Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout20171221.tiffINVENTORY OF ITEMS FOR CONSIDERATION Applicant Richard & Betty Roos Case Number USR17-0009 Submitted or Prepared Prior to Hearing At Hearing PC Exhibits 1 Letter from Angela and Tanya M. Leeper received 3/16/2017 X 2 Letter and Attachment (Map) from Hazel K. Frank received 3/20/2017 X 3 Letter from Terrah D. Hill received 3/21/2017 X 4 Letter from Hazel K. Frank received 4/6/2017 X 5 E-mail from Alvin & Nancy Fichter received 4/16/2017 X 6 Letter from James & Jeanne Baxter received 4/17/2017 X 7 Neighborhood Meeting Invitation X 8 Neighborhood Meeting Summary provided by Applicant X 9 Supplemental Responses from Applicant X 10 Landscaping/Screening Examples from Applicant X I hereby certify that the 8 items identified herein was submitted to the Department of Planning Services at or prior to the scheduled Planning Commissioners hearing. Chris Gathman — Planner To whom it May Concern, b Afgn r - _ I am writing in reference to case #USR17 -UU (N. This case is a proposed V lot that will border my property. I am opposed to tth is proposed project for many reasons and have many concerns with such a large RV lot going into an agricultural/residential zone. one of my main concerns with the proposed RV lot is the increase in traffic on County Road 6 and County Road 17, The traffic on County Road 6 has increased significantly in recent years and bringing a large-scale business as such to these crossroads will only increase the traffic. Not only will the traffic increase, but also adding recreational vehicles traveling back and forth on 6, as well as in and out of the lot, with the volume of semis that travel that road daily is a recipe for accidents. Another main concern of mine is the fact that bringing a lot to this area would mean bringing more people and their valuable property to the area, and thereby increasing the potential for crime. There are many RV lots already existing in the area and they have had multiple break-ins and theft. Having an RV lot like this right next to our property is unsettling. The potential for trespassing and criminals being on our property is highly elevated with the coming of this business. The potential for, the lot to bring people out to our property when they otherwise would not be there is largo, Keeping our land and ourselves, safe, as well as our peace, is a large priority to those of us that have spent most of our lives living in this agricultural community. A few of the other oppositions that I have to the RV Lot, are the lights that will be needed to light the large lot at night, fencing and construction of the lot, the disruption of the agricultural and residential area, noise pollution and stress on the areas aquifers. With such a large RV lot and security concerns, there will he a large need to light the lot at night. If the lot is lit at night it will produce a large amount of light pollution to the surrounding neighbors* When the lot is constructed there will be a significant amount of noise, increase in dust and a large amount of fencing. The fencing will boarder my property, and I will need to incur the cost of a survey to make sure my property lines are not infringed upon. Bringing a storage lot of this magnitude to this area is a disruption of the agricultural and residential area that . most of us have been a part of for many, many years. Lastly, there are many RV lots that serve the greater Brighton area already and some of those that have the potential. for expansion; it is in my opinion that there is not a need for another, especially in the middle of an agriculture zone. A build of this magnitude would be best suited for a commercial or industrial zone. I hope that my concerns are considered in the approval of this RV lot. Thank you for your time and consideration. EXHIBIT ir-arcb *'H Y./ . e (fp a r-13/461 r I $ 4, ric rrit • Ant ', l 4Eie" %Im Soma per.` % PI I a - P O oss-0 O (l) lo rlrrEa! jrir[ttr►«ridrtfrsfirttrtFltRrrhltgllitri.i.irr,rirtr '43 M ■ I "4 (vys iO a) HAZEL K. FRANK 1S96 County Road 15 Brighton, CO 80603 303-659-3795 (land) 303-726-2799 (cell) March 14, 2016 .4, Weld County Planning Services 155S North 17th Avenue Greeley, CO 80631 Attention: Chris Gathman Re: Case Number USR 17-0009 Richard & Betty Roos, Sr. Proposed RV and Indoor Storage Facility Ladies and Gentlemen: I am writing to you to urge that you deny the captioned Use by Special Request. Our home is located a little over a mile to the southwest of the proposed RV and indoor storage facility location but there is a hill between us so we cannot see the proposed site. However, I have serious objections to this facility on the grounds of poor planning. This site is in the agricultural zone and there are a number of residences in close proximity to the site, There is significant agricultural activity in the surrounding area conducted by "family" rather than "corporate' farmers as the applicant stated. The applicant also stated that this site has been abandoned for the last three years (the time period that the applicants have owned the property?) due to its inability to produce a crop. Every site has different challenges, but cattle grazed on the proposed site for over 20 years, there is successful farming across the street from this location and my husband grows dry land grass hay on our small property. There are already seven of these RV storage sites in the area. You will see from the attached map that all but one of these sites are within 1-1/2 miles of 1-25 in an area that is becoming increasingly commercial/industrial, The remaining site is at 312 County Road 19 (#1 on the map) and it is, in my opinion, a prime example of poor planning. it is a large white blot on the countryside which is very visible from County Road 2 — the southern gateway to Weld County. The proposed site would, similarly, be plopped down in an area that has residences, a few home businesses (mostly connected to agricultural by Weld County standards) but no official commercial or industrial status. I do not see any connection between an RV storage facility and agriculture. In addition to the seven RV storage facilities shown on the attached map, there are another four RV storage and/or indoor storage facilities west of 1-25 between Roads 2 and 10 and east of County Line Road, We really do not need yet another RV storage facility in our area unless, of course, it is Weld County's plan to make southwestern Weld County the storage yard for the Denver Metro Area. Section 22 -2 -24G2 -A1 Policy 7.2 states "Conversion of agricultural land to nonurban residential, commercial and industrial uses should be accommodated when the subject site is in an area that can support such development, and shouid attempt to be compatible with the region' (emphasis added), The proposed use of this site is not compatible with the surrounding region. I note from an attachment to the application that the applicant has received a well permit from the State of Colorado allowing for a well to serve three residences at this location. This would be a use that would be compatible with the surrounding area. EXHIBIT Page Two As always, I have concerns about the increased traffic on Road 6 (a two lane road with no shoulders) and, in this case, long rigs that require additional turning circle room. Oilfield traffic runs on Road 6 24/7 and batch plant traffic is particularly heavy in the early mornings and late afternoons even on Saturdays which could coincide with the times that RV rigs would he going In and out of the proposed facility and turning onto Road 6. In the event the Planning Department does approve this incompatible use, stringent mitigation measures should be imposed to protect the property values and rural lifestyles of the surrounding neighbors. It would be very much appreciated if you could telephone me (303-726-2799) and let me know if and when this case will be heard by the planning commission so that I can arrange to attend the hearing. Very truly yours, hazel K. Frank Attachment: Area map N tb CD fi La T Fs - p II —I, .n 3 4 r len rip 72, ra 111O ZEtrt Affordable Auto & RAJ Storage w 4 C) a Wy C � ft O rim It` m �9 a o 0 U, eufllleal3am euo iPa3aH Ul (a O ty ►.n 0 O'' Cl. 2 un azi aile1025 AU algeP-104V MIN 13 C NJ 0'4 L.n = ii r N.a in to S La a O 0 nib Q CR March 14. 2017 RE: Proposed Pro iect:: Case # U R1•x-0009 T P To Whom It May Concern: As a resident of 7253 County Rd. 6 in Brighton, CO, I am typing this letter to strongly oppose the proposed project of an uncovered and covered storage facility for RVs, boats, trailers, automobiles, etc. with a mini storage unit, which would be backed up to our property line. The reasons, I strongly oppose this project is for the following re ons • We moved to the country for the peace and quiet of country life, not to feel as though we were in the city or in an industrial area, if we wanted that lifestyle, we would have moved to that type of area. We like our privacy and our peace and quiet. We do not want more people driving by and looking or preventing us from enjoying our properties. • Having such a facility ould also bring our road more traffic than it already has and ensure more attempted thefts in our area. It would also lower all of the property values within the area. In addition to the above, having well. a facility is a major eye sore and w; along with a majority of our neighbors feel as though this proposal is taking away land that could be utilized as it was intended as agricultural to place . facility that we already have several of the same type within a 10 mile radius of here, Another point that I would like to add in, is that on the back of our property, not too far from where this proposed project would go, there are trees where families of beautiful Eagles live and return to nightly. By doing construction and bringing in the traffic for this project, it could be the loss of the Eagles returning and gracing us with their daily flights. Thank you for your time in regards to this proposed project! increly, kukolive6• Terrah 0. Hi Resident: 7253 County Rd. 6 Brighton, CO 80603 1/4, c cy\ Vcsan HAZEL K. FRANK 1596 County Road 15 Brighton, CO 80603 303-659-3795 (land) 303-726-2799 (cell) u March 30, 2016 Weld County Planning Services 1555 North 17th Avenue Greeley, CO 80631 Attention: Chris Gathrnan Re: Case Number USR 17-0009 Richard & Betty Roos., Sr. Proposed RV and Indoor Storage Facility Ladies and Gentlemen: h' c This letter is a follow-up to our discussions this morning regarding the captioned USR. As I told you, Mr. Jinn Roos called me on March 29Th and we had a lengthy and informative telephone conversation and I appreciate his courteousness in contacting me. Following are the items about which I have questions or concerns: 1. Richard and Betty Roos purchased 73.50 acres. Their USR Application states the total acreage as 66.3 acres. The Olsson & Associates Drainage Report states the proposed project site is 58.70 acres. Some of the discrepancy may be due to the southeastern portion of the parcel for which no use is stated on the site plan, Mr, Jim Roos told me that this parcel was not included because if it was included they would have had to build a third detention pond. He said a house may be built on this parcel sometime in the future. 2. Mr, Jim Roos told me that he plans to build a home for himself in the northeast corner of the property. Initially, there would be water storage containers for fire suppression at this location (No. 16 of the application addresses fire protection) but he was negotiating with NCWCU to bring water from Road 17 and Road B to the site in an 8" pipe. Although Richard Roos has obtained a well permit from the State of Colorado, Mr. Jim Roos said he did not like Laramie Fox Hill water and didn't want to use this permit Item 2 of the Environmental Health section of the application states "We would like to propose a new septic system for the residential property. We are also setting an area aside for a septic system in the event we decide to install an RV dump station." I do not see on the site plan any locations set aside for residences, water storage containers or septic systems or a water well location. 3. Mr. Jim Roos told me that they planned to excavate the RV storage site area so that the RVs would sit lower than the existing grade and they would not be visible above the two foot berm topped with six foot fence and screen trees described in the site plan. This seemed like a good idea to me. Mr, Roos said that this type of screening would be used around the entire property but the site plan shows this screening only on the south and east sides. Items 13 and 14 of the application are confusing to me. No. 13 describes the fencing to be installed on Road 17 and states "Other areas may have chain -link fence Page Two with top wire.' No. 14 states "All outdoor storage area will be screened with a combination of landscaping trees low growing bushes the 10 to 12 foot high range. As well as blackout strips in the chain -link fence where wood fences riot used." f told Mr_ Roos that chain -link fence with black out strips would not work in our windy neighborhood and he agreed and he stated that they would be installing the berm and fence described in the site plan on all sides of the facility. If this USR is approved, I would request that a requirement be made that the entire site be surrounded by the two foot berm with six foot wooden fence and 1O to 12 foot high screen trees and that this area should be maintained and dead or dying trees replaced, This might mitigate to some degree adverse impacts this facility would have on neighboring property values. Page 1 of the Olsson Drainage Report states "It should be noted that runoff from the property to the north currently drains onto our site, however a berm will be built to route the flow around our site.' Mr. Jim Roos told me that runoff from the north would go through the middle of the property down the existing "dry swale" and DIsson's site maps appear to me to confirm this. Perhaps the drainage report should be amended in this respect to avoid future misunderstanding, S. In our telephone conversation, Mr. Roos stated that he thought Weld County should develop standards for RV storage facilities and I agree. I am very much opposed to this facility being located at this site. There are at least eleven RV storage areas in a two mile corridor on each side of I-25 between Co u my Roads 2 and 10. If there is more demand for RV storage due to the burgeoning housing subdivisions in Adams County, I believe these storage sites should be restricted to corridors adjacent to major arterials and not dotted here and there all over the countryside and thus turning our farming and very low density residential area into Adams County, et al.'s storage yard. Very truly yours, Hazel K. Frank From: Latiafchter To: Chris Gathrnan Subject: USROO-00a9 Date: Sunday, April 16, 2017 5:38:18 PM Mr. Gathman, Knowing that you have volumes of mail to read, I will make this brief We live on the section west of the proposed RV Storage site and we are opposed to it for several reasons. The information we have seems to show a lot of loose ends and unintended consequences from poor planning on the part of the Roos'. Rd 17 is already burdened with oil traffic and regardless of what these people think, traffic in the area would be increased if this USR is approved. The traffic on lid, 6 is another problem, even though they won't exit on that road, there will be an impact with traffic entering Rd. 6 which is already heavily used by oil and gravel trucks. There are already a number of storage sites in the area and they can be a magnet for robberies as in the case of the RV Storage site owned by the Seltzer family near the corner of Rd 2 just north on Rd 19, which was burglarized. Just before that a Seltzer home nearby was ransacked resulting in a huge financial loss. There does not seem to be any benefit to the Weld county citizens since the preponderance of vehicles stored in our area are from Adams, Denver or Boulder county In the late 1980's and 1990's various companies wanted to put landfills in our area and so we are used to fighting the plague of putting undesirable businesses in our area. We hope that The Planing Department will not approve this U R 17- 000. Thank you. Sincerely, Alvin and Nancy Fiehter, 8706 R 8, Brighton, CO 80603 As noted on the Development Case LISR17-0009 Plan Application: Parcel # 1459-20-4-00-011 To whom it may concern: The above parcel should not be rezoned. I live directly across from this land. This property is currently zoned agricultural but has been abandoned for years not due to its inability to produce a crop. The surrounding land uses are mostly farming and are producing a crop! The dirt road that services the above land is not equipped to handle more than the current local traffic As you can see from the picture, the tire tracks of cars traveling in both directions overlap because two vehicles cannot safely pass each other due to the narrowness of the road. The road is grated on a weekly basis which creates a slope on each side into a ditch. Having the RV storage entrance and exit gates be on road 17 would increase traffic and could create a hazard when cars and RVs pass due to the narrowness of the road and downward slope. Dirt roads are not engineered for commercial use. The safety of the people could be compromised if use of this country road 17 does not remain for local farm traffic only. The applied zoning change should not be changed for the following reasons: 1_ Local road safety - The road is not designed for more traffic than the present farm use. 2. The area is zoned agricultural and used in that way! 3. Weld County is a farm community; let us not destroy that. 4. Local farmers are shutting down because of the lack of acreage to farm. This would be another loss for farmers and the way of life in Weld County. Sincerely, James and Jeanne Baxter 2198 County Road 17 Brighton, CO 80603 We wculd life to invite you to an informational meeting on the RV Storage project we are proposing at CR 6 and 17. Please join us Friday the 17th from 6:30p.m. to 8:30p.m. at 15940 Elmira Street Brighton, CO 80602 for an open house to discuss plans and gather input. We will have beverages and snacks. Please call Jim at 303-619-7903 if you have any questions, can't make it, or if you would like to set up a different time t0 talk about this project. We look forward to speaking with you soon! From: astern stone To: Chrim pthn1an Subject: Re: Another Surrounding Property Owner letter re: your RV storage USF Date: Monday, March 20, 2017 2:48:54 PM Hi Chris thank you for the letter The Friday night neighborhood meeting was a great success we gave invitations to all the surrounding neighbors that were home 12 invitations in all In attendance were the Baxter family the Keeling family the Hathaway family and the Boudreault family The people who were given invitations but said they had no objection to the property proposed use and probably would not attend the meeting were from the Rowlett property and the Rainey property Virginia rainy is in the process of selling the property to the Hathaway's The neighbors were very supportive of our plan to use grading as well as privacy fence to screen our use from their view as well as our plan for automated lighting that will shut off when no one is at the site There were a few concerns about crime we were able to give them some statistics from the weld county sheriffs department proving that is not a factor in outdoor storage facilities The only other major concern was dust from the road and once they understood we would be working with wild county to groom the road and use liquid dust control solution they seemed very good with that as well They were all very excited to have a fire hydrant installed across the street everyone realizes that will positively affect their insurance rates and property values I thought I would let you know that in light ofthis recent letter. We have the support of our neighbors in close proximity, and most of the surrounding property owners are supportive of what we're doing as well. Sent from my iPhone On Mar 20, 2017, at 2:13 PM, Chris Gathman as tuna@L:c1 c ,.cQT In> wrote: Dear Jim and Rich, Attached is another property oner letter that came in today. Regards, Chris Lath an Planner III Weld County Department of Planning Services 1555 N. 17th Avenue tel: 970-400-3537 fox: 970-400-4098 Use by special review questionnaire supplemental 1. Landscaping Landscape bushes and shrubs will be low-water variety. Species included, but not limited to, deciduous trees such as hawthorns, Canada red cherry clumps, purple leaf sand cherries, and different varieties of crabapples. All trees will have a maximum height in the 12 foot range. Non -deciduous trees such as Wichita junipers and other short growing spruce with a maximum - the 15 foot range. Landscaping will be watered by ditch irrigation water requiring us to place a distribution pond in the northwest corner of this lot. Distribution pond will be roughly 50" x 50' by around 4 feet deep. Distribution pond will be pumped dry when irrigation water is not running. Irrigation water will be provided by FRICO farmers reservoir Irrigation Company We currently have water shares both owned and leased that are deliverable to this property. 2F Fire protection We will be using 4 500 barrel frac tanks to store approximately 84,000 gallons of fire suppression water. Tanks will be cleaned prior to their arrival at our site. Frac tanks will be filled by water supply company such as A&W water or rain for rent. Tanks will be permanently connected to an on demand engineered fire pump station which supplies water to the fire hydrants on our property. B. Fencing Fencing between phase 1 and phase 2 of the property will be chain -link with desert sand colored screening material. Fencing on North and West sides of property will also have screening material and be constructed of chain -link as we complete the covered storage along the north property line we will remove the chain -link fence, Fencing along roads six and 17 will be wood fence with stone columns placed roughly every hundred feet in a meandering fashion so as not to be in one straight line. 4. Residential home We have an application currently in front of the northern Colorado water conservation Board to include this property in the northern Colorado conservation District this process tends to take over a year and is required before we will have the ability to connect our property to Central weld water. It is our intention to wait until we can connect to Central weld before we build the residential property on the northeast corner. We have a current well permit which would allow us to build this home whether or not the property is approved by NCWCD. We will not use any well water for the purpose of the storage facility or landscaping. From: Western stone [ma lto: e.sternstone@com�castnet] Sent: Tuesday, April 18, 2017 8:42 AM To: Chris Gathman <cathman@codsweid.co.us> Subject: Gradual landscape slope This is an example of the gradual landscape slope that we are proposing along 17 we will plant tree varieties that do not get as tall as the trees in this photograph but we will mix the colors with some of the evergreens as well as some crab apples and plum head to give you the same general view or feel with a lower profile to preserve the view to the west From: Western stone [rnailto westernstone comc st.net] Sent: Tuesday, April 18, 2017 8:38 AM To: Chris Gathrnan <mmath'man @co.wcld,co1us> Subject: Chain -link fence thing with slats This is the chain -link fencing we are talking about on the northside and the west side of the facility you can see it has the commercial slats that are a lot heavier duty and thicker material making this fence extremely hard to climb for security reasons as well as very durable for wind fir, T nnr rar.- re+i-.ngrs— s• t — p f � a; s rit i . • I J.. ' " M 1 L. d• a a n a" * 4 3 0 - . s. t rl �� Hello