HomeMy WebLinkAbout20031881.tiff MINUTES OF THE WELD COUNTY UTILITIES ADVISORY COMMITTEE
A regular meeting of the Weld County Utilities Coordinating Advisory Committee was held on Thursday,
July 10, 2003, at 10:00 a.m., in the Conference Room of the Weld County Planning Department at 1555
N. 17th Avenue, Greeley, Colorado.
Members Present: Doug Dalton,Xcel Energy; Don Carroll, Weld County Public Works; Doug Melby,
Evans Fire Protection District.
Also Present: Peter Schei, Weld County Public Works; Sheri Lockman and Kim Ogle, Planners, Weld
County Department of Planning; Donita May, Secretary.
Doug Dalton, Xcel Energy, called the meeting to order.
1. APPLICANT: Lance&Julee Meiners
CASE NUMBER: PF-1007
PLANNER: Sheri Lockman
REQUEST: Planned Unit Development for 6 lots with Estate Zone Uses and 1 Non-residential
lot with Agricultural Zone Uses (The Shire)of the 6th P.M., Weld County,
Colorado.
LEGAL: Lot C of RE-3042; being part of the NE4NW4 Section 33, T9N, R67W of the 6th
P.M.,Weld County, Colorado.
LOCATION: South of and adjacent to CR 100 and east of and adjacent to CR 17 section line.
Sheri Lockman, Department of Planning, introduced Case PF-1077. The applicants had provided proof of
well, septic, propane and telephone service, however they did not submit a letter from the Rural Electric
Association saying they could service the sight. The applicant will need to get something more definite
from the Rural Electric Association pertaining to future electric service for their development. The
applicants did have utilities shown on the plat.
Doug Dalton, Xcel Energy, said he had looked over the case and as far as he was concerned, it met all of
the requirements and had no comments or questions.
Don Carroll, Public Works, asked Ms. Lockman about the utility easement for lot six? She said it was of
no major concern unless he wanted it reserved for the future. Mr. Carroll then said he had no major
concerns with the project. Doug Melby, Evans Fire Protection District, expressed no concerns.
Don Carroll made a motion to accept as platted, Case PF-1077. Doug Melby seconded the motion.
Motion carried 3 to 0.
2. APPLICANT: Timothy& Lisa Brough
CASE NUMBER: MF-614
PLANNER: Kim Ogle
REQUEST: Final Plat for a nine lot(9) Minor Subdivision (Pheasant Crest Estates).
LEGAL: Lot B of RE-1911; being part of the SW4 Section 6, T7N, R67W of the 6th P.M.,
Weld County, Colorado.
LOCATION: North of and adjacent to CR 84 and east of and adjacent to CR 13.
Kim Ogle, Department of Planning, introduced Case MF-614. He said it was his understanding that water
was already in place. Mr. Ogle said there was an easement across the property for North Weld County
Water District and they(North Weld County Water) have put in sub-outs and fire hydrants on location. It
appeared that the applicant has shown the utility setbacks on all sides of the development as well as
located septic envelopes on site.
Don Carroll, Public Works, said he had been on the site many times in the past and attested to the fact
that the water was in place. Mr. Carroll has looked at their improvements agreement and was presently
working on it. Mr. Carroll said it appeared the applicants have also met all of the requirements for utility
easements.
Doug Dalton inquired about Lot 1 and Lot 2 and said he did not see a back lot line. Mr. Ogle directed the
7—a2/— 2003-1881
board to sheet two of three, and said there was a twenty foot utility and drainage easement along the
canal, and there was also a twenty foot drainage and utility easement adjacent to CR 13. On page three
of three, there was a no build zone- that is, a corridor approved at Planning Commission,where no
structures of any kind were to be built on the surface, however sub-surface structures were okay. It was
intended to be a view corridor for the property owner to the northeast.
Peter Schei, Public Works, asked the board to look at Lot 7, along CR 13,where the west side of the lot
appeared to be non-conforming. The easement shown there was ten feet and it should have been twenty
feet. Mr. Ogle explained that the reason it had a ten foot easement was that the lot had existing
improvements on it, and the minute it was made a twenty foot easement, all of those buildings were then
located on top of the easement. That was why the easement was shrunk down to ten feet. It had existing
septic, power and water to the facility, and Mr. Ogle requested a variance for Lot 7.
Mr. Carroll asked Mr. Ogle if it was a non-conforming use that was already existing? Mr. Ogle said it was
not a non-conforming use, it had existing structures, and if the easement was increased, the buildings
would then be located over CR 13.
Mr. Ogle then expressed concern over the confusion at the entrance to Pheasant Crest Drive at CR 84.
Mr. Schei agreed with Mr. Ogle and suggested that the utility and drainage easements run through the site
distance triangles and a correction to that effect can be made on the plat. The site distance triangles were
only meant to keep the vegetation less than three and a half feet in height at maturity for the cars that
accessed CR 84. Mr. Ogle said if what Mr. Schei suggests was done, then the subdivision sign would
need to be placed someplace outside of the site distance triangles,farther back onto someone else's
property. Mr. Carroll asked if the sign was to be twenty feet from the property line in an agricultural zone
so that it is outside of the utility easement? Mr. Ogle replied that, yes, it was required to be outside of the
utility easement.
Doug Melby, motioned to approve Case MF-614, to include the exception of the ten foot variance for lot
seven, and to include additional language Peter Schei entered into the record regarding the site distance
triangles. Don Carroll seconded the motion. Motion carried 3 to 0.
Meeting adjourned at 10:20 a.m.
Respectfully submitted,
Donita May
Secretary
Hello