HomeMy WebLinkAbout20032421.tiff BEFORE THE WELD COUNTY, COLORADO, PLANNING COMMISSION
RESOLUTION OF RECOMMENDATION TO THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
Moved by Bruce Fitzgerald,along with changes to the language in Development Standard#21, deletion of
#22 and addition of#18,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-1430
APPLICANT: Marcelle Geudner
PLANNER: Sheri Lockman
LEGAL DESCRIPTION: Part NE4 Section 8, T5N, R67W of the 6th P.M., Weld County, Colorado.
REQUEST: Site Specific Development Plan and Special Review Permit for a business
permitted as a use by right or accessory use in the Commercial Zone
District (Landscaping Materials Yard) in the A(Agricultural)Zone District.
LOCATION: 753 feet west of CR 17 and % mile north of State Hwy 34.
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 Department of Planning Services' staff 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 22-2-150 B.1 (C.Goal 2) states
"ensure the compatibility of commercial land uses with adjacent land uses.Conditions have
been included to ensure the site does not have an adverse impact on the surrounding
properties.
Section 22-3-140.6.1 (T.Policy 4.1)states"establish policy standards for the regulation of
accesses to streets and highways from adjacent land uses and intersecting roads." The
access road serving the site was created by Quit Claim Deed on February 18, 1981. Lee
Morrison,Assistant County Attorney,has reviewed the deed and determined that the access
is legal for the use.
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.R of the Weld County Code provides fora business permitted
as a use by right or accessory use in the Commercial Zone District as a Use by Special
Review 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. North of the site is pasture with a home within 400 feet.An existing
animal confinement operation is east of the site.A poultry business and sod farm lie south
of the site. A single family residence lies within close proximity to the west of the site.
Conditions of Approval and Development Standards ensure that the storage and parking
areas are adequately screened from the 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 site lies within the three mile referral area for the Town of Windsor and
the City of Greeley.The Town of Windsor indicated in a referral response received June 9, �
2003 that the site is depicted as High Density Estate Residential on the Town's Land Use r
Plan map. However, residential development of the subject property in the near future is
unlikely, due to its location. The Town has recommended approval of the Use by Special
Review. In a referral response received May 16, 2003, the City of Greeley has =
recommended conditions that they wish to see implemented should the proposal be K
approved.Some of the City of Greeley's recommendations have been incorporated into the
Development Standards and Conditions of Approval.
2003-2421 • r►
Resolution USR-1430
Marcelle Geudner
Page 2
E. Section 23-2-220.A.5 --The site does not lie within any Overlay Districts.
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 small size of the lot
limit its agricultural value.
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 recommendation for approval is conditional upon the following:
1. Prior to recording the plat:
A. The plat shall be labeled USR-1430. (Department of Planning Services)
B. If applicable, the applicant shall submit an Air Pollution Emission Notice (A.P.E.N.) and
Emissions Permit application to the Air Pollution Control Division, Colorado Department of
Health and Environment for emissions of criteria, hazardous or odorous air pollutants.
(Department of Public Health and Environment)
C. Submit a dust abatement plan to the Environmental Health Services, Weld County
Department of Public Health & Environment, for approval prior to operation. (Department
of Public Health and Environment)
D. The applicant shall submit a Landscape/Screening Plan for review and approval. The plan
shall address the following:
1) In order to mitigate the potential negative impact and aesthetic concerns on surrounding
properties, the applicant shall delineate an opaque visual screen on all sides of the
property to completely screen all materials stored on the site.
2) Section 23-3-250.A.6 of the Weld County Code addresses the issue of trash collection
areas. Areas used for storage or trash collection shall be screened from adjacent public
rights-of-way and adjacent properties. These areas shall be designed and used in a
manner that will prevent wind or animal scattered trash.
3) Section 23-3-250.B addresses operation standards for Commercial uses. The applicant
shall address the issue of on-site lighting, including security lighting if applicable.
Subsection F. states "any lighting ... shall be designed, located and operated in such a
manner as to meet the following standards: sources of light shall be shielded so that
beams or rays of light will not shine directly onto adjacent properties...."
4) The applicant has not delineated any on-site sign(s). If an on-site sign(s) is desired,the
signs shall adhere to Section 23-4-90.A and .8 of the Weld County Code. One
identification sign per principal use shall be allowed, provided that the sign does not
exceed sixteen (16) square feet in area per face. Further, the location of the sign, if
applicable shall be delineated on the Landscape / Site Plan. (Department of Planning
Services)
E. The applicant shall complete all proposed improvement including those regarding landscaping,
screening, access improvements and parking lot requirements or enter into an Improvements
Agreement according to policy regarding collateral for improvements and post adequate
collateral for all required materials. 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. (Department of Planning Services)
Resolution USR-1430
Marcelle Geudner
Page 3
F. The plat shall be amended to delineate the following:
1) The attached Development Standards. (Department of Planning Services)
2) The approved Landscape/Screening Plan. (Department of Planning Services)
G. The City of Greeley has jurisdiction of County Road 17 at this location. The applicant shall
contact the City to verify the access permit or for any additional requirements that may be
needed to obtain or upgrade an access permit.Written evidence that the applicant has complied
with the City of Greeley requirements pertaining to the access shall be submitted to the
Department of Planning Services. (Department of Public Works)
H. The applicant shall attempt to address the conditions(concerns)of the Windsor/Severance Fire
Protection District as indicated in a referral response dated may 14, 2003.Written evidence of
such shall be submitted to the Department of Planning Services. (Windsor/Severance Fire
Protection District)
I. The applicant shall contact Dave Tuttle, Weld County Sheriff's Office, to discuss the Crime
Prevention Through Environmental Design program and any available options for the site.
(Sheriff's Office)
J. 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)
2. Prior to the issuance of the Certificate of Occupancy:
1. An individual sewage disposal system is required for the proposed use and shall be installed
according to the Weld County Individual Sewage Disposal Regulations.
2. The septic system is required to be designed by a Colorado Registered Professional Engineer
according to the Weld County Individual Sewage Disposal Regulations.
3. Upon completion of 1.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 b y D epartment o f Planning Services' Staff. T he p lat s hall be prepared i n
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 mapsaco.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
�-. Marcelle Geudner C/O Jess Aragon
USR-1430
1. The Site Specific Development Plan and Special Use Permit is for a business permitted as a use by
right or accessory use in the Commercial Zone District (Landscaping Materials)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. All liquid and solid wastes (as defined in the Solid Wastes Disposal Sites and Facilities Act,
30-20-100.5, C.R.S., as amended) shall be stored and removed for final disposal in a manner that
protects against surface and groundwater contamination. (Department of Public Health and
Environment)
4. 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)
5. Waste materials shall be handled,stored,and disposed in a manner that controls fugitive dust,blowing
debris, and other potential nuisance conditions. (Department of Public Health and Environment)
6. Fugitive dust 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)
7. This facility shall adhere to the maximum permissible noise levels allowed in the Commercial Zone
as delineated in 25-12-103 C.R.S., as amended. (Department of Public Health and Environment)
8. The facility shall utilize the existing public water supply. (Department of Public Health and
Environment)
9. Adequate handwashing and toilet facilities shall be provided for employees and patrons of the facility.
(Department of Public Health and Environment)
10. 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)
11. Material piles shall not exceed the height of the opaque screening.(Department of Planning Services)
12. The screening and landscaping on site shall be maintained in accordance with the approved
Landscape/Screening Plan. (Department of Planning Services)
13. A building permit shall be obtained prior to the construction of any building. (Department of Building
Inspection)
14. A plan review is required for each building for which a building permit is required. Except for simple
pole type structures, 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)
15. 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: 1997 Uniform Building Code;
1998 International Mechanical Code;1997 International Plumbing Code;2002 National Electrical Code
and Chapter 29 of the Weld County Code. (Department of Building Inspection)
16. Except for pole type structures, 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)
Resolution USR-1430
Marcelle Geudner
Page 2
/0" 17. Building height shall be measured in accordance with the 1997 Uniform 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 27 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)
18. The applicant shall apply dust suppression chemical(magnesium or calcium chloride)on the haul road
between CR 17 and the entrance to the USR site, no less than twice a year, or as needed, as
determined by the Public Works Department. (Department of Public Works)
19. The off-street parking including the access drive shall be surfaced with gravel or the equivalent and
shall be graded to prevent drainage problems. (Department of Public Works)
20. Each parking space adjacent to the building shall be equipped with wheel guards or curb stops where
necessary to prevent vehicles from extending beyond the boundaries of the space and from coming
into contact with other vehicles, walls, fences, or plantings. (Department of Public Works)
21. The historical flow patterns and run-off amounts will be maintained on site in such a manner that 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 or storm run-off. (Department of Public Works)
22. The hours of operation will be not before 8:00am and not after 6:00pm at any given time.(Department
of Planning Services)
n 23. Any recreational vehicle stored on the lot may not be used for overnight housing for any persons or
as an office or storage structure. (Department of Planning Services)
24. The property owner or operator shall be responsible for complying with the Design Standards of
Section 23-2-240, Weld County Code.
25. The property owner or operator shall be responsible for complying with the Operation Standards of
Section 23-2-250, Weld County Code.
26. 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.
27. The Special Review area shall be limited to the plans shown hereon and governed by the foregoing
standards and all applicable Weld County regulations. Substantial changes from the plans or
Development Standards as shown or stated shall require the approval of an amendment of the Permit
by the Weld County Board of County Commissioners before such changes from the plans or
Development Standards are permitted. Any other changes shall be filed in the office of the
Department of Planning Services.
28. The property owner or operator shall be responsible for complying with all of the foregoing
Development Standards. Noncompliance with any of the foregoing Development Standards may be
reason for revocation of the Permit by the Board of County Commissioners.
r
Resolution USR-1430
Marcelle Geudner
Page 3
Motion seconded by Bernie Ruesgen
VOTE:
For Passage Against Passage Absent
Michael Miller
John Folsom
John Hutson
Bryant Gimlin
Stephen Mokray
Bruce Fitzgerald
James Rohn
Bernard Ruesgen
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 5, 2003.
Dated the 5th of August, 2003.
Voneen Macklin
Secretary
t�_5--coo3
and indicated that the standard is for the setback to be met. It is a standard from building inspection. The
setbacks can be met. Mr. Gimlin asked if there is a need for secondary containment because of overflow.
Ms. Katyrynuik stated that according to the submitted information they have a drainage line that will go to
reservoir in the event of an overflow.
Eric Larsen,engineer for Town of Eaton,provided clarification with regard to project. The drain line is to drain
the tank and the overflow will go to reservoir. In event of failure,the natural grading of land is to east towards
reservoir. The flow will go to the east.
James Rohn asked if there is water in reservoir. Mr. Larson stated that the water from the tank would raise
the level in the reservoir 1-2 feet,which would not be an issue because it would not cause it to flow over. Mr.
Rohn asked who owns reservoir. Mr. Larson indicated that John Leffler owns the reservoir and they have
been in contact with him and written authorization will be provided.
The Chair asked if there was anyone in the audience who wished to speak for or against this application. No
one wished to speak.
Stephen Mokray moved that Case USR-1434 be approved along with the Conditions of Approval and
Development Standards with the Planning Commissions recommendation of approval. Bryant Gimlin
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; Michael Miller, yes; Bryant Gimlin, yes; Bruce Fitzgerald, yes; James
Rohn, yes; Bernie Ruesgen, yes; John Hutson, yes. Motion carried unanimously.
CASE NUMBER: USR-1430
APPLICANT: Marcelle Geudner
PLANNER: Sheri Lockman
LEGAL DESCRIPTION: Part NE4 Section 8, T5N, R67W of the 6th P.M., Weld County, Colorado.
REQUEST: Site Specific Development Plan and Special Review Permit for a business
permitted as a use by right or accessory use in the Commercial Zone
District(Landscaping Materials Yard) in the A(Agricultural)Zone District.
LOCATION: 753 feet west of CR 17 and 1/2 mile north of State Hwy 34.
Sheri Lockman, Department of Planning Services presented Case USR-1430, 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 if the site was created by PUD. Ms. Lockman indicated that these were created prior to
zoning and the access was a granted easement to the surrounding property owners. Mr. Rohn asked about
the newly handed out suggested conditions. Ms.Lockman stated they were presented by Deanne Fredrickson
and she is present and will speak.
Michael Miller asked about reference to a motor home and it not used for overnight stays but allowed for
storage purposes. Ms. Lockman indicated storage is allowed but not for office or housing.
Marcel Geudner, owner, provided clarification with regard to the project. The site has been dramatically
improved since it was purchased. There water tap with Little Thompson was put in in the summer of 2002.
The property is leased to Jess Aragon for the Timberock business.
Jess Aragon, owner of Timberock, provided further information with regard to the project and the business.
Mr.Aragon has approval through Windsor to expand but the conditions of approval were cost prohibitive. He
owns 2'/,acres in Windsor. Mr.Aragon widened the road and made several improvements to the site. The
property in Windsor was not platted and he was lead to believe he could use both parcels. Mr. Aragon was
looking for a permanent site when he approached Mrs. Geudner. The business is difficult to re locate so the
materials were relocated and then Weld County was contacted with regard to the review process. The road
was a one lane road and needed to be widened. Mr.Aragon spoke with property owners in the area and none
were willing to share in the cost of widening or had any ideas or suggestions to accomplish it. It was
determined to be an easement road and the improvement was taken on by the business. The road was
2 EXHIBIT
Page -7-
/ 5O
widened to two lanes. 300 tons road base was used and the cost of rentals was accepted by the business.
Timberock has serious concern over safety and the neighbors. The neighbors to the west are on oxygen and
a cedar fence was installed in order to mitigate some of the concerns. The property is located at the top of
a historic drainage and the road floods in a certain spot so a culvert was installed at the low spot in the road
to mitigate water flood issues. The culvert is a one lane access road. The material was brought in, nothing
was removed. Safety concerns were addressed by installing a stop sign at the exit of the property as well as
a sign to slow down. A stop sign was installed on CR 17 to address some concerns from the neighbors.
There will also be a sign posted at the stop sign on CR 17 to make drivers aware of the limited site distance.
Another sign was posted to indicate that children were playing. Timberock is landscape business that sells
to consumers accounts,do not sell to landscapers. The business operates four non CDL trucks,two bobcats
are in the yard and a wheel loader. The equipment is fairly new and adheres to the safety regulations. Mr.
Aragon tells his drivers if they are creating dust then they are driving to fast. The business wants to be a good
neighbor. Mr.Aragon went through photos that were handed out at the meeting. The hours of operation are
in question. The business fits in well with the surrounding area. The material is in piles and there is no fire
hazard with regard to the mulches. They are difficult to ignite.There is no serious plans for growth it will stay
manageable.
James Rohn asked Mr.Aragon if city tax is collected or just state tax. Mr.Aragon indicated they collect state
tax. Mr. Rohn asked if there was a chance to mitigate some neighbors concerns with regard to the entrance
from CR 17. Mr.Aragon indicated he spoke with Mr. Lind about the access on the south end of the property.
Mr. Lind would rather lease ground adjacent to CR 17, that he owns, for a large sum of money adverse to
granting access use of the road.
The Chair asked if there was anyone in the audience who wished to speak for or against this application.
Gary Fredrickson, neighbor in Windsong, indicated his concerns with the development. All the adjacent
owners request denial of the project. The reasons is that it is not compatible with the surrounding land uses
and does have a severe impact on the surrounding neighbors. The surrounding owners question what the
impact is when a special review is requested? Ms. Lockman indicated that the determination is based on
previous cases and the Comprehensive Plan is used. Previous proven land use cases are reviewed and
compared. The criteria are listed on the front of the comments in which Mr.Fredrickson has a copy. The area
is more of a large lot estate residential area with a small amount of agriculture and has been for approximately
20 years. Windsong HOA submitted a letter indicating this project as being a problem. In the Windsor land
use plan the area is classified as high use residential estate. This use is incompatible and has an adverse
affect on the surrounding area. This is also not an agricultural use. Photos were distributed identifying the
view from Windsong. The traffic is more than represented. The noise, dust and traffic make the use
incompatible. The hours of operation are not adhered to. The equipment runs all the time and the fumes and
exhaust are evident throughout the day. This project is not a storage yard but a retail establishment. The
road is a point of contention with the surrounding neighbors. The road has been narrowed at the location of
the culvert. Traffic safety also a huge concern. There is recorded documentation with regard to citations from
the Town of Windsor. The applicant has moved three times. There is immediate adverse impacts on the
neighborhood. The residents were not contacted prior to any improvements being made in the area, either
to the road or the culvert.
Michael Miller asked about the photo#3 taken and where it was taken from. Mr. Fredrickson indicated that
the photo was taken from the property line at Windsong located to the north. Mr.Miller asked if the photo was
magnified for effect. Mr. Fredrickson stated that there is a telephoto on his digital camera but it is not huge.
Mr. Miller added that it is zoned Agricultural through the county and in a letter from Windsor it states that
residential development on the property in the near future is unlikely due to the location. Mr. Fredrickson
indicated that there is evidence to the contrary, with the closing on property and the applicant himself
indicating he will be building his home there also.
Paul Geudner, owner, provided information with regard to the project. A handout was given to the Planning
Commission that indicated racial undertones. Mr. Geudner stated, "this thing is just racial." There was a
meeting at Windsong and a controversial item was left at the applicants property. Mr. Miller indicated that
there will be no testimony allowed that is directed ethnically. If there are facts to be represented then they are
to be presented. Mr. Geudner indicated that the traffic number represented was exorbitant. It is impossible
that 39 cars visited the site within one hour. Mr. Geudner indicated he had never seen more than six cars on
the busiest day they have had. The road into the area is dangerous and has been. People must be
responsible and look both ways. The access road was a one lane mud hole with two tire tracks. Mr.Aragon
Page-8-
has done all the repair work on the road. Mr.Aragon also dug out and made some retention ponds so if the
water came to fast it would have an area to pool and disperse through the culvert. The allegations from the
previous speaker are all bogus and unfounded. There is not much dust,the wind blows to the southeast away
r", from everyone. The dairy utilized the same type of equipment with the backup noise.
Sheri Platt, neighbor, indicated that her in laws owned the entire parcel and the understanding was that this
be a residential not commercial area. Safety is a huge issues because she has children that like to ride their
bikes. CR 17 contains a blind spot to the north and it is very dangerous to enter onto. There are customers
on an hourly basis and a large amount of traffic going in and out. There is a semi going in and out every day.
The hours of operation are far to long. There is a significant amount of dust from the road. It was requested
of Mr. Aragon to water the road and he refused. The sod farm is owned by Mr. Lind and the lease is up so
it is back to agricultural production.
Tom Weiler, neighbor,stated the road was modified to allow for only one lane where the culvert was placed.
The rock from the lane in front of his home was never replaced.The business started last November with land
moving equipment and the land was dug out and the surface dropped approximately 7 feet. Soil erosion will
eventually wear the ground away on his east property line. The site is now handling semi trucks,dump trucks
hauling materials in and out and it has "been nothing but a dust bowl." The fence does not retain the dust.
When there is a wind storm the dust is tremendous. Mr.Weiler has lived in the area for many years and has
never gotten stuck in the lane. This development has significantly impacted his quality of life. Mr.Weiler also
stated, "I'm also concerned it will impact the quantity of my life."
Brad Weiler,neighbor,addressed pictures that were submitted. The operation has been running seven days
a week since last fall barring some holidays. The hours of operation are not what is represented. The noise
from the dumping of the material is very loud. There is a huge health concern especially with the decline of
his fathers health.They have pre existing health problems but this is not going to help. The traffic is enormous
and an issue. A water line was replaced and the rock was never replaced. Mr.Aragon has not called, talked
or written a letter letting the surrounding neighbors know what was planned with the road.
Kathy&Gary Weinmeister,neighbor, indicated concerns. The surrounding neighbors were never contacted
with regard to the work being done on the road to ask if they agreed to it or wanted to share in the cost. The
lane is now restricted at the culvert. The roadway was a 60 foot wide useable lane. The restriction is a 14
foot wide area. That is all that is useable on the road. The dairy has access off of CR 17. Ms.Weinmeister
indicated that safety is a factor at the intersection. The signs are not obeyed.
Judy Hartshorn, neighbor, indicated concerns. The past practice on the decisions regarding the road was to
get together and decide what to do. Mr. Weinmaster helps with the road and also assists in keeping the
weeds down along CR 17 at the blind spot. The culvert limits the ability to plow the road in the winter to gain
access out. There was no communication, it was just done. Half of the easement was removed to build up
the land.
Cindy Rubiano, works with Mr. Aragon, indicated the road was raised. Mr. Weiler asked for the culvert and
now they are not happy with it.
James Spears, truck driver for Mr. Aragon, stated he has plenty of site distance when in a semi truck. The
size of a semi requires a wide swing.
Mike Tarkanian,son works for Mr.Aragon, indicated that there is plenty of room for the kids to ride bikes,the
Platts lane is 1/4 mile long. The site is manicured, trees have been planted and there are no weeds on the
property. The hours start at 8:30am because that is when he drops his son off and normally picks him up
around 6:00pm. The fence was one of the first things that was done. There was no animosity in putting the
fence up, it was something he wanted to do to try and mitigate some of the concerns.
Tina Schinner, future neighbor to the north, indicated their desire for property to be able to do 4H projects.
The concern is for the safety of the kids. In last thirty days the trucks are going slower, in the beginning they
were coming at a high rate of speed. Another concern is the run off from the culvert into the property. It would
run through the middle of the property towards Windsong. The area is zoned agricultural and he is running
a retail business. The understanding is that it is a private road and it is now being used as an access to a
business.
Page -9-
Deanne Fredrickson, neighbor, provided information with regard to suggested conditions that were handed
out to the Planning Commission in the beginning. There is more traffic but the amount is not known. CR 17
is potentially hazardous. There are some water quality issues with the detention pond. There are
professionals in the business that could have been utilized for the upgrades. The conditions were a way of
satisfying some of the concerns for the business and adequately monitoring the operation. It is questionable
if it is compatible with the area. The results would have been different if permission or at least input would
have been asked for. There is a break down in the system when someone does something and then asks
for permission to do so. It may not be a reason for denial but it is a reason to look very closely at the project.
Mr. Aragon did this to himself, he was aware that there was a process and chose to place it there then ask
for permission. There needs to be information gathered with regard to the road and what is needed to support
this type of business.
Cory Modelmog, works for Mr. Aragon, there is and always will be problem with traffic because of CR 17.
Drivers of commercial trucks can see over the blind spot due to the height of the trucks. The semi truck
comes in very few times a week.
Graham Sterkling,works for Mr.Aragon, does not understand how the use could not be compatible with the
surrounding area. The dairy contains piles of manure and uses the same type of equipment.
Chair closed public portion of the meeting.
Jess Aragon indicated that screening will be on the north side of the property with trees and a landscape plan
has been done. The use is compatible with the surrounding area especially the dairy. The hours of operation
are 8:30am-6:00pm Monday through Saturday and 9:00am-5:00pm on Sunday during the daylight savings.
This depends on the weather. In October the hours requested are 9:00am -5:00pm and 10:00am -4:00pm
on Sunday. The equipment is new and does comply with the pollution standards. Diesel are not required to
be left idling any more and this saves on fuel. Mr. Aragon called the different neighbors but got negative
responses when asked about the road. There was an investigation done on the road prior to doing any work
and it was determined to be a public easement. In not getting any response from the neighbors,the project
was taken on by the business. Don Carroll came to the site and the issues of drainage and the road were
discussed. CR 17 is an issue that the whole area has to face. Safety is a number one priority, a business
cannot be operated without a conscious effort on safety.
Bryant Gimlin asked about the status of the road. Ms. Lockman stated Mr. Morrison made the determination
that the way it was created legally as a road for a roads purpose not a private lane. Mr. Barker stated it was
a deed and it was intended to be an easement but open to any members of the public that wanted to access
the properties. It is as close to a public road but is not dedicated to the public or to the local government. It
is more like a public roadway. Private easement will be called out specifically to the beneficiaries of the
easement. Mr. Mokray asked if county is obligated to do anything on the road. Mr. Barker stated that the
county does not take on maintenance and it is not considered public/county property unless there is a deed
to the county. Mr. Miller asked how this affects what Mr. Aragon did to the road and does he need to get
permission. Mr. Barker indicated the Mr. Aragon has as much right to maintain the road as anyone else.
Char Davis indicated she has a condition for dust abatement on the site but not the road accessing the
property. It is in prior to recording the plat 1 C.
Don Carroll stated that a separate item will be needed for a dust abatement from CR 17 to the entrance of
the business. The question is whether to have dust control the whole way or just in front of the business. Mr.
Ruesgen questioned if Mr.Aragon should have to pay for the complete cost since he is not the only one that
uses the road. Mr. Gimlin indicated it was a public and commercial business that causes the need for this.
Mr. Rohn stated, "he is creating a nuisance with that dust to the neighbors and since he is the major
contributor with that being in that neighborhood. I think that he should have to shoulder that as a
appeasement to the neighbors for impacting their lives.". Mr. Fitzgerald indicted that this issue has been
handled before and the applicant was the one that shouldered the burden. Mr. Mokray asked Mr. Carroll if
he had an estimate of the cost. Mr. Carroll stated it was approximately 30-50cents for a square yard, one
application. The condition states a minimum of twice a year or as needed directed by Public Works. Mr.
Bryant suggested making the applicant responsible for dust abatement if he would like to go to the dairy and
ask to share then that is fine. Mr. Miller stated the business is creating a majority of the problem. Trucks
create more dust than cars do. Mr. Carroll suggested language consisting of"the applicant shall apply dust
suppression chemical (magnesium or calcium chloride)on the haul road between CR 17 and the entrance
Page-10-
to the USR site, no less than twice a year, or as needed, as determined by the Public Works Department."
Mr. Rohn would like to see a minimum of three times not two. Mr. Miller indicated twice a year is fine.
Stephen Mokray asked about the dust on the lot. Ms. Davis stated it will be inspected if complaints arise.
Bruce Barker suggested making the dust abatement language a Development Standard. Don Carroll
suggests it be Development Standard#18 then renumber as needed.
James Rohn moved to accept the above language with regard to dust abatement but the minimum application
be three times not two. There was no second. Motion failed.
Bruce Fitzgerald moved to accept the above language with regard to dust abatement and enter it as
Development Standard #18. John Folsom seconded.
The Chair asked the secretary to poll the members of the Planning Commission for their decision. John
Folsom, yes; Stephan Mokray, yes; Michael Miller, yes; Bryant Gimlin, yes; Bruce Fitzgerald, yes; James
Rohn, yes; Bernie Ruesgen, yes; John Hutson, yes. Motion carried unanimously.
Char Davis, Public Health, indicated that there is a dust abatement condition that states the applicant shall
submit a dust abatement plan prior to recording the plat. They would decide if approved or not. If there are
complaints an air quality specialist will respond.
Michael Miller asked Mr. Carroll if there was a possibility to add a sign for trucks entering the roadway. Mr.
Carroll stated that CR 17 had been annexed by the City of Greeley. The county does not maintain the public
road to the site nor does it maintain CR 17. The City of Greeley must be contacted to see if there is going to
be any upgrades. There is a blind spot on CR 17 to the north, there is adequate site distance to the south.
In order to generate a traffic study 200 vehicles are needed. This access road is not close to the 200 vehicles
per day. The City of Greeley should respond with regard to the excel/decel lanes. CR 17 was a collector
when it belonged to Weld County. It generated 2200 vehicles in a 24 hour period. Mr. Fitzgerald asked if
there is going to be a design change on the road. Mr. Carroll stated that it would if it was in the County
system. Stormwater retention is covered in Development Standard. Ms.Lockman indicated the referral from
Greeley did not discuss the access or right-of-way. The access road is 24 feet in width for a two lane road,
it does narrow across the drainage. The narrowing could cause access issues during winter months and how
that is dealt with is up to homeowners.
Michael Miller indicated that there was nothing that could be done with CR 17 since it belongs to the City of
Greeley.
Bruce Fitzgerald asked about the hours of operations and for clarification. Mr.Aragon clarified that during the
summer months it would be 8:30 to 6:00pm Monday through Saturday and 9:00am to 5:00pm on Sunday and
the other times would be 9:00am through 5:30pm Monday thru Saturday and 10:00am to 4:00pm on Sunday.
Jess Aragon indicated issues with Development Standard #21 and #22. Development Standard #22 that
deals with limiting the dates of operation, is difficult since material will be delivered in the winter months due
to being able to purchase at reduce prices. Also there is Christmas tree business, elsewhere, during
November and December. There are times when calls come in from customers in the winter months. It would
be beneficial to be able to service them alone and not completely open the business. Ms. Rubiano added that
the yard is closed but calls are forwarded to the cell phone. One person gets the material and delivers. The
weather is very indicative to this type of business. Mr. Folsom indicated it could be defined as open to public
during the restricted hours. Mr.Aragon stated that the winter times allows purchase of rock at cheaper price.
Mr. Ruesgen stated that Development Standard#22 needs to be removed, it is hard to tell a business owner
that he has to shut his business down at a specific date and time. Mr. Ruesgen added that the hours of
operation could be not before 8:00am Monday through Saturday and no later than 6:00pm
Bernie Ruesgen moved to amend Development Standard #21 to read "the hours of operation will not be
before 8:00am and not after 6:00pm at any given time." Also to delete#22 from the Development Standards.
Bruce Fitzgerald seconded. Motion carried with Mr. Rohn voting no.
r
Jess Aragon Indicated that the landscape screening plan to the south of the property would like to see
Page -11-
language added with regard to future development occurring. Mr. Miller clarified that a plan will be submitted
and the county will approve it and they will take into consideration the possible development.
Bryant Gimlin commented that this kind of application in which a housing development is compatible with
landscaping. Landscaping business is similar to the operation of a dairy in terms of equipment, noise and
traffic. The neighbors get some benefit of the conditions that are required, noise restriction, traffic, dust
abatement and hours of operation.
James Rohn commented that there has been testimony for and against the project. This area is a rural setting
and this is the third time the applicant has moved to get away from rules and gotten caught. Since the
neighbors have to use the lane they are going to be impacted greatly. A landscaping business is much better
than thirty homes but this interrupts the quality of life of the neighborhood. Very much against the proposal.
Michael Miller commented that there has been a large improvement and the business is nicely ran. In another
location it would be a nice business. This, however, is not compatible with the area. The people that live in
the area had a reasonable expectation that the area would remain somewhat similar to they when moved.
This operation compromises the quality of life and expectations. It is unfortunate that the business was done
first before the process.
James Rohn moved to deny case due to incompatability noting Section 22-3-50 B.1 P. Goal 2 There was no
second to the motion.
Bruce Fitzgerald moved that Case USR-1430,along with the amended Development Standards,be forwarded
to the Board of County Commissioners along with the Conditions of Approval and Development Standards
with the Planning Commissions recommendation of approval. Bernie Ruesgen 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;Michael Miller,no;Bryant Gimlin,yes;Bruce Fitzgerald,yes;James Rohn,
no; Bernie Ruesgen, yes; John Hutson, yes. Motion carried.
John Folsom commented that this project hinges on compatability. There is trouble with the code that states
commercial and industrial uses can be used in the agricultural zone. Similar cases have been approved and
there should be no variance.
James Rohn indicated his comments were the same as his reason for recommending denial.
Bryant Gimlin commented that he does believe it is compatible with the surrounding agriculturally zoned
properties.
Michael Miller commented he does not believe it meets the standard in Section 23-2-28-3 requiring the use
to be compatible with the existing surrounding land use. Similar operations have been passed but it is our
responsibility to consider each of them as individual applications under the same parameters. This application
and the location does not meet the standards.
Meeting adjourned at 6:10pm
Respectfully submitted
Voneen Macklin
Secretary
Page -12-
SUMMARY OF THE WELD COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING
Tuesday, July 1,2003
A regular meeting of the Weld County Planning Commission was held Tuesday 2003, in the Weld County
Public Health/Planning Building,(Room 210),1555 N. 17th Avenue,Greeley,Colorado. The meeting was called
to order by Chair, Michael Miller, at 1:30 p.m.
ROLL CALL
Michael Miller-present
Bryant Gimlin - present
James Rohn - present
John Folsom -present
Stephan Mokray-present
John Hutson -absent
Bernard Ruesgen -absent
Bruce Fitzgerald-absent
Also Present: Monica Daniels Mika, Michelle Katyryniuk, Chris Gathman, Department of Planning; Bethany
Salzman, Zoning Compliance Officer; Peter Schei, Public Works; Pam Smith and Char Davis, Environmental
Health; Lee Morrision, County Attorney; Donita May, Secretary.
The summary of the last regular meeting of the Weld County Planning Commission held on June 17,2003,was
approved as read.
e"` The following are continued items:
CASE NUMBER: USR-1430
APPLICANT: Marcelle Geudner
PLANNER: Sheri Lockman
LEGAL DESCRIPTION: Part NE4 Section 8, T5N, R67W of the 6th P.M., Weld County, Colorado.
REQUEST: Site Specific Development Plan and Special Review Permit for a business
permitted as a use by right or accessory use in the Commercial Zone District
(Landscaping Materials Yard)in the A(Agricultural)Zone District.
LOCATION: 753 feet west of CR 17 and %2 mile north of State Hwy 34.
Sheri Lockman,Department of Planning Services,requested a continuance of case USR-1430,in order to allow
the applicant additional time to notify the properties mineral owners, in accordance with Colorado Revised
Statute, C.R.S.24-65.5-103. Staff requested the case be moved to August, 5, 2003. Ms. Lockman also said
that due to the many safety complaints received,a compliance officer will be talking to the applicants regarding
the safety concerns, prior to the August hearing date.
The Chair asked if there was anyone in the audience who wished to speak for or against this continuance. No
one wished to speak. John Folsom moved that Case USR-1430, be continued to August 5, 2003. Stephen
Mokray seconded the motion. Motion carried unanimously, 5-0.
CASE NUMBER: USR-1431
APPLICANT: Marlin Ness
PLANNER: Chris Gathman
LEGAL DESCRIPTION: NE4 Section 21, T5N, R65W of the 6th P.M., Weld County, Colorado.
REQUEST: Site Specific Development Plan and Use by Special Review for an RV Park,
Storage and Recreation Area in the Agricultural Zone District.
Page-1-
Hello