HomeMy WebLinkAbout20032939.tiff BEFORE THE WELD COUNTY, COLORADO, PLANNING COMMISSION
RESOLUTION OF RECOMMENDATION TO THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
Moved by Stephen Mokray, 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-1415
APPLICANT: Genevieve P. Clark
PLANNER: Robert Anderson
LEGAL DESCRIPTION: Parts of Section 5 and 8, T4N, R68W of the 6th P.M., Weld County,
Colorado.
REQUEST: Site Specific Development Plan and a Special Review Permit for a
Business permitted as an Accessory Use (Woodworking Business) in the
Commercial or Industrial Zone District in the A(Agricultural) Zone District
LOCATION: East of and adjacent to WCR 3 at the junction of WCR 48.
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 ordinances in effect. The proposed use is inconsistent with
Sections 22-21
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 for a Business
permitted as an Accessory Use (Woodworking Business) in the Commercial or Industrial
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. Surrounding land uses are predominantly agricultural in nature with
associated rural residences. Conditions of Approval and Development Standards can
ensure that the proposal is consistent with surrounding land uses.
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 towns of Johnstown and Berthoud did not return a
referral response and Larimer County found no conflict with their interests.
E. Section 23-2-220.A.5—The application complies with Section 23-5, Article V of the Weld
County Code. The site does not lie within any Overlay Districts. Effective January 1,2003,
Building Permits issued on the lot will be required to adhere to the fee structure of the Weld
County Road Impact Program/Area#3. (Department of Planning Services)
F. Section 23-2-220.A.6 -- The applicant has demonstrated a diligent effort to conserve
agricultural land in the locational decision for the proposed use.
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, an. ` '$
Development Standards ensure that there are adequate provisions for the protection o
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. -;1
2003-2939
Resolution USR 1415
Genevieve Clark
Page 2
THE DEPARTMENT OF PLANNING SERVICES' STAFF RECOMMENDATION FOR APPROVAL IS
CONDITIONAL UPON THE FOLLOWING:
1. Prior to recording the plat:
A. The plat shall be prepared in accordance with Section 23-2-260.D. of the Weld County
Code. (Department of Planning Services)
B. All sheets of the plat shall be labeled USR-1415. (Department of Planning Services)
C. The plat shall be amended to include the following:
1) Weld County Road 3 is designated on the Weld County Transportation Plan Map
as a local gravel road,which requires 60 feet of right-of-way at full build out.There
is presently 60 feet of right-of-way. A total of 30 feet from the centerline of Weld
County Road 3 shall be delineated right-of-way on the plat.This road is maintained
by Weld County. (Department of Public Works)
2) The applicant shall indicate off street parking for visitors, parking for employees,
loading and unloading areas and designate with arrows the traffic circulation pattern
through the proposed Use by Special Review. (Department of Public Works)
3) The attached Development Standards. (Department of Planning Services)
D. 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)
E. The septic system serving the residence and will be used by employees 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 with a copy provided to
the Department of Planning Services. In the event the system is found to be inadequately
sized or constructed the system shall be brought into compliance with current Regulations.
(Department of Public Health and Environment)
F. The applicant shall submit a waste handling plan,for approval, to the Environmental Health
Services Division of the Weld County Department of Public Health & Environment with a
copy provided to the Department of Planning Services. The plan shall include at a
minimum, the following:
1) A list of wastes which are expected to be generated on site (this should include
expected volumes and types of waste generated).
2) A list of the type and volume of chemicals expected to be stored on site.
3) The waste handler and facility where the waste will be disposed (including
the facility name, address, and phone number). (Department of Public
Health and Environment)
G. The applicant shall submit evidence that a basic level of protection against destruction of
life and property has been provided and attempt to address the requirements(concerns)of
the Berthoud Fire Protection District (Fire Extinguishers, Internal Circulation, Permit), as
stated in the referral response dated 1/3/03. Evidence of such shall be submitted in writing
to the Weld County Department of Planning Services. (Berthoud Fire Protection District)
Resolution USR 1415
Genevieve Clark
Page 3
2. Prior to scheduling a Board of County Commissioners hearing:
A. The applicant shall submit a Landscape/Screening/Lighting/Security/Sign Plan to the
Department of Planning Services for review and approval. The Plan shall indicate location,
type and dimensions of all existing and proposed signs,screening material,lighting fixtures,
security measures,the location and species of all plant material,a planting implementation
schedule and landscape maintenance/replacement plan.(Department of Planning Services)
B. There are no current or historical building permits on record for this parcel. The following
shall b e submitted t o the Department o f B uilding Inspection for review and a pproval.
Evidence of such shall be submitted to the Department of Planning Services.
1) A building permit will be required for each building used in the woodworking
business. T he permit a pplication s hall include a p lot p Ian showing distances
between all buildings and from buildings to property lines. Afloor plan for buildings
used in the woodworking business listing and describing the equipment used and
types of wood finishing processes shall be submitted as well.
2) A plan review is required for each building. Two complete sets of plans are
required when applying for each permit.
3) Changes in the character or use of existing buildings shall conform to the
requirements of Section 3405 of the 1997 Uniform Building Code. (Weld County
Building Inspection)
3. The applicant shall submit two (2) paper copies of the plat for preliminary approval to the Weld
County Department of Planning Services. Upon completion of the review of the paper plat and
submission of any required items 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 maps(caco.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
GENEVIEVE P. CLARK
USR-1415
1. A Site Specific Development Plan and a Special Review Permit for a Business permitted as an
Accessory Use (Woodworking Business) in the Commercial or Industrial Zone District 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. (Department of Public Health and Environment)
7. This facility shall adhere to the maximum permissible noise levels allowed in the Residential 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. All potentially hazardous chemicals must be stored and handled in a safe manner in accordance with
product labeling. (Department of Public Health and Environment)
10. The applicant shall operate in accordance with the approved "waste handling plan ". (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 hand washing and toilet facilities located at the a pplicants' 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)
13. A permanent, adequate water supply shall be provided for drinking and sanitary purposes.
(Department of Public Health and Environment)
14. Building height shall be limited to the maximum height allowed per UBC Table 5-B. Wall and
opening protection and limitations shall be in accordance with UBC Table 5-A. Separation of
buildings of mixed occupancy classifications shall be in accordance with UBC Table 3-B and
Chapter 3. Setback and offset distances shall be determined by the Zoning Ordinance. (Weld
County Building Inspection)
Resolution USR 1415
Genevieve Clark
Page 2
15. 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 Chapter23 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. (Weld County Building
Inspection)
16. The hours of operation shall be daylight hours and the maximum number of employees shall be 2.
(Department of Planning Services)
17. All storage areas shall be screened (Department of Planning Services)
18. Effective January 1, 2003, Building Permits issued on the lot will be required to adhere to the fee
structure of the Weld County Road Impact Program/Area#3. (Department of Planning Services)
19. The landscaping on site shall be maintained in accordance with the approved landscape plan.
(Department of Planning Services)
20. There shall be no staging or parking of vehicles for the purpose of loading on the Weld County right-
of-way. The applicant shall utilize on-site parking and loading areas. (Department of Public Works)
21. The historical flow pattern and run-off amounts will be maintained 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 increase,diversions,concentration and/or unplanned
ponding of storm run-off. (Department of Public Works)
22. The property owner or operator shall be responsible for complying with the Design Standards of
Section 23-2-240, Weld County Code.
23. The property owner or operator shall be responsible for complying with the Operation Standards of
Section 23-2-250, Weld County Code.
24. Personnel from the Weld County Government shall be granted access onto the property at any
reasonable time i n order t o ensure the a ctivities carried out o n the property comply with the
Development Standards stated herein and all applicable Weld County regulations.
25. 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.
26. 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 .
Resolution USR 1415
Genevieve Clark
Page 3
Motion seconded by Cathy Clamp
VOTE:
For Passage Against Passage Absent
Fred Walker
Michael Miller
John Folsom
Cathy Clamp
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 February 18, 2003.
Eyed the 18th of February, 20 3.
Voneen Macklin
Secretary
SUMMARY OF THE WELD COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING
Tuesday, February 18, 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 Absent
Bryant Gimlin
James Rohn
Fred Walker Absent
John Folsom
Stephen Mokray
Cathy Clamp
Bernard Ruesgen Absent
Bruce Fitzgerald
Also Present: Char Davis, Peter Schei, Don Carroll, Chris Gathman, Robert Anderson, Kim Ogle
The summary of the last regular meeting of the Weld County Planning Commission held on February 4,
2003, was approved as read.
The following items are on the consent agenda:
CASE NUMBER: CZ-1028
APPLICANT: Steve Brancucci
PLANNER: Kim Ogle
LEGAL DESCRIPTION: N2 E2 SE4 of Section 30, T1 N, R66W of the 6th P.M., Weld County,
Colorado.
REQUEST: Change of Zone from A(Agricultural)to 1-3 (Industrial).
LOCATION: South of and adjacent to WCR 6 and East of and adjacent to State Hwy 85.
CASE NUMBER: CZ-1029
APPLICANT: Steve Brancucci
PLANNER: Kim Ogle
LEGAL DESCRIPTION: N2 E2 SE4 of Section 30, T1 N, R66W; Lot B of CorrRE-470, SE4 SE4 of
Section 30, Ti N, R66W of the 6th P.M., Weld County, Colorado.
REQUEST: Change of Zone from A(Agricultural)to 1-3 (Industrial).
LOCATION: North of and adjacent to WCR 4 and West of and adjacent to WCR 27.
CASE NUMBER: 2nd AmUSR-274
APPLICANT: Duke Energy
PLANNER: Kim Ogle
LEGAL DESCRIPTION: S2 SE4 SW4 of Section 24, T2N, R63W of the 6th P.M., Weld County,
Colorado.
REQUEST: Site Specific Development Plan and a Special Review Permit for a Mineral
Resource Development Facility including a Natural Gas Processing Facility
in the A(Agricultural)Zone District.
LOCATION: North of and adjacent to WCR 18 and 1/2 mile west of WCR 73.
CASE NUMBER: AmUSR-941
APPLICANT: Duke Energy Field Services, Inc.
PLANNER: Kim Ogle
LEGAL DESCRIPTION: Part SW4 Section 30,Ti N, R67W of the 6th P.M.,Weld County, Colorado.
Page-1-
REQUEST: Request for a Site Specific Development Plan and a Special Review
Permit for a Mineral Resource Development Facility including an Oil and
Gas Support and Service Facility(Oil and Gas Processing Facility) in the
A(Agricultural)Zone District.
LOCATION: North of and adjacent to WCR 4; 1/4 mile West of WCR 15.
CASE NUMBER: AmUSR-1038
APPLICANT: Duke Energy Field Services, Inc.
PLANNER: Kim Ogle
LEGAL DESCRIPTION: Part SE4 Section 8, T3N, R66W of the 6th P.M., Weld County, Colorado.
REQUEST: Request for a Site Specific Development Plan and a Special Review
Permit for a Mineral Resource Development Facility including an Oil and
Gas Support and Service Facility (Oil and Gas Processing Facility) in the
A(Agricultural)Zone District.
LOCATION: North of and adjacent to WCR 34; 1/4 mile West of WCR 29.
Stephen Mokray moved to approve the Consent Agenda as read. John Folsom seconded. Motion carried
unanimously.
CASE NUMBER: USR-1410
APPLICANT: Guadalupe & Rose Chavez
PLANNER: Chris Gathman
LEGAL DESCRIPTION: Part SE4 of Section 4, T1 N, R65W of the 6th P.M., Weld County,
Colorado.
REQUEST: Site Specific Development Plan and Special Use Permit for a Use by Right,
Accessory Use,or a Use by Special Review in the Commercial or Industrial
Zone Districts (Indoor &outdoor storage and repair of machines/vehicles
associated with an asphalt&concrete business).
LOCATION: North of and adjacent to WCR 12;approximately 300 feet east of WCR 43.
Chris Gathman, Department of Planning Services, read a letter into the record requesting an indefinite
continuance. The applicant is working on an access agreement.
The Chair asked if there was anyone in the audience who wished to speak for or against this application.
Christopher Ernst, representative for the applicant, indicated that the docket is full in March and an April
deadline will be worked towards.
James Rohn moved to continue indefinitely. Cathy Clamp seconded. Motion carried.
CASE NUMBER: USR-1416
APPLICANT: William &Ann Stonebraker
PLANNER: Chris Gathman
LEGAL DESCRIPTION: Part NE4 of Section 28, T2N, R64W of the 6th P.M., Weld County,
Colorado.
REQUEST: Site Specific Development Plan and Special Use Permit for a Use by Right,
Accessory Use or Use by Special Review in the Commercial or Industrial
Zone District (Display Fireworks Storage) in the A (Agricultural) Zone
District.
LOCATION: South of and adjacent to WCR 18; 1/2 mile East of WCR 53.
•
Chris Gathman,Department of Planning Services presented Case USR-1416,reading the recommendation
and comments into the record. The Department of Planning Services is recommending approval of the
application along with the Conditions of Approval and Development Standards.
John Folsom asked for clarification from Alcohol Tobacco and Firearms(ATF)and the worst case scenario
for a possible explosion effecting the homes or traffic on Hwy 76. Mr.Gathman indicated that there is a 300
Page -2-
or 500 foot setback that is an ATF requirement between the storage units. Mr. Folsom asked about the six
foot fencing and is there a condition of approval addressing this. Mr. Gathman indicated a screening plan
will be required that will include security. Mr. Folsom asked if the ATF will inspect the site. Mr. Gathman
indicated that the applicant could address that question.
Lynn Leeberg, representative for the applicant, provided clarification with regard to the project. This a 13
acre site on a total of 137 acres. There will be no manufacturing of the fireworks,just storage. Fireworks
are considered low explosive and there are several regulations under ATF and the uniform fire code that
must be adhered too. The ATF does inspect on a regular basis and the fire department is on record with no
concerns. The regulations are specifically designed for the worse case scenario. Some of the regulations
consist of 200' separation from storage containers. Those containers are also modified under ATF
regulations. There is also a 300 foot setback from the roads, homes, railroad tracks. The closest resident
is approximately 1900+ feet with the closest container being 300 feet from the 1-76 right of way but the
actual distance is 425 feet from the actual roadway. The desire is minimal signage to draw minimal attention
to the site. This project will have minimal impact on the site and the area due to the lack of need for
electricity, septic,water and public access.
John Folsom asked if this is storage for finished product. Mr. Leeberg indicated it was for finished product
alone.
Bill Stonebraker, applicant, provided clarification with regard to the project. The fireworks are used by the
cities and other organizations that have fire approval for the displays. Mr. Folsom asked about the trips per
day for this site and any special conveyance that the trucks need to be. Mr.Stonebraker indicated that the
trucks are all approved by CDOT and they will not be more than a small van. There will be a possible
increase around the fourth of July to 3 or 4 times a week but that would be the extent of the traffic. Mr.
Gimlin asked if ATF does inspections. Mr.Stonebraker indicated inspections are required. Mr.Gimlin asked
about the size of the containers. Mr.Stonebraker indicated it was approximately 10'x 40'. Mr.Stonebraker
indicated that a landscape design will be made for the area that will assist in the possibility of fire. Ms.
Clamp asked about size of the trailer and rather they are semi trailer. Mr. Stonebraker indicated that they
are more attractive. The units have a double lock system, required by the ATF, they are also lined on the
inside with wood that is fire retardant covered with plywood and Sheetrock. Ms.Clamp asked about the size
of the parcel that is being planned. The setback requirements indicate that thirteen units will be all that fits.
Mr. Stonebraker indicated that the number thirteen was the maximum number that can be placed on the
property. They are no anticipating on having that many. Mr.Folsom asked if the reason for the new site was
the lack of space at the existing facilities. Mr. Stonebraker indicated that there will never be any
manufacturing of the fireworks, it is strictly a storage facility.
The Chair asked if there was anyone in the audience who wished to speak for or against this application.
Bonnie Macintosh, neighbor,opposes the project due to the concerns of the portability of the buildings and
the land being rezoned as commercial. Once this is commercial there is nothing stopping the applicant from
moving the units off and there is no guarantee as to what is being moved in next. Mr.Gimlin indicated that
this proposed use will not change the zoning on the property. This is a use permit in the agricultural zone
district. Mr. Morrison indicated that it applies to the use on this property. Mr. Gathman indicated that a
provision for the termination of the USR upon sale or lease to outside parties has not been included in the
Development Standards. The storage of fireworks could transfer to another owner but the use would have
to remain the same as approved under the USR.
Chair closed public portion.
Mr. Leeberg indicated that this is just a use that is defined as a part of the code. It cannot be changed to
something else without another review. The applicants believe this will be a minimal impact from the site.
There is a significant buffer around the site and this was a benefit for this property. There are questions for
clarification with regard to some of the Development Standards. A signage plan is required and the applicant
would like it to be defined as what is required by the ATF and the Fire Department. The desire is not to bring
attention to the area. The screening is proposed to be 6 foot chain link with no slats because this could call
attention to the area. There is a minimal amount of waste generated on the site. The applicant would like
to get some clarification with regards to the Improvements agreement for collateral. There is no offsite
Page -3-
impact and the applicant would like to keep it as simple and minimal as possible. The applicant will build
in a phase basis as proposed in the application. Mr. Morrison asked for clarification on the lack of need for
public road improvements. Mr.Gathman indicated that there is a private access. The fencing and possible
improvements to the access road to the site would be covered in the improvements agreement. Mr.
Morrison indicated that the plans will determine what is proposed what of the proposal might need to be
collateral posted. If the work is already done there will be no need for collateral but it could involve the
fencing and the screening. Mr. Leeberg indicated that phasing can be done. There will be three to four
containers and the installation of the fence would be done at the same time. Mr. Morrison would like to see
a description of the phasing and the installation of units and fence. Mr.Stonebraker does not want to take
up the whole area until it is needed.
James Rohn asked Mr. Gathman for clarification with regard to the USR being transferable. He would like
to limit it to these owners and their children because of the neighbor concerns. Mr. Gimlin indicated that it
is really not required on this case it precludes Mr. Stonebrakers possible future plans for the property. Mr.
Leeberg asked a legal question as to if this is allowable under the code. Mr.Morrison indicated that for this
to be effective the applicant has to be agreeable. Mr.Morrison added that the condition cannot be imposed
if the applicant is not agreeable with it. Mr.Morrison provided more clarification with regards to the Condition
for non transfer of the USR. Mr.Stonebraker indicated that this is easily resolved because a hazmat license
must be granted before anyone can come to the property and remove material. Mr. Rohn indicated that
question was that the USR would expire when the ground is sold. Mr.Stonebraker indicated that he would
prefer it expire if the parcel was sold out of the family and a new application would need to be made.
James Rohn moved that new language be added to page 7 2A of the Development Standard that consists
of"This USR shall expire if it is transferred to any party that is not a future heir of the applicant." Cathy
Clamp seconded.
Bryant Gimlin commented that even though the applicant has agreed to this he is not sure the applicant fully
understands to concept of the standard. It may not even be necessary in this case.
The Chair asked the secretary to poll the members of the Planning Commission for their decision. John
Folsom, no;Stephan Mokray,yes; Bryant Gimlin,no;James Rohn,yes;Cathy Clamp,yes. Motion carried.
Cathy Clamp suggested additional language for Development Standard 1 consisting of " for a
maximum of thirteen units as indicated in the application materials " James Rohn seconded
The Chair asked the secretary to poll the members of the Planning Commission for their decision. John
Folsom,yes;Stephan Mokray,yes;Bryant Gimlin,yes;James Rohn,yes;Cathy Clamp,yes. Motion carried
unanimously.
Cathy Clamp moved that Case USR-1416,be forwarded to the Board of County Commissioners along with
the Conditions of Approval and Development Standards with the Planning Commissions recommendation
of approval. Stephen Mokray seconded the motion.
The Chair asked the secretary to poll the members of the Planning Commission for their decision. John
Folsom,yes;Stephan Mokray,yes;Bryant Gimlin,yes;James Rohn,yes;Cathy Clamp,yes. Motion carried
unanimously.
CASE NUMBER: USR-1415
APPLICANT: Genevieve P. Clark
PLANNER: Robert Anderson
LEGAL DESCRIPTION: Parts of Section 5 and 8, T4N, R68W of the 6th P.M., Weld County,
Colorado.
REQUEST: Site Specific Development Plan and a Special Review Permit for a
Business permitted as a Use by Right or Accessory Use (Woodworking
Business) in the Commercial or Industrial Zone District in the A
(Agricultural)Zone District .
Page -4-
LOCATION: East of and adjacent to WCR 3 at the junction of WCR 48.
Robert Anderson,Department of Planning Services presented Case USR-1415,reading the recommendation
and comments into the record as well as corrected the title to include the words "use by right". The
Department of Planning Services is recommending approval of the application along with the Conditions of
Approval and Development Standards.
John Folsom asked about the referral from the Berthoud Fire Protection and if there are finishing operations
with volatile substances conducted on the site. Mr.Anderson indicated that finishing appears to be included
in the application but suggested that the owner clarify Commissioner Folsom's question(s). Mr. Folsom
asked Mr.Anderson about a stipulation for hours of operations and the number of employees. Mr.Anderson
recommended the addition of Condition of Approval#16 with the language consisting of"Hours of operation
shall be daylight hours and the operation will be limited to two employees"and subsequent renumbering
Bruce Clark, applicant and operator, provided clarification with regard to the proposal. There will be no
finishing, no painting and/or adhesives. 99%is building dog houses and tough shed type buildings. There
is very little scrap generated with no chemicals. A minimum amount of material is used in the design. Ms.
Clamp asked if this is custom orders or are these marketed items. Mr. Clark indicated they are done as
ordered. There are no businessmen, no sales men,there is just himself and one employee. The inventory
at this time of year may be several sheds but around April the market picks back up and those will be gone.
James Rohn asked if this was done commercially or was this a hobby that grew into a business. Mr.Clark
indicated that money has been made from this but it has increased recently. It has been a majority of the
income for the past twenty years.
The Chair asked if there was anyone in the audience who wished to speak for or against this application.
No one wished to speak.
Bruce Clark disagrees with regard to the septic system. The system was reviewed by Department of Health
on February 2001 and deemed adequate for a residence. There is an employee and himself and there is
really no need for a civil engineered system. Char Davis,Weld County Health Department, indicated that
it was evaluated as a home and since this will be more of a commercial use it is reviewed differently. The
use is reviewed differently.
John Folsom moved to add language provided by Mr.Anderson with regard to the hours of operation and
number of employees. Cathy Clamp seconded
The Chair asked the secretary to poll the members of the Planning Commission for their decision. John
Folsom,yes;Stephan Mokray,yes;Bryant Gimlin,yes;James Rohn,yes;Cathy Clamp,yes. Motion carried
unanimously.
Stephen Mokray moved that Case USR-1415, be forwarded to the Board of County Commissioners along
with the Conditions of Approval and Development Standards with the Planning Commissions
recommendation of approval. Cathy Clamp seconded the motion.
The Chair asked the secretary to poll the members of the Planning Commission for their decision. John
Folsom,yes;Stephan Mokray,yes;Bryant Gimlin,yes;James Rohn,yes;Cathy Clamp,yes. Motion carried
unanimously.
Meeting adjourned at 3:00pm
Respectfully submitted
, I0L0j2kl-ocuic
Voneen Macklin
Secretary
Page-5-
Hello