HomeMy WebLinkAbout20183586.tiff EXHIBIT
2
BEFORE THE WELD COUNTY. COLORADO. PLANNING COMMISSION OST2- l % -UcnL4
RESOLUTION OF RECOMMENDATION TO THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
Moved by Bruce Johnson. that the following resolution be introduced for passage by the Weld County
Planning Commission. Be it resolved by the Weld County Planning Commission that the application for:
CASE NUMBER: USR18-0074
APPLICANT GLENN DEWAYNE CECIL
PLANNER ANGELA SNYDER
REQUEST A SITE SPECIFIC DEVELOPMENT PLAN AND USE BY SPECIAL REVIEW PERMIT
FOR ONE (1 ) SINGLE-FAMILY DWELLING UNIT PER LOT OTHER THAN THOSE
PERMITTED UNDER SECTION 23-3-20.A. (SECOND SINGLE-FAMILY DWELLING
UNIT) IN THE A (AGRICULTURAL) ZONE DISTRICT.
LEGAL DESCRIPTION LOT A REC EXEMPT RE-2281 . PART SW4 SECTION 32. T7N , R64W OF THE 6TH
P. M. . WELD COUNTY. COLORADO.
LOCATION NORTH OF AND ADJACENT TO CR 74. EAST OF AND ADJACENT TO CR 51 .
be recommended favorably to the Board of County Commissioners for the following reasons:
1 . The submitted materials are in compliance with the application requirements of Section 23-2-260 of
the Weld County Code.
2. It is the opinion of the Planning Commission that the applicant has shown compliance with Section 23-
2-220 of the Weld County Code as follows
A. Section 23-2-220.A. 1 -- The proposed use is consistent with Chapter 22 and any other
applicable code provisions or ordinance in effect.
Section 22-2-20. F. 3. - A. Policy 6. 3. states. -Encourage multi-generational, caretaker, guest
and accessory quarters. "
The proposed second single family dwelling has been used as a residence for family
members, and the family would like the option of using it for family in the future.
Section 22-2-20. H. - A. Goal 8. States. 'Ensure that adequate services and facilities are
currently available or reasonably obtainable to accommodate the requested new land use
change for more intensive development. "
There is currently water and septic service provided to the property. Water is being provided
to both homes by North Weld County Water District (NWCWD). Sewer service is being
provided to both homes by Galeton Water & Sanitation District.
B. Section 23-2-220.A.2 -- The proposed use is consistent with the intent of the A (Agricultural)
Zone District.
Section 23-3-40.M . of the Weld County Code allows for one (1 ) single-family dwelling unit per
lot other than those permitted under section 23-3-20.A. (second single-family dwelling unit) in
the Agricultural (A) Zone District.
C. Section 23-2-220.A. 3 -- The uses which will be permitted will be compatible with the existing
surrounding land uses.
Both homes are currently on the property. so this permit will not change the density or nature
of the area. The site is adjacent to the Galeton townsite. The density is consistent with the
urban nature of the Galeton townsite and the proposal is compatible.
There are five (5) Use by Special Review Permits within one (1 ) mile of the proposal : SUP-
315 Hog Farm , USR- 1577 Outdoor Storage and Farm Equipment, USR13-0046 Electrical
Contractor Shop. USR-917 Wastewater Treatment Plant. and USR-703AM Adult Group
Home.
RESOLUTION USR18-0074
GLENN DEWAYNE CECIL
PAGE 2
The Weld County Department of Planning Services sent notice to thirty-six (36) surrounding
property owners. Planning staff received no letters in response to this USR.
D. Section 23-2-220 .A.4 -- The uses which will be permitted will be compatible with future
development of the surrounding area as permitted by the existing zoning and with the future
development as projected by Chapter 22 of the Weld County Code and any other applicable
code provisions or ordinances in effect, or the adopted Master Plans of affected
municipalities.
The site is not located within the boundary of an Intergovernmental Agreement (IGA) or within
three miles of an incorporated municipality.
E. Section 23-2-220.A. 5 -- The application complies with Chapter 23, Articles V and XI , of the
Weld County Code.
A portion of the property is located within the Special Flood Hazard Area of Willow Creek.
Development within this area requires a Flood Hazard Development Permit. The property is
not within the Geologic Hazard Overlay District or the Airport Overlay District. Building
Permits issued on the lot will be required to adhere to the fee structure of the County-Wide
Road Impact Fee Program . Building Permits issued on the proposed lot will be required to
adhere to the fee structure of the County Facility Fee and Drainage Impact Fee Programs.
F. Section 23-2-220.A.6 -- The applicant has demonstrated a diligent effort to conserve prime
agricultural land in the locational decision for the proposed use.
The soil designation for the site is "Prime (Irrigated)" per the 1979 Soil Conservation Service
Important Farmlands of Weld County Map. The small lot size does not support agricultural
operations. The property is not irrigated. and this proposal will not remove any land from
agricultural production.
G . Section 23-2-220.A.7 — There is adequate provisions for the protection of the health . safety.
and welfare of the inhabitants of the neighborhood and County.
The Design Standards (Section 23-2-240. Weld County Code). Operation Standards (Section
23-2-250, Weld County Code), Conditions of Approval and Development Standards can
ensure that there are adequate provisions for the protection of health. safety, and welfare of
the inhabitants of the neighborhood and County.
This recommendation is based. in part. upon a review of the application materials submitted by the applicant.
other relevant information regarding the request, and responses from referral entities.
The Planning Commission's recommendation for approval is conditional upon the following:
1 . Prior to recording the map:
A. There is a Use by Special Review Permit. SUP-312 , for a hog farm in the A (Agricultural) Zone
district. This USR encompasses all of Section 32-7-64, including the subject property. A partial
vacation or complete vacation shall be done to remove this property from SUP-312. Please
note that a complete vacation request letter needs to include signatures of all affected property
owners.
B. The Map shall be amended to delineate the following:
1 . All sheets of the map shall be labeled USR18-0074 (Department of Planning Services)
RESOLUTION USR18-0074
GLENN DEWAYNE CECIL
PAGE 3
2. The attached Development Standards. (Department of Planning Services)
3. The map shall be prepared in accordance with Section 23-2-260.D of the Weld County
Code. (Department of Planning Services)
4. Show and label all recorded rights-of-way and easements on the lot. (Department of
Planning Services)
5. Show and label the locations and setbacks of the existing principle and second homes.
( Department of Planning Services)
6. Show the floodplain and floodway (if applicable) boundaries on the map. Label the
floodplain boundaries with the FEMA Flood Zone and FEMA Map Panel Number or
appropriate study. (Department of Planning Services - Floodplain)
7 . County Road 51 is a paved road and is designated on the Weld County Functional
Classification Map as a collector road which requires 80 feet of right-of-way at full
buildout. The applicant shall delineate on the site plan the future and existing right-of-
way. All setbacks shall be measured from the edge of future right-of-way. This road is
maintained by Weld County. (Department of Public Works)
8 . County Road 74 is a paved road and is designated on the Weld County Functional
Classification Map as an arterial road which requires 140 feet of right-of-way at full
buildout. The applicant shall delineate on the site plan the future and existing right-of-
way. All setbacks shall be measured from the edge of future right-of-way. This road is
maintained by Weld County. (Department of Public Works)
9. Both existing accesses should be delineated on the plat as they are. Show and label the
approved access location, approved access width and the appropriate turning radii (60')
on tie site o an. —1e app icant must ob'ain an access permi • in tie approved-location(s)
pf+oc to-construction.-(Department of Public- Works)
10. The applicant shall show the drainage flow arrows. (Department of Public Works)
11 . Show and label the parking and traffic circulation flow arrows showing how the traffic
moves around the property. (Department of Public Works)
2. Prior to Construction:
A. Any construction in the floodplain requires a floodplain permit. (Department of Planning
Services - Floodplain)
3. Upon completion of Condition of Approval #1 above. the applicant shall submit one (1 ) electronic copy
(.pdf) of the map for preliminary approval to the Weld County Department of Planning Services. Upon
approval of the map the applicant shall submit a Mylar map along with all other documentation required
as Conditions of Approval. The Mylar map shall be recorded in the office of the Weld County Clerk and
Recorder by the Department of Planning Services. The map shall be prepared in accordance with the
requirements of Section 23-2-260. D of the Weld County Code. The Mylar map and additional
requirements shall be submitted within one hundred twenty (120) days from the date of the Board of
County Commissioners Resolution. The applicant shall be responsible for paying the recording fee.
(Department of Planning Services)
3. In accordance with Weld County Code Ordinance #2012-3. approved April 30. 2012. should the map
not be recorded within the required one hundred twenty ( 120) days from the date of the Board of
County Commissioners Resolution , a $50.00 recording continuance charge shall added for each
additional three (3) month period. (Department of Planning Services)
RESOLUTION USR18-0074
GLENN DEWAYNE CECIL
PAGE 4
4. The Use by Special Review activity shall not occur. nor shall any building or electrical permits be
issued on the property, until the Use by Special Review plat is ready to be recorded in the office of the
Weld County Clerk and Recorder or the applicant has been approved for an early release agreement.
(Department of Planning Services)
Motion seconded by Lonnie Ford.
VOTE
For Passage Against Passage Absent
Bruce Johnson
Bruce Sparrow
Michael Wades
Tom Cope
Gene Stille
Lonnie Ford
Richard Beck
Elijah Hatch
Skip Holland
The Chair declared the resolution passed and ordered that a certified copy be forwarded with the file of this
case to the Board of County Commissioner's for further proceedings.
CERTIFICATION OF COPY
I . Michelle Wall . Recording Secretary for the Weld County Planning Commission. do hereby certify that the
above and foregoing resolution is a true copy of the resolution of the Planning Commission of Weld County.
Colorado. adopted on October 2, 2018.
Dated the 2nd of October, 2018
Michelle Wall
Secretary
RESOLUTION USR18-0074
GLENN DEWAYNE CECIL
PAGE 5
SITE SPECIFIC DEVELOPMENT PLAN
USE BY SPECIAL REVIEW PERMIT
DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS
Glenn Dewayne Cecil
USR18-0074
1 . A Site Specific Development Plan and Use by Special Review Permit. USR18-0014. for one ( 1 ) single-
family dwelling unit per lot other than those permitted under Section 23-3-20.k (second single-family
dwelling unit) . in the A (Agricultural) Zone District, subject to the Development Standards stated hereon.
(Department of Planning Services)
2. Approval of this plan may create a vested property right pursuant to Section 23-8-10 of the Weld County
Code. (Department of Planning Services)
3. A Flood Hazard Development Permit is required for all construction or development occurring in the
floodplain or floodway as delineated on Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) FIRM
Community Panel Map #08123C- 1275E effective date January 20, 2016 (Willow Creek Floodplain). Any
development shall comply with all applicable Weld County requirements_ Colorado Water Conservation
Board requirements as described in Rules and Regulations for Regulatory Floodplains in Colorado. and
FEMA regulations and requirements as described in 44 CFR parts 59. 60. and 65. The FEMA definition of
development is any man-made change to improved or unimproved real estate. including but not limited to
buildings or other structures. mining, dredging. filling . grading , paving . excavation. drilling operations , or
storage of equipment and materials. (Department of Planning Services - Floodplain)
4. FEMA's floodplain boundaries may be updated at any time by FEMA. Prior to the start of any
development activities, the owner should contact Weld County to determine if the floodplain boundaries
have been modified. (Department of Planning Services - Floodplain)
5. The property owner shall control noxious weeds on the site. (Department of Public Works)
6. The access on the site shall be maintained to mitigate any impacts to the public road including damages
and/or off-site tracking. (Department of Public Works)
7. There shall be no parking or staging of vehicles on public roads. On-site parking shall be utilized.
(Department of Public Works)
8. Any work that may occupy and or encroach upon any County rights-of-way or easement shall acquire an
approved Right-of-Way Use Permit prior to commencement. (Department of Public Works)
9. The historical flow patterns and runoff amounts on the site will be maintained. (Department of Public
Works)
10. A permanent. adequate water supply shall be provided for drinking and sanitary purposes. (Department of
Public Health and Environment)
11 . Sewer service shall be provided by Galeton Water and Sanitation District. (Department of Public Health and
Environment)
12. The property owner or operator shall be responsible for complying with the Design and Operation
Standards of Chapter 23 of the Weld County Code.
13. Necessary personnel from the Weld County Departments of Planning Services. Public Works_ and Public
Health and Environment shall be granted access onto the property at any reasonable time in order to
ensure the activities carried out on the property comply with the Conditions of Approval and Development
Standards stated herein and all applicable Weld County regulations.
RESOLUTION USR18-0074
GLENN DEWAYNE CECIL
PAGE 6
14. The Use by Special Review area shall be limited to the plans shown hereon and governed by the
foregoing standards and all applicable Weld County regulations. Substantial changes from the plans or
Development Standards. as shown or stated, shall require the approval of an amendment of the Permit by
the Weld County Board of County Commissioners before such changes from the plans or Development
Standards are permitted. Any other changes shall be filed in the office of the Department of Planning
Services.
15. The property owner or operator shall be responsible for complying with all of the foregoing Development
Standards. Noncompliance with any of the foregoing Development Standards may be reason for
revocation of the Permit by the Board of County Commissioners.
16. RIGHT TO EXTRACT MINERAL RESOURCES STATEMENT Weld County has some of the most
abundant mineral resources. including. but not limited to. sand and gravel , oil, natural gas, and coal .
Under title 34 of the Colorado Revised Statutes, minerals are vital resources because (a) the state's
commercial mineral deposits are essential to the state's economy: (b) the populous counties of the state
face a critical shortage of such deposits: and (c) such deposits should be extracted according to a rational
plan. calculated to avoid waste of such deposits and cause the least practicable disruption of the ecology
and quality of life of the citizens of the populous counties of the state.
Mineral resource locations are widespread throughout the County and person moving into these areas
must recognize the various impacts associated with this development. Often times. mineral resource sites
are fixed to their geographical and geophysical locations. Moreover. these resources are protected
property rights and mineral owners should be afforded the opportunity to extract the mineral resource.
17. WELD COUNTY'S RIGHT TO FARM : Weld County is one of the most productive agricultural counties in
the United States. typically ranking in the top ten counties in the country in total market value of
agricultural products sold. The rural areas of Weld County may be open and spacious, but they are
intensively used for agriculture. Persons moving into a rural area must recognize and accept there are
drawbacks. including conflicts with long-standing agricultural practices and a lower level of services than
in town . Along with the drawbacks come the incentives which attract urban dwellers to relocate to rural
areas open views, spaciousness. wildlife, lack of city noise and congestion. and the rural atmosphere and
way of life. Without neighboring farms. those features which attract urban dwellers to rural Weld County
would quickly be gone forever.
Agricultural users of the land should not be expected to change their long-established agricultural practices to
accommodate the intrusions of urban users into a rural area. Well-run agricultural activities will generate off-
site impacts. including noise from tractors and equipment: slow-moving farm vehicles on rural roads: dust
from animal pens, field work. harvest and gravel roads: odor from animal confinement. silage and manure:
smoke from ditch burning: flies and mosquitoes: hunting and trapping activities: shooting sports. legal hazing
of nuisance wildlife: and the use of pesticides and fertilizers in the fields. including the use of aerial spraying.
It is common practice for agricultural producers to utilize an accumulation of agricultural machinery and
supplies to assist in their agricultural operations. A concentration of miscellaneous agricultural materials often
produces a visual disparity between rural and urban areas of the County. Section 35-3.5-102. C.R.S. .
provides that an agricultural operation shall not be found to be a public or private nuisance if the agricultural
operation alleged to be a nuisance employs methods or practices that are commonly or reasonably
associated with agricultural production.
Water has been . and continues to be. the lifeline for the agricultural community. It is unrealistic to assume
that ditches and reservoirs may simply be moved "out of the way" of residential development. When
moving to the County, property owners and residents must realize they cannot take water from irrigation
ditches. lakes. or other structures. unless they have an adjudicated right to the water.
Weld County covers a land area of approximately four thousand (4,000) square miles in size (twice the
size of the State of Delaware) with more than three thousand seven hundred (3. 700) miles of state and
county roads outside of municipalities. The sheer magnitude of the area to be served stretches available
resources. Law enforcement is based on responses to complaints more than on patrols of the County. and
the distances which must be traveled may delay all emergency responses. including law enforcement.
ambulance, and fire. Fire protection is usually provided by volunteers who must leave their jobs and
RESOLUTION USR18-0074
GLENN DEWAYNE CECIL
PAGE 7
families to respond to emergencies. County gravel roads. no matter how often they are bladed . will not
provide the same kind of surface expected from a paved road. Snow removal priorities mean that roads
from subdivisions to arterials may not be cleared for several days after a major snowstorm . Services in
rural areas. in many cases. will not be equivalent to municipal services. Rural dwellers must, by necessity,
be more self-sufficient than urban dwellers.
People are exposed to different hazards in the County than in an urban or suburban setting. Farm
equipment and oil field equipment, ponds and irrigation ditches, electrical power for pumps and center
pivot operations, high speed traffic. sandburs. puncture vines. territorial farm dogs and livestock, and open
burning present real threats. Controlling children's activities is important. not only for their safety. but also
for the protection of the farmer's livelihood.
a H5 EXHIBIT
'ol. laol $
d
SUMMARY OF THE WELD COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING
U5C- -00-144
Tuesday, October 2 . 2018
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 Bruce Johnson; Bruce Sparrow. Skip Holland , Lonnie Ford. Michael Wailes, Richard Beck. Tom
Cope.
Absent Elijah Hatch , Gene Stille
Also Present. Kim Ogle, Chris Gathman . Michael Hall. Angela Snyder, Department of Planning Services:
Lauren Light and Ben Frissell. Department of Health. Evan Pinkham , Public Works, Frank Haug. County
Attorney. and Michelle Wall. Secretary.
CASE NUMBER: USR18-0074
APPLICANT: GLENN DEWAYNE CECIL
PLANNER ANGELA SNYDER
REQUEST A SITE SPECIFIC DEVELOPMENT PLAN AND USE BY SPECIAL
REVIEW PERMIT FOR ONE ( 1 ) SINGLE-FAMILY DWELLING UNIT PER
LOT OTHER THAN THOSE PERMITTED UNDER SECTION 23-3-20.A.
(SECOND SINGLE-FAMILY DWELLING UNIT) IN THE A
(AGRICULTURAL) ZONE DISTRICT.
LEGAL DESCRIPTION LOT A REC EXEMPT RE-2281 : PART SW4 SECTION 32. T7N . R64W
OF THE 6TH P. M. . WELD COUNTY. COLORADO.
LOCATION : NORTH OF AND ADJACENT TO CR 74, EAST OF AND ADJACENT TO
CR 51 .
Angela Snyder. Planning Services. presented Case USR18-0074. reading the recommendation and
comments into the record. The Planning Department has received a letter from the applicant requesting to
vacate Use by Special Review Permit SUP-315 covering the subject property for a 1000-head hog farm.
The Department of Planning Services recommends approval of this application with the attached conditions
of approval and development standards.
Commissioner Johnson asked if the second home was a manufactured home. Ms. Snyder responded that
it is a permanent house on a foundation. The second home was permitted with a ZPMH permit for a mobile
home for medical hardship. Commission Johnson asked if the USR permit is the proper permit for this case
instead of a subdivision exemption for the second home. Ms. Snyder said the USR for a second dwelling
will allow the property owner to keep both houses on the same property. The applicant wishes to keep both
homes on the same parcel.
The Chair asked for further explanation on the applicant vacating Special Review Permit SUP-315. Ms.
Snyder explained it is Condition of Approval and that there will be a separate hearing for vacating the permit
with the Board of County Commissioners.
Evan Pinkham . 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.
Sheri Lockman . Lockman Consulting . 36509 County Road 41 . Eaton, Colorado. Ms. Lockman explained
that the applicant would like to retain the existing modular home on his property as a second residence.
Ms. Lockman said the property is not eligible for a recorded exemption or a subdivision exemption.
The Chair asked if there was anyone in the audience who wished to speak for or against this application .
No one wished to speak.
Ms. Lockman stated they have concerns with the Condition of Approval B. 9. She stated that in the referral
from Public Works they indicated that the existing access onto County Road 74 should be closed and the
Lot B access be moved to County Road 51 which is on the neighboring property. Ms. Lockman said Public
Works based their decision on the fact that the access onto County Road 74 does not meet spacing criteria
and the neighboring property is owned by the applicant so he could grant the easement. She presented
the Board with a photograph of the access of County Road 51 . Ms. Lockman stated that neither of the
accesses meet the spacing criteria stated in Condition of Approval B . 9. The applicant believes the access
onto County Road 74 is much safer. Ms. Lockman said there is no way the applicant can meet the turning
radii of 60 feet on County Road 51 . The access is 16 feet wide and is limited by the modular home, a large
tree, a utility box and the front yard of the neighboring home. Part of the lot is in the floodplain and water
runs across the road . The applicant would like to keep the access on County Road 74. as it is currently.
Ms. Lockman would like the Condition of Approval B. 9. to be amended to say "Show and label the existing
access location and the approximate turning radius of 25 feet on the site plan.
Mr. Haug. County Attorney. explained that granting an access permit is a separate process that is not this
board's decision to grant or deny an access permit. Mr. Haug asked Mr. Pinkham if there is an access
permit. Mr. Pinkham said there is not an access permit in this location. In reviewing this case based on
County Code Public Works determined that access to County Road 51 , a lower classified road , would be
safer than access on County Road 74 . He explained although these are existing access locations. they do
not meet the spacing requirements set in County Code. As far as procedure, Mr. Pinkham said this topic
can be discussed before the Board of County Commissioners at the hearing . Mr. Haug explained to the
Board that the Planning Commission can ask to modify the language but cannot grant an access on a
certain road .
Commissioner Johnson stated that he has been through that intersection many times during his lifetime
because he lived in that neighborhood. He would like to see the requirements drafted in such a manner
that the existing accesses remain in the historic sites and dimensions. Commissioner Johnson said the
roads have been safe and functional.
Commissioner Beck said he is familiar with these roads and he sees no problem with the existing accesses.
He doesn't see a reason to move the access to County Road 51 when it is on another property.
Commissioner Beck feels it should be grandfathered as is.
Commissioner Cope said he agreed with the other Commissioners' comments. He referred to the
Assessor's map and said there is one existing access that he feels should be grandfathered in. The other
access being requested is on another property that happens to have the same owner. Commissioner Cope
does not think it makes sense to put the access to this property from County Road 51 .
The Chair said when reading over the conditions of approval. he did not remember reading that one access
point was favored over another access point. He asked Mr. Pinkham if that was correct. Mr. Pinkham
explained that they made a recommendation for access in their staff comment. He said that is not a binding
recommendation but the recommendation is based on code requirements. The Chair said he did not think
the conditions of approval language should be changed at this hearing but discussed before the Board of
County Commissioners.
Commissioner Johnson stated that he thinks the Planning Commission should make a recommendation to
the Board of County Commissioners that the existing situation does not change. The Chair replied that
there is not verbage in the Condition of Approval that states it does need changed . Ms. Lockman said the
Condition of Approval states "approved access location-. She has been told that the access permit is done
along with a building permit. She explained there will not be a building permit submitted. Ms. Lockman is
not sure when they will get the access permit.
Commissioner Holland stated that he thinks the use of the access will change. He said that when the
second dwelling becomes a residence with someone who is not connected with the family. it will become
an issue. He agrees that the accesses should be grandfathered in. Commissioner Beck stated that
changing the access from County Road 74 to County Road 51 flips the problem. Commissioner Holland
said he agrees with that but the issue is the conflict still exists. Ms. Lockman explained that "change of
use" usually does not mean from residential to residential. Commissioner Holland said that is not the
-change of use he was talking about. He said he agrees with his colleague but thinks there is an access
issue.
Motion : Amend Condition of Approval I19. to read "Both existing accesses should be delineated on the
plat as they are.
Motion Moved by Bruce Johnson , Seconded by Richard Beck.
Vote: Motion carried by unanimous roll call vote (summary: Yes = 7).
Yes: Bruce Johnson. Bruce Sparrow. Lonnie Ford. Michael Wailes. Richard Beck. Skip Holland . Tom Cope.
The Chair asked the applicant if they have read through the Development Standards and amended
Conditions of Approval and if they are in agreement with those. The applicant replied that they are in
agreement.
Motion : Forward Case USR18-0074 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 Lonnie Ford.
Vote: Motion carried by unanimous roll call vote (summary : Yes = 7).
Yes: Bruce Johnson. Bruce Sparrow. Lonnie Ford, Michael Wailes, Richard Beck, Skip Holland , Tom Cope.
Meeting adjourned at 4: 31 pm.
Respectfully submitted,
r_-,f MAW-
Michelle Wall
Secretary
ATTENDANCE RECORD
NAME - PLEASE PRINT LEGIBLY ADDRESS EMAIL
John Doe 123 Nowhere Street, City, State, Zip
Stay/ 2-49eAina 3b307 G� /I f'h� �Obt« - +JPII11OCki?Cut ii/411 itit ta34
��-_ 36bVo cgs ( fie. Sob i S�
14o _I 'efEtgAti Pin? LarienStc._ v--47,3-- ,
,2)uct n up CA ( F.a. kQt..e II qi4LEA , I r)i-h,nQi: Qd
eu. /P n,n p , Y L) 3 91 w SG Qc4 0 d Co 5&S) 2 e-k�.rA .tjsn. <frit
_ ' �� C qV lad CD DSt3 tPm h & l%
�o0 ?i � �Gr � P� � dialer( � ky6P4 n co'�►-,
a - .tee f iy ltr, Cow -/
sc Olt
w l r ` 4 4 Co n ut Y 'k'kW 7 A a
i+►C . .1-t_Cs1 lot J 2 r00 i G '"uST- iiqro 'Z hil cr. re O 702.02 -PA -.n(AL a-5 A 'n"Ai Lea ‘4
4k'Ilt&ti
14)k rn_s 16 d r ,? 2Li4' eau/bill Prl 3 , t Atintl4 CG /ribs' 3 4arnstad4 ad tit
+ op , a enzt-t r a 21 (.4 C V,a 1 P cL a t i 3 c1 aim ,A)
a .C7 f II De rte/ ,I /tom f1 b)e d- & �C.c in F�°Z,3 1 r t r; - _s/ter
Pb I- O t3 ° v.? a jeo /6 rv7 S � ewc-e Le 208o j e.. Q 730 A rl� rn.
-"fob
Ck "Cl:& C C I I oV LC • \\\s \\1,1 ital. Stk ki viSskr. (I : Sy Z. s c 7 + �se k�� I
v, �v \-.1 Dee W . it � �� tv4 . Lbsisi .�:tistty . ro l`� �� elivitn9Ail ,4a,4441t-.Oy
MT +cA M4 *F-F SOS AZ L2enve ' Love tc CO CO 37 �+s, /E'4K 4 S - /5, C0
ti J Ave .,
is I .Cl 4 1 (DC'� � COCt L 8 lvY,�� ,�,C� C o ytitnorTv'�CQ' 1,,;IlNA,.�s.coy, ,
laseity AAonflit- 'D :2 oiv, Av ,r--iraoti .tL eDirS4 w4i scr<1 r rn5mnfl •
Hello