Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout971798.tiffSUMMARY OF THE WELD COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING WILD Cl,;Vf_,;. Tuesday, July 1, 1997 r' 7 rt 1J 7:1 -22 A regular meeting of the Weld County Planning Commission was held July 1; 199i, in the County Commissioners' Hearing Room (Room #101), Weld County Centennial Building, 915 1irLStreet, Greeley, Colorado. The meeting was called to order by Chairman, Arlan Marrs. TO Tape 527 Glenn Vaad Gristle Nickles Fred Walker Marie Koolstra Jack Epple Rusty Tucker Stephen Mokray Shirley Camenisch Arlan Marrs Present Present Absent Present • Absent Absent Present Present Present Also Present: Monica Daniels -Mika, Director, Gloria Dunn, Current Planner, Kerri Keithley, Current Planner, Department of Planning Services; Lee Morrison, Assistant Weld County Attorney; Trevor Jiricek, Supervisor, Weld County Health Department; Tammie Pope, Secretary. The summary of the last regular meeting of the Weld County Planning Commission held on June 17, 1997, was approved with a correction. 1. REQUEST: PLANNER: Changes to the Weld County Zoning Ordinance and Subdivision Ordinance. Monica Daniels -Mika, Director, Gloria Dunn, Current Planner and Kerri Keithley, Current Planner. Monica Daniels -Mika explained why the Department of Planning Services' staff feels the proposed changes are necessary, noting that the intent is to make the Ordinances more user friendly and to provide clarity in the land use process. The purpose of the changes to the Subdivision Ordinance is to make the regulatory documents adhere to the Intergovernmental Agreements. Marie Koolstra asked for clarification as to when an IGA would take precedence. Ms. Daniels -Mika stated that the IGA is an Ordinance adopted by the County, and is an additional regulatory tool. The Department of Planning Services' staff is trying to tie them all together. Lee Morrison stated that he missed a portion of the previous meeting and was concerned by some of what he read in the summary. The IGA is an officially adopted document, consistent with the other planning documents. The Planning Commission's scope of authority is defined by the various Ordinances, including Intergovernmental Agreements. Mr. Morrison stated that he did not feel it was appropriate for the Planning Commission to say that the document is not one they favor, and therefore ought to be ignored. Ms. Koolstra asked who will "police" the IGA's to make sure that all sides involved are participating, noting that Firestone did not participate in the last hearing without coercion. Mr. Morrison discussed how all sides have the ability to seek specific performance of the Agreement, and the Department of Planning Services' staff has talked with the Town of Firestone representatives to address how the Agreement will work. Ms. Daniels -Mika explained thatthe current language in the Zoning Ordinance states that every five years the Zoning Map needs to be readopted. The County is currently in the process of going to GIS, so the proposed change is to remove the time parameters. Gloria Dunn gave an overview of the changes to Section 43, Mobile Homes and Accessory Dwelling Units. The Department of Planning Services' staff is proposing to limit the type of structure allowed for accessory farm use to only mobile homes, which are temporary. Accessory dwellings are permanent structures, which make them inconsistent with the temporary nature of the allowed use. Ms. Dunn stated that the staff is also recommending approval of language requiring that the need for an accessory to farm mobile home be established and then revalidated annually. There was discussion between Ms. Koolstra and Ms. Daniels -Mika as to why these changes are necessary. Ms. Daniels -Mika explained that this change is requested so that justification for the use will be required. Ms. Koolstra noted her personal 971798 WELD COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES July 1, 1997 Page 2 experience where neighbors were more receptive to the idea of her kids building a home, but the County was more receptive to the idea of a mobile home. Arlan Marrs stated that he, as a landowner, does not want to be limited to mobile homes. Kent Keithley reiterated that accessory to the farm is a temporary use, and so by nature, a mobile home is much easier to remove than a stick built home. Mr. Marrs asked if a modular home is considered a mobile home. Ms. Keithley stated yes, as long as it is not on a permanent foundation. There was discussion about the Uniform Building Code regulating the type of foundations for permanent and temporary structures. Mr. Marrs stated that he feels that landowners should be able use mobile homes, modulars on permanent foundations, or even stick built homes as long as they agree to remove them when there is no longer the need for them. There was discussion regarding the differences between mobile homes and manufactured homes. Lee Morrison explained that manufactured homes are those placed on permanent foundations and they are treated the same as stick built houses; all others are referred to as mobile homes. Mr. Morrison suggested that a separate vote be taken for this issue. Ms. Dunn gave an overview of the Medical Hardship and Temporary Accessory Structure Sections. Ms. Koolstra asked if the Department of Planning Services' staff checks on the compatibility of a temporary accessory structure; Ms. Dunn stated no, because it is not a zoning permit process. Ms. Koolstra stated that she feels this is inconsistent, as often times these mobile homes are not as well taken care of as mobile homes that are lived in. Ms. Dunn explained that in the agricultural zone, a small, stick built storage building is a use by right. Therefore, a mobile home used for storage would be compatible, as it would only require a building permit. Mr. Marrs stated that he feels this encourages the use of mobile homes for storage. Mr. Morrison stated that this does not encourage the use of mobile homes for storage, as the building permit would be an additional hurdle not required for the shed (unless it has electricity). Ms. Keithley gave an overview of Section 23, Site Plan Review, explaining that the revision was prompted by the lack of information requested from the applicant in the current packet. Trevor Jiricek gave an overview of Section 47, Livestock Feeding Performance Standards. The changes were made because there was a problem with the way it was written in the past. As it was written, every livestock feeding operation in the County was in violation of the Ordinance. Mr. Jiricek gave examples of the unrealistic things the Health Department was to have approved in the previous wording. It has been amended to a list of standards or criteria which can be used to evaluate the operation or compliance of the facility if the Health Department were to receive a complaint. Stephen Mokray asked what the Health Department does prior to this to prevent complaints. Mr. Jiricek stated that the best management practices most facilities operate under are not part of any Ordinance or Regulations. The Health Department has found that most Ordinances are most effective when complaint -driven, and they also do not have the staff to inspect the facilities one by one. Ms. Daniels -Mika added that the Health Department will respond to requests for proactive suggestions. After discussion, it was decided that "water -tight" will be deleted from Section 47.2.1 and "in accordance with the Confined Animal Feeding Operation Control Regulations" will be added after "surface". Per Ms. Koolstra's request, Mr. Jiricek discussed ground water monitoring wells. Mr. Marrs asked if the monitoring wells could be implemented if Section 47.2.7 were not included. Mr. Morrison stated that if the County was going to assume the cost for the well, it would not be necessary. However, since the County wants the information developed by the party suspected of causing the problem, this wording would be necessary for authority to obtain the information. There was discussion regarding groundwater being public property, regarding the CAFO regulations, and regarding the County's authority. There were concerns that 47.2.7 was too broad. Glenn Vaad suggested the elimination of the paragraph due to the State's power to protect the health and welfare of the people, and also because the Use by Special Review process attaches Conditions of Approval. There was discussion about the qualified ground water scientist definition; Mr. Jiricek stated that if 47.2.7 is deleted, the definition can also be deleted. After further discussion, it was decided that 47.2.7 is unnecessary, as the County will be protected by CAFO Regulations. Glenn Vaad moved to delete 47.2.7, with the subsequent renumbering, and to delete the new definition of qualified ground water scientist. Stephen Mokray seconded the motion. 971798 WELD COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES July 1, 1997 Page 3 The Chairman asked the secretary to poll the members of the Planning Commission for their decision. Glenn Vaad-yes; Gristle Nicklas-yes; Marie Koolstra-yes; Stephen Mokray-yes; Shirley Camenisch-yes; Arlan Marrs - yes. Motion carried unanimously. Glenn Vaad questioned the wording of Section 4.6.14 and asked why it talks about the responsibility of "the planner" until the end, and then it refers to "the Department of Planning Services". Ms. Daniels -Mika explained that the planner makes a recommendation to staff, which then becomes the recommendation of the Department of Planning Services. Ms. Koolstra stated that the wording of Section 43, to her, implies that the County looks at agrioulture as impermanent. There was further discussion about Section 43. Ms. Daniels -Mika suggested that the wording be changed to include anything but a stick built structure, which is a permanent structure. Mr. Marrs ofstructure stated a as long as the landowner understands it is a temporary use, he should be able to place any type on his land. There was discussion about accessory structures causing confusion to prospective property buyers; they could give buyers the impression that the structures are a use by right. Mr. Morrison suggested that the permts be recorded or covenants be required in order to give legal notice. Per Shirley Camenisch's request, Ms. Daniels -Mika discussed what the fees are based on. Ms. Koolstra, asked what landowners such as Francis Gregerson (Gregerson Dairy) will do with existing permanent structures. Ms. Daniels -Mika stated that Mr. Gregerson has already substantiated the need for accessory dwellings, so there is no problem. If the use were to change, Mr. Gregerson could work with the Department of Planning Services to try to reclassify the accessory dwellings. Ms. Daniels -Mika explained how there is no accessory use available to rent a structure in an agricultural zone district. Mr. Marrs asked if the Department of Planning Services' staff wanted to make any changes to Section 43 before the Planning Commission votes on it. Ms. Daniels -Mika recommended that a consistent standard be used throughout the Subdivision and Zoning Ordinances stating that the first two pages of the application will be recorded at the Weld County Clerk & Recorders Office and the appropriate fee will be paid. Mr. Morrison and Ms. Daniels -Mika discussed whether the annual reviews should be recorded as well. Mr. Morrison again suggested that a covenant be required. It was also suggested that the property owner be required to notify the Weld County Assessor's Office, and they in turn make a notation on the property tax notice. Mr. Morrison stated that the Assessor's Office would have to be involved in that decision. Mr. Marrs asked how big of a problem the issue is. Ms. Daniels -Mika explained that the Department of Planning Services' staff is starting to see many such cases all of a sudden. Mr. Marrs noted that the changes requested by the Department of Planning Services' staff will not prevent the possibility of someone buying property with the misunderstanding that they can use the existing accessory dwellings as they please. Ms. Daniels -Mika reiterated that a temporary structure needs to be temporary. Ms. Daniels -Mika explained how the property owners will be reminded yearly to submit justification of the use. There was further discussion about to what extent the County should go in order to make the disclosure process as easy as possible for any prospective buyers. Cristie Nicklas moved that the Subdivision Ordinance changes be forwarded to the Board of County Commissioners with Planning Commission's recommendation for approval. Stephen Mokray 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; Stephen Mokray-yes; Shirley Camenisch-yes; Arlan Marrs - yes. Motion carried unanimously. Gristle Nicklas moved that changes to Section 43 of the Weld County Zoning Ordinance be forwarded to the Board of County Commissioners, with the deletion of "Mobile Home" and replacement with "Accessory Dwelling Unit", with the Planning Commission's recommendation for approval. Ms. Dunn asked if Ms. Nicklas' intent was to exclude mobile homes; Ms. Nicklas stated no. Mr. Morrison explained that "dwelling unit" includes everything but mobile homes, so Ms. Nicklas' was inadvertently excluding mobile homes with her choice of wording. 3'71798 WELD COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES July 1, 1997 Page 4 Cristie Nicklas moved that changes to Section 43 of the Weld County Zoning Ordinance be forwarded to the Board of County Commissioners, with the addition of "Accessory Dwelling Unit" and with the addition of "Prior to the issuance of the Temporary Accessory Farm Use permit, the applicant shall provide for recording a covenant enforceable by the County which adequately describes the Mobile Home or Accessory Dwelling Unit and provides that the use of the Mobile Home or Accessory Dwelling Unit is subject to the Temporary Accessory Farm Use permit" to Section 43.2.3.3, 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; Stephen Mokray-yes; Shirley Camenisch-yes; Arlan Marrs - yes. Motion carried unanimously. Stephen Mokray moved that changes to Section 47 of the Weld County Zoning Ordinance be forwarded to the Board of County Commissioners 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; Stephen Mokray-yes; Shirley Camenisch-yes; Arlan Marrs - yes. Motion carried unanimously. Glenn Vaad moved that changes to Section 21.4.3 of the Weld County Zoning Ordinance be forwarded to the Board of County Commissioners 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; Stephen Mokray-yes; Shirley Camenisch-yes; Arlan Marrs - yes. Motion carried unanimously. Cristie Nicklas moved that changes to Section 23 of the Weld County Zoning Ordinance be forwarded to the Board of County Commissioners with the Planning Commission's recommendation for approval. Stephen Mokray 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; Stephen Mokray-yes; Shirley Camenisch-yes; Arlan Marrs - yes. Motion carried unanimously. Glenn Vaad moved that changes to Section 10 of the Weld County Zoning Ordinance be forwarded to the Board of County Commissioners 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; Stephen Mokray-yes; Shirley Camenisch-yes; Arlan Marrs - yes. Motion carried unanimously. Ms. Dunn explained that the proposed addition to Section 24 is to give the Weld County Public Works Department the ability to use something other than the 100 -year storm to measure runoff, and to clean up the language. Stephen Mokray moved that changes to Section 24 of the Weld County Zoning Ordinance be forwarded to the Board of County Commissioners with the Planning Commission's recommendation for approval. Glenn Vaad seconded the motion. WELD COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES July 1, 1997 Page 5 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; Stephen Mokray-yes; Shirley Camenisch-yes; Arlan Marrs - yes. Motion carried unanimously. Meeting adjourned at 3:55 p.m. Respectfully submitted, Tammie Pope Secretary 971798 Hello