HomeMy WebLinkAbout992245.tiff SUMMARY OF THE WELD COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING
Tuesday,'August 17, 1999'
A regular meeting of the Weld County Planning Commission was held Tuesday, 1999,111 the Weld County
Public Health/Planning Building, (Room 210), 1555 N. 17th Avenue, Greeley, Coloradc. the meeting Was
called to order by Chair, Fred Walker, at 1:30 p.m.
ROLL CALL
Fred Walker Present
Cristie Nicklas Present
John Folsom Present
Jack Epple Present
Bruce Fitzgerald Present
Michael Miller Present
Stephan Mokray Present
Arlan Marrs Present
Bryant Gimlin Absent
Also Present Ben Patton, Planner, Anne Johnson, Long Range Planner, Julie Chester, Lead Planner,
Department of Planning; Lee Morrison,Assistant County Attorney; Don Carroll, Public Works; Trevor Jiricek,
Health Department; Wendi Inloes and Trisha Swanson, Secretary.
The summary of the last regular meeting of the Weld County Planning Commission held on August 3, 1999,
was approved with a name correction.
CASE NUMBER: Z-528
APPLICANT: RiverDance PUD/ Mike Siegrist
PLANNER: Ben Patton
LEGAL DESCRIPTION: Located in Section 35 and the W2 of Section 36, T3N, R68W of the 6th P.M.,
Weld County, Colorado.
REQUEST: PUD Change of Zone in the MUD area for 600-800 residential/commercial lots located in the
A (Agricultural) zone district.
LOCATION: East of and adjacent to 1-25; south of and adjacent to Weld County Road 28.
Ben Patton, Department of Planning, presented Case Z-528. New comments were handed out to the board
that replaced the preliminary comments. Ben then read the recommendation into the record, and stated that
the Department of Planning is recommending approval of the application, along with the Conditions of
Approval. Ben stated that originally an Equestrian Center had been proposed, and this has now been deleted
from the plans.
Fred Walker asked about the phased development and if the Conditions will change through the different
phases. Ben explained that at this time the developers have not identified the filings and that this is a blanket
Change of Zone. The Conditions will apply to each phase.with each phase going through a Final Plat.
John Folsom asked about the off site improvements for WCR 28, and if they were adjacent to the
development. Ben explained that the improvements required will take place to property to the north. The
applicant will be responsible for paving half of what will be built out on WCR 28 for the length of their property,
with a dust abatement plan on the remainder of the gravel road. Development to the northwest will be
required to build out the other portion.
John Folsom then asked about the request for a letter of map revision required by FEMA, and shouldn't the
County also require this condition. Ben explained that this letter does need to be completed, and that
provision has been made for Flood Hazard Development Permits for any structures on the site. Furthermore,
the area which is currently encumbered by the Flood Plain will be a part of a filing to be completed at a later
date. This will allow time for the revision to be completed.
c <,
992245
SUMMARY OF THE WELD COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION
August 17, 1999
Page 2
Molly Larson, representative for the applicant, gave a presentation of the proposed development. Ms. Larson
talked about the uniqueness of the property, the lakes, wildlife, typography, and the views. Trails, docks for
the lakes for possible boating and skiing, picnic areas and a clubhouse are among some of the proposed
features. The Equestrian Center proposal will be replaced by large suburban homes with an open space
component.
Stephan Mokray asked about the water and sewer commitment and the requirement for one unit of Little
Thompson per lot and if they are prepared to provide this amount.
Dan Gerew, a representative for the applicant, explained that negotiations with Little Thompson are ongoing.
Ben Patton added that he had spoken with a representative from the Division of Water Resources office, and
in lieu of the commitment from Little Thompson, they are withdrawing their requirement of one share of water
per lot.
Mike Siegrist, applicant, added that they are currently in negotiations with Little Thompson to put in a potable
and non-potable system. They are at the end of Little Thompson water system, and they do have irrigation
on the site and lakes and other amenities to handle fire flows. Little Thompson will then only provide the
potable water which would reduce the amount of shares. Sewer service is St. Vrain Sanitation with 1,300
taps currently, and they have the capability for 2,200, with plans for expansion being proposed.
Stephan Mokray asked about their augmentation requirements. Mr. Siegrist explained that the augmentation
is currently being done with water rights owned on the property along with an agreement for winter water. The
plan is with the State al:this time.
Arlan Marrs asked Mr. Siegrist why they decided to take out the equestrian center. Mr. Siegrist explained that
the original concept was when residents came home at night they would not need to go anywhere else for their
recreational needs. The equestrian center was meant to house about ten horses to rent and ride on the trials.
With concerns from Planning and the Health Department on smell, flies, and waste, they concluded that they
did not need the extra enmity. Mr. Siegrist said they felt they had enough on the project, and it was their
decision to delete the project.
Mike Miller asked about how the phasing was going to take place. Mr. Siegrist explained on the overhead how
they will proceed, start ng west and going east, and water will be available when the first phase begins.
John Folsom asked about any IGA's in place, and would they apply. Ben Patton explained that the property
is located in an overlay district, and that the MUD standards will apply, but the property is north of the
Frederick, Firestone, and Dacono IGA boundary.
The Chair asked if there was anyone in the audience who wished to speak for or against this application.
Sharon Hopper, had many concerns on the proposal. Ms. Hopper feels that the development is very scary
and that Del Camino is just a name and not a City or Town with no amenities to give new development. The
1-25 intersection is becoming more congested, more agriculture is being taken out of production, and there
is an increase in traffic and an increase in the School District. Ms. Hopper asked when the Commission sees
this type of proposal. Fred Walker explained that the Board receives the information one week prior to a
hearing. Ms. Hopper then read a few lines from an article in the Longmont Times Call regarding the increase
in development in the Del Camino area.
Fred Walker asked Ben if the right to farm covenant will be placed in the Conditions. Ben said that it will be
required to be placed on the Final Plat.
Ginny Shaw, stated some of her concerns. Ms. Shaw feels that long range agricultural needs to be looked
at. There are several dairies in the area, and where does the development fit in. Ms. Shaw asked the Board
to consider the development being so far away from urban services such as police protection, grocery stores
and medical facilities.
SUMMARY OF THE WELD COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION
August 17, 1999
Page 3
Dan Gerew, representative, addressed John Folsom's concerns on the flood plain issue. Mr. Gerew explained
that there is flood plain that extends to the north of the lakes. They will be applying for either a CLOMR or
LOMR permit, dependirg upon the results of the detailed study. They have done hydraulic studies in laying
out the development to ensure that the lots will not be in the flood plain. They will possibly pursue the LOMR
permit, and if this is not obtained by the time of development, they would go through the Flood Hazard
Development Permit process through the County. Mr. Gerew also stated that they would not be encroaching
on the Floodway and therefore will not be doing any studies on that.
Stephan Mokray asked Don Carroll about any studies on entries and exists for traffic for the development.
Don explained that as part of the requirements of the MUD, a traffic analysis is asked for, and a traffic
consultant studies the analysis. Public Works than makes comments regarding traffic volumes, internal road
systems, and county roads, and the state comments on frontage roads. Stephan asked Don what traffic
impact he sees for this area. Don explained that they are not at a point at this time to make comment on the
latest study. Ben PattoI added that he had received a letter from CDOT stating that they had no issues with
the development.
Stephan still had concerns with the traffic impact. Ben further explained that there are two road systems
involved,WCR 28 and the I-25 frontage road. WCR 28 will be improved to county standards through a road
improvements agreement. The comments from CDOT that they have no concerns is as strong of an
indication the County has.
Cristie Nicklas asked what type of land designation the property was. Molly Larson stated that 117 acres of
the property is currently farmed with a portion being irrigated. Cristie asked if there was any provision in the
MUD standards that addressed taking prime farm ground out of production. Ben said there was no provision,
and that since the site is in the MUD, this allows urban scale development to be proposed. The County would
like to see it preserved; however, by doing so on this site, it would present the same type of problems that
allowing the equestrian center would with the same type rural and urban incompatibility.
John Folsom asked Jon Carroll about the parameters of the study of the traffic analysis with other
developments in the area, and asked about the underpass being enlarged. Don explained that any
development going into the area would require the same type of traffic study as this proposal. The underpass
would be a State issue.
The Chair asked Molly Larson if they were in agreement with the Conditions of Approval. Molly stated that
they were in agreement.
Arlan Marrs moved that Case Z-528, be forwarded to the Board of County Commissioners along with the
Conditions of Approval and Development Standards with the Planning Commissions recommendation of
approval. Stephan Mokray seconded the motion.
Mike Miller commented that he feels this development attractive, but is inappropriate for the area and that the
density is extreme, and has concerns with agricultural be taken out of production because of rural and urban
incompatibility.
Jack Epple commented that the Commissions job is to make sure the applicant follows the regulations, and
they have in this case.
John Folsom agreed with Jack, but has reservations that services in the area are not adequate and places
an imposition on surrounding municipalities on providing services, especially Longmont.
Cristie Nickles also agreed the developers have followed the rules, but the density of this development should
be closer to a municipalities, and creates a burden to the County to provide services.
Fred Walker commented on the preservation of prime farm ground and feels if a land owner wants to develop,
he should have the right to do so.
SUMMARY OF THE WELD COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION
August 17, 1999
Page 4
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, no; Jack Epple, yes; Bruce
Fitzgerald,yes; Cristie Nicklas, yes; Fred Walker,yes. Motion carried.
CASE NUMBER: USR-1239
APPLICANT: T. Key n Macurdy
PLANNER: Anne Best Johnson
LEGAL DESCRIPTION: Lot A of RE-1851; Part of the SW4 of Section 9, T1 N, R68W of the 6th P.M.,
Weld County, Colorado.
REQUEST: A Site Specific Development Plan and a Use by Special Review Permit for a Masonry
Construction Company in the Agricultural Zone District.
LOCATION: North of and adjacent to Weld County Road 10, approximately 1/4 mile east of Weld County
Road 5.
Anne Best Johnson, Department of Planning, presented Case USR-1239. New comments were handed out
to the board that replaced the preliminary comments. Anne then read the recommendation into the record,
and stated that the Department of Planning is recommending approval of the application, along with the
Conditions of Approval and Development Standards.
Bruce Fitzgerald asked about the letter in the packet dated November 26, 1996, that Mr. Macurdy received
that he was in violation, and why it had been three years. Anne said Mr. Macurdy could better explain this.
John Folsom asked about an old gas pump on the site, and if Planning and Health were satisfied that there
is not an underground tank on the premises that might lead to ground contamination. Trevor Jiricek, Weld
County Health Department, stated they were satisfied.
Kevin Macurdy, applicant, addressed Bruce Fitzgerald's question on the violation. Mr. Macurdy explained that
when he purchased the property five years ago, the two previous owners had businesses on the site and had
not obtained the appropriate permits. The use has not changed from what had been out there, and he is now
trying to bring the site into compliance. Mr. Macurdy also explained that he has done a Recorded Exemption
on the property, and th s is when Planning became aware of the violation. He wanted to finish one process
before beginning another, and was also held up some because of his engineer, and it took more time.
The Chair asked if there was anyone in the audience who wished to speak for or against this application.
Jane Maxwell Jones, s:Jrrounding property owner, expressed concerns on safety. She explained that there
have been two incidents of theft, one being tools from a residential construction site, and the other was a
pickup truck stolen from Mr. Macurdy's property. Mrs. Jones husband was told by Mr. Macurdy that is was
one of his disgruntle employees. Mrs. Jones has concerns of future problems, and wanted to know if Mr.
Macurdy has any lega or moral obligation to his neighbors.
Fred Walker asked Anne about number of employees. Anne explained that there will be five employees that
will come to the site in the mornings to pick up their vehicles and equipment, and well leave for jobs offsite.
There will also be one part time accountant coming to the site once a week.
Lee Morrison, Assistant County Attorney, addressed the legal/moral obligation. Lee said that is would depend
upon the compatibility of the business. As a neighbor, neighbors should look after one another, but that there
would be no legal obligation as described.
Mrs. Jones asked if they could require Mr. Macurdy to supervise his employees. Lee explained that they have
done this on occasion with an operation that has a technical function such as waste, but in this case it may
be a reach to prove that this operation this case is a difficult/technical operation.
SUMMARY OF THE WIELD COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION
August 17, 1999
Page 5
Bruce Fitzgerald asked if Mrs. Jones if she was aware of any conviction from the crimes. Mrs. Jones said she
was not aware of any convictions, but that the Sheriffs office had been to the site.
Mr. Macurdy added that his truck was stolen from a non-employee, and that the Weld Sheriffs office in
conjunction with the Commerce City Police, had apprehended the individual. The other theft on the tools has
also been recovered at 90% and returned to the contractor.
The Chair asked Mr. Macurdy if he was in agreement with the Conditions of Approval and Development
Standards. Mr. Macurdy stated that he was in agreement.
Stephan Mokray moved that Case USR-1239, be forwarded to the Board of County Commissioners along with
the Conditions of Approval and Development Standards with the Planning Commissions recommendation of
approval. Cristie Nicklas 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, yes; Bruce
Fitzgerald,yes; Cristie Nicklas, yes; Fred Walker,yes. Motion carried unanimously.
Meeting adjourned at 2:55 p.m.
Respectfully mitt
Wendi Inloes
Secretary
Hello