HomeMy WebLinkAbout961743.tiff HEARING CERTIFICATION
DOCKET NO. 96-46
RE: CHANGE OF ZONE FROM AGRICULTURAL TO PUD(AGRICULTURAL AND ESTATE) -
LITTLE THOMPSON VALLEY ESTATES, C/O KEVIN AND DINA MCCARTY
A public hearing was conducted on September 25, 1996, at 10:00 a.m., with the following present:
Commissioner Barbara J. Kirkmeyer, Chair
Commissioner George E. Baxter, Pro-Tern
Commissioner Dale K. Hall
Commissioner Constance L. Harbert
Commissioner W. H. Webster
Also present:
Acting Clerk to the Board, Shelly Miller
Assistant County Attorney, Lee Morrison
Planning Department representative, Shani Eastin
The following business was transacted:
I hereby certify that pursuant to a notice dated August 28, 1996, and duly published September 5,
1996, in the North Weld Herald, a public hearing was conducted to consider the request of Little
Thompson Valley Estates, do Kevin and Dina McCarty, for a Change of Zone from Agricultural to
PUD (Agricultural and Estate). Lee Morrison, Assistant County Attorney, made this a matter of
record. Shani Eastin, Planning Department representative, presented a packet of information,
Exhibit E, to the Board and noted the Town of Berthoud is requesting this hearing be postponed.
The Board decided to hear from the Town of Berthoud's Planner, then the applicant. Don Burchett,
Director of Planning for the Town of Berthoud, voiced concerns about the site being adjacent to an
area proposed for annexation and reiterated concerns indicated in his letters dated August 6, 1996,
and August 24, 1996, the latter being marked as Exhibit D. Mr. Burchett responded to questions
from the Board, noting the Town is in the process of completing a preliminary draft of a Land Use
Plan for this area; therefore, if the Board decides to proceed today, he requested it consider the
compatibility of this proposal with existing surrounding land uses. Kevin McCarty, applicant, stated
he understands Berthoud's position; however, he does not want to delay his plans and noted the
compatibility of his proposal with Berthoud's existing plan, referencing Exhibit C: "Excerpts from
Town of Berthoud Land Use Plan, May 1994". Mr. McCarty also responded to questions from the
Board, and the Board concurred to proceed with said hearing today due to fairness to the applicant.
Mr. Morrison noted since certain merits of the case have been disclosed by the Town and the
applicant, that testimony may be incorporated into the record if they so agree. Ms. Eastin then
presented a summary of the proposal, further reviewed the letters included in Exhibit E and detailed
in her memorandum dated September 25, 1996, recommended the addition of Condition of
Approval #10.c., and entered the favorable recommendation of the Planning Commission into the
record as written. Mr. McCarty confirmed he would like to incorporate his earlier comments into
the record, and Dina McCarty, applicant, submitted their"Proposal Summary" as Exhibit F and five
photographs of the site as Exhibit G. Mr. McCarty reviewed their goals, proposed covenants, and
sketches of the future proposal. He commented on the current use of the dry-crop land and plans
to preserve the sub-irrigated alfalfa and enhance and protect the existing wildlife habitat.
Responding to questions from the Board, Mr. McCarty explained the trees to be planted to mitigate
(co : PL 961743
PL1041
HEARING CERTIFICATION - LITTLE THOMPSON VALLEY ESTATES (COZ#500)
PAGE 2
the impacts of the existing race track will be drip irrigated with a pump from any irrigation water
available and from natural water retained. Ms. Eastin confirmed the other surrounding land uses
are a dog kennel, residences, and a motorcycle track which is a non-conforming use in the
Agricultural Zone District. Ms. McCarty thanked and commended Ms. Eastin for her cooperation
and assistance throughout the application process and further reviewed their goals to establish the
property, maintain and enhance the wildlife habitat, and improve agricultural productivity. She
reiterated the various aspects of the covenants, including the right-to-farm provision. (Changed
to Tape#96-26 during Ms. McCarty's presentation.) Bart Kellogg, representing Valley Dirt Riders
and Rocky Mountain Promotions, stated he holds the lease on the "off-road facility" known as the
dirt track and advised it would be more appropriate to change the zone to industrial/commercial to
ensure compatibility with the existing surrounding uses. He stated approval of this Change of Zone
to PUD causes concern regarding the continued use of the track. After Board discussion, Mr.
Morrison clarified this proposal is "coming to the nuisance", and the Agricultural Zone District has
additional protections. He also confirmed the track is a non-conforming use with a permit and has
the right to continue at the same level with the same conditions. Jeff Stoll, Health Department,
confirmed the events at said track are exempt from the nuisance definition in State statute. Mr.
Morrison reiterated the pre-existing use is well protected as long as there are no changes or plans
to expand. Responding to further questions from the Board, Mr. Kellogg further explained the use
of the different tracks at the facility and their proximity to the roads in the area. Mr. Burchett stated
he, too, would like to incorporate his earlier comments into the record and stated the interchange
at 1-25 and Highway 56 is the gateway into Berthoud; therefore, the Town is concerned how
development in that area will impact it. He reiterated concern about the compatibility of the
proposal with the existing uses and responded to questions from the Board concerning the visual
impact. Mr. Burchett agreed the proposal meets the requirements of the Town's current plan;
however, many other issues must be considered including the impact to and from the existing and
future uses. In response to further questions, he explained the Town has been approached by
landowners requesting annexation; however, the current Town Board feels the area is not ready
to be developed. Chair Kirkmeyer reiterated the application fits all or most criteria in Berthoud's
current plan, which was updated in 1994. Marie Koolstra, surrounding property owner, stated this
proposal is inconsistent with the agricultural section of the Comprehensive Plan and referenced her
letter included in Exhibit E. She voiced other concerns regarding the proposal's incompatibility with
the other existing uses and submitted a photograph taken from her home of the proposed site as
Exhibit H. Ms. Koolstra stated more input is needed from professional referral agencies and
adequate water is not available. She also stated this proposal is premature because there is no
plan in place for the entire area, and this is leap-frog development. Responding to the Board, Ms.
Koolstra stated she has lived in the area for 30 years. Brad Gielissen, Secretary/Treasurer of River
Bend Farms, stated he farms adjacent to the proposed development and confirmed the agricultural
aspects of the property are very limited. He stated he is impressed with and favorable to this
proposal because it will enhance agriculture and the applicants have addressed the Right-To-Farm
Act for protection. Mr. Gielissen clarified he is not promoting development; however, he is grateful
to see the applicants' concern regarding agriculture, etc. He questioned what type of development
would be compatible with a motorcycle track and a dog kennel and stated this development will add
a different flavor. Responding to questions from the Board, Mr. Gielissen confirmed the applicants
are willing to invest the necessary funds and have done a wonderful job with the property in the
short time they have been there. Wilbert Koolstra, surrounding property owner, stated the irrigation
is not adequate for the proposed vegetation and the use is incompatible. He also stated this
961743
PL1041
HEARING CERTIFICATION - LITTLE THOMPSON VALLEY ESTATES (COZ#500)
PAGE 3
proposal is setting a precedent for future potential development. Mr. McCarty reiterated his
experience with farming practices and clarified this development is not setting a precedent. He
confirmed he has worked with many professional referral agencies and is well aware of the limited
water. Mr. McCarty submitted a letter of support from David P. Lamb, surrounding property owner,
as Exhibit I, and responded to questions from the Board concerning his personal involvement with
tree belts. He reiterated many professionals will be involved and relied upon and confirmed he
understands and has researched soil types, noting this property is appropriate for urban-type
development. Discussion ensued concerning the vacation of the recorded exemption on the
property, and Ms. Eastin clarified the recorded exemption was approved, but the plat has not been
recorded; therefore, it is not legal and must be withdrawn. Mr. McCarty responded to further
questions from the Board, and Ms. Eastin confirmed the right-to-farm covenant is referenced in
Condition of Approval #8 and is required on the plat. She also confirmed the agricultural access
is on the Koolstra's property, not on the subject site. Commissioner Harbert stated this proposal
is well-planned and follows the recommendations in the Weld County Comprehensive Plan, with
the only question being whether the site is adjacent to a municipal boundary; however, it is very
close to the Johnstown annexation. Therefore, considering the overall plan and the testimony
which addressed many of the Board's concerns, Commissioner Harbert moved to approve the
request of Little Thompson Valley Estates, Go Kevin and Dina McCarty, for a Change of Zone from
Agricultural to PUD (Agricultural and Estate), based on the recommendations of the Planning staff
and the Planning Commission, with the Conditions of Approval as entered into the record and the
addition of Condition of Approval #10.c. The motion was seconded by Commissioner Webster,
who complimented the applicants and concurred the proposal is well thought out and will
appropriately utilize property and water. The motion then carried unanimously.
This Certification was approved on the 30th day of September, 1996.
APPROVED:
ATT4,08
�� BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
W COUNTY, COLORAD
Id oard -4 a-- / .//z/Ci�t ?`j�/U
Barbar J. Kirkmeye C air
ka Board ` � �
}`` rg¢ E. Baxter, P -Te
TAPE #96-25 AND #96-26
Da a K. all
DOCKET#96-46 j
Constance L. Harbert
PL1041 jg /fj�W. ebster Gl ! C i'?c, i7
961743
PL1041
ATTENDANCE RECORD
HEARINGS ARE AS FOLLOWS ON THIS 25TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER, 1996:
DOCKET#96-38 - S #403 for MEADOW VALE FARMS, INC.
DOCKET#96-46 - COZ#500 for LITTLE THOMPSON VALLEY ESTATES, C/O MCCARTY
DOCKET#96-47 - USR#1122 for ROLLAND JONES AND MABLE PITTMAN
PLEASE legibly write or print your name and complete address and the DOCKET
# (as listed above) or the name of the applicant of the hearing you are attending.
NAME AND ADDRESS (Please include City and Zip Code) HEARING ATTENDING
Ar e/ -e- �. Oe\c)., tgl4 1 t9s+1.‘ Aoe A�.6050n Cc) web-a7
G /9757 �r7.Sr�-!n (� y C ,c Son -y�
<,Gz /67 75-/ /9./4(E?:« 7517-C Acscri. �o 64 7e-v 7
�) EXHIBIT INVENTORY CONTROL SHEET
Case e- 2- #5(30 — ,96-7Wc. Liksh fivrk.. Vat& Fait v C0
�YtC�ttJc:lu 45.et)Ln S I.i_r a_
Exhibit Submitted By Q Exhibit Description
A. C -fr) Y2 ec :ok Ide o.,_
B. NI .P.hPM+1. 11dAie � ain _ 67ft771.: n �
C. eve) , cy,,,; C?c c,r /5
D. 3 rk, -,Q /r d 7 7/zy (IC
5
E. I r1"(kl�mia i C! 5Scm�']!c� Of c�C-u9n?
F. 1`7 c gyti S iCvnmay; hae/<
a Mc Cce ✓t .'S) ��at
H. �� (czars Ifi Y 1�p�o
Q
00 v' hu w l y tie r
J.
K.
L.
M.
N.
O.
P.
Q.
R.
s.
T.
U.
Hello