HomeMy WebLinkAbout951192.tiffMit ,Eaton Nast Uepadinznt
Organized January 1, 1914
Eaton, Colorado
October 27, 1994
To Whom It May Concern:
I have inspected the property at 16928 Hwy 392 which is
proposed to be used by Ditter Excavation for the parking of
equipment and minor maintenance activities. I find that such use
would not adversely effect the Eaton Fire Department and we approve
such use for the property.
Donald B. Cadwallader, Chief
Eaton Fire Department
MEMBER COLORADO STATE FIREMEN'S ASSOCIATION
951192
COMML n.jITY DEVELOPMENT
1000 10TH STREET, GREELEY, COLORADO 80631 (303) 350-9780
January 27, 1995
Mr. Todd A. Hodges
Current Planner
Weld County Department of Planning Services
1400 North 17th Avenue
Greeley, CO 80631
USR-1074
Dear Todd:
JAN 3 1 1995
�M,pinnninf
As we discussed recently, the City of Greeley Planning Commission
will not be able to hear the Ditter USR application prior to the
County Planning Commission's hearing on February 7. Therefore, I am
writing this letter to explain the staff's position on the
application. A formal recommendation will be forwarded to you after
the Greeley Planning Commission hears the case on February 28.
The Greeley Planning Staff is very concerned about allowing this
industrial storage use in the proposed location. Good planning
would not allow an outside storage use with negative visual impacts
to locate between two upscale rural residential developments.
Although the residents of the Seeley Lake area would probably not be
directly affected by the storage use, the residents of Pinnacle Park
will definitely be subjected to the adverse visual impacts generated
by outside equipment storage. We understand that a storage building
is planned at some time in the future, but we are all aware of
situations where even though building storage is available,
equipment is stored outside.
The other concern we have is in regard to the location of the site
on a U. S. Highway. As you know, Highway 392 is a much traveled
route, and actually behaves like an entryway. This site is within
the area which the City plans to include as an urban growth area to
be specifically designated in an intergovernmental agreement with
the County. The City plans to request the County to apply City
standards for development in this area. Although the agreement is
not formalized at this time, we ask the County Planning Commission
951192
+ EXHIBIT
I /5
Todd A. Hodges
January 27, 1995
Page Two
and County Commissioners to consider the inappropriateness of this
use in the proposed location and deny the application.
In the event that the application is not denied, very intense
screening standards should be applied.
As always, we appreciate the opportunity to comment.
Very truly yours,
QJ
Lanell J. Adler
Planner II
951192
STATE OF COLORADO
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
Region 4
1420 2nd Street
P.O. Box 850
Greeley, Colorado 80632-0850
1303) 353-1232
Weld County, SH 392
Ditter Use by Special Review
S.W. Corner SH 392/WCR 35
W. of Lucerne
February 2, 1995
Mr. Todd Hodges - Current Planner
Department of Planning Services
Weld County Administrative Offices
1400 N. 17th Avenue
Greeley, CO 80631
Dear Todd:
The Ditter Use by Special Review and Site Specific Development
Plan has been reviewed. A site visit was conducted on February 1,
1995. We offer the following comments:
RIGHT-OF-WAY Right-of-way (ROW) has not been addressed by the
submittal; however, projected traffic along this section of SH 392
indicates the need for a 150 foot total ROW, with 75 feet each
side of the highway centerline. Additional width to meet the
projected need should be protected by reservation or, preferably,
dedication as permitted by County regulations.
ACCESS Access to the state highway system is governed by the State
Highway Access Code (SHACode). The narrative states that the
residential and agricultural property is to be developed to
operate and store equipment for an excavation business. The
narrative further states that the business employs four employees
who will drive to the property to get the equipment then report to
the excavation site. They will then return to the property at the
end of the day. Given this type of operation, it is possible that
the property will see an increase of 16 trips per day.
Section 2.10.3 of the SHACode provides the Department the warrant
and obligation to re-evaluate access when a property experiences a
change of use. A "change of use" is deemed to have occurred when
the use of an access increases by more than 20%. It is likely
that this property will be deemed to have changed use.
This section of SH 392 has been identified as a Category 3
highway, which allows private direct access to the highway only
when the property in question has no other reasonable access to
the general street system or if the local authority and Department
determine and agree that denial of direct access to the state
highway and alternative direct access to another roadway would
cause unacceptable traffic operation and safety problems to the
overall traffic flow of the general street system. The property
is bordered by Weld County Road 35, and, in fact, the i ve
requested that an access to WCR 35 be allowed.�LJ cq 2
EXHIBIT
FEB 6 1995 .t
X492
Mr. Todd Hodges
February 2,1 995
Page 2
Ditter Special Review
The Department believes that access to WCR 35 should be required.
That access should be spaced at a distance of at least 200 feet
from the south edge of SH 392 to the north edge of the access.
The access located on SH 392 should be removed. An access permit
is required for that activity.
DRAINAGE The property slopes away from the highway. Changes on the
property shall not result in any change in that condition.
UTILITIES If new utility lines or connections are necessary within
the state highway ROW, a utility permit will be required. Prior
to such utility work, Mr. Henry Rangel of the Department should be
contacted at (303)350-2111.
Our comments are based upon the submittal as received January 18,
1995 and site visit of February 1, 1995.
Thank you for the opportunity to review the Ditter Special Use
proposal. If you have any questions, I can be reached at (303) 350-
2148.
GTHI
xc: G. Hice-Idler
G. Sisson
file
Sincerely,
Gloria T. Hice-Idler
ssistant to Teresa G. Jones
on Development/Access Coordinator
951192
1
WIiBc.
COLORADO
mEmoaAnuum
Todd A. Hodges
To Weld County Planning
From
Date
February 14, 1995
01
Trevor Jiricek, Supervisor, Environmental Protection Service
subject Case Number; USR-1074 Name: Ditter, Larry, Stacy, & Kerri
NE4 of Section 23, Township 06 North, Range 66 West
Environmental Protection Services has reviewed this proposal; the following conditions are
recommended to be part of any approval:
1. All liquid and solid wastes shall be stored and removed for final disposal in a
manner that protects against surface and groundwater contamination.
2. No permanent disposal of wastes shall be permitted at this site.
3. Waste materials shall be handled, stored, and disposed in a manner that controls
fugitive dust, blowing debris, and other potential nuisance conditions.
4. Fugitive dust shall be controlled on this site.
5. The maximum permissible noise level shall not exceed the light industrial limit of
70 db(A), as measured according to 25-12-102, Colorado Revised Statutes.
6. Any existing septic system involved in a commercial endeavor (i.e. office, etc.) is
required to be reviewed by a Colorado Registered Professional Engineer and a copy
of that review submitted to this Division, before the required I.S.D.S. Evaluation
can be performed.
TJ/cs-240
\I! FEB 1 7 1995
9tji.�. w
COMMUNITY uEVELOPMENT
1000 10TH STREET, GREELEY, COLORADO 80631 (303) 350-9780
March 1, 1995
Mr. Todd Hodges
Weld County Department of Planning Services
1400 North 17th Avenue
Greeley, CO 80631
USR 1074
Dear Todd:
As we discussed yesterday afternoon, the members of the City of
Greeley Planning Commission who were present at yesterday's meeting
unanimously recommended denial of the Ditter USR application. I
have enclosed a copy of the Planning Commission staff report which
supports the Planning Commission's recommendation. It was the
position of the Planning Commission that the location of this
industrial -type use between two residential areas is totally
inappropriate.
In addition to the attached justification, the Planning Commission
specifically and strongly recommended that the property owners of
the Seeley Lake area and the Pinnacle Park Subdivision be notified
of the application prior to the County Commissioner's public hearing
if they have not already been notified.
As usual, we really appreciate the opportunity to comment.
Very truly yours,
Lanell J. Adler
Planner II
Attachment
e>h bi i I
,JC
Lc7721,
MAR 1995
e.C tit) cA
951192
PLANNING COMMISSION SUMMARY
ITEM:
PROJECT:
Weld County Referral
Use by Special Review to Allow an Excavation Business
and Storage of Heavy Equipment in the Agricultural Zone
LOCATION: West of Weld County Road 35 and South of U.S.
Highway 392
APPLICANTS: Larry, Stacy, and Kerri Ditter
PLANNING COMMISSION HEARING DATE: February 28, 1995
PLANNING COMMISSION FUNCTION:
Review the proposal and determine compliance with the City of Greeley
Comprehensive Plan and make a recommendation to Weld County.
PROJECT OVERVIEW AND BACKGROUND:
The applicants propose to operate an excavation business and store heavy equipment
in the Agricultural zone. The storage part of the business constitutes an industrial -
type use both in the city and the county. The equipment associated with the business
consists of two loaders, a backhoe, a skid loader, two trucks and two trailers. The
applicants provide excavation services to the agricultural community and for
commercial and residential development. The business presently employs four
employees on one shift from approximately 7:00 a.m. to 6:00 p.m. The employees
drive to the site and drive the excavation equipment from there to the excavation site.
At the end of the day, the employees return the equipment to the property where it is
stored overnight. The business is conducted five to six days per week.
The tandem dump trucks which would be stored and driven from the site weigh
approximately 21,280 pounds and typically are pulling a trailer weighing 8,000
pounds. On the trailers are one of the following pieces of equipment:
• 544E Loader Weighing Approximately 26,000 pounds
• 544D Loader Weighing Approximately 24,000 pounds
• John Deere 510 Backhoe Weighing Approximately 16,000 Pounds
• Skid Loader Weighing Approximately 4,000 Pounds
The application states that from time to time clean dirt may be stored on the property
during an excavation to be returned to the excavation site at the conclusion of the
excavation project. The applicants estimate that no dirt would be stockpiled in excess
of six months. The application also states that the equipment would be stored to the
south of an existing metal shed and a building not yet constructed. The new building
is proposed to be constructed in either spring or fall 1995. The equipment is
presently being stored where it is visible from Highway 392.
951192
No new landscaping or screening is proposed.
The site is located outside of the City's Long -Range Expected Growth Area but
within the area which the City plans to include as an urban growth area to be
specifically designated in an intergovernmental agreement with Weld County. With
the intergovernmental agreement, the City plans to request the County apply City
standards for development in this area.
SITE DATA:
Surrounding Land Uses
Surrounding Zonings
Acreage
Current Use of Property
North - Highway 392, Pinnacle Park Rural
Residential Subdivision
South - Vacant Ground in Native Grasses,
Seeley Lake Rural Residential
Subdivision
East - Weld County Road 35
West - Vacant Ground in Native Grasses
North - A (Agricultural) and R-1 (Low -
Density Residential)
South - A (Agricultural) and R-1 (Low -
Density Residential)
East - A (Agricultural)
West - A (Agricultural)
8 Acres, More or Less
2 Residences and Outbuildings, Equipment
Storage and Excavation Business
KEY ISSUE:
Does the proposed business in this location comply with the policies of the City of
Greeley's Comprehensive Plan?
ANALYSIS:
The Comprehensive Plan does not address this type of development outside of the
City's Long -Range Expected Growth Area. However, the Comprehensive Plan does
encourage compatibility of adjoining land uses and sets forth standards for industrial
development.
Specifically the Comprehensive Plan provides that industrial development is
encouraged to be located in areas where conflicts with other land uses are minimal
and which have rail access and/or close proximity to expressways. While this
Planning Comm. Summary 2
WCR/Ditter USR
95.192
particular land uses would not benefit from locating adjacent to rail access or an
expressway, the issue of conflicts with other land uses must be addressed. This
proposed outside storage use would be more appropriate located away from
residential subdivision uses.
The Comprehensive Plan clearly states that industrial development should be located
so that negative external influences generated by the industrial use do not affect either
existing or potential nonindustrial land uses and should be geographically separated
from existing or anticipated commercial and residential land uses if the industrial use
generates significant negative external impacts. This business with the potential
negative visual impacts associated with the storage of heavy equipment should be
located away from the existing residential uses.
The City's Comprehensive Plan also encourages enhancement of the visual appeal of
properties located adjacent to principal thoroughfares, entryways, and activity areas.
As stated earlier in a letter to Weld County, Highway 392 is a much -traveled route
which behaves like an entryway and should be protected from negative visual
impacts. We are also concerned about access onto Highway 392 with heavy
equipment. Motorists in this area travel at high speeds, and site distance from the
property is limited because of the existing buildings and trees. The applicants have
indicated an interest in adding an access onto Weld County Road 35 from the
property. If the application is approved, access should be restricted to the county
road, and an extensive screening plan to provide a year-round buffer of the property
from the travel corridor and adjacent residences should be provided.
PLANNING STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
The Planning staff recommends that the Planning Commission find that the proposed
use would not be compatible with the existing surrounding land uses and therefore
does not conform to the policies of the Comprehensive Plan and further recommends
that the Planning Commission recommend denial of the request to Weld County.
In the event the City of Greeley Planning Commission decides to recommend
approval of the application to Weld County, the staff recommends the following
conditions be included with the recommendation:
1. Access with heavy equipment shall be restricted to Weld County Road 35.
2. Prior to recording the special review permit plat, an extensive landscape plan,
adequate to provide year-round screening of the stored heavy equipment, shall be
reviewed and approved by the Weld County Planning Department. The plan
shall be implemented during the 1995 growing season and shall be maintained on
the property.
Planning Comm. Summary 3
WCR/Ditter USR
951192
ATTACHMENTS:
Attachment A -
Attachment B -
Attachment C -
Attachment D -
Attachment E -
Vicinity Map
Project Narrative
Site Plan
Pinnacle Park Subdivision Plat
January 27, 1995, Letter to Weld County Planning Staff
Planning Comm. Summary
4 WCR/Ditter USR
951192
Hello