HomeMy WebLinkAbout20011153.tiff SUMMARY OF THE WELD COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING
Tuesday, April 17, 2001
A regular meeting of the Weld County Planning Commission was held Tuesday 2001, in the Weld County
Public Health/Planning Building, (Room 210), 1555 N. 17th Avenue, Greeley, Colorado. The meeting was
called to order by Chair, Cristie Nicklas, at 1:33 p.m.
ROLL CALL171fli
Cristie Nicklas Present f c
Fred Walker Present
John Folsom Present
r :y=
Jack Epple Absent
Michael Miller Present
Stephan Mokray Present
Arlan Marrs Present
Bryant Gimlin Absent
Cathy Clamp Present
Also Present: Sheri Lockman, Chris Gathman, Robert Anderson, Julie Chester, Lauren Light, Bethany
Salzman, Department of Planning Services; Don Carroll, Department of Public Works; Trevor Jiricek, Char
Davis, Department of Environmental Health; Lee Morrison, Assistant County Attorney.
The summary of the last regular meeting of the Weld County Planning Commission held on, April 3, 2001,
was approved as read.
1. CASE NUMBER: S-588
APPLICANT: Denver/Canadian c/o Dan Ochsner
PLANNER: Sheri Lockman
LEGAL DESCRIPTION: Lot AofAMRE-2151.Being part of the E2 of Section 21, Township
3 North, Range 67 West of the 6th P.M., Weld County, Colorado.
REQUEST: Final Plat for a 5-lot Minor Subdivision - Ivy Crest
LOCATION: West of and adjacent to Weld County Road 19, 1/4 mile north of State Highway 66
Sheri Lockman, Planner requested a continuance along with the Department of Public Works and Planning
Services Staff for Case Number S-588 to be continued until May 1,2001. The applicant is working with the
Department of Public Works to build a road on the adjacent property. The applicant would like to do this
prior to the Planning Commission Hearing.
Cristie Nicklas asked if there were any questions for staff from the Planning Commission.No questions were
asked. Cristie Nicklas asked if the applicant was available. The applicant was not present. No public
comment was presented. Stephen Mokray moved that Case Number S-588 be continued until May 1,2001.
Michael Miller seconded. Motion carried for continuance.
2. CASE NUMBER: USR-1318 (continued from March 20, 2001)
APPLICANT: Jose Aguirre
PLANNER: Chris Gathman
LEGAL DESCRIPTION: Part of NW1/4 Section 35, Township 5 North, Range 66 West of
the 6th P.M., Weld County, Colorado (Lot 14, Indian Hills
Subdivision)
REQUEST: A Site Specific Development Plan and a Special Review Permit for a Home
Business (flatwork/concrete contractor's business) in the (A) Agricultural Zone
District
LOCATION: Approximately 250 feet South of Weld County Road 52 and west of and adjacent
to 44`" Avenue.
Chris Gathman, Planner. with Department of Planning Staff's understanding, informed the Planning
Commission that the applicant is withdrawing his application for Case Number USR-1318 for a Special Use
/�l'd`ivaxva ( tits- 0-/-Vic; -Qa)/ 2001-1153
Permit. It should be noted that this is a pending zoning violation. Chris Gathman also stated there is a
pending violation hearing scheduled before the Board of County Commissioner's scheduled for May 8,2001,
at 10:00 A.M. to consider this violation. The representative for the applicant is available.
Cristie Nicklas asked Lee Morrison what would happen at the violation hearing. Lee Morrison responded
that the Board of County Commissioners decides whether or not to refer the violation to the Weld County
Attorneys' office to seek legal remedies in court.
Cristie Nicklas asked the audience how many were in attendance for Case Number USR-1318. She
requested a show of hands. Cristie Nicklas reiterated that the violation hearing before the Board of County
Commissioners will be on May 8, 2001 at 10:00 A.M. and conferred with Lee Morrison if the public would
be allowed to speak. Lee Morrison stated that most likely the public would be granted an opportunity to
speak, however there might be time constraints.
George Ottenhoff, representative for the applicant stated his name and address for the record.
Christi Nicklas asked Mr. Ottenhoff was the applicant's plans were at this time. George Ottenhoff
responded that they were looking at what options are available. Mr. Ottenhoff was also concerned
regarding the time of the violation hearing as he is previously scheduled for depositions at that time.
Lee Morrison suggested Mr. Ottenhoff correspond with the Clerk to the Board and the County Attorneys
office as soon as possible with alternative times and dates on Mondays and Wednesdays as there may be
an opportunity to reschedule.
Cristie Nicklas suggested to the public that if the hearing dates and times have changed it will probably be
on the website, however if that is not available,to contact the Clerk to the Board,or with Bethany Salzman,
Code Compliance Officer for the Department of Planning Services.
Cristie Nicklas opened the hearing for public comment, only for whether or not this case should be
withdrawn. Cristie Nicklas also stipulated to the public that the Planning Commission at this time
has no jurisdiction over this case.
Marian Ogden stated name and address for the record. Mr. Ogden's concern was the noise that
is generated from Mr. Aguirre's business.
Lee Morrison informed Mr.Ogden that there may be private remedies,however,the county is not authorized
to file a lawsuit until the Board Hearing. A court order can not be authorized until the Board of County
Commissioners institutes legal action.
Stephan Mokray moved that the Planning Commission accept the withdrawal of USR-1318. Michael Miller
seconded the motion.
The Chair asked the secretary to poll the members of the Planning Commission for their decision. John
Folsom, yes; Arlan Marrs, yes; Stephan Mokray, yes; Michael Miller, yes; Jack Epple, absent; Bryant
Gimlin, absent; Cathy Clamp, yes; Gristle Nicklas, yes; Fred Walker, yes. Motion carried unanimously.
3. CASE NUMBER: USR-1324
APPLICANT: Asphalt Specialties Co., Inc.
PLANNER: Chris Gathman
LEGAL DESCRIPTION: Part of N2 of SW4 Section 20,Township 1 North, Range 66 West
of the 6th P.M., Weld County, Colorado
REQUEST: A Site Specific Development Plan and a Special Use Permit for a Asphalt and
Concrete Batch Plant Facility in the A(Agricultural)Zone District.
LOCATION: West of and adjacent to Weld County Road 27 and 1/4 mile north of Weld County
Road6.
Chris Gathman,Planner presented Case Number USR-1324 and read the Department of Planning Services
comments and recommendations of approval into the record. Chris Gathman also presented amendments
to the comments. In the recommendations of approval, Section 3, Condition 3.C. was added which
pertains to the comments from the Colorado Department of Transportation, and Condition 3.D. pertains to
the comments from Diane Houghtaling regarding the lengths of the accel-decel lanes off Highway 85. The
next amendment is the in the Development Standards, deletion of Condition 3 (hours of operation)which
is covered in the Operations Standards of Section 23-4-290 of Weld County Code.
Fred Walker wanted to know when the applicant received the referral from Colorado Department of
Transportation.
Chris Gathman, the applicant has not seen the referral due to the lateness of it. However, the Colorado
Department of Transportation referral is available to the applicant, at this time.
Cathy Clamp requested the map be shown again and where the residences to the south are located. Chris
Gathman located the residences on the map.
Michael Miller, asked if there were three (3) residences to the north of the property on the Horton Feedlot
property line. Chris Gathman concurred that the residences were associated with the grain processing.
Michael Miller agreed there were three residences to the north of the site and one residence at the north
property line across the road.
John Folsom questioned a possible conflict between the Colorado Department of Transportation and the
Department of Public Works in the recommendation of approval,3.C.and 3.D. Diane Houghtaling had told
Chris Gathman that she still wanted verification on the accel-decel lanes because that was part of the traffic
study that was submitted.
Alex Schatz, from Banks and Gesso, permitting representative for Asphalt Specialities Company, Inc., did
a presentation on behalf of the applicant providing maps regarding a more detailed site plan showing out
buildings and structures;and landscaping plan showing berms with a six-foot fence will buffer the view and
the noise.
Arlan Marrs questioned Mr. Schatz regarding the amount of trucks per day coming from and going into the
plant. The traffic study indicated 385 round trips which means approximately 190 trucks, including other
types of traffic such as employees. Total trucks would be around 150 round trips. About fifty(50) percent
of the trucks will be heading south on Highway 85. Mr. Schatz indicated the applicant would be willing to
have a condition stipulating that the trucks go out Highway 85 where there is a signalized intersection and
route the trucks north on Highway 85 as opposed to Weld County Road 27. Arlan Marrs concerns were for
Weld County Roads 6 and 8 for the trucks turning south onto Highway 85. A haul route to Weld County
Road 2 where there is a signal light would alleviate this.
Mr. Schatz confirmed that the applicant would be willing to work out the routing of truck traffic.
Ken Buderal,Asphalt Specialites Company,Inc.,applicant reiterated that he would be agreeable to rerouting
the trucks to Weld County Road 2.
Don Carroll, mentioned that Weld County Road 6 will be signalized this year.
Michael Miller, mentioned there was no berming to screen, homes to the north and there is no noise
mitigation apparent. Mr. Schatz was unaware of the residences directly to the north. Mr. Schatz did not
have a problem continuing the berming along the north line. Mr. Miller asked Mr. Schatz to determine if the
applicant was proposing a processing plant,which was apparent on the site plan or if the application was
for a Asphalt and Concrete Batch Plant facility with no processing plant. Mr. Schatz confirmed that no
processing would be involved and the application was for the asphalt&concrete batch plant facility.
Michael Miller was concerned about the noise from the facility during the early hours of operation. The
applicant stated that the berms and fencing would buffer the noise as well as the plant being adjacent to
the grain silos which also helps buffer the noise. Michael Miller said the noise level will be sixteen(16)feet
above the buffer area. Mr. Buderal said it would be feasible to enclose and insulate the vibrator to mitigate
the noise level to acceptable limits.
Michael Miller asked Lee Morrison if it was a County Ordinance to maintain hours of operation to daylight
hours. Lee Morrison stated there are specific provisions pertaining to these kinds of operations. In the
absence of anything being said in the application those are the standards however, the Board specifically
sets alternative hours and the Planning Commission could make a recommendation on whether to agree
or disagree with the hours requested.
Michael Miller asked Don Carroll if Weld County Road 8 was going to be signalized. Don Carroll responded
that the 85 Corridor study indicated that County Road 8 was scheduled to be signalized.
Cathy Clamp asked the applicant what plan for remediation was in place after the USR was completed.
Mr. Schatz said the facility will be on the site until such time as the operation is no longer economically
viable. Cathy Clamp confirmed that there was no ending date for this USR to be completed.
Chris Gathman clarified what the County Code says on the hours of operation: All sand and gravel
operations shall be conducted during the hours of daylight except in case of public or private emergency or
to make necessary repairs to equipment. This restriction shall not apply to operation of administrative and
executive offices or repair facilities located on the property.
Michael Miller stated that in the development standards that you will install a facility to capture wash water
from drum washouts and truck washings. On the plat, there is no indication for allowing this. Mr. Schatz
stated that the detention pond area would facilitate this.
Cristie Nicklas opened the hearing for public comment.
William A.Southard,an attorney for Ruth Ann Southwick,spoke on behalf of Ruth Ann Southwick.She owns
the eighty acres south of the facility. Mr. Southard voiced several concerns of Mrs. Southwick, such as
water,noise,dust,oil leakage,and where does the gravel comes from. Mrs.Southwick also had questions
regarding the use Weld County Road 27 as the road has a five-ton limit. Mr. Southard stated that the
gravel was being hauled several miles from the south to the plant.
Cristie Nicklas asked Mr. Southard if Ms. Southwick lived on the property. He stated no she does not.
Cathy Clamp asked if Mrs. Southwick intend to subdivide at this point. Mr. Southard said not at this time.
Don Carroll responded to Mr. Southard regarding Weld County Road 27. The Department of Public Works
is requiring a road improvements agreement that will basically require the applicant to do repairs or overlays
if the road needs improvement. A designated haul route will also be assigned to the applicant. The haul
route at this point will be from the entrance north or south to either Weld County Road 6 or 8 and onto the
Highway 85 corridor.
Joe Sasaki,stated concerns for the farm vehicles and the trucks on the same roads. Mr.Sasaki stated that
farm vehicles are not allowed on Highway 85 so they use Weld County Road 27. Mr. Sasaki suggested the
dirt road by the trailer court could be used.
Tom Ugorchi, voiced concerns for the traffic and road conditions.
Cristie Nicklas asked Don Carroll to respond to the public comments.
Don Carroll stated that the applicant didn't indicate he would be hauling in the direction of the dirt road and
that the in the 85 Corridor study the dirt road may be closed in the future.
Cristie Nicklas asked Don Carroll if there was anyway to mitigate conflict with the agriculture community and
this number of trucks. Don Carroll responded that it is more of a law enforcement issue.
Fred Walker suggested that Don Carroll would be willing to work with the applicant in determining a haul
route that would accommodate the agriculture community as well as the truck drivers. Cristie Nicklas
suggested that the applicant also meet with the farmers for their input into the haul routes.
Michael Miller expressed his concerns of the added 320 trips per day on Weld County Road 27 and the
safety and traffic hazard. Don Carroll responded he would consult with Diane Houghtaling regarding the
traffic study of the vicinity.
Cathy Clamp stated the last traffic study in that area was done in 1996. A revised traffic study may be
needed at this time. Also, the width of County Road 6 and 8 is a real concern regarding both truck travel
and farm vehicles at the same time. Don Carroll responded that mitigation of the intersections on Road 6
and 8 to accommodate right and left turn lanes.Cristie Nicklas asked that a traffic count be done before the
Board of Commissioners hearing. Don Carroll agreed to see if this could be done.
Alex Schatz stated there was a traffic study submitted with the application. To mitigate the traffic there will
be accel-decel lanes into the facility.
Alex Shatz also commented that they were aware of Mrs. Southwicks concerns from the onset. Siting and
layouts of the plants were based on some of Mrs. Southwicks comments during the initial conversations.
Cristie Nicklas confirmed with the applicant that the drivers bringing the aggregate into the facility and the
drivers going out of the facility would be employed by Asphalt Specialists. Cristie Nicklas requested that
the drivers have some education of the farm machinery and their limitations. The applicant agreed to this
request.
Michael Miller asked about the source of the aggregate. The applicant stated that the aggregate came from
Kenosha ponds located in the Northeast part of Boulder County and the Southwest part of Weld County.
Applicant also stated that an application had been submitted to that site, however, Boulder County had
concerns regarding the future growth of Longmont. That application was withdrawn. Michael Miller pointed
out that by sourcing out the aggregate from the site in Boulder county, it is doubling the amount of traffic on
the county roads. Michael Miller commented that usually the concrete plant and mining area were at the
same site. Alex Schatz explained that the site in Weld County had potential opportunity for rail service.
Alex Schatz explained that previously an application had been withdrawn from Weld County for a concrete
batch plant on Weld County Road 20 '/:due to compatibility concerns with neighboring land uses.
John Folsom asked the applicant if there had been an application to Boulder County. Alex Schatz
responded that a batch plant would not fit with Boulder County's plans for that site. John Folsom questioned
the site location. Alex Schatz stated that Asphalt Specialities bears the risk if the market does not find use
for the aggregate.
Cristie Nicklas asked Chris Gathman to include a landscape plan with berming along the north side of the
plant in the conditions before recording the plat.
Cristie Nicklas requested a letter from the applicant stating the recycling part of the application would not
be part of this site operation.
Discussion began on the hours of operation with Michael Miller agreeing with Planning Staff that the
Ordinance for daylight hours was sufficient. Arlan Marrs requested the exact hours of operation from the
applicant. Mr. Schatz stated the hours of 6:00 a.m. to 10:00 p.m. as stated in the application is being
requested. Kim Buderal,owner stated the hours from 6:00 a.m.to 10:00 p.m.are critical for their operation.
Arlan Marrs moved to change the hours of operation from daylight hours to the hours of 6:00 a.m. to 10:00
p.m. Fred Walker seconded.
The Chair asked the secretary to poll the members of the Planning Commission for their decision. John
Folsom, yes; Arlan Marrs, yes; Stephan Mokray, no; Michael Miller, no; Jack Epple, absent ; Bryant
Gimlin, absent; Cathy Clamp, no; Cristie Nicklas, no; Fred Walker, yes. Motion fails.
Fred Walker asked Don Carroll if the shoulders on Weld County Roads 27, 6 and 8 could also be included
in the Improvements Agreement with Public Works,thereby giving the farm implement drivers on these an
opportunity to pull over to the side in a safe manner. Don Carroll responded that Public Works would try to
make the road shoulders as wide as possible.
The applicant stated they were in agreement with the conditions of approval and Development Standards
from the Department of Planning Services staff.
Lee Morrison suggested that a plan for education of the drivers be submitted with information regarding
trainings, signage and information on mitigating traffic conflict between farm elements and trucks on the
roads. The applicant was in agreement.
Don Carroll clarified that there had been a previous traffic count on the site. A traffic count will be supplied
before the Board of County Commissioners hearing.A haul route will be posted to verify vehicle traffic.
Chris Gathman stated that the applicant shall submit a plan detailing the mitigation of conflict with
agricultural vehicles and vehicles entering and exiting the batch plant site prior to recording the plat.
Cathy Clamp made a motion to send Case number USR-1324 with the amendments to the conditions of
approval and Development Standards to the County Commissioners with our recommendation for approval.
Arlan Marrs seconded.
Michael Miller voted no commenting that the application is in violation of 22-5-80 which calls for the
reasonable and orderly development of mineral resources and 23-2-20 which compromising the health,
safety and welfare of residents of the county by duplicating truck trips on the county roads.
John Folsom voted no suggesting alternatives should be exhausted first by applying to Boulder County for
the batch plant at the site of the aggregate mine.
Cathy Clamp voted yes but is in agreement with Michael Miller however, batch plants are necessary for all
the current building projects. Cathy Clamp stated a stable site that is somewhat less obtrusive causes less
pain for residents than multiple sites that are closer to residential areas.
Stephen Mokray voting no,agrees with Michael Miller as it is an inefficient operation and also has concerns
about the traffic.
Fred Walker,voted yes but with concerns regarding the traffic,but said the Department of Public Works will
be available to help mitigate the traffic problems.
The Chair asked the secretary to poll the members of the Planning Commission for their decision. John
Folsom, no; Arlan Marrs,yes; Stephan Mokray,no; Michael Miller,no,;Jack Epple,absent; Bryant Gimlin,
absent; Cathy Clamp, yes; Cristie Nickles, yes ; Fred Walker,. Motion carried.
4. CASE NUMBER: USR-1323
APPLICANT: John Hochmiller
PLANNER: Robert Anderson
LEGAL DESCRIPTION: N2/N2/SE4, SEC 32, T3N, R65W, 6TH PM, Weld County, CO
REQUEST: A site specific development plan and special review permit for a business
permitted as a use by special review(commercial junk or salvage yard) in the 1-3
(industrial)zone district.
LOCATION: West and adjacent to WCR 41 & '/z Mile S of WCR 28
Robert Anderson, Planner presented Case USR-1323 and read the Department of Planning Services
comments and recommendations of approval into the record. Amendments to staff comments include 2.B.,
additional language regarding the uses of (Auto Sales and Paint Ball); 2.E., the County Code overlay
districts; Condition of approval #1, the 30-day time line for recording the plat is changed to 60 days;
Condition of approval#2.E.,the word"screening"has been added to landscape plan;Condition of approval
2.E.2, additional language regarding concentrated landscaping; Condition of approval 2.F. the removal of
commercial and the emphasis of Industrial;2.G. Submission of compliance with condition of approval 2G;
2.L.3 is an addition that the plat be drawn with "North" as being to the top of the Plat"; 2M.Improvements
Agreement;Addition of Development Standard 14,the hours of operation. Robert Anderson also presented
slides and video of the site.
Stephen Mokray asked how long the operation had been in violation. Bethany Salzman, Code Compliance
Office, Department of Planning Services, received the initial complaint in July of 2000. The violation was
started in October of 2000. John Folsom asked if there were any current improvements to the site. Bethany
Salzman responded that the violation is a result of a commercial operation without a Use by Special Review.
Bethany Salzman stated there were no other violations other than the non-commercial junkyard at the back
of the property. Robert Anderson stated that of his visit to record the video there has been no remediation.
Cathy Clamp wanted to know the time line that has been given to the applicant to make changes and
information on condition 2M. Robert Anderson stated the Waste Handling plan from the Department of
Environmental Health will have to be in place before proceeding with the USR. It is also apparent that the
applicant wants to remedy the situation.
Cathy Clamp also wanted the designation of debris in a salvage yard. Robert Anderson stated that salvage
does not include items found in a dump, (old couches, paint cans, drums filled with unknown liquids).
In answering, Robert Anderson stated the landscaping improvements agreement are usually the last thing
to be accomplished when since this requires a bond to be released before the plat can be recorded.Also
there has been no dollar amount set until the Landscaping Plan is submitted. Robert Anderson stated that
landscaping is a real issue, and the Department of Planning Staff understands the nature of this business
and is not asking for a lot of living vegetation, however, berming would probably be the most cost effective
and still provide a screen.
Cristie Nicklas asked how long this 320 acres been zoned Industrial. Robert Anderson replied that Z-110
and Z-230 go back to 1968. Lee Morrison stated that the zone change Z-110 has unique conditions,
previously changes of zones were done with conditions attached,for example a combination USR/Change
of Zone.
Michael Miller asked what and who we were screening the business from. Robert Anderson replied the
screening was used to block the view from public rights of way, and property owners. Michael Miller
questioned the screening as the other business surrounding Mr. Hochmiller's, are not screened. Robert
Anderson, replied that Department of Planning Staff have tried to be consistent as the applications come
up for review to bring them into compliance. Again the landscaping plan isn't something that requires either
a lot of time or money. The Department of Planning staff is asking for a berm that would impede the view
of the operation when driving by. Patina Oil and Gas are berming on their property. Planning staff is
adhering to the ordinance as written by requiring a landscaping plan.
Bonnie A. Rogers, applicant stated name and address for the record. The applicant stated that they rent
the property.
Cathy Clamp inquired if the there were residences at the business operation. Bonnie Rogers,stated there
was no one living there. Cathy Clamp confirmed that the applicant is requesting the hours of operation to
be extended to 8:00 p.m.
Cristie Nicklas opened the hearing to public comment.
John Hochmiller,son of the owner gave name and address for the record. John Hochmiller's concern is the
landscaping requirement, as he is the owner of Active Truck Parts.
John Hochmiller, Sr. gave name and address for the record. He stated he also owns Active Truck Parts
property. John Hochmiller, Sr. expressed concerns regarding the landscaping and the lack of water in the
area.
Jerry Jamison owner of Tire Mountain stated that he built a six-foot berm in October and in March the berm
is now two-foot high as the wind blew it away.
Cristie Nicklas stated that it is going to be very difficult to build a berm and have it stay without massive
stabilization with vegetation and with limited water will even more difficult. Cristie Nicklas suggested to the
Planning staff to offer alternatives to the berm.
Michael Miller confirmed with Lee Morrison the use of the property is vested not the use somewhere on the
property.
Cathy Clamp commented that she would be amenable to a chain-link fence along border of Weld County
Road 41. And no screening is necessary on Weld County Road 27.
Cristie Nicklas asked Robert Anderson if the Planning Commission was required by Ordinance and Zoning
Requirements and USR Requirements to have some time of screening. Robert Anderson confirmed this.
Robert Anderson also clarified that a chain-link fence is not opaque screening. Planning Services main
concern regarding the berming, is salvage yards usually put their own type of screening of old cars,trailers
end to end, etc. Planning staff is looking at the visual impact of this type of screening. Berming can be
accomplished by using native plants and shrubs.
Lee Morrison wanted confirmation of the screening in the Code Book, Section 23-33-350 B.
Bethany Salzman confirmed the definition of a non-commercial junkyard, with Robert Anderson.
The non-commercial junkyard shall be totally enclosed within a building or structure or visually screened
from all adjacent properties and rights of way.
Fred Walker commented that when Planning Staff brings applications to be considered at Planning
Commission, changes to the Code, we remember these kinds of things. Fred Walker referred to Cactus
Hill application referral of the town didn't like the chain link fence along the county road and required Cactus
Hill to construct a wooden fence along the road. The only thing the fence screened was the first pen of
lambs, which is testimony today that a six foot berm is not going to screen everything else. I am very
supportive of throwing out all the landscaping concerns. There is no cost effective way to screen.
Arlan Marrs,we need to remember we do have these rules and regulations and if it was simple the Planning
Commission wouldn't have to be here. Our duty is to look beyond and be reasonable and take that
requirement off. In this particular case if landscaping isn't going to be effective the burden should not be
put on the applicant.
Michael Miller asked Lee Morrison if the Planning Commission could remove the landscaping requirements.
Lee Morrison suggested that 1-3 is a use that has the most visual impact,least screening and protection from
view of the zones.
Michael Miller stated we need to be reasonable on what landscaping requirements are requirements.
John Folsom said there are other alternatives such as snowfencing.
Cathy Rogers answered Cristie Nicklas that they were in agreement of the Conditions of Approval and
Development Standards.
Trevor Jiricek stated that a Development Standard needed to be added after Number 8 and subsequently
renumbered: "No more than 250 gallons of waste fluids (oil transmission fluids, antifreeze, etc.) shall be
stored on the site at any one time. All liquid waste shall be stored in covered drums, in a covered structure,
on a concrete apron."
Discussion continued on the landscaping requirements.
Fred Walker moved that Planning Commission delete Planning Staff's conditions of approval,2.E.1,the
wording "sufficient screening"; delete 2.E.2, and 2.E.3 and on 2.M. strike the third line "and
landscaping/screening requirements and delete Development Standard 11. Michael Miller seconded.
The Chair asked the secretary to poll the members of the Planning Commission for their decision. John
Folsom, yes; Arlan Marrs, yes; Stephan Mokray, yes; Michael Miller, yes; Jack Apple, absent; Bryant
Gimlin, absent; Cathy Clamp, yes; Cristie Nicklas, yes ; Fred Walker, yes. Motion carried unanimously.
Michael Miller moved that Case USR-1323 be forwarded to the Board of County Commissioners along with
the Department of Public Health and Environments' addition to the Development Standards with our
recommendation of approval. Cathy Clamp seconded.
The Chair asked the secretary to poll the members of the Planning Commission for their decision. John
Folsom, yes; Arlan Marrs, yes; Stephan Mokray, yes; Michael Miller,yes; Jack Epple, absent; Bryant
Gimlin, absent; Cathy Clamp, yes; Cristie Nicklas, yes ; Fred Walker, yes. Motion carried unanimously.
5. CASE NUMBER: 3rdAmUSR-655
APPLICANT: Sparboe Horizon Corporation
PLANNER: Julie Chester
LEGAL DESCRIPTION: E2 of Section 35, T2N, R65W of the 6th P.M., Weld County,
Colorado
REQUEST: A Site Specific Development Plan and a Special Review Permit for an Agricultural
Service Establishment primarily engaged in performing agricultural, animal
husbandry,or horticultural services on a fee or contract basis, including Livestock
Confinement Operations (an amendment to an egg production facility housing a
maximum of 1,620,000 layers) in the Agricultural Zone District.
LOCATION: North of and adjacent to 1-76 Frontage Road, West of and adjacent to WCR 47.
Julie Chester, Planner, presented Case Number 3r° AmUSR-655 and read the Department of Planning
Services comments and recommendations of approval into the record. The H.S. Gathering letter was
received April 16, 2001, which was submitted with revised staff recommendations. The added
recommendation will be 2.F. on page five. The original USR-655 was approved by the Board of County
Commissioners in December, 1984. The applicant and his representative are present.
Cathy Clamp verified the existing chicken farm is presently approved for 1,750,000 and now it is being
lowered to 1,620,000 chickens and the new pullet farm is asking for 260,100 pullets. Cathy Clamp's
concerns were that the laying facility may exceed the number of chickens allowed by the permit.
Tom Haren, AgPro, representative for the applicant stated his name and address for the record.
Tom Haren answered Cathy Clamps concerns regarding the number of chickens by stating with new
technology, the buildings will be specifically designed to accommodate the reduced number of chickens.
Christi Nicklas wanted to know about flies at the airport. Tom Haren, stated that the majority of all the fly
complaints were for the previous owner, however there was a complaint last summer which was
investigated by Butch Homer,Department of Public Health and Environment Specialist. The site inspection
indicated the facility had already been sprayed. He also went to the airpark where the complaint was
generated, and flies were present, but not excessive. That is the only complaint on record since Sparboe
Farms purchased the facility.
Cathy Clamp confirmed the present chicken farm has 720,000 but was approved for 1,750,000, but the
applicant is requesting 1,620,000. The pullets are going to be moved on to the laying facility.Cathy Clamp's
concerns were that the facility may exceed the number of chickens allowed by the permit. Tom Haren
stated that they would not be exceeding this number without coming in with a major redesign and new
buildings.
Russell Riley stated his name and address for the record. He stated he works on Farm Two and Sparboes
are good stewards for the grounds. He stated that the Sparboe operation is a clean facility.
Cristie Nicklas asked Tom Haren if the applicant was in agreement with all of the conditions of approval and
Development Standards. Tom Haren asked that the first sentence of Development Standard 18 be deleted
and replaced with"The facility shall provide an accurate analysis of nutrient content of any manure produced
on the property and a copy of CSU Best Management Practices to any individual, corporation, etc. that
removes manure from the site."
Trevor Jiricek stated that facilities rely on others to haul the manure away and the purpose of this is get
information to those taking the manure to landfills and composting facilities.
Julie Chester stated she also in agreement with this change.
Michael Miller moved that 3r°AmUSR-655 be forwarded to the Board of County Commissioners along with
amended Development Standard,number 18,the Conditions of Approval,and Development Standards with
the Planning Commissions recommendation of approval. Stephen Mokray seconded.
The Chair asked the secretary to poll the members of the Planning Commission for their decision. John
Folsom, yes; Arlan Marrs, yes; Stephan Mokray, yes; Michael Miller,yes; Jack Epple, absent; Bryant
Gimlin, absent; Cathy Clamp, yes; Cristie Nicklas, yes ; Fred Walker, yes. Motion carried unanimously.
6. CASE NUMBER: USR-1322
APPLICANT: Sparboe Horizon Corporation
PLANNER: Lauren Light
LEGAL DESCRIPTION: SW4 of Section 29, Township 2 North, Range 65 West of the 6'
P.M., Weld County, Colorado
REQUEST: A Site Specific Development Plan and a Special Review Permit for a Livestock
Confinement Operation (Pullett Replacement Farm for 260,100 pullets)in the
A (Agricultural)Zone District
LOCATION: East of and adjacent to Weld County Road 39; approximately 1/2 mile west of
Weld County Road 41; north of and adjacent to Weld County Road 16
Lauren Light,Planner presented Case USR-1322 and read the Department of Planning Services comments
and recommendations for approval into the record.
Cathy Clamp requested the current count at the chicken farm as they will be trading back and forth.
Lauren Light responded that the chickens won't be traded back and forth. Cathy Clamp stated the pullets
are being raised to go to the chicken farm. Cathy Clamp stated that is in the case of die-off or sale as to
when the pullets are moved.
Tom Haren, AgPro, representative for the applicant stated his name and address for the record.
Tom Haren stated that the facility is currently a layer facililty but will change to a pullet farm. There is
currently 180,000 layers to 260,100 pullets, but we are downsizing. The pullets or replacements will go to
Farm One. All of the layers will be in Farm One.
Vince Rosity, farm manager for Sparboe Farms stated the chickens life expectancy is 110-120 weeks. At
that time they will sent to a rendering plant, so the pullets will not all come in at one time, neither will the
layers all go out at one time. They are done systematically,so one month you might have two flocks going
out for a total of 180,000 birds but then they would bring a 180,000 pullets to replace the layers. Then at
that point they would bring chicks in again and grow them up to 18 weeks again.
Cristie Nicklas asked for public comment either for or against this case.
Russell Riley stated his name and address for the record. He stated he works on Farm Two and Sparboes
are good stewards for the grounds. The Sparboe operation is a clean facility.
Gristle Nicklas asked Tom Haren if the applicant was in agreement of all the conditions of approval and
Development Standards. Tom Haren asked that the first sentence of Development Standard 20 be deleted
and be changed to read "The facility shall provide an accurate analysis of nutrient content of any manure
produced on the property and a copy of CSU Best Management Practices to any individual,corporation,etc.
that removes manure from the site."
Trevor Jiricek stated that facilities rely on others to haul the manure away and the purpose of this is get
information to those taking the manure to landfills and composting facilities.
Lauren Light stated she was also in agreement with this change.
Michael Miller moved that Case USR-1322 be forwarded to the Board of County Commissioners along with
amended Development Standard,number20,the Conditions of Approval,and Development Standards with
the Planning Commissions recommendation of approval. Cathy Clamp seconded.
Fred Walker voted yes with comments stating that Best Management Practices as defined by CSU
University, that there are differences between the agriculture community and the university community.
Fred also stated that by putting this statement in that we are concurring that CSU Best Managment Practices
is always right.
Lee Morrison also stated that when CAFO regulations were reviewed the last time the prime issue was how
are people going to know how much is allowed to be applied and those are the guidelines that are pointed
to CSU as the basis for that, those are a recognized standard that the regulators are going to look at.
The Chair asked the secretary to poll the members of the Planning Commission for their decision. John
Folsom, yes; Arlan Marrs, yes; Stephan Mokray, yes; Michael Miller,yes; Jack Epple, absent; Bryant
Gimlin, absent; Cathy Clamp, yes; Cristie Nicklas, yes ; Fred Walker, yes. Motion carried unanimously.
Julie Chester thanked Sparboe Horizon Corp.for allowing the Department of Planning Service,Department
of Public Health and Environment to tour the facility.
Planning Commission on June 5,2001 will be at the Weld County Training Center due to the large amount
of public attendance. The meeting,will start at 10:00 a.m.
Wendi Inloes also stated the Code books provided to you are checked out to you.
Meeting adjourned at 5:17 P.M.
Respectfully submitted,
l/L- f��4712(7/ 1�
Vicki Hamilton
Secretary
Hello