HomeMy WebLinkAbout971058.tiffSUMMARY OF THE WELD COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING
Tuesday, May 6, 1997
A regular meeting of the Weld County Planning Commission was held May 6, 1997, in the County
Commissioners' Hearing Room (Room #101), Weld County Centennial Building, 915 10th Street, Greeley,
Colorado. The meeting was called to order by Chairman, Arlan Marrs.
Tape 525
Glenn Vaad ,{ Pt'eseri .
Rusty Tucker c Absent- ,=;
Fred Walker -a (-I) Absent'.
Shirley Camenisch ii m present �
Cristie Nickles
? Present
Jack Epple ffesent `--
Marie Koolstra ,ijesent
Arlan Marrs Present
-a
Also Present: Monica Daniels -Mika, Director, Todd A. Hodges, Current Planner II, Kerri Keithley, Current
Planner, Shani L. Eastin, Current Planner, Department of Planning Services; Lee Morrison, Assistant Weld
County Attorney; Don Carroll, Weld County Public Works; Tammie Pope, Secretary.
The summary of the last regular meeting of the Weld County Planning Commission held on April 15, 1997, was
approved as read.
CASE NUMBER: Z-505
PLANNER: Todd A. Hodges
APPLICANT: Douglas E. Myers, do James S. Hillhouse
REQUEST: A Planned Unit Development for a Change of Zone from Agricultural to Planned Unit
Development Estate, Agricultural and Open Space for a 5 -lot subdivision.
LEGAL DESCRIPTION: Lot B of RE -1211, located in the SE4 of Section 4, T6N, R67W of the 6th P.M., Weld
County, Colorado.
LOCATION: North of and adjacent to Weld County Road 72; west of and adjacent to Weld County Road
19.
CASE NUMBER: S-423
PLANNER: Todd A. Hodges
APPLICANT: Douglas E. Myers, c/o James S. Hillhouse
REQUEST: A Planned Unit Development Final Plan for a 5 -lot subdivision (Gander Valley PUD) 4 Planned
Unit Development Estate lots and 1 Planned Unit Development Agricultural lot.
LEGAL DESCRIPTION: Lot B of RE -1211, located in the SE4 of Section 4, T6N, R67W of the 6th P.M., Weld
County, Colorado.
LOCATION: North of and adjacent to Weld County Road 72; west of and adjacent to Weld County Road
19.
Todd A. Hodges presented both cases together. Mr. Hodges explained that the 5 -lot subdivision is consistent
with a Minor Subdivision but is instead presented as a Planned Unit Development because a Minor Subdivision
cannot be reviewed next to an adjacent subdivision or municipality. The PUD criteria is more stringent, but
there are consistencies with this proposal and Minor Subdivisions. Proposed accesses for the site are off of
Weld County Roads 72 and 19. There is an existing access that services Lot A of RE -1211, which is also the
emergency access for the adjacent property, Shiloh Estates PUD. The Change of Zone request will change
the lots from Agricultural to four Estate zone lots, approximately six acres each, and one lot for Agricultural PUD
uses, approximately 40 acres. The access to the four Estate lots will be off of Weld County Road 19, and will
be a gravel road. Usually a gravel road is not acceptable for a PUD, but because this proposal is consistent
in intensity with a Minor Subdivision, the Department of Planning Services' staff is recommending approval of
971058
WELD COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES
May 6, 1997
Page 2
the gravel road. The Board of County Commissioners' indicated in a work session that PUD's that are
consistent in intensity may propose a gravel access. Mr. Hodges stated that the Department of Planning
Services' staff is recommending approval of both proposals with the corresponding Conditions of Approval.
Glenn Vaad asked if the applicant has agreed to the Town of Windsor's request for dedication of additional
right-of-way on Weld County Road 19 to meet County arterial standards. Todd A. Hodges stated that the
applicant is in agreement.
Marie Koolstra asked if there will be any paved roads in subdivision. Mr. Hodges stated that there will not be
any paved roads, but the gravel road will meet gravel standards. Ms. Koolstra asked if this proposal is two
subdivisions put together. Mr. Hodges stated that this proposal is for one subdivision; Weld County Road 19
services the four estate lots, and the agricultural lot is serviced by the existing agricultural access on Weld
County Road 72. Arlan Marrs asked about the connecting road to the Shiloh PUD. Mr. Hodges stated that it
is not for public use, it is for emergency vehicles only. Glenn Vaad asked how the road will be maintained.
Mr. Hodges stated that it is part of the Shiloh PUD Conditions of Approval.
The applicant, Jim Hillhouse, stated that he is co-owner of the property with Douglas Myers. Mr. Hillhouse
stated three lots will be sold, he will live on the fourth lot, and he will farm and hunt on the agricultural lot. There
will be very strict covenants. The homes will be in the 2000-3000 square foot range, and will be ranch style.
The outbuildings will have to be approved by the architectural committee. Mr. Hillhouse stated that the
proposal is for an upscale neighborhood, keeping with the rural style.
Arlan Marrs asked if the covenants will state anything regarding the surrounding farmers right to farm. Mr.
Hillhouse stated yes. Mr. Marrs asked if the covenants will address hunting. Mr. Hillhouse stated yes, and
added that his goose pit will be more than 400 feet from the nearest house, while the Department of Wildlife
only requires a 150 foot distance.
Marie Koolstra asked if there will be any open space shared by everyone. Mr. Hillhouse stated that the
entryway will be landscaped 200 feet back on both sides of the road and will be dedicated to the homeowners
association for maintenance.
The Chairman asked if there was anyone in the audience who wished to speak for or against this application.
No one wished to speak.
Glenn Vaad moved that Case Number Z-505, Douglas Myers c/o James S. Hillhouse, be forwarded to the
Board of County Commissioners with Conditions of Approval with the Planning Commission's recommendation
for approval. Cristie Nicklas seconded the motion.
The Chairman asked the secretary to poll the members of the Planning Commission for their decision. Glenn
Vaad-yes; Cristie Nicklas-yes; Marie Koolstra-yes; Jack Epple-yes; Shirley Camenisch-yes; Arlan Marrs -yes.
Motion carried unanimously.
Glenn Vaad moved that Case Number S-423, Douglas Myers c/o James S. Hillhouse, be forwarded to the
Board of County Commissioners with the Conditions of Approval with the Planning Commission's
recommendation for approval. Shirley Camenisch seconded the motion.
The Chairman asked the secretary to poll the members of the Planning Commission for their decision. Glenn
Vaad-yes; Cristie Nicklas-yes; Marie Koolstra-yes; Jack Epple-yes; Shirley Camenisch-yes; Arlan Marrs -yes.
Motion carried unanimously.
WELD COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES
May 6, 1997
Page 3
CASE NUMBER: USR-1145
PLANNER: Kerni Keithley
APPLICANT: Russ and Bonnie Heppner
REQUEST: A Site Specific Development Plan and a Special Review permit for a private airstrip in the A
(Agricultural) zone district.
LEGAL DESCRIPTION: Lot B of RE -1466, located in part of the W2 NW4 of Section 28, T7N, R64W of the 6th
P.M., Weld County, Colorado.
LOCATION: East of and adjacent to Weld County Road 53; approximately 1 mile north of Weld County
Road 76.
Kerni Keithley gave a brief overview of the proposal. Ms. Keithley stated that the proposed runway will be
grass, and the remainder of the site will continue to be in agricultural production of alfalfa. The Department of
Planning Services' staff is recommending approval with the Conditions of Approval and Development
Standards. Ms. Keithley stated that one Condition of Approval is that the applicant shall complete and submit
an approved FM form to the Department of Planning Services.
Glenn Vaad noted that Don Carroll suggested noting on mylar the distance of the runway from the edge of the
right-of-way of the County road. Mr. Vaad asked what this distance is. Kern Keithley stated that the airstrip
will be located approximately 20 feet from Weld County Road 53. The dimensions are 50 feet in width and
1500 feet in length. Mr. Vaad asked if the FAA will assess this information. Ms. Keithley stated yes.
Shirley Camenisch asked if the applicant has applied for the FAA permit yet. Ms. Keithley did not know.
The applicant, Russ Heppner, stated that the airstrip will be used for light aircraft for sport and recreation. The
wing span will be approximately 30 feet. The centerline of the runway is greater than 60 feet from the County
road.
Shirley Camenisch asked the applicant if he has submitted the FAA form. Mr. Heppner stated that the form
has been submitted and the FAA has acknowledged they received it.
Arlan Marrs asked how many flights per day there will be. Mr. Heppner stated that he doubted there would be
even ten flights per month. Mr. Marrs asked if repairing aircraft is his main business. The applicant stated that
it is just a hobby, and he will be repairing only his own aircraft.
Arlan Marrs asked if there was a power line on Weld County Road 53. The applicant stated there is a
powerline running down the west side.
Shirley Camenisch asked if the applicant will be flying over any homes during takeoffs and landings. Mr.
Heppner stated no.
The Chairman asked if there was anyone in the audience who wished to speak for or against this application.
No one wished to speak.
The Chairman asked if the applicant was in agreement with the Conditions of Approval and Development
Standards. The applicant was in agreement.
Marie Koolstra asked if the FAA standards will be included in the Development Standards. Kern Keithley stated
that Development Standard #4 covers this information.
Arlan Marrs asked Don Carroll if he was comfortable with the distance from the right-of-way. Don Carroll stated
that the typical setback in an agricultural zone is 20 feet. However, he was concerned with the airstrip being
parallel to the County road and that oncoming traffic could be affected when an airplane was landing. Mr.
Carroll asked for clarification as to whether the 60 foot measurement the applicant previously mentioned is from
WELD COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES
May 6, 1997
Page 4
the center of the road, the edge of the road, or the edge of the right-of-way. The applicant stated that the
measurement is from his ditch line. Therefore, there is a twenty foot setback from the ditch to the edge of the
runway, or 45 feet from the center of runway to right-of-way. Arlan Marrs asked the applicant why the airstrip
will be so close to the County road. Mr. Heppner stated that some factors behind the decision were that he
did not want to take anymore ground out of hay production, there will be a very limited number of flights, and
the size of the aircraft will consume only a third to a half of the space.
Arlan Marrs asked what liability the County would have if, for example, the plane were to be blown onto traffic
in the road upon takeoff or landing. Lee Morrison stated that granting a reasonable permit would not generate
that kind of liability. The issue is whether this is a safety hazard. Mr. Morrison suggested that the actual
distances from centerline of the County road to centerline of the airstrip be recorded on plat for clarification.
Shirley Camenisch asked if Weld County Road 53 is oiled or paved. Don Carroll stated that it is a gravel road.
Ms. Camenisch asked how much traffic there is. Don Carroll stated that there are 117-129 vehicles per day
within a 9-1/2 mile section of Weld County Road 53. The applicant stated that most of the traffic does not travel
as far south as his property.
Glenn Vaad noted that the applicant is taking the least amount of land possible out of production, which meets
one of the Planning Commission's goals.
Russ Heppner noted that the east end of runway #227 at the Greeley -Weld County Airport is very close to
intersecting the highway (within approximately 100 feet). His airstrip however will be parallel to the road.
Jack Epple moved that Case Number USR-1145, Russ and Bonnie Heppner, be forwarded to the Board of
County Commissioners with Conditions of Approval and Development Standards with the Planning
Commission's recommendation for approval. Cristie Nicklas seconded the motion.
The Chairman asked the secretary to poll the members of the Planning Commission for their decision. Glenn
Vaad-yes; Cristie Nicklas-yes; Marie Koolstra-yes; Jack Epple-yes; Shirley Camenisch-yes; Arlan Marrs -yes.
Motion carried unanimously.
CASE NUMBER: USR-1146
PLANNER: Kerri Keithley
APPLICANT: Laurel Johnson
REQUEST: A Site Specific Development Plan and Special Review Permit for a commercial use (concrete
cutting business with five employees and storage for trucks and trailers) located in the A
(Agricultural) zone district.
LEGAL DESCRIPTION: SE -622 located in part of the SE4 of Section 22, T6N, R67W of the 6th P.M., Weld
County, Colorado.
LOCATION: North of and adjacent to Weld County Road 66 (Eastman Park Drive), east of State Highway
257.
Kerri Keithley presented a summary of proposal, Conditions of Approval, and Development Standards. The
Department of Planning Services' staff recommends approval of this request.
Glenn Vaad asked if Don Carroll's request for 80 feet of additional right-of-way on Weld County Road 66 was
addressed. Ms. Keithley stated that the property is within the City of Windsor's limits. Recently, the property
went through the Recorded Exemption process, and at that time the additional right-of-way was reserved in
the plat.
The applicant, Laurel Johnson, stated that an additional 30 feet of right -of way was dedicated per the City of
Windsor's request. Ms. Johnson stated that she and her husband want to live on the site, have horses and
run the business. There are currently two employees. There is not a lot of traffic, just some in the morning
WELD COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES
May 6, 1997
Page 5
when the workers are leaving for job sites and then between 4:00 p.m. and 6:00 p.m. when they return. There
is also not a lot of noise. The equipment, trucks, and trailers will be stored on the property, and most should
fit inside a large barn, which is 250 feet back from the road.
The Chairman asked if there was anyone in the audience who wished to speak for or against this application.
No one wished to speak.
The Chairman asked if the applicant was in agreement with the Conditions of Approval and Development
Standards. The applicant was in agreement.
Marie Koolstra moved that Case Number USR-1146, Laurel Johnson, be forwarded to the Board of County
Commissioners with Conditions of Approval and Development Standards with the Planning Commission's
recommendation for approval. Glenn Vaad seconded the motion.
The Chairman asked the secretary to poll the members of the Planning Commission for their decision. Glenn
Vaad-yes; Cristie Nicklas-yes; Marie Koolstra-yes; Jack Epple-yes; Shirley Camenisch-yes; Arlan Marrs -yes.
Motion carried unanimously.
CASE NUMBER: Z-506
PLANNER: Shani L. Eastin
APPLICANT: Tom Francis (Hillcrest Estates)
REQUEST: A Change of Zone from A (Agricultural) to E (Estate) for a 5 -lot Minor Subdivision.
LEGAL DESCRIPTION: Lot B of RE -1936, E2 of the NE4 of Section 25, T6N, R67W and W2 of the NW4 of
Section 30, T6N, R66W of the 6th P.M., Weld County, Colorado.
LOCATION: South of and adjacent to Weld County Road 66; east of and adjacent to Weld County Road
23-1/2.
Shani L. Eastin gave an overview of the proposal. Ms. Eastin explained there are two proposed accesses from
Weld County Road 66 for the site. Access to Lots 1-4 will be through a joint street; access to Lot 5 will be
through an existing access that also services two residences on property located outside the Minor
Subdivision. Ms. Eastin stated that the City of Greeley recommended that this proposal be denied because
the proposal is located one mile north of their long range expected growth area, and developments of this type
may be hard to incorporate into the city in the future. However, the Department of Planning Services' staff
believes that this proposal will not affect the City of Greeley given that this development is located outside the
City's expected growth area and provisions have been made to ensure that the buyers are aware of rural -type
uses in the area.
Marie Koolstra asked if the right-of-way to service two lots is in agreement with the lot owners. Shani L. Eastin
stated that it is an existing easement put there approximately ten years ago through a Recorded Exemption.
Glenn Vaad asked why this property is no longer considered prime agricultural land. Ms. Eastin stated that
the property was part of a Recorded Exemption approximately ten years ago, and then again approximately
one year ago. The property is listed as prime farm ground if irrigated, but the applicant does not have the ability
to irrigate because the well and irrigation system are now owned by someone else. Also, due to the Recorded
Exemptions, the property is now only 30 acres, which is not economical to farm.
Arlan Marrs asked for clarification regarding the concerns about drainage and gas line easements in the letter
from three surrounding property owners. Ms. Eastin stated that the Department of Planning Services' staff was
not presented with any easement lines as described in their letter received May 5, 1997. Condition of Approval
#3F states the plat shall show all existing easements on the property.
The applicant, Tom Francis, stated that the access easement that Ms. Koolstra was previously referring to is
a part of Lot B. The applicant felt that instead of constructing a road between SE -263 and the two lots, it would
WELD COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES
May 6, 1997
Page 6
be less intrusive to have access off of the existing drive. Mr. Francis stated that the gas line easement
discussed in the surrounding property owners' letter is shown on the plat. The 25 foot utility easement is for
the natural gas line that comes off of Weld County Road 66. Mr. Francis stated that he intends to provide the
necessary easements for repair and servicing the Storm Lake Drainage Canal.
Arlan Marrs asked if any of the acreage is currently irrigated. Mr. Francis stated it has been in the past, and
he understands the prime farm ground concept. However, this is only a 30 acre disjointed field and there is
not a consistent supply of water. Therefore, it is not economically feasible to farm.
Shirley Camenisch asked how these large estate lots will be irrigated. Mr. Francis stated that the building
envelopes will be approximately 3/4 of an acre. Ms. Camenisch asked if the soil would retain water well. Mr.
Francis stated that it is a good soil and retains water well.
Jack Epple asked if the Department of Public Work's request for an additional 30 feet of right-of-way had been
addressed. Don Carroll stated that Weld County Road 23-1/2 isn't on the section line, so Public Works wanted
a dedication identifying that where the road is now is part of the County system. Currently, the road falls within
the applicant's property. Mr. Francis stated the current property boundaries contain part of Weld County Road
23-1/2 and part of Weld County Road 66. He stated that he intends to dedicate those discrepancies to the
County. He stated that the boundaries also include a section that will be deeded to Mr. Detterer. Shani L.
Eastin stated that the Change of Zone area will include only the property located in the south and east portion
of the County road. Ms. Eastin also referred to Condition of Approval #3E.
Shirley Camenisch asked if there were two existing accesses. Don Carroll stated that the 60 foot driveway
section with the cul-de-sac would be new. The access to the east is existing. The Windsor Fire Department
asked for an emergency exit onto Weld County Road 23-1/2. Ms. Camenisch asked why the proposal wasn't
limited to one access. The applicant stated that an existing access on Weld County Road 23-1/2 was unsafe
due to a rise in the road and the proximity to a corner. Therefore, they are abandoning the access except for
emergency use, and are trading it for a new access. Ms. Camenisch asked why they are not limiting the
accesses to the one off of Weld County Road 66. Mr. Francis stated that he felt it would impose on the existing
residences. Arlan Marrs asked if Weld County Road 66 is a gravel road. The applicant stated yes. Mr. Marrs
asked what type of traffic increase this type of application will create versus the Podtburg Dairy application the
Planning Commission heard recently. Don Carroll stated that the traffic count taken in August of 1996, was
97. The Public Works Department estimates that each lot will generate 6.5 trips per day, which puts the
increase well below the 200 mark. Mr. Carroll stated that he requested a dust control plan at the dairy
because of the type of operation. The trucks used in conjunction with the dairy will generate hundreds of times
more dust particles than cars will.
The Chairman asked if there was anyone in the audience who wished to speak for or against this proposal.
Steve Corbiere, surrounding property owner, stated that he has concerns with the zone change, especially in
light of the recent approval of the Podtburg Dairy expansion. He felt that the zone change will be contradictory
to the agricultural area. Mr. Corbiere stated that the proposed site was farmed well last year. He felt the
applicant was saying that the soil is good for grass but not for anything else, which was contradictory. Mr.
Corbiere is concerned that his pasture will turn to weeds if the grass does not take. Four to seven acre lots
will be difficult to water from a tap, and soil conservation will be hard to maintain from North Weld Water. Cristie
Nickles asked if Mr. Corbiere had irrigation water for his property. He stated he has a 1/2 share from the
Whitney Ditch Irrigation plus a well. Shirley Camenisch asked if the proposed site was irrigated last year. Mr.
Corbiere stated yes.
Lee Detterer, surrounding property owner, stated that he farms 170 acres and is president of Storm Lake
Drainage District. The drain line is two to three miles long and involves 14 farms. The portion of the drain line
that runs through the proposed site is an old 24" clay tile, requiring extensive repairs. These repairs involve
drag lines, dump trucks, and several big pumps. There also must be storage for the water during repairs. Mr.
WELD COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES
May 6, 1997
Page 7
Detterer stated that this line was put in for farms; concern for residential development was not necessary.
Therefore, the Storm Lake Drainage District is requesting a 100 foot easement and a place for water storage
during repairs. They are also asking that a homeowners' association be formed so that there will be only one
vote for all five lots. Mr. Detterer stated that he does not feel this proposal is compatible with surrounding
neighbors. Jack Epple asked if there is an existing easement across the proposed site. Mr. Detterer stated
that he does not know as their records only go back to the 1950's, but the Storm Lake Drainage District was
started in approximately 1916. Lee Morrison asked if there is documentation showing that 100 feet is needed
to maintain the line. Mr. Detterer stated no, but he could get documentation. Mr. Morrison stated that the two
parties should try to come to an agreement about the easement size before the Board of County
Commissioners' hearing, if possible. Mr. Morrison asked if the same issue was raised during the Meadow
Springs Subdivision hearing. Mr. Detterer stated that Meadow Springs is in the Storm Lake Drainage District,
but the main drain line is not on that property, therefore they are not responsible for repairs. Mr. Morrison
asked if they are part of the assessed district. Mr. Detterer stated yes. Arlan Marrs asked if a homeowners
association with only one vote was created there. Mr. Detterer stated yes. Jack Epple asked if the Planning
Commission could add a Development Standard stating that the two parties shall come to an agreement. Mr.
Morrison asked if there is an equal assessment or acreage assessment. Mr. Detterer stated it is an acreage
assessment, but the votes are equal. Mr. Morrison stated that a general Development Standard stating that
the issue has to be addressed, without particulars, would be acceptable.
Harold Klaus, surrounding property owner, stated that he has lived in the neighborhood his entire life. Mr.
Klaus stated that the drainage line has required routine repairs about once a year, and the repairs are a major
operation. His concern is for the buyers of the proposed lots who will be investing a lot of money into a dryland
situation. He thinks it is a misuse of precious tap water, and unfair to put the demand on the North Weld Water
line. Mr. Fouse stated that this is a lot of highly productive farm land to be pulled out of production for five home
sites. Shirley Camenisch asked if water can be rented in the proposed area for irrigating. Mr. Fouse stated
that water could probably be rented from people who own shares from the Whitney Ditch.
Theresa Brunner, surrounding property owner, stated she has lived on Lot A five years. Ms. Brunner stated
the applicant has a water line running across her property to irrigate his property. She understood that the
applicant originally had eight shares of water. There is a questionable easement that has caused Ms. Brunner
problems with the ditch company, and she is currently without water. Ms. Brunner stated that she is supposed
to irrigate her property off of the same line that the applicant irrigates his property from. Cristie Nickles asked
if the water comes from the Whitney Ditch. Ms. Brunner stated yes.
Tom Francis responded to the surrounding property owners' concerns. He stated he intends to establish an
easement for the Storm Lake Drainage District line. Mr. Francis stated that Mr. Corbiere's letter referred to the
applicant starting a fire that burned down mailboxes. Mr. Francis stated neither he nor his hired man had
anything to do with the fire. He reiterated that the proposed site is not an efficient farmed farm. Arlan Marrs
asked if the covenants will address whether homeowners can irrigate past a certain point of the homesite, or
whether it's expected to stay dryland pasture. Mr. Francis stated that the main lawns will be.irrigated with a
sprinkler, but the majority of the acreage will be dryland, as it would be impossible to irrigate it off a 5/8 inch
tap. Mr. Francis stated he has found many problems since acquiring the land and is doing his best to correct
them. Mr. Marrs asked if the applicant agreed with the proposed one vote for the homeowners' association.
The applicant stated that it is an excellent idea. Mr. Marrs asked if the applicant had any objections to
negotiating a drain line easement. The applicant did not have any objections to negotiation, but questioned
the 100 foot suggestion. He felt 60 feet was more reasonable.
Shani L. Eastin read a possible additional Condition of Approval. Item #5 would read: "The issues of the
location and extent of the drainage easement in the manner of voting and assessment for the Storm Lake
Drainage District shall be addressed prior to submittal of the Final Plan." Ms. Eastin noted that since this is a
Minor Subdivision, a homeowners' association is not required.
Tammie Pope
Secretary
WELD COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES
May 6, 1997
Page 8
Marie Koolstra asked if the applicant purchased water with the property. Mr. Francis stated that the property
came with five shares of Whitney Ditch water. Ms. Koolstra asked if the applicant had looked into what types
of grasses could be established on the proposed site. Mr. Francis stated that he has already seeded the
property with a native Colorado dryland grass mixture. Ms. Koolstra asked if the applicant would consider
making some water available to the proposed lots since the land was irrigated in the past. Mr. Francis stated
that there is no way to get water now. The property came with only five shares of Whitney Ditch water, and
there are rules against assigning partial shares and pumps. Cristie Nicklas asked if the five shares will be used
on the applicant's own farm. Mr. Francis stated yes.
The Chairman asked the applicant if he was in agreement with the Conditions of Approval, with the addition
of item #5. The applicant was in agreement.
Glenn Vaad asked if Condition of Approval #4G means a covenant will be made and buyers will know there
is a right to farm. Shani L. Eastin stated that #3D requires the entire covenant to be placed on the plat and #4G
requires that it be followed.
Cristie Nicklas moved that Case Number Z-506, Tom Francis, be forwarded to the Board of County
Commissioners with the Conditions of Approval, with the addition of #5, with Planning Commission's
recommendation for approval. Glenn Vaad seconded the motion.
The Chairman asked the secretary to poll the members of the Planning Commission for their decision. Glenn
Vaad-yes; Cristie Nicklas-yes; Marie Koolstra-no; Jack Epple-yes; Shirley Camenisch-no; Arlan Marrs -yes.
Motion carried.
Meeting adjourned at 3:31 p.m.
Respectfully submitted,
Hello