HomeMy WebLinkAbout20201739.tiffMINUTES OF THE WELD COUNTY BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT MEETING
Tuesday, June 2, 2020
A regular meeting of the Weld County Board of Adjustment was held on Tuesday, June 2, 2020, in the
Hearing Room of the Weld County Administration Building, 1150 O Street, Greeley, Colorado. The
meeting was called to order by Chair Michael Wailes at 10:00 a.m.
Roll Call.
Present: Karl Kohlgraf, Michael Wailes, Lonnie Ford, Gene Stifle, Kathryn Wittman, New member.
Also Present: Maxwell Nader, Department of Planning; Lauren Light, Environmental Health; Mike
McRoberts, Public Works; Bob Choate, County Attorney; and Michelle Wall, Secretary.
CASE NUMBER:
APPLICANT:
PLANNER:
REQUEST:
LEGAL DESCRIPTION:
LOCATION:
BOA20-0001
BRUCE AND LETICIA SCHNAAK
MAXWELL NADER
APPEAL FOR A VARIANCE FROM SETBACK REQUIREMENTS OF
SECTION 23-3-70.B IN THE A (AGRICULTURAL) ZONE DISTRICT
LOT C REC EXEMPT RE 4099, PART NE4 SECTION 23, T2N, R64W
OF THE 6TH P.M., WELD COUNTY, COLORADO.
SOUTH OF AND ADJACENT TO CR 20; WEST OF AND ADJACENT
TO CR 59.
Maxwell Nader, Planning Services, presented BOA20-0001, reading the recommendation and comments
into the record. The applicant submitted a letter addressed to the Board of Adjustment dated June 1, 2020,
stating their intentions have always been to follow all the rules and regulations set forth by Weld County
Code. The letter said they followed all the steps and procedures regarding the application process and site
plans for the new construction. The site plan that was submitted displays all the correct placements and
measurement. Due to the negligence of the general contractor, their construction projection is on hold and
has put them into a financial strain. The applicant is requesting a minimum variance distance of 10 feet,
and in their opinion, this will not interfere or impede upon normal flow of traffic on County Road 59.
It is the opinion of the Weld County Department of Planning Services that this request for a variance from
setbacks be denied because the setback provisions set forth in Section 23-3-70.B. of the Weld County Code
are applicable and that rules and regulations in Chapter 23 are intended to protect the public health, safety
and welfare of the citizens of Weld County. In addition to this the applicant has created their own hardship.
The Department of Public Works is in support of this denial with concerns detailed in referral dated May 21,
2020. The Department of Public Health and Environment are also in support of this denial with concerns
detailed in their referral dated May 11, 2020.
Should the Board of Adjustment approve this request for a variance, the Weld County Department of
Planning Services recommends the following conditions of approval:
1. The property owner shall submit a written and signed agreement that states if Weld County needs
to utilize the future right-of-way of County Road 59 the current or future property owners will remove
all or portions of the structure within the setback at their own cost.
2. The applicant shall address the requirements of the Weld County Department of Public Works as
stated in the referral response dated May 21, 2020. Evidence of such shall be submitted in writing
to the Weld County Department of Planning Services.
3. The applicant shall address the requirements of the Weld County Department of Public Health and
r' co j-i ong 2020-1739
6/15/a.0
Environment, regarding the septic location, as stated in the referral response dated May 11, 2020.
Evidence of such shall be submitted in writing to the Weld County Department of Planning Services.
Bruce Schnaak, 8925 County Road 59, Keenesburg, Colorado. Mr. Schnaak said they are building a home
for his parents on their property. He said they hired a general contractor that was highly recommended by
General Steel. Mr. Schnaak said that his parents paid him a lot of money, but the contractor failed to follow
procedure.
The Chair asked the applicant if the project is just a foundation at this point. Mr. Schnaak said it is.
Mr. Schnaak said the problem is the money has already been spent, and the contractor is gone. He said
the contractor implied he had liability insurance, but there was no insurance. They have not been able to
get ahold of the contractor since.
Commissioner Wittman asked the applicant if they have ever been able to get ahold of the contractor. Mr.
Schnaak replied that they did make contact with the contractor three weeks ago by email. He said they got
legal help and went to General Steel but were told General Steel is not held liable for anything the contractor
does. The applicant said the lawyer did not recommend pursuing with a lawsuit against the contractor
because he said the contractor could claim bankruptcy and the Schnaak's will be out their money.
Commissioner Wittman asked if the contractor was an independent contractor. Mr. Schnaak said yes.
The Chair asked the applicant if the variance was approved, how would the construction resume. Mr.
Schnaak said the building is laying on the ground of their property. They have received four bids from
different contractors along with recommendations to finish the building. The Chair asked the applicant if
they have enough funding to finish the building. The applicant responded that they have paid all the
contractors and permits thus far and have funds to complete the building.
Commissioner Ford asked the applicant what they would do if the variance is not approved. He wondered
if they would move the foundation further back. Mr. Schnaak said they would not. His parents have decided
they will move to an apartment and they will try to sell the building in hopes to recoup some of their money.
Mr. Schnaak said they asked General Steel if they would be willing to take the building back, and they said
no.
Commissioner Ford asked staff if this variance was approved, could the building need to be tore down later
in the future. Staff explained if Weld County needed to use that feature right away, the building would need
to be moved.
Mr. Schnaak said they have a few neighbors who are closer to the road then them. He wondered if all
those homes could be torn down. Staff explained it would depend on how Public Works would handle
obtaining the right of way. Mr. Schnaak mentioned that County Road 59 dead ends.
Commissioner Stille asked Mr. Schnaak how far north the road dead ends from his property. Mr. Schnaak
said approximately 5 miles.
Commissioner Wittman asked staff if Weld County has any immediate plans for County Road 59. Mike
McRoberts, Public Works, said the cross section for a rural arterial road will extend out for 48 feet from the
center line of the road. He said the concern is obstructions at the intersection of County Road 59 and
County Road 20. Mr. McRoberts explained that if the building was erected, and especially if County Road
59 was ever built out to its ultimate section, there would be a limited amount of site and could become a
safety concern on both County Roads.
The Chair asked Mr. McRoberts how the intersection of County Road 59 and County Road 20 was
controlled currently. Mr. McRoberts said he didn't think there is a light or a sign there, but he would need
to confirm that. Commissioner Wittman asked if a four-way stop would be feasible. Mr. McRoberts said
the executive staff would need to see what would be involved in order to put up a four-way stop there. Mr.
Choate explained a four-way stop is not typically put up at an intersection of a local road and an arterial
road. The Chair asked the applicant if there are any stop signs on County Road 20. Mr. Schnaak said
there is only one because the other road is not a through road.
Commissioner Stille asked why County Road 59 is classified as an arterial road and not a local road. Mr.
McRoberts said he didn't know but it was probably when they were designing the Transportation Plan.
Commissioner Still asked if it was conceivable to have the road reclassified. Mr. McRoberts said that would
have to go before the Board of County Commissioners.
Commissioner Ford asked the applicant about the houses he mentioned that were closer to the road then
him. Mr. Schnaak said there is a building to the south of them that is closer to the road and a residential
house further south as well. Staff explained those buildings or houses could potentially be non -conforming
uses and that those structures were already there before the road became an arterial road.
The applicant said they received a letter in the mail from the Town of Keenesburg wanting to annex them
along the roadway, all the way out to the A-1 Organics soil factory. Mr. Schnaak asked if that means the
Town of Keenesburg takes it away from Weld County. Mr. Choate, County Attorney, said Weld County has
received notice that there is interest from the Town of Keenesburg to annex the roadway down to the A-1
facility. Mr. Choate explained that the Town of Keenesburg would have to annex the County Road 59 as
well. Mr. Schnaak said he spoke to someone with the Town of Keenesburg to said if the annexation goes
through, the Town would not require that much of a setback.
Commissioner Stille asked the applicant how long they have lived on the property. Mr. Schnaak said they
built the house 10 years ago and he was not aware that County Road 59 was an arterial road. They were
grandfathered in to being allowed to use the dump anytime they would like.
The Chair asked if there was anyone in the audience who wished to speak for or against this application.
No one wished to speak.
Mr. Choate stated that the applicant provided the letter from the Town of Keenesburg to be entered into
the record.
Mr. Schnaak asked if the house would have to be tore down if the road was expanded. Mr. Choate
explained that in the case of Weld County expanding the road, the County usually pays for the property
and in some rare cases condemns the property. He said normally if a house is on the property, they
would pay for the damages incurred to use the right of way.
Staff recommended amending Condition of Approval 1. to add ", if necessary" to the end of the sentence.
After further discussion, the Chair asked Staff if they would have any objection to striking Condition of
Approval 1. Staff replied, they would have no objection.
Motion: Strike Condition of Approval 1. Moved by Michael Wailes, Seconded by Lonnie Ford. Motion
passed unanimously.
Commissioner Wittman asked about the septic location. Mr. Nader said the septic is not part of the
variance request but said Environmental Health could speak more on the septic. Lauren Light,
Environmental Health, explained that the applicant has not put in a septic yet. They will need to meet the
setbacks. The Board of Public Health cannot do a variance based on a construction error. Ms. Light said
they issued a new permit that states they have to meet the 90 foot setback.
The Chair asked the applicant if they have read through the amended Conditions of Approval and if they
are in agreement with those. The applicant replied that they are in agreement.
Motion: Grant the appeal of BOA19-0002, along with the amended Conditions of Approval as proposed,
Moved by Gene Stille, Seconded by Michael Wailes.
Vote: Motion carried by unanimous roll call vote (summary: Yes = 6).
Yes: Gene Stille, Karl Kohlgraf, Kathryn Wittman, Lonnie Ford, Michael Wailes, New member.
Commissioner Stille said that based on several factors heard today including the set back to the arterial
road and the expense of the foundation. He said they do not know what will happen in the future to the
north or east of this property.
The Chair said he agreed. He said in this case, the fact that the Town of Keenesburg is interested in
annexation, he feels that is more likely to happen then the County building a four-way highway.
Commissioner Wailes said he feels confident they are not creating a safety issue. He stated he felt the
applicant was trying to do everything right and the contractor was in error.
Commissioner Wittman told the applicant she hopes they are able to get everything done without it costing
a lot.
Meeting adjourned at 10:44 am.
Respectfully submitted, 9- n
Michelle Wall
Secretary
Hello