Morrison asked if there was a basis for this issue. Mr. Delke indicated that the development will not coexistent with the existing neighbor. The entrance is on a hillside onto Hwy 392,this will prove to be dangerous for school buses. There is no fence along the creek and trash problems exist and will be worse with more people. There are to many questions at this point and time. The Chair closed public portion James Rohn abstained from the case. Todd Hodges,addressed the concerns with the surrounding owners. There are subdivisions located in the area. The development of the covenants is costly and those will be done with the final plan. Those can be made available to the public as soon as possible. An approval is needed prior to the financial burden of the covenants. Mobile homes would need to go through a different process therefor these homes will be stick built and nice homes. This proposed use encourages the continued agricultural uses. There can be several issues that arise with different land uses. There is a State Statue and right to farm covenant that addresses the situation but there can also be language in the covenants that address this. There are nice homes in the area and these will be comparable. The area fits the minor subdivision application process. The elimination of open space was a directive and has not been required in a minor subdivision. North Weld Water District is one of the easiest to work with in that the previous applicant had an agreement and this applicant has a proposed agreement. The agreement would be signed if approval is granted. This will not impact the existing services as indicated through the water district. This water line extension will contain fire hydrants. The applicant has proposed paving the internal road and CDOT has no concerns. Tammy Ellerman,provided information with regard to the irrigation water. The water has to come across two properties before it arrives at this ground. There are 2 shares and that is all it came with,there are some lateral rights. There will be an 8 inch water line, homes and fire hydrants. Doug Ochsner asked if Larimer Weld Irrigation or Reservoir. Ms.Ellerman indicated it was irrigation,early water that delivers May to mid-June. Bryant Gimlin asked if an 8 inch line would be installed and how big the residential taps will be and will that be enough to support some landscape irrigation. Ms. Ellerman indicated that the line was required by the District. The applicant is the one being used to upgrade the line. Mr. Gimlin asked about the amount of water each lots will have access to. Mr. Ellerman stated it was approximately one acre. Todd Hodges indicated the condition 1A-Prior to Scheduling that the applicant have a signed agreement with existing operator or show the drill windows as indicated per the State Statute. The applicant has shown the two existing wells with the 150 foot radius. The potential drill sites have been shown. The applicant would like to not show the 400 foot setback by the two existing wells and the no build radius is shown. Mr. Morrison stated that 400 foot radius is for existing wells the 800 foot box is for proposed wells that have not been drilled. Mr. Hodges indicated that they have met 1A and they would like it to be removed or discussion that staff agrees this has been met. Mr. Morrison asked for clarification with regards to the location of the existing and the possible wells. Mr. Morrison stated that the areas that can maintain the safety margin should remain. Mr. Morrison is comfortable with the intent of the applicant. Ms. Lockman suggests adding"around undrilled wells" at the end of the sentence and clarify. Mr. Miller stated an envelope is for proposed not existing the language is fine as it stands. Doug Ochsner commented that the highest and best use is the minor subdivision which is the goal of the landowner. Mr. Ochsner stated it comes down to compatibility and there is a need for agricultural type lots that do promote 4H and not necessarily mansions. The concern is the lack of water for the ground. If these were larger lots with water it would be more acceptable. The compatibility is there but the size and design of the subdivision is in questions. Bryant Gimlin commented that the previous denial was based on the access, compatibility and the water. Those issues have not gone away but possibly changed order. The lack of water on the large lots is a major concern,there will be dust and dirt. Bruce Fitzgerald commented that compatibility is an issue. Tonya Strobel stated that there is a need for this type of housing and some have been approved through the recorded exemption and subdivision process. This development is not consistent with the surrounding properties. Michael Miller commented the compatibility issues are big. People have a responsibility to determine if the surrounding uses will be compatible with them and the dairy is not. The irrigation system is essential. There are some that do not understand that without water there is nothing but dirt and dust. The lack of effort on the part of the developer for irrigation water shows that it is not important to them. Dryland cannot have animals unless there is a way to irrigate. The water issues is the main reason he will not be in support and secondarily it is not compatible. This is not in best interest of the health safety and welfare of the county. Tonya Strobel moved that Case MZ-574, be forwarded to the Board of County Commissioners along with the Conditions of Approval and Development Standards with the Planning Commissions recommendation of denial. Bruce Fitzgerald seconded the motion. The Chair asked the secretary to poll the members of the Planning Commission for their decision. Michael Miller, yes; Bryant Gimlin, yes;Tonya Strobel, yes; Doug Ochsner,yes; Bruce Fitzgerald,yes. Motion carried unanimously. Doug Ochsner commented that this minor subdivision could get approval if the design was different,water and compatibility and water enter into this. Bryant Gimlin commented he is in favor of denial based on staff recommendations based on lack of irrigation and compatibility. Doug Ochsner left the meeting due to prior commitment. PLANNER: Monica Mika ITEM: Changes to Weld County Code Chapter 23: Section 23-1-90, amended definitions of DERELICT VEHICLE, HOUSEHOLD PETS, and KENNEL; corrections to stated elevations of Greeley-Weld County Airport in Sections 23-5-10 and 23-5-50;and correction to referenced Airport map in section 23- 5-20; Chapter 24: correction to subdivision exemption process and time parameters in section 24-8-35. Monica Mika, Department of Planning Services presented the proposed Code Changes, reading the recommendation and comments into the record. The Department of Planning Services is recommending approval. Lee Morrison stated there are two levels of licencing for birds that is based on both the number of birds and on the species. One requires a greater need for care and a smaller number of birds. Ms. Mika indicated that staff is referencing the definition back to the State regulations. Mr. Miller asked for clarification with regard to the term"ayes." Mr. Morrison stated that previously spell check was used and apes replaced the correct language. Game Birds are separately licensed through the Department of Wildlife. Hello