Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout972572SUMMARY OF THE WELD COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING f "" 27 Tuesday, November 18,. 1997 CLERK A regular meeting of the Weld County Planning Commission was held on November 18TQprtnrihee.,Gepnty Commissioners' Hearing Room (Room #101), Weld County Centennial Building, 915 10th Street, Greeley, Colorado. The meeting was called to order by Vice -Chairman, Rusty Tucker, at 1:30 p.m. ROLL CALL Glenn Vaad Rusty Tucker Fred Walker Bruce Fitzgerald Cristie Nicklas Jack Epple Marie Koolstra Stephan Mokray Arlan Marrs Absent Present Present Absent Present Present Present Present Present Also Present Todd Hodges, Current Planner II, Shani Eastin, Current Planner, Kerri Keithley, Current Planner, Department of Planning Services; Don Carroll, Weld County Public Works; Sheble McConnellogue, Trevor Jiricek, Weld County Health Department; Lee Morrison, Assistant Weld County Attorney; Wendi Inloes, Secretary. The summary of the last regular meeting of the Weld County Planning Commission held on November 4, 1997, was approved as read. CASE NUMBER: USR-1167 PLANNER: Shani Eastin APPLICANT: Brian and Lisa Wallace REQUEST: A Site Specific Development Plan and Special Review Permit for a Commercial Use (Sports Marketing Business) in the A (Agricultural) Zone District. LEGAL DESCRIPTION: Lot A of RE -1888, part of the NE4 of Section 13, T3N, R68W of the 6th P.M., Weld County, Colorado. LOCATION: West of and adjacent to Weld County Road 13; approximately 1/, mile north of Weld County Road 32. Shani Eastin, Department of Planning Services, presented Case USR-1167 for Brian and Lisa Wallace for a Sports Marketing Business, which is operated from their home. Shani explained that the Planning Commission has continued this case twice before due to no response by Mr. Wallace for information regarding the Roping Arena portion of the application. The additional information requested was submitted to the Department after the November 4, 1997 deadline, therefore not giving staff the appropriate time to review the case. Staff is proposing to delete the roping arena from the application. The Sports Marketing Business is in current operation and has an active violation on the property. Staff is recommending approval for the Sports Marketing Business. The property lies within three miles of the Town of Mead. Rusty Tucker said that they first need to determine whether the Roping Arena portion of the application should be included with the Sports Marketing Business. Marie Koolstra asked Shani to explain the information that was not submitted. Shani explained that the Town of Mead had numerous concerns on the Roping Arena itself. The Planning Staff directed Mr. Wallace to contact the Town of Mead and address their concerns which were stated in a September 10, 1997 letter. The applicant did not contact the Town of Mead. Shani stated that the applicant would have the opportunity to apply to amend the application to include the arena, or apply for a new application in the future. nu-triatnd ia/./q 2 972572 SUMMARY OF THE WELD COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION November 18, 1997 Page 2 Rusty Tucker asked Shani that if the Planning Commission denies the roping arena request, would the County Commissioners be able to look at it. Lee Morrison, Assistant County Attorney, explained that the Planning Commission needs to act only on what the applicant has applied for and take action because the Commissioners need to have the Planning Commissions recommendation. Mr. Morrison suggested hearing from the applicant on why they have not submitted the information requested. Brian Wallace, applicant, explained that he has tried to contact the Town of Mead to go over their concerns, but have had no response. Mr. Wallace did get a copy of the questions from the Planning Department and answered the Towns concerns and faxed a copy of this to the Planning Department which was after the deadline given by the Planning Department. Mr. Wallace is willing to do whatever they needed to include the arena at this time. Mr. Wallace then read the questions and concerns by both the Town of Mead and the Health Department, such as the size of the arena, possible lighting, water, septic, noise level, traffic, parking, dust control, food and concessions, seating and hours. Mr. Wallace feels that most of these have been addressed and will be defined for them. Shani added that she had received the information from the applicant on November 13, 1997, after the application had been changed. Arlan Marrs verified with Shani that she has received the answers from Mr. Wallace addressing the ten questions from the Town of Mead. Shani did have a copy of the questions and answers, along with the Conditions of Approval for the arena, if the Board was to include it into the recommendation. Christie Nicklas asked about Development Standard #12 regarding the number of people that will be using the arena and the need for a PA system for 20 to 25 people. Mr. Wallace explained they were trying to determine if they were going to go by the number of contestants, or the total number of people that will be at an event to decide on a PA system or a hand held system. Mr. Wallace explained that the main reason for the arena is for the 4-H kids in their group and not necessarily for large events. Arlan Marrs asked Mr. Morrison about the use by right as far as the arena is concerned. Mr. Marrs understood that if this was a commercial venture where Mr. Wallace was charging for admission, that this is when the permit process would take place. Mr. Morrison explained that this is one criteria, and that it depends on whether the event is broader than family and friends, opposed to being open to the public. A person who uses an arena for their own private use is not required a use by special review permit, but once that it is open to the public and used for commercial gain, it becomes public use requiring a permit. Mr. Wallace explained that they would like to include the arena at the same time for insurance purposes, and so that they do not have to go through another application. Mr. Tucker asked for a motion to include the roping arena into the USR-1167. Arlan Marrs moved to include the roping arena and Fred Walker seconded the motion. The Vice -Chairman asked the secretary to poll the members of the Planning Commission for their decision. Arlan Marrs, yes; Marie Koolstra, yes; Christie Nicklas, yes; Stephan Mokray, yes; Rusty Tucker, yes; Jack Epple, yes; Fred Walker, yes. Motion carried unanimously. The Vice -Chairman asked if there was anyone in the audience who wished to speak for or against this application. No one wished to speak. Christie Nicklas asked Mr. Wallace if he had seen the additional Conditions of Approval and Development Standards prior to the hearing. Mr. Wallace had not and Ms. Nicklas wanted to make sure that he is aware of all of them. Mr. Wallace did have a question on Development Standard #12 regarding the number of people being limited to 25. Mr. Wallace had a concern that there could be 25 contestants, but each contestant could bring people with them, exceeding this requirement. SUMMARY OF THE WELD COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION November 18, 1997 Page 3 Arlan Marrs had a question on the lighting that will be used for the arena. Shani explained that the lighting issue is covered under the Operation Standards which Mr. Morrison explained is part of the Ordinance and attaches to any USR that includes lighting issues. Alan Marrs had questions regarding if the wording of 25 contestants should be changed to 100 total people. Mr. Wallace was in agreement that 100 people would be appropriate. Shani had a concern that the amount of users could have a direct impact on septic, dust control, traffic, and parking, so would prefer to have something specific from the applicant. It was decided to change the wording to say 25 contestants or 100 people total. Arlan Marrs moved that Case USR-1167, be forwarded to the Board of County Commissioners along with the Conditions of Approval and the change to Development Standard Number 12 to additionally say 25 contestants or 100 people, with the Planning Commissions recommendation of approval. Christie Nicklas seconded the motion. The Vice -Chairman asked the secretary to poll the members of the Planning Commission for their decision. Arlan Marrs, yes; Marie Koolstra, yes; Christie Nicklas, yes; Stephan Mokray, yes ; Rusty Tucker, yes; Jack Epple, yes; Fred Walker, yes. Motion carried unanimously. CASE NUMBER: USR-1173 PLANNER: Shani Eastin APPLICANT: Wood and Barbara Eppelsheimer REQUEST: A Site Specific Development Plan and Special Review Permit for a' Private Airstrip in the A (Agricultural) zone district. LEGAL DESCRIPTION: Lot B of RE -2021, located in the E2, NW4 of Section 34, T2N, R63W of the 6th P.M., Weld County, Colorado. LOCATION: South of and adjacent to Weld County Road 16; approximately 1/4 mile west of Weld County Road 69. Shani Eastin, Department of Planning Services, gave an overview of the request for an 80 -acre private airstrip on a 240 acre parcel. There was an addition to the Conditions of Approval, 3c, numbers 1,2,3, and 4 from the Federal Aviation Administration, which addresses the close proximity of the proposed airstrip and an existing airstrip (USR-878) to the north. Staff is recommending approval of this application. Rusty Tucker asked if only the applicant will be using the airstrip or if there is a joint agreement for Mr. Benson, who is the owner of the adjacent airstrip. Shani explained that the agreement between Mr. Eppelsheimer and Mr. Benson is for air space and control of landing and takeoff patterns and that the private airstrip states that the applicant is the only person available to use it. Wood Eppelsheimer, applicant, gave a history of his experience and past use of airstrips. Mr. Eppelsheimer intends to use his airstrip for light use only, using if for travel to other farm interests in other states and different parts of Colorado. He has spoke to the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) on regulations of his airstrip along with Mr. Benson's airstrip. He has also discussed what type of patterns would be acceptable as far as take off, safety issues and airspace, which the requirement is 120 feet on each side. Rusty Tucker asked Mr. Eppelsheimer how far apart the two runways will be. Mr. Eppelsheimer stated that there was a quarter of a mile between the two airstrips. Arlan Marrs asked approximately how many flights are expected to go in and out of the airstrip. Mr. Eppelsheimer explained that he intends to fly out about once a week in the summer months, and winter months he does not intend to fly because of bad weather. SUMMARY OF THE WELD COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION November 18, 1997 Page 4 Stephan Mokray asked due to the close proxirraty of the airstrips, if he and Mr. Benson ever considered sharing an airstrip. Mr. Eppelsheimer explained that they had discussed it, but did not believe that a Use by Special Review would allow for them to do that. Lee Morrison explained that the existing permit may not allow for Mr. Benson to include both parties to use the same airstrip since he had limited the use for himself, however the permit could have possibly been amended. Mr. Morrison also explained that if the two had gone together, this changes the use from an airstrip to an airport. Mr. Eppelsheimer explained that he did not feel there would be a safety problem because of the low usage of flying and the separation distance of the two parallel runways. Mr. Mokray then asked about the letter from the FAA dated September 9, 1997, stating that they were not approving or disapproving but only making a determination on the two airstrips . Mr. Eppelsheimer explained that the FAA makes recommendations of what is safe, but leaves it up to the landowners and local authorities. The Vice -Chairman asked if there was anyone in the audience who wished to speak for or against this application. Steve Benson, property owner of the existing airstrip, spoke against the application expressing concerns of the close proximity of the airstrips, safety issues and the liability. Mr. Benson feels that the current 240 acres that Mr. Eppelsheimer currently owns is going to be divided into smaller acre parcels making the runway available to other users and becoming more than a one person operation. Stephan Mokray asked Mr. Benson if he was aware that the application was only for a single use airstrip. Mr. Benson is aware but feels that there is going to be future problems. Rusty Tucker asked for Shani to clarify the process of subdividing the land giving further access to the airstrip. Shani explained that the land has been approved for two recorded exemptions and one subdivision exemption, which is a right by Mr. Eppelsheimer to apply for. Mr. Tucker asked if someone doe&buy the property, would they be allowed to use the airstrip. Shani explained that if someone is to buy the property, they would be able to operate the airstrip under the same conditions, and if someone was to buy the subdivided property and wished to use the airstrip, they would be able to do so but they would need to apply, and this would change the verbiage from airstrip to airport requiring an amendment to the use. Lee Morrison explained that the use of the airstrip is confined to the owner of Lot B until amended. Al Becker, property owner, spoke against the application, expressing concerns of the two airstrips and the subdividing of Mr. Eppelsheimers land. Pat Bone, property owner, spoke for the application, stating that their property would be directly affected and had no objection to the airstrip. She also said that both Mr. Benson and Mr. Eppelsheimer have such low use she does not see a problem. Dennis Kitzman, property owner, had no problem with the airstrip as long as it stayed private, but did have a concern with the development and the airstrip becoming more active. Mr. Eppelsheimer explained that he had no intention of subdividing his property and understands that if the use changes, he will have to come back to amend his permit. He explained how there are three existing homes on the property with plans on destroying two of them and went through the exemption process for his own purposes of building on his property. Fred Walker asked about the Condition of Approval 3c and if Mr. Eppelsheimer had chosen one of the four as recommended by the FAA. Mr. Eppelsheimer explained that he would prefer to stay with number three, but that the FAA stated that he could choose one or a combination of the four, but feels this would be the safest. SUMMARY OF THE WELD COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION November 18, 1997 Page 5 Mr. Walker than asked if they should decide on one to avoid conflict in the future. Lee Morrison did not feel that they should choose one and exclude the others in case the two property owners did work something out in the future. The FAA has made their recommendations and are done with their determination. Mr. Eppelsheimer would like to work things out and would prefer number three. Christie Nicklas was not comfortable limiting Mr. Eppelsheimer and stated they should leave if as is and let the FAA work it out. Mr. Marrs asked Mr. Eppelsheimer if he could choose one and make an application to the FAA and get a response to give the Planning Department. Mr. Eppelsheimer was in agreement with being able to do this. Shani had a few typographical errors she wanted to correct on Condition of Approval #3b #4 the word object -fee to object -free and the change by Public Works of 125 feet to say 60 feet. Mr. Tucker asked is there was a difference between a #3 safety area and #4 object free area. Shani explained that the definitions have been submitted by the FAA in the referral with comments section and read them into the record. Mr. Tucker asked Mr. Eppelsheimer if he was in agreement with the Conditions of Approval and Development Standards. He stated that yes he was. Stephan Mokray moved that Case USR-1173, be forwarded to the Board of County Commissioners along with the Conditions of Approval and Development Standards with the Planning Commissions recommendation of approval. Arlan Marrs seconded the motion. The Vice -Chairman asked the secretary to poll the members of the Planning Commission for their decision. Arlan Marrs, yes; Marie Koolstra, yes; Christie Nicklas, yes; Stephan Mokray, yes; Rusty Tucker, yes; Jack Epple, yes ; Fred Walker, yes. Motion carried unanimously. CASE NUMBER: USR-1171 PLANNER: Kerri Keithley APPLICANT: Douglas Born REQUEST: A Site Specific Development Plan and a Special Review Permit for a Commercial Use for a vehicle sales business located in the A (Agricultural) zone district. LEGAL DESCRIPTION: Lot B of RE -1024, located in part of the SW4 of Section 29, T7N, R67W of the 6th P.M., Weld County, Colorado. LOCATION: North of and adjacent to Weld County road 76; approximately 3/4 mile west of State Highway 257, also located adjacent to the Town of Windsor's limits on the east, north and south boundaries. Kern Keithley, Department of Planning Service, presented Case-USR-1171, for a Commercial Use for a vehicle sales business. Kern gave background information on Mr. Born's property. The case originated from a complaint from a surrounding property owner. The site has been inspected by the Health Department and the Zoning Compliance officer from the Department of Planning. Kerri clarified that the applicant is applying for 15-20 customers come to his site per month to purchase vehicle parts. Mr. Born owns one and a half acres and is not planning on expanding his site and will not have any employees. A noncommercial junk yard is allowed as an accessory use in the agricultural zone district as long as the property is visually screened from public right of way's and adjacent properties. Mr. Born is allowed to have the vehicles on his property if properly screened, he is just asking for people to come to his property to buy parts. Kerni explained that Conditions of Approval and Development Standards will address incompatibilities such as screening, hours of operation, a non -transferable clause and the installation of a fire hydrant. The Department of Planning Services is recommending approval of the application. The Town of Windsor is recommending denial of the permit through the referral due to incompatibilities, property values, and the concern of not having control over the Development Standards. Rusty Tucker asked about the fire hydrant and where the water will be supplied from. Kern explained that there is an existing public water line that runs adjacent to the property and Mr. Born would need to tap into the line. SUMMARY OF THE WELD COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION November 18, 1997 Page 6 There are concerns from the Windsor -Severance Fire District on the low pressure of the water line, but they feel that any hydrant will be better than not having one at all. Fred Walker asked Kerri to explain the proposed landscaping and if there was a definite plan. Kerni explained that there has been a fence installed and staff is are asking for a landscape/screening plan and also asking Mr. Born to plant some evergreen trees for screening. Rusty Tucker asked Kerri to give the difference between the sale of antique car parts and a junkyard. Kerri explained that a noncommercial junkyard is an accessory use with no commercial component. Mr. Born would not be able to sell parts, where as the special use permit allows Mr. Born to sale the vehicles and have customers and be able to advertise. Arlan Marrs asked for Kerri to again clarify what Mr. Born has by right the ability to do. Kerni explained that Mr. Born has a right to have a noncommercial junkyard with no commercial component in it and is able to keep the cars and parts on his site, but they would need to be screened. Mr. Born, the applicant, explained he is collecting antique and classic cars and that it is mainly a hobby but he does sell extra parts and pieces. Mr. Born does not do any repair work or work on other people's vehicles, and does not store any oil, gas or batteries. Mr. Born had gone to his neighbors after receiving a complaint and tried to resolve any problems. A building to store some of the vehicles and a seven -foot fence has been installed to the north and west side of the property, and about 100 trees have been planted about two years ago that are now about 14 feet high. Mr. Born has had to move vehicles onto his site that have been stored elsewhere due to enormous expenses he has incurred to comply with the County. He has no plans for expanding the business or becoming a full-time salvage yard. Fred Walker asked Mr. Born if the screening between the shed access to the home is recent and if it is temporary. Mr. Born said it is real recent and was temporary but will eventually be permanent. Mr. Walker also made Mr. Born aware that he was parking his trailer in a County right-of-way and that the south access of the property is one big access and wanted to make sure that he understood Public Works recommendation. Don Carroll, Weld County Public Works, explained that there is an intent of a barrow pit but it does not carry water and is flat, the County does have a 30 -foot right-of-way on the applicants side and 30 feet on the other side and that there should be no staging or parking on the County right-of-ways. Mr. Walker has also seen Mr. Born's collection grow and explained that he has seen the screening Mr. Born has done and asked if he was at a saturation point of collecting. Mr. Born replied by stating that he would like to sell more and could not say whether or not he planned on buying more at this time. The Vice -Chairman asked if there was anyone in the audience who wished to speak for or against the application. Ti Benson spoke against the application, stating that she has a concern with an industrial activity to operate with in a residential environment. Mrs. Benson feels that there are several nice homes in the area and believes the applicants property is affecting the property values of the homes around the area. Christie Nicklas asked Mrs. Benson if she was aware that if they deny the request, Mr. Born cannot sell any of the parts but the site will stay as is. Mrs. Benson wants to insure that nothing is sold off the property. Vern Blue spoke against the application, with concerns of the depreciation of the home values. He is also stated that the property is a junkyard, and that in the last seven years there has been no attempts of screening until just recently. Mr. Mokray asked how long he has lived there and Mr. Blue explained that he has been there 14 years and that the business had not been there before. Mr. Blue did know the previous owners and had asked prior to the Born's moving in if Mr. Born had planned on doing anything. Mr. Blue had been told that Mr. Born would have three or four antique cars that he would have on the property, which he believes have grown to more than 100 full or partial vehicles at the present time. SUMMARY OF THE WELD COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION November 18, 1997 Page 7 Mike Moore spoke against the application with concerns of the growth of the vehicles, and that a hobby has slowly over the years turned into a sales operation and growing across the street. Mr. Moore had pictures of the surrounding homes and pictures of how the cars have escalated. Marie Koolstra asked Mr. Moore what the current zoning is in his subdivision. Mr. Moore said that it is residential which is located in the County. Marie explained that County issues of residential property have been a problem due to people who move into a residential area that is County and feels it is a lose lose situation for property owners with the rules and regulations they have to deal with. Chuck Kler, spoke against the application and has lived in the area as long as Mr. Born and does not feel that Mr. Born is a hobby due to the fact that loads of junk keeps coming in and out of the property and it keeps stacking up and extending into the county road. Arthur Pitner spoke against the application stating that within a quarter of a mile there are three subdivisions. Two of those have been annexed into the Town of Windsor and the surrounding property around the Born's. Mr. Pitner also does not feel that this is a hobby and sees trailer loads of vehicles coming in and out and has seen a steady growth. He believes that the trees and fence's will not screen the cars piled two and three high. Mr. Pitner feels that this is not a place for a commercial activity and sees an increase in traffic becoming a problem. Don Carroll made a clarification that of the three subdivisions in question, two are County maintained, Roth and Northwest Estates, and one is in the Windsor limits. Denise Hamernik spoke against the application with concerns of the amount of people that will be coming in and out of the property, the increase of traffic, and the value of the surrounding properties. Mrs. Hamernick understands that if the permit is not granted that he still has a right to collect the cars and does not want to see any future growth. There was also a question of the proposed future plan for another building. Kerri explained that the proposed building would be for storage of the current vehicles for screening reasons. Mrs. Hamernik also has concerns that if Mr. Born is granted a permit, he will be able to advertise and increase the amount of customers. Kern explained that Mr. Born is currently advertising, and if granted the permit, the Planning Department would be able to limit the number of people coming onto the site but it would be difficult to enforce. Nancy Kerber, spoke against the application and is concerned with the growth of what they consider to be a junkyard and feels that Mr. Born is only trying to hide a mess that people have to drive by that live in the subdivisions. Bert Deautaud, spoke against the application with concerns of the surrounding residential homes around Mr. Born's property and does not feel a commercial use is appropriate for the area. Mr. Deautaud understands that Mr. Born has the right to store the vehicles on the property if done properly, but feels that the buying and selling could be done elsewhere. Robert Penny, Attorney for Doug Connelly, Mr. Born's neighbor directly to the west, expressed his client's frustration of the growth of Mr. Born's vehicles. Mr. Penny had pictures of the property from 1992 to present showing the increase. Mr. Penny explained how Mr. Born has been in violation for years and the County has not enforced the Ordinance and the cars have been stacking two to three high. Mr. Connelly has tried to sell his home for a year and has been told that the home has depreciated by tens of thousands of dollars, and sees this happening to others. Mr. Penny stated that if the permit is approved by the County that it would constitute an unconstitutional taking of his clients property without due process. Mr. Penny also does not feel that the County will be able to monitor the location and said if the permit is not granted that Mr. Born will no longer be a problem in the County because he would probably load up his vehicles and pursue his work elsewhere. Stan Liss spoke against the application with concerns that there will be an impact of economic interests and supports the Town of Windsor's recommendation for denial. SUMMARY OF THE WELD COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION November 18, 1997 Page 8 Doug Connelly spoke against the application explaining that a few vehicles had increased to the point that it is devaluated the property values. Mr. Connelly stated that he is frustrated by the way things have been handled and a junkyard should not be allowed. Fred Walker asked Mr. Connelly if he felt there was any solution to the situation. Mr. Connelly feels the only solution is to remove the vehicles which he considers to be a nuisance. Douglas Cole spoke for the applicant. Mr. Cole stated that the vehicles that sit on the road belong to him and not Mr. Born and that he has also been asked to clean up his property. Mr. Cole has helped Mr. Born and does not feel that the items he has are junk and considers them to be treasures. Mr. Born addressed the comments that were made by the surrounding property owners. He stated that he does not stack his cars, and that traffic will not increase. The proposed building has been requested by the County if needed in the future without going through the process again. Mr. Born has not heard any complaints until the meeting and people have bought, sold and built residences around his site since they have been there with no problems. Rusty Tucker added that one of the advantages to moving to the County is that you have the right to do what you want with your property with no or little restrictions. Arlan Marrs asked for explanation if the material inside the fence become higher or buildings are built outside the fence that people are able to see. Kerri explained that the material inside the screening cannot be visible from the right-of-way or adjacent properties, Mr. Born would need to screen according to the height and length of material and this is difficult to do for the Connelly's property because they have built their home up due to the water table. The Planning Department is asking for a detailed screening plan prior to recording the plat so they can review it to make sure that it meets the intent of not being visible. Lee Morrison added that the standard of screening from adjacent properties in the ordinance does not address screening from the highest point on the structure on the adjacent property, but instead is based upon the height of the land. Arlan Marrs asked again for Kerri to explain the use by right and what the application is intending and what happens if it is denied or approved. Kerni explained the process to the Commission. Rusty Tucker asked if the Town of Windsor has put a time limit on the request for a fire hydrant, and Kerni was not aware of any at this time. Jack Epple asked if any zoning changes have taken place since 1990 and the current zoning. Kerri explained that the last change was done in the mid 80's when Windsor annexed surrounding land and was not aware of any current changes. The current zoning on the annexed property is zoned PDR (Planned Development Residential Use). Stephan Mokray verified that if the permit is denied, Mr. Born will still use it as a hobby and if approved he will be able to expand and allow people on his property to buy parts. Kerri verified that this was correct. Stephan Mokray moved that Case USR-1171, be denied. There was not second to the motion. Fred Walker stated that in fact there has been an expansion for a period of time and the site should be allowed limited commercial activity. If there is an expansion, the neighbors will watch and should contact the Planning Department to ensure the permit is enforced. The Vice -Chairman asked Mr. Born if he was in agreement with the Conditions of Approval and Development Standards. Mr. Born was in agreement but did have a concern with the fire hydrant issue and is uneasy about the expense of a hydrant without having the required amount of water pressure required. SUMMARY OF THE WELD COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION November 18, 1997 Page 9 Marie Koolstra asked if Mr. Born would be able to get back some of his expense by surrounding property owners that will be using it. Kerri was not aware of any because Mr. Born is being required by the Fire District to obtain the hydrant, but suggested changing the wording to say that Mr. Born will attempt to put in the fire hydrant to allow him to go through an appeal process with the Fire District. Lee Morrison does not believe that there will be anything to appeal since Mr. Born has not actually said that he will not put the hydrant in and that there should be better clarification from the Fire District. Mr. Born said he was not objecting to put in a hydrant, but was just concerned that it will not have the required water pressure. Jack Epple moved that Case USR-1171, be forwarded to the Board of County Commissioners along with the Conditions of Approval and Development Standards with the Planning Commissions recommendation of approval. Christie Nicklas seconded the motion. The Vice -Chairman asked the secretary to poll the members of the Planning Commission for their decision. Arlan Marrs, yes; Marie Koolstra, yes; Christie Nicklas, yes; Stephan Mokray, no; Rusty Tucker, yes; Jack Epple,yes; Fred Walker, yes. Motion carried unanimously. Meeting adjourned at 4:30 p.m. Respectfully submitted Wendi Inloes Secretary Hello