HomeMy WebLinkAbout20193669.tiffSUMMARY OF THE WELD COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING
Tuesday, July 16, 2019
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,
Michael Wailes, at 12:30 pm.
Roll Call.
Present: Michael Wailes, Bruce Sparrow, Bruce Johnson, Gene Stille, Tom Cope, Lonnie Ford, Richard
Beck, Elijah Hatch.
Absent: Skip Holland.
Also Present: Chris Gathman and Angela Snyder, Department of Planning Services; Lauren Light and Ben
Frissell, Department of Health; Evan Pinkham, Hayley Balzano, Evan Pinkham, and Mike McRoberts,
Public Works; Bob Choate, County Attorney, and Kris Ranslem, Secretary.
Motion: Approve the July 2, 2019 Weld County Planning Commission minutes, Moved by Bruce Johnson,
Seconded by Elijah Hatch. Motion passed unanimously.
CASE NUMBER: USR19-0019
APPLICANT: CRESTONE PEAK RESOURCE HOLDINGS LLC
PLANNER: CHRIS GATHMAN
REQUEST: A SITE SPECIFIC DEVELOPMENT PLAN AND USE BY SPECIAL REVIEW
PERMIT FOR OIL AND GAS SUPPORT AND SERVICE (STORAGE AND
STAGING YARD FOR OIL AND GAS EQUIPMENT ALONG WITH AN EXISTING
OFFICE/SHOP BUILDING, EXISTING WELDING SHOP, EXISTING
EQUIPMENT STORAGE BUILDING, EXISTING FIELD MEASUREMENT AND
CALIBRATION BUILDING AND UP TO TWENTY-FIVE (25) CARGO
CONTAINERS FOR STORAGE OF VALVES, FITTINGS AND ELECTRICAL
ITEMS) IN THE A (AGRICULTURAL) ZONE DISTRICT.
LEGAL DESCRIPTION: LOT B RECX18-0083, PART SE4 SECTION 28, T1 N, R67W OF THE 6TH P.M.,
WELD COUNTY, COLORADO.
LOCATION: WEST OF AND ADJACENT TO CR 19 AND NORTH OF AND ADJACENT TO CR
4.
Chris Gathman, Planning Services, presented Case USR19-0019 reading the recommendation and
comments into the record. Mr. Gathman said that this site has historically operated as a natural gas
processing facility under previous owners and operators and was approved in July 1974. The facility was
later amended in 1986, 1988 and 1994. Since 2016 the site has been utilized for storage and staging and
the applicant is applying for this use under this USR.
Mr. Gathman noted that in 2008 Weld County approved the Dry Creek RUA (Regional Urbanization Area)
and this area was identified for future residential and commercial development. One of the requirements
of the RUA outlined in Section 26-4-90.B.3 states that buffer development on an oil and gas operation areas
a landscape buffer should be employed for the outer 50 feet of the setback of an oil and gas well or
operations area. This buffer area may be used for underground utilities, sidewalks, trails, and/or parking
and must be landscaped. Therefore, there is a Condition of Approval 1.E requiring a landscape and
screening plan to fulfill the RUA requirements.
The Department of Planning Services recommends approval of this application with the attached conditions
of approval and development standards.
Evan Pinkham, Public Works, reported on the existing traffic, access to the site and drainage conditions for
the site. An Improvements and Road Maintenance Agreement is required.
Ben Frissell, Environmental Health, reviewed the public water and sanitary sewer requirements, on -site
dust control, and the Waste Handling Plan.
1
Corytm nie-O--tioOf3-11L1 119
1'1S
2019-3669
Meghan Campbell, Crestone Peak Resources, 1801 California Street, Denver, Colorado, stated that the
site was previously used as a natural gas processing facility and they are proposing a storage and staging
yard for oil and gas equipment. The full site is fenced, and access points have car access entry only. They
feel that there won't be any major noise concerns associated with this site as it would be minimized by
enclosing most of the equipment inside the buildings and acoustical insulation.
Commissioner Hatch asked how long Encana used the facility for storage previously. Ms. Campbell said
that she was not sure, however, her colleague indicated six to seven years.
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 USR19-0019 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 Tom Cope, Seconded by Elijah Hatch.
Vote: Motion carried by unanimous roll call vote (summary: Yes = 8).
Yes: Bruce Johnson, Bruce Sparrow, Elijah Hatch, Gene Stille, Lonnie Ford, Michael Wailes, Richard Beck,
Tom Cope.
CASE NUMBER:
APPLICANT:
PLANNER:
REQUEST:
LEGAL DESCRIPTION:
LOCATION:
USR 19-0027
SERGIO AND EMMA VARGAS
ANGELA SNYDER
A SITE SPECIFIC DEVELOPMENT PLAN AND USE BY SPECIAL REVIEW
PERMIT FOR ANY USE PERMITTED AS A USE BY RIGHT, AN ACCESSORY
USE, OR A USE BY SPECIAL REVIEW IN THE COMMERCIAL OR INDUSTRIAL
ZONE DISTRICTS (COMMERCIAL TRUCKING BUSINESS WITH THREE (3)
TRUCKS) PROVIDED THAT THE PROPERTY IS NOT A LOT IN AN APPROVED
OR RECORDED SUBDIVISION PLAT OR LOTS PART OF A MAP OR PLAN
FILED PRIOR TO ADOPTION OF ANY REGULATIONS CONTROLLING
SUBDIVISIONS IN THE A (AGRICULTURAL) ZONE DISTRICT.
LOT A REC EXEMPT RECX16-0160, E2 NE4 SECTION 20, T4N, R64W OF THE
6TH P.M., WELD COUNTY, COLORADO.
SOUTH OF AND ADJACENT TO CR 44, APPROXIMATELY 700 FEET WEST
OF CR 53.
Angela Snyder, Planning Services, presented Case USR19-0027, reading the recommendation and
comments into the record. Ms. Snyder noted that correspondence was received from three surrounding
property owners as well as a letter from one property outside the 500 -foot notification area. The letters
outline concerns about traffic, poor visibility on County Road 44, industrial use of the site, the access
easement through the property to another property, waste, noise, environmental impacts, and hours of
operation. The Department of Planning Services recommends approval of this application with the attached
conditions of approval and development standards.
Hayley Balzano, 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, on -site
dust control, and the Waste Handling Plan.
Mark Taylor, Alles, Taylor and Duke, 3610 35th Avenue, Evans, Colorado, stated that the applicant is initially
proposed 10 trucks, however, they reduced the number to three (3) trucks and trailers.
Commissioner Wailes asked what support services he provides. Mr. Taylor said that it is mainly oil and
gas support and water for the oil and gas industry.
Commissioner Sparrow asked for clarification if the applicant intends to have up to 10 trucks. Mr. Taylor
said that they originally proposed 10 trucks, however, because of the resistance of the number of trucks
2
from neighbors and the engineering costs, they reduced the number of trucks to a maximum of three (3)
trucks.
Commissioner Wailes noted that he didn't see a limit of trucks in the development standards. Ms. Snyder
suggested that it should be added.
The Chair asked if there was anyone in the audience who wished to speak for or against this application.
Debbie Hill, 20705 CR 53, Kersey, Colorado, stated that they are the original owners of the property. She
expressed concern regarding the easement and added that when they placed the easement it was for a
residential easement. She further added that they intended to divide their property for residential purposes
in the future. She said that easement cannot handle commercial traffic and it would block any further
residents from access. Ms. Hill additionally expressed concern regarding traffic safety, noise and property
value. She requested that screening be provided so that they will be able to sell their lots as well as a buffer
zone to provide protection for their livestock.
Tammy Long, 25660 CR 44, Kersey, Colorado, stated that they are concerned with the traffic safety coming
in and out of the access road. She added that it is right by the ditch and below the incline. She said that it
will be an accident waiting to happen. Ms. Long also stated that she is concerned about the impact to their
cattle on their 80 acres. She provided a letter she submitted through an email.
The Chair asked the applicant if they can propose a safer access. Ms. Snyder clarified that the proposed
access is using the easement on the east side of the property and apologized for incorrectly stating the
ditch access road. Mr. Taylor said that he is more concerned with cars and pickups because trucks are
seated higher and have more visibility.
Mr. Taylor said that they have increased the radius of the access to 60 feet to accommodate the turning of
the trucks. Commissioner Johnson asked if this will be impacting the Hill's property or Weld County's
property. Mr. Taylor said it would impact both.
The Chair referred to adding a development standard limiting the trucks to three (3). Ms. Snyder suggested
adding a new Development Standard 5 that states "Commercial vehicles shall be limited to three (3)". Bob
Choate, County Attorney, noted that the limit is identified in specific request in Development Standard 1.
No further action was taken.
Commissioner Cope referred to the 60 -foot radius going out beyond the property lines and asked how that
will be handled as he doesn't believe they have the legal right to do that. Ms. Balzano said that they would
need written permission from the property owner to construct the radium on their property or ask for a
variance for the turning radius. Mr. Taylor added that they could shift it to the west a touch.
Commissioner Beck asked if they should consider a continuance given there is no solution to the access.
Ms. Snyder said that if they move the access further west they could fit the radius within the easement;
however, if the access easement moves too much then they would have to renegotiate the distance of their
access permit location. Commissioner Johnson said that if they can fit it within their easement he doesn't
see this as an issue.
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.
Commissioner Beck asked if the County Attorney has an opinion with the easement issue. Mr. Choate said
that this property has direct access onto their right-of-way. Because the recorded exemption plat has an
easement indicating where that access goes, it is within Public Work's discretion to grant an alternate
access location. He added that if they can fit it within their existing access point, they have the legal right
to do that, otherwise the applicant can request a variance from Public Works.
Motion: Forward Case USR19-0027 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 Gene Stille, Seconded by Lonnie Ford.
Vote: Motion passed (summary: Yes = 6, No = 2, Abstain = 0).
3
Yes: Bruce Sparrow, Elijah Hatch, Gene Stille, Lonnie Ford, Richard Beck, Tom Cope.
No: Bruce Johnson, Michael Wailes.
Commissioner Johnson stated that he feels the site is incompatible with the existing neighbors.
Commissioner Wailes agreed with Mr. Johnson and cited Section 23-2-220.A.2 and 23-2-220.A.3. He
added that the use is not consistent with the intent of the Agricultural Zone District and is not compatible
with the existing surrounding land uses.
The Chair called a recess at 1:29 pm and reconvened the hearing at 1:35 pm.
CASE NUMBER: USR19-0037
APPLICANT: CARVER LANDSCAPE COMPANY
PLANNER: CHRIS GATHMAN
REQUEST: A SITE SPECIFIC DEVELOPMENT PLAN AND USE BY SPECIAL REVIEW
PERMIT FOR ANY USE PERMITTED AS A USE BY RIGHT, AN ACCESSORY
USE, OR A USE BY SPECIAL REVIEW IN THE COMMERCIAL OR INDUSTRIAL
ZONE DISTRICTS (OFFICE, SHOP, VEHICLE AND EQUIPMENT STORAGE
AND STORAGE OF LANDSCAPING MATERIAL ASSOCIATED WITH A
LANDSCAPE BUSINESS) PROVIDED THAT THE PROPERTY IS NOT A LOT IN
AN APPROVED OR RECORDED SUBDIVISION PLAT OR LOTS PARTS OF A
MAP OR PLAN FILED PRIOR TO ADOPTION OF ANY REGULATIONS
CONTROLLING SUBDIVISIONS IN THE A (AGRICULTURAL) ZONE DISTRICT.
LEGAL DESCRIPTION: LOT A REC EXEMPT RE -670, PART W2NW4 SECTION 16, T7N, R66 OF THE
6TH P.M., WELD COUNTY, COLORADO.
LOCATION: EAST OF AND ADJACENT TO CR 29; APPROXIMATELY 0.5 MILE NORTH OF
CR 80.
Chris Gathman, Planning Services, presented Case USR19-0037, reading the recommendation and
comments into the record. Mr. Gathman noted that one (1) letter from a surrounding property owner was
received regarding concerns of excessive weeds and storage of unsightly items. The Department of
Planning Services recommends approval of this application with the attached conditions of approval and
development standards.
Hayley Balzano, Public Works, reported on the existing traffic, access to the site and drainage conditions
for the site. Ms. Balzano referred to the Access Control Plan for County Road 29 and added that this
access and a neighboring access are identified as a safety concern due to the spacing of the accesses.
Lauren Light, Environmental Health, reviewed the public water and sanitary sewer requirements, on -site
dust control, and the Waste Handling Plan.
Tim Carver, 284 Madero Way, Windsor, Colorado, stated that he bought this property with the shop in 2002
and has been operating the landscape company for 15 years. He said that he was naive when he
purchased the property and didn't know it needed to be zoned for a landscape company. He has since
cleaned up the property and wants to be in compliance.
Commissioner Cope said he heard from Public Works that the access is in conflict with one of the neighbor's
access. He asked if the access can be adjusted so that it can be shared between the two properties. Mr.
Carver said that there is an irrigation ditch and it would take a lot of earth work and culvert to make that
happen. Ms. Balzano said that according to the Access Control Plan it should be combined with one of the
neighbors; however, it doesn't appear to be achievable and added that the property is not long enough to
meet spacing.
The Chair asked if there was anyone in the audience who wished to speak for or against this application.
Gary Winters, 39471 CR 29, said that he is a neighbor. He said that the applicant is trying to keep up with
the weeds but doesn't feel that he will keep up with it. He noted that his employees urinate on the ground.
He also feels his property values will suffer from having this business next door.
4
Chad Judge, 806 Kohler Farms Road, Kersey, Colorado, said that he supports small business, Weld
County, agriculture, and is also a small business owner and a farmer. He wants to see that there is a fair
resolution to this case. He suggested that maybe the parties could get together and see if there is a middle
ground.
Commissioner Sparrow said he doesn't know where he stands on this case. Mr. Judge said that
government has a place but sometimes there can be a little overreach and feels the parties should try to
figure this out. He said that anyone starting a small business doesn't have a manual on how to apply for a
permit and the process of what it takes. He added that if he had to choose a side, he would choose the
small business.
The Chair asked if there were any changes to the Resolution. Mr. Gathman said that he would like to
amend Development Standard 3 to correct the days of operation and said it should be Monday through
Friday.
Motion: Amend Development Standard 3 to read "The hours of operation are 7:00 a.m. - 5:00 p.m. Monday
— Friday", Moved by Tom Cope, Seconded by Elijah Hatch. 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 USR19-0037 to the Board of County Commissioners along with the amended
Conditions of Approval and Development Standards with the Planning Commission's recommendation of
approval, Moved by Tom Cope, Seconded by Michael Wailes.
Vote: Motion carried by unanimous roll call vote (summary: Yes = 8).
Yes: Bruce Johnson, Bruce Sparrow, Elijah Hatch, Gene Stille, Lonnie Ford, Michael Wailes, Richard Beck,
Tom Cope.
CASE NUMBER: USR19-0028
APPLICANT: CURTIS AND CELESTE HURD
PLANNER: ANGELA SNYDER
REQUEST: A SITE SPECIFIC DEVELOPMENT PLAN AND USE BY SPECIAL REVIEW
PERMIT FOR ANY USE PERMITTED AS A USE BY RIGHT, AN ACCESSORY
USE, OR A USE BY SPECIAL REVIEW IN THE COMMERCIAL OR INDUSTRIAL
ZONE DISTRICTS (COMMERCIAL CDL DRIVING SCHOOL) PROVIDED THAT
THE PROPERTY IS NOT A LOT IN AN APPROVED OR RECORDED
SUBDIVISION PLAT OR LOTS PART OF A MAP OR PLAN FILED PRIOR TO
ADOPTION OF ANY REGULATIONS CONTROLLING SUBDIVISIONS IN THE A
(AGRICULTURAL) ZONE DISTRICT.
LEGAL DESCRIPTION: PART SE4NE4 SECTION 12, LYING EAST OF C/L BULL CANAL Ti N, R68W OF
THE 6TH P.M., WELD COUNTY, COLORADO.
LOCATION: WEST OF AND ADJACENT TO CR 13 (COLORADO BLVD), APPROXIMATELY
0.5 MILES SOUTH OF CR 12 (GRAND VIEW BLVD).
Angela Snyder, Planning Services, presented Case USR19-0028, reading the recommendation and
comments into the record. Ms. Snyder noted that a letter was received from a surrounding property owner
regarding concerns of compatibility of the Dacono Intergovernmental Agreement (IGA), dust, traffic, noise,
and property devaluation. The Department of Planning Services recommends denial of this application due
to incompatibility with the IGA with the City of Dacono. Should the Planning Commission recommend
approval of this request, Staff included conditions of approval and development standards.
Hayley Balzano, 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, on -site
dust control, and the Waste Handling Plan.
Curtis Hurd, 4505 Colorado Boulevard, Dacono, Colorado, stated that Ms. Babcock asked if she could
operate her CDL training in his back yard. He wasn't aware that this needed a land use permit. He added
5
that he is surrounded by Dacono on three sides of his property and was not aware of the IGA with Dacono
and further added that he didn't have an opportunity to vote for it. Mr. Hurd said that Dacono made it clear
in their conversation with them in January that they did not want the CDL school there and that they would
insist on annexation per the IGA. He added that once his property is annexed into the city limits, they would
not allow the school to continue operating.
Commissioner Stille asked how the CDL school functions. Mr. Hurd said that it is set up where there are
backing pads in the back of the property and the property is also used to train for roadside inspections prior
to going out on the road. He noted that Anadarko owns the property south of and adjacent to his property
which is included in the Dacono city limits and they have zoned for multigenerational housing. Mr. Stille
asked if the modular office has classrooms. Mr. Hurd said there is little classroom training but more on the
road training. Mr. Stille asked if the trucks are muffled. Mr. Hurd said that they comply with State code and
regulations where sound dampening is concerned.
The Chair asked if there was anyone in the audience who wished to speak for or against this application.
James Blank, 4535 Colorado Boulevard, stated that he lives to the north of the subject site. He said they
started with two trucks and now have four trucks and five trailers now. He is concerned with the dust from
the trucks as they drive on dirt. He expressed concerns regarding the noise, dust and decrease in value of
their property and they continue to expand. He encountered a problem when coming back from vacation
where a 1950 truck was parked one foot away from his property and broke his fencepost and no one said
anything to him. He reiterated that this is not compatible with residential property.
Chad Judge, 806 Kohler Farms Road, Kersey, Colorado, said that he sees opportunity for the neighbors to
get along. He agreed with Mr. Blank that if this was happening right next to his fence he would be upset
as well. He suggested that the applicants install a tall fence, like the oilfield uses, for dust control or spraying
to keep the dust down. He added that there is a shortage of truck drivers and there is a need for schools
like this to ensure that drivers are getting trained properly.
Bonnie Babcock, 555 Holly Street, Hudson, Colorado, said that she currently operates only two (2) trucks.
A friend of hers who owned a CDL colleague passed away and his family needed to move a couple of his
trucks and so she has stored them until everything was finalized. She said that they will be moved off of
the property. The trailers are by the property line to help block some of the dust. She added that she has
tried talking to the neighbor, but he won't talk to her and isn't nice. She wasn't aware of the fencepost being
broke but she will look at that. Mr. Hurd added that he will walk the fence line and will make sure the fence
is intact and will repair it immediately if needed.
Bob Choate, County Attorney, noted that the recommendation was for denial. If the Planning Commission
decides to recommend approval, he noted that findings for each of the criteria will need to be made into the
record. He referred to Section 19-2-60.C.8 which provides three different options to choose from if the
Planning Commission chooses to recommend approval over the municipality's objection.
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 USR19-0028 to the Board of County Commissioners along with the Conditions of
Approval and Development Standards with the Planning Commission's recommendation of denial, Moved
by Bruce Johnson, Seconded by Tom Cope.
Commissioner Cope said that this is a fairly well enforced IGA and the reality is that it doesn't really seem
compatible with residential and then they would be required to annex into the Town and the Town will deny
the availability of zoning that request.
Commissioner Wailes said that this is a tough one and the applicant made some good points. He added
that the applicant didn't have the opportunity to speak against the IGA and is not within the city limits of
Dacono. He said that it is a difficult operation to run in the presence of residential properties.
Mr. Cope said that the applicant might be able to make adjustment to the location of the school on the
property and it could relatively be a low impact.
6
Vote: Motion passed (summary: Yes = 7, No = 1, Abstain = 0).
Yes: Bruce Johnson, Bruce Sparrow, Elijah Hatch, Gene Stille, Lonnie Ford, Richard Beck, Tom Cope.
No: Michael Wailes.
Commissioner Wailes cited Section 19-2-60.C.8.b that suitable mitigation measures could be imposed by
the County as conditions of approval to adequately mitigate adverse consequences of incompatibility or
conflict to include dust handling agreements and noise standards.
The Chair called a recess at 2:50 pm and reconvened the hearing at 3:04 pm.
CASE NUMBER:
APPLICANT:
PLANNER:
REQUEST:
LEGAL DESCRIPTION:
LOCATION:
USR19-0030
RONALD & DIANE BAKEL
CHRIS GATHMAN
A SITE SPECIFIC DEVELOPMENT PLAN AND USE BY SPECIAL REVIEW
PERMIT FOR ANY USE PERMITTED AS A USE BY RIGHT, ACCESSORY USE
OR USE BY SPECIAL REVIEW IN THE COMMERCIAL OR INDUSTRIAL ZONE
DISTRICTS (OUTDOOR STORAGE OF RVS, BOATS, TRACTOR TRAILERS,
PERSONAL VEHICLES AND EQUIPMENT, INDOOR STORAGE AND UP TO
600 CARGO CONTAINERS TO BE USED FOR PERSONAL STORAGE)
PROVIDED THAT THE PROPERTY IS NOT A LOT IN AN APPROVED OR
RECORDED SUBDIVISION PLAT OR PARTS OF A MAP OR PLAN FILED
PRIOR TO ADOPTION OF ANY REGULATIONS CONTROLLING
SUBDIVISIONS IN THE A (AGRICULTURAL) ZONE DISTRICT. THIS
PROPOSED USR ALSO INCLUDES A REQUESTED WAIVER FROM THE
WELD COUNTY SIGN REQUIREMENTS DELINEATED IN CHAPTER 23 OF
THE WELD COUNTY CODE TO ALLOW TWO (2) FIFTEEN (15) SQUARE -FOOT
TEMPORARY SIGNS, TWO (2) 18 -SQUARE FOOT PERMANENT FREE-
STANDING SIGNS AND TWO (2) PERMANENT 32 -SQUARE FOOT BUILDING
SIGNS.
LOT B CORR EXEMPT RECX16-0120, PART NE4 SECTION 4, T4N, R68W OF
THE 6T" P.M., WELD COUNTY, COLORADO.
EAST OF AND ADJACENT TO CR 7 AND SOUTH OF AND ADJACENT TO
STATE HIGHWAY 60.
Chris Gathman, Planning Services, presented Case USR19-0030, reading the recommendation and
comments into the record. Mr. Gathman noted that a letter was received from the existing dairy facility
expressing concerns on sharing the eastern access point, concerns with biosecurity and traffic conflicts
with the existing agricultural equipment utilized by the dairy. Another letter was received from a surrounding
property owner from Larimer County regarding concerns with compatibility and traffic on State Highway 60
in this location. The Department of Planning Services recommends approval of this application with the
attached conditions of approval and development standards.
Hayley Balzano, Public Works, reported on the existing traffic, access to the site and drainage conditions
for the site. Public Works is not in agreement with the access point on County Road 7 as proposed because
of the site distance. They would like to have a traffic engineer further review the site distance requirements
and survey what site distance is currently there.
Lauren Light, Environmental Health, reviewed the public water and sanitary sewer requirements, on -site
dust control, and the Waste Handling Plan.
Robert Malloy, 980 Norway Maple, Loveland, Colorado, stated that he is representing the owners. Mr.
Malloy said that the access on County Road 7 is not important to them. He stated that State Highway 60
continues to 1-25, but it does not have access to 1-25. He said that they do have an access from CDOT for
State Highway 60. Mr. Malloy said that the project will be built as demand grows. They intend to have
indoor storage along the outer edges and to use them for screening as well.
The Chair asked if there was anyone in the audience who wished to speak for or against this application.
No one wished to speak.
7
Commissioner Johnson said that he read that pods or cargo containers will be used as storage and asked
the applicant to clarify. Mr. Malloy said they are looking at both options.
Kevin Bakel, 2726 East State Highway 60, Loveland, Colorado, said that they would like to leave the storage
options open as they are trying to include as many storage related activities as possible and build as they
grow. Commissioner Johnson said that he believes pods are personal property and the stick -built storage
is real property so from a taxing standpoint there is a big difference. Mr. Malloy said that if there are pods,
they will be owned by the applicant and not rented to the tenants.
Mr. Malloy referred to Condition of Approval 1.E and finds this difficult that the adjacent property owners
won't sign off if they do not support this request. Ms. Balzano said Condition of Approval 1.E can be deleted
as they verified it is right-of-way for old County Road 7.
Motion: Delete Condition of Approval 1.E, Moved by Michael Wailes, Seconded by Tom Cope. 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 USR19-0030 to the Board of County Commissioners along with the amended
Conditions of Approval and Development Standards with the Planning Commission's recommendation of
approval, Moved by Elijah Hatch, Seconded by Michael Wailes.
Vote: Motion passed (summary: Yes = 7, No = 1, Abstain = 0).
Yes: Bruce Sparrow, Elijah Hatch, Gene Stille, Lonnie Ford, Michael Wailes, Richard Beck, Tom
Cope.
No: Bruce Johnson.
Commissioner Johnson said that he doesn't know if there will be permanent structures or pods and thinks
that there is a major difference in the application for one or the other.
Commissioner Sparrow commented that he is concerned about the pods as well because of weed control.
CASE NUMBER: USR19-0032
APPLICANT: FRONT RANGE LANDFILL INC
PLANNER: CHRIS GATHMAN
REQUEST: A SITE SPECIFIC DEVELOPMENT PLAN AND SITE SPECIFIC DEVELOPMENT
PLAN FOR ANY USE PERMITTED AS A USE BY RIGHT, ACCESSORY USE OR
USE BY SPECIAL REVIEW IN THE COMMERCIAL OR INDUSTRIAL ZONE
DISTRICTS (OFFICE AND MAINTENANCE BUILDING ALONG WITH FUEL
STORAGE AND FUEL STATION FOR COMPANY VEHICLES, TRUCK PARKING
AND STORAGE (INCLUDING DUMPSTER AND ROLL -OFF CONTAINER
STORAGE), A CONTAINER SHOP AND A TRUCK WASH) PROVIDED THAT
THE PROPERTY IS NOT A LOT IN AN APPROVED OR RECORDED
SUBDIVISION PLAT OR PART OF A MAP OR PLAN FILED PRIOR TO
ADOPTION OF ANY REGULATIONS CONTROLLING SUBDIVISIONS IN THE A
(AGRICULTURAL) ZONE DISTRICT.
LEGAL DESCRIPTION: PART OF THE SE4 SECTION 28, T1N, R68W OF THE 6TH P.M., WELD
COUNTY, COLORADO.
LOCATION: WEST OF AND ADJACENT TO CR 7; 0.5 MILES SOUTH OF CR 6.
Chris Gathman, Planning Services, presented Case USR19-0032, reading the recommendation and
comments into the record. Mr. Gathman noted that 15 letters of concern and opposition were received
regarding concerns including the stockpiling of material on this property associated with the adjacent landfill,
runoff into the ditch, how they deal with truck wash water, impacts to County Road 6, impacts on property
values, dust and traffic impacts on County Road 7; and using County Road 7 as a haul route. Mr. Gathman
said that the original questionnaire stated that they would be utilizing County Road 6, however, in
discussions with the applicant they have revised the application questionnaire to indicate that traffic will be
going north on County Road 7 up to Erie Parkway or County Road 8. County Road 6 will not be utilized as
8
a haul route for this facility. The Department of Planning Services recommends approval of this application
with the attached conditions of approval and development standards.
Hayley Balzano, Public Works, reported on the existing traffic, access to the site and drainage conditions
for the site. She added that they have been working on an agreement with the applicant on the access
location.
Ben Frissell, Environmental Health, reviewed the public water and sanitary sewer requirements, on -site
dust control, and the Waste Handling Plan.
(Tom Cope left the hearing at 3:51 pm)
Jason Edwards, 6420 Southwest Boulevard, Fort Worth, Texas, said that the hauling facility will house the
waste collection vehicles at the end of the day once the route has been completed. No solid waste will be
stored at the facility. The main building at the facility will include a maintenance area, office areas and
meeting areas. The site will include employee parking, truck parking, truck wash, container shop, fueling
area and storage area. Mr. Edwards said that the growth in Weld County has demanded this use of this
facility and the existing facility is becoming too small. He added that the facility is being developed to
include a renewable fuel truck system. Development will allow for the continued conversion of trucks to
renewable fuel (compressed natural gas).
Mr. Edwards said that they are proposing a wood or metal fence along the property along with live screening
(evergreen). He said that they do not intend to use County Road 6, but rather go north on County Road 7
to Erie Parkway. He also stated that there is an agreement between the landfill and Ranch Eggs
Subdivision about access on County Road 7 and he noted that this facility is under Waste Connections
Colorado, Inc. which is a separate entity from Front Range Landfill who has the agreement with Ranch
Eggs Association. This proposed facility is an office and maintenance facility for Waste Connections. The
applicant is proposing to relocate their existing facility from their existing property currently located in the
Town limits of Erie (on County Road 1 north of Highway 7). The existing facility is on a smaller site (between
2-3 acres) and the applicant is proposing to relocate to this site (which is over 10 acres). The larger site will
provide for room expansion of the facility due to population growth which has occurred and future growth
in also to address future growth.
The Chair asked if there was anyone in the audience who wished to speak for or against this application.
Sherri Struble, 3310 Johnson Lane, Erie, Colorado, stated that she lives in unincorporated Weld County
and is part of the Ranch Eggs Association. She cited Section 23-2-230.B.4 and said that burden is on the
applicant to show that this non -agriculture use of the land is appropriate for the area. She added that the
1991 Agreement was between Ranch Eggs Neighborhood Association and the landfill and prevents trash
truck use of County Road 7. She noted that the agreement didn't say just filled trash trucks and the point
was to keep the trash traffic off of County Road 7.
Commissioner Johnson asked what would make this case more palatable. Ms. Struble said that anything
needs to be done to alleviate the traffic issues. She asked if the landfill would guarantee that their
employees would approach from Erie Parkway or County Road 8 would be helpful then they wouldn't have
the trash trucks nor the personal transportation issues.
Chris Raimo, 914 CR 7, Erie, Colorado, stated that she lives in the Ranch Eggs Subdivision. She stated
that Mid -American who was the previous owner and all of the owners have honored this agreement and it
has also been incorporated into their EDOP. She referred to what could possibly solve this problem and
added that the applicant could abide by the agreement which there is one access to that property on County
Road 5. Erie also has an agreement for transportation agreement that has never been fulfilled, which is
the extension of Sheridan Parkway.
Commissioner Beck asked the County Attorney to explain how the Planning Commission are influenced by
this agreement. Bob Choate, County Attorney, stated that he disagrees with letter provided by Attorney
David Bower. He added that you can take it into account in how it relates to compatibility or that it would
be valuable in determining mitigation measures, but it is specific to traffic visiting the solid waste disposal
site and facility which is the subject of the certificate of designation and this site does not require that and
9
is not a solid waste disposal site facility. He said it can be considered for compatibility and mitigation, but
it doesn't prohibit the Planning Commission from recommending approval of this application.
Ms. Raimo said that the proposed hauling facility is in direct violation of the 1991 Agreement that the Landfill
made with RENA and the agreement was designed to keep the landfill traffic off of County Roads 7 and 6
and out of the Ranch Eggs community. She said that this industrial hauling facility is incompatible with
Weld County's Agricultural Goals and Policies and this proposed facility is in conflict of protecting the health,
safety, convenience and general welfare of the community. Ms. Raimo pointed out that Broomfield has
planned development east of and adjacent to the site for residential and open space. She noted that the
recent code changes through Ordinance 2019-02 removed this type of development through a USR permit.
Chad Judge, 806 Kohler Farms Road, Kersey, Colorado, said that the landfill has been there 28 years and
the town kind of grew to it so anyone in that area probably knew it was there. He said that truck traffic is a
nuisance and if there is a way to alleviate that he is in support of that. He is concerned with the water
issues and is also pro -business, so it makes sense to have the trucks after they dump to go right over and
clean out rather than pushing them to another location. He is not for or against this case, however he just
wished to bring up come points. He asked the Planning Commission to take into consideration the truck
traffic and the public's best interest as well as the protection of water.
Calvin Hall, 1924 Carol Drive, Erie, Colorado, said that he lives in unincorporated Weld County on County
Road 6. He expressed concern regarding existing heavy traffic and the increased traffic, trash, erosion of
the road, and incompatibility with the neighborhood. He added that they are not supposed to use County
Road 6, but it is used for access to the dump.
Dee Trembath, 3376 Longview Road, Erie, Colorado, stated she is concerned with the traffic including the
traffic from the Encana site and expressed concern regarding the excessive speed and noise from jake
brakes. She also expressed concern regarding water contamination into their irrigation ditches.
The Chair asked the applicant to address the concerns.
Mr. Edwards said that there is no intent of using County Road 6 other than pickup of residential trash. He
added that the hauling route will be north on County Road 7 to Erie Parkway. Regarding contamination of
water, he said that all the maintenance will be done indoors and the water from truck washing area will be
contained. He added that the grading to the FRICO ditch is sloped away so if there were any spills it
wouldn't enter the ditch. Mr. Edwards said that there is residential on the east and to the south and an
existing landfill north and west. He said waste collection is never wanted but a necessary utility and
because of the growth Waste Connections needs to make sure that they are meeting the needs of the
community. He added that Waste Connections would be happy to talk to the residents to discuss their
issues.
Commissioner Johnson what the noise level is. Mr. Edwards said that the maintenance will be the only
noise and will be performed indoors so the noise will be eliminated. Mr. Johnson referred to jake brakes
and Mr. Edwards said that he will talk with Waste Connections about the use of jake brakes. Mr. Johnson
asked what the possibility is of having the access on County Road 5 rather than County Road 7. Mr.
Edwards said that it would not be great because the site north and west is all landfill so there is no free
space to create an access through that to this site.
Commissioner Sparrow asked what the service area is and how far the trucks reach out. Mr. Edwards said
that there is some variability depending on what contracts they have at the time. He added that it is probably
20 miles or more in some directions. Commissioner Johnson asked which direction most of the customers
are from. Mr. Edwards said that most are likely south moving north.
Sarah Phillips, 2573 South Xavier Street, Denver, Colorado, agreed that a proposed mitigation common
ground would be that employees could commit to a northbound only route. Commissioner Wailes said that
is a valuable thing in response to the neighbors, unfortunately there is no way for the County to begin to
enforce that, so he is reluctant to add that as a development standard. Commissioner Johnson disagreed
and said that it can be enforced when someone would make a complaint.
10
The Chair asked if there are any changes to the Resolution. Mr. Gathman noted that a referral was received
from Farmer's Reservoir and Irrigation and recommended attaching a condition of approval that would read
that the applicant shall attempt to address their concerns. He read their referral comments into the record.
Mr. Edwards said that they did receive a similar letter from FRICO on the recorded exemption application
and he added that they did reach out to FRICO and addressed their comments. The Chair added that he
doesn't see adding anything at this point.
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.
Commissioner Johnson said that Staff has done a good job of reviewing this application. He said that in
looking at immediate proximity to neighborhood this is probably a palatable activity with it being adjacent to
the landfill, however, on the other hand he is not sure it is compatible with the overall growth of the
neighborhood.
Motion: Forward Case USR19-0032 to the Board of County Commissioners along with the Conditions of
Approval and Development Standards with the Planning Commission's recommendation of denial, Moved
by Gene Stille, Seconded by Bruce Johnson.
Commissioner Stille cited Section 22 and Sections 23-2-220.A.2 and 23-2-220.A.4 regarding compatibility
with future development as well as agricultural use and the direction of growth.
Commissioner Beck said that there are a lot of typical problems and tends to agree with the motion that
government is always behind the curve as far as having roadways to service what is going on. He added
that we keep adding traffic and not getting roads improved in time to handle them all.
Commissioner Sparrow referred to his question of the service area and said that it is appropriate for the
people in the area to deal with the trash in a 5 -mile radius, but the traffic problem with the way it is he is
concerned reaching out 20 miles or more.
The Chair called for the vote.
Vote: Motion failed (summary: Yes = 3, No = 4, Abstain = 0).
Yes: Bruce Johnson, Gene Stifle, Richard Beck.
No: Bruce Sparrow, Elijah Hatch, Lonnie Ford, Michael Wailes.
Absent: Tom Cope.
Commissioner Sparrow added that he does think this is a good location and hopes that the County will
solve the traffic problem.
Since the motion failed, the Chair asked if there was another motion.
Motion: Forward Case USR19-0032 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 Michael Wailes, Seconded by Bruce Sparrow.
Commissioner Wailes said that the applicant has met the criteria in Section 23-2-220.A of the Weld County
Code. He added that if you can't park a trash truck next to a landfill, he isn't sure where it can be parked.
The Chair called for the vote.
Vote: Motion passed (summary: Yes = 4, No = 3, Abstain = 0).
Yes: Bruce Sparrow, Elijah Hatch, Lonnie Ford, Michael Wailes.
No: Bruce Johnson, Gene Stille, Richard Beck.
Absent: Tom Cope.
The Chair called a recess at 5:00 pm and reconvened the hearing at 5:08 pm.
11
CASE NUMBER: USR19-0022
APPLICANT: EDUARDO SALVADOR RIVERA TORRES
PLANNER: ANGELA SNYDER
REQUEST: A SITE SPECIFIC DEVELOPMENT PLAN AND USE BY SPECIAL REVIEW FOR
AN ANIMAL BOARDING AND TRAINING FACILITY AND COMMERCIAL RACE
TRACK IN THE A (AGRICULTURAL) ZONE DISTRICT
LEGAL DESCRIPTION: LOT D REC EXEMPT RECX17-0069, PART SW4 SECTION 23, T9N, R67W OF
THE 6TH P.M., WELD COUNTY, COLORADO.
LOCATION: NORTH OF AND ADJACENT TO CR 102, EAST OF AND ADJACENT TO CR
21.
Angela Snyder, Planning Services, presented Case USR19-0022, reading the recommendation and
comments into the record. Ms. Snyder noted that letters were submitted in objection regarding concerns
of noise, road maintenance, safety, lighting, waste, adequate fire protection and animal health. The
Department of Planning Services recommends approval of this application with the attached conditions of
approval and development standards.
Commissioner Wailes referred to Development Standard 15 regarding the no illegal gambling is permitted.
He understands that it is State law and asked how the Department of Planning Services can enforce that,
other than through the Sheriff's Department.
Mike McRoberts, Public Works, reported on the existing traffic, access to the site and drainage conditions
for the site. An Improvements and Road Maintenance Agreement with triggers for offsite improvements
will be required.
Commissioner Johnson asked how dust will be handled. Mr. McRoberts said there will be a trigger for mag
chloride and it will be covered in the Improvements and Road Maintenance Agreement.
Lauren Light, Environmental Health, reviewed the public water and sanitary sewer requirements, on -site
dust control, and the Waste Handling Plan. Ms. Light noted that the Planning Commission may want to
add a time frame to Development Standard 7 or the facility will be required to put in septic and a water
source. She added that the application indicates that there are two wells on site, however, they are
domestic wells and they cannot be used for this use. Ms. Light said that the noise is restricted to the
residential zone and the applicants did submit a noise study and they indicated that they would comply with
the noise standard.
The Chair asked Ms. Light to clarify her request on Development Standard 7. Ms. Light said that if the
applicant wants to use portable toilets, under Environmental Health Policy, it is six months or less and there
is nothing in here that limits that.
Commissioner Hatch referred to Development Standard 13 regarding the requirement of two State of
Colorado licensed veterinarians not related by blood, marriage or friendship to any property owner,
applicant or participant and said that veterinarians are a very small community and asked how they would
expect to enforce that. Ms. Snyder said that this has been a development standard that they have used in
the past on racing facilities and not quite sure how it came to be. Commissioner Wailes agreed.
Shannon Toomey, AGPROfessionals, 3050 67th Avenue, Greeley, stated that she is representing the
applicant. Ms. Toomey stated that the request is to allow for an equestrian training, boarding and event
center. The site will include a 600 -yard horse track, bleachers for spectators, a children's playground, a
horse stable and a barn for storage of maintenance equipment. She said that the horse track has already
been constructed as a training track and it is a use by right. The Use by Special Review that the applicant
is requesting is to allow the 50 to 350 spectators to watch the training events that occur on site.
At full build out, the site will host racing events one to two times per month between the months of March
and October. Since they are only allowed to use the portable toilets for six months, the races will occur
from April to September until permanent restrooms can be constructed.
The applicants did submit a Temporary Assembly Permit application in 2018 and the Board of County
Commissioners directed them to apply for a USR to address any concerns. Ms. Toomey noted that the
12
race times won't start until after 10 am, however, they are requesting 8 am to allow for employees to come
and prepare the race events. They are anticipating between 5 to 10 races per day.
Ms. Toomey said that noise limits will not exceed the residential limits measured 25 feet from the property.
Commissioner Beck asked how many parking places will be identified for visitors. Ms. Toomey said that
there will be 150 spaces available and 30 spaces available for trailers. Mr. Beck asked if the parking will
be on gravel. Ms. Toomey said the parking area will have road -based material.
Commissioner Beck asked if the horses will be kept in the stalls. Ms. Toomey said that if the boarding stalls
are full they will be kept in the trailers or in a fenced off area.
Tim Naylor, AGPROfessionals, said this is typical of what is at a rodeo and people that bring horses to the
event would have a trailer that they would tether their horses to their trailers in the parking area. He added
that the parking area is separated from the spectator parking.
Commissioner Sparrow said he was concerned with spectators standing along the race track with no railing.
Mr. Naylor showed a visual slide of the railing for the horse track and there is 10 feet of distance to another
fence, so the spectators can not interfere with the horse track. Mr. Sparrow said that there is no way of
preventing betting but asked if the applicant will be involved in it. Mr. Naylor said the applicant will not have
any involvement at all and added that if there is betting it would be between two individuals.
Commissioner Ford expressed concern regarding the road maintenance of County Road 21. Mr. Naylor
said that they want to make sure the road is maintained. He added that from the neighborhood meeting
that they held, the person at the end of the road at the intersection of County Roads 21 and 102 does not
want that road maintained because he would rather have the washboard there to slow the traffic down.
Rebecca Hendricks, Block and Bridle Veterinary Service, 32649 CR 53, Greeley, Colorado, stated that any
horse coming from out of State to Colorado has to have a certificate of veterinary inspection. This certificate
states that the animal has been examined and found free of infectious disease and is fit to travel. The time
length of that validity is typically 30 days. Ms. Hendricks said that any horse that is in State will have some
mileage limitations that they still need to have a brand inspection and they will also have a brief health
check to ensure there are no signs of infectious disease.
Ms. Hendricks referred to the veterinarian community and said it is a surprisingly small community and they
know everyone so it is near impossible to find two veterinarians that don't have some sort of a kinship to
the property owner. She said that they will have a veterinarian on site through the entire event to check for
health papers, any infectious diseases, and management any sort of medical or illnesses that arise while
horses are at the track.
Commissioner Johnson referred to the bend at the end of the horse track and said it is a pretty abrupt turn.
Ms. Hendricks said that lengths of races can vary, and it is a relatively sharp curve at the end however it is
easier to make somewhat of a bend as horses can gallop a corner relatively easy. The issues she has
seen is the horses running as fast as they can go and stopping at a fence and end up over the fence so if
there is a slow down time or a curve while they are still at a gallop that is a huge mitigation.
(Gene Stille left hearing at 6:00 pm)
Mr. Naylor referred to Development Standard 13 regarding the two veterinarians related by blood and said
that this was removed at a previous Board of County Commissioner hearing for a previous horse track
application.
The Chair asked if there was anyone in the audience who wished to speak for or against this application.
Rob Claudell, 50295 CR 21, stated that he lives across from the site entrance and expressed concern of
school bus route. He added that these numbers that are being asked for mean nothing after the permit has
been granted as they tend to follow the guidelines of asking for forgiveness than for permission. Mr.
Claudell said that they moved out to this area for peace and quiet and not next to a commercial race track.
13
He noted that in the past there was a massive fire out there and they are 45 to 60 minutes away from the
Sheriff's Department or ambulance.
Mike Robbs, 9991 CR 102, said he will be taking most of the abuse of the dust on the, road as he lives
directly across from it. He is concerned that there is too much traffic and likes the road not being maintained
to slow people down. He is not opposed to the boarding facility but is concerned with the race track.
Aleta Claudell, 50295 CR 21, said that they have lived there for 10 years. She said that the parking lot will
be facing her house and added that she lives the closest to the road that they will be driving in on, so it will
be 500 feet from her front door. She also expressed concern regarding noise and doesn't believe it is
compatible with the neighborhood.
Edward Mistier, 50409 CR 21, stated that he can see the track from their living room window. He expressed
concern of incompatibility, noise, security at the event, fire protection, and not having a grading permit for
the race track. He doesn't feel it is fair to impose on the existing neighbors.
Chad Judge, 806 Kohler Farms Road, Kersey, Colorado, asked if there is possibility to consider access
from County Road 102 rather than County Road 21. He added that the roads that will be used will probably
be in the best condition they have ever been in. He agrees that there needs to be a serious effort to
maintain trash control. He suggested that maybe the property owner could have some water trucks on site
to respond to a fire.
Cynthia Burkhart, 9309 CR 104, stated that she is opposed to this application. She said that this has always
been designed to be a race track and added that there were 2 Facebook pages advertising events last
year. She expressed concerns of illegal gambling, risk of spreading infectious diseases, changes in the
number of spectators, violation of not submitting a grading permit, fire hazards, trash, and incompatibility
with the neighborhood.
Diana Varra, 9080 CR 102, stated that she owns property directly south of race track. She said that they
calve out their calves on the corner of County Roads 102 and 19 from February through March and there
could be 300 cars coming past and it is a detriment to their farming operation. She referred to the letter
from the Racing Commission who discouraged these events and expressed concern regarding the five hills
on County Road 102 and the safety of the traffic. She added that they have large equipment that travel the
same roads that these 350 cars will be traveling.
Rick Carlson, 7660 CR 102, stated that he lives two miles away. He has known the owners since he was
in grade school and added that this is a top notch facility and very clean. Mr. Carlson said that he is on the
Board of Directors for the Colorado Regulators, which is the Colorado based Cowboy Mounted Shooting
Association for the State of Colorado. He said that these horses are valuable, trained and very well cared
for. He added that this facility will help train horses to the next level of competition and it will be done safely
and will have good cowboy techniques.
Daryl Burkhart, 9309 CR 104, said that he is opposed to this and added that the majority will be good people
but there will be a small percentage that will leave trash and destroy properties. There are no traffic lights
or stop signs and is concerned about the traffic safety. He is also concerned about fire protection. He
provided an Arapahoe Permit for racing where there is a background check to make sure there is no
gambling.
Susan Mistier, 50419 CR 21, stated that they can see the race track from their house. She agrees with the
safety concerns, impacts to the road and especially the dust as she has lung issues. She added that she
is not a fan of mag chloride as it messes up the vehicles and it kills the grass along the roads. Ms. Mistier
said that the County Commissioners had denied the Temporary Assembly Permit because it was not
compatible with the area. She is not opposed to the boarding facility but does oppose the race track.
Jay Davis, 51229 CR 21, said that he is opposed to this and added that there is little to no means of
enforcing these development standards and they are not a policing force. He stated that it is not palatable
for the neighbors.
14
The Chair noted that a grading permit wasn't acquired and asked Mr. McRoberts to explain. Mr. McRoberts
said that he doesn't have a lot of knowledge about the grading permits and said that in talking with his
college earlier today that the applicant did do the grading without the permit. He added that because it is
intended to be a commercial facility they do need to get a grading permit. Mr. Naylor said a grading permit
should have been obtained. He added that it was prior to AGPRO's involvement with this case and added
that they have completed a full drainage report, and this will be included with the grading permit.
Mr. Naylor said it is near impossible where this track would not impact somebody and added that it needs
to be in the ag zone district. He stated that if the applicant doesn't follow the rules they can essentially lose
the ability to continue operating. He added that they are trying everything to mitigate their concerns.
Commissioner Ford asked how they will limit participation. Mr. Naylor said that they will have to follow the
gate and the owner knows how the races will draw the crowds and they will have to limit those.
Commissioner Johnson asked if there is any way to access the event from County Road 102 rather than
County Road 21. Mr. Naylor said that it is something that they can sit down with Public Works and work
out.
Commissioner Ford asked if they couldn't have water trucks on site for each event for fire protection. Mr.
Naylor said that he asked the applicant during the hearing if they would have water trucks available for fire
and Mr. Torres said that they do have water trucks, so they would be happy to have those on site.
Commissioner Johnson said that trash is hard to control off -site, but it is something to think about. Mr.
Naylor said that they did submit a Nuisance Plan and they have addressed that in the plan. He added that
they will be policing the site after the event to make sure that the trash is properly disposed of.
The Chair asked Staff if they had any changes to the Resolution. Ms. Snyder referred to Development
Standard 13 regarding the two veterinarians not related by blood and said that it was taken out at a prior
Board of County Commissioner hearing. She added that she would be in support of striking this
development standard. Commissioner Johnson asked why we require two (2) veterinarians. Mr. Beck
agreed.
Motion: Amend Development Standard 13 to read "One (1) State of Colorado Licensed Veterinarian shall
be on site during any event. The veterinarian will remain on site until the last event is over", Moved by
Bruce Johnson, Seconded by Richard Beck. Motion carried unanimously.
The Chair referred to the possible change suggested by the Health Department on Development Standard
7. Mr. Naylor said that they are planning to have events from April to September as long as they have the
portable toilets. He added that when they have a permanent facility for restrooms they will operate from
March to October. Mr. Choate said that he doesn't believe it is necessary to amend Development Standard
7 as it is addressed in Development Standard 25.
Ms. Toomey referred to Development Standard 42 where it states that the Use by Special Review Permit
shall be reviewed annually. She added that this is the first time they have seen this and asked what the
review would entail. Mr. Naylor added that they don't believe it follows the county code. Ms. Snyder
recommended deleting that development standard.
Motion: Delete Development Standard 42, Moved by Elijah Hatch, Seconded by Bruce Johnson. 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.
Commissioner Johnson said that these are never easy. He said that he believes the applicant has done
an excellent job of trying to mitigate all the issues. He added that trying to change the access from County
Road 21 would be a real positive step prior to the Board of County Commissioner hearing. Commissioner
Sparrow agreed that the change of access would help a lot. Mr. Johnson said that he understands the fire
protection issue and added that area has changed drastically over the last few years in growth.
15
Kristine Ranslem
Secretary
Commissioner Beck said that he is familiar with County Road 102 and he added there are some tremendous
hills on that road, so he would have real concerns with the access on County Road 102 because of the
topography.
Motion: Forward Case USR19-0022 to the Board of County Commissioners along with the amended
Conditions of Approval and Development Standards with the Planning Commission's recommendation of
approval, Moved by Bruce Johnson, Seconded by Elijah Hatch.
Vote: Motion passed (summary: Yes = 4, No = 2, Abstain = 0).
Yes: Bruce Johnson, Elijah Hatch, Lonnie Ford, Michael Wailes.
No: Bruce Sparrow, Richard Beck.
Absent: Gene Stille, Tom Cope.
Commissioner Beck said that he has spent 40 to 50 years in the horse business and is in support of all
horse business but doesn't believe a commercial track is compatible with the neighborhood. He believes
traffic is a problem.
Commissioner Sparrow said that having that many people on a Saturday is incompatible with the
neighborhood.
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. The Chair
announced that this is Bruce Sparrow's last hearing and thanked him for serving on the Planning
Commission.
Meeting adjourned at 7:11 pm.
Respectfully submitted,
16
Hello