HomeMy WebLinkAbout20162877.tiffHEARING CERTIFICATION
DOCKET NO. 2016-68.B
RE: A SITE SPECIFIC DEVELOPMENT PLAN AND USE BY SPECIAL REVIEW PERMIT,
USR16-0015, FOR A KENNEL (UP TO 75 DOGS, SIX (6) MONTHS OF AGE OR OLDER
OF A NON-SPECIFIC BREED TO INCLUDE DOGGIE DAYCARE AND BOARDING) IN
THE A (AGRICULTURAL) ZONE DISTRICT — KENNETH AND RANA BACHMAN, CIO
TANNER HILL
A public hearing was conducted on September 7, 2016, at 10:00 a.m., with the following present:
Commissioner Mike Freeman, Chair
Commissioner Sean P. Conway, Pro-Tem
Commissioner Julie A. Cozad
Commissioner Barbara Kirkmeyer
Commissioner Steve Moreno
Also present:
Acting Clerk to the Board, Tisa Juanicorena
Assistant County Attorney, Bob Choate
Planning Services Department representative, Kim Ogle
Public Works Department representative, Evan Pinkham
Planning Services Engineer representative, Hayley Brown
Health Department representative, Lauren Light
The following business was transacted:
I hereby certify that pursuant to a notice dated July 15, 2016, and duly published
July 20, 2016, in the Greeley Tribune, a public hearing was conducted on August 31, 2016, to
consider the request of Kenneth and Rana Bachman, c/o Tanner Hill, for a Site Specific
Development Plan and Use by Special Review Permit, USR16-0015, for a Kennel (up to 75 dogs,
six (6) months of age or older of a non-specific breed to include doggie daycare and boarding) in
the A (Agricultural) Zone District, at which time the Board deemed it appropriate to continue the
matter to September 7, 2016, to allow the applicant to present to a full quorum of the Board. On
September 7, 2016, Bob Choate, Assistant County Attorney, made this a matter of record.
Kim Ogle, Department of Planning Services, presented a brief summary of the proposal. He
provided the site location in relation to the relevant County roads and clarified the three (3) acre
site is surrounded by lands within the municipal limits of the City of Longmont. Mr. Ogle reported
four (4) adjacent property owners submitted letters of objection and 15 surrounding property
owners submitted letters of support. He reviewed the concerns cited in the letters of objection.
Mr. Ogle stated the site is located within the three (3) mile referral area of the Towns of Frederick,
Firestone and Erie, the City of Longmont and Boulder County and he reviewed the referral
responses from the aforementioned jurisdictions. He also reported the site is located in the
Intergovernmental Agreement Areas (IGA) of The Town of Firestone and the City of Longmont
and also Weld County and the City of Longmont. Mr. Ogle reviewed the criteria for approval based
on the IGA between Weld County and the City of Longmont and relative to the current application.
Mr. Ogle explained the property has a Deed of Conservation in place and the beneficiary of the
easement is the City of Longmont. He reviewed the limitations of the easement as the cause for
(c.' Pt, P6, M
10-17-1 (o
2016-2877
PL2436
HEARING CERTIFICATION - KENNETH AND RANA BACHMAN, C/O TANNER HILL
(USR16-0015)
PAGE 2
disagreement between the City of Longmont and the applicant and he clarified that after
consulting with the County Attorney, staff agreed to allow the Board of County Commissioners to
determine the outcome. Mr. Ogle reviewed the correspondence received from all parties prior to
both Planning Commission and today's hearing. He continued with the description of the use
stating the dimensions of the single family residence, outbuilding, and dog runs, the number of
employees, and hours of operation. Staff sent out 16 referrals and received five (5) responses
with comments. Mr. Ogle displayed images of the site layout plan, the property from all
surrounding views, and the surrounding properties and entered the split vote of 5-3 for a favorable
recommendation of the Planning Commission into the record as written.
B. Commissioner Kirkmeyer stated she would like to hear from the City of Longmont and also
raised the question regarding the definition of Agriculture in relation to the Conservation Easement
and how a dog kennel fits that definition.
Commissioner Cozad further requested legal counsel regarding the legal role of the Board
concerning enforcement of the Conservation Easement.
a: Mr. Choate stated the two issues are: 1) the Conservation Easement limitations; and 2) the
Conservation Easement is owned by the City of Longmont, which has a Coordinated Planning
Agreement with Weld County. He clarified the Code does not specify the Board must enforce
private covenants in land use cases and it is reasonable to consider the Conservation Easement
limitations as it relates to Chapter 23 of the Weld County Code regarding compatibility, but the
Board is not precluded from granting the USR due to the Conservation Easement and it is at the
discretion of the Board. Mr. Choate further conjectured the City of Longmont will most likely
contest the construction of something that is in violation of the City of Longmont.
a Commissioner Kirkmeyer requested clarification regarding proceeding with an application
that does not include the developmental rights of the owner of the Conservation Easement. After
further discussion, Mr. Choate recommended the Board hear the case.
Commissioner Conway recommended the Board hear the case and pointed out that the City
of Longmont is present to state their disagreement.
Chair Freeman interjected his concern regarding the definition of agriculture use regarding
this application.
Commissioner Cozad clarified the Conservation Easement is a separate agreement between
the City of Longmont and the Bachmans.
a Commissioner Kirkmeyer stated the Board can take the Conservation Easement in
consideration with the application and requested clarification regarding fee ownership of the City
of Longmont based on the Easement agreement.
2016-2877
PL2436
HEARING CERTIFICATION - KENNETH AND RANA BACHMAN, C/O TANNER HILL
(USR16-0015)
PAGE 3
IR Dan Wolford, Open -Space Manager for the City of Longmont, verified the City of Longmont
is not a fee owner. After which, Commissioner Kirkmeyer stated her acquiescence to the case
moving forward and Commissioner Conway suggested the Board procure the City of Longmont's
definition of Agriculture prior to proceeding.
. Chair Freeman recessed for lunch at 11:51 a.m.
a Chair Freeman reconvened at 1:34 p.m.
,a Mr. Choate reviewed the terms for proceeding and recommended hearing from both the
applicant and the City of Longmont to determine if the use is allowable for consideration. He
clarified if it is determined to be an acceptable use, the case may move forward to hear the staff
presentations and public input; however, if it is not, the Board may deny public input and proceed
with findings. He further provided copies of the aforementioned agreements and pertinent
correspondence to the Board for their review, and to the applicant and the City of Longmont
representative, as well.
El In response to Commissioner Conway, Mr. Choate verified the dates reflecting the
Conservation Easement, Annexation into the City of Longmont, and De -annexation from the City
of Longmont.
Tanner Hill, applicant, responded to Chair Freeman's request to explain how his application
fits the requirements of the Conservation Easement. Mr. Choate interjected that this is the
applicant's opportunity to clarify to the Board how the proposed Use can meet the requirements
of the Conservation Easement.
Mr. Hill stated the proposed Use conforms to the zoning codes of Weld County and the City
of Longmont, and #18 of the Conservation Easement explains the Use is acceptable based on
the state statute. He reported that he already owns one kennel in unincorporated Weld County
that is the model for the new kennel. In response to Chair Freeman, Mr. Hill insisted the state
statute clarifies the Use.
la. Commissioner Kirkmeyer stated the terms of the easement are that it shall be interpreted to
affect the purpose of the easement which is clearly stated to limit the uses of the property to
single-family residential and agricultural uses; therefore, she requested the applicant explain how
this is an agricultural use. In response to Commissioner Kirkmeyer, Mr. Hill asked for guidance
on how to proceed considering different definitions and language between the state statute, City
of Longmont and Weld County definitions of agricultural uses. Commissioner Kirkmeyer explained
the direction he needs to go in is to define how a kennel is an agricultural use by any definition.
In response to Commissioner Kirkmeyer, Mr. Hill stated he will demonstrate by referring to
the zoning codes of Weld County and the City of Longmont and also by the definition of the state
statute and how the Use meets those criteria. He began by reviewing the criteria of a kennel as a
Use by Special Review in the A (Agricultural) Zone per Weld County. He reviewed that a kennel
2016-2877
PL2436
HEARING CERTIFICATION - KENNETH AND RANA BACHMAN, C/O TANNER HILL
(USR16-0015)
PAGE 4
is also a conditional use per the City of Longmont and he explained the definitions of the City of
Longmont regarding kennels and animal care facilities and stated, per the City of Longmont, the
Use is an animal care facility which is allowable with conditions to mitigate negative impacts.
Mr. Hill expressed his frustration in attempting to gain answers from all entities and inviting all
parties, to no avail, to visit his current facility to assist with a determination of compatibility.
E Mr. Hill displayed images of his existing kennel from all surrounding views to include the
outdoor dog areas and the outbuilding for the kennel and stated the proposed facility would be
identical. He requested the Board determine if it fits with the A (Agricultural) Zone. Mr. Hill
conveyed his effort to create a farm for dogs. He welcomed the Board to hear what the immediate
neighbors at the existing location think about his facility and him as a person. Mr. Hill refuted the
accusation that his facility scares off wildlife and displayed images.
a Commissioner Kirkmeyer interrupted the presentation and requested Mr. Hill show how his
Use is an agricultural use. Mr. Hill stated his interpretation is anything that would conform to a
farm -like structure and his animal care facility could not be any more farm -like. Others have also
described it as a farm for dogs. Commissioner Kirkmeyer suggested he investigate definitions of
agriculture and livestock while listening to the City of Longmont.
a Chair Freeman invited Mr. Wolford to convey the City of Longmont's definition of agriculture.
He offered copies of one of the first letters sent to the Bachman's from the City Attorney to the
Board and County Attorney, which includes the definition as related to livestock and crops and
does not include livestock confinement or commercial uses. In response to Commissioner
Kirkmeyer, Mr. Wolford stated his best guess is the definition has been in place since 2007. In
response to Commissioner Conway, he had no answer regarding why the definition was not
included in the agreement.
In response to Commissioner Cozad, Mr. Wolford stated the zoning is different for the
property in question; however, for an agriculture zoned property within the City of Longmont, this
facility would likely be approved through a special review process.
. In response to Commissioner Conway, Mr. Wolford stated he did not personally meet the
applicant at the current site; however, he and staff have driven by, observed, googled information
and are familiar with the site and, based on the Conservation Easement and the guidelines of the
municipal code, stated it does not meet the requirement for agriculture use. In response to
Commissioner Kirkmeyer, he sees it as a commercial use not an agricultural use.
Commissioner Kirkmeyer stated the code reference that defines a Conservation Easement.
2 Mr. Hill stated he would like to believe the definition of agriculture is far from limiting it to
livestock and crops and he is attempting to have an animal care facility for dogs on the property
that is incredibly agricultural to be compatible with the surrounding properties. He further stated
he is trying to go by the definitions in the Conservation Easement and the zoning codes. The
intent is to have an agricultural concept with his operation.
2016-2877
PL2436
HEARING CERTIFICATION - KENNETH AND RANA BACHMAN, CIO TANNER HILL
(USR16-0015)
PAGE 5
IR Chair Freeman requested discussion from the Board to determine if the consensus is an
agricultural use. Chair Freeman stated his definition is broader than livestock and crops and there
can be a relation with agri-tourism. He expressed his difficulty with the relation between a kennel
and agriculture.
El Commissioner Kirkmeyer provided the dictionary definition for agriculture which includes
farming, cultivation of crops, and raising of animals to provide food and products for humans. She
clarified based on the Conservation Easement that it can be amended by both parties and she
suggested the hearing be continued to provide an opportunity for Mr. Hill to discuss with
Mr. Wolford a possible amendment to the easement that would be acceptable to both parties.
Commissioner Moreno expressed his concern with the public rescheduling. Commissioner
Kirkmeyer stated because the USR has not been fully heard, the opportunity will still be available
for public input when/if the case is fully presented. Chair Freeman concurred it is pre -mature to
address the possibility of public comment. Commissioner Moreno stated his agreement for the
continuance to open up the dialogue between the parties.
Commissioner Conway encouraged the applicant to continue to reach out to invite the public
to visit the existing site. Chair Freeman stated the case does not need to go back to Planning
Commission. Commissioner Cozad agreed and stated the Use has not been fully determined if it
fits in with the agriculture use but there are some details that need clarification with the
Conservation Easement and the Annexation, and continuing the application allows time to work
through these details. She agreed with the continuance.
la In response to Chair Freeman, Mr. Hill stated Ms. Bachman is present and the Board may
want to hear from her regarding a continuance.
e. In response to Commissioner Kirkmeyer, Ms. Bachman gave the history of the difficulties
since the purchase of the property nine (9) years ago.
�+�• In response to Commissioner Kirkmeyer, Mr. Hill stated the immediate neighbors are always
welcome and have been invited to visit the current operation; however, they aren't in agreement
with a kennel. He further stated he is willing to continue but has no faith in an amendment or
agreement between themselves and the City of Longmont because there has never been an
ounce of cooperation from the City of Longmont. Mr. Hill stated he appreciates the sound decision
making of the County Commissioners.
. Commissioner Cozad stated she hopes everyone will make a good effort.
Ms. Bachman stated she will honor the request for a continuance but feels it will not result in
anything positive. She expressed her frustration with fighting a big municipality.
2016-2877
PL2436
HEARING CERTIFICATION - KENNETH AND RANA BACHMAN, C/O TANNER HILL
(USR16-0015)
PAGE 6
Commissioner Cozad conveyed her understanding but continued to recommend a
continuance. In response to Commissioner Cozad, Ms. Bachman stated she would be happy to
sit down with Mr. Wolford. Mr. Hill interjected he would as well.
a After further discussion, the Commissioners agreed to October 12, 2016. The applicant
asked for a sooner date. Mr. Choate interjected that Mr. Wolford does not have the authority to
make the decision without consulting the City of Longmont, which will require time. Chair Freeman
stated October 5th is the soonest date available.
Mr. Wolford stated his willingness to sit down and talk, but the process to amend will take a
public process.
Commissioner Kirkmeyer encouraged the applicant to take some time to regroup and then
meet with the City of Longmont and reach out to neighbors.
Commissioner Kirkmeyer moved to continue the request of Kenneth and Rana Bachman,
c/o Tanner Hill, for a Site Specific Development Plan and Use by Special Review Permit,
USR16-0015, for a Kennel (up to 75 dogs, six (6) months of age or older of a non-specific breed
to include doggie daycare and boarding) in the A (Agricultural) Zone District, to October 5, 2016,
at 10:00. The motion was seconded by Commissioner Moreno. Commissioner Kirkmeyer
addressed the public and clarified the Board will determine if the case can be heard and if it is
favorable to proceed, the staff will present the case and there will be an opportunity for public
input at that point. She thanked the public for attending. Commissioner Conway also thanked the
public for attending and stated due diligence to do the right thing is important. Chair Freeman
thanked the public for coming today and apologized for the complicated nature of this case. The
motion to continue carried unanimously. There being no further discussion, the hearing was
completed at 3:01 p.m.
2016-2877
PL2436
HEARING CERTIFICATION - KENNETH AND RANA BACHMAN, C/O TANNER HILL
(USR16-0015)
PAGE 7
This Certification was approved on the 12th day of September, 2016.
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
WELD COUNTY, COLORADO
ATTEST:" ,yj Kok,
Weld County Clerk to the Board
BY:
D
AP
uuty Clerk to the Board
unty Attorney
Date of signature: 1O1 5/ ta,
Mike Freeman, Chair
ara Kirkmeyer
Steve Moreno
2016-2877
PL2436
web
J
a
2
w
a
N
0
Ql C(
'3v°'�
6c v ca pip
Y
ft
Q
C as
O
eit)
O
Se
tO
00
rA
a
o
O
A
8
0 CJ V
v
a
A
v
V
O
a
J
qJ
Q
a
U
r-
rZ
C
,i
1'
It
K
w
1+LL
s
Y
VJ
rn
w
C
O
a
bo
-1
a'
H
F
a
C'
O
V
n6
0
cc
W
a -
S
T
v
VO
o-
0
�'f94 F✓f£RL.s-15 PK _
t
>-
J
3
W
J
f -
z
a
w
en
w
J
a
W
2
a
z
L
V
LC
L
c
C y� 4
J
to
CO
d
L
J
i4-
C
L
C
W
T.
w
2
t
ID
J
J
4
cc
Hello