The URL can be used to link to this page

Browse Search

Home My WebLink About780030.tiff RESOLUTION RE: DENIAL OF CHANGE OF ZONE FROM A-AGRICULTURAL DISTRICT TO B-BUSINESS DISTRICT FOR CHARLES HOBDAY. WHEREAS , the Board of County Commissioners of Weld County, Colorado, pursuant to Colorado statute and the Weld County Home Rule Charter, is vested with the authority of administering the affairs of Weld County, Colorado, and WHEREAS, a public hearing was held on the 13th day of September, 1978 at 2 : 00 o'clock p.m. for the purpose of hearing the petition of Charles Hobday, 6900 Weld County Road 39 , Ft . Lupton, Colorado 80621, requesting a change of zone from A-Agricultural District to B-Business District for the following described parcel of land, to-wit: That part of the Southeast one-quarter of Section 30 and that part of the East one-half East one-half, Section 31, Township 2 North, Range 65 West of the 6th Principal Meridian, Weld County, Colorado described as: Beginning at the Northeast corner said Southeast one-quarter, Section 30, thence S 00°00'00" W on an assured bearing along the East line said South- east one-quarter a distance of 1197.50 feet to the true point of beginning; thence S 90°00'00" W a distance of 1008.26 feet; thence S 26°38'00" W a distance of 623.54 feet; thence S 15°11'50" E a distance of 925.34 feat to a point on the North line of the East one-half East one-half, Section 31; thence N 89°45'10" E along said North line a distance of 360.22 feet; thence S 26°23'40" E a distance of 1077.99 feet to a point 200.00 feet West of the East line said East one-half East one- half, Section 31; thence S 00°20'30" W parallel with said East line a distance of 3722.86 feet to a point 650.00 fact North of the South line said East one-half East one-half, Section 31; thence S 89°57'35" W parallel with said South line a distance of 1125.65 feet to a point on the West line said East one-half East one-half, Section 31; thence S 00°23'20" W along said West line a dis- tance of 650.00 fact to the Southwest corner said East one-half East one-half, Section 31; thence N 89°57' 35" E along the South line said East one- half East one-half, Section 31 a distance of 1326.18 feet to the Southeast corner said Fast one-half East one-half, Section 31; thence N 00°20'30" E along the East line said East one-half East one-half, Section 31 a distance of 5341.31 feet to the Southeast corner Section 30; thence N 00°00' 00" E along the East line said Section 30 a distance of 1445.85 feet to the true point: of beginning. Contains 85.258 Acres more or less. Part of the East Half of the Northeast Quarter of Section 6, Township 1 North, Range 65 West of the 6th P.M. , Weld County, Colorado, being more particularly described as follows: 780030 Zre//r 1/4) 7 Roaa9 Beginning at the Northeast Corner of said Section 6, and considering the East Line of said Section 6, as bearing South 00°43'37" West, with all other bearings contained herein relative thereto; Thence South 00°43'37" West, along said East Line, 2551.64 feet to the East Quarter Corner of said Section 6; Thence South 89°39'04" West, 668.42 feet; Thence North 00°47'58" East, 2555.53 feet to a point on the North Line of the Northeast Quarter of said Section 6; Thence North 90°00'00" East, along said North Line, 662.90 feet to the Northeast Corner of the Northeast Quarter of said Section 6, said point being the Point of Beginning. Said described parcel of land contains 39.0192 acres, more or less, including a strip of ground 50 feet in width along the South line of said described parcel of land and is subject to any rights-of-way or other easements as recorded by instruments of record or as now existing on said described parcel of land. WHEREAS , the petitioner was present, and WHEREAS, Section 8 . 2 and 8. 3 of the Weld County Zoning Resolution authorized the Board of County Commissioners to grant a change of zone upon the showing by the petitioner of certain facts , and WHEREAS, the Board of County Commissioners heard the testi- mony and statements of those present on behalf of the petitioner and has studied the recommendations of the Weld County Planning Commission for denial of the proposed change of zone, and WHEREAS , the Board of County Commissioners hereby finds that the petitioner has not met his burden of proof in fulfilling the requirements of the Weld County Zoning Resolution for a change of zone. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Board of County Com- missioners of Weld County, Colorado that the petition of Charles Hobday for a change of zone from A-Agricultural to B-Business on the above-described tract of land, be and hereby is , denied. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED by the Board that the reasons for denial and findings of fact contained in the Weld County Planning Commission recommendations in this matter dated August 1, 1978 , be and hereby are incorporated as the findings of fact and con- clusions of law of the Board of County Commissioners in this matter, as if fully set forth herein. The above and foregoing Resolution was, on motion duly made and seconded, adopted by the following vote on the 13th day of September, A.D. , 1978 . BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS WELD COUNTY, COLORADO -7cere //err 1 i' S ` .!!✓i ' (No) I ATTEST: ‘7111 � a � tiv� Q�CP/tQLPIy�/ Weld County Clerk and Recorder and Clerk to the Board'; Deputy County Clerk 7 A‘PROV,ED AS TO FORM: County Atto e y Date Presented: September 18, 1978 September 13, 1978 I hereby certify that pursuant to a notice dated August 9, 1978, duly published August 10, 1978 and August 31, 1978 in the Johnstown Breeze, a public hearing was held on the request of Charles Hobday for a Change of Zone from agricultural to business district. Mr. Richard Huckeby and Mr. Don Drawer were present to make the request for Mr. Hobday. Assistant County Attorney Kay Norton explained the history of this application and the Planning Staff reviewed the Planning Commission's reasons for recommending denial of the COZ . After all testimony was received, Commissioner Steinmark made a motion to deny the COZ and to incorporate the Planning Commission' s statements into the resolution as reasons for denial. Commissioner Roe seconded the motion and it carried with Commissioners Jacobucci, Roe and Steinmark voting aye. Commissioner Carlson and Chairman Dunbar voted nay. Chairman Board of County Commissioners Weld County, Colorado yy} a „w, : Attest: Weld County Clerk and Recorder and Clerk to the Board W By: LiODe uty Coulerk Docket #78-55 Tape #78-101 Zd/,r I 0 9 NOTICE Pursuant to the zoning laws of the State of Colorado and the Weld County Land Use Code, a public hearing will be held in the Chambers of the Board of County Commissioners of Weld County, Colorado, Weld County Centennial Center, 915 10th Street, Greeley, Colorado, at the time specified. All persons in any manner interested in the following proposed Change of Zone are requested to attend and may be heard. BE IT ALSO KNOWN that the text and maps so certified by the County Planning Commission may be examined in the Office of the Clerk to the Board of the County Commissioners, located in the Weld County Centennial Center, 915 10th Street, Third Floor, Greeley, Colorado. Docket No. 78-55 Charles Hobday 6900 Weld County Road 39 Ft. Lupton, Colorado 80621 Date: September 13, 1978 Time: 2: 00 P.M. Request: Change of Zone from A-Agricultrual to B-Business LEGAL DESCRIPTION: Part of the East Half (E') of the Northeast Quarter (NE≤) of Section 6, Township 1 North, Range 65 West of the 6th P.M. , Weld County, Colorado, being more particularly described as follows: Beginning at the Northeast Corner (NE Cor) of said Section 6, and considering the East Line of said Section 6, as bearing South 00°43 ' 37" West, with all other bearing contained herein relative thereto; Thence South00°43 ' 37" West, along said East Line, 2551. 64 feet to the East Quarter Corner (E4 Cor) of said Section 6; Thence South 89°39 ' 04" West, 668 . 42 feet; Thence North 00°47 ' 58" East, 2555. 53 feet to a point on the North Line of the Northeast Quarter of said Section 6; Thence North 90°00 ' 00" East, along said North Line, 662 . 90 feet to the Northeast Corner (NE Cor) of the Northeast Quarter of said Section 6 , said point being the Point of Beginning. Said described parcel of land contains 39. 0192 acres, more or less, including a strip of ground 50 feet in width along the South line of said described parcel of land and is subject to any rights-of-way or other easements as recorded by instruments of record or as now existing on said described parcel of land. /if_ Yc? AND: That part of the Southeast one-quarter of Section 30 and that part of the East one-half east one-half, Section 31, Township 2 North, Range 65 West of the 6th Principal Meridian, Weld County, Colorado described as: Beginning at the Northeast corner said Southeast one-quarter, Section 30; thence S00°00 ' 00"W on an assumed bearing along the East line said Southeast one-quarter a distance of 1197 . 50 feet to the true point of beginning; thence S90°00 ' 00"W a distance of 1008 . 26 feet; thence S26°38 ' 00"W a distance of 623. 54 feet; thence S15°11' 50"E a distance of 925. 34 feet to a point on the North line of the East one-half east one-half, Section 31; thence N89°45 ' 10"E along said North line a distance of 360. 22 feet; thence S26°23 ' 40"E a distance of 1077 . 99 feet to a point 200. 00 feet West of the East line said East one-half East one-half, Section 31; thence S00°20 ' 30"W parallel with said East line a distance of 3722. 86 feet to a point 650. O0 feet North of the South line said East one-half East one-half, Section 31; thence S89°57 ' 35"W parallel with said South line a distance of 1125. 65 feet to a point on the West line said East one-half East one-half, Section 31; thence S00°23 ' 20"W along said West line a distance of 650. 00 feet to the Southwest corner said East one-half East one-half, Section 31; thence N89°57 ' 35"E along the South line said East one-half East one-half, Section 31 a distance of 1326. 18 feet to the Southeast corner said East one-half East one-half, Section 31; thence N00°20 ' 30"E along the East line said East one-half East one-half, Section 31 a distance of 5341. 31 feet to the Southeast corner Section 30; thence N00°00 ' 00"E along the East line said Section 30 a distance of 1445. 85 feet to the true point of beginning. Contains 85. 258 Acres more or less. THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS WELD COUNTY, COLORADO BY: MARY ANN FEUERSTEIN WELD COUNTY CLERK AND RECORDER AND CLERK TO THE BOARD BY : Jeannette Ordway, Deputy DATED: August 9, 1978 PUBLISHED: August 10, 1978 and August 31, 1978 in the Johnstown Breeze _ -ANNING COMMISSION MEETING WELD COUNTY, COLORADO AUGUST 1 , 1978 1 : 30 P.M. TAPE 694 CHUCK CARLSON: Our next item on our agenda will be the zone change , Charles Hobday . We ' ll recess for about five minutes and get the room cleared so we can get around. Discussion DON DRAWER: Are we going to continue from where we were four weeks ago or - CHUCK CARLSON: Basically . DON DRAWER: OK, I think at that time we were going over the reasons that the Planning Commission staff had recommended denying the request . I don ' t believe we had started any of the questions . Do you remember? CHUCK CARLSON: You first state what you want to state , and we will discuss it . DON DRAWER: I had given a short resume ' of what we were doing out there and I believe he was reading some of the reasons why it was turned down. They are requesting for it to be denied, and if it ' s time for the rebuttal I ' ll go through that , if not , I ' ll wait for that . CHUCK CARLSON: We weren ' t reading anything according to yours . DON DRAWER: OK. Well , I think everybody is familiar with what we were doing out there , whose who hadn ' t been there came out and I think everybody else had been there previously . And I really don ' t know what else I should go into, other than any questions at this time under the proposals that we had . JERRY KIEFER: I guess I raised a question . Let me ask Mr . Drawer a question then . I think my question basically at that time . Let me ask first , Chuck, these have already been read, the staff has read them, it ' s OK . My question at that time had to do with the history of the case , since I am kind of new on the Commission . I guess I was surprised to find the history was really not as long as I thought it out to be . Mr . Drawer in- dicated that in 1968 the process in a sense began , but there was a six year span between 1968 and the time that a violation -1- , was notes ; in other words , ng; action did take place between 1968 and 1974 . As far as seeking a change of zone . Is that true? DON DRAWER: That ' s correct . JERRY KIEFER : And your appearance in 1974 was not to seek zoning change but in a response to a violation announcement , right? DON DRAWER: That ' s correct . CHUCK CARLSON: No . You have any more that you want to read then? CHUCK CUNLIFFE : I just want to bring the Planning Commission up to date . The staff did read the staff recommendations into the record and the - on Mr. Drawer' s recent trip before the Planning Commission two meetings ago . At that time , the Planning Commission decided to take a field trip and some of the members expressed a desire to be brought up to date . We asked why the Planning Commission has a case history of the advance . Mr . Drawer has received a copy of this . He may wish to comment on that . Case history is basically from the record we have in our office . There were taken from our zoning violation case . The only thing I would like to comment on, as far at the summary sheet on page 3 is , since May 23 , 1977 , Mr . Drawer has - Mr. Hobday has filed the rezoning application, which is before you today . I don ' t think we will answer any questions the Planning Commission might have as far as the summary unless further clari- fication is needed. And, I would also like to comment on our original comments . We has a surrounding property owner who was opposing this request . Mr. Drawer has submitted a letter today indicating that Mr. Reilly , the adjacent property owner that was objecting, no longer has objection to the request . His main objection was County Road 16 being put in or constructed. Mr . Drawer has assured him that that is not what they want to do , so he has withdrawn his objection to the request. CHUCK CARLSON: OK, do you have any remarks going on any of that stuff? -2- DON DRAWER : No, that ' s all true . The reason , I might add though , that from 1968 till 4973 , we were erroneous in some of the things that we have done out there ; but we were under the assumption that we still had correct zoning for what we were doing and subsequently since then , they have said that it appears that there was a typographical error in the 1966 , whatever the year was , that was current for the zoning that the folder that they gave out , the Planning Commission folder. And that was in 1972 when it was redone , it was eliminated; the listing under agriculture that we felt we were under . JERRY KIEFER: In other words , the suggestion in 1968 that you seek a zone change , was that a strong suggestion or suggestion you didn ' t , or do you remember the situation? DON DRAWER: I remember the meeting very well , and it was accompanied by quite a bit of laughter because it was taken more as a Disney land approach . We ' ll have a Disney land in Weld County and we weren ' t that strong on it . We know this was something that we were going to pay for as we go and would be time consuming and we just didn ' t feel that , you know, we didn 't take as seriously as it should have been ; but we didn ' t really feel that , it was all that much in error . GARY FORTNER: Mr. Chairman , I believe the tapes from those meetings are available , if you want to listen to them. CHUCK CARLSON: OK. IRMA WHITE : I believe I have a question for Mr . McKay . I saw the application for which rezoning had to be accompanied by the land owner. The land owner has to , either the land owner or his authorized agent must appear and sign the application and then a representative must appear and we have a form that we do that is to keep the agent for the land owner indicating that they have a legal right to represent the land owner in that matter. Do we have that? I assume we have data ( inaudible) CHUCK CUNLIFFE : Mr . Drawer, er Mr . Fobday or Mr . Drawer has , they have submitted a letter indicating that Mr . Drawer is Mr. Hobday ' s agent . We have received that in the office prior to -3- this time and is not included' in your packets , but the staff was aware that he is, in fact,lan agent for Mr . Hobday . CHUCK CARLSON: That ' s , so that ' s fully legal . KAY NORTON: Yes . CHUCK CARLSON: OK IRMA WHITE: I was just thinking it would help , you know, if you talked to him and find out what his intentions for the future ( Inaudible) KAY NORTON: Well , the fact that Mr . Drawer is an authorized agent would not necessarily preclude you from requesting information from the land owner himself if he is to be involved in the activities . You can ' t force him to fly down from Chicago and come see you, but you would like to request information by letter and I think that ' s the answer . If you feel that strongly about it , I suggest you ask Mr . Drawer first , and then if he can ' t answer yourquestion ( Inaudible ) FRANK SUCKLA : In that case, can I ask a question? KAY NORTON: Yes. FRANK SUCKLA : Since I wasn ' t here at the last meeting, I 'm sitting in the dark on some of this , and - KAY NORTON: Well , there was no discussion really . So you ( Inaudible) CHUCK CUNLIFFE : On the meeting on July 5 , when this originally came before the Planning Commission there was - FRANK SUCKLA : Well , at that meeting this was heard before . KAY NORTON: Oh . • FRANK SUCKLA: I mean I wasn ' t there . I wasn ' t here and what ' s the question Alice asked , wanted to ask is, what connections is Charles Hobday with Don Drawer and the so-called plan that you have for this Sunset Village . DON DRAWER: Sundown , Sundown & Southern Railroad FRANK SUCKLA: Yea. What I am getting at is , did you sell your interest or are you still in it? DON DRAWER: No, I 'm still in it and I am 50% owner, however, it' s not as of record now. On August 22 , there will be sale -4- for the rest of the Flying DEanch Airport , and we felt until this other episode was completely terminated, sold, and you know, we had a lawsuit with Small Business Administration that was settled and it was felt that this would be better to put it in Mr. Hobday ' s name for the time being and since that was what was pending holding the application for rezoning, it wasn ' t acceptable until then . This is where we ' re at right now. FRANK SUCKLA : Thank you. JERRY KIEFER: Mr . Drawer, one of the questions that I guess , says , answers the following questions must be submitted. Now you did submit answers to these questions in our packet here , I note , except it did say give some evidence of the proposed business or commercial enterprise , a tentative time schedule for construction . I didn ' t see that in here. Now, you seem to outline pretty well all the things that are intended. Is there a timetable? DON DRAWER: Well , basically it has been increasing to some extent lately, but there is no timetable such as two years from now well be open . We retire the note on the property on the highway February of this next year, and then the only balance that is left is at Small Business Administration ; and I think somewhere during that time period of the next four or five years the thing will be accelerated enough to where it can be opened. We ' ve , we have over three quarters of the amount of necessary track to complete the operation there on the property now, not all of it is laid down, but it ' s there. And we ' ve been unable to move more buildings in because , well , we shouldn ' t say unable to , we ' ve moved a few in with storage permits but anything that would be occupied in any manner we haven ' t been able to move in because a building permit is unobtainable . And we do liave six more buildings in storage that will come on the property when it ' s legal to bring them on : We went to Mazula, Montana, a week ago to bid on a tree moving machine . We weren ' t successful , but we do have that in -5- our ideas , and that will probably be in the near future because obviously it is something that is needed out there . JERRY KIEFER : Tree moving? DON DRAWER: Trees . It doesn ' t need seedlings, you know, seedlings would be OK but it needs trees . And we have said that our intent and we have talked to two studios about it , our intent would be to move sufficient number of buildings , complete the track and have the train running, and then approach the movie studios about making a movie . And the understanding there would be that , in return for using the place for the movie that they would finish falsefronting the ones and sign painting and whatever it takes to make it look the way we ' re planning on making it look. And a, when they filmed Centennial here , they did stop by, they flew in and we picked them and brought them out there, and this was the second time in about seven years that they had been out and so they updated the photographs . They updated their files , said that they still thought it was a very good possibility . JERRY KIEFER: Down the road. DON DR/ ER: Well , we don ' t want it now because. it ' s - there ' s not enough there - it ' s not ready. Now, if they would falsefront the place without buildings there , you know they ' ll fall over when they ' re done . We saw them film "True Grit" at Ridgeway and they take a tree and they stick it in the ground, without roots or anything, and four days later the tree is dead, but they get the effect they want . We don ' t want that , we want that effect to stay when they leave, we want the effect to stay there the way it was in the movie , so we feel it ' s still too premature to entertain something like that . CHUCK CARLSON: Any further questions? Any comments of anybody in the audience . Do you have any other comments? DON DRAWER: Well , some of the reasons that they , the staff, said that they were against the thing being located where it ' s at . I have the answers to the questions , but maybe a couple of more be touched upon . The property as you saw out there , as long as I ' ve been there has never been in farming. It ' s been -6- in soil bank for three years when I first got it. And , you know, we just didn ' t tear itiup and we didn ' t wish to stay in the program or , I guess , we weren ' t even eligible except for a period of time that you' re, not yet to be off of it . There ' s no irrigation water there.. An old seep used to run through it , but it now ends just past Highway 52 and we have no water rights to it , if it was even there . It ' s been aband- oned and blown over. We feel the county would benefit by allowing the development in the southern part of the county, the area has easy access to I-76 and it ' s a tourist route . It would be very hard to tap , say up north somewhere here or in other areas that aren ' t closer to Denver and, let ' s see , the property is almost 2 miles long and narrow in width and that would be quite hard to find elsewhere in the county . I don ' t know of any municipality that would have that kind of property available and I don ' t think they want it in town . It ' s not something that ' s condusive to , well , the people are complain- ing about the railroad now, the real railroads, they don ' t want the coal trains through the town and they want them to route around it and so I don ' t feel this would be , even if it was feasible , to move it , it wouldn ' t be something that you' d want to put next to a town . We ' ve talked to all the neighbors , I know than all personally and there was no objection , with the exception of Mr. Reilly , who lives on the end of County Road 16 and he was afraid that we might want access in from that direction and that doesn ' t fit in with the plan whatsoever, we don ' t want cars and people to be able to go along side of the train , because it would ruin the effect . We were trying to give the effect of open land the way it was in the earlier days and it wouldn ' t work if there was a road all along side and people were parked there, and so it wasn ' t our intention at all to 'want that . And when I clarified that to him, he withdrew his objection . IRMA WHITE : I think the problem I have with this , the idea is great but I wonder , you know, about if it is really feasible to carry it out . There ' s a problem with water there , it ' s going -7- to take a lot of money , we haven ' t any insurance that any movie company will ever come'- ,( Inaudible) DON DRAWER: Well , I wouldn ' t say we don ' t have any insurance , we don ' t have it in writing, but the plan that they were talking about . This engine that we have is the sister to the one up at Georgetown and their thoughts there were to make part of the movie on the plains with a town and then some of it would be filmed up in the mountains , in Georgetown there . And it ' s something that would be hard for them to do without a large ex- pense if they didn ' t have something already available and one that they could paint to look the same as the other engine, the same number and everything, so I don ' t think it ' s all that far out . They ' re filming quite a bit , we now have Colorado Film Commission which actively lobbies to get the film makers into the state and this is one of the things that Centennial came about and the new movie that they are filming up here in Greeley . I don ' t think it ' s that far out at all , but of course ,' the only other thing I can say is that we ' ve been at it for over ten years now and I can show you pictures of 10 years ago and it ' s gone a long way since then . -8- CERTIFICATE State of Colorado) ss. County of Weld ) I, Jeannette Ordway, Deputy County Clerk and Acting Clerk to the Board of County Commissioners of Weld County, Colorado, do hereby certify that the attached record is a true and correct copy of the transcription of a meeting of the Weld County Planning Commission held on August 1, 1978 in connection with the application of Charles Hpbday for a Change of Zone from A to B. Dated this 23rd day of May, 1979 . ' (:: ' 1,-1" I( e P-±cite--,-/A e nnette Ordway D uty County Clerk and Acting Clerk to the Board of County Commissioners Weld County, Colorado Hello