HomeMy WebLinkAbout20172847.tiffHEARING CERTIFICATION
DOCKET NO. 2017-46.B
RE: A SITE SPECIFIC DEVELOPMENT PLAN AND USE BY SPECIAL REVIEW PERMIT,
USR17-0018, FOR ANY USE PERMITTED AS A USE BY RIGHT, ACCESSORY USE,
OR USE BY SPECIAL REVIEW IN THE COMMERCIAL OR INDUSTRIAL ZONE
DISTRICTS (OUTSIDE RECREATIONAL VEHICLE, BOAT AND WATER CRAFT
PARKING, STORAGE AND STAGING) 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 — HAROLD AND LINDA
AMERIN, JR.
A public hearing was conducted on August 23, 2017, at 10:00 a.m., with the following present:
Commissioner Julie A. Cozad, Chair
Commissioner Steve Moreno, Pro-Tem - EXCUSED
Commissioner Sean P. Conway
Commissioner Mike Freeman
Commissioner Barbara Kirkmeyer
Also present:
Acting Clerk to the Board, Tisa Juanicorena
Assistant County Attorney, Bob Choate
Planning Services Department representative, Kim Ogle
Public Works Department representative, Evan Pinkham
Planning Services Engineer representative, Hayley Balzano
Health Department representative, Lauren Light
The following business was transacted:
I hereby certify that pursuant to a notice dated June 28, 2017, and duly published July 3,
2017, in the Greeley Tribune, a public hearing was conducted to consider the request of Harold
and Linda Amerin, Jr., for a Site Specific Development Plan and Use by Special Review Permit,
USR17-0018, for any Use permitted as a Use by Right, Accessory Use, or Use by Special Review
in the Commercial or Industrial Zone Districts (outside recreational vehicle, boat and water craft
parking, storage and staging) 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. Bob Choate, Assistant County Attorney, made
this a matter of record.
Chair Cozad reviewed, for the public, the procedures to follow should this case result in a tie
vote due to four Commissioners being present and one Commissioner excused.
Kim Ogle, Department of Planning Services, presented a brief summary of the proposal,
and stated the 64 -acre site is surrounded by lands in agricultural production. He described the
proximity of residences within one (1) mile of the facility and stated one (1) adjacent property
owner wrote a letter of opposition with concerns related to increased traffic, lack of a traffic control
Cc,tPLC Kormm). PecHB), HLCcL), CreICTJ)
lO/ to / 17
2017-2847
PL2479
HEARING CERTIFICATION - HAROLD AND LINDA AMERIN, JR. (USR17-0018)
PAGE 2
device, nuisance animals, compatibility, and that there are several existing similar facilities in the
area. He reported the site is located in the three (3) mile referral area of the Towns of Frederick
and Firestone, and the Cities of Fort Lupton and Dacono and he reviewed the referral responses
from these municipalities. He mentioned the City of Fort Lupton considered it an opportunity for
annexation; the City of Dacono voiced opposition to recreational vehicle parking within city limits,
therefore, opposed this type of facility inside the Intergovernmental Agreement Area and
Comprehensive Planning Agreement Area; and the Town of Frederick considered it an
opportunity for annexation as well. Mr. Ogle stated the facility would be built in three (3) phases
with up to three (3) employees on -site and he described Phase 1 to include 300 spaces, Phase 2
to include 303 spaces and Phase 3 with an additional 237 spaces for a total of 876 spaces. He
stated the applicant intends to install a secured chain -link fence with entrance allowed by use of
an automated keypad. He further stated there would be asphalt driving surfaces and no washing
of vehicles on -site. Mr. Ogle reported 20 referrals were sent with seven (7) referral responses
were received with comments. He reviewed the Planning Commission's vote of approval based
on the citation of only two (2) criteria and he displayed images of the site and surrounding views.
• Evan Pinkham, Department of Public Works representative, provided a brief overview of the
transportation plans and requirements and stated the access is from County Road (CR) 19, which
has been annexed by Dacono and is under their jurisdiction; therefore, the applicant will need to
work with Dacono for the Access Permit. Mr. Pinkham provided the average daily vehicle count
for CR 19 to include truck percentages.
• Hayley Balzano, Planning Services Engineer representative, presented the drainage and
grading requirements and stated the applicant has submitted a drainage narrative and there is an
area exception regarding unobstructed flow with no outdoor storage. If the applicant intends to
develop in the floodplain, they will need a Flood Hazard Permit. Ms. Balzano reviewed the relevant
Conditions of Approval and Development Standards and clarified that Condition of Approval
(COA) #1.8.11 is a duplicate and can be deleted.
El Lauren Light, Department of Public Health and Environment, reviewed the water and sewer
provisions and stated a portable toilet is acceptable for the business and, according to the
applicant, there is no washing or maintenance of vehicles being performed on -site. She clarified
if the applicant adds a RV Dump Station, in the future, they would need a special permit from the
State. Ms. Light stated Development Standards (DS) #13-22 address typical Environmental
Health items.
• Sheri Lockman, Lockman Land Consulting, LLC, represented the applicant and stated the
intent to provide needed storage. She reviewed the details surrounding the applicant's effort to
work with the City of Dacono regarding the access, opaque fencing and landscaping
requirements, and stated the applicant has met the baseline standards in the Intergovernmental
Agreement. She explained the agricultural uses of the adjacent parcels; however, the location
indicates these areas will not remain agricultural for long and she reviewed the various offers
regarding annexation. Ms. Lockman made it clear that there is a demand and a need for this
facility. In response to Commissioner Conway, Ms. Lockman reported having discussions with the
City of Fort Lupton, specifically with Todd Hodges, regarding annexation but the applicant is
declining at this time.
2017-2847
PL2479
HEARING CERTIFICATION - HAROLD AND LINDA AMERIN, JR. (USR17-0018)
PAGE 3
Ron Haake, adjacent property owner, stated he is opposed to the site with mixed feelings
because Mr. Amerin, Jr., is a very good neighbor; however, he does not want to see this in his
backyard and he expressed frustration that the screening will not obstruct the view of the site
because of the topography. He mentioned he and his wife submitted a letter citing traffic concerns.
In response to Commissioner Conway, Mr. Haake stated he did attend the Planning Commission
hearing and he expressed his frustration with the City of Dacono regarding CR 19 and no real
intent for improvements. In response to Chair Cozad, Mr. Haake stated he has lived on the
adjacent property since 1978, and he provided the history of the subject site regarding agricultural
activity.
In response to Chair Cozad, Ms. Lockman questioned the cut sheets for the proposed lights
and requested Mr. Ogle change that Condition. She also stated she has spoken to Mr. Haake and
agrees with him that it will be impossible to completely screen the site from his view because of
the slope of the land.
In response to Commissioner Kirkmeyer, Ms. Lockman explained the use as long term
parking/storage of recreational vehicles and she described the screening to include fencing and
trees. Ms. Lockman reviewed the offer from Mr. Hodges to annex and the distance to the Distant
Thunder PUD.
Chair Cozad requested Ms. Lockman explain how this application meets the criteria for the
Use by Special Review Permit. In response to Chair Cozad, Ms. Lockman stated the use is
compatible and the applicant is making every effort to screen for the adjacent neighbor. She stated
these uses are allowed and permitted in the A (Agricultural) Zone District, there are similar uses
in the area, and the Code allows applicants to bring these requests before the Board. She
reminded the Board that the applicant has met the criteria for the IGA and tried to please the
surrounding municipalities. Ms. Lockman pointed out that Mr. Amerin, Jr., has tried to farm it and
it hasn't worked out. She noted the future development of the area could go commercial, with the
planned commercial development in Distant Thunder, so it is compatible with future development
in the area. She clarified this land does not have water, therefore, it is not considered "Prime"
agricultural land and she does believe the application meets the health, safety and well-being of
the neighborhood.
el In response to Commissioner Conway, Ms. Lockman stated the number of employees is
sufficient.
In response to Chair Cozad, Mr. Ogle explained the actual use does not fall in an overlay
district or geohazard district and only a small portion of the site is located in the floodplain;
however, there is no development planned in that area.
Mr. Choate stated staff's original reason for denial was based on the City of Dacono's
objection, therefore, if the Board chooses to approve the application, they will need to reference
a determination from Section 19-2-60.C.8. He mentioned that Planning Commissioner Cope
2017-2847
PL2479
HEARING CERTIFICATION - HAROLD AND LINDA AMERIN, JR. (USR17-0018)
PAGE 4
commented the application should be approved because Dacono's anticipated "open space"
zoning is unreasonable because of existing uses on adjacent properties.
• In response to Chair Cozad, Ms. Lockman reviewed her notes regarding prior dialogue with
the City of Dacono regarding the referral responses and correspondence that stated the proposed
use is not allowed but they were not recommending it for denial.
• In response to Commissioner Freeman, Commissioner Kirkmeyer stated it could be a
referral situation.
CEJ Chair Cozad stated the City of Dacono is not present and she explained the reasoning behind
the Intergovernmental Agreement and Coordinated Planning Agreements. Ms. Lockman
interjected her frustration regarding the communication with Dacono. Chair Cozad and
Commissioner Kirkmeyer provided comments reflecting examples of municipalities meeting
regarding future development.
• In response to Chair Cozad, Mr. Amerin, Jr., stated he has owned the property for five or
six years. Commissioner Kirkmeyer clarified the City of Dacono annexed CR 19 over a year ago.
In response to Commissioner Conway, Mr. Ogle stated the City of Dacono did not show up for
the Planning Commissioner hearing.
• Chair Cozad stated she is in support of this application based on criteria that have been met
and the fact that the applicant has made a diligent effort to work with surrounding communities.
She further stated there are some mitigations that can be added to reduce the impact to the
adjacent neighbors.
Commissioner Kirkmeyer stated she is not in support of the proposed application and cited
Section 23-2-230.6.4 because the City of Dacono has made it clear they have a conflict with the
zoning and this makes it incompatible with future development and the adopted master plans of
the municipality. Furthermore, she stated the City of Dacono does not allow recreational vehicles
making it incompatible with regional planning and, therefore, not consistent with Chapter 22. She
described this use as a storage yard, which is not allowed in the A (Agricultural) Zone and she
clarified this use does not meet the definition of a parking lot either, so she is unsure how this
came before the Board because outdoor storage is not allowed. Commissioner Kirkmeyer
explained the application does not meet the requirements of the Code, is not consistent with
Chapter 22, does not meet the intent of the A (Agricultural) Zone District, and is not compatible
with the future development or the adopted master plan of the City of Dacono.
▪ Commissioner Freeman stated there are a number of RV Storage facilities in the County and
he clarified this site is not Prime agricultural land; therefore, with mitigation, he will support the
application. Commissioner Conway concurred with Commissioner Freeman and Chair Cozad.
• Chair Cozad stated her findings to support the application and referenced
Section 23-2-230.B.1 stating it is consistent with Chapter 22, specifically in Section 22-2-20.G.7
supporting commercial development in agricultural areas when the impact is low or can be
2017-2847
PL2479
HEARING CERTIFICATION - HAROLD AND LINDA AMERIN, JR. (USR17-0018)
PAGE 5
mitigated, as stated in the Resolution. She explained the policy in relation to agriculture and that
this is a use that is allowed by Special Review as outlined in Section 23-3-340.S, and pressed
that it does fall under C-3 (Business Commercial) and C-4 (Highway Commercial) which is in line
with commercial and private parking lots, as she believes it does meet the definition of a parking
lot. Chair Cozad further stated the proximity to State Highway 52 promotes this use and she
referenced Section 22-2-20.G.2 (A.Policy 7.2) to remind the Board that conversion of agricultural
land should be considered for other uses that can be supported and this use fits the location. She
referenced Section 23-2-230.B.2 and reiterated this use is consistent with the intent of the
A (Agricultural) Zone District as it meets the criteria of the Comprehensive Plan, as stated above.
Chair Cozad stated the mitigation requiring landscaping and screening, and addressing lighting,
provides compatibility with surrounding land uses as required in Section 23-2-230.B.3, and she
noted the applicant has met the criteria for the Baseline Standards for Dacono, which promotes
compatibility with future development meeting the criteria for Section 23-2-230.B.4 even in
consideration of the comments from the City of Dacono. She further asserted that it does meet
the criteria in Section 19-2-260.C.8, the anticipated zoning is unfeasible because designating
property that is owned by someone as "open space" is unreasonable. She pointed out the site is
not being developed in the floodplain, and regarding Section 23-2-230.B.5, it does lie in overlay
district. Chair Cozad stated the applicant demonstrated this site does not take Prime agricultural
land out of production meeting the criteria of Section 23-2-230.B.6, and with the mitigation, it does
meet the Design Standards for adequate provision to protect the health, safety and welfare of the
neighborhood and County, as required in Section 23-2-230.B.7.
In response to Chair Cozad, Ms. Lockman described the proposed motion detector light at
the entrance and she requested the cut -sheet submittal portion of COA #1.6.7 be removed.
Mr. Ogle stated staff was concerned regarding the brightness and wanted options submitted to
staff. Commissioner Kirkmeyer explained they will need to submit a Lighting Plan to be approved,
so that requirement does not have to be included. After discussion, the Board agreed to remove
the requirement regarding the submittal of cut sheets, but to retain the requirement to submit a
Lighting Plan. The Board agreed to remove Condition of Approval #1.B.11, per staff. After input
from staff and the Board, the Board agreed to change COA #1.6.6 to read, "The applicant shall
submit a Screening Plan for review and approval by the Department of Planning Services." The
Board further agreed to amend DS #8 to read, "The approved landscaping/screening plan shall
be maintained."
In response to Chair Cozad, Ms. Lockman, on behalf of the Mr. Amerin, Jr., indicated they
have reviewed, and agree to abide by, the Conditions of Approval and Development Standards,
as amended.
Commissioner Freeman moved to approve the request of Harold and Linda Amerin, Jr., for
a Site Specific Development Plan and Use by Special Review Permit, USR17-0018, for any Use
permitted as a Use by Right, Accessory Use, or Use by Special Review in the Commercial or
Industrial Zone Districts (outside recreational vehicle, boat and water craft parking, storage and
staging) 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, based on the recommendations of Planning staff and the Planning
Commission, with the Conditions of Approval and Development Standards as amended and
entered into the record. The motion was seconded by Commissioner Conway. Commissioner
2017-2847
PL2479
HEARING CERTIFICATION - HAROLD AND LINDA AMERIN, JR. (USR17-0018)
PAGE 6
Kirkmeyer stated she will not be supporting the motion based on her earlier findings. Chair Cozad
requested a roll call vote which resulted in the motion being carried 3-1, with Commissioner
Kirkmeyer voting no. Chair Cozad stated her reasons to support the application and referred to
her aforementioned findings. Commissioner Conway stated he concurs with the findings put on
the record. There being no further discussion, the hearing was completed at 11:14 a.m.
This Certification was approved on the 28th day of August, 2017.
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
ATTEST:da,&k?.
Weld County Clerk to the Board
Depuiy Clerk to the Board
County Attorney
Date of signature: 1O 11O ( 17
WELD CO N 161(2, 61
COLORADO
tom(
Julie A. Cozad, Chair
EXCUSED
Steve Moreno, Pro- em
2017-2847
PL2479
Q
ZIP
�(�
N
�:/
N
ST
S
CITY
4
ADDRESS
s
v
"^
QN
la
`
O
-
rr\\,
VO
N
3
EMAIL
8
ytlj
C
41
J
.L
a
y
LLI
Ie.
cs
NAME - PLEASE PRINT LEGIBLY
�
?
a
i
pJ
,G
�
Hello