HomeMy WebLinkAbout20231251.tiffMINUTES OF THE WELD COUNTY UTILITIES ADVISORY COMMITTEE
A regular meeting of the Weld County Utilities Coordinating Advisory Committee was held on Thursday, April
27, 2023, via Microsoft Teams Meeting. The meeting was called to order by Chair, Michael Wailes, at 10:00
a.m.
Members Present Mike McRoberts, Michael Wailes, Jerry Adams, Alyssia Padilla, Robert Fleck, Amy
Mutchie.
Members Absent: Jared Rauch, Shelly Bergstrom, Jeremy Young and Andrew Holder.
Also Present: Chris Gathman, Department of Planning Services and Kris Ranslem, Secretary.
Case Number: PUDF23-0001
Applicant T3 Land & Investment, LLC
Planner: Chris Gathman
Request: A PUD (Planned Unit Development) Final Plan for four (4) lots with C-3
(Business Commercial), C-4 (Highway Commercial), I-1 (Industrial), 1-2
(Industrial) and 1-3 (Industrial) Uses along with two (2) non -buildable outlots
(Tract A and Tract B). Tract B will contain a detention pond for the PUD.
Legal Description: Lot A Recorded Exemption RECX19-0011; being part of the SE4 Section
13, Township 4 North, Range 65 West of the 6. P.M., Weld County,
Colorado.
Location: North of and adjacent to County Road 44; west of and adjacent to County
Road 49.
•
Chris Gathman, Planning Services, presented Case PUDF23-0001. He stated that the applicant is applying fora 4 -lot
Planned Unit Development. The property is currently vacant. Planned Unit Developments are subject to the
Utility Easement requirements delineated in Section 24-3-60 of the Weld County Code.
A future right-of-way for grade separation at County Road 44 and County Road 49 for future road
improvements is identified on the draft PUD final plat (consistent with the PUD change of zone plat recorded
under PUDZ19-0001 recorded under reception # 4600107).
There are existing multiple easements that cross the property including:
A 30 -foot pipeline easement for Snyder Oil that would have crossed through Outlot B and Lot 1 was
abandoned in December of 2022.
A 30 -foot non-exclusive easement for a pipeline and appurtenances related to the pipeline was granted by
Miller Feedlots to Snyder Oil. Construction drawings for this PUD do not identify a pipeline in this location.
This runs diagonally across the PUD, crossing through proposed Lot 2 and Lot 4.
A 50 -foot natural gas pipeline easement (right-of-way agreement) was granted from Timmerman & Sons
Feeding Company under reception # 3507166 in 2007. This is located just inside the western boundary of the
PUD.
A 30 -foot pipeline grant with a receiver and valve site was granted by T3 Investments to T3 Land and
Investments LLC in 2016. This pipeline and associated improvements are still in place and crosses the 50 -
foot Colorado Interstate Gas Company gas pipeline easement recorded under reception # 3507166. This runs
along the southern boundary of the PUD.
Proposed easements are identified on the PUD plat as well:
• A 40 x 40 exclusive easement along with a 20 -foot utility easement for Central Weld County Water on
Lot 3.
• A 20 x 20 utility easement to XCEL Energy for a relocated transmission pole.
Drainage and Utility Easement requirements per Chapter 24, Article III, are outlined in Section 24-3-60 of the
Weld County Code:
Cott-un:Co* o
O5 /043- /23
2023-1251
A. Fifteen (15) feet minimum drainage and utility easements are required adjacent to public
road rights -of -way, unless otherwise recommended by the Utilities Coordinating Advisory
Committee for technical purposes.
B. Twenty (20) feet minimum drainage and utility easements are required along internal lot lines and
shall be apportioned equally on abutting properties, unless otherwise justified by the Utilities
Coordinating Advisory Committee for technical purposes.
C. Ten (10) feet minimum drainage and utility easements are required along exterior lot lines, unless
otherwise justified by the Utilities Coordinating Advisory Committee for technical purposes. Corner
exterior lots requires fifteen (15) feet.
D. Easements shall be designed to provide efficient installation of utilities and drainage swales.
Proposed easements maybe modified by the Utilities Coordinating Advisory Committee. Public
utility installations shall be located to permit multiple installations within the easements to avoid
cross connections, minimize trenching and adequately separate incompatible systems.
Staff has reviewed the Utility Plan/Final Plat submitted by the applicant and recommends the following
revisions:
1) The drainage and utility easement shall be re -located to the west side of the right-of-way for the
grade separation at County Road 49 and County Road 44. In accordance with Section 24-3-60, the
width of the drainage and utility easement shall be revised to15-feet in width.
2) In accordance with Section 24-3-60, the drainage and utility easement along the south side of Lots 3
and 4 shall be revised to 15 -feet in width.
Mr. Gathman noted that Outlot A will have a fire tank. Kelsey Bruxvoort, AGPROfessionals, added that there
will be a large fire suppression tank so instead of having a 20 -foot easement equally apportioned on the outlot
they moved it into Lot 1 as there is not much of a footprint in the outlot to contain that tank, so it was beneficial
to locate that 20 -foot easement on other side of the outlot.
Mr. Gathman said that there are no utility easements shown on the north, east and west boundaries along
Outlot B and asked if the Utility Board had any concerns. He added that Outlot B is for detention and is not a
buildable lot.
Jerry Adams asked if Outlets A and B are called out or are they not utility easements as well as drainage or
are there notes on the plat. Mr. Gathman said that the entire outlots are not identified as utility or drainage
easements. He added that there would be some constraints with some areas such as the 50 -foot pipeline
easement. Mr. Adams said that there is no way across Outlot B. He added that although it is a drainage area
there could be utility easements as close to the perimeter as possible that might be an option or if the whole
thing was made a utility easement it might be possible to get across that outlot.
Amy Mutchie agreed with Mr. Adams and stated that at a minimum they would want to show an easement
along the future right-of-way line for the grade separation. It would be important along County Road 49 to
have that feature. Ms. Mutchie said that on Outlot B by including future grade separation line and extending
it, it looks like that detention pond would encroach into that. She agrees with Mr. Adams that there needs to
be something there to help them get through Outlot B.
Mr. Gathman said that the 15 feet would go along the entire way of the grade separation which continued up
through the northern boundary of the PUD. He asked if it should be designated as a utility easement and they
have to work around the constraints or try to run it along the perimeters. Mr. Adams suggested that maybe to
keep it simple just call it out as a detention and utility easement. He doesn't want to unreasonably impact the
outlots but it seems that there is no other use for them anyway. Mr. Gathman said it would give them a
drainage and utility easement with the understanding that they would work around, if and when the
development happens and it would give them some flexibility. Ms. Bruxvoort stated that she doesn't see an
issue with calling those outlots as utility and drainage easements. She added that they would want to retain
the 20 -foot easements on the south side of Outlot B because there isn't much space to work with that
2
detention pond. She further added that they would also like to retain the 20 -foot easement on south side of
Lot 1 as it will be needed to get other utilities to Lot 1.
Mike McRoberts asked if that 20 feet on Lot 1 should be labeled a drainage and utility easement. Mr.
Gathman said that it should be identified on the plan.
Mr. McRoberts asked how the future right-of-way will be identified and asked if it needs a bearing and
distance like the lot lines. Ms. Bruxvoort said that there will be notes that County Road 44 right-of-way varies
and 4 reception numbers will be listed on that label. She said that they will make sure that County Roads 44
and 49 will be appropriately located with reception numbers. Mr. McRoberts was talking about the diagonal
future right-of-way for the grade separation and how it would be identified. Mr. Gathman said that the Board
of County Commissioners required that this be consistent and identified as shown on the Chang of Zone plat.
Mr. McRoberts said the change of zone identifies it with bearing and distance and would be good to show
that on the final plan.
Motion: Approve the final plan for PUDF23-0001 along with Staffs recommendations and also to label
Outlots A and Bas drainage and utility easements, label/identify the 20 -foot access and utility easement on
the southern boundary of Lot 1, extend the 15 -foot utility and drainage easement along the west side of the
grade separation through Outlot B to the northern boundary of the PUD and include the label identification
(bearings and distances) for the grade separation noted on the Change of Zone plat, Moved by Amy Mutchie,
Seconded by Jerry Adams.
Yes: Robert Fleck, Jerry Adams, Alyssia Padilla, Mike McRoberts, Amy Mutchie, and Michael Wailes.
Meeting adjourned at 10:26 a.m.
Respectfully submitted,
Kristine Ranslem
Secretary
3
Hello