Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout20203916.tiffSUMMARY OF THE WELD COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING Tuesday, December 15, 2020 A regular meeting of the Weld County Planning Commission was held in the Weld County Administration Building, Hearing Room, 1150 O Street, Greeley, Colorado. This meeting was called to order by Chair, Elijah Hatch, at 12:30 pm. Roll Call. Present: Tom Cope, Lonnie Ford, Elijah Hatch, Skip Holland, Butch White. Absent: Gene Stille, Dwaine Barclay, Sam Gluck, Troy Mellon. Also Present: Chris Gathman, Angela Snyder, and Maxwell Nader, Department of Planning Services; Lauren Light, Department of Health; Melissa King, and Zack Roberson, Department of Public Works; Bob Choate, County Attorney, and Kris Ranslem, Secretary. Motion: Approve the December 1, 2020 Weld County Planning Commission minutes, Moved by Tom Cope, Seconded by Skip Holland. Motion passed unanimously. CASE NUMBER: USR20-0022 APPLICANT: 151 DEVELOPMENT GROUP, LLC PLANNER: CHRIS GATHMAN REQUEST: A SITE SPECIFIC DEVELOPMENT PLAN AND USE BY SPECIAL REVIEW PERMIT FOR AN OIL AND GAS SUPPORT AND SERVICE (OUTSIDE STORAGE OF OIL FIELD SUPPORT EQUIPMENT, VEHICLES AND SUPPLIES) AND MORE THAN THE NUMBER OF CARGO CONTAINERS ALLOWED BY SECTION 23-3-30 OF THE WELD COUNTY CODE (UP TO 20 CARGO CONTAINERS) IN THE A (AGRICULTURAL) ZONE DISTRICT. LEGAL DESCRIPTION: PART SW4 SECTION 19, T3N, R68W OF THE 6TH P.M., WELD COUNTY, COLORADO. LOCATION: NORTH OF AND ADJACENT TO STATE HIGHWAY 66 AND EAST OF AND ADJACENT TO CR 1. Chris Gathman, Planning Services, stated that the applicants are requesting a continuance to the January 19th Planning Commission hearing. The applicants are proposing to reduce the overall size/footprint so that a better plan will work for the surrounding landowners. The Chair asked if there was anyone in the audience who wished to speak for or against the continuation of this application. No one wished to speak. Motion: Continue USR20-0022 to the January 19th Planning Commission hearing, Moved by Butch White, Seconded by Skip Holland. Vote: Motion carried by unanimous roll call vote (summary: Yes = 5). Yes: Butch White, Elijah Hatch, Lonnie Ford, Skip Holland, Tom Cope. CASE NUMBER: APPLICANT: PLANNER: REQUEST: LEGAL DESCRIPTION: LOCATION: COZ20-0007 WESTERN EQUIPMENT & TRUCKING INC MAXWELL NADER CHANGE OF ZONE FROM THE A (AGRICULTURAL) ZONE DISTRICT TO THE 1-2 (MEDIUM INDUSTRIAL) ZONE DISTRICT. LOT B REC EXEMPT RE -4059, BEING PART SE4 SECTION 11, T4N, R66W OF THE 6TH P.M., WELD COUNTY, COLORADO. NORTH OF AND ADJACENT TO CR 46; WEST OF AND ADJACENT TO CR 35. Maxwell Nader, Planning Services, presented Case COZ20-0007, reading the recommendation and comments into the record. Mr. Nader stated that Dan's Garage is being relocated due to a CDOT project proposed to go through his current property, which is approximately one (1) mile south of this location. He noted that three letters of support were received for this project and submitted for the record. The Department of Planning Services recommends approval of this application with the attached conditions of approval and development standards. 1 CotAt-kun;Cokt-lon $ of/ob/a1 2020-3916 Commissioner White asked what the outcome of the meeting was between the applicants and the City of Evans. Mr. Nader said that they did not have any resolution. He added that the City of Evans had 21 days to respond, which they did, and the applicant discussed options with the City of Evans; however, no decision has been made. Commissioner Holland asked if irrigation water was available and if is available if that would that change Planning Staff's recommendation. Mr. Nader said it would depend on if it is being used or not. He added that with the location and the applicant's situation with CDOT's proposed changes he said it makes sense to move close to where his current location is, and it could be supported. Zack Roberson, Public Works, reported on the existing traffic, access to the site and drainage conditions for the site. Lauren Light, Environmental Health, reviewed the public water and sanitary sewer requirements and on - site dust control. Eric Wernsman, 16495 Essex Road South, Platteville, Colorado, said that Dan's Garage has been in business since 1978 and purchased the current property in 1999. The State of Colorado is requiring the applicants to relocate so CDOT can install the Highway 85 bypass at County Road 44 Mr. Wernsman stated that the applicants are requesting the rezone so that they can reconstruct their facility and continue their business along the Highway 85 corridor. He added that this proposed site is not within one -quarter of a mile of the City of Evans' boundaries and the applicants do not feel that the additional cost of annexing proved any value to them. He further added that the applicants have their own water and the ability to provide sewer. He noted that the City of Evans does not have any services in this area. In response to Commission Holland's previous inquiry regarding irrigation water, Mr. Wernsman stated that the property was dried up prior to the applicant purchasing the property. He added that there was corn on it last year, but it was with leased water. The Chair asked if there was anyone in the audience who wished to speak for or against this application. No one wished to speak. The Chair asked the applicant if they have read through the Development Standards and Conditions of Approval and if they are in agreement with those. The applicant replied that they are in agreement. Motion: Forward Case COZ20-0007 to the Board of County Commissioners along with the Conditions of Approval with the Planning Commission's recommendation of approval, Moved by Tom Cope, Seconded by Butch White. Vote: Motion carried by unanimous roll call vote (summary: Yes = 5). Yes: Butch White, Elijah Hatch, Lonnie Ford, Skip Holland, Tom Cope. CASE NUMBER: USR20-0024 APPLICANT: ENSIGN UNITED STATES DRILLING INC PLANNER: CHRIS GATHMAN REQUEST: A SITE SPECIFIC DEVELOPMENT PLAN AND USE BY SPECIAL REVIEW PERMIT FOR AN OIL AND GAS SUPPORT AND SERVICE FACILITY (OUTSIDE STORAGE OF OIL AND GAS VEHICLES AND EQUIPMENT) IN THE A (AGRICULTURAL) ZONE DISTRICT. LEGAL DESCRIPTION: LOT A REC EXEMPT RECX12-0042, PART NW4 SECTION 18, T4N, R64W OF THE 6TH P.M., WELD COUNTY, COLORADO. LOCATION: EAST OF AND ADJACENT TO CR 49 AND IS APPROXIMATELY 700 -FEET SOUTH OF CR 46. Chris Gathman, Planning Services, presented Case USR20-0024, reading the recommendation and comments into the record. Mr. Gathman noted that Staff added Condition of Approval 1.C in regard to access onto County Road 49. He stated that originally when this Recorded Exemption was done, the access was proposed to be shared onto County Road 49 and this was before the county highway project. He added that it is not a possibility to access directly onto County Road 49 anymore; therefore, with this condition of approval Staff has stated that access onto County Road 49, as previously shown on the 2 Recorded Exemption, is no longer allowed. The applicant shall apply for a new access permit onto County Road 46. Mr. Gathman stated that the applicant is requesting that no screening of the site be required and has contacted nearby surrounding property owners for their input regarding whether or not screening should be required. These responses have been included in the application material. He added that Staff has attached a condition of approval requiring screening based on this being an outside storage use of industrial type equipment and also due to the proximity to County Road 49. Mr. Gathman noted that no correspondence or phone calls have been received from surrounding property owners for this case. The Department of Planning Services recommends approval of this application with the attached conditions of approval and development standards. Commissioner Holland asked if this site is contiguous with other Ensign properties. Mr. Gathman replied that it is and added that this property is directly adjacent to the property to the north owned by Ensign as well. Melissa King, Public Works, reported on the existing traffic, access to the site and drainage conditions for the site. Commissioner Cope referred to the comment that if the properties were to be sold in the future, they would have to have two separate accesses. Ms. King said that currently the accesses are not separate and they have permitted access points onto County Road 46. She added that the easement across the property would not be an issue at this point Mr. Gathman said that the issue is that there is no way to establish an easement across property from one property you own to another property you own. Therefore, Staff was looking at what happens if this property would be sold. He said that this condition would address this issue so that it is on record that the access permit is designated to access the property to the south. Sam Gluck entered the meeting at 1:00 p.m. Lauren Light, Environmental Health, reviewed the public water and sanitary sewer requirements, on -site dust control, and the Waste Handling Plan. Commissioner Ford said that it appears it is a landlocked property and added that although the applicant owns both properties it seems that there should be an easement otherwise it is an illegal lot. Mr. Gathman said that technically it is a legal lot because it is a recorded exemption. He said that the issue is that at the time of the recorded exemption an access was established on County Road 49. However back then the County Road 49 project didn't exist and although the properties border county road right-of-way, they cannot get access onto County Road 49 now. Bob Choate, County Attorney, said that they can allow access since they own both parcels. He added that it comes down to what is good planning for the future. County Road 49 is the only designated county highway and Public Works is not going to give anymore accesses; therefore, as a condition of approval they need to change their access to County Road 46. He said that you can't grant an easement to yourself unless its on a plat; therefore, they added this condition. He added that they can reserve themselves an easement if they ever sell one of the two parcels and it takes care of itself. Michael McDaniel, Ensign, 3400 Woodcock Street, Berthoud, Colorado, provided a brief explanation of the criteria that they are required to meet. He said that the location is surrounded by a heavy use of oil and gas infrastructure. He added that on the elevation plan there is a 13 -foot elevation difference from the west side to the east side along the county road. Mr. McDaniel referred to the required screening and added that with the elevation differences the county road is also higher than the actual property. He said that according the Draft Resolution it is requiring at least a 6 -foot fence with a one to three-foot clear span underneath. Mr. McDaniel stated that it is their opinion that even with this requirement that this would be hard to accomplish with a screen wall as you would still be able to see over it. He added that by having the fence it could lead to unruly activity since there is no lighting on site and added that there is not 24 -hour staff on site and utilized only during the day. Mr. Mc Daniel stated that they have done some outreach to the neighbors in the area and submitted that outreach for the record. 3 The Chair asked if there was anyone in the audience who wished to speak for or against this application. No one wished to speak. Commissioner Cope asked what type of fence they are proposing. Mr. McDaniel said with the wind it would probably be a metal privacy screen with chicken wire underneath. However, they are requesting that a fence would not be required. Mr. Cope said that it does seem like it requires screening, whether it is fence or trees, but asked Staff for their thoughts. Mr. McDaniel said that they provided examples along County Road 49 that have the same storage material and infrastructure and do not have screening walls. Mr. Cope said that it may have been prior to the upgrade of County Road 49. Commissioner Holland asked how tall the frac tanks are along the county road. Mr. McDaniel said that they are 10 feet high. Mr. Holland asked Staff how important the screening is. Mr. Gathman said it is important as it is a storage yard. He added that regardless of other USRs in the area, he believes the screening should be here. Mr. Holland asked if it would be acceptable to build a berm and put some reasonable fence on top of a berm. Mr. Gathman said that they are not prescriptive about screening and could do berming but not sure if grading would be affected. Mr. McDaniel said that they are putting drainage in that goes above and beyond the drainage criteria. They only request a variance for the screen wall. Mr. Holland believes that we should be consistent with the screening but understands that the screening won't hide the frac tanks. Commissioner Ford said that he lives along County Road 49 and he drives by this every day and said that these blue containers are kind of a screen already as you can't see behind them. He somewhat agrees with the applicant that putting a fence isn't going to hide the tanks unless you put up a 15 -foot wall. The Chair asked the applicant if they have read through the Development Standards and Conditions of Approval and if they are in agreement with those. The applicant replied that they are in agreement. Motion: Forward Case USR20-0024 to the Board of County Commissioners along with the Conditions of Approval and Development Standards with the Planning Commission's recommendation of approval, Moved by Butch White, Seconded by Lonnie Ford. Vote: Motion carried by unanimous roll call vote (summary: Yes = 5). Yes: Butch White, Elijah Hatch, Lonnie Ford, Skip Holland, Tom Cope. CASE NUMBER: USR20-0028 APPLICANT: LONNIE SHOEMAKER PLANNER: ANGELA SNYDER REQUEST: A SITE SPECIFIC DEVELOPMENT PLAN AND USE BY SPECIAL REVIEW PERMIT FOR OUTDOOR STORAGE OF PUBLIC UTILITY -RELATED EQUIPMENT AND USES (PUBLIC UTILITY SUPPORT AND SERVICE) SIMILAR TO THE USES LISTED (OIL AND GAS SUPPORT AND SERVICE) AS PERMITTED AS LONG AS THE USE COMPLIES WITH THE GENERAL INTENT OF THE ZONE DISTRICT IN THE A (AGRICULTURAL) ZONE DISTRICT. LEGAL DESCRIPTION: LOT B REC EXEMPT RECX17-0007; BEING PART N2SW4 SECTION 13, T2N, R67W OF THE 6TH P.M., WELD COUNTY, COLORADO. LOCATION: EAST OF AND ADJACENT TO CR 23, APPROXIMATELY 0.37 MILES NORTH OF CR 20. Angela Snyder, Planning Services, presented Case USR20-0028, reading the recommendation and comments into the record. Ms. Snyder noted that there are multiple structures that were built without obtaining the appropriate building permits. Additionally, Ms. Snyder stated that the access, as part of the recorded exemption, was supposed to be closed and reclaimed; however, it is still being used quite heavily. Ms. Snyder stated that this site does not comply with several parts of the Comprehensive Plan and provided explanations to those criteria. She added that the site does comply with Sections 23-2-220.A.5 and A.6 as it is not taking up any prime agricultural land. Ms. Snyder noted that a petition was received from surrounding property owners regarding concerns of noise, blowing dirt and trash, amount of outdoor stored materials, increase in criminal activity, noise from trucks running and that they didn't feel the commercial business fit the area. 4 The Department of Planning Services recommends denial of this application. Should the Planning Commission recommend approval, Staff has provided several conditions of approval and development standards to be included. Zack Roberson, Public Works, reported on the existing traffic, access to the site and drainage conditions for the site. A Road Maintenance Agreement will be required due to the amount of traffic. Mr. Roberson said that the applicant had submitted a drainage narrative; however, at the time they were using an old narrative which is no longer found in the current county code. Since the original submittal the applicant has built additional buildings and the site has found to have generated 12 cfs, which is above the allowed 10 cfs. Due to this, this exception is no longer valid and Staff has updated the conditions of approval for a final drainage report and certification of compliance stamped and signed by a professional engineer in the State of Colorado. Mr. Roberson recommended adding a new development standard in relation to this to the draft resolution. Lauren Light, Environmental Health, reviewed the public water and sanitary sewer requirements, on -site dust control, and the Waste Handling Plan. Lonnie Shoemaker, 9124 CR 23, said that he has been in the directional drilling business and has sold his company to the new owners in April. He added that there are 25 employees and running four crews. Mr. Shoemaker said that there is so much traffic on this road from the gravel pit north of County Roads 19 and 23 and added that the majority comes from them. Mr. Shoemaker said that they do use the access Ms. Snyder referred to as it made more sense since it was safer for them than the shared access that the County wanted them to put in. He added that there are no water rights to this property. Mr. Shoemaker said that he had hired someone to submit the building permits; however, they have gone AWAL so the permitting that was supposed to be done hasn't been completed. Commissioner Cope clarified if the applicant is still living on site and leasing the area to the new drilling company. Mr. Shoemaker replied that is correct and the new owners want to try and keep everything the same. Mr. Cope said that in the storage area it looks like part of the area is in a recorded right-of-way agreement with Amoco Production and he added the applicant would have to get permission from them to be allowed to store anything there. Commissioner Cope asked what the intent is for the use of the commercial building. Mr. Shoemaker said that it is mainly for storage. He added that they keep their equipment inside and perform minor repairs like fixing a light occasionally. The Chair asked if there was anyone in the audience who wished to speak for or against this application. Steven Gill, 9510 CR 23, Ft. Lupton, stated that he lives adjacent to this property. Mr. Gill said that he has talked to a lot of neighbors and encouraged to follow up at this meeting. He said that there are quite a few of the neighbors who signed the petition and added that there quite a few other that want to stay anonymous but who are highly opposed to what is going on. Mr. Gill expressed concerns that there is too much commercial in the area, noise issue with equipment running and people yelling over the equipment, exhaust brakes, hours of operation, blowing trash, and criminal activity with people sneaking into the site at night. He said that he has had to repair his fence several times where they have pushed trucks or trailers into his fence line. The materials they stored are all along his fence and it is unsightly with blowing trash and has been there a long time. Mr. Gill asked why the applicant put his equipment on his fence instead of on the other side of the building by the applicant's own house. He further asked for clarification that the applicant is not actually operating the business for himself, but that he sold the business. He expressed concern that it is not even his neighbor running the business but from someone else running the business that shouldn't be there in the first place. Mr. Shoemaker said that the north side of his property is the only place where he can store anything because there is an oilfield right-of-way that you can't build anything on it. He added that these concerns 5 are the first he has heard about these. He believes that they can work something out that can work for everybody. He said that that you should be able to do what you want on your property. He added that he works for the new company. The Chair asked Staff for any changes they would like to make. Mr. Roberson suggested adding a new Development Standard 16 that would read "Weld County is not responsible for the maintenance of onsite drainage related features". Motion: Add a new Development Standard 16, as requested by Staff, Moved by Tom Cope, Seconded by Sam Gluck. Motion carried unanimously. The Chair asked the applicant if they have read through the amended Development Standards and Conditions of Approval and if they are in agreement with those. The applicant replied that they are in agreement. Motion: Forward Case USR20-0028 to the Board of County Commissioners along with the amended Conditions of Approval and Development Standards with the Planning Commission's recommendation of denial, Moved by Butch White, Seconded by Sam Gluck. Vote: Motion carried by unanimous roll call vote (summary: Yes = 6). Yes: Butch White, Elijah Hatch, Lonnie Ford, Sam Gluck, Skip Holland, Tom Cope. Commissioner Cope agreed with Staffs rationale for the recommendation for denial. The Chair asked the public if there were other items of business that they would like to discuss. No one wished to speak. The Chair asked the Planning Commission members if there was any new business to discuss. No one wished to speak. Meeting adjourned at 2:22 pm. Respectfully submitted, Kristine Ranslem Secretary 6 Hello