HomeMy WebLinkAbout992857.tiff SUMMARY OF THE WELD COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING
(Corrected) Tuesday, November 2, 1999
A regular meeting of the Weld County Planning Commission was held Tuesday, November 2,1999, in the
Weld County Public Health/Planning Building, (Room 210), 1555 N. 17th Avenue, Greeley, Colorado. The
meeting was called to order by Chairman, Fred Walker, at 1:30 p.m.
ROLL CALL
Fred Walker Present
Christie Nicklas Present
John Folsom Present
Jack Epple Absent
Bruce Fitzgerald Present
Michael Miller Present
Stephan Mokray Present
Arlan Marrs Absent
Bryant Gimlin Present
Also Present: Kim Ogle, Planner; Eric Jerman, Planner; Julie Chester, Planner; Monica Daniels-Mika, Director,
Department of Planning Services; Dennis Renley, Plans Examiner; Roger Vigil, Plans Examiner; Building
Inspection; Lee Morrison, Assistant County Attorney; Sheble McConnelogue, Trevor Jiricek, Department of
Public Health and Environment; Trisha Swanson, Secretary.
The summary of the last regular meeting of the Weld County Planning Commission held on October 19, 1999,
was approved as read.
Case Number: USR-1240
Applicant: Cornerstone Evangelical Free Church
Planner: Eric Jerman
Legal Description: Lot A of RE-1940, being part of NE4, Section 12, Township 4 North, Range 68 West
of the 6th P.M., Weld County, Colorado
Request: A Site Specific Development Plan and a Special Review Permit for a Church in the
Agricultural Zone District
Location: South of and adjacent to Hwy 60 and approximately 1 mile west of WCR 13
Eric Jerman, Department of Planning Services, asked that Case USR-1240 be continued indefinitely at the
request of the applicant as they are not able to fulfill the requirements of condition #2 A at this time. Eric
stated that this additional time is requested for the applicant to continue to negotiate with the Town of
Johnstown for sewer service.
The Chair asked if there was anyone in the audience who wished to speak for or against this application. No
one wished to speak.
Michael Miller moved that Case USR-1240 be continued indefinitely. Christie Nicklas seconded the motion.
The Chair asked the secretary to poll the members of the Planning Commission for their decision. John
Folsom, yes; Stephen Mokray, yes; Michael Miller, yes: Bryant Gimlin, yes; Bruce Fitzgerald, yes; Cristie
Nicklas, yes; Fred Walker, yes. Motion carried unanimously.
CASE: USR-1247
APPLICANT: Tri-State Generation and Transmission, Inc.
PLANNER: Kim Ogle
REQUEST: A Site Specific Development Plan and Special Review Permit for a Public Utilities Facility,
specifically a 115 kV/12.5 kV Transmission Line and equipment modernization at Substation
LEGAL DESCRIPTION: Part of the NW4 of Section 1, Township 1 North, Range 68 West of the 6th
P.M., Weld County, Colorado
LOCATION: East of and adjacent to WCR 11; approximately 1/10 of a mile south of ,.— O1-
State Highway 52
992857
SUMMARY OF THE WELD COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION
November 2, 1999
Page 2
Kim Ogle, Department of Planning Services, presented Case USR-1247 and read the case into the record.
The Department of Planning services is recommending approval of this application.
Fred Walker asked if the 10-foot right-of-way mentioned on page 4, #3 was dedicated or reserved. After
discussion, it was decided by Lee Morrison that it was to be reserved as the applicant does not own interest
in the right-of-way.
Mark Flary, Applicant, stated that the line is needed to keep up with the growth occurring in the area.
The Chair asked if there was anyone in the audience who wished to speak for or against this application
Tom Hughes, a surrounding property owner who represented other property owners, stated that he does not
like the future power poles as they block the view of the mountains for future development and the possible
health problems. Tom would like to see the applicants bury the line instead of having it above ground. Fred
Walker mentioned that there are already existing power line along that road. Tom mentioned that these lines
are smaller than the proposed lines and with lower voltage. Discussion followed to why these lines had to be
higher. The law requires the height to increase with the increased voltage. The cost associated with burying
the lines is ten times as expensive.
Dr. Robert Pearson, project manager with Radiant Engineering Corporation in Denver, spoke concerning the
health effects. The higher power line's magnetic field is lower, the electrical current in the wires is reduced
by the larger line. He also stated that the Federal Government has stopped doing research on the health
effects of magnetic fields and electric current associated with power lines as there has been nothing found
to indicate any connection. Bryant Gimlin asked if the buried lines would be more of a possible threat. Dr.
Pearson stated that the lines being closer would cancel out the magnetic field. The real issue of burying the
line is the difference between $100,000 and$1,000,000 per mile, as well as the ease of repairing the unburied
line.
Lee Morrison asked the applicant a few questions and indicated that the wording on# 3 should say reserve
instead of designate.
The Chair asked the secretary to poll the members of the Planning Commission concerning the change in
wording. John Folsom, yes; Stephen Mokray, yes; Michael Miller, yes: Bryant Gimlin, yes; Bruce
Fitzgerald, yes; Cristie Nicklas, yes; Fred Walker, yes. Motion carried unanimously.
Christie Nicklas moved that the Planning Commission approve USR-1240 with changes in the wording on
Condition# 3. Stephen Mokray seconded the motion
The Chair asked the secretary to poll the members of the Planning Commission for their decision. John
Folsom, yes; Stephen Mokray, yes; Michael Miller, yes: Bryant Gimlin, yes; Bruce Fitzgerald, yes; Cristie
Nicklas, yes; Fred Walker, yes. Motion carried unanimously.
Christie Nicklas commented that she understood the argument about the visual impact on the future
developments in the area; but it is these new developments that created the need for the line in the first place.
CASE: Z-532
APPLICANT: Vector Properties, LLC
PLANNER: Eric Jerman
LEGAL DESCRIPTION: NW4 Section 6, Township 6 North, Range 67 West of the 6th P.M., Weld
County, Colorado.
REQUEST: Change of Zone from Agricultural to PUD for 45 lots with Residential uses. Lot sizes are
proposed to range from 2 to 4 acres.
LOCATION: South of and adjacent to WCR 74; east of and adjacent to WCR 13.
Eric Jerman, Department of Planning Services, presented Case Z-532 and read the case into the record,
followed by a video of the site, with notes of possible problems for the development. The access off of WCR
SUMMARY OF THE WELD COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION
November 2, 1999
Page 3
13 will be only for emergency access, with the main entrance from WCR 74.The Department of Planning
Services is recommending denial as the submitted materials are not in compliance with Section 6.4.3 of the
Weld County Planned Unit Development Ordinance. The proposal is not consistent with the Weld County
Comprehensive Plan, which does not support the development of urban scale development outside of the
Urban Growth Boundary. The principal concerns are as follows: The number of lots exceeds the maximum
of 5 lots (total of 45 lots)allowed in this area, the applicant has proposed to set aside only '/the open space
that is required in the PUD Ordinance, no pedestrian trails or sidewalks, poor soils on the western and
southern portion of the property may cause problems for construction, shallow ground water on the property
may cause problems with the septic systems, and the lot size is inconsistent with the Town of Windsor's Land
Use Plan.
John Folsom asked if it was inside the Urban Growth Area or Boundary or not. Eric stated that it was an area
the Town of Windsor recognizes as their municipal growth area. The county and Windsor do not have an
Intergovernmental Agreement, and the county does not recognize Windsor's Urban Growth Boundary (UGB).
John asked why they should not develop as there is development around this area. Eric stated that those
areas were annexed by Windsor before the current laws were in effect. Eric explained that the town had to
conform with 1/6th contiguity requirements.
Michael Miller asked about the placement of the septic envelopes next to each other, although some of the
septic envelopes are higher than the home. Trevor Jiricek, Department of Public Health and Environment,
stated that the two septic sites are acceptable.
Michael Miller asked about the lot lines being drawn to the center of the road. Eric stated that the Department
of Planning Services had asked the applicant to change that when this plan was submitted in the Sketch Plan
stage, but that the applicants chose not to change them. Michael also asked Trevor if the percolation tests
were extremely low, which Trevor said they were not. Trevor stated that the Department of Public Health and
Environment had more trouble approving the septic arrangement with the high water table than the clay soils
on the site.
Lee discussed the annexation of the site, that it would be within the town's limits. Fred Walker questioned the
statement that the site was not contiguous, stating that he recalled WCR 74 being a part of the flagpole
annexation. Eric stated that the Trap Range is not a part of the Town of Windsor. Fred asked for clarification
about page 3 paragraph 2 concerned with this site possibly not being within the Town of Windsor's Urban
Growth Boundaries implied"as defied by the county". Eric said this was correct. Fred wanted to point out that
the town does consider this a part of their UGB. Lee pointed out that as it does not fall into the recognized
area by the county, it falls by default into the rule that it must be within '/ mile of the municipals services as
defined by the Weld County Comprehensive Plan.
John asked Eric if he had spoken with Windsor Planning and why the town is not interested in annexation.
Eric stated that the town had sent a memorandum concerning the density of the proposed subdivision, but
that it was entirely possible that the town would encompass this area in the future.
Mike Sollenberger, the applicant, stated that they had gone to the Town of Windsor to discuss annexation,
but as Windsor's core of annexation was one mile. The applicant stated where the contiguity came from with
Windsor city limits. Mike stated that he feels they have met the intent of the Windsor Community separator
and feels they could meet the concerns of the Planning Department with strict covenants concerning
landscaping. Mr. Sollenberger discussed that the lot sizes vary and that the town of Windsor does not have
a requirement of 2 '/:acre minimum at this time.
Michael Miller asked about the building envelopes in the southwest area where the ground water is so high.
The applicant stated that the building envelopes are 12' in elevation above the ditch ridge. Michael asked why
the open space was so small, only 8 percent. Discussion followed concerning the size of the lots in the other
subdivisions in the area, subdivisions that are much older.
Lester Littin of Earth Engineering stated that the high water areas are in the open space area, also that the
SUMMARY OF THE WELD COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION
November 2, 1999
Page 4
site would keep the existing wetland areas in the open space. Michael Miller asked when they tested the
percolation rates. Mr. Littin responded in February, when the water table is at its lowest, and some of the
lower water table areas were re-tested in the past few months.
Stephen Mokray asked why the applicant would not consider a central sewer for the site. The applicant stated
that it takes a higher density to pay for this system and there needs to be a natural point of outfall which they
do not have on the site.
Reinhold Ziel, current owner of the land, discussed the existing topography and wetlands as well as the
existing sandy soil conditions, stating that he does not have to develop now, but his land is not productive farm
ground.
Aldon Hill, landowner of 292 acres to the south, stated that there is only ground water on the extreme east side
that drains off this property and the ditch is dry in the winter. He also wanted to state that the farms in the area
will still be doing aerial spraying and the subdivision landowners will also have to deal with stock dogs. Fred
mentioned that Weld County has a Right to Farm that deals with the farmers rights and the road will be paved
in the future.
Fred Walker discussed the referral letter of an adjacent subdivision supporting this development. Fred stated
how he grew up with Reinhold Ziel and he wanted the commission to realize that even ground marked "prime"
has places that are not easily farmable or productive, and this land is one of those pieces. Fred feels if the
applicant can meet the standards of the county they should be able to go forward with the subdivision process.
The open space may not be public open space, but there is a large amount of the site that will not be built
upon. Fred feels it is redundant to request additional open space on top of the open lots. Fred stated that
there should be some flexibility in the PUD to work toward assisting good applications. He feels the rigidness
of the 15% open space is overdone.
John Folsom brought up the note that urban development should be adjacent to municipalities and that urban
scale properties should be annexed to towns. If Windsor indicates it could possibly be annexed, they should
maybe wait until Windsor is ready to annex the property.
Christie Nicklas stated that the applicants have used the PUD process to develop an urban scale development
that may technically follow the rules for the contiguity, but they have blatantly disregarded many of the PUD
rules for lot size, density, trying to get around the rules to do it their way, not the way that the PUD process
sets up development. They want to make up the PUD rules to suit their situation instead of following the
process. This is too urban a scale development and Windsor has made some mistakes in the past
concerning annexation, and maybe they are trying to do things slower and grow in a better way to not repeat
mistakes. This development is too urban scale for this area. Christie feels that developing this property is
probably the best thing to do, but this plan is not the way to do so.
Bruce Fitzgerald feels this development is too intense for the county, but should be developed through
Windsor.
Stephen Mokray agrees with Bruce that they should wait for annexation.
Michael Miller agrees that the best use for this property would be development. He mentions how the
Planning Department has asked for some concessions on the open space, pathways, and sidewalks and that
the developers have basically said that theydon't want to do it that way. The developers feel they have enough
open space and don't have to do sidewalks. While other PUD applications have had some concessions
made, the applicant has pushed aside too many things. If the density was lowered, there may be fewer
problems in lot size and open space, but as it stands there are a lot of marginal parts to this plan.
Fred Walker countered that there isn't much difference between this and Moriah Estates, which had 26 lots
on 62 acres that the Board of County Commissioners approved, while this is 45 lots on 120 acres, a principle
difference with Moriah being it was clustered with a large open space. Fred asked Trevor if developing could
sometimes be better for the environment than farming practices. Trevor was unable to say either way without
SUMMARY OF THE WELD COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION
November 2, 1999
Page 5
more information from studying numbers.
Christie Nicklas moved to forward Case Z-532 to the Board of County Commissioners with a recommendation
of denial along with the Planning staffs recommendation for denial as it does not meet the PUD guidelines
and is too urban of a development for the area it is in. Bruce Fitzgerald seconded the motion.
The Chair asked the secretary to poll the members of the Planning Commission for their decision. John
Folsom, yes; Stephen Mokray, yes; Michael Miller, yes; Bryant Gimlin, yes; Bruce Fitzgerald, yes; Christie
Nicklas, yes; Fred Walker, no. Motion carried.
After voting was completed Fred Walker further stated that the application is a compatible use of this land as
there are people who want to live on this land and for the Planning Commission to be presumptuous because
it feels there is something wrong with the application, not based on facts, is wrong. The property owner is in
limbo because of the two overlaying districts and his rights need to be addressed.
CHANGES TO SECTION 20 ORDINANCE 119-O
BUILDING OFFICIAL: Dennis Renley
REQUEST: Changes in requirements in the Weld County Building Code Ordinance concerning
engineered foundations.
Dennis Renley, Plans Examiner, Weld County Building Inspection Department, presented the changes to
Ordinance 119-O, the Weld County Building Code Ordinance. Dennis stated that these changes are for minor
changes to the electrical code wording to meet the correct guidelines and to change the requirements for
applications on additions to existing buildings.
Discussion covered whether this would cause a larger financial burden to the public or not. Dennis stated that
the change to the foundation guidelines will actually save most applicants between $300-$800. The current
requirements have all additions needing an engineered soils report with the application, while this change
allows more flexibility in open hole inspections with a Colorado Engineer's stamp and allowing matching
existing foundations.
Bryant Gimlin moved to approve the three changes to Ordinance 119-O. Christie Nicklas seconded the
motion.
The Chair asked the secretary to poll the members of the Planning Commission for their decision. John
Folsom, yes; Stephen Mokray, yes; Michael Miller, yes; Bryant Gimlin, yes; Bruce Fitzgerald, yes; Christie
Nicklas, yes; Fred Walker, yes. Motion carried unanimously.
SUBMITTAL DEADLINES AND FEE SCHEDULE FOR 2000
PLANNER: Monica Daniels-Mika
Monica Daniels-Mika, Director of the Department of Planning Services, presented the Planning Commission
submittal and hearing dates, including a revision to include the correct dates in November and the fee
schedule for the year 2000. Fred Walker asked if the fee schedule had increased any fees. Monica stated
that there were no changes in the fees , that the fees just have to be approved every year.
Stephen Mokray moved to approve the revised submittal and hearing dates and the fee schedule for 2000.
Michael Miller seconded the motion.
SUMMARY OF THE WELD COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION
November 2, 1999
Page 6
The Chair asked the secretary to poll the members of the Planning Commission for their decision. John
Folsom, yes; Stephen Mokray, yes; Michael Miller, yes; Bryant Gimlin, yes; Bruce Fitzgerald, yes; Christie
Nicklas, yes; Fred Walker, yes. Motion carried unanimously.
Meeting adjourned at 3:45 p.m.
Respectfully submitted,
Trisha Swanson
Secretary
Hello