HomeMy WebLinkAbout20042328 BEFORE THE WELD COUNTY, COLORADO, PLANNING COMMISSION
RESOLUTION OF RECOMMENDATION TO THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
Moved by John Folsom, 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: USR-1480
APPLICANT: Mildred Mae Sarchet LLC/Arrested Oil Field Services
PLANNER: Jacqueline Hatch
LEGAL DESCRIPTION: Lot B RE-3668; pt of N2 NW4 of Section 35, T3N, R67W of the
6th P.M., Weld County, Colorado.
REQUEST: A Site Specific Development Plan and Special Review Permit for
a Mineral resource development facility including an oil and a
gas support, and service facility in the A(Agricultural)Zone
District
LOCATION: West of and adjacent to CR 21 %; and south of and adjacent to
CR 28.
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
23-2-260 of the Weld County Code.
2. It is the opinion of the Planning Commission that the applicant has shown compliance
with Section 23-2-220 of the Weld County Code as follows:
A. Section 23-2-220.A.1 -- The proposed use is consistent with Chapter 22 and any
other applicable code provisions or ordinance in effect. Section 22-2-60 (A.Goal
4) states, "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." Application materials indicate that the site can
support the proposed use. Conditions of Approval and Development standards
ensure that a reasonable attempt will be made to be compatible with the region.
B. Section 23-2-220.A.2 -- The proposed use is consistent with the intent of the A
(Agricultural) Zone District. Section 23-3-40.A.2 of the Weld County Code
provides for a Mineral resource development facility including an oil and gas
support and service facility in the A(Agricultural)Zone District.
C. Section 23-2-220.A.3 -- The uses which will be permitted will be compatible with
the existing surrounding land uses. The surrounding property is primarily
agricultural. The development standards and conditions of approval will ensure
compatibility with adjacent properties.
D. Section 23-2-220.A.4 -- The uses which will be permitted will be compatible with
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 and any other applicable code provisions or ordinances in effect, or the
adopted Master Plans of affected municipalities. The subject property lies within
the three mile referral area of the Towns of Firestone and Platteville. The Town
of Platteville reviewed the request and found no conflicts with their interests. No
comments were received from the Town of Firestone.
2004-2328 e
Gs� 4�/y U
Resolution USR-1480
Mildred Sarchet
Page 2
E. Section 23-2-220.A.5 -- The site does not lie within any Overlay Districts.
Building Permits issued on the Lot will be required to adhere to the fee structure
of County Wide Road Impact Program (Ordinance 2002-11).
F. Section 23-2-220.A.6 -- The applicant has demonstrated a diligent effort to
conserve prime agricultural land in the locational decision for the proposed use.
The applicant is proposing to utilize approximately 1.5 acres for this USR while
also residing on the property. The remaining 76.2 acres will continue to be in
agricultural production.
G. Section 23-2-220.A.7 -- The Design Standards (Section 23-2-240, Weld County
Code), Operation Standards (Section 23-2-250, Weld County Code), Conditions
of Approval and Development Standards ensure that there are adequate
provisions for the protection of health, safety, and welfare of the inhabitants of
the neighborhood and County.
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.
The Planning Commission's recommendation for approval is conditional upon the following:
1. Prior to scheduling a Board of County Commissioners hearing:
A. If applicable, the applicant shall submit a detailed signage plan to the Weld
County Department of Planning Services. (Department of Planning Services)
2. Prior to recording the plat:
A. The applicant shall submit a dust abatement plan for review and approval to the
Environmental Health Services, Weld County Department of Public Health and
Environment. Evidence of approval shall be submitted to the Department of
Planning Services. (Department of Public Health and Environment)
B. The septic system serving the residence shall be reviewed by a Colorado
Registered Professional Engineer. The review shall consist of observation of the
system and a technical review describing the systems ability to handle the
proposed hydraulic load. The review shall be submitted to the Environmental
Health Services Division of the Weld County Department of Public Health and
Environment. In the event the system is found to be inadequately sized or
constructed the system shall be brought into compliance with current regulations.
Evidence of approval shall be submitted to the Department of Planning Services.
(Department of Public Health and Environment)
C. The Platte Valley Soil Conservation District has provided information regarding
the soils on the site. The applicant shall review the information and use it to
positively manage on site soils. (Department of Planning Services)
D. A tracking pad shall be installed directly south CR 28 for approximately 50 feet.
Evidence shall be provided to the Department of Public Works and the
Department of Planning Services that this has been completed. (Department of
Public Works)
Resolution USR-1480
Mildred Sarchet
Page 3
E. The existing buildings are required to obtain building permits for the change of
use. Evidence of Building Inspection approval shall be submitted to the
Department of Planning Services. (Department of Building Inspection)
F. The applicant shall provide the Department of Planning Services with a
maintenance plan that is in compliance with Section 23-2-250.F of the Weld
County Code. (Department of Planning Services)
G. The applicant shall clarify whether Mark Brown resides in the residence identified
as 10084 County Road 28 Platteville. (Department of Planning Services)
H. The applicant shall enter into a Private Improvements Agreement according to
policy regarding collateral for improvements and post adequate collateral for all
landscaping, transportation (access drive, parking areas, etcetera) and non-
transportation (plant materials, fencing, screening, water, signage etcetera). The
agreement and form of collateral shall be reviewed by County Staff and accepted
by the Board of County Commissioners prior to recording the USR plat. Or the
applicant may submit evidence that all the work has been completed and
approved by the Department of Planning Services and the Department of Public
Work. (Department of Planning Services)
The plat shall be amended to delineate the following:
1. All the pages of the plat shall be labeled USR-1480. (Department of
Planning Services)
2. The applicant shall submit a Screening and Landscaping Plan for review
and approval. (Department of Planning Services)
3. The location of the dumpster and appropriate screening shall be
submitted for review and approval by the Department of Planning
Services. (Department of Planning Services)
4. Should exterior lighting be a part of this facility, all light standards shall
be delineated on the Use by Special Review Plat. (Department of
Planning Services)
5. County Road 28 is designated on the Weld County Road Classification
Plan as a collector status road, which requires 80 feet of right-of-way at
full build out. There is presently 60 feet of right-of-way. A total of 40 feet
from the centerline of County Road 28 shall be delineated on the plat as
right-of-way reservation for future expansion of County Road 28. This
road is maintained by Weld County. (Department of Public Works)
6. The eastern access shall be improved and utilized for the proposed use.
The eastern access shall have a minimum of a 40-foot turning radius to
accommodate large trucks turning with the capability of two-lane traffic.
(Department of Public Works)
7. The applicant shall provide fourteen (14) parking spaces. (Department
of Planning Services)
Resolution USR-1480
Mildred Sarchet
Page 4
8. The applicant shall provide the Department of Planning Services with
evidence that one of the accesses to the property has been closed
permanently. (Department of Planning Services)
9. The attached Development Standards. (Department of Planning
Services)
C. The applicant shall submit two (2) paper copies of the plat for preliminary
approval to the Weld County Department of Planning Services. (Department of
Planning Services)
3. Upon completion of 1. and 2. above the applicant shall submit a Mylar plat along with all
other documentation required as Conditions of Approval. The Mylar plat shall be recorded
in the office of the Weld County Clerk and Recorder by Department of Planning Services'
Staff. The plat shall be prepared in accordance with the requirements of Section 23-2-
260.D of the Weld County Code. The Mylar plat and additional requirements shall be
submitted within thirty (30) days from the date of the Board of County Commissioners
resolution. The applicant shall be responsible for paying the recording fee. (Department
of Planning Services)
4. The Department of Planning Services respectively requests the surveyor provide a digital
copy of this Use by Special Review. Acceptable CAD formats are .dwg, .dxf, and .dgn
(Microstation); acceptable GIS formats are ArcView shapefiles, Arclnfo Coverages and
Arclnfo Export files format type is .e00. The preferred format for Images is .tif(Group 4).
(Group 6 is not acceptable). This digital file may be sent to mapsco.weld.co.us.
(Department of Planning Services)
5. The Special Review activity shall not occur nor shall any building or electrical permits be
issued on the property until the Special Review plat is ready to be recorded in the office
of the Weld County Clerk and Recorder. (Department of Planning Services)
SITE SPECIFIC DEVELOPMENT PLAN
SPECIAL REVIEW PERMIT
DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS
Mildred Mae Sarchet/Arrested Oil Field Services
USR-1480
1. The Site Specific Development Plan and a Special Review Permit for a mineral resource
development facility including oil and gas support and service facility in the A
(Agricultural) Zone District, as indicated in the application materials on file and subject to
the Development Standards stated hereon. (Department of Planning Services)
2. Approval of this plan may create a vested property right pursuant to Section 23-8-10 of
the Weld County Code. (Department of Planning Services)
3. Hours of operation in the winter months (November through April)will be 7:00 am to 5:00
pm and in the summer months (May through October) will be 7:00 am to 7:00 pm as
stated in the application material. (Department of Planning Services)
4. The site is limited to no more than five (5) employees as stated in the application
material. (Department of Planning Services)
5. There shall be no parking or staging of trucks within the public right-of-way. (Department
of Planning Services)
6. All liquid and solid wastes (as defined in the Solid Wastes Disposal Sites and Facilities
Act, 30-20-100.5, C.R.S.) shall be stored and removed for final disposal in a manner that
protects against surface and groundwater contamination. (Department of Public Health
and Environment)
7. No permanent disposal of wastes shall be permitted at this site. This is not meant to
include those wastes specifically excluded from the definition of a solid waste in the Solid
Wastes Disposal Sites and Facilities Act, 30-20-100.5, C.R.S., as amended.
(Department of Public Health and Environment)
8. Any vehicle washing area(s) shall capture all effluent and prevent discharge from the
washing of vehicles in accordance with the Rules and Regulations of the Water Quality
Control Commission, and the Environmental Protection Agency. (Department of Public
Health and Environment)
9. Fugitive dust and fugitive particulate emissions shall be controlled on this site. The
facility shall be operated in accordance with the approved dust abatement plan at all
times. (Department of Public Health and Environment)
10. The facility shall adhere to the maximum permissible noise levels allowed in the
Commercial Zone District as delineated in 25-12-103, C.R.S. (Department of Public
Health and Environment)
11. Adequate toilet and hand washing facilities shall be provided for employees. The
employees shall be allowed to use the toilet facilities located in the residence.
(Department of Public Health and Environment)
12. Any septic system located on the property must comply with all provisions of the Weld
County Code, pertaining to Individual Sewage Disposal Systems. (Department of Public
Health and Environment)
Resolution USR-1480
Mildred Sarchet
Page 2
13. A permanent, adequate water supply shall be provided for drinking and sanitary
purposes. (Department of Public Health and Environment)
14. If applicable, the applicant shall obtain a Storm Water Discharge Permit from the
Colorado Department of Public Health and Environment, Water Quality Control Division.
(Department of Public Health and Environment)
15. The operation shall comply with all applicable rules and regulations of the State and
Federal agencies and the Weld County Code. (Department of Public Health and
Environment)
16. The historical flow patterns and run-off amounts will be maintained on site in such a
manner that it will reasonably preserve the natural character of the area and prevent
property damage of the type generally attributed to run-off rate and velocity increases,
diversions, concentration and/or unplanned ponding of storm run-off. (Department of
Public Works)
17. A plan review is required for any additional building. Plans shall bear the wet stamp of a
Colorado registered architect or engineer. (Department of Building Inspection)
18. Buildings shall conform to the requirements of the various codes adopted at the time of
permit application. Currently, the following has been adopted by Weld County: 2003
International Building Code, 2003 International Mechanical Code, 2003 International
Plumbing Code, 2002 National Electrical Code and Chapter 29 of the Weld County Code.
(Department of Building Inspection)
19. Each building will require an engineered foundation based on a site-specific geotechnical
report or an open hole inspection preformed by a Colorado registered engineer.
Engineered foundations shall be designed by a Colorado registered engineer.
(Department of Building Inspection)
20. Building height, setbacks and offset distance shall be determined by the Weld County
Code. Separation of buildings and mixed occupancy classifications shall be in
accordance with Sec. R309.2 of the International Residential Code. (Department of
Building Inspection)
21. Building heights shall be measured in accordance with 2003 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 for
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. When measuring buildings to determine offset and setback
requirements, buildings are measured to the farthest projection from the building.
Property lines shall be clearly identified. (Department of Building Inspection)
22. Effective January 1, 2003, Building Permits issued on the proposed lots will be required
to adhere to the fee structure of the Weld County Road Impact Program. (Ordinance
2002-11) (Department of Planning Services)
23. The landscaping on site shall be maintained in accordance with the approved landscape
plan. (Department of Planning Services)
Resolution USR-1480
Mildred Sarchet
Page 3
Motion seconded by James Rohn
VOTE:
For Passage Against Passage Absent
Michael Miller
John Folsom
Bryant Gimlin
Stephen Mokray
Bruce Fitzgerald
James Rohn
Tonya Strobel
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 July 20, 2004.
Dated the 20th of July 2004.
()AEA
nr, ,
Voneen Macklin
Secretary
— .2OO'f
PLANNER: Jacqueline Hatch
LEGAL DESCRIPTION: Pad of the NW4 of Section 29, T1 N, R66W of the 6th P.M., Weld County,
Colorado.
REQUEST: Site Specific Development Plan and Special Review Permit for a use
permitted as a Use by Special Review, (Oil & Gas Support & Services) in
the A(Agricultural)Zone District.
LOCATION: East of and adjacent to Hwy 85 business (CR 27); approximately 1/4 mile
south of CR 6.
James Rohn moved to accept the Consent Agenda. Doug Ochsner seconded. Motion carried.
The following Items will be Heard:
CASE NUMBER: USR-1480
APPLICANT: Mildred Mae Sarchet LLC/Arrested Oil Field Services
PLANNER: Jacqueline Hatch
LEGAL DESCRIPTION: Lot B RE-3668; pt of N2 NW4 of Section 35, T3N, R67W of the 6th P.M.,
Weld County, Colorado.
REQUEST: A Site Specific Development Plan and Special Review Permit for a Mineral
resource development facility including an oil and a gas support,and service
facility in the A(Agricultural)Zone District
LOCATION: West of and adjacent to CR 21 1/2; and south of and adjacent to CR 28.
Jacqueline Hatch,Department of Planning Services presented Case USR-1480,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.
James Rohn asked about the letter from the neighbor indicating the operation has been there, but there was
no indication from Ms. Salzman, Zoning Compliance Officer, there was a violation. Ms. Hatch stated there
was an approved RE and with the site inspection of that RE it was determined a business was operating. The
property owner was then instructed to apply for a USR to address the business.
John Folsom asked if there was documentation in the packet that gives Mr. Brown authority to sign for the
application. Ms. Hatch indicated that Mr.Sarchet has the authority to sign and he is the owner of the property,
the Browns are leasing the property. Mr. Folsom asked about the questionnaire indicating three employees
and there being no signatures. Ms. Hatch indicated they are not required to sign the questionnaire, but Mr.
Sarchet has signed the application.
Bruce Fitzgerald stated the application was submitted by the tenant and the comments indicate a vested
property right, but who would the vested property right be for? Ms. Hatch stated Mr.Sarchet was told a USR
would need to be done but since this was not his business he had the tenant do the paperwork. Mr. Sarchet
did review the paperwork and sign off on it. Mr. Sarchet, the owner of the property if fully aware of the
business and it operation. Mr. Fitzgerald asked for clarification with regard to the property right. Ms Hatch
indicated the vested right goes with the property.
Michael Miller asked if there was a condition indicating the USR is for the existing tenant only, when or if he
leaves the USR will be no longer valid. Ms. Hatch stated there is not a condition in place now but one can be
added as a Development Standard.
Michael Miller asked about 2A addressing a reasonable attempt to be compatible with the area. Ms. Hatch
indicated that was from the code.
Robert Sarchet, property owner, indicated he does have the authority. The letter of objection came from the
home to the east. They would like for nothing to happen on the ground due to their view to the west,the vie
could be disrupted. The Browns described the business operation in the submittal though Mr.Sarchet did ge
the well permit and the cost was split because that would be a benefit to both. The operation is nicely kep
and maintained. Mr. Brown has a small operation and really no desire to increase.
John Folsom asked how long the business was in operation on the site. Mr. Sarchet was not aware before
he applied for the RE. Mr. Folsom asked if "at any point were you not aware that this type of operation
required a special permit?" Mr.Sarchet stated he was not aware of this. Mr.Folsom indicated the application
includes oil &gas support and asked if any of the activities conducted are not related to oil &gas or mining?
Mr. Sarchet will defer those questions to Mark Brown the operator of the business.
James Rohn asked Mr. Sarchet the purpose for the RE that he applied for. Mr. Sarchet indicated it was
irrigation problems on the farm and the need for a pivot system. The best way to finance the new system was
to sell off part of the farm that was separated from the farm. Mr. Sarchet indicated the RE is at the east end
near CR 28.
Mark Brown, tenant, provided clarification on the project.
John Folsom asked how long the business has been in operation on this site. Mr. Brown stated he began
three years ago. Mr. Folsom asked if the business is solely related to oil&gas or mining. Mr. Brown stated
that most of the contract work has been through Patina Oil&Gas. Mr.Brown indicated they do what they can
to keep working.
Michael Miller asked what equipment is on site. Mr. Brown indicated he has two tandem dump trucks, one
two ton vehicle and a road grader which is rarely on site. Three are three employees that work every day.
Mr. Brown added that it is a small business and he does not plan on expanding. There are no material and
limited traffic. Mr. Miller clarified that if he chooses to expand he will need to come back to the Department
of Planning Services and re-apply. Mr. Brown indicated he is aware of this and may be downsizing anyway.
The Chair asked if there was anyone in the audience who wished to speak for or against this application. No
one wished to speak.
Michael Miller suggested having a restriction added that states the USR is valid only with this tenant and
cannot be conveyed to the land.
Bruce Fitzgerald moved to add Development Standard#25 that states"This USR shall be terminated upon
sale or renewed lease agreement with a new tenant."
Doug Ochsner asked for clarification with regard to the USR and the tenant moving, if another business
moved in it would need to be identical to the existing business. Mr. Miller stated it comes down to
interpretation of the next possible business on site with the same USR. This would leave it up to the County
to determine the difference.
James Rohn asked if the USR is tied to the name. Mr. Miller stated the USR is tied to land owner.
Bruce Fitzgerald indicated he has not seen an application like this, normally the owner is making the request
and he is not comfortable without the liability of having the Development Standard limiting the USR to this
owner.
Michael Miller asked Mr. Morrison asked for clarification with regard to a possible provision that ties the USR
to the tenant not the property. The application was submitted by the tenant with the owners knowledge and
signatures. Mr. Morrison asked if there was any capitol investment in the property that goes along with the
use. Mr. Miller stated the use is basically parking equipment on site and using the house as office or base
of operations. Mr. Morrison added that the property owner would need to be in agreement with the
Development Standard limiting this. Mr. Miller added the owner does not have an issue with adding this.
James Rohn added he is not open to writing blank checks without expiration, it will be hard for the property
owner to replace the business. Mr. Rohn suggests leaving the comments alone.
Chad Auer seconded the motion that was on the table.
The Chair asked the secretary to poll the members of the Planning Commission for their decision. John
Folsom, no; Michael Miller,yes;James Rohn,no;Chad Auer,yes; Doug Ochsner, no; Bruce Fitzgerald,yes.
Motion failed
Mr.Sarchet added that this is a rental house so if Mr.Brown leaves it will still be considered as such. The only
thing that would remain is the commercial well that is recorded.
Bruce Fitzgerald asked if there was an expense in the conversion of the well. Mr. Sarchet indicated the fees
were split.
James Rohn asked Mr. Brown "you had been operating this prior for three years, did you know when you
started the business that it would be in violation of the code?" Mr. Brown indicated he did not. Mr. Rohn
continued "have you operated a similar business in any other part of the County?" Mr. Brown stated he has
not.
John Folsom moved that Case USR-1480, be forwarded to the Board of County Commissioners along with
the Conditions of Approval and Development Standards with the Planning Commissions recommendation of
approval. James Rohn seconded the motion.
The Chair asked the secretary to poll the members of the Planning Commission for their decision. John
Folsom, yes; Michael Miller,yes; James Rohn, yes; Chad Auer, yes; Doug Ochsner, yes; Bruce Fitzgerald,
yes. Motion carried unanimously.
James Rohn commented "normally I am a little more skeptical on these cases but seeing that the two, the
owner and the lessee,are working so hard together I think we need to give them a little benefit of the doubt."
CASE: PZ-1045
APPLICANT: Highland Acquisition Group
PLANNER: Jacqueline Hatch
LEGAL DESCRIPTION: Lot B RE-3105 N2NW4 of Section 5, T1 N, R68 W of the 6th P.M., Weld
County, Colorado.
REQUEST: Change of Zone from(A)Agriculture to PUD(Highland Estates)for nine(9)
lots with (E) Estate Uses (17acres) and (2)two non-residential outlots(13
acres)for open space and one (1)agricultural outlot(24 acres)
LOCATION: South of and adjacent to Hwy 52 and approximately 1/4 mile east of CR 3.
Jacqueline Hatch, Department of Planning Services presented Case PZ-1045, 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 if there was for sale sign on property now. Ms. Hatch indicated there was not.
James Rohn asked about the letter from Anadarco stating objection without the agreement and if they would
need to strip mine because of the coal that is underground. Mr. Rohn believes this should be looked at
further. Ms. Hatch indicated she would not have that information, but Molly Somerville is present.
John Folsom asked if a PUD with Estate zones have no minimum lot size? Ms. Hatch indicated the overall
density has been met for septic systems with the agricultural outlots. Mr. Folsom stated,"so in other words
it doesn't have to conform to the requirement of an Estate Zone District,which is in 23-3-40.A which requires
2.5 acres so this does not apply to this application?" Ms.Hatch stated the reason for the 2.5 acre requirement
is for the septic and if the overall density has been met the Health Department agrees with this. Mr. Folsom
indicated that the leech fields will need to be on each lot and 1.7 acres is not sufficient ground for the septic
and leech field. Pam Smith, Health Department,added that since they have the agricultural outlots that helps
the overall density. The overall density is one septic system per 6.3 acres. The policy is if on community
water and a septic system there can be a lot size of one acres provided all the setbacks can be met. The soil
types will also play a part in this. The minimum lot size has been met and the overall density has been met
also. This property does show that the perk rates are good in the area. Mr. Folsom added that his concern
is that the lots are in cluster and those leech fields must be within the 1.7 acres within that cluster. Ms. Hatch
added that the Health Department has asked that envelopes be shown.
James Rohn asked Ms. Smith about the possibility of the agricultural outlot being sold and if that will destroy
the minimum lot size required and used in the density calculation. Ms. Hatch stated the outlots are non
buildable and that is a Development Standard. Mr. Rohn added that there is no Condition addressing
Ordinance 2022-11. Ms. Hatch indicated that it can be placed in the Conditions.
John Folsom asked if there had been any response from CDOT. Ms. Hatch stated there is a Condition
requiring the applicant to contact CDOT.
Hello