Elk in Rocky Mountain National Park
 

LARIMER COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION

Minutes of September 15, 2004

 

The Larimer County Planning Commission met in a regular session on Wednesday, September 15, 2004, at 6:30 p.m. in the Hearing Room.  Commissioners’ Boulter, Huddleston, Korb, Nelson, Pond, terMeer, and Wallace were present. Commissioner Waldo was absent.  Commissioner Morgan presided as Chairman.  Also present were Rob Helmick, Principal Planner, Matt Lafferty, Senior Planner, Sean Wheeler, Planner II, Jim Reidhead, RLUC Director, Traci Downs, Engineering Department, Doug Ryan, Environmental Health, and Jill Albracht, Planning Technician and Recording Secretary.

 

COMMENTS BY THE PUBLIC REGARDING THE COUNTY LAND USE CODE: None 

 

COMMENTS BY THE PUBLIC REGARDING OTHER RELEVANT LAND USE MATTERS NOT ON THE AGENDA:  None

 

APPROVAL OF THE MINUTES FOR THE AUGUST 18, 2004 MEETING: MOTION by Commissioner Pond to approve the minutes; seconded by Commissioner Korb.  This received unanimous voice approval.

 

AMENDMENTS TO THE AGENDA:  Motion by Commissioner Korb to elect the Red Feather Lakes Planning Advisory Committee representative and alternative, seconded by Commissioner Wallace.  Commissioner Huddleston volunteered to be the representative.  Commissioner Wallace volunteered to be the alternative.  This received unanimous voice approval.

 

CONSENT ITEMS:

 

ITEM #1 GREELEY WATER LINE LOCATION AND EXTENT #04-Z1523: Mr. Wheeler provided background information on the request for approval of the Farmer’s Segment Phase of the Bellevue Pipeline #10 Water Transmission Main, between Windsor and Timnath.

 

Commissioner Pond asked if there was a contingency plan for invasive weeds or wetland vegetation that did not reestablish?

 

Tom Keith, EDAW, Inc., stated that a specified monitoring program had not been defined to check the vegetation reestablishment, but minimal disturbance was anticipated with an expectation that the areas would reestablish themselves quickly.  He also stated that there would be a commitment to control the weeds. 

 

Commissioner Boulter asked what the time table was for the completion of the project?

 

Dan Moore, City of Greeley, stated that construction would begin in the Fall of 2005.  He estimated that the project would take approximately six months; therefore, it would be completed by April or May of 2006.

 

Commissioner Korb moved that the Planning Commission adopt the following Resolution:

 

      BE IT RESOLVED that the Planning Commission approves the Greeley Water Line Location and Extent #04-Z1523, subject to the following conditions:

 

 

1.   Construction of the Greeley Water Line shall be as specified in File #04-Z1523. 

 

2.   If construction results in any alterations to the original drainage patterns, the applicant shall provide the Larimer County Engineering Department with a Drainage Report for review and approval.

 

1.   The applicant shall comply with the requirements of the Colorado Department of

      Public Health and Environment.

 

Commissioner Pond seconded the Motion.

 

Commissioner Nelson did not participate in the vote due to owning property affected by the project.

 

Commissioners’ Boulter, Huddleston, Korb, Pond, terMeer, Wallace, and Chairman Morgan voted in favor of the Motion.

 

MOTION PASSED: 7-0

 

ITEM #2 CRYSTAL LAKES 13TH FILING LOT 133 REZONING #04-Z1519: Mr. Lafferty provided background information on the request to rezone Lot 133, Crystal Lakes 13th Filing, from E-Estate to O-Open. 

 

Commissioner Pond moved that the Planning Commission adopt the following Resolution:

 

BE IT RESOLVED that the Planning Commission recommend to the Board of County Commissioners that the Crystal Lakes 13th Filing Lot 133 Rezoning #04-Z1519 for the property described on “Exhibit A” to the minutes be approved.

 

Commissioner Huddleston seconded the Motion.

 

Commissioners’ Boulter, Huddleston, Korb, Nelson, Pond, terMeer, Wallace, and Chairman Morgan voted in favor of the Motion.

 

MOTION PASSED: 8-0

 

ITEMS:

 

ITEM #3 LAND USE CODE AMENDMENTS – RLUC ENGINEERING STANDARDS: Mr. Reidhead provided background information on the request to adopt the Rural Land Use Process Engineering Standards and Guidelines for Roads and Drainage.  The Engineering Standards would be included in the new Section 5.8.6.D.3 of the Larimer County Land Use Code.  

 

Commissioner Huddleston suggested that the Fugitive Dust completion time was increased from 6 months to 18 months.

 

 

 

Rich Dvorak, TST, Inc. Consulting Engineers, explained that Fugitive Dust was a State Statue permit not obtained through the Rural Land Use Center; therefore, the regulation could not be changed. 

 

Commissioner Huddleston suggested Section 5.8.6.D.3 incorporating a required stipulation that there be a headwall for the road culverts.

 

Mr. Dvorak stated that it would be the private engineer’s responsibility to determine if a headwall was necessary due to the slope steepness or if a flared  end section was necessary to control the flow of the cross culverts.

 

Mr. Reidhead stated that he would add a new sentence to Standard 5.8.6.D.3.c.2 which would state:  The owner’s engineer will determine the need for a culvert headwall or a flared end section of the culvert.

 

Chairman Morgan asked if the applicant’s consulting engineer would complete an inspection report, document the deficiencies, and then later determine if the deficiencies had been resolved? 

 

Mr. Dvorak explained that the standards would require the private engineer to stamp and seal the drawings, stating that the improvements were done in conformance to the plan.  The consulting engineer would be liable if they stamped and sealed plans that were untruthful. 

 

Chairman Morgan inquired about what the consequence would be if the applicant was not in concurrence with the engineer’s recommendation?  He asked if the applicant would be able to challenge the engineer’s recommendations?

 

Mr. Reidhead stated that the Rural Land Use Center would defer the standards to the consulting engineer, whereas it would be their responsibility to make sure that everything was done properly. 

 

PUBLIC TESTIMONY:

None

 

DISCUSSION:

Commissioner Wallace suggested that any success and/or recommendations made to approved Rural Land Use projects after being approved be reported back to Larimer County.

 

Commissioner Korb and Chairman Morgan suggested amending Standard 5.8.6.D.3.f to allow the applicant the ability to receive another opinion if they did not agree with their current consulting engineer’s recommendations.

 

Commissioner Korb moved that the Planning Commission adopt the following Resolution.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

BE IT RESOLVED that the Planning Commission recommend to the Board of County Commissioners that the Larimer County Land Use Code Amendments:  Rural Land Use Process Engineering Standards and Guidelines for Road and Drainage be approved subject to the recommended sentence to 5.8.6.D.3.c.2 and an evaluation in the interim from the Rural Land Use Center to consider exploring the reassessment of project standard deviations.

 

Commissioner Pond seconded the Motion.

 

Commissioners’ Boulter, Huddleston, Korb, Nelson, Pond, terMeer, Wallace, and Chairman Morgan voted in favor of the Motion.

 

MOTION PASSED: 8-0

 

ITEM #4 LEGACY HEIGHTS CONSERVATION DEVELOPMENT GENERAL DEVELOPMENT PLAN #04-S2323: Mr. Lafferty provided background information on the request for a General Development Plan for a 55 lot single family Conservation Development on 278 acres.  The development would include 50% residual land in 3 residual lots located along a ¾ mile stretch of the western side of County Road 21, and ½ mile stretch of the southern side of County Road 10.  The applicant was also proposing to construct the project in 2 phases.   

 

Commissioner Huddleston asked about the inadequate space for a detention pond to the west and north of the Dry Creek Lateral?

 

Mr. Lafferty explained that in Phase I of the project there was adequate opportunity in the detention basins to provide detention for storm water flows.  However, in Phase II, no detention ponds were indicated for the area west of the canal.  Consequently, carrying the drainage across the canal would be difficult, and a detention basin needed to be specified before the Preliminary Plat was submitted.  Mr. Lafferty noted that the addition of a detention basin in that area may eliminate a couple of the proposed Lots.

 

Rob Persichitte, Intermill Land Surverying, stated that the two detention ponds shown on the site plan would hold the drainage for Phase I.  Lot 54 in Phase II would be moved allowing for a drainage pond, with an additional pond built to allow drainage into the Dry Creek Lateral.  He explained that currently the Lots along County Road 21 and County Road 10 had a 100 foot buffer with a 50 foot setback to any structure to the back of the Lots; however, the setback had now been increased to 100 feet.  He also stated that the residual land would be farmed, and the use would remain agricultural.

 

Commissioner Boulter asked where the Prairie Dog colony was?

 

Mr. Persichitte stated that it was located in the south portion of Phase II.

 

Jim Nordhougen, applicant, stated that the Division of Wildlife indicated that there were raptors located in the trees in Phase II.  The concerns were acknowledged, and the area would be buffered. 

 

 

 

PUBLIC TESTIMONY:

Meredith Hutmaker, 801 N. County Road 21, had concerns for the raptors, trees, and lakes in the area.  She also stated that dirt had begun to be moved out of the ponds, and she had concerns about the dust in the area.

 

Karen Stockley, neighbor to the south of the development, suggested that the buffer be 150 feet from the homeowner’s land.  She also stated her concerns for the wildlife in the area and suggested protecting the Prairie Dogs, raptors, and Great Horned Owls that lived in the area by reconfiguring Phase II away from Prairie Dog colony, pond, and trees.  She stated that she would like to see the applicant be a good steward to the land. 

 

Barb Eppelsheimer, 1056 County Road 23, stated that she was opposed to the road which was proposed to run through the south portion of her property. 

 

Mr. Nordhougen explained that Rex Harris, representative for the Dry Creek Lateral Ditch, informed him that the company had the authority to cut and remove all trees within the right-of-way.  He also stated that no work had been contracted to begin development of the land yet. 

 

Mike Hutmaker, 801 N. County Road 21, stated that dirt was being hauled out of the lake, and he had an issue with the dust being created.  He also remarked that at the neighborhood meeting Mr. Nordougen stated that he would pay for the paving of County Road 21, and he wanted assurance that he would not have to pave the road.

 

Mr. Persichitte replied that the applicant would pave County Road 21.

 

Mr. Lafferty explained that the trees on the property were to remain unless another agency such as a ditch company had the authority to remove them.  He also remarked that Larimer County had not received any recommendations from the Division of Wildlife on what the buffers should be for the wildlife.  He stated that dust control measures would be addressed during the Preliminary Plat process. 

 

DISCUSSION:

Commissioner Wallace encouraged the applicant to abide with the Larimer County Parks and Open Lands request to include an easement or regional trail.

 

Mr. Lafferty concurred.  He stated that during the Preliminary Plat process negotiations would occur between the applicant and the Parks and Open Lands Department regarding that request.

 

Commissioner terMeer asked why the Prairie Dog colony could not be relocated?

 

Mr. Lafferty replied that relocation within the property would result in a negative impact for the other property owners. 

 

Commissioner Boulter asked for clarification on the proposed buffer and setback measurements?

 

Mr. Nordhougen stated that there would be a 100 foot buffer and a 100 foot setback.  The 100 foot setback would be maintained by the private property owners, and the 100 foot buffer would be maintained by the Home Owner’s Association.

 

Commissioner terMeer asked if the applicant was opposed to a 150 foot buffer?

 

Mr. Nordhougen replied that he felt a 150 foot buffer was more than what was needed, and it would be more to maintain for Home Owner’s Association.

 

Commissioner Nelson asked how large the lots were?

 

Doug Ryan, Health Department, stated that the smallest lot was 2 acres, with most of them around that size.  He remarked that the soils were good in terms of percolation, depth-to-ground water, and depth-to-bed rock.  The Health Department had asked that all the lots be setback at least 100 feet from the Dry Creek Lateral; therefore, each lot would have a full 2 acres available for citing a septic system and potentially a replacement septic system.  He stated that the lot sizes were appropriate given the ditch lateral and the soils.

 

Commissioner Nelson asked if an increased buffer would require the lots to be moved in order to qualify for the septic requirements?

 

Mr. Ryan explained that the lots would have to be redesigned because the Larimer County Land Use Code standard required that the lots be a minimum of 2 acres in size.  The development would have to be shifted to the south and would still have to retain the 50% residual land. 

 

Commissioner Boulter stated that he would support a 100 foot buffer with the additional 100 foot setback for the building envelopes rather than a 150 foot buffer.

 

Commissioner Pond moved that the Planning Commission adopt the following Resolution.

 

BE IT RESOLVED that the Planning Commission recommend to the Board of County Commissioners that the Legacy Heights Conservation Development General Development Plan, File #04-S2323, for the property described on “Exhibit B” to the minutes be approved subject to the following conditions:

 

2.   The Preliminary Plat for the Legacy Heights Conservation Development shall be consistent with plans and representations of the General Development Plan for Legacy Heights (04-S2323).

 

3.   A Preliminary Plat for the Legacy Heights Conservation Development shall include a minimum of 50% residual land, excluding the pond area of the property.

 

 

4.   The number of single family lots within the Legacy Heights Conservation Development shall not exceed the 55 lots illustrated on the Legacy Heights General Development Plan.

 

 

5.   A feasibility analysis for connection to the Berthoud sewer system shall be provided before the submission of the preliminary plat for this development. Should the feasibility analysis regarding connection to the Berthoud sewer system indicate that service is feasible then this recommendation shall be null and void.

 

 

 

 

6.   A Preliminary Plat application for the Legacy Heights Conservation Development shall provide for the following:

 

a.   Compatibility with the existing and allowed uses in the area,

 

b.   Compliance with all standards and other requirements of the Larimer County Land Use Code and with all other federal, state and county laws and regulations, and

 

 

c.   Compliance with Section 8 (Standards for all Development) of the Larimer County Land Use Code.

 

 

7.   A Preliminary Plat application for the Legacy Heights Conservation Development shall include a 100 foot buffer from County Road 10 with an additional 100 foot setback from the building envelopes.

 

Commissioner Korb seconded the Motion.

 

Commissioners’ Boulter, Huddleston, Korb, Nelson, Pond, terMeer, Wallace, and Chairman Morgan voted in favor of the Motion.

 

MOTION PASSED: 8-0

 

The hearing recessed for 10 minutes.

 

ITEM #5 SCHREINER SAWMILL SPECIAL REVIEW #01-Z1406: Mr. Wheeler provided background information on the request for a Special Review approval for an existing, illegal wood processing sawmill facility within the LaPorte Area Plan.  He advised the Planning Commission of staff’s recommendation of denial.

 

Stuart Olive, representative to the applicant, stated that Mr. and Mrs. Schreiner purchased their property 11 years ago with the belief that they had a legal, non-conforming use operating on the parcel.  He remarked that the four contiguous properties all had businesses related to wood processing.  He explained that the new building erected on the property was intended to decrease the visual impact of the operation.

 

PUBLIC TESTIMONY:

Judy DeVore, adjacent property owner to the Schreiners, explained the history of their property and pointed out that they had to obtain variances for the two operating businesses on their acreage.  She stated their property had been subdivided into three parcels, and they were trying to sell the lot next to the Schreiner’s property; however, it was not selling because their property was an eye sore.  She asked the Planning Commission to turn down the proposal.

 

Gene DeVore, adjacent property owner to the Schreiners, voiced concerns that nothing had been done to improve the property.  He explained that Mr. Schreiner had promised to put up fences but nothing had been done, and he had not made any effort to help maintain road. 

 

 

 

Steve Schreiner, applicant, stated that the wood processing was occurring on the property when he purchased it.  He explained that he was waiting on the Special Review outcome for the determination of what permanent fixture could be erected to provide a wall.  He stated that he had split half of the road maintenance cost with Mr. DeVore and for the last three years he had helped with the snow removal. 

 

Mr. Wheeler explained that the LaPorte Area Plan designated the area for rural, residential type uses.  He also mentioned that a building permit was issued in 1993 for a 40 x 48 garage and was defined for personal uses only. 

 

Commissioner Nelson mentioned that since other non-agricultural uses in the area were approved, he could not justify denial of the application on the basis that the operation was not agricultural.

 

DISCUSSION:

Commissioner Huddleston stated that he would support staff’s recommendation of denial. 

 

Commissioner Korb stated that he would not be in favor of the industrial use at the location. 

 

Commissioner Nelson acknowledged that the conditions on the property were poor; nonetheless he did not feel the business was operating against the Master Plan and the LaPorte Area Plan.

 

Commissioner Wallace stated that she would deny the application due to the DeVore property being sold as residential, and due to the difficult task of buffering the Schreiner sawmill since it was located near the highway. 

 

Commissioner Boulter stated that the sawmill use on the property was not incompatible with the surrounding area.  He explained that he was torn with making a decision regarding the application outcome.

 

Commissioner terMeer stated that the business did not belong in the area, and she would vote to deny the application.

 

Chairman Morgan remarked that there was already an established process of development and mixed uses in area and enforcement was not the job of the Planning Commission.  He stated that the application could be approved with structured conditions and/or proposed to table the application.

 

Commissioner Korb preferred to deal with the application as it existed and did not feel that tabling or placing conditions on the application would solve the problem. 

 

Commissioner Korb moved that the Planning Commission adopt the following Resolution.

 

BE IT RESOLVED that the Planning Commission recommend to the Board of County Commissioners that the Schreiner Sawmill Special Review, File #01-Z1406, for the property described on “Exhibit C” to the minutes be denied.

 

Commissioner Wallace seconded the Motion.

 

Commissioner Nelson and Chairman Morgan voted against the Motion.

 

Commissioners’ Boulter, Huddleston, Korb, Pond, terMeer, and Wallace voted in favor of the Motion.

 

MOTION PASSED: 6-2

 

REPORT FROM STAFF:  Mr. Helmick reminded the Commission of their upcoming meetings. 

 

ADJOURMENT:  There being no further business, the hearing adjourned at 10:24 p.m.

 

These minutes constitute the Resolution of the Larimer County Planning Commission for the recommendations contained herein which are hereby certified to the Larimer County Board of Commissioners.

 

 

 

_______________________________                      ______________________________

Roger Morgan, Chairman                                             Jason Waldo, Secretary

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

EXHIBIT A

 

 

 

 

Lot 133, Crystal Lakes 13th, PUD, County of Larimer, State of Colorado

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

EXHIBIT B

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

EXHIBIT C

 

Background Image: Rocky Mountain National Park by Sue Burke. All rights reserved.