Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout20183130.tiffHEARING CERTIFICATION DOCKET NO. 2018-103 RE: A SITE SPECIFIC DEVELOPMENT PLAN AND USE BY SPECIAL REVIEW PERMIT, USR18-0034, FOR ANY USE PERMITTED AS A USE BY RIGHT, ACCESSORY USE OR USE BY SPECIAL REVIEW IN THE COMMERCIAL OR INDUSTRIAL ZONE DISTRICTS (COMMERCIAL VEHICLE AND EQUIPMENT STORAGE ASSOCIATED WITH A CONCRETE CONSTRUCTION BUSINESS) 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 - LUIS MARTINEZ A public hearing was conducted on October 10, 2018, at 10:00 a.m., with the following present: Commissioner Steve Moreno, Chair Commissioner Barbara Kirkmeyer, Pro -Tern Commissioner Sean P. Conway Commissioner Julie A. Cozad Commissioner Mike Freeman Also present: Acting Clerk to the Board, Selena Baltierra Assistant County Attorney, Frank Haug Planning Services Department representative, Chris Gathman Public Works Engineer representative, Hayley Balzano Health Department representative, Ben Frissell The following business was transacted: Vi I hereby certify that pursuant to a notice dated August 13, 2018, and duly published August 16, 2018, in the Greeley Tribune, a public hearing was conducted to consider the request of Luis Martinez, for a Site Specific Development Plan and Use by Special Review Permit, USR18-0034, for any Use permitted as a Use by Right, Accessory Use or Use by Special Review in the Commercial or Industrial Zone Districts (commercial vehicle and equipment storage associated with a concrete construction business) 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. Frank Haug, Assistant County Attorney, made this a matter of record. IR Chris Gathman, Department of Planning Services, presented a brief summary of the proposal and the type of trucks and trailers parked onsite, and stated there will be no washing or maintenance of the trucks. He explained the proposed and existing screening and stated there will be no onsite employees; however, three (3) employees will visit the site in the morning and return in the evening. He provided the hours of operation, stated approximately two (2) times a month, six (6) people will come to site to load concrete, and indicated bottled water and portable toilets will be provided for employees accessing the site. Mr. Gathman mentioned the application was submitted in response to a zoning violation, ZCV18-00004, and there was a neighborhood meeting held in March, and more than four (4) surrounding property owners attended. He indicated the site is located in a rural area; however, it is adjacent to existing residences. ccPLCGG(TP), Pw(HB), F,HCBF), CC .CFH) 1l/a87.18• 2018-3130 PL2589 HEARING CERTIFICATION - LUIS MARTINEZ (USR18-0034) PAGE 2 Mr. Gathman stated four (4) letters of opposition were received, and he reviewed the concerns included in these letters. He stated the site is within the three (3) mile referral area of the Towns of Berthoud, Firestone and Johnstown, and correspondence was received with no concerns. He mentioned the site is located on approximately 11.61 acres and is designated as "irrigated, non -prime," and "irrigated, prime" by the Soil Conservation Important Farmlands of Weld County Map. He indicated a total of 13 referrals were sent out, and nine (9) responded without concern or with comments which were considered in the staff recommendation. He displayed images of the site and surrounding views and entered the favorable recommendation of the Planning Commission into the record as written. In response to Commissioner Kirkmeyer, Mr. Gathman clarified there is a fence along the north and east sides of the proposed site. Responding to Commissioner Cozad, Mr. Gathman clarified the Town of Mead did not return a referral regarding the application. El Hayley Balzano, Public Works Engineer representative, provided a brief overview of the transportation plans and stated the site accesses onto County Road (CR) 36. She indicated the width and the turning radii of the access needs to be verified by the applicant, and she provided the traffic counts to include truck percentages and reviewed the vehicle round trips. Ms. Balzano stated the site meets a drainage exception, and indicated Public Works has received a Drainage Narrative. She requested a correction to Condition of Approval (COA) #1.A.11 regarding the existing access. She also recommended deleting Development Standard (DS) #25 stating it does not apply to this site. She presented the drainage and grading requirements and in response to Commissioner Cozad, Ms. Balzano clarified the traffic counts. Ei Ben Frissell, Department of Public Health and Environment, indicated the Little Thompson Water District provides water to the site and the septic system is permitted for three (3) bedrooms. He stated there will be no washing or maintenance of vehicles on the site, and DS #10-19 address Environmental Health Items. El Sheri Lockman, Lockman Land Consulting, LLC, represented the applicant and stated the storage and parking area will be limited to behind the garage. She described the proposed visual mitigation, and stated Mr. Martinez is the owner, while Mr. Marquez is the operator. She indicated traffic will peak in the summer months and minimize in the winter months. She clarified Mead submitted a Notice of Inquiry found in the application. Ms. Lockman indicated the photos taken and displayed by Mr. Gathman were not accurate due to future screening and she provided additional images and pointed out the applicant's home and explained the proposed site layout. She mentioned the road quality and explained proposed dust mitigation. Ms. Lockman encouraged surrounding property owners to speak with Mr. Martinez and Mr. Marquez regarding employee behavior. In response to Chair Moreno and Commissioner Cozad, Ms. Lockman indicated there is not an entrance gate to the property, and indicated the trailer is for personal and not business purposes. Mr. Gathman clarified the number of letters and emails received from surrounding property owners. He also confirmed a Notice of Inquiry was received, in March. 2018-3130 PL2589 HEARING CERTIFICATION - LUIS MARTINEZ (USR18-0034) PAGE 3 Becki Zipp, surrounding property owner (SPO), showed her home on the displayed map and indicated the proposed application is not compatible with the surrounding uses. She stated most of Weld County is zoned Agricultural, explained her knowledge of the USR process and mentioned the applicant's violation. She indicated, in March, she was under the impression the business would be moving from Mr. Martinez' property. She discussed the USR remaining with the property and mentioned future concerns. Ms. Zipp reviewed the hours of operation and stated the business operates outside of these hours. She stated this proposed use would take away from the agricultural neighborhood and requested the Commissioners deny the request. In response to Commissioner Conway, Ms. Zipp indicated she has been aware of the storage onsite since spring of 2018. In response to Commissioner Cozad, Ms. Zipp explained her biggest concern about compatibility is this USR being a gateway to other similar uses within the neighborhood. She described other surrounding properties where the proposed site could relocate to a Commercial Zone. In response to Commissioner Cozad, Ms. Zip explained her knowledge of surrounding land uses to include farming and animals. El In response to Commissioner Kirkmeyer, Mr. Gathman indicated the parcel is 11.6 acres. Tom Neiley, SPO, stated he is the immediate neighbor to the east and requested the Commissioners not approve the USR. He claimed the visual mitigation is not adequate, and the application will negatively impact property values. He stated he often hears the trucks accessing the property prior to their operating hours and indicated he does not see any screening along the access road. He expressed frustration with noise he thought to be associated with cleaning vehicles on the property, as well as the number of trucks accessing the site. He reviewed the number of trucks and employees, expressed concern that it will continue to increase, and stated there is an existing dust issue, mainly in the summer. In response to Commissioner Conway, Mr. Neiley pointed to his property on the map and claimed he would be the most impacted by the proposed application. In response to Commissioner Conway regarding screening, Mr. Neiley stated trees may be the only successful way to mitigate the site. In response to Chair Moreno, Mr. Neiley indicated he has lived at his property for 25 years. el Cathy Sprague, SPO, pointed out her property and stated she owned her property before the applicant bought the subject parcel. She indicated she shares the concerns of her fellow neighbors, and mentioned her biggest concerns are safety, impact to property values and road conditions. She stated the road is narrow, with steep drop-offs, and a blind hill. Ms. Sprague stated the road is not well maintained and discussed the dust issue. She explained the applicant does not adhere to the proposed application conditions, and fears it will continue, if approved. ID Joe Zipp, SPO, explained he and other SPOs educated themselves about the zoning and USR process and he read the Mission Statement of the Weld County Code. He emphasized the application is not compatible with the quality of life and could potentially impact property values. He discussed the failed visual mitigation, discussed the USR process, and provided a letter to the Commissioners compiled by the SPOs that were unable to attend. He indicated the location of surrounding residences on the vicinity map. Mr. Zipp read the letter in opposition of the application (Exhibit D), and indicated there are 15 out of the 16 surrounding property owners that signed the letter. 2018-3130 PL2589 HEARING CERTIFICATION - LUIS MARTINEZ (USR18-0034) PAGE 4 la Ms. Lockman stated there is an overstatement of the impact to SPOs and she submitted a picture of the fence from Planning Commission. She described the fence use for visual mitigation and addressed the equipment and trucks being seen over the fence by SPOs. She mentioned it is hard to combat the arguments of the neighbors who are afraid of what could happen. Ms. Lockman indicated the applicant has made attempts to adhere to the Weld County Code, stated there are not enough commercial locations in the area, and argued small agricultural parcels are not good for most traditional farming operations. She indicated the employees have been asked to drive slower to help with the dust. She further stated the surrounding property owners did not understand the rights of the applicant, and mentioned the applicant is open for suggestions. In response to Chair Moreno regarding the number of daily trips, Ms. Lockman estimated there are approximately 12 round trips per day during peak times. • In response to Commissioner Conway regarding a different location, Ms. Lockman stated the applicant does not want to move the storage, but understands with the violation and a denied application, they will have to move within 30 days. • In response to Commissioner Kirkmeyer regarding the violation, Ms. Lockman indicated she was unsure of how the violation began. Commissioner Kirkmeyer requested the applicant answer, and Ms. Lockman stated there is a little bit of a language barrier. Luis Martinez, applicant, indicated when he bought the property he was told he could store the vehicles and equipment on the site, and it was not in violation. He stated the violation began in June of 2017. • In response to Commissioner Cozad, Mr. Martinez stated he lives on the property, but Mr. Marquez is the business owner, leases the property, but does not live on the property. In response to Commissioner Kirkmeyer, Ms. Lockman confirmed there is no cleaning of vehicles on the property, and the only noise would come from the trailers hooking to the trucks. In response to Commissioner Cozad regarding vendors, Mr. Martinez stated there are no customers or vendors that come to the site, other than the men that bring concrete ties. la Chair Moreno recessed the hearing at 11:29 a.m. for a five (5) minute break. el Chair Moreno reconvened the hearing at 11:34 a.m. Chair Moreno clarified there is someone in the audience willing to interpret any further questions for the applicants, if needed. • Mr. Gathman stated Mr. Neiley determined he had a recording of the noise he had previously explained as cleaning noise. In response to Mr. Gathman, Commissioner Cozad explained it is hard to validate an audio recording. In response to Commissioner Cozad, Mr. Gathman clarified the recording is a video with audio, but is not time stamped. Commissioner Freeman agreed with the comments made by Commissioner Cozad regarding the audio validation. Chair Moreno stated the Board would not listen to the audio because it cannot be verified. 2018-3130 PL2589 HEARING CERTIFICATION - LUIS MARTINEZ (USR18-0034) PAGE 5 • Commissioner Cozad requested Ms. Lockman provide an explanation of how this application is compatible with surrounding uses other than the proposed fence. Ms. Lockman reiterated the visual mitigation by the fence, and explained the applicant is unaware of the noise issue and, therefore, does not know how to mitigate the noise. In response to Commissioner Cozad regarding the noise complaint from SPOs, Ms. Lockman stated the employees have been talked to about being good neighbors, and there should be no additional noise other than the trucks and loading. Ms. Lockman discussed the hours of operation and the possibility of extending the hours. Commissioner Cozad requested how the existing application is compatible. Ms. Lockman echoed the visual mitigation is attempted with the fence, the noise is adequate, and stated this application will create little additional traffic. Ms. Lockman attempted to address the dust issue, and indicated the road is being used for ATVs and horses and, therefore, that creates a safety issue when the trucks are trying to use the road. She concluded by stating the application is compatible. • In response to Chair Moreno, Ms. Lockman indicated they have reviewed the Conditions of Approval and Development Standards, as presented. • Commissioner Conway stated the application needs work and asked for the opinions of his fellow Commissioners. El Commissioner Kirkmeyer indicated, even with modifications, she is not in support of the application. She stated the Conditions of Approval and Development Standards are to ensure adequate provisions for the protection of the health, safety and welfare of citizens. Commissioner Kirkmeyer communicated she does not believe outdoor storage meets the intent of the A (Agricultural) Zone District. She referenced Chapter 22 of the Weld County Code, and explained the Agricultural Zone should support the uses that are of high quality and rural character, which outdoor storage does not. Commissioner Kirkmeyer explained the application is not compatible with Section 22-2-20.D (A.Goal 4), or Section 22-2-20.6.2 (A.Policy 2.2). She indicated Commercial Uses (A.Goal 2) are allowed when they are directly related to, or dependent upon, agriculture. She reiterated the application is not consistent with the Agricultural Zone, and stated it is not like rural residential Use by Right. She stated the application does not promote agriculture or agricultural activities and agreed with the surrounding property owners that it will change the look and feel in the existing neighborhood. She indicated it is not compatible or consistent with existing or future development, and echoed she will not be supporting the application. IR Commissioner Cozad stated USRs can work in the A (Agriculture) Zone; however, it is a case -by -case basis. She explained her belief in private property rights, and stated there is a collection of factors that make this application incompatible. She discussed her concerns to include the visual impacts and the access road. She stated Mr. Marquez and Mr. Martinez have not followed the rules, even since Planning Commission. Commissioner Cozad addressed the noise standard in comparison to the residential neighborhood. She stated the applicant has not shown they are compatible. Commissioner Cozad indicated a continuance would not be appropriate, nor would it change that the use is not compatible in this neighborhood. 2018-3130 PL2589 HEARING CERTIFICATION - LUIS MARTINEZ (USR18-0034) PAGE 6 Chair Moreno appreciated the comments made by the other Commissioners and reiterated it is the responsibility of the applicant to prove the compatibility of the application. He stated he has not heard the compatibility of the USR and mentioned his concerns for the application. Chair Moreno indicated he is not in support of the application. el Commissioner Freeman stated he agreed and disagreed with the comments made by Commissioner Kirkmeyer. He indicated this is an 11 -acre site, and agriculture is not preserved with a parcel of this size. He mentioned he struggled with this Use by Special Review because it is more than a Use by Right and does not support agriculture. Commissioner Freeman agreed there are multiple reasons why this application is not compatible, and stated he feels the surrounding area is not agricultural but, instead, rural residential. He indicated the impact is minimal regarding the number of trucks; however, there are enough other concerns to not support this USR. Commissioner Conway agreed with his fellow Commissioners and reiterated the applicant has not proven compatibility. He agreed with Commissioner Cozad that these USRs are a case -by -case process. He discussed the noise standard, empathized with the applicant, and stated there is a shortage of zoned property where this would fit. Commissioner Conway reminded the Board of the 94% of opposing SPOs, and agreed it could be continued, but it would remain incompatible. El Commissioner Kirkmeyer moved to deny the request of Luis Martinez for a Site Specific Development Plan and Use by Special Review Permit, USR18-0034, for any Use permitted as a Use by Right, Accessory Use or Use by Special Review in the Commercial or Industrial Zone Districts (commercial vehicle and equipment storage associated with a concrete construction business) 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. Commissioner Kirkmeyer stated the findings that the applicant has not met: Section 23-2-230.6.1, Section 22-2-20.D (A.Goal 4), Section 22-2-20.6.2 (A.Policy 2.2), and Section 22-2-20.G.2 (A.Policy 7.2). She indicated the proposal does not meet Section 23-2-230.6.2, stating the application is not consistent with the intent of the A (Agricultural) Zone District and does not promote agriculture. Commissioner Kirkmeyer found in Section 23-2-230.6.3, that the proposed use to be permitted is not compatible with existing surrounding land uses, which are generally permitted as agricultural production in nature, and rural residential and the proposed use would change the neighborhood. She found that in Section 23-2-230.6.4, the use will not be compatible with future development which will remain viable in the agriculture production and rural residential of high quality character. The motion was seconded by Commissioner Cozad, who added to the findings of Section 23-2-230.6.3 to update the number of surrounding residences to 16, 15 of which were opposed. She added there were more than four (4) letters of opposition and requested it too be changed to state seven (7) letters of opposition have been received. She indicated the concerns that are listed in Section 23-2-230.B.3 were mentioned as concerns previously. She reiterated the 2018-3130 PL2589 HEARING CERTIFICATION - LUIS MARTINEZ (USR18-0034) PAGE 7 incompatibility has mostly to do with the visual impacts, the increase of traffic, potential dust, and noise. The motion carried unanimously. Commissioner Conway thanked the neighbors for their presence and input. He reiterated his empathy to the applicant and indicated the Board will work toward the proper zoning for this type of need. Commissioner Cozad thanked everyone for their presence, and reminded the group they will remain neighbors. She appreciated the applicant's attempt and explained there are Use by Right and Accessory Uses that can be done on this property. She mentioned there have been similar USRs approved; however, the previous applicants worked with the SPOs for a plan that worked for everyone. There being no further discussion the hearing was completed at 12:03 p.m. This Certification was approved on the 15th day of October, 2018. BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS WELD CO NTY, COLORADO ATTEST: dlitiftvo G' ..k"%to;eA Weld County Clerk to the Board e • uty Clerk to the Bo AP' ' �� ED AS FORM: County A ttorney Ste Moreno, Chair Date of signature: II -1% 2018-3130 PL2589 ATTENDANCE LIST ill) j1 NAME - PLEASE PRINT LEGIBLY ADDRESS (CITY, STATE ZIP) EMAIL COUNTY OF RESIDENCE SPEAKING (YIN)' l r i Vi,! L -.7,-.,---(1)--.)76(,1-1 (;�.S 07 !/ 9 Z -O she7,1/C)CkAlq/1(�k6G?1 w(rz-.,r 07) T -In: Z1e s` vc t 2 3� vz4millr- 1Q6s7 �u�, ,Z ,/,'/, 0v?Gflo,t,C V Y L?-eC: k�1 P 3x}43 i.� _3(c?Ia 1- ' .v� l ly, e'o 3i 3an.--A b ► o PC ma,1, corgi �� (C(t - C' Cr8≤,r; 1-, 191R 1916-,,e.,1li2,C 414(5.1) 0_0 (ccn, VI 54-toi CP- 3(.. -Ti Tri<u4--4 J 5ri mbz f C ei .\(,)\)\, ..ik\l,', .,, S'\16\l'\.\i'-\)\ :5.(0 \ USt. 1\Q,11 Q,. C'\(), Q,0,/v-v \A) d._ tit r L_ i� c j 5- Z ILt:2__ , ✓:C �n� l 4471 / (-,\ �, /`i1�1�f3 riC Al'<��1/Z l�l4.( (`O tcj"<Cl� y. 1\��:,.-)01U ) :yvD I.,.� - hft',X1(7, _ �(�_ cl\ Cco/ �U G CcL'�i�u,1 � L, cC_ ip 115Z (Li; I GNO t✓(Giv, .W'`07 - - - - US Z t c ,irtt63 'wZZ.-0 3 ck:(> ,, r .1 (f� 1 Vdic)0..L) l LL tt - (_!:iC:1J d 01 ET, ,rYc,„ V 90,5fc,- Jar4: AA1oi‹64,. cut Ct'(�) 5 Le G' . h `5.;) 7a ; / / 1 x,11 1.J ''.;1"4, 6' < f t , Hello