The URL can be used to link to this page

Browse Search

Home My WebLink About20170262LETTER OF CONCERN RESPONSE FORM DEPARTMENT: DEPARTMENT HEAD: DATE LETTER RECEIVED: LETTER RECEIVED FROM: LETTER RECEIVED VIA: EMAIL/MAILING ADDRESS: 1/12/2017 Richard West Snail Mail 4525 65th Ave, Greeley, CO 80634 * * * PLEASE RESPOND WITHIN THREE DAYS. IF RESPONSE WILL BE DELAYED, PLEASE NOTIFY "CTB GROUP" BY EMAIL. RECOMMENDED ACTION: VC CA- P::.__ St cl, tu.-.„.\\< A kA 4\ b-\- -oi y . 0\3 \a. S1/45 -c.. ir S cYC C._ L\ V .e., Q, I., \ .\.,S \inc.. CL---t-AAIN-04-‘\\-4 G ic\-c.- .5 '3 (-cc s i ccAcAkk \ v'v-•. C \\I {f S \-t 'y L\ l i h , 1 ' r MAr; \ \\ cC\\L ) Li e J ''M A`A 15V METHOD OF RESPONSE: l /y Board Action Work Session Letter (Attached) Email (Attached) Telephone Call No Response (Explain) Department Head Signature: rA m:/CTB/LETTERS OF CONCERN/Forms/2017 CC3(\tel (Ym 00i CO1/4-4 i Or\ S CC PL. CTP) i /3o/t"7 ol/a3/I "7 2017-0262 Wiest History- 095928000003 A building permit was applied for on October 27, 2016 for a Residential Single Family Addition to the primary residence located on the Richard Wiest property (BCR16-01316). Planner -on -call, Michael Hall, was asked to come to the front by building staff on October 27 as there were two homes on the property. Section 23-3-20.A of the Weld County Code states, "One (1) SINGLE- FAMILY DWELLING UNIT and AUXILIARY QUARTERS per LEGAL LOT" and therefore Michael looked into how the second home was permit on the lot. The primary home is the Wiest residence and was built in 1995. The 2nd home (rental) was built in 1897. There was no information about the 2nd home in SLIC or Accela. Hall put a zone hold on the building permit until the 2nd home could be addressed and listed options on the building permit that could remedy the 2nd home. Mr. Wiest came in several weeks later during November to check on the building permit status and zone hold. Mr. Wiest was upset that the building permit was on hold because of the 2nd home issue and he did not want to deal with the 2nd home. Mr. Hall requested that Mr. Wiest address the 2nd home by coming in for a Pre Application meeting to discuss a USR or present evidence that the home was properly permitted. Mr. Wiest came in with a letter dated 4/14/1995 written by a previous planner, Todd Hodges that addressed two homes on the property. The letter stated that one home was to be used for accessory purposes only (not residential) and one home was to be demolished. Mr. Wiest criticized the County for not finding this letter and for keeping poor records. Mr. Wiest was harsh, demanding and angry whenever dealing with the Planning and Building staff. Mr. Wiest argued a third home was allowed to be on the property for rental. There was no mention of this in the letter provided by Mr. Wiest. Mr. Hall did more research and found the same 4/14/1995 hardcopy letter in a property research folder in the Planning file room. Another earlier document dated 3/28/1995, was also found in which the BOCC unanimously approved and granted that one home was to be used for accessory purposes only (not residential) and one home was to be demolished before the building permit for a new home may be issued. Another earlier letter dated 3/9/1995, was written by Mr. Wiest that requested this modified proposal that was then approved BOCC. Another earlier letter dated 1/7/1994 written by Chuck Cunliffe, Planning Director, addressed the original proposal which stated that 2 of the existing dwellings shall be removed from the property in order to get building permits for a new home. Mr. Wiest continued to argue that there was a third home out there that was not addressed in the Planning letters. Mr. Wiest continued to berate and act hostile towards staff. The best available documentation planning staff had at the time appeared to state that no 2nd home on the property for a residence was allowed or even acknowledged. In order to further discuss this situation Mr. Hall gave Mr. Wiest a pre application form. Staff did not have the full story of what took place in 1995 and Mr. Wiest was angered by this. Staff remained factual and continued to do research. Mr. Wiest was upset of having to complete a basic pre app form. The pre app was set up on 11/22/2016 (PRE16-0260) and the meeting was scheduled for the next week, Friday, 12/2/2016. Mr. Wiest came in for the pre application meeting which was attend my Mr. Hall, Michelle Martin, Tom Potter and Kris Ranslem at that time Mr. Wiest presented a letter dated, 12/21/1993 that did in fact state there were three homes on the property. This was the first time Mr. Wiest had present staff with this information and as a result addresses the 2nd home. Mrs. Martin informed Mr. Wiest this letter was the missing piece need to resolve the issue. Mrs. Martin thank Mr. Wiest for providing this letter. Mr. Wiest was aggressive and short throughout the pre app meeting. Although planning staff in 1995 was aware of the 2nd home, no formal action or grandfather process was found that accounted for the 2nd home. Mr. Hall completed the NCU application for Mr. Wiest on the spot at the pre app meeting and had Mr. Wiest review and sign the NCU. Mr. Hall then instructed building staff to release the building permit within the same hour. The same day, Hall setup the NCU (NCUI6-0017) case in Accela, wrote the staff report, approved the NCU and sent a copy of the NCU to Mr. Wiest. Mr. Wiest left the Planning office still angry and upset although the issue had been resolved. Mr. Wiest blamed Planning staff although they were doing their job and was upset about the time it took to properly piece together the story. UN Z � WT: Uo z Ote Oco wIne C‘ F- o wz Jo U W 0 0 Q Co 0 O 0 H m D w H 0 IN REFERENCE TO A LETTER OF CONCERN. IN THE WELD COUNTY DEPARTMENT OF PLEASE SEE THE ATTACHED RESPONSE FROM IF APPROVAL NOT GIVEN: RECOMMENDED AMENDED RESPONSE PLAN? APPROVE SUBMITTED METHOD OF RESPONSE? U I ,. a.) -Q Y -r Niej O z w • C Q O u FREEMAN KIRKMEYER O Z cc O 2 ct 0 U Ct 0 U • ct V C C) .� O a.4.4 January 9, 2017 Julie Cozad Weld County Commissioner, District 2 P.O. Box 758 Greeley, CO 80632 Dear Commissioner Cozad: I am writing you concerning the troubling time my contractor and I experienced applying for and obtaining a building permit from the Department of Planning Services. In late September, Dan Hall of DCL Construction submitted the application and plans for a building permit to add a room to my residence at 4525 65th Avenue (Parcel ID #0959-28s0-00-003) in Greeley, adhering to the requirements of the Planning Services Department. After submitting the application and plans, Dan Hall followed up with the department and informed me that things were moving along smoothly. However, he hit a roadblock on November 11. Michael Hall in the Planning Department informed my contractor that the building permit was on hold and asked him questions regarding the original residence (built in 1897) located on the property. At that point, Dan advised me to contact the department concerning questions about the original residence. The permit was not issued until December 2, 2016, after much frustration and follow- up on my part. I went to the department in person to address the issue. Michael Hall informed me that because a second home is located on the farm, the building permit had been put on hold. We discussed why the original home had anything to do with a building permit for my residence. I pointed out that in 1995 I was given a building permit for the second residence and I had a Certificate of Occupancy dated October 13, 1995. Therefore, if the department approved the building and occupancy of the second residence, why would they not approve an addition to that home? I also brought to his attention that I had been paying property taxes on both residences. After 20 minutes of back and forth Mr. Hall informed me that "grandfathering" the home in question would most likely be the easiest route to get my permit issued. A few days later, on November 15, I provided Planning Services with two letters (attachment 1 and 2) regarding the building process for the residence at 4525 65th Avenue. The department did not have this correspondence on file. Upon reviewing the letters, Mr. Hall stated that the original home on the farm was not code compliant. Again, I was confused as I was not asking for a building permit on the original home. No reference was ever cited as to what code violation needed to be addressed or how the two residences were related. On November 18, I provided Mr. Hall a copy of the 1995 Certificate of Occupancy (attachment 3) for 4525 65th Avenue as documentation to confirm that Planning Services had approved the home for occupancy. At this encounter, I was informed by Mr. Hall that "grandfathering" was no longer an option and that the decision was now in the hands of Michelle Martin, Planning Manager. Again, I followed up on November 21 with a phone call to Ms. Martin. After all this time I was never contacted by anyone in the department to discuss or resolve the issue they perceived I was guilty of. In fact, when I told Ms. Martin. that Mr. Hall told me to call her regarding the hold on my building permit, she replied that my phone call wasn't necessary. However, she did take the time to review the documents I submitted and Mr. Hall's findings relevant to my request, and informed me that none of the paperwork submitted addressed the original residence. After discussing the situation and documentation I provided, she did not agree that if the department allowed me to build and occupy the second residence in 1995, the original residence was in compliance at that time. Ms. Martin ended the conversation stating that I would need to go the SUR route as "grandfathering" is not an option. She e -mailed the SUR documentation to me and scheduled a meeting to review the SUR. At the SUR hearing on December 2, my administrative assistant and I stated that we did not understand the purpose of the meeting and asked for the specific section of the Code that was in violation. At that point, Mr. Hall stated he would need to ask his supervisor to join the meeting. He did not provide us with the Code provision. When Ms. Martin joined the meeting, we asked her for the Code reference but again none was provided. I proceeded to point out that in preparation for this meeting; I had been to the Assessor's Office to confirm that I was in compliance with their records. The assessor's records confirmed the original residence was classified as a rental residence and was not being used for farm purposes. Also, I had found another letter (attachment 4) addressing th.e original residence concerning my request to build 4525 65t11 Avenue. After reviewing this letter, Ms. Martin stated the letter cleared up everything and they could grant a NCU for the original house. In the meantime, another staff member checked the status of the building permit and informed us that it had been approved, but was on hold. Ms. Martin immediately removed the hold but asked if the original residence had ever been vacant and for how long. I responded that to the best of my knowledge it had been vacant around a year. She stated that if a property had been vacant more than 6 months it would need to be inspected, but her department could easily work around that. At this point, I filled out the paperwork required for a NCU and asked to have my building permit issued immediately. I did receive my building permit on December 2 at the conclusion of the hearing. I ask you to remember that my contractor started this process in September, I was never contacted by the department regarding clarification on the zoning in question, and I was never given the Code section that was supposedly being violated. We experienced poor customer service due to a lack of direct communication, timeliness, common sense, professionalism, and trust. I felt like the staff thought I was trying to get away with something illegal. It is my desire that you will address this situation so that no one else experiences the ineptness and lack of respect showed to me. Thank you for your time to address this situation. I trust that by submitting this complaint before my project is completed, the integrity and timeless of my construction inspections will not be adversely affected. Sincerely, \ Richard Wiest Cc: Tom Parka, Director of Planning Services March 9,199m Dchpartment of Planning Wald County Administrative Offices 1400 N. 17th avenue rreeley, CO 90634 Pc! Ts modify January 7.3994 proposal cono"erning remo1'al of t„ c houses from 4393 55th ave. Greeley, CD 90534 (Township 5, Range SE !.leas 5t1'? P.M. 9 ti -n. 29 4 1 /7 St 1/4. Weld County) Dear Pinning Services Members, la!^ writing to requeet a change .in an original agreet ent that .:.a.5 cnn«l.l'"a t e''i on January January 4v• 1 994 f Ac-ording to the original agreement (aee :en^l^aura) .T.3!^ to remove or deetrcy't'wo hc::se_ on '"y property in order to obtain a {."ilrlil+ns,,: permit. I have obtained a demo144inn permit for the firat ho -se and -ill within the next a..i:t ‘e.ks demolish this house. I -,ould l.1 a to readdreea the third house'(15'x34' 15'':34' $inyl . ``story locateA on the property. rather. than rE14oJe or deetroy this house I ••'o"ld like to modify the house and 'lice it for farm w'echinery storage. I will remove all -.t i 1 i t 4 es from the building, completely g'ut -the in!ide (rerove all interior walls) and install a 15' garage door in the building to utilize it for farm. machinery etcrege. The reason for the change in the original plan are purely economics as a.'el1 na to imply find a new use for this h'ailding rather that destroy it. Thank you for considering this t'odification to the original agreement of Janua" y 7.• 1 994 f Sincerely, Richard West 142.7 45th ave. Creel ey, CO 90634 .r DEPARTMENT OF PLANNING SERVICES PHONE (303) 353-3845, EXT.354C WELD COUNTY ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICES 1400 N. 17TH AVENUE GREELEY, COLORADO 80631 COLORADO April 14, 1995 Richard Wiest 1423 45th Avenue Greeley, CO, 80634 Subject: Additional dwelling located at 4383 65th Avenue as referenced in the letter from Chuck Cunliffe, dated January 7, 1994. Dear Mr. Wiest: Thank you for your letter of March 9, 1995. The Board of County Commissioners reviewed your letter along with the provided information and the letter from Chuck Cunliffe, dated January 7, 1994. The Board of County Commissioners will allow your new request to keep one of the existing structures as a storage building, conditional upon the following: 1. You obtain a building permit for the new dwelling; 2. One of the existing dwellings shall be removed from the property within 30 days after occupying the new dwelling and proper permits be obtained for the demolition or removal. 3. The second existing dwelling shall be gutted for the use as a storage building within 30 days of occupying the new dwelling and used only for the storage of farm machinery. The storage building shall not be used as temporary or overnight housing. If you have any further questions, please call or write me. Sincerely, ins**(4.4 Todd A. Hodges Current Planner pc: property research file j 1 l • • • 41 'a. '• / •I ,' \. I ►' ►:d • .J ►• • '• • ♦• . *.I • ••♦L. •� • .• • • • ••M7• •'••• 99 • +• PO • s •IV•/ • •• .•I • • t'. • 4 • • • • • • • • gas • en et • • • • • pis mai 4.0 I © ct? vana ct 4 a 4,000 sols4 II 010 I(91 / lte. _,.<▪ 1 4 II r , • 4 • . • Do Diol . • • • li a • • • Fro Das Wel pawl Dom ass ammo Duni • • 093 ro taa soma 1.43 MIS gala • a amp 4.16 ann Its tow) O (64 • en "8 Inv CS ins 0 as Oat es; Chl CS cin CJ ens • Ise tit was toss 6.4 "8 sio fRO ass tab anon Cit ewe 4.0 owe INS Inn Sal Zoe INS CD • esint Ca CMS • ass COI rn O • #.1A\ c\ri as 00 3 10. • Era vi • bal can 4e4"& yr Ls hats SIM ONO 104 n\\ dic Caw Ca SS• D • tin kik el 10 4 4 4 0 • • • • • • • • • MIS • iiibi::4 . • • rp... , 6, • el air • _423 45th aye. Greeley, CD 80634 Dec. 21, 1993 Dear Fanning yerviose Members. - I am writing to inform you of my intent to build a home on my farm located at SW 1/4 of Section 28. township , Range 66 west of 6th P.M., also known as 4383 65th Ave. I am planning on a story and:1/2, brick and frame home. At present, there are three houses on the site, The first is a laborers' house which is unoccupied. The second is used as a rental unit. .The third house I occupy Feb/March thru Novemeber^ - as part of my fare operation. All three of these houses were built prior to 1945. My intent is -to sell my present home in Greeley and move to the farm as this .will oe more convenient to continue my farm operation from there. At present I am considering removing the third house.and possibly the first. I would appreciate any:he regarding a building permit and an :withbuilding a home there, ctsld.'give me $11 ation5 cbncerned _ate ir71cerel V 0 HHO Z 2 D D co W ODD U U) Q _JQ5 W z p[ 3�0 UJ = U m I-- E z LL J -' O - o 5 al Z Ho W I - J Q W Q ti Z dr)5 O Q O flo_ r w E m ° F__ Z V� \stzo • �U W-•-• O Q O _J 0 1-- < Zo OZ � EL awOcL I= 00 O Ozz LL a Q z . ° > Ocncc/cc?) woQw m-v)w 0 Wto co i< >- a Z W z a� Qp� a a a 0DN 2 -w°-2 f - w O w re F ry o Luo0ZO w O F— sai r: O u_, o ce 5 -W z o V Lli Em (i zwo �Q _.J Ese v 0wuj Cl. W O LLLLz Q O 0 o w u) W W _J .. O 0 C LL W i- 0c0 Q d,z H C Quo W W z 2 -LL2 W00 u Z W w W Qi-w UJ J DC i 0 WELD COUNTY LETTERS OF CONCERN CERTIFICATE OF MAILING FIRST NAME RICHARD LAST NAME WIEST COMPANY ADDRESS 1 CITY 4525 65TH AVE GREELEY STATE CO POSTAL CODE 80634 I hereby certify that I have sent a true and correct letter of receipt in accordance with the notification requirements of Weld County in the United States Mail, as addressed on the attached list this 12th day of January, 2017. ()a * 6CLafirktA'Q Chloe A. Rempel Deputy Clerk to the Board r±irit't o u 1" January 12, 2017 RICHARD WIEST 4525 65TH AVENUE GREELEY, CO 80634 CLERK TO THE BOARD PHONE: (970) 400-4225 FAX: (970) 336-7233 1150O STREET P. O. BOX 758 GREELEY, COLORADO 80632 RE: LETTER OF CONCERN REGARDING WELD COUNTY BUILDING PERMIT To Whom It May Concern: Thank you for contacting the Weld County Clerk to the Board's Office in service of the Weld County Board of Commissioners. We have received your letter of concern and are processing it. The issue you raised is under the jurisdiction of the Weld County Department of Planning. The department head, Tom Parko, is directly accountable to the Weld County Board of Commissioners. Your letter is being forwarded to both the County Commissioners and Tom Parko, Department of Planning. You can expect a response shortly. Once your letter of concern has been reviewed, the letter itself and the Weld County response will be listed on the Board of Commissioner's agenda as an item of communications. You can reach the Department of at (970) 356-4000, extension 3520. If you have questions or need additional information, please do not hesitate to contact me at (970) 400-4225. Very truly yours, a Chloe A. Rempel Deputy Clerk to the Board crempel@weldgov.com cc: PL (TP) CA (BC) BOCC ietAfv- Hello