HomeMy WebLinkAbout720666.tiff x
WELD COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION
Date : September 12 , 1972
Subject : Indianhead Subdivision final plat
Applicant : Interladco , Inc .
Planning Commission members present :
Glenn Anderson , Chairman
J . Ben Nix
John Watson
Ronald Heitman
John Weigand
•
Others :
Glenn Billings , County Commissioner
Harry Ashley , County Commissioner
Marshall Anderson , County Commissioner
Sam Telep , County Attorney
Jim Ohi , Planner
Burman Lorenson , Planning Director
• Gary Eastman , Planner
720666
•
Tapes of September 5 , 1972 meeting were heard by Mr . Nix ,
Mr. Heitman and Mr . Weigand .
Mr. Anderson : Interladco , Indianhead Subdivision .
Mr. Lorenson : I ' ll let Jim present
or has considered the requested variance and so forth and
has responded to recommendations on the variances that they
requested.
Mr. Nix : May I ask , is Dale Olhausen ' s comments
as they were , well I don ' t if anybody else received by mail ,
' but I did , is this fairly up to date as to the status of
this?
Mr. Lorenson : It is , this is what he presented
at the last Planning Commission and he read in detail all
to the Planning Commission , the items that were sent to
you by mail .
Mr. Nix : Yeah .
Mr. Lorenson : And they were discussed by the
Planning Commission and since there wasn ' t a quorum, no
action was taken on any of them .
Mr. .Billings : Burman , let me ask a question be-
fore you get into this , I got a letter , it was a copy dir-
ected to you from the ditch company that goes through there
and there was some disagreement between what Interladco had
proposed in their last - - - - , and the ditch company
going through there , do you agree with that?
Mr. Ohi : Alright they , they sent a letter say-
ing that they heard rumors that Interladco is now prepar-
ing to put in a domestic sewage plant and they were con-
cernec about the seep and that . Interladco talked to them ,
• •
- and they talked to , they talked to them to work out the
problems . They sent in a letter saying the ditch company
and Interladco had agreed to try to work out the problems
and I talked to Ray DeGood who is the attorney for the
Farmer 's Ditch , and he says that there are still a lot of
problems to be worked out , all they agreed upon was to try
to work together and that Interladco is going to give them
more easement , they haven ' t specified how much more and
they are even talking about relocating the ditch now , which ,
all this doesn ' t show on the plat. There ' s nothing we have
s
in a written form from Interladco saying that these things
will be done .
Mr. Billings : Well there again , I think Sam
would probably say this is between the ditch company and
Interladco , but I just wanted to be sure you got your copy
of it.
Mr. Ohi : Should I read the recommendations?
The Planning staff recommends denial of the plat for the
following reasons : 1 . There is insufficient dedication
and/or provision of public area and right-of-way as re-
quired by Section 5 . 1 and Section 3 .7 of the old Subdivi -
sion Regulations . They have refused to dedicate the right--
of-way for Highway 34 and they have refused to reserve it.
They designate it as area for possible 34 , but Section 5 . 1
says , "there will be sufficient , there will be sufficient
right-of-way and public area dedicated for public use" .
And - - -
Mr. Nix : Do they give reasons for , they give a
reason for this ?
Mr. Ohi : They want to be paid for it .
-2-
•
•
Mr. Lorenson : And they did indicate one other
thing too . In their negotiation with the Highway Depart-
ment , they said that the Highway Department has announced
expansion of Highway 34 in this area and why should they
be expected to pay for their property when they' re going
to be , when the Highway Department ' s going to be buying
right-of-way from people across the street and from the
east of them and from the west of them , just because
they ' re platting it , why do they have to dedicate it when
everybody else is getting paid.
' Mr . Nix : Yeah , but the property owners are not
asking for anything from the , from the State .
Mr. Lorenson': That is their argument.
Inaudible .
Mr. Billings : Well , you can always go back and
' hang your hat on Kodak , said they wasn ' t going to dedicate
any to the County too , but they did when they got their
Industrial .
Mr. Lorenson : Did they really?
Mr. Billings : They set asdie a certain area of
• ground for public use for whatever was needed for public
• use .
Mr. Nix : I think they should have to dedicate ,
myself.
Mr . Eastman : There was also the problem of a
dwelling unit within that area , wasn ' t there?
•
Mr. Lorenson : There ' s a house located down in
- this area . Have you got the airphoto , the airphoto?
-3-
• •
Mr . Ohi : No , I ' ve just got the preliminary. It
won ' t show it .
Mr. Lorenson : There ' s a house on there .
Mr. Ohi : It ' s in the northwest corner of that
plat .
Mr. Heitman : Sam , you better be prepared on this .
Mr. Telep : You ' re either going to look good or
very foolish .
Mr. Ohi : The preliminary plat showed a 100 foot ,
now this is taken from the plat , a 100 foot minimum addi -
tional right-of-way along the south edge of U. S . 34 . It
was shown 100 foot right-of-way on the preliminary plat ,
whether it was dedicated or not , but it was stated as right-
of-way for the highway. This is the preliminary plat here .
Mr. Billings : It was dedicated on the prelim-
inary plat?
Mr. ,0hi : No , it ' s just indicated that there is
a minimum 100 foot additional right-of-way on 34 .
Mr. Lorenson : Minimum additional right-of-way ,
100 feet .
Mr. Ohi : The Interladco has made a big point
that preliminary plat , that we can ' t record anything on
the final plat that wasn ' t specified on the preliminary
plat .
Mr. Eastman : This was specified though .
Mr. Ohi : Right . So that ' s another thing - - -
Inaudible .
• i
Per. Telep : Cause I don ' t know if you can crake
• that a condition ( inaudible ) they withdrew it .
Mr. Lorenson : Withdraw what? The preliminary
plat?
Mr. Watson : Well , then they start all over.
Mr. Telep: They could .
Mr. Ohi : But they' re asking us to approve the
final plat see?
Mr. Telep : I don ' t know if they can go ahead
and the people to give you that additional ground - - - -
Inaudible .
Mr. Watson : We get 20 feet throughout the whole
County .
Mr . Telep : You say you get 20 feet - - - -
Mr. Watson : Well we do - - - we get it without
any problem , all the way through the County.
Mr. Telep : Somebody says they' re not going to
give it , then what are you going to do?
Inaudible .
Mr. Telep : haven ' t been in court yet ,
I know we haven ' t been getting it .
•
Mr. Watson : Well what ' s it , well this is a
policy
Mr. Telep : They require it but there ' s no law
that says that , that you can get it . I don ' ₹. know of any
law.
-5-
• s
Inaudible .
Mr . Watson : Now , can I say what I think what
could be done?
Mr . Telex : Certainly , that ' s what you 're here
for .
Mr. Watson : I think that these people would ded-
icate the right-of-way if the Highway Department would hire
M.A. I . to appraise these improvements and pay them for what
the fair value is , they ' d dedicate the land .
Mr. Telep : Well I don ' t know , you know what ,
what the law of condemnation is , John .
Mr. Watson : Alright , Sam , - - -- - hire somebody
like Bob Mitchell to go in there and say , those houses are
worth so much , pay them for it , and they' d dedicate the
- land.
Mr. Telep : That ' s fine , that' s fine .
Mr. Watson : They ' d have no basis to argue .
Mr. Telep : Well , if they ' d do that , but it isn' t
being done though , is it?
Mr . Watson : Well , I ' m just saying that I think
it could be done .
Mr. Telep : Well , well lots of things could be
done , but they aren ' t being done . You know and I know when
the State Highway comes out in here and wants to widen the
existing road , they come in there and they have their appra-
isers in , and you know that , John .
Mr. Watson : Sure .
-6-
•
Mr. Tele2: And they appraise that property and
they offer you a fair price and if you don ' t take it , they
take it anyway and they ' ll condemn it and then they ' ll
have a court battle and this is the same thing here . There
is no difference whether
Inaudible .
Mr. Watson : All we ' re doing is trying to say
that the Highway Department will be reasonable with them
and give them a fair value - - - and they dedicate the
bare ground.
Mr. Telep : I can ' t answer a question - - - -
Mr. Watson : They ' re argument was that that ' s
what whats -his-name ' s arugment , that there was houses on
this , well - - - - the houses , and dedicate the bare land .
Mr. Telep : That ' s right .
Mr. Watson : Let him eat his words .
Inaudible .
Mr. Telep : My position is , that if Interladco
- - - - if you just tell them , well now , it ' s all 'set and
ready to go , then - - - - that we want from you is to ded-
icate the extra , what are we talking about? 20 feet? Ask-
ing 100 feet and how long , how many acres are we talking
about? And they says that they ' ll do it , but they want to
get paid for it . You see? So alright , so it poses a
question and that - - - - let them take us to court , cite
our cases , cite their cases I don ' t know of any.
Inaudible .
Mr. Anderson : They indicated
7
.
Mr. Telep : So you go ahead and make your recom-
mendations and see what the hearing will be before they - -
Mr. Watson : Interladco , I still say Interladco
will dedicate the land if they got paid for fair market
value - - -
Mr. Telep : I don ' t know whether you want - - -
You want to sound them out , John?
Mr . Watson : Inaudible .
Mr. Telep : I don ' t know, you ' re posing a hypo-
thetical question , I don ' t know , I deal with the law , I
apply the law to the facts . , I ' m not saying it can ' t be
done .
Inaudible.
Mr. Telep : You ' ve got reasons to deny this , and
if you think you have , bring them up , they ' ll be put on
that recorder and then you ' ll make your recommendations to
the Board - - - - we can ' t keep sitting on this .
Mr. Uhl : Our Subdivision Regulations also say
that where the public land is not dedicated directly on
the plat to the appropriate public agEncy, .arrangements
for such transfer of title shall be arranged , shall be
agreed upon prior to approval of the final plat . And I
pointed this out to the developer and they refused to do
anything like this .
Mr. Watson : In other words , they didn ' t want to
listen to the regulations .
Mr. Ohi : Right . So that ' s not a 7 - - -
•
Inaudible .
Mr . Telep : If you feel so adamant about the
damned thing just - - - - make your recommendations to the
Board and then see what happens .
Mr . Ohi : Our new regulations also state that
the only basis for rejection of a final plat shall be it ' s
non-conformance with the adopted rules and regulations and
resolutions currently in force - - development in the
County , it ' s lack of conformance with the approved prelim-
inary plan and changes required in the public interest.
So we do have that provision to make changes , after the
preliminary plat has been approved on the final . It ' s in
our new regulations .
Inaudible .
Mr. Ohi : Also , also a thirty foot additional
• right-of-way may be required when a subdivision adjoins an
existing or proposed major arterial highway. This is Sec-
tion 3 . 1 of our existing , our old Subdivision Regulations , .
they haven ' t done that either. We could have required that
they - - - - frontage roade .
Mr. Heitman : Alright , Jim, do you have other
reasons for denial ?
Mr. Ohi : Second , there ' s insufficient evidence
that the proposed sewage lagoon will be maintained in a
manner not detrimental to adjoining property owners , in-
cluding Farmer ' s Ditch Company. First of all , only the loc-
ation has been approved by the State Health Department for
the sewage lagoon . B . No provision has been made for main-
tenance and upkeep of the facility. In the County Commis-
sioner ' s minutes there ' s a statement by Stobbe that they are
-9-
• s
going to set up a trust fund to maintain this and he ' s
talked about Home Owner ' s Association , and I asked them to
write down specifically hour they propose to maintain this
once they sell all these lots off . Mho ' s going to be re-
sponsible for the sewage lagoon and the facilities , and he
said , "there ' ll be a Home Owner ' s Association" , but he
wouldn ' t give me any kind of a written statement of how it ' s
to be done . He refused to do that . He didn ' t think it ' s
their responsibility. The sewage plan indicates that no
effluent discharge into any kind of a distant waterways .
They plan to irrigate .•with the effluent. Their sewage re-
port says that they will need 11 . 6 acres to get the run-off,
the effluent to keep that at a certain level . And my ques-
tion is , my point is that there hasn ' t been provision to
specify , well , which lots are they going to irrigate?
They ' re going to have to have 11 lots to take the effluent
to irrigate it and there ' s no provision to show how these
- lots will be irrigated or what kind of a line will be put
in for irrigation or whatever. What kind of safety require-
ments , provision are there that the effluent .
Mr. Heitman : Should that be a Health Department
problem rather than Planning?
Mr. Ohi : Well , there hasn ' t been , it should be ,
but there hasn ' t been sufficient materials presented by
Interladco on this . They just state that they will irri -
gate lawns with this effluent . But the Health Department
has approved only the location of this plant.
Mr . Heitman : They have to approve the , the ef-
fluent run-off , they can ' t run down the barrow pit or - - -
what happens . I would assume the Health Department would
have to . When a dairy goes in out here , they make darn well
_in_
•
know where the effluent runs to . Why wouldn ' t they have
to here?
Mr . Watson : I think that ' s what he ' s saying and
they haven ' t said where they ' re going to pump that up on
and if it takes 11 lots to do it , they haven ' t even said
where .
Mr. Heitman : lathy did the Health Department ap-
prove this until
Mr. Lorenson : They , Glen Paul did indicate that ,
that Ron Schuyler of the State Health Department thinks
this is going to be a great system. He stopped and talked
to me about it but we have 'seen nothing , we don ' t know , as
far as I know , any report was submitted to the , to them ,
but Glen Paul has stated to me personally , that he feels
that they think he thinks they' ve got a great system which
• means that there must be some kind of design or something
proposed . We have no idea what it is .
Mr. Ohi : Well , there is a report , but no design .
There ' s some equation showing what kind of run-off they .
foresee and how much acreage they need for the pond , and
what the holding capacity and holdirig period shall be. But
there ' s no design as to hoar they ' re going to
Mr. Heitman : the basic reasons that
you - - - - enough .
Mr: Ohi : Right. Third , the Subdivision will
have negative impact on agriculture on adjoining lands .
There ' s been , we ' ve got property owners adjoining complain-
ing that there won ' t be adequate provisions for maintain-
ing the sewer system . That they might get run-off, if they
-11 -
•
do , who do they go to? Eventually there ' ll be complaints
from the residents there of the farmer spreading manure or
spraying .
Mr . Heitman : Well , of course , you ' re going to
get back - - - - Sam will defend that because it' s a , it
becomes a personal problem between the Home Owner' s Assoc-
iation and that farmer , it ' s - - - -
Mr. Ohi : Yeah , but there ' s no provision for a
Home Owner ' s Association there . We ' ve just have it from
the word from Stobbe that there will be one eventually.
Four. Satisfactory arrangement with the Farmer' s Ditch
Company has not been reached . Fifth. The drainage pond
proposed to be located on tWo lots are to be building sites .
These two lots here . I don ' t think it ' s satisfactory.
Inaudible .
Mr. Ohi : It ' s to catch all the drainage from
the whole subdivision . The ponds are to be located - - -
Mr. Lorenson : On Lots 21 and 22 and they' ve in-
dicated a buildable area in those lots where they feel that
• construction can be put and still hold the run-off.
Mr. Ohi : Well , my question is , who ' s going to
maintain that if it silts up or whatever? Is this person
here going to have to maintain it?
Mr. I ' d think not .
Mr. Ohi : I think there haven ' t been enough pro-
vision made for these kind of things .
Mr , Watson : Well , you ' ve put in a lot of time
on this thing and I think you ' ve searched it pretty well ,
and I - - - -
-12-
•
• - !
Mr. Lorenson : He ' s got one more .
Tyr . Ohi : Six , two more . Six , the lots don ' t
meet the minimum lot size requirements , the minimum lot
width requirements of the A zone . They ' ve asked for a var-
iance on this but it seems to me that if our regulations
specify a 180 foot lot width , they ' re trying to cram too
many lots into the subdivision , a lot of them don ' t meet
the regulations .
Mr . Lorenson : This one , doesn ' t meet it for
example . They gray they have these set-back lines , they ' re
proposing that the building be placed behind them , so
there ' s 180 foot of set , or 180 foot width at this point.
Inaudible .
Mr. Heitman : Alright , I have a point. You got
one more , I was waiting for you to get through .
Mr. Ohi : One more , is the impact of the devel -
opment on the school district . The school district has
asked for 5 acres in that - - -
Inaudible .
•
• Mr. Heitman : Their position was that this came
in after , after their preliminary , and they , they stated
that we were going to have to , they indicated that we were
h.obnobing with the school district to get them to do that
so that we could deny it , where all this - - -
Mr . Ohi : This was a response we got from them
after we sent them the final plat which we always do to
the school districts .
Mr. Lorenson : We ' re required to do it by St?t�
law now.
-11-
• • •
Mr. Watson : The final plat or the preliminary?
Mr. Lorenson : Well , we send then both .
Mr . Watson : I think - - - -
Mr. Heitman : This is my question to the staff.
Have they been confronted with each one of these reasons
that you ' ve given us ? Have they had a presentation of this?
Mr. Lorenson : Yes , they have.
Mr. Ohi : They had that - - -
Mr. Heitman : Have they had it in writing?
Mr. Lorenson : Well , I think , did you give it to
them in writing" On these items ?
Mr. Heitman : These eight items or seven or what-
ever it is you presented .
Mr. Lorenson : Well , yes , they were - - - -
•
Mr. Heitman : Were they presented this?
Mr. Lorenson : Yes , they were given it because
they responded to it in letter.
Mr. Heitman : Alright , the letter that we got
was their response . They tried to compromise or give rea-
sons why they couldn ' t compromise , right"
Mr. Lorenson : That ' s right .
Mr. 'Heitman : Alright .
Mr . Watson : And this letter that they mailed to
all the members is supposed to be the answers - - -
Inaudible .
_, A
• •
Mr. Heitman : There ' s 14 questions .
Mr . Chi : Not to these , not to these - - - -
Mr. Heitman : ►•iel l , alright , that ' s ►ghat I ' m try-
ing to find out . There were 14 in that other one .
Mr. Ohi : Right . -- - - - That was at the hearing ,
two previous hearings which I presented then . This is ,
what I presented here , is a summary of all those things - -
Mr. Heitman : Alright .
Mr. 0hi : Take into consideration their reply and
the most recent developments .
Mr . Heitman : Those 14 items were covered in
these 8 or 7 or 8 that you give us now, right? I know that
this 180 foot minimum - - . Alright , this is my position .
I think they ' re really getting upset because we ' re giving
them the good professional stall .
Mr. Watson : We have .
Mr. Heitman : O. K. , let ' s expidite the thing , I
suggest that we deny it on as many of these reasons as
meet , that we think we can substantiate by law.
Mr. Lorenson : By the regulations .
Mr . Heitman : By the regulations . Alright. This
takes it off our back , it ' s , we all agree , it ' s bad planninc
there ' s nothing right about it to start with , put it on the
County Commissioners and if they want it , then it ' s their
baby , as far as I ' m concerned . But it ' s sure not what we
Want .
Mr. Watson : And we can we hang your hat on the
-15-
i
•
regulations - - - -
•
Inaudible .
Mr. Telep : Don ' t deny it , I ' d just say you re-
commend it .
Mr. Heitman : Two meetings ago , Ben , they , they
absolutely slandered you , terrible .
Mr. Watson : Called him a liar.
Mr. Heitman : I never sat in such a meeting in
s my life . I was so mad , I - - - - John
just shook and he
talked , but I didn ' t dare .
Mr. Weigand : I see you got served.
Mr. Nix : There ' s my responsibility.
Mr. Anderson : The basis for rejection as far as
. rejection of the final plat shall be it ' s non-conformance
to adopted , rules , regulations and resolutions currently
in force and effecting .the land of this development of the
County. The lack of conformance with the approved prelim-
inary plan and changed to
Inaudible .
Mr, Heitman : Would these cover that then?
Mr. Anderson : Yeah .
•
Mr. Heitman : Then we put the monkey right where
it belongs .
Mr. Anderson : I don ' t know as we can use the
road.
Inaudible .
-16-
•
•
Mr . Lorenson : Wel 1 , you can pull the regulations
out on them because that ' s what they pulled out on us .
Mr. Heitman You bet .
Mr . Weioand : Pull every one you can and stall - -
Inaudible .
Mr. Heitman : I think we ' ve stalled as long as
we can stall , let ' s just - - -
Mr. Anderson : Have they got some streets that
are longer than they ' re supposed to be -
Mr. Lorenson : Well , - - -
Mr. Ohi : I think the street lengths are all
right .
Inaudible .
• Mr. Heitman : The staff' s got to dig out the
regulations
Secretary : You ' re making the motion to deny it?
Mr. Heitman : Yeah , and Tim seconded it .
Mr. Anderson : Is everybody in agreement or under-
stand the motion?
Mr . Lorenson : The motion is to deny it , based
upon the existing regulations and conformance to them. Is
that , do I understand it right?
Mr. Anderson : The reasons for denial is based
upon the various items that do not meet the present regu-
lations .
•
-17-
Mr. Heitman : The only thing that I want to make
sure is that every reason in there can be backed by a reg-
ulation . And I question that one .
Mr . Ohi : The right-of-way?
Mr . Watson : Well , the highway shouldn ' t be in
there .
Mr. Heitman : No , the highway shouldn ' t be in
there , and the one where you said they could complain about
people ' s spreading manure and this sort of thing . I don ' t
know whether you got regulations to back that up or not .
Mr. Weigand : Well , we got regulations that - - -
Inaudible .
Mr. Heitman : Yeah , but I want to deny this on
regulations only.
Mr. Anderson : And .changes required in the public
interest .
Mr. Telep : They have not complied with your
rules and regulations . That ' s what you ' re saying , but make
them specific .
Inaudible .
Mr . Nix : Attorney , you draw the resolution .
Mr. Telep : Well , I don ' t care about that . I ' m
talking about your reasons - - in accordance with the rules
and regulations . Be specific , so that the Commissioners
won ' t just - - - -
Mr. Heitman : That ' s what I ' m asking , to make
-18-
• •
that every one of them reasons , you , the staff , draw the
reasons , but make sure every one of them is substantiated
by a resolution .
Mr . Lorenson : By regulation .
Inaudible .
Mr. Telep : I ' m sure that ' s what they always
mean to do .
Mr . Ohi : I think the highway can be backed up ,
the highway thing can be backed up by resolution .
Mr. Lorenson : We do have two places in our old
regulations and our new regulations which require a front-
age road due to main arterials . Now I don ' t , that would
be some basis of requiring some type of dedication for ,
next to the highway .
Mr. Telep : Well , if you ' re in doubt , if you ' re
after a frontage road , you ' ve got , you ' re arguing a little
different now .
Mr . Lorenson : Well - - - -
Mr. Telep : Yeah , that makes more sense .
Mr . Lorenson : But it ' s a , it ' s a you
know it ' s the one where it says
• Mr . Telep : Yeah , that ' s in the public interest .
Mr . Lorenson : A frontage road may be required ,
so
Mr. Telep : You better leave that alone for the
time being .
-19-
Mr. Heitman : I don ' t think , Burman , you can
quote new regulations any place .
Mr. Lorenson : That ' s old regulations .
Mr. Telex : You don ' t have any , well you ' ve got
the new regulations now , but you ' re not requiring a front-
age road as such , are you?
Mr. Lorenson : We , we haven ' t talked to them
about a frontage road .
Mr. Telep : You ' re just talking about a piece of
ground that might be granted by the State of Colorado at a
future time . And you want to be able to get it for free
at this time . I don ' t , there ' s any law that says - - -
Mr. Watson : They ' ll never sell those lots on
that highway anyway , nobody there is going to buy a house
. over there .
Mr. Telep : Well , John , you ' re talking about
economics now.
Mr. Watson : Well , alright. I understand.
Mr. Anderson : O. K.
Inaudible.
Mr. Telep : Wee 1 , you got enough reasons . How
many you got , about half a dozen?
Mr. Heitman : Six , that I think - - -
Mr. Teleo : Burman?
Mr. Lorenson : If we list each violation of the
regulations separately , there should be about a half a dozen .
• s
Mr. Telep : O . K. I ' ll talk about them when - -
Mr. Lorcnson : .'!e ' 1 l work it up , and before we
send it to the County Commissioners , we ' ll have you re-
view it .
Pair. Anderson : 0 . K. The motion has been made
and seconded , will the secretary call the roll ?
Secretary : Watson? Yes . Nix? Yes . Heitman?
Yes . Weigand? Yes . Anderson? Yes .
a
Hello