HomeMy WebLinkAbout20173190.tiff1
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
COUNTY OF WELD, STATE OF COLORADO
1150 O Street, Greeley, Colorado 80634
TRANSCRIPT OF PUBLIC MEETING
IN RE:
A SITE SPECIFIC DEVELOPMENT PLAN AND USE BY SPECIAL REVIEW PERMIT,
USR17-0016, FOR ANY USE PERMITTED AS A USE BY RIGHT, ACCESSORY
USE, OR USE BY SPECIAL REVIEW IN THE COMMERCIAL OR INDUSTRIAL
ZONE DISTRICTS (RV AND BOAT STORAGE, A DUMP STATION, ENCLOSED
SELF STORAGE AND THE PARKING AND STAGING OF TRASH CONTAINERS,
ROLL -OFFS, AND VEHICLES AND/OR EQUIPMENT TO PICK UP AND DELIVER
SAME AND FOUR (4) INDIVIDUAL FLEX OFFICE BUILDINGS) 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 - WW, LLC
(10:28 A.M. TO 2:44 P.M.)
The above -entitled matter came for public meeting before the Weld County Board of
County Commissioners on Wednesday, June 21, 2017, at 1150 O Street, Greeley, Colorado,
before Tisa Juanicorena, Deputy Clerk to the Board.
I HEREBY CERTIFY that upon listening to the audio record, the attached transcript, as
prepared by Agren and Blando Court Reporting and Video, is a complete and accurate account of
the above -mentioned public hearing.
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
WELD COUNTY, COLORADO
Esther E. Gesick
Clerk to the Board
(anntwnic:atOv�QJ
9 -18- 4.O17
2017-3190
2
1 APPEARANCES:
2 ON BEHALF OF THE BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS:
3 COMMISSIONER JULIE A. COZAD, CHAIR
4 COMMISSIONER STEVE MORENO, PRO-TEM
5 COMMISSIONER SEAN P. CONWAY
6 COMMISSIONER MIKE FREEMAN
7 COMMISSIONER BARBARA KIRKMEYER
8 ALSO PRESENT:
9 ACTING CLERK TO THE BOARD, TISA JUANICORENA
10 ASSISTANT COUNTY ATTORNEY, BOB CHOATE
11 PLANNING SERVICES DEPARTMENT, KIM OGLE
12 PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT, EVAN PINKHAM
13 ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT, HAYLEY BALZANO
14 HEALTH DEPARTMENT, LAUREN LIGHT
15 APPLICANT REPRESENTATIVE:
16 JULIE COLEMAN
3
1 CHAIR. COZAD: All right, we'll go ahead and
2 call up Docket number 2017-48.
3 MR. CHOATE: Docket 2017-48 case USR17-0016.
4 The applicant is WW, LLC. The request is a Site
5 Specific Development Plan and Use by Special Review
6 Permit for any Use permitted as a Use by Right,
7 Accessory Use, or a Use by Special Review in a C-1
8 neighborhood, commercial, or I-i and I-2, Industrial Zone
9 Districts, (RV and boat storage, a dump station,
10 enclosed self -storage and the parking and staging of
11 trash containers, roll offs, and vehicles and/or
12 equipment to pick up and deliver the same and four
13 individual flex office buildings) provided that the
14 property is not a lot in an approved or recorded
15 subdivision plat or part of a map or plan filed prior
16 to adoption of any regulations controlling subdivisions
17 in the A (Agricultural) Zone District.
18 This is Lot B of Recorded Exemption, RECX16-
19 0076, part of the southeast quarter of Section 33,
20 Township 1 North, Range 67 West of the 6th prime
21 meridian in Weld County, located north of and adjacent
22 to County Road 2, approximately a half mile east of
23 County Road 17.
24 Notice of today's hearing was published May
25 23rd, 2017, in the Greeley Tribune.
4
1 MS. COZAD: Ok. Before we go to staff I just want
2 to put on the record that we did have a request this
3 morning for someone to do sign language for this
4 hearing. We have made multiple attempts to get
5 somebody here and have not been able to get somebody.
6 We are accommodating the person that asked as best as
7 possible, and we're going to go ahead and move forward
8 today.
9 At this time I'm going to turn it over to our
10 Planning Department and Kim Ogle.
11 MR. OGLE: Good Morning. Kim Olge, Department of
12 Planning Services. As stated, this application is USR17-0016.
13 The applicants are Ralph Walker and Karl Wiscombe on behalf of WW,
14 LLC. The sign for today's hearing was posted at least ten days
15 prior to the Planning Commission hearing by Planning staff and is
16 evidenced by photograph and affidavit.
17 The site is located north of and adjacent to
18 County Road 2, approximately a half mile east of County
19 Road 17 on a parcel of land created through a Recorded
20 Exemption land use process in 2016. The site is
21 located two miles south of the city of Dacono corporate limits,
22 two and a half miles east of the city of Northglenn, and north
23 of and adjacent to the Adams County line.
24 The site is located within a three mile
25 referral area for the City of Dacono, City of
5
1 Northglenn, and Adams County. It is not located within
2 any existing inter -government agreement area or
3 coordinated planning agreement of any municipality.
4 The cities of Northglenn and Dacono each
5 returned a referral dated April 6th indicating no
6 conflict with their interest. Adams County did not
7 respond to the referral request.
8 There are several residents located in the
9 immediate area; four residents being located approximately
10 150, 390, 390, and 600 feet west of the site's property
11 line. To the north are two residents located within 50
12 feet of the property line, and to the east there are
13 residents approximately 780 feet from the property
14 line.
15 Adjacent land uses to the east include a RV,
16 boat and mini storage facility, permitted under USR12-
17 0022. Adjacent to the west is a machine and welding
18 shop permitted under USR-1494. To the north, near
19 County Road 4 and 19, are several natural gas facilities
20 and high pressure pipelines supporting use facilities.
21 The applicant proposes to construct a screened, outdoor
22 surface parking, RV storage facility, and limited
23 perimeter covered parking. Adjacent to the west is a
24 proposed 511 -unit, self -storage facility. The future
25 office residence on site is for the site manager.
6
1 There is currently an unpermitted roll off
2 and dumpster business catering to the construction
3 industry for sites in the north Metro area of Denver on
4 site. Per the application, materials and dumpsters are
5 returned empty as no trash or debris is brought back to
6 the property after use.
7 The applicant states the roll -off and
8 dumpster containers are in constant demand and are
9 either stored on site at area landfills or at the job
10 site. All trucks associated with the business are
11 parked inside the existing garage shop facility on site and
12 are out of sight.
13 Adjacent to the existing garage shop building, the
14 applicant is proposing four flex office buildings that do not
15 currently have a defined user or defined use.
16 Department of Planning Services received
17 eight letters prior to the Planning Commission hearing
18 with concerns or opposition from surrounding property
19 owners who live to the west, east, and northeast of the
20 proposed site. The letters listed several common
21 concerns and issues. The business is not an
22 agriculture related use, impacts on property values
23 including resale opportunities, a potential eyesore,
24 increased traffic on area roads and traffic impact,
25 traffic safety, the potential for staging on County
7
1 Road 2 for vehicles waiting to enter the facility, nuisance,
2 vermin and debris, including rodents and insects from the roll
3 offs, not compliant with the current land use and future
4 expectations, potential for crime, theft, and vandalism with no
5 on -site management.
6 Eighteen referral agencies have reviewed this
7 case, eight offered comments, some with specific
8 conditions. Section 22-2-20.B (A.Policy 2.2) states, "Allow
9 commercial and industrial uses which are directly related to or
10 dependent upon agriculture to locate within
11 agricultural areas when the impact of surrounding
12 property is minimal or mitigated, or where adequate
13 services and infrastructure are currently available or
14 reasonably obtainable." The applicant is proposing to
15 construct a commercial business on a tract of land.
16 Chapter 22, Article II, Section 22-2-20
17 states Agriculture Goals and Policies. Section 22-2-10.F
18 states, "Land use policy should support a high
19 quality rural character which respects the agricultural
20 heritage and traditional agricultural land uses of the
21 county. As agricultural lands are converted to other
22 uses, rural character includes those uses which provide
23 rural basic economies and opportunities to both live
24 and work in rural areas."
25 The natural landscape and vegetation
8
1 predominate over the built environment. Agricultural
2 land uses in the development provide the visual landscapes
3 traditionally found in rural areas and communities.
4 Section 22-2-20.G (A.Goal 7) states County land use
5 regulations should protect the individual property
6 owner's right to request a land use change, acknowledge
7 that conversion of agricultural land to urban,
8 residential, commercial, or industrial usage should be
9 considered when the subject site is located inside an inter -
10 government agreement area, urban growth boundary area,
11 regional urbanization area, or urban development nodes
12 or where adequate services are currently available or
13 reasonably obtainable.
14 The property is located outside of an IGA,
15 UGB, and regional urbanization area or urban
16 development nodes and will utilize a well for potable
17 water and fire suppression and septic for affluent flows. It
18 was the opinion of the Planning Commission in a vote of
19 six to one that these uses as defined in the request
20 are not supported by the Weld County Comprehensive Plan
21 and the uses as requested are not directly related to,
22 or dependent upon, agriculture and may impact the
23 surrounding neighborhood and adjacent rural residential
24 properties through an increase in area traffic, new turning
25 movements into and out of the property, on -site lighting that will
9
1 pose ambient and possibly transient light onto adjacent property
2 and public rights -of -way and reduce the dark sky enjoyed by
3 adjacent property owners.
4 The potential for use and conditions to
5 develop, including the introduction of rodents and
6 insects from roll -offs, the potential for new
7 neighborhood security issues as the facility is staffed
8 during business hours only and, therefore, recommend
9 denial of the application. Should the Board approve
10 the application, the Planning Commission has submitted
11 Conditions of Approval and Development Standards.
12 We have some images that we can run through.
13 CHAIR COZAD: Let's look at the images first
14 and then we'll see if there's any clarifying questions.
15 Go ahead and we'll look at images.
16 MR. OGLE: This is the main access into the
17 property. It goes right down the center of the site. This is a
18 little further down, this is one of the residences that's nearest
19 to the property line. It's about 50 feet to the north.
20 This is looking back up to the south on that same drive.
21 This is looking to the east on County Road 2 and west on
22 County Road 2. The site off to the northwest is this
23 metal skin building. This is where the roll -offs are
24 staged and the trucks park in the evening. Then those
25 are the roll offs.
10
1 These are surrounding property views looking
2 outward from the site at the adjacent properties. There is some
3 oil and gas on the property. I think there's three wells out
4 there. This is looking directly south across County Road 2.
5 This is looking off to the west.
6 CHAIR COZAD: Are there any clarifying
7 questions? Commissioner Conway.
8 COMMISSIONER CONWAY: Yeah, Mr. Ogle, you had stated in
9 your introduction about number of other RV storage. Can you
10 bring up that map and just point out where those are in
11 relationship?
12 MR. OGLE: So this is Seltzer's USR12-0022. Recently,
13 the Board approved one, it's over here on -- I think
14 it's 17 and 6 for Roos. It's not on the map, but it was just
15 recently approved by the Board.
16 COMMISSIONER CONWAY: Thank you.
17 CHAIR COZAD: Other clarifying questions for Kim?
18 Commissioner Kirkmeyer.
19 COMMISSIONER KIRKMEYER: I'm sorry if he stated this.
20 I was reading through documents. Did this start out as
21 a violation?
22 MR. OGLE: It did not. We didn't know about
23 it. They came to us and said we want to improve the
24 property and that's when we found out about the roll -
25 off business.
11
1 COMMISSIONER KIRKMEYER: So there was a current
2 business on the property.
3 MR. OGLE: There is. It's Western Roll Off.
4 It came in as Kelly's Roll Off and then they purchased
5 the company and now it's called Western Roll Off.
6 CHAIR COZAD: I have a quick question just to
7 clarify. In the description of our resolution it talks
8 about staging of trash containers and then it says roll -
9 offs. When you're saying trash containers, are those
10 individual trash containers or smaller -- not roll -offs
11 but more like you'd see on a commercial property?
12 MR. OGLE: More like a commercial property.
13 I think there's --
14 COMMISSIONER MORENO: You had pictures of those,
15 didn't you?
16 MR. OGLE: Yeah.
17 CHAIR COZAD: Did you have pictures of - not the roll -
18 offs but the other containers? Those look like roll -offs to me,
19 but okay. Any other clarifying questions? Did you have
20 anything else, Kim?
21 MR. OGLE: No, that's all. Thank you.
22 CHAIR COZAD: Evan?
23 MR. PINKHAM: Evan Pinkham, Department of
24 Public Works. Access is from County Road 2, which is
25 maintained by Adams County, so the applicant should
12
1 work with Adams County as far as access and any other requirements
2 as far as auxiliary lanes. They should work with Adams County as
3 far as that. I do have a Traffic Study, just for
4 informational purposes, on County Road 2. It was
5 completed on April 9th of 2014. The traffic count was
6 3,121 trips in that day, and 14 percent trucks.
7 The applicant should also be aware of the
8 alignment study that was completed along County Road 2
9 in that location although it doesn't directly impact
10 this site. Be happy to answer any questions you have.
11 CHAIR COZAD: Go ahead, Commissioner Kirkmeyer.
12 COMMISSIONER KIRKMEYER: I understand we have an IGA
13 with Adams County for maintenance of Weld County Road 2
14 in certain portions. So, it sounds like you said this
15 is a portion where they're doing maintenance?
16 MR. PINKHAM: Correct.
17 COMMISSIONER KIRKMEYER: I didn't believe we gave
18 away our jurisdiction or our authority with regard to
19 access. So, the access permit actually needs to come
20 from Weld County because this is on the north side of
21 the county line.
22 MR. PINKHAM: Okay, so the applicant will
23 need to work with Public Works and get an access permit
24 in that case.
25 CHAIR COZAD: I have a question as well, but
13
1 actually think I may save that until after our public
2 hearing. Anything else, Evan?
3 MR. PINKHAM: No, that's all. Thank you.
4 CHAIR COZAD: Other questions before I move on? Go
5 ahead, Commissioner Conway.
6 COMMISSIONER CONWAY: (inaudible).
7 MR. OGLE: They did, Yes.
8 COMMISSIONER CONWAY: And they were --
9 MR. OGLE: No objections.
10 COMMISSIONER CONWAY: Thank you.
11 CHAIR COZAD: It was Adams County that didn't
12 return, wasn't it?
13 MR. OGLE: That's correct.
14 CHAIR COZAD: But both Northglenn and Dacono
15 returned them with no conflicts? Okay, Hailey?
16 MS. BALZANO: Hailey Balzano, Planning
17 Services Engineer. The applicant has provided a
18 Preliminary Drainage Report. A Final Drainage Report
19 will be required prior to recording the USR map.
20 Engineering items requested on the map are listed under
21 Conditions of Approval, G.10 and 11. They're our typical
22 items.
23 Typical grading requirement is listed under
24 Condition of Approval 5.A. Development Standards 35
25 and 36 state historical flow patterns and runoff amounts on
14
1 the site will be maintained and Weld County is not
2 responsible for the maintenance of on -site drainage related
3 features. I'll be happy to answer any questions.
4 CHAIR COZAD: Questions for Hailey? Thank you.
5 Lauren?
6 MS. LIGHT: Lauren Light, Environmental
7 Health. A commercial well will provide water to the
8 site. A new septic system will be installed or the
9 existing unpermitted system. It would require a
10 commercial permit and it would have to be upgraded to
11 current standards. We have included both of those
12 requirements in Development Standards.
13 Depending on what type of businesses would be
14 located in the flex buildings, they may be able to use
15 a portable toilet if it's in accordance with EH policy.
16 Depending on how many people the well would serve,
17 we've included a Development Standard that does require
18 that water system to adhere to the State drinking water
19 regulations. We also included that an RV dump station
20 does require a permit. Noise is restricted to the
21 commercial level. We've also included our typical dust
22 and waste items.
23 Since we don't know what type of businesses
24 will be located on site we won't have a chance to look
25 at a site plan review. Since it's a USR we included
15
1 numerous Development Standards to address any business
2 that may come in like fuel storage tanks, washing of
3 vehicles or equipment, chemical fertilizer and
4 pesticide storage, processed wastewater disposal, and
5 air emissions permitting.
6 Again, since there's not a Site Plan Review
7 we tried to cover everything based on what may happen
8 in the future, so that was kind of a little bit
9 difficult to go through that. So, that's why there's so
10 many Development Standards, 15 through 31, which we put
11 in numerous environmental health items.
12 CHAIR COZAD: I actually have a question for
13 Kim about this but are there clarifying questions for
14 Lauren? Kim, if there were different uses than are
15 listed in the Resolution wouldn't that potentially be
16 considered a change to the USR? Wouldn't they have to
17 come back in?
18 MR. OGLE: They would. Either do an
19 amendment or a full blown USR depending on what that
20 change was.
21 CHAIR COZAD: So they can't bring in other
22 things without going through an amendment process.
23 MR. OGLE: They're trying to permit these
24 flex office buildings as all encompassing, anything
25 that's in the Commercial or Industrial Zone Districts.
16
1 We just want to know what the uses were.
2 CHAIR COZAD: So it's just within the
3 buildings --
4 MR. OGLE: Within the four flex --
5 CHAIR COZAD: -- they want the flexibility to
6 have multiple different kinds of uses that may not come
7 back in front of us.
8 MR. OGLE: Correct.
9 CHAIR COZAD: I think that's a good
10 clarification for us as a Board. Any other questions
11 for staff?
12 COMMISSIONER KIRKMEYER: Yes, I do, for Kim. Were
13 referrals sent to Fort Lupton and Brighton?
14 MR. OGLE: They were not. They're outside of
15 the three miles.
16 CHAIR KIRKMEYER: Actually, Fort Lupton and
17 Brighton have an Intergovernmental Agreement in place and Fort
18 Lupton and Dacono have an Intergovernmental Agreement in place.
19 This is actually Fort Lupton's and Brighton's -- actually it's
20 Fort Lupton's agreement because of the agreement they have
21 with the RUA people. So, this should have been sent a referral.
22 CHAIR COZAD: Other questions for Kim at this
23 time? All right, if the applicant would like to come
24 forward or the representative. Please state your name
25 and address for the record. Do you have a presentation
17
1 this morning?
2 MS. COLEMAN: We do, Kim can pull that up. My name's
3 Julie Coleman. I represent WW, LLC. I'm here to give a
4 brief presentation and answer any questions you might
5 have. Appreciate your time. This might take a little
6 bit longer than we'd like, but we want to make sure we
7 have a full picture of what's going on.
8 Forgive me for having my laptop on the screen but I just
9 don't want to look behind me the whole time, so I can see what
10 we've got up on the board. So, I wanted to briefly go through --
11 Kim, could you go through the slides -- talk about the
12 property history. As Commissioner Kirkmeyer said, we
13 purchased the property -- WW, LLC purchased the
14 property approximately a year ago, and the roll off
15 business has been operating on that property since
16 2012.
17 When WW, LLC, started leasing the property,
18 four or five months before that they were unaware that
19 the existing uses were unpermitted on the property and
20 immediately began work with Kim to try and get a permit
21 to do expanded use on the property as well as when we
22 found out that uses weren't permitted as well as the
23 septic tank, etcetera. So, we immediately started to
24 remedy that situation. That's one reason why we're
25 here before the Board, as well as to get the additional
18
1 uses permitted.
2 So the property has not been used for
3 agricultural purposes in decades. It was used as a reservoir.
4 As you know, this is dry area. There's not a real way you can
5 farm this land. The garage on the property that we own was built
6 in approximately 2001, and it was used to maintain race
7 cars from 2001 to approximately 2016. The roll off
8 business that was on site, Kelly's Roll Off, was
9 established in approximately 2012. The closest
10 residences, as far as we found, were built in 2012,
11 about right after the roll off business started.
12 Again, we bought the property, we haven't
13 changed the use on the property yet, since it's been in
14 operation, except that we haven't been using the office
15 that's in the building. Kim, can you go to the next slide?
16 This just shows kind of a schematic of what
17 our architect has put together of what the entrance
18 would look like when we build. We've made sure we've
19 made it look like something that's attractive along
20 County Road 2 or 168th to make sure that there's --
21 it's a nice spot in the area. We've got landscaping to
22 block the views of the boat and RVs.
23 We've got a cedar fence and we've got a
24 security system. We've got cameras, an on -site manager
25 that has a residence there, as well as cameras that can
19
1 show -- everybody that comes in and goes out of the
2 facility has a code and we know who comes in and comes
3 out. As you can imagine, our business is to secure
4 other people's property so we have to maintain a high
5 level of security on the property and make sure there's
6 not issues that way. Kim, can you please go to the next slide?
7 I wanted to show you the site plan of the
8 improvements and overlay some of the existing things we've got
9 going on. As you can see on the east side we've got a
10 gathering line to an existing gas well. We've got a
11 pipeline that goes across the property diagonally and
12 an existing oil well kind of in the south center of the
13 property. It really kind of limits what can be done
14 with this property. Certainly, there's no water so
15 there's not a lot of farm uses that could happen on
16 this property.
17 Although it's a large property and it is on a
18 major corridor of 168th, that is expanding to four lanes
19 at some point. One of the things I want to bring up that the
20 Planning Commission did recommend denial to the County
21 Commissioners; however, most of their conversation, in my opinion,
22 revolved around that this entire area is growing a lot, rapidly,
23 and they said that they would rather see us rezone the entire
24 area.
25 We worked with staff - and we can go to the next slide -
20
1 and the Special Review Permit, specifically, is made for this type
2 of use, allowing development in an agriculture zone that may
3 have a potentially greater impact than the existing
4 uses, but that is compatible with the neighborhood and
5 that is established and maintained in a safe manner,
6 that doesn't impact the health, welfare, and
7 convenience of the existing neighborhood.
8 What our position is today is to show you
9 some of the compatible uses surrounding our
10 neighborhood. Not only are there two boat and RV
11 storages within short distance, or three, but there's many
12 commercial uses surrounding our property, and it is in the path
13 of development. If you could please go to the next slide, Kim.
14 We've got a schematic off the Weld County
15 website, obviously, Adams and Weld County are looking at
16 this area highly, knowing that it's really equidistant
17 between the City of Brighton and the City of Thornton
18 -- or Northglenn is it? Northglenn. As you know, this
19 is a highly -traveled road and it's going to get busier
20 as things go on.
21 County Road 2 is slated to be expanded to four lanes,
22 as is County Road 19. County Road 17, they're planning on
23 connecting with Quebec and having it run up north through
24 the section of property that we're in. It's fairly close to
25 our property. We can go to the next slide please.
21
1 So we're going to talk about the neighbors to
2 the north, east, and west. The ones that are opposing
3 this project, and talk about the views that they have,
4 as well as talk about the uses that they have on their
5 properties, as well as what we've planned to make sure
6 that we have as minimal impact as possible on the
7 neighbors.
8 Obviously, we've designed our project to use
9 landscaping and screening, and positioning the
10 buildings further away from residences as possible. I can give
11 you some of the distances to the nearest residences or property
12 lines if you are interested in those. I've labeled --
13 you might be able to see here in the teal color, those are
14 the property owners centered mostly on their -- where their
15 property begins, and if you have any question I can point out
16 where the property line goes. Just so that when some of the
17 speakers come we can look at their property lines and see where
18 they back up to our property and our proposed developments.
19 As you can see, to the north there's the West
20 Brighton Compressor Station planned to the northwest of
21 our property and the northwest of the Moore property.
22 The Moore's sold the property to us and we were fine
23 with giving them more land. They decided they wanted
24 their lot line to be much closer to the residences than
25 they had. As we said before, they were aware of our
22
1 development proceedings and what we wanted to do, and
2 we are permitting the uses they already had on the
3 property.
4 So if you can see here, this yellow line
5 shows the demarcation below what we're proposing, and
6 this is the existing and the rest of this is existing.
7 These numbers right here indicate that I took a photo
8 from that position. So, I'll go through those slides
9 and show you what it looks like from those areas.
10 So these two photos are taken from our north
11 property line to the northeast showing the Moore and
12 Amerin properties. Then looking east to the Morton and
13 Neil properties. You see that there's the oil and gas
14 equipment on the northern border of our property, and
15 then farmland.
16 It's interesting to note that the slope to
17 the north goes down and we've got some berms on our
18 property. If you stay on the north side of our
19 property you cannot see County Road 2, nor can you see
20 any structures that would be built because the view is
21 blocked from the berms. I can show that on this slide.
22 No, that's not a good one. I'll show it later on the
23 property photos you can't see north -- from that north
24 property line you can't see where we would be putting
25 the self -storage units. So, if you go to the next slide.
23
1 Showing the neighbors to the east, I want to
2 walk through that a little bit. Obviously, you can see
3 that we've put some barriers along the eastern edge.
4 We were putting some cedar fence as well as the -- I
5 think it's this awning over the boat and RV storage --
6 it could be a building but we were just planning to
7 have a roof basically over the boats and RVs in that
8 area.
9 As you can see we've also left open a wide
10 area to the north to leave in native grasses. The
11 nearest garage from our property line is about 635
12 feet. That's the Bidwell property. You can see the
13 Brighton Boat and RV storage. Again, you can see those
14 numbers in blue and I'll be showing some photos in
15 those areas coming up soon.
16 The Knutson property and the Seltzer property
17 Trust are currently being marketed at commercial
18 property values. They see that commercial development
19 is coming in this area and these tracts of land are for
20 sale for commercial -type uses in the Ag Zone, of course. It's
21 important to note that there are many uses similar to ours and
22 proposed in our area.
23 Let's go to the next slide, Kim. The first
24 photo is from our property line looking east at the
25 Morelli and Bidwell properties. You can see there's
24
1 not much of a slope headed that way but it's 635 feet
2 from our property line to the Bidwell structure.
3 Photo number two shows the Bidwell property. It's
4 a big garage. There's no home on site and there's
5 approximately 20 trailers of some type. I don't think
6 they're RV or boats but they're construction -type
7 trailers on the property. Obviously, at the bottom
8 you've got the entrance view of the Brighton Boat and
9 RV storage. I can tell you our landscaping plan is a
10 little bit more robust than that. We have -- our
11 entrance we're planning to make look a little bit
12 nicer.
13 If you go to the next slide, Kim, you can see the
14 Moore property. This is on the east side of County
15 Road 19. They've got semi -tractor trailers parked back
16 behind their house. They've got a commercial type
17 building and they -- I don't know what it is, some kind
18 of commercial building, storage, behind their property.
19 The Morelli property is a nice property. They've got a
20 large garage and office with a really large barn and a
21 home on the property. The Morton property on the bottom,
22 they also have some kind of business office running out
23 of there. It looks like some kind of construction company
24 with their really nice home. They've got about six or seven
25 trailers on site, some shipping containers, and other storage
25
1 facilities. If you go to the next slide, Kim. I'll go to the west
2 side property line. Again, I think it's important to point out
3 that not only are we going to have the cedar fence and the
4 landscaping on the west side, but there's also this berm that
5 goes through the property. I think you can kid of see it. It
6 kind of traverses this way. We've tried to locate the
7 proposed development as far away from the residences and from
8 their views as possible.
9 The self -storage units are on this southern
10 side of the property near the Goddard property.
11 They've got about 240 feet between our property line
12 and their garage shop. I think it's a welding shop.
13 They've also got some shipping containers out there.
14 I'll show you those photos in a minute.
15 Then we go up to the Torgerson property.
16 They've got two large barn garages and some shipping
17 containers, some trailers. So, from their house their
18 view, they'd have to look through all those structures
19 to be able to see our property. The one property that
20 has an unobstructed view of our site is the Knels
21 property. What we've tried to do is make sure that
22 there's no proposed structures in that view.
23 If you look at the number three where I took
24 a photo right on their back property line, there's
25 nothing proposed in that area for them to have to look
26
1 at or hear.
2 We do have the barns. We call them flex
3 office, but truly we're looking at garages similar to
4 the garages that are on other properties. We don't yet
5 know what we might want to put in there. We just try
6 and save your time and not have to come back. But
7 we're not planning on any major commercial businesses.
8 We don't have any plans for those right now.
9 This project would probably be phased in over
10 time. We'll start with the boat and RV, putting in the
11 landscaping and the fencing first, and start
12 constructing the self -storage. As a need arose for
13 garages or barns or whatever for somebody to rent out
14 to put their larger equipment in we would construct
15 those facilities when it became commercially viable.
16 If there's anything in this application
17 that's not super important to us it would be those flex
18 office buildings as you call them. That's not
19 something that's a major part of what our business is.
20 The existing roll -off business was run out of
21 this shed just below the Kennison/Moore property line.
22 They were renting that out to Kelly's Roll Off. Again,
23 we didn't need that much land, but they wanted to draw
24 the property line right up on the house border, so
25 that's where it is. We ideally wouldn't have wanted to accept as
27
1 much land as we took, but they wanted to sell it.
2 You can see the sheds, and the barns, and the
3 shops on site. I'm going to run through the pictures.
4 If we need to toggle back to this slide, just raise your hand and
5 we can see where those photos are coming from. Thank you, Kim.
6 The next slide is of the Goddard property.
7 This is where the welding shop is. This is the
8 property that's closest to our proposed use. The self -
9 storage units would have a block wall or the cedar
10 fence that face this property along with the landscape
11 border. The Goddard property has done a nice job of
12 landscaping. They have a lot of trees on site and
13 they've got a lot of landscape screening that you
14 almost can't see our property from their property line.
15 It's a really nice property.
16 Again, I've got number two on the bottom.
17 This property is the Torgerson property. That's the
18 two large garages or barns along with the storage shed. You can't
19 see one of the buildings. They've got some the storage shed and
20 they've got shipping containers and trailers it looks like. Then
21 the property that I was saying is the closest, it has the
22 home the closest to our property that has a view of our
23 property is the Knels property, which we will install
24 landscaping, a cedar fence. They don't have any views
25 of our development that's proposed. We tried to keep
28
1 that area as open as possible. So, they will still have
2 a view of the native grasses to the east.
3 This is a slide of the building and home, the
4 Korb (ph) property. They've got a new residence right
5 off of County Road 2. That road that you see in the
6 foreground is County Road 2 that will expand to four
7 lanes. They've got their home and then they built a
8 large commercial -type office, industrial -- I don't
9 know what -- maybe barn you'd call it.
10 Then off to the left of this photo - you can't see it -
11 there's a large red barn as well. So we just wanted to make sure
12 that we include the photos so that you know what our neighbors'
13 properties truly look like. If you go to the next slide.
14 We kind of zoomed out a little bit and looked
15 at the commercial uses that are in our section or right
16 adjacent to our section. You can see the subject
17 property in white. We've clearly got the Brighton Boat
18 and RV storage very close to our property, along with
19 the businesses that are run out of some of these other
20 properties in our section. The Bidwell property, the
21 Neil property, and some of those others.
22 Excel Energy obviously has a large plant.
23 I'm going to show you some pictures of that. They've
24 got an operations center up on the corner. It's not
25 just a processing plant. They've got a big operations
29
1 yard up on that County Road 4, along with some gas
2 processing plants. I'll show you some pictures of
3 those. Kim, if you want to go to the next slide.
4 These slides - if you want me to go back I can go back and show
5 you where the pictures were taken from - shows the Excel quality
6 control station, the operations yard, which was hard to get a good
7 picture of. Number three. Then I've got some pictures of the
8 processing plants. These are heavy industrial uses within less
9 than a half a mile of our property line. Again, as we said, this
10 is north of us and we believe that the real growth corridor is
11 along 168th with the four -lane road. Next slide.
12 This is just some more views of additional
13 gas processing plants near our neighborhood. I just
14 want to summarize these last couple of slides to talk
15 about the compatibility of uses that we believe are in
16 and around our property. There are agriculture uses,
17 certainly, but there is no prime farm land that's being
18 destroyed here. There's no water to these properties
19 that could be farmed.
20 There's many businesses right off these
21 properties. We understand that there's residences on
22 these properties as well, but if you go in there and
23 look at the type of storage, and containers, and
24 buildings that they have, we understand that there's an
25 agriculture theme and we want to preserve that as well
30
1 as possible, but make no mistake, we're not the only
2 ones that want to run a commercial business in the
3 area. I just want to point that out.
4 There's many heavy industrial and commercial
5 uses within less than a half a mile. The roads are
6 planned for expansion, and we believe our proposed
7 development is compatible with the existing proposed
8 uses that are coming in the neighborhood. We also
9 believe that the design and landscaping of the
10 buildings and the structures will be to a point that it
11 will be something that will add to the community and be
12 something nice to look at, as well as provide a
13 convenience to those who require things to store.
14 I wanted to make sure we touched on all the
15 requirements for approval for the Special Use Permit.
16 We also need to make sure that we protect the health,
17 safety, and welfare, and convenience of the residents
18 of Weld County. We believe that this proposal does
19 that.
20 We have an on -site manager who will manage the
21 self -storage unit. We have cameras. Again, we're in
22 the security business. We have to make sure that the
23 property that's on our lot is secure and that there's
24 no thefts, break-ins or problems. We certainly
25 wouldn't allow that to happen and we wouldn't be in
31
1 business for very long if that happened on our
2 property.
3 This proposal will create jobs in Weld County
4 and provide convenience to local residents and all the
5 housing developments nearby that need a place to store
6 their materials.
7 Again, the next slide kind of gives a list of
8 the things that we're required to demonstrate and I
9 believe we've gone through these and demonstrated we're
10 not destroying prime farm land and we're consistent
11 with the uses in the neighborhood, both proposed and existing,
12 and that we are making sure that we protect the health, welfare,
13 and safety. We'll abide by all traffic safety rules. We'll make
14 sure that we get access permits in Weld County if that's
15 required. We are not in the business of trying to fly
16 under the radar and not get permits. We want to make
17 sure that any business that we operate has all the
18 permits, requirements, and everything so that we are
19 good neighbors.
20 We would love to meet with the neighbors on a
21 six-month or three-month basis during the construction
22 phase and after we get open to make sure that we can
23 meet their needs and if they have a concern or if
24 they'd like a tree placed a certain way, or if they're
25 concerned about our fencing we can work with them and
32
1 make sure that we can do things to alleviate their
2 concerns and let them know that we don't plan to open
3 and operate a business that has crime, and debris, and
4 trash.
5 I guess I should make sure that you
6 understand that these roll -off containers are for
7 construction materials. We don't have a problem with
8 rodents. We store some of these on our other
9 properties and we don't have a problem with dust and
10 debris or trash. They're emptied off at a landfill and
11 they come back.
12 Sometimes they come back for a short time --
13 we don't typically have more than a couple on site.
14 Some of the photos that were shown, we had some of the
15 containers there for a brief time to put new logo on
16 them and get them back out, but we don't anticipate
17 having a large number of roll -offs on the property at
18 any time, just like they have been since 2012.
19 Other than that I can't think of anything
20 else that's important to say. If you can go to the next slide.
21 Just another photo of --schematic of what the property would look
22 like as you're passing down to County Road 2. This development
23 is consistent with other uses. It will add jobs and
24 convenience. It's on a major corridor that's planned
25 for urban development.
33
1 We'll do our best to maintain the
2 agricultural feel and view as much as possible by
3 maintaining the setback from County Road 2 as well as
4 leaving open that farmland in the center of our
5 property where the residents will have the greatest
6 view.
7 I welcome any questions or comments that you
8 have. Happy to answer.
9 CHAIR COZAD: Clarifying questions at this
10 point. Commissioner Moreno?
11 COMMISSIONER MORENO: I just want to get the picture
12 again with the map where the RV is going to be parked.
13 MS. COLEMAN: That's on slide -- the second
14 slide.
15 COMMISSIONER MORENO: Because you're going to have
16 different operation hours and everything. It looks
17 like the southeast corner if I'm looking at it right.
18 Where are you going to be having the 24 hours for the
19 RV parking? How many spaces?
20 MS. COLEMAN: Probably these RV parking and
21 the self -storage would be technically open 24 hours,
22 but that's a really good point, Commissioner Moreno.
23 Most of the time our tenants when they rent space from
24 us and they come in, they drop off their boat or RV or
25 their storage shed, and they almost never come back.
34
1 Especially the self -storage.
2 The boat and RV people come back once every
3 couple months and they come during the day. Most of
4 our tenants don't come at night because you don't have
5 a need to pick up your RV in the middle of the night.
6 You go during the day when it's light, you pick it up,
7 you hook up, you want to have light and then you leave.
8 So we really have found that with our businesses
9 that although our facility is open 24/7 by access code and
10 we have a manager on site, our people come really during
11 business hours to pick up their equipment and then they leave.
12 The traffic is - if you sit on one of our properties and watch
13 people come in -- it's one every couple -- people come every couple
14 months to pick up their trailer or RV.
15 COMMISSIONER MORENO: How many spaces are there?
16 MS. COLEMAN: It would be phased, but
17 probably 35 to 40 per acre. We'd build it out as we
18 have capacity.
19 COMMISSIONER KIRKMEYER: How many acres?
20 MS. COLEMAN: In the development there's
21 probably 76, but that boat and RV storage lot is
22 probably three acres.
23 MALE IN AUDIENCE: It's 20 acres.
24 MS. COLEMAN: So 20 acres for the boat and RV
25 storage lot and then the rest will probably be left open
35
1 besides the self -storage, out of 70 acres.
2 COMMISSIONER KIRKMEYER: I'm sorry, did you say that
3 168th Avenue, which is County Line, is -- who is
4 planning that to be - I guess I'm getting in the weeds aren't I?
5 CHAIR COZAD: Let's just try and keep it to
6 clarifying questions.
7 COMMISSIONER KIRKMEYER: I'll wait. I'm sorry.
8 COMMISSIONER CONWAY: I didn't hear you in your
9 presentation talk about a community meeting. Was there
10 a community meeting?
11 MS. COLEMAN: We did have a community
12 meeting. We had three residents show up. We held it
13 at the Hampton Inn in Brighton. We had three of the
14 notifying parties show up. Actually, I think one and
15 then a couple others came. Sorry, I can't count. It
16 was five.
17 COMMISSIONER CONWAY: Of the concerns that may
18 or may not have been brought up, were they incorporated into
19 your proposal?
20 MS. COLEMAN: Most of the concerns were
21 crime. At the community meeting they talked a lot
22 about crime and we've -- I think that the issues -- the
23 things that we can do is we put in a cedar fence. We
24 can put in fencing all around the perimeter, which we
25 need to do to secure the property anyway. And then we
36
1 have cameras up and have the onsite manager.
2 I don't believe that's alleviated their
3 concern. They think that we're going to attract crime
4 to the neighborhood. We haven't had that -- certainly
5 there's break ins here and there that happen but we
6 don't have crime at other facilities. With the onsite
7 manager and the cameras it's really hard for people to
8 get in and out to commit a crime and get away with it.
9 I think their concern is that people will see
10 our development and then come to their place. We don't
11 have a history of that. I don't know how we could
12 alleviate that concern. I don't know how we could
13 improve that.
14 COMMISSIONER CONWAY: How many folks were invited to
15 the community meeting?
16 MS. COLEMAN: I believe it's around 20 or so.
17 We have a list. I just sent it to Kim --
18 MALE IN AUDIENCE: Every resident was invited.
19 CHAIR COZAD: If you're going to speak you need
20 to come up to the microphone.
21 MS. COLEMAN: It was everyone within 500 feet
22 of our property line. I believe it was around 20
23 mailers we sent out, at least.
24 COMMISSIONER CONWAY: Thank you.
25 MS. COZAD: Other clarifying questions for
37
1 the applicant? If you'll go have a seat we're going to
2 go ahead and open up the public hearing. At this time
3 we'll go ahead and open up the public hearing.
4 If you'd like to speak if you'd come up to
5 the microphone. Make sure and state your name and
6 address for the record. If we can keep comments to - generally,
7 we say three minutes, that would be great. If somebody else
8 has already said what you want to say you can just say I agree
9 with the previous person. We don't necessarily have to repeat
10 things over and over, but if there's new information, we'd like to
11 hear that. So, whoever would like to come up first come
12 on up and give us your comments. Thank you for being here today.
13 MR. NEIL: Good morning.
14 CHAIR COZAD: Good morning.
15 MR. NEIL: My name is Steve Neil. I own two
16 lots right along County Road 19.
17 CHAIR COZAD: Kim, can you put up the map that
18 shows where the residents are? Maybe you can point out
19 where you live.
20 MR. NEIL: It's within 500 feet of that
21 property. I know you sent out notices but I know I
22 never got one. So, I don't know what happened.
23 CHAIR COZAD: If you'll address your comments
24 to the Board, Mr. Neil.
25 MR. NEIL: I just have a short statement
38
1 here. We all bought our land because it was
2 agriculturally zoned. We were looking for a country
3 lifestyle, peace and quiet, no crowds, plenty of space.
4 Then the storage unit on County Road 19 was approved
5 and built and that increased the noise, increased
6 traffic, and there's been some break ins that never
7 occurred before then at residences around that area.
8 So, needless to say, the quality of life has
9 decreased. But at least we had a road in between that
10 facility and our properties. This one there's no
11 buffer at all. They're going to like basically stick
12 it in everybody's back yards here. Our agricultural
13 zoning is getting whittled away by commercial zoning.
14 I know that when that other RV unit went in
15 there on 19 that the property right across the street
16 from that was up for sale. I know he had to drop his
17 price almost a third of what he was asking to get it
18 sold. So, property values are going down. I think
19 another RV storage unit facility would even make that worse.
20 Even dropping more.
21 All we're asking is to keep the agricultural zoning that
22 we all spent substantial money on, and looking for a lifestyle out
23 there. And not to let all this commercial stuff keep creeping
24 in on us. Pretty soon we're surrounded by it and we might as well
25 zone it commercial. That's the way it looks like it's headed.
39
1 I think there's just too many homes and too many properties out
2 there that would be affected. I just don't think it's right.
3 That's all I have to say.
4 CHAIR COZAD: Any questions for Mr. Neil? Yes,
5 Commissioner Kirkmeyer.
6 COMMISSIONER KIRKMEYER: He's going to point where he
7 lives?
8 CHAIR COZAD: Can you point out where your
9 property is in relationship to the development?
10 MR. NEIL: These two lots.
11 CHAIR COZAD: Do you have a home out there?
12 MR. NEIL: No. We intend to build one
13 though.
14 COMMISSIONER KIRKMEYER: So that was part of my
15 question. Then the other question is - are you aware of
16 any of the history of the crime in the area in the last
17 four or five years since the other things have all been
18 permitted?
19 MR. NEIL: Well just talking to a couple of
20 the neighbors. They've had break ins and equipment and
21 stuff have been stolen from their yards. I personally
22 have not had that but we really don't have anything out
23 there.
24 COMMISSIONER KIRKMEYER: Thank you.
25 COMMISSIONER CONWAY: I just -- when did you purchase
40
1 this property to build your home out there?
2 MR. NEIL: I'm thinking -- we probably bought
3 it about 10, 12 years ago. The main reason we haven't
4 built is we're sending our daughter through college and
5 it's kind of taken care of all of our funds.
6 COMMISSIONER CONWAY: So you purchased the property 12
7 years ago.
8 MR. NEIL: Probably.
9 MS. COZAD: Other questions for Mr. Neil?
10 MR. MORENO: Did you attend one of the
11 meetings that they mentioned that they had?
12 MR. NEIL: I didn't know anything about these
13 meetings at all. The only reason I even found out
14 about this was Robert Morelli came over with a notice
15 and gave it to me. That was right before the Planning
16 Commission. I didn't even have time to write a letter
17 in here before I even found out about it
18 CHAIR COZAD: Any other questions? Thank you
19 for being here today. Come on up. Again, if you'll state
20 your name and address for the record. If you want to
21 go ahead and show us where your property is in relation
22 to the project, that would be great.
23 MR. GODDARD: Yes, my name is A.J. Goddard. I
24 live at Weld County Road 2, or 8495 Weld County Road 2.
25 Can I get the map that I had given you with the properties? It
41
1 says section --
2 MR. CHOATE: Is that this map, sir?
3 MR. GODDARD: Very similar to that one, yes.
4 The area in Weld County has changed dramatically over
5 the last 20 years. I can remember coming out to this
6 property and properties around and doing a lot of
7 shooting. Did a lot of varmint hunting and shooting
8 long distance. When I bought my 80 -acre piece on there
9 it was all AG. There was only two original farmsteads
10 on that whole section. That was about 15 years ago.
11 In those 15 years the section has gotten divided up and
12 there's quite a few homes, I think.
13 So when the section from now -- we probably
14 have 24 homes on that section is what I calculated, and
15 those have all come in -- actually all but two of them
16 have come in in the last 15 years. So, they're all new
17 homes. They're all real nice homes. A lot of them
18 over a million dollars. There's three under
19 construction right now.
20 I do have a USR. I own a piece just adjacent
21 to this. I had a small machine and welding shop in
22 there. I heard comments that there's a lot of industry
23 in the area. There is another USR on the far corner, a
24 landscaping business by the Stonebacks. My business,
25 I'm really not doing a lot in there anymore. The
42
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Stonebacks aren't really either. Even though we went
through the process. There's a lot of mom and pop
shops in the area, as they've stated, but they're
small. They're nothing at the scale of this.
I know Kelly had a USR. Kelly Harmon, who
had the roll -off company. It was up on Road 6. In the
housing crisis he had a balloon on his home, lost that,
lost the facility. He needed some place to go. I
introduced them to the Moore's, who owned this
property, so they could use that building back there.
He had a small operation. Had two or three, maybe four
dumpsters at any one time parked out there.
They allowed me to do shooting on their
property. In my machine shop I made rifle actions, and
part of that I wanted to do some testing and I was
shooting to the east and had a 200 -yard range. It went
out on to the property that is proposed circled in red.
During this time Kelly had this small
operation back there. They purchased the roll -off
business and from what I understand they didn't just
purchase that. This group has purchased a couple other
roll -off businesses.
I did not make it to their open house or
their thing, but part of what they said, they planned
no change for the use that has been there for years.
43
1 Well, they bought a couple other roll -off companies.
2 All of a sudden we see all these roll -offs there. It
3 has changed considerably and this concerns me.
4 It really concerns me, this flex use. What
5 kind of use is it? I mean are we going to have
6 buildings with anything from asphalt companies to who
7 knows -- could be landscaping with trucks coming in and
8 out. Sheet rock. Who knows what? It's commercial or
9 industrial. We have no idea.
10 I mean that's not USR. That's not the mom
11 and pop that I think of in these places. It's one
12 thing to have a mom and pop that doesn't have a USR
13 that we can probably get it changed or shut down in the
14 future.
15 Now I don't do any shooting in the
16 neighborhood because it has changed. It's more homes.
17 If we look at the other map that I've got there, if you
18 look on this section I think we've got 24 homes on that
19 section. If you go to the one to the east of us
20 there's only six homes on that whole section. When
21 they got that USR in there for the storage facility the
22 Seltzer's owned almost all the property around that.
23 Their main opposition was the person across,
24 Ken Knutson. He had one home there that was appraised
25 at $1.5 million. He was asking that and after that
44
1 storage -- he came and fought that. After that storage
2 lot went in he ended up selling it to the Morelli's for
3 $1 million. That's a huge hit, and that's something
4 I'm concerned about is that hit that the neighbors
5 would take, because there are a lot of homes on this
6 property, or on this section.
7 If it was on the section to the east or even
8 to the north of that where there's only three homes and
9 the compressor plant is on that, that would make sense.
10 If it was on the Howard section to the north with four
11 homes, that would make sense. But this section has
12 been divided up and it's more residential.
13 Just because something has been historic
14 there, the roll -off business that has not been
15 permitted. My shooting, which was not permitted. I
16 guess it's rural, you could do that, but it's changing.
17 Those uses just aren't acceptable anymore. Especially
18 an escalation of those businesses where it would be who
19 knows how many roll -offs there. I mean I've seen an
20 increase where there's 20, 30 of them sitting back
21 there.
22 And this flex use, who knows what that's
23 going to bring. It really concerns me.
24 CHAIR COZAD: Do you have further comments?
25 MR. GODDARD: Part of it is I see the RV
45
1 canopies. They gave us -- or this was sent out. I
2 didn't make it to the meeting, I was out of town when they
3 did this presentation. I was unaware of the flex space but
4 those canopies look fairly high to cover fairly tall
5 motor homes. I would have to think that's 14 foot. If
6 I was living to the east of this and having to look at
7 that, that would I would think greatly impact me.
8 I think that's it. Do you have any questions?
9 CHAIR COZAD: Any questions? No questions.
10 Thank you. Anybody else like to come forward? Again, please
11 state your name and address for the record.
12 MR. GODDARD: Can I make one more comment?
13 CHAIR COZAD: Sure, come on back up. Make sure to state
14 your name again for the record.
15 MR. GODDARD: (inaudible).
16 CHAIR COZAD: Let me just put on the record
17 that Mr. Goddard came back up to the microphone. Go
18 ahead.
19 MR. GODDARD: Yes, on this I own property
20 that is listed as number 24 and 20. Number 20, I'm
21 eligible for another Recorded Exemption here this next
22 year. I was planning on breaking off another lot just
23 north of 23, which is right adjacent to this roll -off
24 business that's escalating.
25 You know, it's going to hurt my value
46
1 considerably. I don't know what I can sell it for now
2 if this happens. I guess that's one thing, but the
3 properties I've sold to other neighbors, 24, 23, and 22
4 on the maps, they have all built real nice homes. I
5 would say they're close to a million dollars. I don't
6 know what to say to those folks who are really going to
7 get impacted by this because this view is right out
8 their back porch.
9 CHAIR COZAD: Hopefully they're here and they
10 can come and speak. Anything else, Mr. Goddard?
11 MR. GODDARD: That's it.
12 CHAIR COZAD: Thank you. Come on up. If we can keep
13 our comments hopefully to three minutes, I'd really like to get
14 through the public hearing this morning if possible before we
15 break for lunch. State your name and address for the record.
16 MR. WYCOFF: Commissioners, thank you for hearing us. I
17 am Bill Wycoff. I live at 333 County Road 17. That is due west
18 of the section, and we also own acreage in the section itself.
19 CHAIR COZAD: Mr. Wycoff, I'm sorry I need to interrupt
20 Did we get the maps from Mr.Goddard as part of the record?
21 MR. CHOATE: I have some maps that aren't -- they
22 don't look exactly like what was shown on the screen.
23 So we'll get them electronically.
24 CHAIR COZAD: It seems that our clerk has
25 those, so we can just make sure and put those in as
47
1 exhibits since they were used as part of the testimony.
2 MR. CHOATE: We'll make that happen.
3 CHAIR COZAD: I'm sorry I interrupted Mr.
4 Wycoff. Do you have pictures or something?
5 MR. WYCOFF: I do. We transferred them over
6 but they're not opening.
7 MS. COZAD: We have those as a part of our
8 record?
9 MR. WYCOFF: Yes, and the two maps Mr. Choate was
10 talking about are part of my presentation. If we can open up
11 the -- okay, Bill Wycoff at 333 County Road 17. What I wanted to
12 start off with is a topographical map, just so you have
13 a feel for the roll of the land and where it's at.
14 The area we're talking about is right in
15 here. To the south of the reservoir, not going to be
16 developed. The property falls off -- you can see there's 51-22
17 altitude here and it drops 100 feet over to this corner. So, it
18 does indeed slope quite nicely and gently to the north.
19 The homes that have been built there are a very
20 pleasant place.
21 The next illustration is comparable to what
22 A.J. just talked about. In fact, he's the source of
23 it. We've got identified by number the various
24 properties. Not all of the properties have residences
25 built on them. This section was broken up in 1999-2000.
48
1 The section was a farm and it was broken into 80 -acre
2 parcels in 1999-2000.
3 My wife, Adrian, and I moved into the territory in1982,
4 and this number 25, that's our house on Road 17, and this also has
5 25 because it's the 80 acres we purchased at the time of the break
6 up. So, we were there when it was a farm and we were able to
7 secure 80 acres across the street. We're an operating kennel and
8 the property works magnificently to train dogs, to train horses
9 and dogs, and we harvest hay off of it. Early on we were
10 harvesting winter wheat but the drought kind of changed our
11 direction with that, as it did with a lot of people. Since the
12 original farm was broken up into 80 acres, what's been going on is
13 very consistent from that time. People have been buying the land
14 and building houses, enjoying the agricultural life.
15 Now if we could go to the slides. What I
16 want to do is run through the existing houses that are
17 there and to try and make the point that people bought
18 homes, built homes, many people are still there such as
19 A.J. and myself and other families to enjoy and to
20 relish the agricultural life.
21 What we're doing is we're starting out with
22 number one and proceeding through all of them. The
23 pictures are associated with the numbers on the map.
24 This number one property, the owners still live there.
25 The fellow built the house, put his own sweat into it, has raised
49
1 cattle, has raised lots of hogs. Next slide.
2 This is just to the east of him, beautiful
3 house, people enjoy the country living. Next slide.
4 This is a brand new house. It's less than a
5 year old, hasn't been landscaped yet. Folks have dogs,
6 family, relishing the land.
7 House next door to that, again, just finished
8 in the last couple of years. This goes around the
9 corner. Original owners, built a house to last. It's
10 got a metal roof. These are their horses; definitely ag
11 oriented. Can't deny that.
12 House next door, I have seen some horses over
13 there but I don't know of any currently. Next slide.
14 House under construction right now. This is
15 just from last week. This is the house associated with
16 it. Original owner, he's got buildings next door but it's not
17 uncommon for a proprietor/owner to live there. Next slide.
18 Morelli house down the road. Beautiful
19 house set back. This is the barn full of horses. You can't
20 deny the agricultural implications there. Chuck full
21 of horses.
22 Not a house but something of a storage
23 facility. What we've really got over here are lots of
24 horse trailers and water tanks. Very ag oriented. The
25 person who owns it put in a lot of -- keeping it in the
50
1 country zone.
2 Now here's the original houses that were there when the
3 property was broken up in 1999-2000. This is the original
4 farmstead and the next slide is the other one. So, these are the
5 Schneider houses back in the day. Still there. There's a
6 chicken. Animals all over the place. A.J. Goddard's place; he's
7 had cattle roaming around, definitely Ag, a proprietor running his
8 own business. Another beautiful house down the way. A new
9 house by the Knels, right close to the place. Tractor.
10 Here's another horse poking his face out. All ag oriented. House
11 is not even finished yet and they're seeking a more
12 agricultural environment, so that's why they bought in.
13 You can see to the northwest a grad view, another
14 pleasant house. This house is the Wheeler's. He's got his hogs
15 and chickens all over the place. Clearly ag after ag. House
16 folks have just moved into. The trend is really clear
17 in terms of this section, the only things that have
18 been built are residential and ag oriented.
19 The roll -off RV storage facility is not at all
20 compatible with the current uses and the evolution that
21 is absolutely clear. Several of us harvest hay off the
22 land. It's still in agricultural applications. Even
23 though it is dry it can still grow grass, and
24 (inaudible) possibly has subterranean irrigation, which
25 is pretty fortunate.
51
1 So I'm trying to show that the land was a
2 farm, the people who have been buying it have been very
3 ag focused. The current evolution is very soured. It goes
4 forward, we spoke of RE's and people buying houses in there, it
5 should be consistent. The future of the section, I
6 think, should be consistent with its past, the direction
7 it's been going in and what we see going on in the
8 future.
9 One of the things I heard earlier relative to
10 the roll -off and the purchase is it does sound a little
11 bit like there's some tax avoidance here. That really
12 isn't the notion. The notion is what are we going to
13 do in the future? I think the future should really
14 continue with the ag residential orientation. Thank you. Any
15 questions?
16 CHAIR COZAD: Thank you. Any questions?
17 MS. KIRKMEYER: Can we go back to the
18 overhead map that showed all the properties? Can you
19 show us where the RUA boundaries are? The Todd Creek
20 RUA that was approved back in 2009?
21 MR. WYCOFF: At one point the RUA --
22 MS. KIRKMEYER: Not Todd Creek subdivision in
23 Adams County, but -- okay, thank you. Show us where
24 the RUA is.
25 MR. WYCOFF: At one point the demarcation was
52
1 the center line of the section. There were discussions
2 of it moving over to the east a little bit, but as I
3 was dealing with it the RUA followed with the
4 Northglenn 208 area at the time, which broke -- it
5 would have been right here.
6 COMMISSIONER KIRKMEYER: So is this property in the
7 RUA area?
8 MR. WYCOFF: I don't believe it is.
9 MR. OGLE: It is not.
10 COMMISSIONER KIRKMEYER: No it is not? It's adjacent to
11 it? Ok. Can you also demonstrate on the map where the
12 subdivisions and all of the Todd Creek subdivisions are in Adams
13 County in relationship to the proposed use?
14 MR. WYCOFF: County Road 2 comes over to 17.
15 17 is the effective continuation of Quebec, which is
16 down over here. Over in this area is the Eagle Shadow
17 Subdivision. So, it's right adjacent to -- the Eagle
18 Shadow is diagonal to the southwest. All in here.
19 It's quite fully developed.
20 COMMISSIONER KIRKMEYER: Yes. And then to the east of
21 the Signal Reservoir there's properties there as well?
22 MR. WYCOFF: Residential properties, yes.
23 MS. KIRKMEYER: Ok. Thank you. Did you go to the
24 neighborhood meeting?
25 MR. WYCOFF: Unfortunately I was out of
53
1 state.
2 COMMISSIONER KIRKMEYER: So you didn't have the
3 opportunity?
4 MR. WYCOFF: I couldn't have.
5 COMMISSIONER KIRKMEYER: And there was only one
6 opportunity?
7 MR. WYCOFF: There was only the one.
8 COMMISSIONER KIRKMEYER: Thank you.
9 CHAIR COZAD: Any other questions? Thank you.
10 MR. WYCOFF: One minor comment. If you
11 wanted the topographic map could be a little more clear
12 relative to the adjacent communities.
13 COMMISSIONER KIRKMEYER: I just wanted you to point
14 out -- I know where it's located. I just wanted you to
15 point it out for the Board.
16 CHAIR COZAD: Then if you'll hang on,
17 Commissioner Conway has a quick question.
18 COMMISSIONER CONWAY: I did have one question. When
19 you did your purchase of this property you bought the
20 80 acres, Number 25, did you do a Recorded Exemption on 26 and 27
21 after you bought that?
22 MR. WYCOFF: Funny you should mention that.
23 We did do a Recorded Exemption. 26 and 27 was exempted
24 as one five -acre area, and the gentleman who lived
25 there initially trained horses, trained dogs. He had
54
1 medical issues, sold the subsequent owner - at the time
2 that the Recorded Exemption was done back in 2000, it
3 was very clearly communicated to me that that is the
4 lot A that could not be further subdivided. However, the
5 rule had changed and the subsequent owner subdivided
6 the five acres himself. So, I did carve off the one
7 part, the second part was --
8 COMMISSIONER CONWAY: So you did 26 and the new owner
9 did 27. Thank you.
10 CHAIR COZAD: I think we're okay with no more
11 questions. I think we probably have time for one more
12 person before we take a break for lunch. So, the next person
13 please state your name and address for the record.
14 MR. KNELS: My name is Rusty Knels. This is
15 my wife, Sarah. We live at 8295 County Road 2. We are
16 the property directly west and adjacent to the proposed
17 development. We're the most impacted.
18 I guess this has been an agricultural
19 residential area. I mean I'm probably not going to get
20 up -- I agree and echo what everybody has said up to
21 this point. We purchased this property about two and a
22 half years ago. About two years ago we built a custom
23 home here on five acres. Spent a considerable amount
24 of time and money making this our home. We intend to
25 raise our family here.
55
1 We've got some major concerns with the project as well.
2 I guess one of the main things would be the storage facility and
3 just the negative impact on our home values. I know it's been
4 brought up where folks have lost a third or in excess of a half a
5 million dollars. Has us a bit concerned. I don't think folks in
6 general want to move out and purchase places like that directly
7 beside garbage and RV storage facilities. I guess in the Planning
8 meeting Mr. Walker claimed that a storage facility could help
9 increase the value. I don't see how that's possible and I don't
10 see any proof of that being provided at all. A development of this
11 nature is really not consistent with development in the area.
12 Kind of echoing A.J. Goddard and Bill Wycoff there I know the
13 crime rate has been addressed. Again, we have the same concern as
14 the rest of our neighbors on that. Not so much the crime that
15 takes place on their property with the video cameras that was
16 stated earlier, but just more of the folks that are kind of
17 attracted to maybe look over the fence and seizing the
18 opportunity. On County Road 19, that storage facility, there was
19 four or five break ins up there last year. I guess the one
20 thing we've seen with the garbage roll -off business that's been
21 there, in the last year that thing has probably tripled in size.
22 I know it's been operating illegally behind our home. We weren't
23 aware of that before or knowing that maybe we should bring that
24 concern to the county prior to this USR meeting.
25 We also heard before that Mr. Walker said he
56
1 had actually purchased three additional roll -off
2 businesses and relocated them all to this facility. I
3 expect that it's going to continue to grow. I know
4 they said they have two or three sitting there. We've
5 seen 15 to 20 for the last six months straight.
6 MS. KNELS: And it was also mentioned in the
7 last meeting too that there was painting operations
8 being done out there as well. Just wanted to put that
9 on the record.
10 MR. KNELS: A large scale dumpster operation
11 without county approval or permitting. That's our
12 understanding. The flex building is a big concern for
13 us. You know, just not having a specific purpose
14 designated for those. It really is kind of a wild
15 card. I don't know who enforces it at that point if a
16 permit were approved. I kind of feel like it's going
17 to go again under the radar if you don't have to
18 readdress it in front of the Commissioners here.
19 I guess looking at the proposal initially --
20 and I didn't see it on their presentation today but
21 there was two proposed separate sites directly to the
22 south of the current roll -off business, proposal A and B. There
23 was no purpose stated for that. During the planning phase of this
24 meeting they were saying it could be anything commercial. So,
25 there again, kind of echoing the other neighbors, What is anything
57
1 commercial? I don't know what constitutes that.
2 Then again, just kind of the traffic impact - I know we
3 had a study from 2014 of like 3,100 vehicles. Well we purchased
4 this property in 2014 and I can say the traffic has at least
5 doubled on that highway. They've opened some subdivisions up
6 right off of County Road 2 and people use it as a direct route to
7 go to 1-25 for getting to work.
8 Just kind of brings up this is right on top
9 of a hill. You come up without turning lanes, I see it
10 being a dangerous spot for people to get into more
11 accidents.
12 MS. KNELS: Their entrance kind of sits on
13 top of a hill and there's definitely blind spots there.
14 We've seen plenty of people passing each other on
15 double yellow lines and we're concerned already with
16 the traffic on County Road 2, and we're concerned that
17 having trailers stopped on top of that hill trying to
18 make a turn into their storage facility may increase
19 safety risks in that area.
20 MR. KNELS: They stated there that County
21 Road 2 is going to be a four -lane highway. I don't
22 know that that study has been done or what the time
23 line is for a project like that, but I assume that
24 that's sizeable and it's going to be a long ways out.
25 To say that we're going to institute this in the next
58
1 five to ten years is probably a reach.
2 As far as visual mitigation, they talked about a cedar
3 fence. That's a nice gesture on their part and definitely some
4 trees and landscaping -- as you've seen from the stuff on
5 (inaudible) they planted three foot trees. They're all
6 dead. Who enforces again the maintenance of that
7 stuff?
8 MS. KNELS: Who enforces watering them?
9 MR. KNELS: I guess an eight -foot cedar fence
10 with 14 -foot campers, there again, you're not really
11 visually mitigating much. Good faith gesture for sure,
12 but --
13 I guess just in closing, we'll try to keep it to three
14 minutes here - as constituents in Weld County I just hope you guys
15 kind of consider this as you're voting on this project. We just
16 hope that you move forward with the recommendation from the
17 County Planning Board to deny the permit.
18 CHAIR COZAD: Any questions for either Rusty or
19 Sarah this morning? Commissioner Kirkmeyer.
20 COMMISSIONER KIRKMEYER: Did you attend the meeting?
21 MR. KNELS: We didn't. We were also out of
22 state at the time. As far as notices go, that was kind
23 of one thing that was taking us back a bit. We did
24 receive a mailer, 500 feet, but our neighbors directly
25 to the south of us, the Torgerson's, they're 150 feet
59
1 from my house, they did not receive one.
2 MS. KNELS: A lot of it was word of mouth we
3 felt like.
4 MR. KNELS: We kind of went out and went
5 around to all the neighbors and brought up our concerns
6 to see if they had shared concerns. It just didn't
7 seem like it was well circulated.
8 COMMISSIONER KIRKMEYER: So how much notice did you
9 get for the neighborhood meeting?
10 MR. KNELS: I don't think it was much. Like I said, we
11 were out of town when we got the notice. The meeting is tonight
12 and we're like well, we're not going to be able to attend. We
13 would have liked to voice our concern there as well, but -
14 CHAIR COZAD: Just a follow up to that, did you
15 contact the applicant at all and try and get something
16 set up with them since you weren't able to go to the
17 meeting?
18 MR. KNELS: No, ma'am.
19 MS. KNELS: We figured we would probably be
20 able to get all of our information from the Planning
21 meeting, and we did. He came up to us and gave us
22 fliers and pictures of what it would look like and what not at
23 that meeting.
24 CHAIR COZAD: Any follow-up questions? Thank you for
25 being here today. How many more people were planning on speaking?
60
1 We do have a couple of commitments this afternoon and over
2 the lunch hour, so we are going to go ahead and take a
3 break. You want to just come back at 1:15? Is that
4 going to work for everybody? {Muffled Discussion)
5 So we're going to take a recess and we will
6 be back and reconvene at 1:15. Thank you.
7 (Pause in proceedings)
8 MS. COZAD: We have the board all back. Let
9 the record reflect that all five County Commissioners are in
10 attendance and we are still in a public hearing. We'll
11 reconvene and anybody that would like to come forward come
12 on up to the podium and state your name and address for the
13 record and address the Board. Thanks again for being here today.
14 MR. CAMPBELL: Good morning, David Campbell. I live at
15 8219 County Road 2. I'm right here. I'm the outlier with the two
16 acre, small parcel on this big thing. Hope to remedy that
17 one day by adding some acreage to it and make it a
18 bigger place; make it fit in.
19 I do agree with all the other statements that have been
20 made up here in regards to County Road 2 widening, the issues
21 of traffic, property values. Concerned about the flex storage and
22 the flex designation and what that means for future, and the
23 additional traffic. The one thing that I don't think has been said
24 enough is one of the items stated here was that this provides
25 value to the community or fits into the community. Most of
61
1 the locations of the community around here, whether it be Todd
2 Creek, Eagle Shadow, Baseline Lakes, or the 24 residents on this
3 parcel are all two plus acre lots. Most of them are larger than
4 that with their own storage. As a matter of fact, as you drive
5 around all these locations you see a large storage for their RV,
6 for their boat or whatever, and a nice house and that's how it is.
7 You know, it's moving out of the city. The traffic this will
8 market to is Metro Denver, Colorado Springs, all the metro areas.
9 This is going to bring an influx of traffic into our community,
10 our neighborhood that really shouldn't be there. It really
11 doesn't support or provide any benefit to us at all as a
12 community. Even if you look at Brighton, Dacono, there are
13 numerous storage facilities closer to them that bring more value,
14 and this one just doesn't fit. This should be in a more
15 commercial location closer to the highway, somewhere more designed
16 for a commercial development. That's what I had.
17 CHAIR COZAD: Any questions for Mr. Campbell?
18 COMMISSIONER MORENO: I guess the question we've been
19 asking them all, did you attend any meetings?
20 MR. CAMPBELL: I did not. I was planning on
21 attending the community meeting. I didn't get an
22 invite but I got word of mouth that it was there. That
23 day I was sick and I didn't want to go.
24 CHAIR COZAD: Thank you. Anybody else like to
25 come up? If you'll state your name and address for the
62
1 record.
2 MR. KORBE: My name is Jeffrey Korbe and I
3 live at 8289 County Road 2, which is this property
4 right here. So, we purchased this property back in
5 August of 2013. I was mentioned earlier, not by name.
6 Both me and my wife are from rural Logan County out by
7 Sterling. Moved up here multiple years, lived in a neighborhood,
8 disliked finances or whatever reason. We've always been at the
9 same address for our entire lives.
10 We've been saving and, like I said, purchased the
11 property in 2013, added a shop. By no means it's commercial
12 regardless of whatever. We are in the process of
13 building a house now. Ours is one of the ones that are
14 not completed. So, you can tell that it's been an
15 ongoing process.
16 One of the biggest problems I have with this
17 developer is that even through the speech they're
18 continuing to ask for this permit, and there's been
19 some points that have been brought up about flex buildings,
20 or we're going to have this or do that, so as an outside
21 bystander some of the things I'm hearing is they're
22 asking for a permit now that's all encompassing, that
23 we want to do the roll -off business, we want to do the
24 RV storage, but we also want these flex buildings. We
25 might do something else here. What?
63
1 So I guess my point, also in the planning
2 meeting it was mentioned that they had a commercial
3 painting business which brings in a whole other set of
4 environmental issues. Just going down to the Home
5 Depot and buying a gallon of paint you have to pay
6 environmental fees and everything else. So is that
7 going to be rolled off into the roll -off business where
8 they're dumping some of their other materials? I don't
9 know.
10 Again, a lot of questions are being brought
11 up but I don't think a lot of them have been answered
12 by the developer other than there's buildings in the
13 area. I don't see any other commercial and industrial.
14 If they are they're also not permitted.
15 Me and my wife bought this property and, like I said,
16 we've been at our current address for 24 years. We've
17 invested our life savings on this property to own the
18 land, put up the building, to build our dream house. I
19 have no idea what the value is or what it's going to
20 be. Obviously, when we get done we'll find out. I
21 don't really want this stuff in my back yard. I don't
22 want to spend my life savings on the hope that their
23 business is going to drop my value. So, that's my
24 concerns right there.
25 Again, I see it as asking for a permit to do all
64
1 this wonderful stuff in their eyes, and it will be
2 easier to ask for forgiveness later rather than
3 permission now. Because they haven't addressed all the
4 issues with some of the stuff they're wanting to do.
5 Thank you.
6 CHAIR COZAD: Before you leave, any questions?
7 COMMISSIONER KIRKMEYER: Did you attend the
8 neighborhood meeting?
9 MR. KORBE: Oh, good point. No, I did not
10 get an invite for that meeting, nor did I get any kind
11 of notification from Weld County. Our property is
12 about 600 to 650 feet directly to the west off of County Road 2.
13 Again, another concern would be the widening
14 of the road. My property borders that property -- or
15 the road, and this is the first I'm hearing about
16 anything. That's not in any plans or works for at
17 least five to ten years, which would be much better in
18 my mind because my property borders it.
19 CHAIR COZAD: Thank you. Come on up.
20 MS. MORELLI: I'm Sheila Morelli. My
21 husband, Robert, is out of town on a business meeting
22 so he couldn't be here today. Our address is 305
23 County Road 19. We are the property that is right
24 here. Our border would be right up to the RV storage.
25 We live directly across from this RV storage.
65
1 We purchased our home four years ago, and the RV
2 Storage was approved but they hadn't built anything
3 yet. They did disclose to us and we did decide to go
4 ahead and purchase the property. I think knowing
5 there's an RV storage and actually living with an RV
6 storage across from you is two different things. We
7 assumed it wouldn't be that bad. Had we known what we
8 know now, even though we love being in Weld County, we
9 would not have purchased that property.
10 The traffic is huge and significant. I know
11 they say you pick up your RV once in the summer and that's
12 it. That's not true. We have people who pick up RVs
13 on Thursday, they're coming back in the middle of the
14 night, all hours.
15 I know one other thing that I don't like about what
16 they're saying is they have a lot of unanswered questions.
17 When the RV storage across from us was approved there were
18 many stipulations that they had to follow such as landscaping.
19 They did put trees in but they haven't watered the trees.
20 They're dead trees that sit up front.
21 One of the other things is they were not allowed to
22 have commercial vehicles stored there. Well I'm telling you
23 there are commercial vehicles stored there. The Knudson's lived
24 there prior to us for may years. They never had any theft.
25 We have had significant theft. We had an ATV
66
1 stolen directly from our barn. Our neighbor had his
2 trailers, all the locks cut and things stolen out of
3 his trailers as well. So, you know, them saying that it's not
4 going to bring any crime or traffic issues is not true.
5 I know this for a fact.
6 This storage facility also sits on a crest of
7 a hill coming semi from both directions. We witness
8 people passing over that double yellow line all the
9 time. I do think it's going to be very unsafe, you know, as you
10 have vehicles stopping to turn in and there's no turn
11 lanes.
12 I think the other very dishonest thing that
13 this corporation is doing is they are showing our
14 outbuildings and they're saying that we have industrial
15 buildings. They're painting a picture that is not
16 true. Most of us do have outbuildings but they're
17 outbuildings to store our RV, our boat, our horse
18 trailers. Since we purchased the property we originally purchased
19 the home with eight acres. And the trend that we were seeing
20 based on the outlying small acreage neighborhoods, and then in our
21 parcel we were seeing more and more homes go up, we were feeling
22 very positive about our community, so we ended up purchasing
23 32 more acres and now we sit on almost 41 acres. Had
24 we known that there was going to be another RV lot back
25 there we definitely wouldn't have purchased another 32
67
1 acres.
2 Our adult daughters, as soon as we can have
3 an exemption they plan on building back here in the
4 corner. We want to add two more homes when we can
5 exempt the land for our children to build.
6 And another thing, the number of roll -offs, when we
7 first moved there I didn't even know there was a roll -off company
8 running out of there because there was only one or two
9 roll -offs there at a time. So, over this past year at any
10 time there's 15 to 20 roll -offs there. I've taken
11 pictures over the last six months wondering what was
12 going on.
13 Again, most of our neighbors are ag. We have several
14 horses we keep on the property. I think the important point
15 to make is I think this is going to be an ongoing
16 challenge for Weld County. I think corporations are
17 going to continue to try to purchase Ag property
18 because the prices are so much less than buying a piece
19 of commercial land. So, I feel like they're taking
20 advantage of the communities and the County by
21 purchasing land cheap and not having to purchase actual
22 commercial property and getting special use permits.
23 Then also the traffic study that was done in
24 2014, I guarantee you that has changed significantly
25 over the past three years. When you go down County
68
1 Road 2 the other day we happened to go during rush hour
2 and we sat at the Stop sign on 13 and 2 for 20 minutes
3 waiting just to get through that Stop sign. So, the
4 traffic has significantly changed. I think it will
5 bring a whole lot more traffic if they do approve that.
6 Thank you.
7 CHAIR COZAD: Were there any questions?
8 COMMISSIONER KIRKMEYER: Did you attend the
9 neighborhood meeting?
10 MS. MORELLI: I did not. We came to the
11 Planning meeting.
12 COMMISSIONER KIRKMEYER: So you were under the
13 impression -- I heard this a couple of times -- you
14 were under the impression they said they weren't going
15 to change the use. Were you under the impression that
16 meant that they weren't going to expand the use as
17 well with regards to the number of roll -offs?
18 MS. MORELLI: Correct. The roll -offs, and
19 then I just think there's a lot of unanswered questions
20 about the flex things. They could put anything under
21 the sun, and as I've seen just with the RV storage,
22 people don't really necessarily follow all the
23 stipulations. If they get this approved they can have
24 that space to do whatever they want with.
25 CHAIR COZAD: Thank you. Good afternoon.
69
1 MS. AMERIN: Good afternoon. My name is Shirley Amerin.
2 I don't live there yet but I own this parcel(inaudible). I
3 bought it four years ago. My story is kind of unique.
4 The day that I was going to sign the contract with the
5 builder I got notification that my well had been
6 contaminated from the four wells around it being shut
7 in. So, the Colorado Oil and Gas Commission suggested that I not
8 move forward with building my home, so I have been
9 homeless for four years because the Colorado Oil and Gas
10 Commission is working with us and three other owners in
11 that area to get another source of water for us.
12 Then now when I got notification that the RV
13 storage was going in and that they're proposing the gas
14 plant, which has not been approved yet, I could
15 literally not give my land away if I wanted to.
16 I sold my farm out in Keenesburg with
17 intentions of moving over here and building my last
18 home. I'm an agricultural person and wanted to stay in
19 the agricultural community. Now all of my means of my
20 future are on hold, and at this point the RV storage
21 would just depreciate it even more.
22 I went to the public meeting, and Mr. Walker
23 will just, in my opinion, tell you just about what you
24 want to hear to get an approval. He said it would
25 increase my value. Well, it won't because my neighbor
70
1 across the street, she had her home on the market after
2 she got broken in twice, and the second time she felt
3 so violated and it was such a bad break in -- she was a
4 single person, which I am a single person -- that she
5 put her home on the market.
6 It did not sell so she added 4.9 acres to her
7 property to get it to sell, and she sold it for
8 $35,000.00 less after the home was on the market for
9 118 days. Mr. Walker says that the RV is going to add
10 value to the area. It is not. It is only going to
11 depreciate it. I've got the comps here to support the
12 sale of her home and the Realtor's comments in here
13 saying that it was an actual decrease in value.
14 At the public meeting I asked Mr. Walker to
15 support me -- p:rovide me with the comps to support the
16 increase in value. He still has not. I asked him at
17 the public meeting and he still has not supported me
18 with any comps saying that it's going to increase my
19 value.
20 She was a single lady, and I am a single lady, and I
21 actually now have a fear of living out there by myself. Mr.
22 Walker at the public meeting thought that it was nothing unusual
23 for me to expect me to live under security cameras, which I've
24 never done in my life. He literally asked me if I felt secure in
25 my home where I live at now without a security camera,
71
1 and I told him yes, I do. But to him I guess that's
2 his expectations to accommodate his means. And these
3 are million dollar homes in the area. I mean their use
4 is just non -conforming.
5 She says that the roll -offs will be at the
6 job sites unless they are to be painted. Is the
7 painting even permitted in Weld County? I know that
8 there are certain standards for the paint quality and
9 the environment, so I'm not sure the Planning Committee
10 brought that up because he had mentioned it trying to
11 down play it, that they're not there that much and if
12 they are there they're only there to get painted really
13 quickly. Then the Planning Committee was like, whoa, whoa, whoa,
14 wait a minute here, what's this about the painting. And then he
15 tried to discount it. Earlier they were saying that
16 they're hardly ever there. In the pictures it clearly
17 states that there's obviously 12 or more roll -offs,
18 that they're not always at the job sites as reported
19 earlier.
20 At the public meeting Mr. Walker said that
21 the traffic would be early morning and evening, which
22 is right at sunrise and sunset when people come to pick
23 up and drop off their RV. I personally know two
24 families that have lost family members due to car
25 accidents on Road 2 in that area because of the sunrise
72
1 and the sunset.
2 Their access location is a death trap. I
3 would just hate to have -- it would be sad if more
4 families lost lives because of the increased traffic,
5 not to mention the increase of the additional noise.
6 There's already so many RV storage areas that
7 aren't even full. Road 19 has lots of room to expand.
8 There's one on Road 17 and 6 with 1,000 plus acres that
9 just got approved.
10 Plus, obviously, the flex office is a concern
11 of mine. They had two different answers in the
12 Planning Committee. Mr. Walker gave one answer when
13 the Planning Committee asked about employees for the
14 flex office space, and then when his partner got up and
15 addressed it they were asked again how many employees
16 would be in the flex office and they were totally from
17 just a couple up to 40. They were totally at opposite
18 ends of the spectrum of the employees that were going
19 to be occupying the flex space. Obviously, there's no
20 answer or circumferences of what they can do with those
21 flex spaces.
22 CHAIR COZAD: Shirley, can you wrap up your
23 comments. We're at five minutes now.
24 MS. AMERIN: I'm not trying to be
25 disrespectful, but it's a lifetime for me. It's a huge
73
1 investment so it is very, very important to me. He has
2 no regards -- my property butts up to the north end.
3 He has no intentions of -- at the public meeting he had no
4 intentions of fencing that in. You can tell that
5 there's an access road right here that comes all the
6 way up here. So, it would be very, very easy for crime
7 to access it. If there is no north fencing it's a wide
8 open hole for anybody to get into, which would only
9 make me more accessible for crime and theft also.
10 He also says that it's just dried up land and
11 it's really only value is good for prairie dogs. Well,
12 I don't think that there's one prairie dog out there.
13 He says that he doesn't know what his plans for the
14 future are, that him and his wife -- this is what was
15 said at the Planning Committee --
16 MS. COZAD: We have all those in our minutes
17 too.
18 MS. AMERIN: -- that they don't even buy
19 green bananas. Well, if it's Phase A and Phase B, and
20 in ten years what is going to happen? That's going to
21 be my back yard. If they don't know what their
22 intentions are it's just a wide-open hole of what the
23 possibilities are.
24 Again, obviously, the crime has increased. If
25 these people want to live in an HOA community where RV
74
1 storage is not allowed that's okay, but that doesn't
2 mean that we necessarily want it in our back yard
3 because we live in an agricultural community. There
4 are developments out there that do allow RV storage
5 that they could purchase in.
6 When I moved I didn't move into the city and
7 take my livestock with me, and I don't go and ask to
8 spread my manure in their back yard. I just know that
9 it's not going to happen. So, if they decide to live in
10 a controlled community.
11 I don't know if Mr. Walker lives on Addison
12 Court, but if he does in my homework this is Mr.
13 Walker's living arrangements now that he lives in, if
14 he does live on 10793 Addison Court. He has picked the
15 perfect location from 2003 into the cul-de-sac, wide
16 open, open spaces behind him in Douglas County. He
17 could easily -- if Douglas County would be okay with
18 accepting this and permitting it he could go in his own
19 back yard and put in his own commercial use.
20 I don't want to live in Commerce City, and I
21 don't want to live in an industrial area. Why should
22 he enjoy his open space in Douglas County while we have
23 to live in Weld County with the daily traffic at his
24 expense.
25 CHAIR COZAD: Can you submit that as evidence?
75
1 MS. AMERIN: Yeah, you can have it. The
2 facts are that --
3 CHAIR COZAD: You need --
4 MS. AMERIN: Just a couple more minutes. The
5 facts are that the noise will increase, theft, property
6 values will depreciate, traffic accidents, and it is
7 non -conforming land use. All of this will be for the
8 benefit of Walker Commercial at our expense.
9 Weld County is a Right to Farm community and
10 this is a non -conforming use. There's a reason that
11 the Planning Commission denied their request.
12 In regards to the Weld County website it even says that
13 Weld County Right to Farm statement can be found as
14 part of the agricultural goals and practice as part of
15 the plan to support the importance of agriculture in
16 the community. Individuals who move into these areas
17 must realize that they will experience conditions and
18 services unlike in an urban setting and must be willing
19 to accept the lifestyle.
20 In regards to the commercial property that is
21 offered out there, it is not commercial property. It
22 is commercial realtors. I do real estate full time.
23 It is commercial realtors that are offering property
24 for residential one plus acre sites. They're being
25 offered by commercial realtors. The Knutson property
76
1 isn't even offered by a realtor. It's for sale by
2 owner.
3 MR. CHOATE: Ten minutes, Madam Chair.
4 MS. AMERIN: The West Brighton Compressor Station
5 hasn't been approved yet, and I don't know, he just has not
6 followed up with anything that I have requested. I
7 think there's only been ten notifications that were
8 sent out, if you count the number of surrounding
9 properties, which would support why there was only five
10 people there.
11 I talked to Adams County in regards to the
12 expansion of County Road 2, and I actually even did
13 this like three or four years ago and the planner at
14 Weld County showed me the plans that they have. His
15 word for word was this will not happen in my lifetime.
16 It will not happen within the next 20 to 30 years. So
17 there's going to be a huge impact on Weld County Road 2
18 as far as traffic and the sunrise and the sunset as far
19 as access to the property.
20 CHAIR COZAD: Any questions?
21 COMMISSIONER MORENO: Did you attend any meetings?
22 MS. AMERIN: Yes. I said at the beginning
23 that I attended it. That's when I asked him for the
24 comps and he --
25 MR. MORENO: Okay.
77
1 MS. AMERIN: -- said it would increase the
2 values.
3 CHAIR COZAD: Thank you very much. Go ahead
4 and come on up.
5 MR. MCDONOUGH: My name is Mike McDonough. I
6 just purchased the property at 619 Weld County Road 19.
7 I'm building my personal home there, and I don't want
8 to reiterate what everybody else has already said, but
9 in their proposal today they said that there's
10 commercial buildings all over the place on our
11 quadrant. I don't think a shop on a five -acre property
12 is a commercial building. There's not other commercial
13 use out there.
14 They also showed in their proposal that
15 there's a compressor site there. Well, the compressor
16 site is not going to be there if I have anything to do
17 with it. You can't count that because they haven't
18 even started that.
19 One of the things they said in the Planning
20 Commission meeting is that they're going to cover the
21 RVs with a canopy to make things look better. Well, if
22 you see other canopies over RVs in the area they've got
23 to be 14 feet high, so the top of the canopy is around
24 16 feet high. A six-foot privacy fence isn't going to
25 cover a canopy whatsoever. That would be quite
78
1 unsightly.
2 They also showed in their presentation this
3 morning here all kinds of industrial buildings, and
4 tanks, and gas and oil equipment. That equipment isn't
5 even in our quadrant. The only thing there is, is right
6 here there's about four oil tanks. Maybe 12 feet high,
7 somewhere around there. All the other pictures they
8 took were on the other quadrants around us.
9 Our point is if you look -- and there's another in
10 the earlier presentation that showed how many home owners are in
11 the other quadrants around us. There's 24 that we've got
12 in ours and we're trying to build a community out there
13 with our homes and our shops that are not commercial.
14 The RV storage location you could just move a mile in
15 any direction and you wouldn't affect 24 people. You
16 might affect three people, four people. So, I just
17 don't think it fits in if you look at all the custom
18 homes that are around in our community that we're
19 trying to build. Put this right smack dab in the
20 middle of it.
21 Another very good point is also that you're
22 trying to put a commercial business on agricultural,
23 and we all bought out there because it's agricultural for our
24 homes so we wouldn't be surrounded by commercial. I don't
25 think that's right that you'd be able to change that.
79
1 My main concern of course is the same
2 concerns as the rest of them is the theft, and the
3 noise, and the traffic affecting my property value.
4 CHAIR COZAD: Any questions for Mr. McDonough?
5 COMMISSIONER KIRKMEYER: Neighborhood meeting?
6 MR. MCDONOUGH: Wasn't notified.
7 COMMISSIONER KIRKMEYER: You were not notified?
8 MR. MCDONOUGH: No. The problem with that is
9 they're only required to notify people within I believe
10 it's 600 feet ---
11 CHAIR COZAD: 500 feet.
12 MR. MCDONOUGH: So if you get a situation
13 like this where we're all out on five acre parcels, ten
14 acre parcels, you're only going to catch three people.
15 They said they notified 20 people.
16 CHAIR COZAD: Can you show us where your
17 property is again?
18 MR. MCDONOUGH: Right here.
19 CHAIR COZAD: Thank you. Others? Esther, you
20 want to read into the record and then make sure we have
21 a name and address? Or are you sending something to
22 me? Are you sending it to all of us? I'll read it
23 into the record.
24 These are questions from James Torgerson. Do
25 we have an address? His statement in the email says,
80
1 "My wife and I looked for land in 2010 before buying.
2 The reason is my kids are involved in 4H animals and
3 wanted a safe place to go. Did not realize that this
4 was planned. Where is the resident's protection?
5 Concerned with decreased property values and traffic
6 has definitely increased on the roads. RV and boat
7 storage makes a lot more money than what his land is
8 worth, approximately $250,000.00."
9 MS. GESICK: Esther Gesick, Clerk to the
10 Board. I'm providing typed translation services for
11 Mr. Torgerson today. His notes indicate that his
12 address is 8299. He is the parcel that's number 22 on
13 the numbered map that was provided earlier, so the
14 address would be 8299 County Road 2.
15 CHAIR COZAD: Ok, thank you. Any questions
16 for Mr. Torgerson? I think we can ask the same
17 question that we've asked everyone else. Can you ask
18 him if he attended or was notified of the meeting?
19 MS. GESICK: He was working so he was unable
20 to attend.
21 CHAIR COZAD: Was he notified?
22 MS. GESICK: Yes.
23 CHAIR COZAD: Any other questions? Does he
24 have anything else, Esther?
25 MS. GESICK: He said that he agrees with all
81
1 the other speakers too based on what he's seen typed on
2 the screen. He said there is 24 homes in the area and
3 the property value is the major concern for him.
4 CHAIR COZAD: Thank you. Anybody else like to
5 come forward and speak today during the public hearing?
6 COMMISSIONER KIRKMEYER: Madame Chair? Did we get a
7 copy of the comps that Ms. Amerin --
8 MR. CHOATE: This is the only thing we've received
9 from Ms. Amerin„ which is the pictures.
10 COMMISSIONER KIRKMEYER: Could we get her comps that she
11 referred to?
12 CHAIR COZAD: Last chance. Anybody else want to come
13 up? Seeing no further public comment we'll go ahead and close the
14 public hearing. If the applicant would come back up and respond
15 to any of the things that you heard today and any follow up.
16 MS. COLEMAN: Sure. Thank you so much for the time.
17 We appreciate the opportunity to hear from the
18 neighbors. I want to just briefly touch on we did send
19 out the notices as required by the Code. Did get that
20 certified by the post office. It may be less than 20
21 that we sent. We just did the list that Kim gave us.
22 It seemed like it was 20 but it may have been less.
23 Not sure on that.
24 In hearing the neighbor's objections we want
25 to make sure that you know and that they know that
82
1 we're willing to work with them and be good neighbors.
2 We're willing to give up and amend the application to
3 delete the flex use office building -- we called them flex office,
4 but micro garages -- we could take those off the application.
5 We also want to let you know that we would
6 like to -- if this application is approved as submitted
7 we can put an eight -foot cedar fence up within the
8 next 90 days to make sure that everything is screened,
9 including the existing roll -off boxes that are there.
10 If the Commissioners desired we would be comfortable
11 with limiting the number of roll -off boxes that are on
12 site at any one time.
13 The reason is because we believe that we can
14 operate our business in the way where there's not very
15 many, if at all, boxes on the property. As they have talked,
16 there are, at times, we've had more boxes on the property to put
17 new logos on and then move forward.
18 We did purchase, as they said, three roll -off
19 companies; however, they are not operated on this property. They
20 are operated on separate properties. We've not changed
21 the operation of the business that was on site as we
22 purchased it, with the thing that we went from four drivers coming
23 to the property down to three. So, we are willing to work with
24 the Commission, with Weld County, with our neighbors to
25 give up on the flex use and limit the number of
83
1 containers on site.
2 The other objections from the neighbors -- I want to let
3 you know we don't operate a commercial painting business on site.
4 Every use that we have submitted in the application we want to be
5 straightforward with. We would like to run a boat and
6 RV storage, a self -storage, and the roll -off company
7 that has been on site since approximately 2012. We
8 have no other plans for the property. We're not trying
9 to hide anything. We want to be good neighbors and
10 follow the USR and make sure we're following it not
11 just to the letter but to the intent.
12 We will water our plants. We will put the
13 landscaping in and do exactly what we tell you we're
14 going to do. If not, we expect Kim will come knocking
15 on our door and telling us to fix it. We want to have
16 a good, secure business. We will have a fence
17 surrounding the entire property, making sure that we
18 don't have impacts on off -site uses for people going
19 back and forth as Shirley stated.
20 Then just briefly I want to touch on we can't
21 provide comps on the property until the use is changed,
22 so we wouldn't be able to provide any comps. I don't
23 think we meant to promise any comps. We certainly
24 haven't tried to promise anything that we can't
25 deliver. We're here to answer any questions that you
84
1 might have.
2 We would ask if you would recognize that there are
3 other similar commercial uses, including two boat and
4 RV storages that are permitted within approximately a
5 half mile of ours. We want to operate a good company
6 that has self -storage opportunities for all of the
7 houses that are coming into the area to the south, to
8 the north, to the east and west. And so, people will
9 have a place to store their boats and RV.
10 Again, we are willing -- we understand that the traffic
11 may be an issue and that the Planning Department may change the
12 recommendation on that. We're willing to submit to any
13 traffic studies that staff would have us work on.
14 Thank you for your time and your patience in
15 listening to all of our comments. Here to answer any
16 questions. Thank you.
17 MS. COZAD: Questions for Ms. Coleman?
18 MR. CONWAY: One of the things that came up
19 multiple times in terms of the public testimony was the
20 cedar fence. You're going to build 16 -foot canopies
21 for 14 -foot high RVs, is that correct? The question
22 from the public was how is an eight -foot fence going to
23 shield a 16 -foot canopy.
24 MS. COLEMAN: That's a great question and I
25 apologize for not touching on that. We had proposed
85
1 the canopies on the east side of the property to help
2 screen. Obviously, people may want to rent a canopied
3 parking space on the RV side. We are willing to get
4 rid of the canopies. It's not a major part of our
5 business and it's not something that is super crucial
6 for us to have done. We understand that it would be
7 above the eight -foot fence.
8 I think that it would be attractive, but if
9 they don't we can eliminate it.
10 MR. CONWAY: Thank you.
11 CHAIR COZAD: Okay, other questions for Ms. Coleman?
12 COMMISSIONER KIRKMEYER: Yeah, I have questions. So,
13 the applicant is responsible; the burden of proof is on you that
14 you've met all of these criteria that are in front of us. So, one
15 of them is the proposed use is consistent with the intent of the
16 Agricultural zone. I'm not sure if you know what the intent of
17 the Agricultural zone is. Do you?
18 MS. COLEMAN: I have read it.
19 COMMISSIONER KIRKMEYER: Would you like me to read it
20 to you? I have a question with relationship to it.
21 MS. COLEMAN: Sure.
22 MS. KIRKMEYER: The intent of the
23 Agricultural zone reads like this: "Agriculture in the
24 county is considered a valuable resource which must be
25 protected from adverse impacts resulting from
86
1 uncontrolled and undirected business, industrial and
2 residential land uses. The A zone district is
3 established to maintain and promote agriculture as an
4 essential feature of the county.
5 The Agricultural zone district is intended to
6 provide areas for the conduct of agriculture activities
7 and activities related to agriculture and agricultural
8 production without the interference of other
9 incompatible land uses."
10 So my question to you is can you explain to
11 me how you think you are consistent with the
12 Agricultural zone district?
13 MS. COLEMAN: My answer is we're consistent with the
14 other uses that are near us in the Ag zone district. So,
15 there's two permitted boat and RV storages on ag land
16 within a half mile, I believe, or maybe a bit more. So, I would
17 say we're consistent with the other ag uses in that we have a
18 small business, the roll -off business, operating out of our
19 property.
20 We comply with the Code requirement that says
21 we're compatible with other existing uses. Many of the
22 photos that I showed you show similar type uses with
23 people storing containers, boats, RV, etcetera on the
24 property. I understand what you're getting at as far
25 as the commercial use, but I would submit to you that
87
1 there are many commercial uses in the industrial zone
2 near and around us since we're at Weld County that have
3 also been approved that are in that same zone.
4 COMMISSIONER KIRKMEYER: I'm sorry, did you just say
5 there is an industrial zone in the area?
6 MS. COLEMAN: No, did I say - no in the Agricultural
7 zone, sorry. There's commercial uses that are in the Agricultural
8 zone that have been approved previously by the Commission and
9 we're consistent with those other uses in the Agricultural zone.
10 COMMISSIONER KIRKMEYER: Okay, so my actual question
11 was not how are you consistent with other uses in the
12 agricultural zone but how do you meet the intent of the zone?
13 The intent of the zone talks about maintaining and promoting
14 agriculture. Can you explain to me how you think an RV storage
15 or a roll -off commercial business meets the intent of the zone?
16 MS. COLEMAN: I would just ask I guess how the other
17 commercial businesses that are in the ag zone meet the intent as
18 well, because I understand what you're trying to get me to say is
19 that we're not farming. I would say to you nobody is farming in
20 the area. What we're trying to do is maintain enough open space
21 and landscaping to make sure that we're consistent with the other
22 uses that have been approved in the Agriculture zone. It's
23 probably not the answer you're looking for.
24 COMMISSIONER KIRKMEYER: I'm not asking you to state
25 anything, I'm just asking you to answer my question.
88
1 MS. COLEMAN: I guess I can't answer it the
2 way you want me to.
3 COMMISSIONER KIRKMEYER: I'm not sure you know how I
4 want you to answer it.
5 MS. COLEMAN: I don't. I don't think I understand.
4 COMMISSIONER KIRKMEYER: That's why I was just asking
6 you the question directly.
7 MS. COLEMAN: I guess I can't answer the question.
8 I tried. I guess I didn't do a very good job.
9 COMMISSIONER KIRKMEYER: So can you explain to us --
10 because you made the comment that 168th, which is County Road 2,
11 would be going zo four lanes, and where you heard that from?
12 MS. COLEMAN: Yeah. I talked to the Weld
13 County Traffic Department last week. I called them and
14 talked to -- Kim had directed me to talk to Tiffany and I
15 ended up talking to another gentleman. I believe he
16 was one of the head of the department.
17 She directed me to the county website and
18 talked to me about the types of roads that are due for
19 expansion, and that 17 would not be increasing in lane
20 size, but that 19 and County Road 2 are planned to go to four
21 lanes.
22 I spoke with him last week, and he directed
23 me to the website with a study which is where I got the
24 graphic from that was on my slide show.
25 COMMISSIONER KIRKMEYER: So did he say when they were
89
1 going to go to four lanes?
2 MS. COLEMAN: They don't have a time line for
3 that. But I spoke with him last week and it's still
4 designated to become a four -lane road at some point.
5 COMMISSIONER KIRKMEYER: You also made a comment
6 that you believed your commercial/industrial use would
7 increase the value in the area.
8 MS. COLEMAN: I didn't state that.
9 COMMISSIONER KIRKMEYER: I'm sorry, I wrote it down
10 that way. So, did I miswrite it down?
11 MS. COLEMAN: I never talked about property
12 values.
13 COMMISSIONER KIRKMEYER: You said that you believed
14 there would be an increase in value in the area.
15 MS. COLEMAN: Did I say that? I didn't say
16 anything about :increasing value. I think that our
17 improvements --
18 COMMISSIONER KIRKMEYER: Do you believe there would be
19 an increase in value or not in the area?
20 MS. COLEMAN: I think that our property is
21 going to look really nice and I think if we develop
22 self -storage and put in the landscaping it's going to
23 be an added value to the community. I didn't say
24 anything about property values. I can't make that --
25 only an appraiser could make that determination once
90
1 the property is built. I'm not an appraiser and I've
2 never tried to be one.
3 COMMISSIONER KIRKMEYER: What type of painting
4 operations will you have at the facility?
5 MS. COLEMAN: We're not painters. I believe
6 that what we had on the roll -off company is they had to
7 periodically redo the logo. We don't have a commercial
8 painting business. We don't even pretend to be
9 painters. There will be no painting on the property
10 more than anyone else would have if they are spray
11 painting a bucket or something. We don't get into the
12 painting business.
13 COMMISSIONER KIRKMEYER: So the other question I have
14 is with regard to access. Your only access to any
15 county road would be access to County Road 2?
16 MS. COLEMAN: That's correct.
17 COMMISSIONER KIRKMEYER: Is there any access occurring
18 to the property on the oil and gas road that was
19 stated --
20 MS. COLEMAN: No, ma'am. We have a fence all
21 around the north border that we'll put in.
22 COMMISSIONER KIRKMEYER: So since you did send out
23 notifications to -- we're not asking about the
24 notification that you have to send out in requirement
25 to the USR process, but you were indicating that you
91
1 sent out notices to the neighborhood to have a
2 neighborhood meeting.
3 MS. COLEMAN: Yes.
4 COMMISSIONER KIRKMEYER: Who did those go to?
5 MS. COLEMAN: Kim has that --
6 COMMISSIONER KIRKMEYER: It was just the same people
7 who were within 500 feet?
8 MS. COLEMAN: It's the one that Kim gave me
9 and I sent them to everybody and had the post office
10 stamp it. Sorry if nobody got invited. We'd love to
11 hear people ahead of time before we have to have our --
12 rather talk in person than have it in front of
13 Commissioners. So, we would have loved to have a lot
14 more people there.
15 COMMISSIONER KIRKMEYER: So you didn't really reach
16 out to the neighborhood other than using the 500 -foot
17 list.
18 MS. COLEMAN: We don't have everybody's phone
19 numbers. The only way we can is to get their
20 information off the county website and send it per the
21 Code.
22 COMMISSIONER KIRKMEYER: There's door-to-door.
23 MS. COLEMAN: Yeah sure, there's door -to -
24 door.
25 COMMISSIONER KIRKMEYER: That's all I have for right
92
1 now.
2 CHAIR COZAD: I have a question; I think you answered a
3 lot of them. You said that as the applicant you'd be willing to
4 reduce the number of containers on the --
5 MS. COLEMAN: Absolutely.
6 CHAIR COZAD: What would be the total number
7 that you would be looking for?
8 MS. COLEMAN: What number would you like?
9 CHAIR COZAD: I would like you to tell us what
10 number would work for you and then we can go from
11 there.
12 MS. COLEMAN: We could go down to four at any
13 one time on the property.
14 CHAIR COZAD: Four? Total?
15 MS. COLEMAN: Yes.
16 CHAIR COZAD: Then you also said that you'd be
17 willing to take out the flex office buildings.
18 MS. COLEMAN: Absolutely. It's not crucial
19 to our business. We just saw there -- we were talking
20 in between that those are very important to the local
21 neighbors and we saw a business need for them and we
22 thought we'd put them on our plan to do them, but we
23 don't need them.
24 CHAIR COZAD: Can you talk maybe a little more
25 in detail about landscaping and what type of
93
1 landscaping --
2 MS. COLEMAN: Certainly. When we do these
3 typically we get the county plant list and see which
4 plants are most desirable. The Planning Department.
5 We go to a landscaper and make sure that we put
6 screening on the outside. One of the reasons that we
7 applied for and got a well was to water the
8 landscaping. It's no use to put in the landscaping and
9 then it all dies because you don't water it.
10 We obviously try and use plants that require a
11 little bit of watering, instead of a lot, because it's a
12 precious resource. We found that watering trucks just
13 don't work so we would put in landscaping and assist in
14 watering the plants until they got to the point that
15 they maybe wouldn't need it anymore.
16 We've developed other boat and RV storage properties and
17 they look wonderful. The landscaping is still alive and if
18 it's not we expect the County would call us and tell us
19 to replace the trees that are dead that we show on our plans. If
20 there's anything I missed there I'd be happy to answer it.
21 CHAIR COZAD: Did you say -- I heard somebody
22 say that there was some existing berms on the property?
23 MS. COLEMAN: There's a large berm that's on the
24 property that runs in mostly an east/west manner. The road
25 kind of -- the road goes down between and there's kind of two
94
1 berms that go east/west. Those berms are fairly large and block
2 the view from the north to the south. Some of those - we'd
3 planned on working on one of them and moving it possibly for a
4 detention pond, but we'd be willing to keep those berms or have
5 something similar in nature on the property if that's what the
6 Commission would like.
7 CHAIR COZAD: I wondered if that would be incorporated
8 into some of your screening and landscaping without blocking
9 people's views to the west especially.
10 MS. COLEMAN: Certainly. We could work on
11 that with Planning staff. Absolutely.
12 CHAIR COZAD: Would you, at this point, still be
13 willing to work with neighbors in the surrounding area?
14 MS. COLEMAN: Absolutely. It's not good business for
15 us to have a feud with our neighbors going on. We intend to,
16 if approved, work with our neighbors and reach out to them and
17 find areas where we can -- if they say why don't you put a
18 three-foot berm in with a fence on top of that, if that's
19 something they're looking for it's something we can certainly
20 accommodate. We plan to be there long terms and we plan to
21 have the business there long term. We plan to have the
22 business there Long term. We want to be good
23 neighbors and we don't want people to hate us.
24 CHAIR COZAD: Commissioner Conway?
25 COMMISSIONER CONWAY: I have a follow-up question about
95
1 the meeting. So was the meeting held before the Planning
2 Commission or after the Planning Commission?
3 MS. COLEMAN: It was held before.
4 MR. CONWAY: So when you came to the Planning
5 Commission, and looking through the Planning Committee notes,
6 there were a lot of concerns that were raised. At that point in
7 time did you just make a determination that there was not anything
8 you could do to mitigate or answer their concerns? I hear you say
9 we want to be a good neighbor, and we want to do all these things,
10 but clearly there was enough of a turnout at the Planning
11 Commission to basically have the Planning Commission to recommend
12 to us a denial.
13 Normally when an applicant gets that at the Planning
14 Commission they reach out to those who testified and have
15 comments. I'm just curious, was there given any thought to having
16 a follow up meeting and maybe reaching out to a lot of these
17 people who are here this afternoon to try to address their
18 concerns? Can you give me some insight into that?
19 MS. COLEMAN: You know, that would have been
20 a great idea, Commissioner Conway. One of the things that it
21 is a tight turn from the Planning Commission to the County
22 Commissioner's meeting and we weren't able to have a
23 neighborhood meeting in the meantime. But certainly
24 that would have been a great idea. It was two weeks
25 and we were out of town for one week so it's hard to
96
1 schedule it when you've got to provide notice to the
2 neighbors too. And you heard that the neighbors had a hard
3 time making the other meeting that we provided notice to so
4 a week turnaround probably wouldn't have helped us a whole lot.
5 We certainly talked to some of our neighbors
6 about it. We talked to some of them individually. I
7 spoke to one of them on the property. The concerns that
8 some of them -- to be honest we can't change their mind on
9 some things. We can't change their mind on the feeling
10 that they think that our proposal is going to bring in
11 a lot of crime. What we can do is we can show them the plans.
12 We showed them how -- there were a lot of
13 things that we didn't show in the Planning Commission
14 meeting that I think were illustrated as what we
15 showed today to show where our landscaping is specifically
16 going. When we went before the Planning Commission we
17 didn't have those artist's renderings, and I think that
18 was one of the big things that we brought today that we
19 wanted to show to the residents to show exactly where
20 the things that abut up, and we wanted to show the pictures
21 of the surrounding uses as far as - you know, there are a
22 lot of nice homes in the area, but there's also a lot of -
23 and when I say industrial -type buildings, I just
24 mean like a metal warehouse/garage type building.
97
1 I don't mean to imply that it's a heavy industrial use.
2 One of the things we've done is make sure that they
3 know that -- they didn't think that we had a fence on
4 our north side at the Planning Commission meeting so we
5 addressed that.
6 What we're trying to do is educate and change
7 our plan as much as possible to make it more
8 understanding from the neighbors. Some people we can't
9 convince. What we can do is agree to put our
10 landscaping and our fencing and reduce roll -offs,
11 reduce and eliminate the flex storage and hope that
12 that's something that we can make easier on the
13 Commission and the residents for a decision.
14 CHAIR COZAD: Other questions for the applicant at this
15 time? I have several questions for staff so -- but I'll start
16 with the rest of the Board. Questions for staff?
17 COMMISSIONER KIRKMEYER: Go ahead.
18 CHAIR COZAD: Several questions. One, I know we talked
19 a little about County Road 2, which is 168th. One of the things
20 that I was curious about, I know we had some discussion about
21 access. But, I didn't see any conditions in here if this
22 would be approved for an improvements agreement.
23 So, did we look at that and was there any
24 discussion about an improvements agreement with the
25 applicant? Because if there's going to be additional
98
1 traffic there may be some improvements that may need to
2 happen, or long term maintenance and those kinds of things.
3 MR. PINKHAM: Evan Pinkham, with Weld County Public
4 Works. During our lunch meeting I went back and met
5 with my staff and we have determined since Weld County
6 Road 2 is really under our jurisdiction on that side
7 we'd like to go back and get that access permit and
8 make sure that we use that as a Condition of Approval
9 to make sure that the access permit is applied for and
10 obtained.
11 Also, our requirement would be that the
12 applicant complete an improvements agreement with the
13 county as a part of the Condition of Approval. With
14 this being a higher use facility, we'd also like to get
15 a traffic study completed, and as a part of that have
16 it be a Condition of Approval and the results of that
17 traffic study to determine the off -site improvements.
18 So, we would have our engineers look at that traffic
19 study and determine if the facility was generating
20 enough traffic for auxiliary lanes on County Road 2.
21 CHAIR COZAD: I think we did hear testimony
22 today about the amount -- well, and you even told us
23 that there's over 3,000 vehicles per day on that road,
24 and turning in and out of a facility -- I don't know if
25 it would or not because I haven't seen a detailed
99
1 traffic study but it could require some turn lanes for
2 safety reasons.
3 MR. PINKHAM: I'd also like to speak to some
4 of the other things that were brought up about Public
5 Works related things. I think that the applicants
6 contacted our office last week and I think the document
7 that staff was pointing to was our crossroads alignment
8 study that was done with Adams County, Northglenn and
9 Thornton.
10 In that traffic study it has some different
11 alignments for each road, but it calls out County Road
12 2's ultimate width to be four lanes. I think where
13 that comes from is the fact that it's an arterial
14 roadway.
15 I also looked in our CRP, our planned improvements
16 for the next five years and that roadway is not looked at
17 for improvements in the next five years at least. Any
18 planning after that we don't have any plans to increase
19 the size of that roadway. I think the staff was
20 probably looking at the ultimate size of that roadway
21 through that document. Not that we have plans for that
22 right now.
23 CHAIR COZAD: Within the five-year CIP.
24 MR. PINKHAM: Exactly.
25 COMMISSIONER KIRKMEYER: Did the study say when the
100
1 ultimate build out would be or was it just based off of
2 what they believed the residential units in the area
3 would be and basically guessed off of that and said there would
4 need to be an ultimate build out of four lanes?
5 MR. P:LNKHAM: I think it was more of an educated guess
6 that someday --
7 COMMISSIONER KIRKMEYER: So there wasn't any like 20
8 years, 30 years, it's just if things continue to grow
9 in this area they would anticipate an ultimate build
10 out of four lanes. No dates.
11 MR. PINKHAM: Absolutely. No date as far as I have seen
12 through this document.
13 CHAIR COZAD: But, it could be developed as development
14 occurs on this corridor too. It would be at the responsibility of
15 people developing as things do change along this whole corridor
16 between Adams and Weld County. As development happens a lot of
17 times those improvements are done ahead of time because the
18 development is there and it's required as part of development.
19 Other questions for Evan? My other question was for Lauren.
20 Lauren, you talked about some concerns the Health Department had,
21 especially with the flex buildings. The applicant has indicated
22 that they're willing to take those off. Does that address most of
23 your concerns? My other question was for Lauren. Lauren, you
24 talked about some concerns the Health Department had, especially
25 with the flex buildings. The applicant has indicated that they
101
1 are willing to ':ake those off? Does that address most of your
2 concerns. I think you indicated that there is going to be a
3 commercial well and septic system on the property, so are there
4 other health concerns and can you address the painting situation
5 too?
6 MS. LIGHT: The requirements for air emission permit is
7 based on volume, so if -- I don't know how big the logos are they
8 paint or anything but if it's not very much then they don't need
9 an air emissions permit. They would have to apply to the State to
10 have the State reply back and tell them if they would need a
11 permit or not. Deleting the flex buildings would be helpful
12 because of the additional development standards we had to add on
13 because we did not know any of the uses that were on there. They
14 do have a well permit that was issued for commercial and
15 irrigation uses.
16 CHAIR COZAD: Kim, on the landscaping -- I'm just really
17 not seeing a lot of detail on the landscaping. Have you sat down
18 with the applicant and talked through what that landscaping would
19 look like? I don't see a lot on the plat, maybe I'm just not --
20 MR. OGLE: Not specifically. The application came in and
21 has a buffer set back from future right-of-way that shows grasses
22 of some type with some trees. When the application came in there
23 was no landscape treatment along the side.
24 CHAIR COZAD: I know we just recently did look at
25 another facility that had like 100 -foot buffer, but they did have
26 landscaping treatment and it was part of
102
1 their plat map. I was really looking for that and I don't see it
2 as part of this application.
3 MR. OGLE: That's correct.
4 CHAIR COZAD: I believe that's all the questions that I
5 had for staff. Does anybody have anything else? Anything else
6 for the applicant? Okay, we'll bring it back to the Board.
7 COMMISSIONER KIRKMEYER: So I know you've probably heard
8 some of my comments already but I'm going to make them again
9 because not everyone has heard them. So, the applicant has the
10 burden of proof to show that they meet all of the criteria that
11 are listed on our page two draft to a one, two, three, four,
12 five, six, and seven. The requirement is all of them.
13 If we find that they have not met one then
14 we're to not approve. If we find they met them all
15 then we do have to approve. And that's in accordance
16 with State statute.
17 So just to go through them, specifically, I
18 would agree with the Planning Commission and the
19 Planning staff and their recommendation of denial. Section -- the
20 proposed use is not consistent with Chapter 22 or other applicable
21 code provisions or ordinance in effect.
22 To be specific, I don't believe that it's consistent
23 with, "Respect and encourage the continuation of agricultural land
24 uses and agricultural operations for purposes to enhance the
25 economic health and sustainability of agriculture." There are
103
1 several policies underneath that that also it's not consistent
2 with. It's also not consistent with A.Goal 2, which is continuing
3 a commitment to viable agriculture through mitigation and to not
4 add uses that would hinder the operations of the agricultural
5 enterprises. Just so we all know, even though it's not in this
6 section, the sections immediately to these sections are some
7 pretty major agriculture operations, including Sakata Farms. It
8 also is not consistent with A.Policy 2.3, which is to encourage
9 development of agriculturally related businesses and industries.
10 It's not doing that. It's not consistent with A.Goal 4. It's not
11 consistent with A.Goal 9, which is to try and reduce potential
12 conflicts between various land uses in agriculture. It is not
13 consistent with Urban Development Goal 1, which says that we
14 should be concentrating urban development within existing
15 municipalities, an approved Intergovernmental Agreement, or
16 regional urbanization areas or County urban growth areas, urban
17 nodes, or where urban infrastructure is currently available or
18 reasonably obtained. The applicant themselves said several times
19 that this is commercial and industrial use. In fact, it was
20 compared several times to commercial and industrial uses.
21 It's also not consistent with industrial
22 development goals. It's not consistent with the intent
23 of the industrial development goals which is to have
24 industrial development to occur in a variety of
25 targeted locations that meet these goals. So, we're to
104
1 be promoting the location of industrial uses. Again,
2 within municipalities, urban growth areas, intergovernmental
3 agreements and regional urbanization areas.
4 It's also not consistent with industrial Goal 6, which
5 is to minimize incompatibilities that occur between industrial
6 uses and surrounding properties. It's not consistent with
7 commercial development Goal 1, which says you're supposed to
8 promote location of commercial uses in municipalities, growth
9 management areas, regional urbanization areas. The reason I keep
10 saying that is because essentially this site is surrounded by a
11 regional urbanization area.
12 So, it's also not consistent with Commercial Goal 2,
13 which says encourage appropriate commercial development to annex
14 into a municipality. This area, as I was explaining earlier, is
15 very close, as I think everyone knows, to the City of Brighton.
16 It's also close to Fort Lupton, and it's also basically surrounded
17 by the regional urbanization area. There are intergovernmental
18 Agreements between Fort Lupton and Brighton with regard to how
19 growth is to occur in this area. I don't think we sent them a
20 referral, in fact, I know we did not, and we should have respected
21 our Coordinated Planning Agreement with Fort Lupton. Also, when
22 I'm stating off these goals within our own zoning regulations,
23 just so we're all clear, outdoor storage is not allowed in a
24 residential zone. That's in our own zoning. Outdoor storage is
25 also not allowed in C-1 or C-2 zones. It specifically states in
105
1 23-3-210 and in 23-3-220 that there is no outside storage
2 to be allowed in those commercial zones.
3 CHAIR COZAD: Commercial or residential?
4 COMMISSIONER KIRKMEYER: It's not at all in a
5 residential zone and not at all in a commercial one or two zone.
6 It's not consistent with Commercial Goal 5, minimizing
7 incompatibilities that occur between commercial uses and
8 surrounding properties. And, it is also not consistent with the
9 RUA.Goal 7, which is provide a quality environment within the
10 regional and urbanization areas that is free from unsightly
11 materials, including, but not limited to, derelict vehicles,
12 refuse and litter. And, the reason I say it's not consistent with
13 that goal because this RUA that was approved back in 2009, but
14 again basically surrounds this area, it doesn't allow for
15 Commercial C-3 zoning. It allows for residential and C-1 or C-2,
16 which are lighter commercial zoning, and that's a very small
17 percentage. So, again, it doesn't meet - and the reason I'm
18 talking about regional urbanization areas is because they are
19 specific to the Comprehensive Plan and they are not a zoning
20 district. So, again, it's not compatible with that. So, that's
21 the first one they don't meet when they're supposed to be meeting
22 all of them. The second one that they're not consistent with is
23 the intent of the agricultural zone. I just have to say I don't
24 appreciate the way I was being answered and spoken to. Apparently
25 it's consistent with the intent of the zone, according to the
106
1 applicant, if it's consistent with other uses in the area. That's
2 not accurate. That's not how it works. I also want to point out
3 that just because a Use by Special Review Permit can be applied
4 for, that does not mean that it is consistent with the intent
5 of the zone district. It just means they have the opportunity to
6 apply for that and then they have the burden to prove that it does
7 meet the intent of the zone district. I already read the
8 definition of the intent of the zone district, which is to,
9 essentially, maintain and promote agricultural and allow those
10 uses, even if they're a use that's allow by a Use by Special
11 Review that is directly related to agricultural zone and to the
12 intent. This is not. There is nothing about an RV storage center
13 or a roll -off commercial business, or any of the other things that
14 they have on here that directly is related to an agricultural
15 zone. They didn't come up with anything at all that showed that
16 they met the intent of the agricultural zone district, so they
17 can't meet that criteria. Number three requires the uses to be
18 compatible with existing surrounding land uses. So, I've already
19 stated in our own code we have that the outdoor storage is not
20 allowed in residential zones. It's not allowed in a commercial one
21 or two. That's what's allowed in the RUA, that's what they asked
22 for, that's what's in the area. So, it's not consistent with
23 what's existing in the area as far as existing development. It
24 also is not compatible with future development because of that
25 RUA. I can't believe I'm actually saying that I'm happy that the
107
1 RUA is there because it actually is not consistent with that. So
2 the applicant is incorrect when they say that it's consistent with
3 the other uses in the area. It absolutely is not because it's not
4 consistent with the RUA. It's also not consistent or compatible
5 with the rural residential area that's immediately in the area
6 because, again, we don't allow outdoor storage in residential
7 areas. This area is obviously a rural residential area. We may
8 not have approved all those things, people figured out how to do
9 80 -acre parcels and then do Recorded Exemptions, and the next
10 thing you know you've got a rural residential area. This use is
11 not compatible with the existing surrounding land uses. I might
12 add to the south is a huge development that went through a
13 process. Todd Creek and Eagle Shadow, whatever it is, and it's a
14 huge subdivision development in Adams County. Adams County
15 doesn't allow RV storages in a residential zone either. So again,
16 it's not compatible with existing or even future growth trends in
17 this area, which is either rural residential or large
18 subdivisions. It's not compatible with either of those because
19 it's not even allowed in those zone districts, either in Weld
20 County or in Adams County. By the way, it's not allowed in
21 Brighton either,which this is closest to as far as
22 municipalities. So, I've covered that the use is not compatible
23 with the existing surrounding land uses, I've also covered in that
24 that it's not compatible with the future development as projected
25 by Chapter 22. Chapter 22, as we all know, is our Comprehensive
108
1 Plan, which one of the Regional Urbanization Areas that doesn't
2 allow for RV storage areas within that area. Again, not compatible
3 with the adopted master plan of Weld County. So the next one is
4 does it lie within an overlay district. I don't believe that
5 it does, so it actually probably meets that one. So, so far we're
6 one out of five. Has the applicant demonstrated there is a
7 diligent effort to conserve prime agricultural land? I would
8 probably agree with the applicant at this point that the prime
9 agricultural land and the farming, at least on this property, is
10 probably not something that's going to happen. So, I think they
11 probably could meet that one or at least kind of by -- I don't
12 know by default they actually meet that one. Whether or not the
13 design standards, the operations standards, conditions of
14 approval, which is the last criteria, assure there are adequate
15 provisions for the protection of health, safety, and welfare of
16 the inhabitants of the neighborhood. I would just also submit to
17 you, I know typically we don't like to - we don't think that the
18 drop in property values is really something that we're to be
19 considering in our discussions, but I guess actually I'm thinking
20 that it should be. As stated before by this Board at a different
21 hearing, USRs are not permanent, they're temporary. So,
22 consistency with a USR is just not possible. They're supposed to
23 be looking at the zone district. It's also not compatible as
24 evidenced by the drop in property values. That is very real that
25 that's occurring in this area because of the RV storage center
109
1 that is at 2 and 19, which most of the time looks like
2 it's abandoned and the trees are dead. I would just like to point
3 out to the Board that it's not the surrounding property owners'
4 job -- really it's not even the Planning Department's job --to
5 ensure that the applicant meets all the criteria that they're
6 supposed to. They're supposed to do that. If this goes through
7 they have to agree that they will abide by those. It's not our
8 job to keep policing them, even though that's what ends up
9 happening. The other thing with regard to -- since the RV center
10 at 2 and 19 was approved into the county and has been developed
11 there have been at least four break ins in that little cut out
12 section in that purple area, that's where the Seltzer house is.
13 There have been at least four break ins that I know of in that
14 house, and there have been a rash of break ins and burglaries in
15 the whole area. So, I think the increase in the traffic and
16 other increases with regard to crime does not provide
17 -- there isn't a way to provide for the adequate
18 protection of health, safety, and welfare. I think the
19 idea that we're going to put yet another access on to
20 County Road 2 at a place -- the neighbors were correct,
21 that's a bad location for it. I don't know where
22 they're going to find a location that would be actually
23 a good location. I just think it's just an accident
24 waiting to happen quite frankly.
25 I don't believe that this application or that
110
1 this applicant has met their burden of proof to show
2 that they meet all of these criteria. I don't believe
3 their presentation or their answers to any of the
4 questions showed that they meet the criteria. I think
5 that we should be reaffirming the Planning staff and
6 Planning Commission's recommendation of denial.
7 CHAIR COZAD: Other comments? Commissioner Freeman?
8 MR. FREEMAN: Sure, so I agree with parts of what
9 Commissioner Kirkmeyer said. I don't know that I agree
10 with all of them. When you start at the beginning the
11 proposed use is consistent with Chapter 22. I think it
12 is simply because we have other uses like that in the
13 county. I think that we've proven that that's the
14 case.
15 The proposed use is consistent with the intent of the
16 ag zone. I think that anything -- any USR that we permit -
17 almost every USR that's permitted in the ag zone is because it's
18 not ag related and that's why it's a USR. So, that's why
19 that's a difficult one to actually -- that's why
20 there's a USR process because it actually isn't
21 agriculture but it's something that's allowed.
22 The one that I'm struggling with just a
23 little bit on this one where I think I actually do agree with
24 Commissioner Ki:rkmeyer is number three, that the use is
25 compatible with existing surrounding areas. I think
111
1 that because of the fact that -- and I disagree that
2 this actual property is not actually in the RUA --
3 COMMISSIONER KIRKMEYER: No, I didn't say it was.
4 COMMISSIONER FREEMAN: So it borders an RUA. So when
5 we're talking about this we're not looking at this to
6 whether it should be permitted -- whether it's allowed
7 in residential or whether it's allowed in C-1 or C-2
8 because it still is actually zoned ag and it is ag,
9 which puts it back to where it does meet the intent of
10 what can happen in an ag zone based on our USR process.
11 But, that being said, I am struggling a little
12 bit with the fact of whether it's compatible with the
13 existing surrounding land uses in this particular
14 section simply because of the number of residential
15 things that are in this section.
16 That one I'm struggling to think that they
17 actually meet that one. The other ones I think you
18 covered pretty well. There's not an overlay plan. So
19 that's kind of -- I mean I could be convinced I guess
20 maybe there's a way to fix it, but that's where I'm at
21 at this point. I actually agree with you that it does
22 not meet number three.
23 CHAIR COZAD: Commissioner Conway?
24 MR. CONWAY: Yeah, I would concur with
25 Commissioner Freeman's analysis.
112
1 COMMISSIONER FREEMAN: Let me say one more thing. To
2 approve this, as you said, you have to meet all seven
3 of these.
4 COMMISSIONER CONWAY: Right, I'm kind of where
5 Commissioner Freeman is and I don't agree with everything but I
6 agree with most. The struggle that I'm having here,
7 the residents clearly demonstrated that although you
8 can make the case is this going from ag to residential,
9 it still has an ag component. People are raising
10 livestock, they're doing different things out there
11 which meet the ag intent.
12 So, I'm having a hard time with compatibility, in terms
13 of three, as you mentioned. I always try to see how we can get to
14 yes, and as I was going through and listening to the public
15 comments I just don't see how we're able to fix this. I mean
16 that's where I'm at.
17 I'm open to my fellow Commissioners who might
18 have some ideas to that but whether we like it or not,
19 as Commissioner Freeman said, this area has changed.
20 People are out there that are building ranchettes,
21 they're building homes on large acreage. They are
22 keeping an ag component, as was clearly demonstrated by
23 a number of the residents who -- I don't know if it was
24 Bill or A.J. that came up and did the presentation with
25 all the -- Bill, thank you.
113
1 Going through this map of where it's
2 delineated out with 27 parcels. I believe he went
3 through at least 50 percent of those and demonstrated
4 that there is at least in most of them some kind of ag
5 component which then would go into the compatibility
6 side of it.
7 So, I do agree with Commissioner Kirkmeyer, it
8 is the applicant's responsibility to demonstrate the
9 compatibility here. I'll be honest with you, I asked
10 the applicants clearly -- and I've got to tell you, we
11 deal with hundreds of land use cases. We know our
12 Planning Commission. They have diverse opinions. When
13 I look at who voted on this in terms of the 6-1 denial,
14 that gives me pause. I always try to look at why.
15 The Planning Commission doesn't reject a lot
16 of USRs, but when they do it they do it for pretty good
17 reason. When I see the diversity of the Planning Commission and
18 read their notes and read their discussion and see folks from
19 different perspectives on land use coming together on this I just
20 have to agree that the Planning Commission probably got this right
21 and we ought to respect their recommendation. Based on today's
22 hearing, where - as Commissioner Freeman and Commissioner
23 Kirkmeyer have outlined, I just can't find the compatibility here
24 or find a reason which the applicant demonstrated to us that this
25 fits there. That's where I'm at.
26 CHAIR COZAD: Commissioner Moreno?
114
1 COMMISSIONER MORENO: I'll keep mine pretty short
2 because I'm kind of just -- a lot of things that have
3 already been stated by my fellow Commissioners. As Commissioner
4 Conway said, I've been reviewing the Planning Commission and
5 Planning staff and their reasons for denial, and the comments that
6 were made, and Commissioner Kirkmeyer has outlined a number of --
7 we just are not there. They're incompatible in this situation
8 here. So, I guess the question on this, I know
9 Commissioner Conway you're saying to look at what we
10 can do. My understanding on this when we talked about
11 this before we don't just totally deny something like
12 this. We have to vote on to deny. So, do we make a
13 motion to approve and then deny this?
14 COMMISSIONER KIRKMEYER: We can make a motion to deny.
15 COMMISSIONER CONWAY: Or reaffirm the Planning
16 Commission's recommendation to us. Which is
17 essentially a denial.
18 MR. CHOATE: Typically, you just move to deny - the
19 important thing there is you want to make sure that everyone has
20 their opportunity to describe their reasons prior to that motion.
21 CHAIR COZAD: So I guess I'm hearing you say
22 you agree with everyone else. So, I guess I'm last because as the
22 Chair I get to go last. I think we always try to find a way that --
23 we've said it before, to get to yes on pretty much every
24 application that comes in here, but it is the burden of proof of
25 the applicant. I'm actually struggling with this one too.
115
1 Generally, I can't do the job for the applicant but I could go
2 through and find all kinds of goals and policies and ways to make
3 things compatible, but that's your job.
4 I think there was a lack in this application
5 of really good dialog with the neighbors, and I think
6 there was an effort made but I think there could have
7 been a better effort made to really get some input from
8 the surrounding property owners, to look at maybe some
9 mitigation that really would work with the neighbors to
10 make it more compatible. I think because of the lack
11 of that and then not - I understand there was not a lot of time
12 between Planning Commission and the Board, but there is
13 always the opportunity to ask for a continuance of this
14 hearing too to make that time and work with the
15 neighbors and really put a plan together that works for
16 everybody in the neighborhood.
17 This area is really changing and there are some
18 agricultural things going on there, but there are some industrial
19 things that are happening in the area. I think the other part
20 of it is if you look at kind of the land use patterns that you
21 can see right on the map, and just from the testimony we've heard,
22 and I know because I've been down in that area too on the south
23 side in Adams County, lots and lots and lots of residential, and I
24 think that's probably where a lot of the traffic is coming from.
25 There's a lot of development that's occurring down there that this
116
1 is a residential area. So, those mitigating impacts to
surrounding
2 property owners really need to be thoughtfully put
3 together to make sure that this type of a use would be
4 compatible.
5 So I think that and I don't think honestly
6 that the applicant really did address the consistency
7 with the Comp Plan. I think that could have been a lot
8 stronger. I think consistency with the intent of the
9 Ag zone district. I just think it wasn't in the application
10 really addressing it and I don't think that the applicant
11 answered the question adequately to say that it is
12 consistent. I think there could be ways to do that but
13 that's not my job.
14 So I will agree with my fellow Commissioners.
15 I think that there are some of the criteria that were
16 met but I think future land development is a big one
17 too, and we do have to look at the approval of the RUA
18 that was approved down in that area and the compatibility
19 with that as well. So, I agree with my fellow Commissioners
20 COMMISSIONER CONWAY: I got distracted before I
21 finished up and forgot to make this point. This is the
22 residents' only turn at bat. I appreciate the quick
23 turnaround time,, but as the Chairwoman said you can
24 always come in here and ask for a continuance and
25 continue to work with the residents in trying to
117
1 resolve their concerns.
2 I kind of felt like -- it's kind of like trust but
3 verify. It's hard for the neighbors, and we always preach the
4 Good Neighbor Policy around here -- we know when an applicant has
5 really tried and they've gone out and worked with the neighbors.
6 Yeah, there are always going to be some that you're never going to
7 get to a point of agreement, but I just kind of felt it
8 was just kind of skating through, particularly in light
9 of the fact that the Planning Commission rejected this
10 on a 6-1 vote.
11 You knew that you were going to have folks
12 here at this hearing today, and there just wasn't an attempt
13 -- and I appreciate the time constraints, but I think the
14 applicant not recognizing that, as the Chairwoman has said, and
15 ask for a continuance to continue that dialog to maybe get to
16 Yes, which we always try to do around here. I think was very
17 problematic. And, I didn't get a chance to say that in my
18 comments and I appreciate the Chairwoman giving me that
19 opportunity.
20 CHAIR COZAD: Sure, go ahead Commissioner Kirkmeyer?
21 COMMISSIONER KIRKMEYER: Madam Chair, I would move that
22 we deny the Site Specific Development Plan and Use by Special
23 Review Permit, USR17-0016, and incorporate into the findings the
24 comments of all of the Commissioners.
25 COMMISSIONER CONWAY: Second.
118
1 CHAIR COZAD: Motion by Commissioner Kirkmeyer, second
2 by Commissioner Conway to Deny USR17-0016 with the findings that
3 were made during the discussion we had and also, I think you
4 outlined the goals and policies and all the criteria. We'll just
5 make sure those are all included in the Resolution. Any further
6 discussion? All in favor say aye.
7 COMMISSIONERS: Aye.
8 CHAIR COZAD: Opposed? Motion carries. Thank you all
9 for being here today.
10 (Hearing adjourned 2:43 p.m.)
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
CERTIFICATE
STATE OF COLORADO)
) ss
COUNTY OF WELD )
I, Esther E. Gesick, Clerk to the Board of Weld County Commissioner and Notary Public
within and for the State of Colorado, certify the foregoing transcript of the digitally recorded
proceedings, In re: A SITE SPECIFIC DEVELOPMENT PLAN AND USE BY SPECIAL REVIEW
PERMIT, USR17-0016, FOR ANY USE PERMITTED AS A USE BY RIGHT, ACCESSORY USE,
OR USE BY SPECIAL REVIEW IN THE COMMERCIAL OR INDUSTRIAL ZONE DISTRICTS (RV
AND BOAT STORAGE, A DUMP STATION, ENCLOSED SELF STORAGE AND THE PARKING
AND STAGING OF TRASH CONTAINERS, ROLL -OFFS, AND VEHICLES AND/OR EQUIPMENT
TO PICK UP AND DELIVER SAME AND FOUR (4) INDIVIDUAL FLEX OFFICE BUILDINGS)
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
— WW, LLC, before the Weld County Board of County Commissioners, on Wednesday, June 21,
2017, and as further set forth on page one. The transcription, dependent upon recording clarity, is
true and accurate with special exceptions(s) of any or all precise identification of speakers, and/or
correct spelling or any given/spoken proper name or acronym.
Dated this 13th day of September, 2017.
Esther E. Gesick, Notary
Weld County Clerk to the Board
ESTHER E. GESICK
NOTARY PUBLIC
STATE OF COLORADO
NOTARY ID 19974016478
MY COMMISSION EXPIRES SEPT. 29, 2017
ORIGINAL ( )
CERTIFIED COPY ( )
Hello