Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout20250215.tiffHearing Certification Docket No. 2025-14.A Board of County Commissioners Weld County, Colorado Probable Cause hearing, PCSC25-0003, to consider setting a Show Cause Hearing to determine whether or not the permittee is in compliance with certain Requirements contained in Zoning Permit — Class I Home Occupation, ZPHO24-0005, for a home office for a flooring business in the R-1 (Low -Density Residential) Zone District — Abbey Van Horn A public hearing was conducted on January 29, 2025, at 9:00 a.m., with the following present: Commissioner Perry L. Buck, Chair Commissioner Scott K. James, Pro-Tem Commissioner Jason S. Maxey Commissioner Lynette Peppier Commissioner Kevin D. Ross — Excused Also present: Acting Clerk to the Board, Jess Reid Assistant County Attorney, Karin McDougal Department of Planning Services Representative, Maxwell Nader The following business was transacted: =' A public Probable Cause hearing, PCSC25-0003, was conducted to consider setting a Show Cause Hearing to determine whether or not the permittee, Abbey Van Horn, is in compliance with certain Requirements contained in Zoning Permit — Class I Home Occupation, ZPHO24-0005, for a home office for a flooring business in the R-1 (Low -Density Residential) Zone District. Karin McDougal, Assistant County Attorney, made this a matter of record. El Maxwell Nader, Department of Planning Services, provided the history of the ZPHO Permit, and the general location of the site, which is in the R-1 (Low -Density Residential) Zone District. He stated the initial complaint about a commercial flooring business was submitted on October 28, 2024, discussions with the homeowner regarding a permit for the home office aspect of the flooring business occurred in November, and staff approved ZPHO24-0005, on January 3, 2025. After issuance of the permit, he relayed staff received complaints and photos of activities taking place on the subject property, specifically, employees coming to the site and commercial vehicles being present. He stated staff visited the site on January 10, 2025, and witnessed activities that were not in compliance with the ZPHO permit. He noted, since the issuance of the permit on January 3, 2025, photos had been submitted by the neighbor on a daily basis documenting activity. He cc : PL(DE/MN/KR) 0.2/24/25 2025-0215 PL2950 Hearing Certification (PCSC25-0003) — Abbey Van Horn Page 2 cited the permit is in violation of Weld County Code Section 23-4-990.F (A Class I Home Occupation shall be conducted by the members of the Living Unit of the Dwelling Unit. A Class II Home Occupation shall be conducted by the members of the Living Unit of the Dwelling Unit plus no I more than two [2] external employees) and 23-4-990.B.6.a (The proposed parking location of any Commercial Vehicle [if applicable], including distances from the property Lot lines and other Structures on the property. Notwithstanding any section of this Code to the contrary, a Class II Home Occupation may include up to two [2] associated Commercial Vehicles), both of which can be associated with Section 23-4-990.D.4 (The Home Occupation shall not create any negative impacts to the public health, safety and general welfare of the neighboring property owners, such as little or no offensive noise, vibration, smoke, dust, odors, lighting, traffic congestion, trash accumulation, heat, glare or electrical interference, or other hazard or nuisance noticeable off the Lot). He displayed and described 16 images of employees and vehicles on the site, added there were many more photos that were not displayed but had been added to the case file, and noted the people and vehicles on the site were a daily occurrence. He stated staff had found probable cause to schedule a Show Cause Hearing and suggested March 5, 2025, for said hearing, if the Board concurred probable cause had been found. Ei In response to Commissioner James, Mr. Nader explained the difference between the Class I and Class II Home Occupation Permits. He relayed the Class I is for a home office and is the only type allowed in the R-1 Zone District, unlike a Class II, which is allowed in the E (Estate) and A (Agricultural) Zone Districts and allows for outside employees and commercial vehicles. Responding to Commissioner Maxey regarding the people and vehicles onsite, and how staff knows they are employees and commercial vehicles, Mr. Nader explained there are additional photos that show the same people and vehicles entering, and leaving the site, each day, and relayed a site visit was conducted by staff who witnessed additional employees coming to the site as well. Mr. Nader confirmed for Commissioner James that under a Class I ZPHO Permit, the permittee can deliver the products, but an employee is not permitted to do so, and reiterated to Commissioner Maxey that the R-1 Zone District only allows for a Class I ZPHO Permit. Mr. Nader did clarify the R-1 Zone District allows USRs, to some degree, as outlined in Section 23-3-110.F.10 (F. Uses by Special Review. The following Buildings, Structures and Uses may be constructed, occupied, operated and maintained in the R-1 Zone District upon approval of a permit in accordance with the requirements and procedures set forth in Article II, Division 4 of this Chapter. 10. Uses similar to the Uses listed as permitted as long as the Use complies with the general intent of the Zone District). He explained that permitting process, including the submittal of comments from outside referral agencies, the notification of surrounding property owners (SPOs) and a hearing in front of the Board. Responding to Commissioner James, Ms. McDougal cited Section 2- 4-40 and confirmed that although the Probable Cause hearing is not open to the public for comment, the permit holder or their representative is allowed an opportunity to speak and provide rebuttal evidence. In response to Commissioner Peppier regarding the 2025-0215 PL2950 Hearing Certification (PCSC25-0003) — Abbey Van Horn Page 3 language of "two external employees," as stated in 23-4-990.F, Mr. Nader clarified staff interprets the language to mean, simply two (2) external employees, regardless of whether they are onsite at the same time or not. Chair Buck reviewed for the permit holder and the public, the procedures to follow should this case result in a tie vote due to four (4) Commissioners being present and Commissioner Ross being excused. =" Deborah Ytterburg, Johnson and Ytterburg, P.C., represented the permittee and stated, of the four (4) people employed by the flooring business, three (3) live at the subject property and one (1) is an external employee. She relayed the external employee comes to the site each morning to receive task instruction and is typically there for five (5) to 20 minutes. She asserted Ms. Van Horn received an email from staff, during the permitting process, which stated such activity was allowed with a Class I ZPHO Permit and relayed there are two (2) vans, one (1) of which is driven by a person living at the property and the other by the external employee. She noted Ms. Van Horn was told the vans would be able to be stored at her property, so long as the logos were covered, and acknowledged one (1) of the images Mr. Nader displayed shows a logo on a van, which has since been covered. She summarized that the images, those shown by Mr. Nader and those in the complete case file, show the residents of the home going about their daily lives. She discussed the traffic associated with the business and stated there is no external traffic related to deliveries and the registered address for the company is a P.O. Box, therefore, customers would never come to the site. =', Mr. Nader confirmed he had discussions with the permittee about logos on the vehicles and clarified having logos on a vehicle does not constitute it as a Commercial Vehicle. He read the Code definition for Commercial Vehicle, and stated if a vehicle, even with a logo, is used for daily transportation, it is allowed in all zone districts. He relayed, staff deemed the subject vans as Commercial Vehicles due to the consistency of the activity and them being utilized for the flooring business. Commissioner James stated he found there was probable cause to set a Show Cause Hearing, but noted he found it abhorrent that pictures were being taken by SPOs over fences and in a stalking manner. =!',, In the matter of Probable Cause hearing, PCSC25-0003, Commissioner James moved to find there is adequate evidence to set a Show Cause Hearing, for March 5, 2025, at 9:00 a.m., for Class I Home Occupation, ZPHO24-0005, for a home office for a flooring business in the R-1 (Low -Density Residential) Zone District, held by Abbey Van Horn, based on the evidence presented by Planning staff and stated the site is out of compliance with Section 23-4-990.D.4, as it relates to the traffic associated with the Home Business. The motion was seconded by Commissioner Maxey, who stated he had concerns about how these types of violations come before the Board, and felt staff was being utilized as some type of police force. He went on to say he finds the business 2025-0215 PL2950 Hearing Certification (PCSC25-0003) — Abbey Van Horn Page 4 activity unobtrusive; however, based on the evidence presented, he found there was probable cause to set a Show Cause Hearing. Upon a roll -call vote, the motion carried 4-0, with Commissioner Ross being excused. There being no further discussion, the hearing was completed at 10:04 a.m. (Clerks Note: Subsequent to the hearing, on Monday, February 3, 2025, the date for the Show Cause Hearing was reconsidered and was moved to March 26, 2025, at 9:00 a.m. to allow for a full quorum of the Board to be present.) The Board of County Commissioners of Weld County, Colorado, approved the above and foregoing Hearing Certification, on motion duly made and seconded, by the following vote on the 12th day of February, A.D., 2025: Perry L. Buck, Chair: Aye Scott K. James, Pro-Tem: Aye Jason S. Maxey: Aye Lynette Peppier: Aye Kevin D. Ross: Aye Attest: Esther E. Gesick, Clerk to the Board 2025-0215 PL2950 ATTENDANCE LIST /Zq/Z5 NAME - PLEASE PRINT LEG1$LY ADDRESS (CITY, STATE ZIP) EMAIL COUNTY Of RESIDENCE SPEAKING (Y/N)? r I a& Obrkk.(SO EL , ...1 fco t3s8o ko, (.,;t6,— botU Al D 2 boraL\ $ Caraw G: -� Un:ti a Au)oy cc c '\ow, cow► B►0o i,loi Y' .%po bm �d co scxw 2 y J Hello